And another Phaedo is off the Streets

"Sallie Bennett-Jenkins QC, defending, told the court that Gadd had been subject to a "very high degree of vilification" and "demonification" in the press after being jailed in Vietnam in 2006 for molesting two girls aged 11 and 12.

She said he had led "an increasingly isolated life" for the last decade and had been unable to walk down the street "without being the subject of vilification"."

And your point is? Should everyone just have forgotten what a wrong'un he is and hero worshipped him instead?

IMHO he's been lucky not to be attacked (or worse) for what he's done, with any luck he'll not step foot outside of jail.
 
Russ77 said:
"Sallie Bennett-Jenkins QC, defending, told the court that Gadd had been subject to a "very high degree of vilification" and "demonification" in the press after being jailed in Vietnam in 2006 for molesting two girls aged 11 and 12.

She said he had led "an increasingly isolated life" for the last decade and had been unable to walk down the street "without being the subject of vilification"."

And your point is? Should everyone just have forgotten what a wrong'un he is and hero worshipped him instead?

IMHO he's been lucky not to be attacked (or worse) for what he's done, with any luck he'll not step foot outside of jail.
Click to expand...

No, but had it been me or you we could have gone to tesco without any hassles.

Sad thing for me is I love his music. Have done since the early 90s when I discover the joy of Bolan, slade, glitter etc...

Of course he has previous and probably is guilty but I do struggle to see how it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt some 40 years later?

Is it also just me that thinks these sentences for Harris and the like are quite tough compared to what others get? In comparison to other sex offenders and violent criminals they seem high when they pose little or nor future risk.
 
Anyway, apologies for detracting from the original post.

16 years is too good for this fella. He should never see the light of day again, in my opinion.
 
boyfalldown said:
at 70 I imagine he's unlikely to ever get out (which isnt a bad thing)
Click to expand...


I believe he is eligible for licenced release in 9 years, according to the guy on the radio, our sooner if he wins an appeal to lessen the sentence.....:mad:
 
Last edited:
archangel said:
I believe he is eligible for licenced release in 9 years, according to the guy on the radio, our spinner if he wins an appeal to lessen the sentence.....:mad:
Click to expand...

I'll have a pint of whatever you're drinking.
 
ST4 said:
Maybe he had a bad childhood and we should feel sorry for him....

NOT!!!!
Click to expand...


Maybe we should nail him to a wall for the crows to feed on.....sounds like a plan.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
archangel said:
I believe he is eligible for licenced release in 9 years, according to the guy on the radio, our sooner if he wins an appeal to lessen the sentence.....:mad:
Click to expand...


He has to win an appeal first ........... It wouldn t be unusual not to make it to 79
 
Not for one moment say Gadd or any of the others are innocent but how on earth are they getting convicted just on he said she said evidence. No forensic evidence, no witness evidence, just he said she said.

This new type of conviction should be of concern to every one.
 
Paul-H said:
Not for one moment say Gadd or any of the others are innocent but how on earth are they getting convicted just on he said she said evidence. No forensic evidence, no witness evidence, just he said she said.

This new type of conviction should be of concern to every one.
Click to expand...

Don't think that anyone who has not heard all the evidence that was put to the jury can question the verdict.
 
Paul-H said:
Not for one moment say Gadd or any of the others are innocent but how on earth are they getting convicted just on he said she said evidence. No forensic evidence, no witness evidence, just he said she said.

This new type of conviction should be of concern to every one.
Click to expand...
In principle, I agree 100%.
But, there can be important evidence that we don't know about, and which helps the jury to decide on the truth of the allegations.

For example, in one case (Rolf Harris) various victims, none of which knew about the existence of the others and so couldn't compare notes, all said that he spat on his fingers before sticking them into them - that's important evidence when it comes from multiple sources.
 
Having met and frequented the same pub as him at the height if his fame, I would say that this the tip of the iceberg TBH
Looking back he always preferred younger underage girls and the lapped up the attention so were probably easy pickings
for someone like him.
At the time everyone just thought he was be friendly to his adoring fans, looking back you can see the reality of it.
Thankfully I was too old for him at 18 :D
 
Gremlin said:
Having met and frequented the same pub as him at the height if his fame, I would say that this the tip of the iceberg TBH
Looking back he always preferred younger underage girls and the lapped up the attention so were probably easy pickings
for someone like him.
At the time everyone just thought he was be friendly to his adoring fans, looking back you can see the reality of it.
Thankfully I was too old for him at 18 :D
Click to expand...

Quite unusual to be telling folk your age :eek: (within a couple of years of course ;) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top