ChatterBank0 min ago
Stuart Hall
I am reading today's Guardian and there is a rather unsettling report on page 2 about the sentence that Hall has been given. Its been discussed on here recently whether the sentence was long enough and the Attorney General is now to review the case apparently. So we must wait and see what results from that review.
What is worrying me is that the parents of some of the very young girls that he molested knew about the abuse at the time "but did not report him"
What kind of parent knows that an old man has groped and seriously assaulted their nine year daughter and then does nothing about it ? Those parents allowed other children that came after to be assaulted in the same way. If they had done what they should have done and gone straight to a police station, those other children might have been spared their ordeal.
What is worrying me is that the parents of some of the very young girls that he molested knew about the abuse at the time "but did not report him"
What kind of parent knows that an old man has groped and seriously assaulted their nine year daughter and then does nothing about it ? Those parents allowed other children that came after to be assaulted in the same way. If they had done what they should have done and gone straight to a police station, those other children might have been spared their ordeal.
Answers
I'm sure, in hindsight, many of these parents would have wished they had acted differently. I imagine many of them would have viewed it as an isolated incident and not a 'pattern' of behaviour but have removed their children from any situations where it could be repeated.
12:16 Tue 18th Jun 2013
@Sqad - I can think of no circumstance where a man can sexually assault a child or teenager and later claim as a legitimate defence or mitigation that "she was asking for it" by virtue of dress and/or demeanour - can you?
I will accept adult sexual encounters can be potentially more complicated, but even then I am struggling to find a scenario where dress or demeanour could be considered a legitimate defence against a genuine charge of sexual assault - can you?
I will accept adult sexual encounters can be potentially more complicated, but even then I am struggling to find a scenario where dress or demeanour could be considered a legitimate defence against a genuine charge of sexual assault - can you?
LazyGun........your first paragraph...with a child.....no there is no defense.
Teenagers can be more complicated as "some" may dress to entice and many teenagers "may do this"......particularly 15 year olds onwards.
This is a group that may follow footballers and dress provocatively to gain access to the V.I.P rooms......not to discuss the Civil War in Syria but to have sex with a famous footballer.
I could take you to a couple of clubs in the North where the bar is on the first floor and the floor is glass. The men sit in the lounges underneath, the girls realising this and come to the evening with no knickers on.
Girls before going to University often go to Maguluf and other places specifically to get "laid" as often as possible.
Yes these are anecdotes and i know how you feel about anecdotal evidence ;-) but mikey is pointing out that girls/women must play their part.
You are talking about the Law and cases that have been brought before the courts, but my comments cover life in general.
Teenagers can be more complicated as "some" may dress to entice and many teenagers "may do this"......particularly 15 year olds onwards.
This is a group that may follow footballers and dress provocatively to gain access to the V.I.P rooms......not to discuss the Civil War in Syria but to have sex with a famous footballer.
I could take you to a couple of clubs in the North where the bar is on the first floor and the floor is glass. The men sit in the lounges underneath, the girls realising this and come to the evening with no knickers on.
Girls before going to University often go to Maguluf and other places specifically to get "laid" as often as possible.
Yes these are anecdotes and i know how you feel about anecdotal evidence ;-) but mikey is pointing out that girls/women must play their part.
You are talking about the Law and cases that have been brought before the courts, but my comments cover life in general.
-- answer removed --
@Sqad. oK, you offer some scenarios.You offer the situation where a girl is actively seeking sex - in those circumstances her manner of dress or demeanour is immaterial, since this is consensual. In your other scenario you posit a hypothetical example of a teenager seeking sex with a celebrity - But again this is consensual, and again the manner of dress or demeanour is immaterial.
What should be material, what should be beholden on every bloke, is to do some basic fact-checking first - verify as best you can the age. Verify consent. Verify they are in a condition to consent. A classic example of this sort of scenario is the situation in France right now, with Frank Ribery - He allegedly flies out a call-girl and has sex with her. She was 17 at the time. This is technically illegal in France, since call-girls have to be 18-plus. Under cross-questioning in court, she admitted that she lied about her age, so I do have a smidgen of sympathy for Ribery in these extremely specific circumstances.
But that particular combination of circumstances is extremely rare.I still maintain that, rare exceptions to the rule aside, no child, girl or adult can be considered to be "asking for it" by virtue of dress or demeanour. Such a claim is not a defence or is any kind of mitigation.
Men often claim to feel emasculated in this modern day age, threatened by female emancipation, lacking a defined role in life - one way of reclaiming respect might be to act like a man with a conscience, instead of treating girls and women as not much more than sex objects.....
What should be material, what should be beholden on every bloke, is to do some basic fact-checking first - verify as best you can the age. Verify consent. Verify they are in a condition to consent. A classic example of this sort of scenario is the situation in France right now, with Frank Ribery - He allegedly flies out a call-girl and has sex with her. She was 17 at the time. This is technically illegal in France, since call-girls have to be 18-plus. Under cross-questioning in court, she admitted that she lied about her age, so I do have a smidgen of sympathy for Ribery in these extremely specific circumstances.
But that particular combination of circumstances is extremely rare.I still maintain that, rare exceptions to the rule aside, no child, girl or adult can be considered to be "asking for it" by virtue of dress or demeanour. Such a claim is not a defence or is any kind of mitigation.
Men often claim to feel emasculated in this modern day age, threatened by female emancipation, lacking a defined role in life - one way of reclaiming respect might be to act like a man with a conscience, instead of treating girls and women as not much more than sex objects.....
Going back to the original question about parents encouraging their children not to come forward.
It's rather easy for us to sit here in 2013 and tut tut about how victims have selfishly (that is the implication isn't it?) not come forward to pres charges.
We have to remember that the facilities for children to give evidence in such cases that we have today would not have existed then.
If your traumatised child were to press charges then there would have been every probability that they'd have been asked to stand in a witness box in a court fullof adults in wigs and gowns and asked to relive the experience in graphic detail.
Their sexual 'history' might have been challenged, their evidence cross examined in an agressive way.
No video links, no specialist child protection officers and limited chance of sucess
Would you have wanted your child to go through that to help someone else you almost certainly wouldn't know?
What srt of parent does nothing about it? The sort of parent that doesn't want their child to go through all that!
It's rather easy for us to sit here in 2013 and tut tut about how victims have selfishly (that is the implication isn't it?) not come forward to pres charges.
We have to remember that the facilities for children to give evidence in such cases that we have today would not have existed then.
If your traumatised child were to press charges then there would have been every probability that they'd have been asked to stand in a witness box in a court fullof adults in wigs and gowns and asked to relive the experience in graphic detail.
Their sexual 'history' might have been challenged, their evidence cross examined in an agressive way.
No video links, no specialist child protection officers and limited chance of sucess
Would you have wanted your child to go through that to help someone else you almost certainly wouldn't know?
What srt of parent does nothing about it? The sort of parent that doesn't want their child to go through all that!
LazyGun
Your first paragraph........that is indeed the problem.....a girl may go out with consensual sex in mind, but this may well alter as the evening goes on.....sexual assault may follow which is unacceptable........but surely you are not saying that her method of dress has not played a part?
If you are saying that and i think that you are.....then we will have to agree to disagree.
Your second paragraph.....I agree.
Your 3 rd paragraph...
\\\\no child, girl or adult can be considered to be "asking for it" by virtue of dress or demeanour. \\.....
Take out the "child" bit, then I would have to disagree.
Your 4th paragraph.....
An emotional end to a well put together post to which i have no answer....;-)
Your first paragraph........that is indeed the problem.....a girl may go out with consensual sex in mind, but this may well alter as the evening goes on.....sexual assault may follow which is unacceptable........but surely you are not saying that her method of dress has not played a part?
If you are saying that and i think that you are.....then we will have to agree to disagree.
Your second paragraph.....I agree.
Your 3 rd paragraph...
\\\\no child, girl or adult can be considered to be "asking for it" by virtue of dress or demeanour. \\.....
Take out the "child" bit, then I would have to disagree.
Your 4th paragraph.....
An emotional end to a well put together post to which i have no answer....;-)
@ JtP - I think it is something of a stretch to accuse any of the contributors here of determining that parents were selfish. Most here, myself included, have expressed puzzlement as to why parents did not, perhaps drawing on personal feelings about their own family members in such circumstances.
You cite all the reasons why a parent might not wish to report an incident to the police - effectively in an effort not to subject their child to stress, intrusive examination and questioning,perhaps hostile or sceptical reception ,poor facilities etc, which all might be true - but how widspread was the knowledge that a child would have to go through this kind of thing back then?
If your daughter had come to you with such a story - what would you have done? I know I would have reported it, because I would have had no knowledge of all these other factors - I would just be very keen to see that the perpetrator was punished and brought to justice....
You cite all the reasons why a parent might not wish to report an incident to the police - effectively in an effort not to subject their child to stress, intrusive examination and questioning,perhaps hostile or sceptical reception ,poor facilities etc, which all might be true - but how widspread was the knowledge that a child would have to go through this kind of thing back then?
If your daughter had come to you with such a story - what would you have done? I know I would have reported it, because I would have had no knowledge of all these other factors - I would just be very keen to see that the perpetrator was punished and brought to justice....
@ Sqad - You are of course perfectly entitled to your opinion - but the conclusions one can draw from that opinion seem to be a depressing indictment of men. Honestly now - are you really saying that it is acceptable for a man to have sexual relations with a girl, maybe non-consensual by virtue of age or state of mind ( ie technically a child or drunk/high/unconscious), because she is dressed provocatively, or has gone commando, or has previously implied she might be keen and eager? Really?
That still to me implies a defence or mitigation of "she was asking for it", as well as relegating men to nothing more than slaves to impulse, which completely overrides their moral compass.We should be more than that. Most of us are, i think, being the optimist :)
That still to me implies a defence or mitigation of "she was asking for it", as well as relegating men to nothing more than slaves to impulse, which completely overrides their moral compass.We should be more than that. Most of us are, i think, being the optimist :)
