Sir Cliff Richard

[JuniorD]

I thought the ITV interview was a bit distasteful, yer woman trotting out the whole “freedom of speech” and “democratic right” bks. There is no unfettered freedom of speech. What when on with Cliff Richard was a feeding frenzy by the media, who are among the greatest of threats to democracy IMO

[anonymous-user]

Cliff Richard was effectively convicted in trial by television due to the BBC coverage, if the BBC are complaining about the impact on journalism today as a result of this case, they only have themselves to blame!

Having now lost the case they should sack the people concerned immediately without a golden cushion.

[Jockman]

bhstewie said:

Murph7355 said:

Maybe requests for broadcasting names should be put to a judge along with any "evidence". If the judge says yes, the press can publish. If not, they can't.

The risks to suspects falsely accused are too great IMO especially where sex cases are involved.

If the police can't make something hang off a single case without resort to subversive publication then they should back off the suspect until they can.

Possibly.

Tbh I don't have a clue what the right answer is, but there's something completely fked up about a BBC journalist almost "forcing" the Police to give them a scoop and then having a helicopter film things.

Interesting to watch the BBC journalist seeking a comment from Execs post trial. She pulled no punches. Asked why nobody was considering their position and pointed out that the licence payer would be furious at having to foot this bill.

[Murph7355]

Jockman said:

bhstewie said:

Murph7355 said:

Maybe requests for broadcasting names should be put to a judge along with any "evidence". If the judge says yes, the press can publish. If not, they can't.

The risks to suspects falsely accused are too great IMO especially where sex cases are involved.

If the police can't make something hang off a single case without resort to subversive publication then they should back off the suspect until they can.

Possibly.

Tbh I don't have a clue what the right answer is, but there's something completely fked up about a BBC journalist almost "forcing" the Police to give them a scoop and then having a helicopter film things.

Interesting to watch the BBC journalist seeking a comment from Execs post trial. She pulled no punches. Asked why nobody was considering their position and pointed out that the licence payer would be furious at having to foot this bill.

It will make zero difference to the way the organisation operates.

It's an organisation that's dead already, it's just wandering around not acknowledging it.

[Jockman]

Murph7355 said:

It will make zero difference to the way the organisation operates.

It's an organisation that's dead already, it's just wandering around not acknowledging it.

Too big to fail. Like the NHS.

The business plan will be adapted and it will lurch from one crisis to another.

[saaby93]

Oakey said:

Police search Berkshire property belonging to Sir Cliff Richard in relation to alleged historical sex offence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28790718

No, not you too Cliff!

Normally BBC news pages are stored forever

[Buffalo]

p1stonhead said:

‘I’d rather ten guilty people get away with it, than one innocent person suffer’

Umm....

https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/101964888641830...

By ‘it’ he means sexual assault. And by ‘suffer’ he means privacy invaded.

I was with him until I heard this. Perhaps not the best thing to say Cliff.

Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 18th July 19:51

By coincidence I read that exact quote last night while researching something completely different. It is attributed to Nipper Read the copper who put the Kray twins away. It was widely reported at the time (in its original context) so, it has a moral basis and it could be that SCR merely recalled it during his interview, rather than believed it to his core.

[Mojooo]

This argument about the need to name so other victims can come forward I suspect is very limited in the grand scheme of things so its a weighing exercise and to my mind privacy trumps it.

Of course the media are as concerned at lack of gossip as they are free speech.

The media say that it may prevent them reporting miscarriages. But I presume the suspect will have the right to waive that if they feel an injustice has occurred.

[Pothole]

p1stonhead said:

‘I’d rather ten guilty people get away with it, than one innocent person suffer’

Umm....

https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/101964888641830...

By ‘it’ he means sexual assault. And by ‘suffer’ he means privacy invaded.

I was with him until I heard this. Perhaps not the best thing to say Cliff.

Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 18th July 19:51

An oddly contradictory thing to say, assuming that he thinks the victims of such assaults are also "innocent".

Slight oversimplification to call it privacy invaded.

[thebraketester]

What strikes me as odd it as why the compo figure is so low..... is he just doing it to prove a point?

[Halmyre]

Isn't his desire for revenge a bit un-Christian? What happened to forgiveness, and turning the other cheek?

[ATG]

Halmyre said:

Isn't his desire for revenge a bit un-Christian? What happened to forgiveness, and turning the other cheek?

Revenge would be un-Christian, but there ain't no contradiction between forgiving and holding to account.

[eccles]

I suppose the whole event needs to be seen in the context of events at the time.
It was at the peak of all those allegations which seem to cover almost every male involved in TV/media during the '60's/70's/80's., and whilst all those allegations did net a few nasty types, quite a few 'celebs' had their reputations ruined by people jumping on the bandwagon.

I think also, in a very small way, that Cliff Richard was seen to be a bit like Savile, in that there was something not quite right about him and his lifestyle, so I find it very easy to imagine some beeb journalists getting all frothy with excitement at netting another big name and going over the top to get an inside line on the raid, and going really over the top and adding a helicopter to the bill.

Sadly I don't think anyone will lose their job over this, just watching newswatch at the weekends where editors have to justify their actions after multiple complaints over a story, their arrogance that they know best is staggering.

[saaby93]

eccles said:

I think also, in a very small way, that Cliff Richard was seen to be a bit like Savile, in that there was something not quite right about him and his lifestyle,

What was 'not quite right' about him
Is there something 'not quite right' about all of us?
Especially being in PH

[saaby93]

thebraketester said:

What strikes me as odd it as why the compo figure is so low..... is he just doing it to prove a point?

It was said somwhere it's the highest for this type of case so far
What were you expecting?
Still less than half many salaries at the beeb so they could pass a hat around between them without affecting the licence

[anonymous-user]

eccles said:

I think also, in a very small way, that Cliff Richard was seen to be a bit like Savile, in that there was something not quite right about him and his lifestyle, so I find it very easy to imagine some beeb journalists getting all frothy with excitement at netting another big name and going over the top to get an inside line on the raid, and going really over the top and adding a helicopter to the bill.

When he was more specific, the reporter said his source wasn't explicit it was Richard, but he drew the inference it was because of 'other things he had heard about him'.

[FiF]

saaby93 said:

eccles said:

I think also, in a very small way, that Cliff Richard was seen to be a bit like Savile, in that there was something not quite right about him and his lifestyle,

What was 'not quite right' about him
Is there something 'not quite right' about all of us?
Especially being in PH

But he once admired the agapanthus 'Jersey Giant' in our front garden. Perhaps someone should have complained about being groomed. Maybe that is just my 'wilful ignorance' coming out, sorry should that have been "willful (sic)" . No doubt some fool will now make a comment around 'coming out'.

[JuniorD]

Pothole said:

p1stonhead said:

‘I’d rather ten guilty people get away with it, than one innocent person suffer’

Umm....

https://twitter.com/itvnews/status/101964888641830...

By ‘it’ he means sexual assault. And by ‘suffer’ he means privacy invaded.

I was with him until I heard this. Perhaps not the best thing to say Cliff.

Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 18th July 19:51

An oddly contradictory thing to say, assuming that he thinks the victims of such assaults are also "innocent".

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, and in the circumstances of a pressure interview and emotions, perhaps by "it" he means not having their their privacy invaded... ? Who knows.

[Cupramax]

eccles said:

Sadly I don't think anyone will lose their job over this, just watching newswatch at the weekends where editors have to justify their actions after multiple complaints over a story, their arrogance that they know best is staggering.

That program beggars belief, it’s purely a vehicle for the beeb news execs to tell us why they were right in what, and how, they reported, no matter how blatantly wrong it was. I’ve never once seen them admit that they may have got something wrong.

[Biker 1]

loose cannon said:

I must be in the minority as I have always thought of him as some weirdo, ......I have never understood the love, he gives me the creeps

& therein lies the problem: st sticks. He's innocent until proven otherwise, so totally unfair of the BEEB to report the raid like they did.