Re: Stuart Hall sentence

So you think it's all about compensation? I think it's about justice, overdue.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

He's 83 years old, age does not justify his actions, but at that age, he is probably worrying more where his next breath is coming from, not any sentence, I am probably wrong, but it is just a possibility.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

It's neither solely about justice or solely about compensation.

All this started with a witch hunt after a dead man who could not be prosecuted. Jimmy Savile. Who could not be proven guilty ... or innocent.

It's a farce. Stuart Hall's court case has been a farce and I'm sure all the other 'celebrities' facing criminal prosecution will provide the media with more courtroom farces ... that the media will relish.

The whole issue of historic sex allegations leaves a nasty taste in my mouth.
Why didn't any of these victims come forward 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago.
Some were probably genuine victims.
Some have since decided they were victims .. probably when a lawyer whispered the word compensation in their ear. Some were in all probability a grope or a quick fondle.
How do they prove it now beyond all reasonable doubt? There is no DNA samples. No crime scene to investigate. No Doctor's medical examination.
It is the alleged victim's word against the accused.

Of course ... it helps speeds the legal process if the accused pleads guilty.

Stuart Hall initially denied all the allegations. He later pleaded guilty ... except to a charge of rape which the police decided not to pursue ... but keep on file.
Surely the police should have tried to nail him for the greatest crime of the lot? That would have been justice.

I'm not saying he is innocent. Afterall, he has said he is guilty.
I'm suspicious that deals have been done ... or the guy didn't want all the hassle and took the easier option.
I think it stinks fouler than an old fishy kipper.

So ... some will see it as a farce like I do .. and others will see it as a farcical sentence of 15 months.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

He has admitted to the abuse of young children. Enough said, as far as I am concerned. He sickens me.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

He was not 83 when he committed those heinous crimes against children. His crimes have caught up with him, to his everlasting shame.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

I'm just wondering why the police didn't prosecute him for the one crime he denied .... the most serious one ... the rape.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

I agree.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

No DNA evidence, so no concrete proof.

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

The most likely reason he wasn't prosecuted for the R, is because the child cannot say for sure whether it was his P or his finger, therefore, cannot without DNA as mentioned prove it beyond doubt. I remember once reporting a flasher when I was a child. I had never seen a P before. The Police asked me whether the P was erect or dangling. It was dangling so therefore that doesn't count as attempted R. That was decades ago when there was naieve children like me who had never been taught about sex and what happens. My parents never told me the facts of life. So a child in those days probably like me didn't know what it was all about therefore, hard to prove. The children were probably unaware of what was happening and He knew what he was doing and a lot of these guys seem to approach the attack in the same way, so without giving details in the media, these children have probably told the same story so therefore making him guilty to which in the end he had to plead guilty to. Quite right as well.
I also said to myself when I heard the story first of all whether some of the girls were his family?

Re: Stuart Hall sentence

Probably because there is insufficient evidence to prove his guilt and its not for the Police to prosecute - they merely bring whatever evidence they have to the attention of the Crown Prosecution Service - its then up to the DPP as to whether or not they have a strong enough case to reasonbly get a conviction or not.