What evidence? That's the problem with this kind of thing. Also as I say, once it's known that there is one charge what's to stop those that once bumped into Harris jumping onto the bandwagon?

There is money to be made and with their identity protected no downside to the case failing.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

One of them didn't have her identity protected as was her wish.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

It's only that simple if you are willing to believe people because they say something happened with no actual proof of it.

It's only a 'consistent pattern of behaviour' if you believe the charges.

Like I say, as there is no requirement to keep the charge quiet......This is a huge weakness to the whole thing. How can they be 'interdependent' to each other if there has been publicity?

Once it is out there is nothing to stop people looking for money taking the opportunity of a meeting with Harris from claiming sexual advances.

If there had been twelve charges against someone who had had no publicity then......I'd be as confident as you.

Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Jun 2014 7.12pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Well I only know what I read of course unlike the jury who had the full unedited version.

Twelve different victims. Twelve counts. All guilty.

A nonce is about to be put away. That's good, isn't it?

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

I have a problem, Stirling. My faith in the jury system has taken a serious kicking over the last week or so. I cannot for the life of me understand how Coulson gets convicted on a range of charges yet Brooks gets an acquittal on the same accusations. I don't see how he can have been guilty yet she wasn't. It makes me very uncomfortable and starting to believe that the state can fix these things. I've posted on this elsewhere.

I'm gutted at the Rolf Harris convictions. Like many others, I couldn't believe that he, of all people, would have done stuff like that. Yet there were twelve separate charges and twelve unanimous guilty verdicts. No dissent anywhere. No majority verdicts needed. No vested interest from the Establishment to influence it either way. In a trial of this nature, I'm reluctantly coming to terms with the fact that the evidence must have been overwhelming. I can't see the trial process and the jury's verdict as anything other than completely transparent.

I think you need to come to terms with this one, fella, as I have,no matter how unpalatable the whole dismal business is. And I'm the most cynical f*cker there is.

Edited by Cucking Funt (30 Jun 2014 8.07pm)

I trust the justice system. 12 charges, 12 guilty verdicts and that's hard to achieve - especially if some on the jury were star struck. Wasn't there a letter he wrote, apologising to a victims family? Remember some have got off - Michael le veil, bill roache etc. It's very sad but he's tied his last kangaroo down, Sport. (Maybe he could be done for that as well)?