h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Now then, now then, now then. Police have arrested an 82 year old man in relation to operation Yew Tree. He was seen carrying a digeridoo, a wobble board and a paintbrush.

Can you tell who it is yet?


(Sorry not really funny I know - but had to be done )

Oh! This is really just too sad!

Me too - this is the first time that I am totally shocked by the allegations. Surely he has genuinely brought more joy to television viewers of all ages than any of the others.

Please avoid jokes involving:

1. tying kangaroos down
2. two little boys
3. being able to make your son arise
4. being able to "tell what it is yet"
5. didgeridoos
6. odd breathing patterns
7. anything to do with "down under"
8. extra legs
9. that creepy advert he used to do in a swimming pool.

... as all of these would count as too obvious.

Max Clifford

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22313286

What he now needs is a good publicist so he can make money out of this.

What struck me with Max Clifford's statement to the cameras is that he can't see that he did anything wrong (that's how I understood it) with what he did - so he can't imagine that anyone else does.

the whole thing is very depressing from so many angles.

Careful,if there is a not gulty verdict I expect someone like Clifford is collecting up all the snippets that pronounce him guilty to give them a good sueing later

"he can't see that he did anything wrong [...] with what he did - so he can't imagine that anyone else does"

Wow. If ever yer noisy feminists needed a poster boy for rape culture, a soundbite that sums up the dehumanising effect... well.

you're not a feminist, Hoo?

Ken Barlow

http://news.sky.com/story/1085437/coronation-streets-bill-roache-arrested

No wonder Deirdre always looked depressed

Reading the Guardian report on this, I noted the following:

"Detectives searched the actor's house"

What exactly did they expect to find that has any bearing on an offence allegedly committed over forty five years ago? I understand it's probably standard procedure, but in all seriousness is there anything they could find that would be admissible? Even in principle?

Possibly anything indicating an interest in underage girls.

He has probably had his computer(s) removed for examination.

PP.

I may be naive, but if I were on a jury I'd have a hard time believing ANYTHING (short of a confession note or something "to be read after my death" or some similar unlikely nonsense) found on a computer in 2013 could be in any way at all relevant to whether someone had or had not committed an offence in 1967. The very idea seems ludicrous.

The whole witch-hunt is ludicrous. Seems to me like this police unit is just trying to justify its existence now. There's no way in hell any sexual allegation can be proven to have occurred or not occurred 45 years ago. It's just money and fame-seekers trying their luck. Honestly, 19bluddy67

"members of the jury, this man was asked what he was doing on the afternoon of August 12th , 2 years before the first moonlanding, and he said, he couldn't remember. A likely story! Guilty!"

To be clear, I'm not proposing there should be any statute of limitations on sexual offences. I'm just baffled by the search and what it might hope to achieve.

And in the news: in three months, Stuart Hall has gone from saying allegations against him were "pernicious, callous, cruel and, above all, spurious", to saying he "deeply and sincerely regrets his actions. He wishes to issue an unreserved apology to the individuals concerned. He now accepts his behaviour and actions were completely wrong and he is very remorseful".

Wonder what changed in three months?

Worth noting that some of the charges he's coughed to dated back to... 1967.

It really is starting to get to the point where aging celebrities might having to start "coming out" as being one of the few who were NOT trading on their status to bang underage kids in the sixties and seventies.

Who says it has stopped?

I never said it had stopped. It's a good deal harder to get away with now, though, I think, because there's less "mystique" to celebrities compared to how it was 40 years ago.

But a good conman is, if you will forgive the terminology, always up for a challenge

I think we would all like to hope that such behaviour is universally recognised as unacceptable and that the police, courts etc. are sensitive to the issue, making it easier than ever before for victims of such crimes to come forward to name and shame the perpetrators while receiving care, compassion and counselling.

Sadly, I suspect that is being naively optimistic.

<BB<