British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   The Sand Pit (https://britishexpats.com/forum/sand-pit-116/)
-   -   The Saville Case - who's next (https://britishexpats.com/forum/sand-pit-116/saville-case-whos-next-776026/)

Millhouse Oct 29th 2012 4:56 am

The Saville Case - who's next
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...y-Glitter.html

More arrests to come apparently.

flares Oct 29th 2012 5:39 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 
never trusted Matthew Kelly

Millhouse Oct 29th 2012 5:47 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by saudiflares (Post 10354828)
never trusted Matthew Kelly

There are so many from that time what could be implicated (I'm not saying guilty, but aware/known):

Cheggers: 25-1
Reid: 20-1
Kelly: evens (no smoke without fire)
Tarrent: 16-3
Corbett: evens (always had his hand up Sue and wasn't shy with Sooty)
Wilmot: 100-1 (outsider)
Jim Davidson: 15-1 (has come forward saying the witch hunt has to stop - sign of guilt)
Edmunds: never trust a man with a beard.

Rantzen has all the answers here in my view. She needs to start grassing.

The Dean Oct 29th 2012 5:52 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 
The way that copper was talking on Sky News on Friday suggests this is even bigger than any of us have realised........

........... I'm going for a link (perhaps nothing more than that) to a member of the royal family..........

ukecadet Oct 29th 2012 5:54 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 
His mate 'Jim the pill' from the Louis Theroux doco has to be a contender.

Millhouse Oct 29th 2012 5:54 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by The Dean (Post 10354840)
The way that copper was talking on Sky News on Friday suggests this is even bigger than any of us have realised........

........... I'm going for a link (perhaps nothing more than that) to a member of the royal family..........

Please, please - let it be Bliar.

Theseus Oct 29th 2012 6:01 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 
All of the Osmonds

scrubbedexpat141 Oct 29th 2012 6:04 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 
That bellend with the giant hammer and luminous clothing, used to present kiddies TV....Timmy Mallett. That's another.

Jeremy Beadle? He was the only person with a hand small enough surely?

shiva Oct 29th 2012 6:05 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by Millhouse (Post 10354844)
Please, please - let it be Bliar.

its fundamentally wrong to hope some one is guilty (it basically implies hope that they have abused people)
however i agree

scrubbedexpat141 Oct 29th 2012 6:07 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by shiva (Post 10354857)
its fundamentally wrong to hope some one is guilty (it basically implies hope that they have abused people)
however i agree

God I'm messed up in the head. I didn't even think of that.

I just read through the lists posted saying 'yeah I bet he did', 'oh god I hope he get's done for something'.

Miss Anne Thrope Oct 29th 2012 6:14 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by saudiflares (Post 10354828)
never trusted Matthew Kelly

Why? Do you have any factual basis for that or is it a gut reaction to him personally because he's a bit effeminate? No danger of a witch hunt here then, eh?

As I recall, the previous accusations against Kelly were thoroughly discredited. He had my sympathy because he was a pretty easy target. Any apparently gay/effeminate man in public life has always been particularly vulnerable to random accusations of kiddy fiddling because of deep-seated prejudices.

And the "no smoke without fire" comment that followed yours only emphasises the danger of this becoming a mindless witch hunt and ruining the lives of innocent people.

shiva Oct 29th 2012 6:19 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by Miss Anne Thrope (Post 10354868)
Why? Do you have any factual basis for that or is it a gut reaction to him personally because he's a bit effeminate? No danger of a witch hunt here then, eh?

As I recall, the previous accusations against Kelly were thoroughly discredited. He had my sympathy because he was a pretty easy target. Any apparently gay/effeminate man in public life has always been particularly vulnerable to random accusations of kiddy fiddling because of deep-seated prejudices.

And the "no smoke without fire" comment that followed yours only emphasises the danger of this becoming a mindless witch hunt and ruining the lives of innocent people.

it could of course also be related to the fact he's an utter twat but then again that is of course entirely subjective and based on no provable fact

flares Oct 29th 2012 6:43 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by Miss Anne Thrope (Post 10354868)
Do you have any factual basis for that or is it a gut reaction to him personally because he's a bit effeminate?

no and absolutely

Boomhauer Oct 29th 2012 6:47 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by Millhouse (Post 10354844)
Please, please - let it be Bliar.

Well if Bliar is involved, the investigation will come to a dead stop and if an investigator should take it upon himself/herself to stick with the case , they may say hello to Dr Kelly.

flares Oct 29th 2012 6:47 am

Re: The Saville Case - who's next
 

Originally Posted by Millhouse (Post 10354831)
There are so many from that time what could be implicated (I'm not saying guilty, but aware/known):

Cheggers: 25-1
Reid: 20-1
Kelly: evens (no smoke without fire)
Tarrent: 16-3
Corbett: evens (always had his hand up Sue and wasn't shy with Sooty)
Wilmot: 100-1 (outsider)
Jim Davidson: 15-1 (has come forward saying the witch hunt has to stop - sign of guilt)
Edmunds: never trust a man with a beard.

Rantzen has all the answers here in my view. She needs to start grassing.

Rod Jane and Freddy...and that's an instruction


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:06 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.