Franky Bear Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I'm in agreement that the police must have reasonable evidence to have been issued with a search warrant. There is a lot of people that have been hiding away for a few years, that must be shitting themselves , as they wait for the knock on the door. The spotlight is on the cops so they would not have performed this raid unless they thought the evidence is watertight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATF Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Who the hell is Cliff Richards? Harry Webb born in India and more popular than the Beatles in Thailand back in the 60's Jacky you seem to be a fan, for the right reasons of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post CharlieH Posted August 15, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 15, 2014 I also agree that given the high profile and possible connections the person may have that the CPS would have had to have a pretty tight case to proceed against him, especially given the press/public exposure that would result. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonytigerbkk Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonytigerbkk Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. And do tell me, what made you think that I was talking about you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacky54 Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. Why is it people on this board always want to mis use the inflammatory word Paedophile? Paedophilia is an attraction to pre pubescent children and not 14+ year olds. This is not an apology, but please drop the witch burning phraseology. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieH Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 antogonizing posts with personal comment removed. FINAL WARNING ANYONE breaching forum rules will now be suspended without further notice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATF Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. Why is it people on this board always want to mis use the inflammatory word Paedophile? Paedophilia is an attraction to pre pubescent children and not 14+ year olds. This is not an apology, but please drop the witch burning phraseology. Jacky that is one strange statement. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balo Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) I believe Cliff is one of the good guys, he might be gay but he would never harm anyone , especially not kids. So British tabloids will now report about any rumours , which is a shame. I hope he will get some justice out of this in the end. Edited August 15, 2014 by balo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonytigerbkk Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. Why is it people on this board always want to mis use the inflammatory word Paedophile? Paedophilia is an attraction to pre pubescent children and not 14+ year olds. This is not an apology, but please drop the witch burning phraseology. Jacky that is one strange statement. I have to agree with you on this ATF. Jacky, while you have correctly identified the true meaning of the word, the word Paedophile is now more commonly used (and accepted) to refer to someone who has sexual urges or engages in sexual acts with a person under 16. This is explained better in Wiki's page on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chiang mai Posted August 15, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. And do tell me, what made you think that I was talking about you? My apologies if you were not, but I don't see anyone else posting in favor of not hanging him until the evidence is clear! It's clear that I seem to have become a target for expressing the need for due process of law and that has resulted in a number of abusive and accusatory posts and I do have a problem of two fronts: the first is being accused of being a "sick peodo" and the second because a few posters are not capable of understanding the issue of due process and the reliability of witnesses over time. I accept I may well be fighting my position overly defensively but I will not stand to be accused of such things, even on an anonymous internet forum. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I believe Cliff is one of the good guys, he might be gay but he would never harm anyone , especially not kids. So British tabloids will now report about any rumours , which is a shame. I hope he will get some justice out of this in the end. Well, there is a due process and it may go to court. Maybe he is a good guy, maybe he isn't. The police along with the CPS obviously think there is something to investigate, so maybe he will get the justice he deserves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3NUMBAS Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 it happened at a billy graham concert but what were the cops looking for ? trophys ? he would have ditched any evidence as he was under suspicion long ago .rumours of Ted Heath having sex parties with rent boys abound with VIPs at the parties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonytigerbkk Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. And do tell me, what made you think that I was talking about you? My apologies if you were not, but I don't see anyone else posting in favor of not hanging him until the evidence is clear! It's clear that I seem to have become a target for expressing the need for due process of law and that has resulted in a number of abusive and accusatory posts and I do have a problem of two fronts: the first is being accused of being a "sick peodo" and the second because a few posters are not capable of understanding the issue of due process and the reliability of witnesses over time. I accept I may well be fighting my position overly defensively but I will not stand to be accused of such things, even on an anonymous internet forum. You may sit down then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacky54 Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) Personally I think there is more chance of the Dali Lama being convicted of doing the naughty with young boys than St Cliff, but that's just my opinion. Edited August 15, 2014 by jacky54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Personally I think there is more chance of the Dali Lama being convicted of doing the naughty with young boys than St Cliff, but that's just my opinion. Well he may get his day in court, and a jury to decide. Who knows, he may be guilty, he might not be. No person though should be above the law just because of who they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshstiles Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 who is he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacky54 Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 who is he? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliff_Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverdie Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I thought this thread was about Cliff Richard and a raid on his home, investigation in progress. I'm confused by the last two pages of post & I think everyone seems to be agreeing on the importance of a professional and unbiased investigation. I understand CM's point about the human memory and I've even seen recent case studies that address these issues. I guess at any subsequent fort case all these issues will be raised by relevant experts in the field. I do hope that the truth in the matter is discovered. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wat dee Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Why is it that every time one of these 70s celebs gets caught there is someone on this board who defends their Pedophile activities? I do understand that there are people who come to Thailand because they have more 'freedom' than in their own country, but there is no need to come onto TVF to let everyone know that you agree with this vile act. And do tell me, what made you think that I was talking about you? My apologies if you were not, but I don't see anyone else posting in favor of not hanging him until the evidence is clear! It's clear that I seem to have become a target for expressing the need for due process of law and that has resulted in a number of abusive and accusatory posts and I do have a problem of two fronts: the first is being accused of being a "sick peodo" and the second because a few posters are not capable of understanding the issue of due process and the reliability of witnesses over time. I accept I may well be fighting my position overly defensively but I will not stand to be accused of such things, even on an anonymous internet forum. So now you think there is need for due process of law even with "old" crimes ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thamesiris Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 If this nonsense continues, at some point in time we'll likely reach a stage where folks will be arrested for something they may or may not have done, in a previous life 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiang mai Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 All crimes are "old" crimes, none get committed in the future! So yes, there is ALWAYS the need for due process of law for ANY crimes, guilty must be firmly and independently established. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaldPlumber Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) Who the hell is Cliff Richards?Some bloke that releases crappy Christmas songs every yearCynically released crappy Christmas songs every year, relying on his dementia affected fan base to loyally buy them until he was sensibly banned from just about every UK radio station which stopped this nonsense in its tracks. Edited August 15, 2014 by BaldPlumber 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watcharacters Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I saw Donovan in concert in the late 1960s and in Mellow Yellow he sang the line I'm just mad about 14 year old girls and I thought "what the ... ???" Preservation of the human species. Until recently a lot of woman got married at that age - in some parts of the world, a lot still do. Are you suggesting that makes it right? . Did you hear him support it in his post, Toad? Yeah, I thought not. It's called an observation. Please don't put unfounded thoughts or accusations into your posts. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I saw Donovan in concert in the late 1960s and in Mellow Yellow he sang the line I'm just mad about 14 year old girls and I thought "what the ... ???" Preservation of the human species. Until recently a lot of woman got married at that age - in some parts of the world, a lot still do. Are you suggesting that makes it right? .Did you hear him support it in his post, Toad? Yeah, I thought not. It's called an observation. Please don't put unfounded thoughts or accusations into your posts. Mine was a question, not an accusation. A point of clarity Understand? Thought not 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacky54 Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Who the hell is Cliff Richards?Some bloke that releases crappy Christmas songs every yearCynically released crappy Christmas songs every year, relying on his dementia affected fan base to loyally buy them until he was sensibly banned from just about every UK radio station which stopped this nonsense in its tracks. They still got to number one though, so not really stopped in it's tracks at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Thankfully not for a few years 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jonmarleesco Posted August 15, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 15, 2014 Until there is firm evidence to the contrary - relevant to an allegation made by an individual almost 30 years after the alleged incident - it would be prudent to withhold the name of the accused. But whenever an allegation of a sexual nature is made, whether or not it ultimately proves unfounded, the police persist in naming the accused, while invariably withholding that of the accuser, even where the allegation is found to be false.The police also claim that they had nothing to do with leaking the search to the media. Something else that beggars belief. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATF Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I saw Donovan in concert in the late 1960s and in Mellow Yellow he sang the line I'm just mad about 14 year old girls and I thought "what the ... ???" Preservation of the human species. Until recently a lot of woman got married at that age - in some parts of the world, a lot still do. Are you suggesting that makes it right? . Did you hear him support it in his post, Toad? Yeah, I thought not. It's called an observation. Please don't put unfounded thoughts or accusations into your posts. What a load of !#@$ we are not colonizing another planet or something. A developed society does not condone sex with barely pubescent girls. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mrtoad Posted August 15, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted August 15, 2014 Until there is firm evidence to the contrary - relevant to an allegation made by an individual almost 30 years after the alleged incident - it would be prudent to withhold the name of the accused. But whenever an allegation of a sexual nature is made, whether or not it ultimately proves unfounded, the police persist in naming the accused, while invariably withholding that of the accuser, even where the allegation is found to be false. The police also claim that they had nothing to do with leaking the search to the media. Something else that beggars belief. I think this is perfectly reasonable , there is something flawed in the process at present. What must happen is that the accuser should feel safe to make the accusation, and the accused should have the right to some privacy up until the actual court process has been completed. Not sure how they would do this, but it certainly seems fair IMO 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts