Harris claims 13 year old had consensual relationship

onerone

The title says it all, the victim of this 16 year relationship claims she was starstruck and afraid of Rolf, so did as he said.


What's your opinion, is it possible for a teenager to have a consensual relationship with someone older?


Is it a case of modern society creating a taboo against these relationships which in turn led the the victim to believe she was wronged because of her young age?

Menas

Where is the link OP?
Did his defence raise this in court?

Cantremember

FFS.

AlwaysAnyTime

Cantremember wrote: »

FFS.

My sentiments exactly

Tropheus

He denies he had a relationship when she was 13. He says it started when she was 18.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/474758/Rolf-Harris-trial-latest-Entertainer-at-Southwark-Crown-Court-on-indecent-assault-charges

Mr. Incognito

16 year relationship??

So she was with him until 29?

Misleading title. One could see how a 16 year relationship could objectively be consensual from 18 to 29.

Not from 13 to 18 though.

Either way, could care less.

onerone

This is all from today's Irish daily mirror I wouldn't be mentioning this otherwise you pack of fuktards.

Wacker The Attacker

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

16 year relationship??

So she was with him until 29?

Misleading title. One could see how a 16 year relationship could objectively be consensual from 18 to 29.

Not from 13 to 18 though.

Either way, could care less.

This implies that you actually care

gctest50

onerone wrote: »

This is all from today's Irish daily mirror I wouldn't be mentioning this otherwise you pack of fuktards.

who's a fuktard ?

How was anyone supposed to know where that "joyful" news came from ?

onerone wrote: »

Spied on both my sisters having showers. the stuck up local catholic girls wouldn't put out soi had to go incest style.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90147062&postcount=45

onerone

Read the letter from Harris addressed to the victims father , straight from the source, if there is a problem then bring it to the courts as the papers cannot publish unsubstantiated claims if they do they are liable

onerone

do u want a slap for that reignition of a previous post? I did things when I was a kid so what, that means all them gerbils are innocent (Google gerbils in urbandictionary) give me a break

daithi1970

..stay classy..

Menas

onerone wrote: »

Read the letter from Harris addressed to the victims father , straight from the source, if there is a problem then bring it to the courts as the papers cannot publish unsubstantiated claims if they do they are liable

Can you give us a link to the letter where he claims that his relationship with a 13 year old was consentual?
He admited in an alleged letter to a relationship with her but not until she was of legal age. That is very different to your claim.

I am not defending the man but believe claims need to be backed up.

onerone

read the letter just as I have done then you will realize what I'm talking about. I wonder why he has been convicted if she was 18, please get back to me on that

Menas

onerone wrote: »

read the letter just as I have done then you will realize what I'm talking about. I wonder why he has been convicted if she was 18, please get back to me on that

Eh...because he has not been convicted.

onerone

I'm sorry the entire conviction is revealed in the letter he wrote to his victims father

onerone

Clearly a number of people have not read this letter its undeniable

Nodin

onerone wrote: »

I'm sorry the entire conviction is revealed in the letter he wrote to his victims father

He
Has
Not
Been
Convicted.

gctest50

onerone wrote: »

do u want a slap for that reignition of a previous post? ..............

?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB53DS3k1yI

Toby Take a Bow

onerone wrote: »

I'm sorry the entire conviction is revealed in the letter he wrote to his victims father

I'm not sure you know what 'conviction' means.

humanji

onerone wrote: »

do u want a slap for that reignition of a previous post? I did things when I was a kid so what, that means all them gerbils are innocent (Google gerbils in urbandictionary) give me a break

Take a few days off.

Menas

onerone wrote: »

Clearly a number of people have not read this letter its undeniable

Clearly one person does not understand that one is not convicted until the end of the trial.

Now, can you link or quote where he admits having a sexual relationship with her when she was 13?

MonsterCookie

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2624114/Rolf-Harris-trial-hears-confession-letter-alleged-victims-father.html

Sad story no doubt.

Sunglasses Ron

When the case was brought he was also charged with producing indecent images (although "producing" is legal jargon that is taken to mean mere possession). I've not seen this charge mentioned in any of the recent reporting on the case, was it dropped? Or perhaps did his legal team successfully argue for it to be tried in a separate trial as the weight of it would be prejudicial to the jurors opinions towards the stories of the complainants in the case? (i.e a jury that convicts him over a charge where physical evidence exists is highly likely to be bent towards convicting him of similar offences for which no physical evidence exists, and therefore the tagging along of this charge in the sex assault case could be seen to result in prejudicing the jury)

Interesting really, because as much as the bulk of the case is he said she said, if he hadn't got an innocent explanation as to how he was found with said image it would be pretty dynamite stuff for the prosecution of the alleged assaults.

Tropheus

Yes, I wondered about the indecent images thing as well. It hasn't been mentioned since the trial began.

Judging by what's coming out in the trial, he's pretty much finished in the entertainment business whether he's found guilty or not.

anto9

A lady come out public in the Australian media ,about what Rolf did to her when she was 13 and on a trip to London .Pretty damning stuff having seen the interview .Probably available on Utube.

Snake

I wonder is the OP slapping the admins in the prison forum right now

Maphisto

anto9 wrote: »

A lady come out public in the Australian media ,about what Rolf did to her when she was 13 and on a trip to London .Pretty damning stuff having seen the interview .Probably available on Utube.

The problem I always have with this and I don't know if the woman is truthful or not but why in the media why on Utube. If its that damning it should be before the court not doing the rounds

Sunglasses Ron

anto9 wrote: »

A lady come out public in the Australian media ,about what Rolf did to her when she was 13 and on a trip to London .Pretty damning stuff having seen the interview .Probably available on Utube.

That she was paid for. Pre trial.

I've no leaning of opinion either way yet as I'm neither a fan nor a hater of Harris (although what appears to be a court ordered media blackout and deliberate attempt to cast off this indecent image charge to a separate trial does sound very questionable, if that indeed is what has happened), but people selling their stories are the last people you can trust for credibility. I think what happens in the court is a better indicator of what really happened than people selling stories to the papers.

anto9

^True it was stated that she was paid for the Aus. TV interview ,but she did sound very believable (unless she is a great actress ) and has shown her face which could cause problems in her life .Anyway i will wait for the Jury to make a verdict .

Maphisto

anto9 wrote: »

^True it was stated that she was paid for the Aus. TV interview ,but she did sound very believable (unless she is a great actress ) and has shown her face which could cause problems in her life .Anyway i will wait for the Jury to make a verdict .

I bought some tools off a guy in a white van about 12 months ago. He sounded very believable- guess what all the tools are knackered.

She might sound plausible but the right place to give evidence is in court where it can be tested and cross examined. The court will use other criteria for accepting or not the evidence of a witness other than how plausible they appear, otherwise there would be no hope for anyone who can't act. Sure we'd all be at the drama classes at the weekends just in case .

Plek Trum

Taken from Dailymail website:

BOMBSHELL LETTER: WHAT ROLF HARRIS WROTE TO GIRL'S FATHER

Here is the full text of a letter written by Rolf Harris to the father of one of his alleged victims in March 1997.

'Dear [the father],

'Please forgive me for not writing sooner. You said in your letter to me that you never wanted to see me or hear from me again, but now [the alleged victim] says it's all right to write to you.

'Since that trip up to Norfolk, I have been in a state of abject self loathing. How we delude ourselves.

'I fondly imagined that everything that had taken place had progressed from a feeling of love and friendship - there was no rape, no physical forcing, brutality or beating that took place.

'When I came to Norfolk, [the alleged victim] told me that she had always been terrified of me and went along with everything that I did out of fear of me.

'I said 'Why did you never just say no?'. And [the alleged victim] said how could she say no to the great television star Rolf Harris.

'Until she told me that, I had no idea that she was scared of me.

'She laughs in a bitter way and says I must have known that she has always been scared of me. I honestly didn't know.

'[The alleged victim] keeps saying that this has all been going on since she was 13. She's told you that and you were justly horrified, and she keeps reiterating that to me, no matter what I said to the contrary.

'She says admiring her and telling her she looked lovely in her bathing suit was just the same as physically molesting her. I didn't know. Nothing took place in a physical way until we had moved to Highlands. I think about 1983 or 84 was the first time.

'I can pinpoint a date was 1986, because I remember I was in pantomime at Richmond.

'When I see the misery I have caused [the alleged victim] I am sickened by myself. You can't go back and change things that you have done in this life - I wish to god I could.

'When I came to Norfolk, spent that time with [the alleged victim] and realised the enormity of what I had done to [the alleged victim], and how I had affected her whole life, I begged her for forgiveness and she said 'I forgive you'.

'Whether she really meant it or not, I don't know. I hope she did, but I fear she can never forgive me.

'I find it hard to like myself in any way, shape or form. And as I do these Animal programmes, I see the unconditional love that dogs give to their owners and I wish I could start to love myself again.

'If there is any way that I could atone for what I have done I would willingly do it. If there is a way I can start to help [the alleged victim] to heal herself, I would willingly do it.

'With your permission I'll phone you in a week to talk to you. If you hang up, I will understand, but I would like to talk to you to apologise for betraying your trust and for unwittingly so harming your darling [the alleged victim].

'I know that what I did was wrong but we are, all of us, fallible and oh how I deluded myself.

'Please forgive me, love Rolf.

'Please forgive me for what must have been the most insensitive thing in your eyes - sending the book for Christmas. Alwen knows nothing about all this - at the time - and rather than tell her I signed the book and wrote the platitudes with sinking heart.

'Forgive me.'
.

Pretty indicting stuff to me - admission of action, timeframes etc. Apparently the victim in question was best friends with his daughter since age of 2 or 3, their families were close. Its a betrayal on that account alone, but if she was over 18, not illegal. If it happened to her when younger (and can be proven to be true) then unfortunately a man I considered to be my childhood hero really is a monster. Out of all the 'celebs' under investigation under operation Yew Tree, I really didn't think this one would be true. Seems I was possibly wrong...

Karl Stein

I'm tough as nails
you're slower than a snail
I beat up every single person in jail

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk4Nu_5vSR0

RoboRat

because as much as the bulk of the case is he said she said

Generally is the case in rape, paedophilia, indecent assault cases.

Maphisto

Plek Trum wrote: »

Pretty indicting stuff to me - admission of action, timeframes etc. Apparently the victim in question was best friends with his daughter since age of 2 or 3, their families were close. Its a betrayal on that account alone, but if she was over 18, not illegal. If it happened to her when younger (and can be proven to be true) then unfortunately a man I considered to be my childhood hero really is a monster. Out of all the 'celebs' under investigation under operation Yew Tree, I really didn't think this one would be true. Seems I was possibly wrong...

Given that this happened in the UK, 16 would be age of consent.

Either way, RH is clearly not the nicest of people though.

Sunglasses Ron

Maphisto wrote: »

Either way, RH is clearly not the nicest of people though.

Like Hitler, or one of those mad fellas.

Anyone still following this? Must say from what we can read from the outside the evidence seems more reasonably strong than most of the other recent celebrity trials/ investigations (although there is a lack of clear proof he was making celebrity appearances at some of the locations/ times of some alleged offences)

I can still only assume there is a media blackout on pending charges relating to the indecent images charges, seeing as there are zero Google results from mainstream media regarding them ever having been dropped. In fact the very few google results only lead to conspiracy theory websites of such demented wingnuttery that they make Alex Jones look like a paper of record.

If he is acquitted and then faces the images charges at a separate trial I'm sure there will be some amount of media uproar as to whether this type of thing should be tagged along to a case as some sort of "character defining" evidence or whatnot.

I Heart Internet

Rolf is gonna have to tie his kangaroo down in a prison shortly.

Sunglasses Ron

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/07/rolf-harris-in-court-as-jury-selection-begins-for-indecent-assault-trial

"He is also facing four counts of making indecent photographs of a child in 2012 but is yet to be arraigned on those charges."




So there it is.

Seems that the defense regarded whatever was found to be fatally prejudicial to the ability of the jurors to decide on the rest of the charges.

This one won't be over for a while even if he is acquitted of the current charges. Given his career is effectively over even if he is found not guilty (likable artists cum folk singers don't do their reputation favors by getting off with the borderline legal daughters of their family friends) one would wonder if he would simply plead guilty to the next charges to avoid a prolonged trial and say as much when asked by the media why he plead guilty- after all it is highly unlikely a man of his age would be jailed for having a small amount of this stuff, some of these people get a suspended sentence for having thousands of them (Darina Allen's husband and that judge down in Cork some years ago spring to mind)

Santa Cruz

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Rolf is gonna have to tie his kangaroo down in a prison shortly.

Hate to see his digeridoo after a few months in the Scrubs.
He won't be singing about two little boys anymore

Sunglasses Ron

Well if we're going to drag it down to this level.....his daughter isn't a bad looker for middle age, whilst his wife looks as mad as a bag of drowning cats.

Sleepy

They were saying on The Right Hook yesterday that he's apparently been able to show evidence (newspaper coverage) that he wasn't even in the country at the time that some of the other abuses are alleged to have taken place so there could definitely be a case of bandwagon cases happening...

Sunglasses Ron

Sleepy wrote: »

They were saying on The Right Hook yesterday that he's apparently been able to show evidence (newspaper coverage) that he wasn't even in the country at the time that some of the other abuses are alleged to have taken place so there could definitely be a case of bandwagon cases happening...

It's been a while but I'm nearly certain that it said the main complainant reported her case to the police before the whole Savile controversy came about.

It is, of course, possible or even likely that some of the complainants here are on a bandwagon as has happened with all these cases, but for one complaint to pre date all this media witch hunt atmosphere is fairly significant.

Fighting Irish

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

16 year relationship??

So she was with him until 29?

Misleading title. One could see how a 16 year relationship could objectively be consensual from 18 to 29.

Not from 13 to 18 though.

Either way, could care less.

Legally

anto9

anto9 wrote: »

^True it was stated that she was paid for the Aus. TV interview ,but she did sound very believable (unless she is a great actress ) and has shown her face which could cause problems in her life .Anyway i will wait for the Jury to make a verdict .

I know longer believe this particular lady .Firstly i read that she got 65,000 Aus dollars from one particular media to tell her story .Then she got her time line totally wrong about when the assault happened .She said initally it happened at the start of her UK group tour ,then it appears in Court it was at the end ,if it happened .

Sunglasses Ron

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2646678/TV-game-video-proves-Rolf-Harris-liar.html

Caught out doing a bit of Bertie- ism it would seem. He would be better off claiming he simply forgot rather than claiming his agent was regularly sending him on mystery tours to places where he didn't even bother asking the name of. Claiming you forgot you were somewhere nearly 40 years ago is a lot more plausible than the Bertie defense, seems like he prosecution really caught him off guard with this one.

I found his claim that he had never been to a reasonably sized world famous town not a million miles away from his own South of England locale to be very odd in the first place, given that he was a regularly touring performer/ artist and all.

His daughter was giving testimony as well, and it wasn't exactly a glowing character reference. One wonders if she is more worried for her mother's health if he is found guilty than whether he actually did it or not.

Guilty or not he seems an awful slimy c'unt regardless.

It's amusing that we consider the ending of RH's career as being an aspect of the possible punishment. The man is over 80. I doubt his career was too hectic recently so that's not going to be much of a loss. It's as bemusing as Silvio Berlusconi being given community service to serve in an elderly care centre when he's 77 years old himself.

Harris quite probably never believed his victim was afraid of him because it suited him to never believe it. In the letter, he self servingly refers to his relationship with his alleged victim as having come from a place of love. However in court, he admitted it was just no frills sex. So we knew he lies by his own admission.

He's a duplicitous self-serving opportunist and quite possibly a pedophile if he has been in possession of child pornography. Even if he's not guilty of any crime, he's shown himself to be the opposite of his benevolent grandad image, and he has duped his viewing public for decades.

Temptamperu

Their is no such thing as consensual with anyone under 18 in my eyes.

porsche959

Temptamperu wrote: »

Their is no such thing as consensual with anyone under 18 in my eyes.

That's not what the law says. Age of consent is 16 in UK and 17 in Ireland.

Temptamperu

porsche959 wrote: »

That's not what the law says. Age of consent is 16 in UK and 17 in Ireland.

I know, I have my own moral compass though.

Smidge

Temptamperu wrote: »

Their is no such thing as consensual with anyone under 18 in my eyes.

In fairness, I'd say there are a LOT of people out there who lost their virginity at 16 with an older partner. Maybe only a year or two but still.

GalwayGuy2

Hmmmm, the juries still out, but I'm not sure they can prove he actually did anything.