He was jailed for a "minimum term of 8 years". He has served that. He wasnt (unfortunately) prosecuted for a number of crimes he perhaps should have been. He therefore cannot be kept in prison - particulary since the decision of the parole board which we cannot get behind. I do hope the authorities act quickly so that he is kept in prison on remand until such time as these NEW charges can be dealt with by reason of law.
Islay may have met him and may have found him to be a complete gentleman. I do not think she can be faulted for saying that is how he behaved. Because in my experience MOST unpleasant and nasty offenders appear to be just so. None of them walk round with "Peodolphile", "Rapist", "Axe Murderer" stamped on their foreheads. The fact that they are able to offend for so long is because they DO appear charming and intelligent. This is how they operate. This is how they get under the radar.
Ask one of my closest friends. One of her friends systematically abused two of her children. She didnt spot it. She nearly killed herself through guilt because she thought he was a charming and loving "uncle". Until the kids fessed up, she had no idea.
I cant even begin to imagine what been raped does to a woman. Got to be the most unimaginable psychological damage. Then for a woman to keep a signed photo of a convicted rapist as a souviner of her birthday bash leaves me cold. (and mystified)
As I mentioned on another thread, I have Jimmy Savile's autograph as well as that of Rolf Harris.
I 'have' them in the respect that they are somewhere in my house......they are not framed and on my mantle-shelf.
When I next chance upon them, I'll throw them away......
You really need to stop your antipathy towards the writer stopping you seeing what is 'actually' being written.
Yes we are, Anne. And some of us (unlike others - not you) are trying to push the thread back on topic instead of displaying antipathy for a particular poster.
I hope none of you ever leave the radio on if Gary Glitter inadvertently comes on then given the level of vitriol shown here because you know what that makes you don't you...? Good grief.
Well Nailit lots of things you have done leave me cold - but there we go.
I answered the OP at the beginning it has chosen to be ignored in favour to have a pop!
Glad I have managed to keep you all entertained!
// instead of displaying antipathy for a particular poster. //
No antipathy here, just genuine curiosity, cant wrap my head around how a woman could have a keepsake in her home of a convicted rapist? Rape is on a par with child sex and murder in my book. I wouldn't want a signed photo in my house of a pedo or serial killer.
But maybe that's just me!
I don't detect any unusual or untoward contrariety in Nailit's posts.
Worboys may have appeared the gentleman in times gone by but, knowing what we know now, what person in their right mind would retain a signed photo of someone who abused, stalked, terrorised and raped woman for years on end?
Well clearly it doesn't make you anything which was exactly my point 237SJ. People have accused Islay of all sorts of sympathies purely because she had a signed photo at her 21st birthday with someone who at the time was a stripper and not a rapist. THAT does not make her a 'fan' of his, an 'apologist' or anything else negative, just as listening to Gary Glitter wouldn't make someone a paedophile.
I think I had Rolf's autograph somewhere too, jack - no idea where, probably long gone, but if I came across it tomorrow I wouldn't be burning it. I keep things because they're part of my life, for better or worse. I'd no doubt keep the autograph of Vlad the Impaler if I had it.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.