Sentencing by judge

What really gets me about the judge’s sentencing statement is his continual stating that “he believes” various bits of testimony that were extensively  changed during the proceedings. Only a complete idiot or someone who was terrified of looking “soft on Paedophiles” would believe (or pretend to believe) the ridiculous stories that were presented as so-called “evidence”.

 

“But the verdicts of the jury show that in the period from 1969 to 1986 you were also a sex offender - committing 12 offences of indecent assault on 4 victims who were variously aged between 8 and 19 at the time etc etc

 

With the least possible respect, Mr Justice Sweeney, SIR, all the verdicts seem to “show” is that as soon as you use the word “paedophile” it doesn’t matter how shithouse the prosecution’s evidence is, or how overwhelming the defence’s evidence is, the defendant is going to be found “guilty…”

 

Exactly how do YOU know that he did all those things?!

 

And tell me Kemosabe: What if there is an appeal and a conviction is overturned? At what point in the space-time continuum do these events suddenly erase themselves and become non-events?

While the new Judge is reading out the new determination?

By close of business the next working day?

When?

 

While we’re at it, Mr Retard-in-a-Horsehair-Wig, Harris has not admitted guilt, so kindly stick all your remarks about “showing no remorse” where the sun don’t shine. If he pleaded guilty, but refused to apologize, you might have some basis for your remarks, but unless he actually admits to committing the crimes, you can never be absolutely sure that there is any “remorse” to “show”.

 

Even if somebody DOES  plead guilty, you also can’t be 100% sure they’re not just doing that in the hope of getting a lighter sentence. I mean he’s going spend the next few years in jail as it is, do you REALLY need to rub his nose in it as well?

 

Leigh Park and "Bindis friend"

A remarkably frank account of the prosecution’s failure to prove that Harris was ever at Leigh Park, from “The News”, the local paper whose issues failed to mention such a newsworthy event.

 

“Jurors have previously heard that despite searches of The News’ archives, council records and letter drops for witnesses, no trace of the entertainer having appeared at the community centre at that time have been found.


Rolf Harris and the Rape of English Justice

Not sure who wrote this, but it’s quite an informative run-down of the whole shemozzle.

 

Plumber finds porn stash – Yes, Th’ Mirror actually published this load of old bollocks. Who said you couldn’t make this shit up….
(The green bits in [square brackets] are my own notes).

“Rolf Harris’s old home was raided months before he was arrested after “a plumber” [claimed he’d] found child porn stashed under the floorboards [back in the 1970s(!)].
We can reveal the collection of pictures of underage girls was
[allegedly] discovered in the early 1970s. A [unidentified] plumber working at his [Harris’s] former property in Sydenham, South East London, [allegedly] stumbled across them – but panicked and put them back.. Harris,  lived at the property – two houses he knocked together – during the 60s and 70s before moving to Bray, Berks.

But in 2012, after the Jimmy Savile scandal erupted, the workman told cops about the [alleged] find. Police visited the property and tore up the floor but found nothing [!!!!!!!!!]. However, it put Harris on the radar of Operation Yewtree.”

 

Earth to Mirror:
1. “Child pornography” and “pictures of underage girls” are two entirely different things…

2. The fact that 12 numb-nuts selected from a council roll bought the prosecution’s pissweak arguments, does not make an unidentified Plumber’s completely unsupported 40 year old story actually true!

Can I just repeat this line; I’m not entirely sure I actually read that!

“Police visited the property and tore up the floor but found nothing. However, it put Harris on the radar of Operation Yewtree

It is only The Mirror, granted, but is that actually TRUE?!! An unidentified plumber reckons he saw some unidentified Porn magazines 40 years ago. The cops swooped but found zip, but that was sufficient to make him a Person of Interest?!!! Gawd, the British justice system is really sailing down the Far Canal

 

Just in case you didn’t know: No (0) child pornography was EVER found at Mr Harris’s premises, either in printed form or on his computer. The investigating officers did find that a computer he used had also  been used to access “Adult” websites, but he claimed it was his nephew that had been doing that late at night, without his knowledge. The same sites were found on his nephew’s computer which tends to back up his claim.

 

REGARDLESS, there was nothing illegal about the sites; they just showed adults participating in perfectly legal erotic activities, and none of the sites were known to host child pornography. However in what is now an almost routine tactic, one of the scumbag prosecution barristers claimed she “thought” one of the women looked “under age’.

 

The defence immediately contacted the website proprietors and were able to get copies of work permits that proved conclusively that this was not the case, and the “child pornography” charges were deemed to be “not in the public interest to pursue”. Which is CPS-speak for “The charges would be viewed as a complete fabrication and would be thrown out.”

 

BUT, they made sure the press heard all about it and you still read lurid reports about “Kiddie Porn” being found on his premises. It is, like the vast majority of other reporting of this subject by the gutter press, ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT!!

 

THE PAEDO-FILE: Rolf Harris case, a travesty in Court, and the corporacratic motives behind it
Some of the assertions here are a bit of a stretch, but interesting to read nonetheless.

 

Red Tops
The Sydney Morning Herald commenting on British papers commenting on Rolf’s conviction.

 

Rolf Harris is Innocent website

This gives some good photos of the locations where some of the alleged “assaults” took place. Also some actual recordings of media interviews with Tonya Lee. Particularly disturbing is the way the Australian Current Affairs show “60 minutes” edited the interview pre and post trial. First he stuck his hands down into her crotch; then he didn’t…. Both versions are shown here.


Rolf Harris And The Next Witch-Hunt Victim

Another good read. He brings up the rarely mentioned similarities between Tonya Lee’s testimony and that of complainants in the Jimmy Saville case (most of whom I simply do not believe), and that of the lesser-known Sarah Monahan in Australia:


“Next we come to Tonya Lee, who like Wendy Wild is a head case, but unlike her is simply lying, and her lies are not even original. After hearing about Rolf’s troubles in the UK, Lee sold her story for a five figure sum. The incident she described – which clearly never occurred – was remarkably similar to an allegation against Jimmy Savile, and one which likewise never occurred. Furthermore, it was very likely inspired by the trashing of another Australian entertainer, Robert Hughes. Like Harris, Hughes was accused of historical sexual abuse; he was convicted shortly before Harris last year. In his own way, Hughes was as big a star as Harris in Australia; initially he was accused by one woman – Sarah Monahan – and as with Harris, other accusers followed. On March 14 last year, court reporter Paul Bibby pointed out in The Age that another woman who had worked on the show Hey Dad! had made anonymous allegations against Hughes on-line, allegations she had previously denied making. The jury still convicted him.

Even more bizarrely, Monahan is now a true believer in the great Satanic conspiracy, and claims Satanic paedophiles wield enormous influence in Australia. She is married to an American, and it was undoubtedly while in the US that she came up with these fairy stories. There is almost always an undercurrent of either feminism or bizarre Christian fundamentalism in most of these bogus tales of ritual abuse. Fittingly, Monahan’s first full length film was called Little White Lies, although they weren’t so little for Robert Hughes.”

 

Sarah Mohahan's Website - Satanic Conspiracy


Gutter Press

: Why don’t you get your bloody facts straight you lowlife tool!

The term “gutter press” was coined for geese like this…

 

More outrageous behaviour from the CPS. (Nothing to do with Rolf directly but still relevant).

Your tax dollars/quids at work….

 

Slowed Down video

The bizarre case of Mark Pearson, 61, finally cleared of a charge of a two-second sexual assault of a woman in a crowded railway station, the trial going ahead despite the complainant failing to identify him in a lineup and CCTV footage clearly showing he didn’t do it! This case should never have gotten past the interviewing stage, but, the cops MUST believe, no matter how utterly egregious the testimony.

 

"There was sufficient evidence for this case to proceed to court and progress to trial. We respect the decision of the jury."

 

What that actually means is: [Under the absurd guidelines of the current legislation] there was sufficient evidence for this case to proceed to court and progress to trial!

 

“Insufficient Evidence” includes the quantity “zero” but intriguingly

“Sufficient Evidence” also apparently includes the quantity “zero”!

 

50 shades of incest
Again, nothing to do with Rolf, but an example of how the pendulum has swung FAR too far in the accusers’ direction in sexual assault cases.

 

Mother of son who hanged himself  after being falsely accused of rape commits suicide a year later
And other feelgood  stories  courtesy of our beloved CPS.

This is a website called “Spiked” run by Barrister Barbara Hewson; well worth a read.

Comments are allowed and they appear to be moderated.

 

Deceased British comedy  actor John Inman cleared of sexually abusing a 13-year-old boy almost four decades ago

I’m Free!”  (Although I’m also brown bread…)

“The man, now 48, claimed he was lured to a hotel room by a friend of John Inman on the promise of an acting role. He told detectives he was forced to perform a sex act on the then 44-year-old actor on several occasions at the Imperial Hotel and the Princess Theatre in Torquay, Devon, in 1979.

But after a four-month inquiry, officers concluded the claims could never be proven as both the accused had died.”

But Liz Dux, of Slater and Gordon Lawyers, who represented Savile victims, said: ‘It’s very dangerous if an offender thinks, “Well, if I committed my crime 40 years ago I’m not going to be prosecuted because there isn’t any police money”. That would be a terrible message to send out.’

Devon and Cornwall Police said: ‘As both of those who were subject to the allegation are deceased, there’s no realistic prospect of a prosecution. As a result, the investigation is not being pursued.’ 

 

Ms Dux. With even less respect than I have for  Mr Justice Sweeney, I can pretty well assure you that  that is the most egregious statement I’ve ever heard come out of a lawyer’s mouth. Inman has been dead for 9 years; how exactly would this “message get sent out”? By Ouija board?