Caroline Flack found dead

Made in Poland wrote: »

You think he deserved to be harassed and tormented by people? If he committed suicide would you be saying the same thing?

I would.

Fook him he is a scumbag.

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

To be fair, I think Made in Poland is making a very fair point. Brown is rightly viewed as utter scum in most right thinking quarters. Flack committed a very similar crime.

She did, no agrument from me on that at all.

Made in Poland wrote: »

Let's assume Caroline was convicted of the alleged crime against her boyfriend, would you describe her as a scumbag?

If she was convicted of domestic battery then yes, I personally would have described her as a scumbag.

Anybody who uses another person as a punching bag (especially while they are sleeping) is scum and it shouldn't matter that it was a woman hurting a man in this case.

Dont you think that somebody who could do this to another person is a scumbag or horrible bastard who should not get any sympathy?

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

I do indeed. I’m also allowed to speculate. Only a very naive person could argue she didn’t commit the crime she was accused of. Or a disingenuous fan of reality tv and celeb culture drivel.

So we should do away with the justice system and leave it up to the Daily Mail?

Laura99 wrote: »

Harsh. They were friends, it made sense for Laura to step into the role, she didn't outshine Caroline so much so that people wanted her to take over completely. And she was also already part of the ITV team, she probably would have been to Cape town the odd time anyways as she's seeing Ian Sterling, and would have visited the set on previous seasons. I don't think this will negatively affect her career at all.

It made sense for "Laura's" own career interests alright. I dont have an issue with that, but if you think she wasnt onto her agent to put her forward for that role as soon as that story came out then you are a bit naive to my mind. They would eat their own young to get big roles and promote themselves. I dont have an issue with that either btw.
But in doing so she loses the right to turn around with the tear jerker, closest of friends stuff to my mind. You cant have it every way.
I dont buy the stuff they peddle afterwards about one wanting the other to have it etc etc. That auld spiel is the work of pr people, because nobody comes across worse than a sore winner/loser. The bottom line is no genuine mate would hunt down the others job like that in those circumstances. Actions speak louder than words.

Made in Poland wrote: »

At what point does it become acceptable to harass and persecute someone?

Where did I say that it was acceptable?

I dont read the tabloids and dont get why people do. I dont watch Love Island or any reality tv... I knew Caroline from when she was outed for Dating Harry Styles when he was 17 and she was 31 - which I personaly thought was a bit gross and it made her stick in my mind.

Caroline was in the public eye and as such when she made mistakes we all got to know about it... doesn't make it right but that's the way it is. And she had the choice to go offline and not engage with what was written about her. I think it is a terrible loss of life and feel very bad for her family,

But that does not change the fact that what she was accused of was horrible... in a lot of domestic violence cases the victim defends the accused and drops charges or trys to.. this is because they are a victim and not strong enough to face what they have been through.. it usually takes a good few instances before they see a pattern and realize it is not going to stop.

How famous do you think people have to be to be allowed to batter somebody and it not be in the public... do you think that the media should have ignored it and not reported on it? Do you think ordinary people dont have the right to express their opinion or comment on articles?

Boggles wrote: »

There is not "taint". That's for slack jawed mail readers.

You are innocent until proven guilty.

I imagine the decision to takes ones life is neither simple or expedient.

Would you brave enough to say that to a family bereaved from suicide?

The "taint" is in the eye of the person who has taken their life.
Not mine.

The case would not have proceeded to prosecution unless the CPS felt their was a reasonable chance of securing a conviction.
The information around the case to date is that a significant assault took place.
That assault is compounded by the fact the victim was asleep.

One can dance around allegedly all day long.
On the balance of probability, given that her family and her management have laid blame on the CPS for pursuing a "show trial" it is fairly clear how Caroline thought proceedings were going to pan out, given her actions subsequent to being given the trial date.

Those actions were not logical, what motivated them is certainly open to interpretation.
But!
Relying on the simple "fact" that she wasn't a convicted batterer when she has avoided trial by taking a tragic and permanent action...

That's a ridiculous argument.

banie01 wrote: »

The "taint" is in the eye of the person who has taken their life.
Not mine.

They are dead, taint or otherwise they can not feel.

banie01 wrote: »

The case would not have proceeded to prosecution unless the CPS felt their was a reasonable chance of securing a conviction.

Not necessarily, The CPS are not infallible. How many examples do you need?

She denied the claim, as did the the victim / witness.

Hardly a slam dunk conviction now was it?

There is certainly questions surrounding the motivations of the CPS.

banie01 wrote: »

Relying on the simple "fact" that she wasn't a convicted batterer when she has avoided trial by taking a tragic and permanent action...

That's a ridiculous argument.

It's not up for debate, she was not a convicted criminal, that's an actual fact. Simple or otherwise.

Again this isn't very hard to understand.

We either rely on the justice system or the court of slack jawed opinion fueled by the rag tops.

Boggles wrote: »

They are dead, taint or otherwise they can not feel.

The taint is perceived as possible by the person, the catastrophise the consequences of the action and outcome in their mind, and it is one of the drivers of suicide.

Much like a failed General been locked in a room with a handgun.
Quite often that is the position the person contemplating suicide will give as an example.

Boggles wrote: »

Not necessarily, The CPS are not infallible. How many examples do you need?

She denied the claim, as did the the victim / witness.

Hardly a slam dunk conviction now was it?

There is certainly questions surrounding the motivations of the CPS.[/quote]

The Police will have presented their file to the CPS and given the time the CPS took to decide on proceeding to trial it was likely very well reviewed.
No-one, least of all me has claimed the CPS are infallible.
Indeed, not even the courts are.

Ms Flack took a drastic action that precludes her name from being cleared in court.
Yes in purely simple terms, innocent until proven guilty stands but now she is dead and the charges withdrawn isn't quite the same as being exonerated.

It is now left to guesswork and summation on the part of all us gawkers, slack jawed or otherwise.

Boggles wrote: »

It's not up for debate, she was not a convicted criminal, that's an actual fact. Simple or otherwise.

Again this isn't very hard to understand.

We either rely on the justice system or the court of slack jawed opinion fueled by the rag tops.

Unfortunately in death, she has lost the right to vindicate her good name.
A dead person has no right to privacy nor can they be defamed.
The information at hand would indicate that a serious assault took place.

I've seen nothing exculpatory on that front.
As for Lewis not supporting the action, Rihanna appeared in court to support Chris Brown.

There is a reason when sufficient evidence of a domestic assault is present, that the decision to proceed with charge and trial is taken out of the victims hands.

Theres a real irony in there being a social media campaign about the effect of social media.

There is a large class of "celebrity" who if it wasnt for social media would be just unemployed.