The peado finder general appointment

[McWigglebum4th]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29719090

So the 2nd person is to be kicked off the leadership of the panel to look into historical child abuse


Who would keep the masses happy?

Or should we just save the hassle and throw everyone the left want thrown in jail in jail without trial

[anonymous-user]

I have got no specific recommendation but why don't they look outside London?

Pick a respected person north of Hampstead and go from there.

Perhaps a grammar schooler or maybe even a comprehensive boy or girl.
How about a foreigner? (not French)

At least someone who doesn't go to knitting parties with the people they are supposed to be questioning.

[TLandCruiser]

how about Shaun Wright? he has plenty of experience in the subject.

[dingg]

why not put Bill Maloney (pienmashfilms) on the panel

if all he says isn't true (re the issue) why hasn't he been prosecuted for libel/slander??

[BlackLabel]

Given that Lord Brittan and his office 'lost' a 40-page dossier that detailed alleged paedophile activity in the 1980s at Westminster (I assume this will need to be investigated at the inquiry) and that Fiona Woolf, the new the chair of the inquiry, dined with Lord and Lady Brittan numerous times at both Woolf's residence and at the Brittan residence perhaps Woolf shouldn't be chairing the inquiry.

Edited by BlackLabel on Wednesday 22 October 19:47

[Rovinghawk]

dingg said:

why hasn't he been prosecuted for libel/slander??

This might be a wild stab in the dark, but I believe it's because libel and slander aren't actually crimes.

[Jasandjules]

McWigglebum4th said:

Who would keep the masses happy?

Someone not related to, or involved in or with, people or events which are subject to the inquiry?

[otolith]

"We need a senior, experienced legal figure, who is not part of The Establishment"

Good luck with that.

[TTwiggy]

I'd go with Breadvan72.

[Foliage]

Monkey Dust <3

[anonymous-user]

otolith said:

"We need a senior, experienced legal figure, who is not part of The Establishment"

Good luck with that.

Good point

Why do they need to be legal though?

There are plenty of people who are used to dealing with projects where they gather lots of evidence, present that evidence in a cogent manner and then reach a conclusion based on the evidence.

[Frybywire]

A respected US District Attorney.

[otolith]

That's a good question. That's the way we do it, I suppose.

I haven't seen any names suggested by the critics of the two appointments, though.

[anonymous-user]

Frybywire said:

A respected US District Attorney.

that is a good starting point.

[dingg]

Rovinghawk said:

his might be a wild stab in the dark, but I believe it's because libel and slander aren't actually crimes.

oh well maybe I should have asked why hasn't any of the people who he perhaps slanders/libels in his films taken a civil case against him?

(are you happy now?)

Edited by dingg on Wednesday 22 October 16:57

[grumbledoak]

Someone untouched by rumours, not short of ability, and preferably retired from politics?

Livingstone.

[otolith]

Chances that the old GLC doesn't have any noncery-related dirty laundry, either of the involved or incompetent variety?

[g3org3y]

Foliage said:

Monkey Dust <3

Oh and OP, it's paedo.

[smegmore]

Michael Mansfield QC?

[kowalski655]

TTwiggy said:

I'd go with Breadvan72.

+1