Police reveal at least 178 UK celebrities are suspected child sex offenders

Boring username

Some 261 celebrities and politicians, including sports, TV and music stars, are being investigated for alleged child sex abuse, police have revealed.
They are among more than 1,400 men suspected by police of being sex predators as the Home Secretary warned it is only the “tip of the iceberg”.
The rogues gallery includes 135 TV, film and radio stars, 43 musicians and seven sports figures as well as 76 politicians, the officer in charge of the issue has disclosed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11617789/Scale-of-child-sex-abuse-revealed-in-new-police-figures.html


Ok, what the hell is going on here? This is unprecedented, I knew there were abnormal personalities getting into showbiz but the numbers involved here are almost beyond comprehension. And that's before we even mention the politicians and religious institutes. I used to think Colm O Gorman's claim that 1 in 4 people had been abused was far fetched-now it's starting to worry me that this is indeed the case.
This rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper and deeper. I wonder if RTE is attracting the same sort of predators?

silverfeather

Boring username wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11617789/Scale-of-child-sex-abuse-revealed-in-new-police-figures.html


Ok, what the hell is going on here? This is unprecedented, I knew there were abnormal personalities getting into showbiz but the numbers involved here are almost beyond comprehension. And that's before we even mention the politicians and religious institutes. I used to think Colm O Gorman's claim that 1 in 4 people had been abused was far fetched-now it's starting to worry me that this is indeed the case.
This rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper and deeper. I wonder if RTE is attracting the same sort of predators?

The percentage of celebs who are sex abusers is likely to be the same percentage as any other social group.

The no of priests who are pedophiles is not actually higher than any other profession. It's just that they were hidden. Similarly it is not that there are a higher number of celebrities to are peados or rapists. They just might use their social power to evade justice. That is key to preventing it.

I think it's best not to be alarmist or you lack credibility and people become jaded.

strobe

Suspected of being. They're being investigated.

Still mad though.

silverfeather

strobe wrote: »

Suspected of being. They're being investigated.

Still mad though.

And some will be found guilty and some totally innocent.

Mechanical Clocktail

It might not be due course but if these allegations are founded on actual police work then I don't think it would be a bad thing for a list of names to be leaked. Assuming that 1400 names haven't been compiled on nothing but hearsay.

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

It might not be due course but if these allegations are founded on actual police work then I don't think it would be a bad thing for a list of names to be leaked. Assuming that 1400 names haven't been compiled on nothing but hearsay.

It wouldn't be a bad thing. It'd be a terrible thing.

All those names are innocent until proven guilty, but if the names were leaked they'd be tried in the court of public opinion.

strobe

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

It might not be due course but if these allegations are founded on actual police work then I don't think it would be a bad thing for a list of names to be leaked. Assuming that 1400 names haven't been compiled on nothing but hearsay.

I'd imagine that given the events of recent times and the criticisms surrounding them, that there would be at least some level of preliminary investigation into someone if an anonyomous letter arrived saying "my best friends nieces neighbors mate, heard off this girl this one time that 'celebrity x' did something to her in the pantry with the candle stick'. A name and shame policy probably isn't the way forward.

porsche959

I think what is more concerning is that while plenty of these celebs have been investigated and jailed if found guilty, there has not been a single arrest of a politician to date.

Lollipops23

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

It might not be due course but if these allegations are founded on actual police work then I don't think it would be a bad thing for a list of names to be leaked.

It would ruin lives if even one or two of them were innocent. I'm willing to bet more than one or two are innocent.

Boring username

strobe wrote: »

Suspected of being. They're being investigated.

Still mad though.

Quite right, I thought I had put suspected in the title. I must have deleted it by accident.

bjork

No suprise

Eutow

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

It might not be due course but if these allegations are founded on actual police work then I don't think it would be a bad thing for a list of names to be leaked. Assuming that 1400 names haven't been compiled on nothing but hearsay.

Why would you want them leaked before anybody has been found guilty? A trial could be thrown out because of leaks.

The Diabolical Monocle

Eutow wrote: »

Why would you want them leaked before anybody has been found guilty? A trial could be thrown out because of leaks.

The general public needs someone to demonize and throw rotten cabbage at, stop getting in the way of the fun with your justice stuff.

What fun is it to spit at an empty police van.

strobe

Boring username wrote: »

Quite right, I thought I had put suspected in the title. I must have deleted it by accident.

If you click just after the last character in the thread title you can edit it if you want.

stimpson

silverfeather wrote: »

The no of priests who are pedophiles is not actually higher than any other profession. It's just that they were hidden.

Say there’s 200 million priests in the world, and 5% of them are paedophiles, that’s still only 10 million…

Eutow

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

The general public needs someone to demonize and throw rotten cabbage at, stop getting in the way of the fun with your justice stuff.

What fun is it to spit at an empty police van.

My bad, I will sharpen my pitchfork and practice my earnest face.

Mechanical Clocktail

Candie wrote: »

It wouldn't be a bad thing. It'd be a terrible thing.

All those names are innocent until proven guilty, but if the names were leaked they'd be tried in the court of public opinion.

As opposed to not being tried at all. Anyway, they are certainly not all innocent and I qualified my post with the assumption that there is evidence against them. I don't expect anyone influential will be implicated in person until after they're dead, and so a leak to a newspaper would go a long way. A decent editor with a set of balls could do some good. I don't trust in the police when it was them that did nothing for decades.

Mechanical Clocktail

The media has a purpose beyond publishing celebrity photographs.

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

As opposed to not being tried at all. Anyway, they are certainly not all innocent and I qualified my post with the assumption that there is evidence against them. I don't expect anyone influential will be implicated in person until after they're dead, and so a leak to a newspaper would go a long way. A decent editor with a set of balls could do some good. I don't trust in the police when it was them that did nothing for decades.

The 'No smoke without fire' school of thought that's proved so reliable in the past.

Mechanical Clocktail

Candie wrote: »

The 'No smoke without fire' school of thought that's proved so reliable in the past.

Great reply, you put some thought into it.

RDM_83 again

Candie wrote: »

The 'No smoke without fire' school of thought that's proved so reliable in the past.

Ironically the last year or so I have learned that if somebody is famous and looks a bit pedo ish they probably actually are =-O

tritium

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

As opposed to not being tried at all. Anyway, they are certainly not all innocent and I qualified my post with the assumption that there is evidence against them. I don't expect anyone influential will be implicated in person until after they're dead, and so a leak to a newspaper would go a long way. A decent editor with a set of balls could do some good. I don't trust in the police when it was them that did nothing for decades.

Oh well, on that logic we should publish an even larger list, since they still won't *all* be innocent. Would you care to provide your own details to add to that larger list?

Yes I know you're just an innocent added randomly on little or no concrete reasoning, but just remember not everyone on this list is innocent.....

We all have to have a set of balls and so some good after all.....

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

Great reply, you put some thought into it.

Whereas publishing the names of people against whom an as yet unproven allegation or who have some suspicion - not evidence, suspicion - against them is a wonderful idea and a great public service if the press would only do it.

The fact that people are entitled to a fair, unbiased trial, and are innocent until proven guilty is completely beside the point. Right? I hope you never have an unfounded accusation publicly made against you, it would be a hard way to change your mind.

tritium

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Ironically the last year or so I have learned that if somebody is famous and looks a bit pedo ish they probably actually are =-O

I realise you're being a bit tongue in cheek there, but there's a Michael laVelle for every Rolf Harris that's convicted.

RDM_83 again

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Ironically the last year or so I have learned that if somebody is famous and looks a bit pedo ish they probably actually are =-O

That's the important word there

Mechanical Clocktail

Eutow wrote: »

Why would you want them leaked before anybody has been found guilty? A trial could be thrown out because of leaks.

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

The general public needs someone to demonize and throw rotten cabbage at, stop getting in the way of the fun with your justice stuff.

What fun is it to spit at an empty police van.

See my reply to candie above. Monocle, try not resorting to such boring ad hominem style replies.

Sheldons Brain

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

As opposed to not being tried at all. Anyway, they are certainly not all innocent and I qualified my post with the assumption that there is evidence against them. I don't expect anyone influential will be implicated in person until after they're dead, and so a leak to a newspaper would go a long way. A decent editor with a set of balls could do some good. I don't trust in the police when it was them that did nothing for decades.

This is a disgraceful proposition. Celebrities have been prosecuted, Garry Litter and Rolf Harris come to mind and others will be if they are guilty. There is a real issue of guilt by association here, maybe you worked with Saville and Harris, it doesn't meant that you knew anything of their activities.

Sheldons Brain

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Garry Litter...

His songs were rubbish.

Eutow

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

See my reply to candie above. Monocle, try not resorting to such boring ad hominem style replies.

I have and I believe you place too much faith in newspaper editors. Out of the print media (The Sun, The Mirror, Telegraph, Guardian etc etc) which one has an editor with balls to print the truth and not some hearsay and click-bait in order to increase sales?

What reason would you want to know the names of people that have not got a guilty verdict against them, and nobody has even been charged with anything yet? There is no need to know the name of anybody until they are found guilty. It is just a way to create gossip, nothing more. It is certainly not in the public interest anyway.

Sheldons Brain

Deleted User wrote: »

His songs were rubbish.

Gary Litter was a tribute act, his best work was Do you want to be in my Bang.

Mechanical Clocktail

Eutow wrote: »

I have and I believe you place too much faith in newspaper editors. Out of the print media (The Sun, The Mirror, Telegraph, Guardian etc etc) which one has an editor with balls to print the truth and not some hearsay and click-bait in order to increase sales?

What reason would you want to know the names of people that have not got a guilty verdict against them, and nobody has even been charged with anything yet? There is no need to know the name of anybody until they are found guilty. It is just a way to create gossip, nothing more. It is certainly not in the public interest anyway.

That's grand from a preachy detatched point of view. Now how long have these people operated? As far as anyone can tell, it's always. These 1400, you can assume these allegations go back decades. They're walking around now with how many molested children to their names? Politicians, policemen and members of the judiciary are said to be included.

If you expect any actual prosecutions outside a couple of scapegoats then I think you'll be disappointed. The world's far from a perfect place. Talking about lofty justice is grand but it's fantasy too when you look at the state of things. These people have been sheltered and protected. We'll all be awaiting justice on this for quite some time.

What I'm saying isn't clean or fair but it's a better alternative to how it is and how it has been. There isn't a question that child abuse might have been committed. It's the case that it has, and on an industrial scale.

ElvisChrist6

Candie wrote: »

The 'No smoke without fire' school of thought that's proved so reliable in the past.

One example of this recently was poor aul Cliff. They showed police raiding his home on the news from a helicopter, due to rumours. Nothing was found, but imagine how great it would be for the news if someone like himself was found to be one. Everyone was ready to jump on him (and some already did) for being paedo scum, but there was nothing to suggest he was.

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

That's grand from a preachy detatched point of view. Now how long have these people operated? As far as anyone can tell, it's always. These 1400, you can assume these allegations go back decades. They're walking around now with how many molested children to their names? Politicians, policemen and members of the judiciary are said to be included.

If you expect any actual prosecutions outside a couple of scapegoats then I think you'll be disappointed. The world's far from a perfect place. Talking about lofty justice is grand but it's fantasy too when you look at the state of things. These people have been sheltered and protected. We'll all be awaiting justice on this for quite some time.

What I'm saying isn't clean or fair but it's a better alternative to how it is and how it has been. There isn't a question that child abuse might have been committed. It's the case that it has, and on an industrial scale.

Innocent people having their lives ruined by being named in association with crimes against kids is not acceptable collateral damage in a civilised society.

Nothing justifies what you're advocating. The people who should be punished for crimes against kids are the people who are shown to have committed the crimes. Not people against whom there is nothing more than unfounded suspicion.

It's a ridiculous thing to advocate, playing into the very worst mob mentalities.

Eutow

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

That's grand from a preachy detatched point of view. Now how long have these people operated? As far as anyone can tell, it's always. These 1400, you can assume these allegations go back decades. They're walking around now with how many molested children to their names? Politicians, policemen and members of the judiciary are said to be included.

If you expect any actual prosecutions outside a couple of scapegoats then I think you'll be disappointed. The world's far from a perfect place. Talking about lofty justice is grand but it's fantasy too when you look at the state of things. These people have been sheltered and protected. We'll all be awaiting justice on this for quite some time.

What I'm saying isn't clean or fair but it's a better alternative to how it is and how it has been. There isn't a question that child abuse might have been committed. It's the case that it has, and on an industrial scale.

The media printing names is going to change what? Evidence still has to be gathered and it still has to go to court, and if you think by printing names, people are going to jail then you are the one that is living in cloud cuckoo land. If the media had true investigation qualities they would have probed this a long time ago instead of focusing on famous arses, liposuction and stretch marks.

Clandestine

Corey Feldman talked about this a few years back, he said pedophilia is the biggest problem in the entertainment industry. He said most of the bigwigs involved are untouchable.

The Diabolical Monocle

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

See my reply to candie above. Monocle, try not resorting to such boring ad hominem style replies.

Ok just did. Looks like she's right and you're wrong.

.... and boring.



..... and butthurt.

Mechanical Clocktail

Candie wrote: »

Innocent people having their lives ruined by being named in association with crimes against kids is not acceptable collateral damage in a civilised society.

Nothing justifies what you're advocating. The people who should be punished for crimes against kids are the people who are shown to have committed the crimes. Not people against whom there is nothing more than unfounded suspicion.

It's a ridiculous thing to advocate, playing into the very worst mob mentalities.

I'm talking about individuals who the police are looking at, and with reason, not with unfounded suspicion. And I'm talking about actual journalism being done. That doesn't mean just publishing a big list of 1400 names on the front page. It's how you get it out there that certain untouchables are actually scum. Media has a role in society beyond vapidness. You believe the institutions that harbored and protected these people are the same ones that are going to prosecute them?

You can tell me all night how outraged you are but it means nothing. Can you address the points I raise.

darkpagandeath

Odd police can investigate this but seem powerless in places like Rotherham....

Mechanical Clocktail

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Ok just did. Looks like she's right and you're wrong.

.... and boring.



..... and butthurt.

Homophobe.

bjork

The media are in cahoots

The day they mention the Gaspar statements is the day I'll reconsider my opinion

Eutow

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

I'm talking about individuals who the police are looking at, and with reason, not with unfounded suspicion.

Who decides what is unfounded suspicion and what might show as suspicious? The media? They have shown in the past that ethics is not their strong point. Remember, something that looks suspicious might not actually mean that person is guilty of anything.

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

And I'm talking about actual journalism being done. That doesn't mean just publishing a big list of 1400 names on the front page.

Good luck with that. Once a name is known by them, they will print all 1400 because it is click-bait. They won't hold back from printing them because if they do they are afraid some other media outlet will steal their thunder and print them instead.

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

I'm talking about individuals who the police are looking at, and with reason, not with unfounded suspicion. And I'm talking about actual journalism being done. That doesn't mean just publishing a big list of 1400 names on the front page. It's how you get it out there that certain untouchables are actually scum. Media has a role in society beyond vapidness. You believe the institutions that harbored and protected these people are the same ones that are going to prosecute them?

You can tell me all night how outraged you are but it means nothing. Can you address the points I raise.

I do see your point. And I think it's a lousy one.

It amounts to approval of trial by media and an abandonment of the rule of law that sees all accused persons as innocent until proven guilty, and overlooks the fact that a person can come to police attention and even under investigation, and still be completely innocent of the crime they're suspected of.

It's not the medias job to dispense justice, it's the courts.

Mechanical Clocktail

Candie wrote: »

I do see your point. And I think it's a lousy one.

It amounts to approval of trial by media and an abandonment of the rule of law that sees all accused persons as innocent until proven guilty, and overlooks the fact that a person can come to police attention and even under investigation, and still be completely innocent of the crime they're suspected of.

It's not the medias job to dispense justice, it's the courts.

No it doesn't, you're given to speaking in hyperbole. What do you think of the fact that the courts, the police, the political establishment, are all implicated. You're ignoring the elephant in the room because it compromises your ideals.

This thing requires its own wikileaks scenario. No one will ever know the extent of this thing without it. What do you think of whisteblowers Candie? A bunch of scumbags that wouldn't follow the rules?

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

No it doesn't, you're given to speaking in hyperbole. What do you think of the fact that the courts, the police, the political establishment, are all implicated. You're ignoring the elephant in the room because it compromises your ideals.

This thing requires its own wikileaks scenario. No one will ever know the extent of this thing without it. What do you think of whisteblowers Candie? A bunch of scumbags that wouldn't follow the rules?

Gas.

Don't know how you come up with that, but then again you're clutching at straws.

Mechanical Clocktail

Candie wrote: »

Gas.

Don't know how you come up with that, but then again you're clutching at straws.

Gas.

Don't know how you're still avoiding actually talking about the child abuse. Talking about straws instead.

Edit: In case you don't understand, whistleblowers commonly break laws and leak information that would otherwise have been supressed or unknown. Just in case you actually don't know how I came up with that. It's what we're talking about and goes against your ideas of justice.

zeffabelli

I am sick to the teeth of the culture of suspicion. Between the NSA and British Surveillance and the Irish reactionary policies of reporting adults who so much as sneeze in the wrong direction of a child, exploiting the presentation of "protection" to control and hunt citizens and to be able to do this immune from come back, protected from slander and immunised from prosecution from the accused, is an ingenious way to bi pass democracy and rule of law.

Suspicion is enough to smear and condemn, even without the sounding of s gavel.

Dinging

What is more shocking is that only 10% of prosecutions that go to court end in a conviction the other 90% go free. The odds are stacked against the victim in sexual crime cases so you can expect a high majortiy of these child sex offenders to get away with their crimes.

darkpagandeath

zeffabelli wrote: »

I am sick to the teeth of the culture of suspicion. Between the NSA and British Surveillance and the Irish reactionary policies of reporting adults who so much as sneeze in the wrong direction of a child, exploiting the presentation of "protection" to control and hunt citizens and to be able to do this immune from come back, protected from slander and immunised from prosecution from the accused, is an ingenious way to bi pass democracy and rule of law.

Suspicion is enough to smear and condemn, even without the sounding of s gavel.

Yeah what happened with them Roma kids ? It went very quiet very fast after all the better safe than sorry people found out they were wrong.

zeffabelli

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yeah what happened with them Roma kids ? It went very quiet very fast after all the better safe than sorry people found out they were wrong.

And you know what else, everyone involved in that is immune from litigation.

Mechanical Clocktail

Mechanical Clocktail wrote: »

Gas.

Don't know how you're still avoiding actually talking about the child abuse. Talking about straws instead.

Edit: In case you don't understand, whistleblowers commonly break laws and leak information that would otherwise have been supressed or unknown. Just in case you actually don't know how I came up with that. It's what we're talking about and goes against your ideas of justice.

Oh, I understand you fine.

Mechanical Clocktail

Candie wrote: »

Oh, I understand you fine.

Grand.