The Max Clifford Trial Continues

Bafucin · 02-05-2014 03:41PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

WTF??? HOW?

wrt40 · 02-05-2014 03:46PM

Can't help thinking something stinks in all this. Would be interesting to hear how they proved the accusations after all this time.

Fred Swanson · 02-05-2014 03:50PM

This post has been deleted.

Lady Spangles · 02-05-2014 03:55PM

Anyway, apparently Harris was charged on 29th August last year. I'm trying to post a link to an article as the source, but it won't let me. Sigh.

http:// www. mirror.co.uk /news /uk-news/rolf-harris-faces-new-sex-2954361

^^ There's a link, but with necessary spaces.

Santa Cruz · 02-05-2014 04:13PM

Lady Spangles wrote: »

It's good that justice has been done. So far, Op Yewtree seems to have been chasing down dead men. The successful prosecution of an actual living person must be a relief for them. :P

However, I don't think I'll ever recover from the shock of Rolf Harris. :O

It's poor Orville I feel sorry for

aidan24326 · 02-05-2014 04:14PM

wrt40 wrote: »

Can't help thinking something stinks in all this. Would be interesting to hear how they proved the accusations after all this time.

What was the evidence against him exactly? It does seem strange that they could make a conviction after all this time, or what proof they would have other than the testimony of people who could (not saying they are) be lying.

Madam · 02-05-2014 04:51PM

aidan24326 wrote: »

What was the evidence against him exactly? It does seem strange that they could make a conviction after all this time, or what proof they would have other than the testimony of people who could (not saying they are) be lying.

The same could be said of the Gerry Adams case or any - its all a matter of she said he said in the end.

Fred Swanson · 02-05-2014 04:58PM

This post has been deleted.

Czarcasm · 02-05-2014 05:28PM

aidan24326 wrote: »

What was the evidence against him exactly? It does seem strange that they could make a conviction after all this time, or what proof they would have other than the testimony of people who could (not saying they are) be lying.

Conspiracy Theories Forum

MagicMarker · 02-05-2014 05:35PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Conspiracy Theories Forum

What post are you replying to, because the post you quoted has nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

I would actually like to know what evidence there was also, considering how notoriously difficult it is to get a rape conviction it's impressive that he was proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt for a crime committed decades ago.

Steppenwolfe · 02-05-2014 05:47PM

aidan24326 wrote: »

What was the evidence against him exactly? It does seem strange that they could make a conviction after all this time, or what proof they would have other than the testimony of people who could (not saying they are) be lying.

In the present climate they only need an accuser and a good prosecuter. I've sat on three juries over the years. It was a real eye opener. They were simple enough cases, but on each occasion at least a third of the jurors were unable to grasp what was going on. Even worse were the ones who based their decisions on their own blatent predudices and not on any evidence or lack of. Before the Saville scandal most of these historical cases would never have made it past the DPP because of lack of evidence. In the hysterical climate post Saville anything goes. I don't know the full details of this case, but I can see how a guilty verdict could be achieved without any hard evidence.

Holsten · 02-05-2014 05:52PM

Big sentence.

I wonder if his victims will feel any better now after all those years.

sadie06 · 02-05-2014 05:59PM

aidan24326 wrote: »

What was the evidence against him exactly? It does seem strange that they could make a conviction after all this time, or what proof they would have other than the testimony of people who could (not saying they are) be lying.

The most damning aspect of the evidence is that even though these women did not know each other at all and came forward separately, their stories were remarkably similar in detail. He used the same lines again and again.

In terms of the length of the sentence, it's his arrogance that really hung him. The judge, quite rightly, took into account his deplorable attitude and smug persona, which must have added further insult to the victims.

Czarcasm · 02-05-2014 06:10PM

MagicMarker wrote: »

What post are you replying to, because the post you quoted has nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

Implying Clifford's victims could be lying? To what end? That's the sort of inferring that Clifford used thrive on when he would lie and twist stories in the media and "let the reader draw their own conclusions". There was no conspiracy theory to convict any of these celebrities. It was merely the case that the Saville case was the catalyst for victims to come forward.

I would actually like to know what evidence there was also, considering how notoriously difficult it is to get a rape conviction it's impressive that he was proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt for a crime committed decades ago.

He was found guilty on eight charges, not guilty on two, and the jury couldn't return a unanimous verdict on the third. The standard of "reasonable doubt" or "proof beyond reasonable doubt" doesn't apply in the UK.

lukesmom · 02-05-2014 06:20PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Implying Clifford's victims could be lying? To what end? That's the sort of inferring that Clifford used thrive on when he would lie and twist stories in the media and "let the reader draw their own conclusions". There was no conspiracy theory to convict any of these celebrities. It was merely the case that the Saville case was the catalyst for victims to come forward.

He was found guilty on eight charges, not guilty on two, and the jury couldn't return a unanimous verdict on the third. The standard of "reasonable doubt" or "proof beyond reasonable doubt" doesn't apply in the UK.

+1 Agree with the above. Found guilty on eight charges seems pretty certain to me.

IvaBigWun · 02-05-2014 06:21PM

I think the reason why this was kept under wraps for years and the reason why this story was bumped to the third or fourth story on Sky News when he was initially accused is simple. Clifford has dirt on many, many people in Fleet Street and beyond.

Its one of the main reasons a certain high trousered client of his has remained safely in the closet by the media for so long

HughMann · 02-05-2014 06:22PM

Not sure if it's been posted yet but Sky News have released a clip of Clifford mimicking reporter Tom Parmenter while he was recording a piece about the case. What a disgusting piece of work.

jack of all · 02-05-2014 06:27PM

HughMann wrote: »

Not sure if it's been posted yet but Sky News have released a clip of Clifford mimicking reporter Tom Parmenter while he was recording a piece about the case. What a disgusting piece of work.

I've just watched that clip, bizarre behaviour altogether.

Steppenwolfe · 02-05-2014 06:36PM

lukesmom wrote: »

+1 Agree with the above. Found guilty on eight charges seems pretty certain to me.

It would seem so on the face of it. Then again, if the jury is prepared to convict on the word of one accuser then they are just as likely to convict on the others. He probably did what he's accused of, but I'd want to hear the evidence myself before being certain.

porsche959 · 02-05-2014 06:43PM

Fwiw, Louis Therouxs documentary on Clifford is here:

http://www.dbvideos.com/wlm-s02e04---max-clifford-3~xycn16

sillyoulfool · 02-05-2014 06:44PM

think_il_rent wrote: »

remarkably severe sentance , i suspect many of his accusers were not so innocent of what was about to go down but are simply taking advantage of the current climate

So its a big hello to Mr "lets blame the victims of sexual assault":mad:

fryup · 02-05-2014 06:56PM

IvaBigWun wrote: »

Its one of the main reasons a certain high trousered client of his has remained safely in the closet by the media for so long

oh ya

give us a hint

nudger · 02-05-2014 07:10PM

fryup wrote: »

oh ya give us a hint

Might be involved in a well known talent show.:rolleyes:

Santa Cruz · 02-05-2014 07:26PM

Pity he can't share a cell with Mr. Gary "do you wanna be in my gang" Glitter

Knob Longman · 02-05-2014 07:29PM

IvaBigWun wrote: »

I think the reason why this was kept under wraps for years and the reason why this story was bumped to the third or fourth story on Sky News when he was initially accused is simple. Clifford has dirt on many, many people in Fleet Street and beyond.

Its one of the main reasons a certain high trousered client of his has remained safely in the closet by the media for so long

We were discussing it earlier and we come to the conclusion if all of this happened in Ireland, **** all would have been done to him as he would be too powerful.

Karl Stein · 02-05-2014 07:34PM

One of the reasons he was convicted was because the women, who wouldn't have known each other and would have been interviewed separately, all gave similar accounts of his behaviour and his *cough* stature.

Pretty damning I would say.

Aidric · 02-05-2014 10:12PM

Ah Max. Not inconceivable that he actually inhaled the smoke he blew up his own ass.

Flippyfloppy · 02-05-2014 10:15PM

jack of all wrote: »

I've just watched that clip, bizarre behaviour altogether.

Was he planning on pleading insane? He certainly looked it.

JP Liz V1 · 02-05-2014 10:22PM

He will need a very good publicist after all this

tritium · 02-05-2014 10:37PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Implying Clifford's victims could be lying? To what end? That's the sort of inferring that Clifford used thrive on when he would lie and twist stories in the media and "let the reader draw their own conclusions". There was no conspiracy theory to convict any of these celebrities. It was merely the case that the Saville case was the catalyst for victims to come forward

When you say any of these celebrities you mean the two convicted so far as opposed to several found not guilty but with their reputations ruined right? In at least one of those cases (le cell) the evidence had a massive number of holes in it yet the CPS proceeded anyway

The Max Clifford Trial Continues

Comments