Stuart Hall, 82, Admits Sex Assaults On Children now Jailed for 15months

[arista]

It's A Knockout TV presenter Stuart Hall, 82, arrested on suspicion of sex offences at his £1.5million home by police

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2243517/Its-A-Knockout-TV-presenter-Stuart-Hall-82-arrested-suspicion-sex-offences-police-1-5million-home-police.html#ixzz2ECQ5DcUo

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/12/05/article-2243517-165D3C6A000005DC-156_634x467.jpg
Getting his MBE last year



Shocker
Is it true?

[MTVN]

Hope not, the guy's a legend with his match reports

[arista]

Yes can he recal
he is 82.

[Munchkins]

How many more pedos will be uncovered :( so sick

[arista]

How many more pedos will be uncovered :( so sick


Hang On
we do not know if he is Guilty.


Hold your horses

[MTVN]

Says it's not part of the Jimmy Saville probe into child abuse as well, so it's probably not paedophilia he's suspected of

[Omah]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2243517/Its-A-Knockout-TV-presenter-Stuart-Hall-82-arrested-suspicion-sex-offences-police-1-5million-home-police.html#ixzz2ECRoF04W

Detectives are quizzing the 82-year-old on suspicion of rape and indecent assault and searched his £1.5m luxury mansion in Wilmslow, Cheshire.

The force refused to confirm or deny the identity of the suspect but said in a statement: 'The man will be interviewed at a police station during the course of the day. The allegations are historic. We are not prepared to discuss further.'

A Lancashire Police spokesman said: 'It's not part of Operation Yewtree.'

:idc:

[bbfan1991]

OMG:o.

[Livia]

Over 60? Famous? Got a penis? Must be a paedo...

[Marcus.]

oh dear

[arista]

Updated
From SkyNews

He will be Charged for Sex attack
on 16-17 year old girl from 1974
and 2 others.

Also on BBCNews underline ticker

[Petershaw1984]

Dirty bastard

[arista]

"Hall, 82, allegedly abused an eight-year-old girl in 1983, and assaulted a 13-year-old girl between July and September of the following year.

He has also been charged with assaulting a 16-year-old girl in 1974. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9725466/Its-a-Knockout-presenter-Stuart-Hall-charged-with-child-abuse.html

[Omah]

http://news.sky.com/story/1021192/stuart-hall-charged-with-three-indecent-assaults

John Dilworth, of the Crown Prosecution Service, said "He has been bailed to appear at Preston Magistrates' Court on January 7, 2013.

"This decision is made in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors and I have concluded that there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that it is in the public interest to prosecute this case."

Not much doubt there, then ..... :idc:

[Mystic Mock]

If this is true then he is a sick bastard.

[Omah]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/stuart-hall-denies-child-sex-1477382

His house was searched for six hours on Wednesday after he was taken into custody early in the morning by police

Veteran broadcaster Stuart Hall last night protested his innocence after being charged with child sex abuse.

The TV and radio legend, 82, spent the day behind closed doors at his £1.5million luxury home.

His property in Wilmslow, Cheshire, was searched for six hours on Wednesday after he was taken into custody early in the morning by police.

He was quizzed for several hours before Lancashire police charged him over historic sex abuse allegations.

Yesterday, Mr Hall’s solicitor, Louise Straw, spoke for him, criticising the way he was arrested and saying he maintained his innocence.

She said: “Stuart Hall was not afforded the opportunity to attend voluntarily at the police station.

"In due course, the decision he should be arrested will be the subject of scrutiny.

“Stuart Hall is innocent. There will be a trial and his defence will then be in the public domain.”

:idc:

[Smithy]

Bruce Forsyth'll be next, I can see it coming

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20930030

BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall has pleaded not guilty to three charges of indecent assault.

The 83-year-old, from Wilmslow, Cheshire, entered his plea at Preston Magistrates' Court, which referred his case to the city's crown court.

He was charged in December following complaints to police about alleged incidents involving three girls aged between nine and 17.

Mr Hall was bailed ahead of his first appearance at crown court in April.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/veteran-bbc-broadcaster-stuart-hall-denies-sex-abuse-charges-8440819.html

Outlining the charges the prosecution said Hall is alleged to have fondled the breast of one girl, then aged 16 or 17, between September 1, 1974 and December 31, 1974 in Blackpool.

On a second occasion he is alleged to have molested a nine-year-old girl by touching some time between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983 and the third alleged indecent assault is that he kissed a 13-year-old girl on the lips, on an occasion between July 1, 1984 and September 27, 1984.

None of the alleged victims can be named for legal reasons.

District Judge Ward granted Hall bail on condition that he lives at his home address in Prestbury Road in Wilmslow, Cheshire, and that he has no unsupervised contact with children under the age of 17.

TBH, those charges, as they stand, seem rather pathetic for a man to be named, shamed and forced to go to Crown Court - in this case, I would certainly suggest a "witch-hunt" has been initiated ..... :pipe:

[Kizzy]

What would you suggest if your daughter approached you and stated someone had molested her when she was 9 ...
Would you tell her to forget it?

[Omah]

What would you suggest if your daughter approached you and stated someone had molested her when she was 9 ...
Would you tell her to forget it?

Is that what happened some time between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983?

The little girl told her father?

Presumably he didn't believe her then .....

:conf:

[Kizzy]

Is that what happened some time between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983?

The little girl told her father?

Presumably he didn't believe her then .....

:conf:

Can you not answer a simple question?
What would your advice be, report the abuse from 83 or forget it?

[Omah]

Can you not answer a simple question?
What would your advice be, report the abuse from 83 or forget it?

Well, that 9-year-old is now 39 and presumably old enough to make her own mind up without a father's help ..... :pipe:

[Kizzy]

Well, that 9-year-old is now 39 and presumably old enough to make her own mind up without a father's help ..... :pipe:

That's not what I asked was it?
:idc:

[Omah]

Can you not answer a simple question?
What would your advice be, report the abuse from 83 or forget it?

What "abuse"?

The 9-year-old who is now 39 tears old alleges that she was "touched" some time between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983

If she wants to take it to Crown Court where she will be subject to scrutiny and cross-examination on such apparently flimsy "evidence", that's up to her, but I've sat as a juror on a very similar case and the verdict went against the plaintiff, so I would suggest that either more concrete "evidence" be found or she drop the charge ..... :pipe:

If Hall is found "Not Guilty" he may well go after some serious "damages" - can she or her family meet those costs?

[MTVN]

The 9 year old allegation seems fairly serious but quite surprising the other two have been dragged up after so long, how can they possibly prove either way whether he fondled the breast of a girl 40 years ago particularly when they're not even sure how old she is and there's a 4 month window in which it might have happened

[Kizzy]

What "abuse"?

The 9-year-old who is now 39 tears old alleges that she was "touched" some time between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983

If she wants to take it to Crown Court where she will be subject to scrutiny and cross-examination on such apparently flimsy "evidence", that's up to her, but I've sat as a juror on a very similar case and the verdict went against the plaintiff, so I would suggest that either more concrete "evidence" be found or she drop the charge ..... :pipe:

If Hall is found "Not Guilty" he may well go after some serious "damages" - can she or her family meet those costs?

Would it have gone to crown court if there was zero evidence?

[Omah]

Would it have gone to crown court if there was zero evidence?

It's gone to Crown Court because of the nature of the alleged offence and those associated with it .....

In the case I sat on, the "evidence" was merely that of the little girl, who said she had been "touched" by a man (as, apparently, in this case) but she turned out to be a liar who was protecting her mother's pornographer boyfriend who WAS her sexual abuser .....

[Kizzy]

It's gone to Crown Court because of the nature of the alleged offence and those associated with it .....

In the case I sat on, the "evidence" was merely that of the little girl, who said she had been "touched" by a man (as, apparently, in this case) but she turned out to be a liar who was protecting her mother's pornographer boyfriend who WAS her sexual abuser .....

So to be fair she was not lying, she was bein assaulted.... Abusers use threats as a form of control, to seek help then panic and blame someone else is something that happens in these cases.

No matter how old you are 19, 19, 39, 59 if you were assaulted, molested or abused as a child my advice would be to report it.

[Nedusa]

This is complete nonsense, the man is 82 years old for gods sake.... If a crime was committed then why was it not reported at the time which is probably over 40 years ago.
This is crazy !!! just another aging male celeb who probably enjoyed the swinging sixties now being drawn into the witch hunt.

Whats next.... Bruce Forsyth buggering young boys on the generation game..!!!!!

[Omah]

So to be fair she was not lying, she was bein assaulted.... Abusers use threats as a form of control, to seek help then panic and blame someone else is something that happens in these cases.


You're missing the point - lives were ruined - the accused was named, shamed and assaulted, lost his job and his house - eventually he and his family had to move to another county all because the little girl lied - the court case cost a fortune while another investigation and subsequent court case had to follow all because the little girl lied - she wasn't threatened, she chose to accuse an innocent man because she thought it was "fun" ..... it was only when the case came to court that her dysfunctional "family" life came to light ......

No matter how old you are 19, 19, 39, 59 if you were assaulted, molested or abused as a child my advice would be to report it

Agreed ..... but not everybody tells the truth - we shall have to see what evidence can be presented if the case gets to trial .....

[Omah]

So to be fair she was not lying, she was bein assaulted.

No, she was a lying little toe-rag who herself would have been charged with offences if she were older ..... :mad:

[Me. I Am Salman]

goddamn pedos

[Nedusa]

why can't all allegations that are made which are of a sexual nature legally be subject to reporting restrictions until pre investigations are concluded. only when actual charges are brought and a trial is arranged should the press get involved.

This current Jimmy Savile story has certainly created a feeding frenzy for the press who are quite happy to sensationalise any allegation against a Celeb regardless of how long ago it was and before any evidence is presented or charges brought.

[Kizzy]

No, she was a lying little toe-rag who herself would have been charged with offences if she were older ..... :mad:


Why this has turned into your skewed view on how children should act and react to abuse and the subsequent court case I don't know.
Do you not think women abused as children should ever report it then?...
ooo...de ja vu...

[Omah]

Why this has turned into your skewed view on how children should act and react to abuse and the subsequent court case I don't know.

You weren't there, as I was, for several days, so you don't, and never will, know the full facts of the case .....

If you ever do jury service, you may find that the old maxim "Never judge a book by its cover comes to mind" .....

Do you not think women abused as children should ever report it then?...


Of course ..... but being "touched" some time between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983 is a very vague accusation and certainly does not come under the heading of abuse - as I said earlier, if that is all she can offer, then the accused may emerge from the case not only innocent but with a hefty damages claim against the plaintiff .....

[Kizzy]

I have served on a jury in a child abuse case.
And yes molestation is abuse.

[Iceman]

Omah you should put your opinions on here more...some very good points! And i think I saw a post or two without a link :wink:

[Omah]

I have served on a jury in a child abuse case.


Quelle coincidence ..... :rolleyes:

Of all the cases, in all the courts, in all the world, she has the same as mine.

[Kizzy]

Quelle coincidence ..... :rolleyes:

Of all the cases, in all the courts, in all the world, she has the same as mine.

Did you think you were the only person to sit on a jury in the UK omah?....

[Omah]

Did you think you were the only person to sit on a jury in the UK omah?....

Just ..... quelle coincidence ..... :rolleyes:

Strange you didn't bring it up before ..... :suspect:

You'll be telling me you were the foreman next ..... and that you shared a ciggie in the usher's toilet with the Joan Collins look-a-like ..... :shrug:

[Kizzy]

Just ..... quelle coincidence ..... :rolleyes:

Strange you didn't bring it up before ..... :suspect:

You'll be telling me you were the foreman next ..... and that you shared a ciggie in the usher's toilet with the Joan Collins look-a-like ..... :shrug:

Why are you being so rude?
I have mentioned it on another thread regarding abuse that I sat on a jury in a case...
Do I have to announce it at the beginning of every thread associated with sexual assaults now?

[Livia]

If this is true then he is a sick bastard.

If.

[Omah]

Why are you being so rude?
I have mentioned it on another thread regarding abuse that I sat on a jury in a case...
Do I have to announce it at the beginning of every thread associated with sexual assaults now?

If I may say so, you're the one being rude by persistently asking me hypothetical questions about a court case about which we know very little except the charges, one of which you have extrapolated into some some sort of father/daughter scenario .....

All we know is that the 9-year-old who is now 39 years old who alleges that she was "touched" (by Hall) some time (in the 12 months) between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983 (in a location not specified).

Anyone who has been juror would want (and wait) to hear more details and consider any "evidence".

[Jesus.]

If anyone wants to touch me in a location not specified, then I'm sure we can sort something out.

[Livia]

If anyone wants to touch me in a location not specified, then I'm sure we can sort something out.

So, it could be, like... Milton Keynes for instance?

[Jesus.]

So, it could be, like... Milton Keynes for instance?

For contact from another human, I'd even travel to the land of Partridge - for a high 6.

[Livia]

For contact from another human, I'd even travel to the land of Partridge - for a high 6.

I'm not going to Swaffham, not even for you. Only two surnames in the whole town.

[Omah]

I'm not going to Swaffham, not even for you. Only two surnames in the whole town.

I know we're going O/T but I have to interject "NFN" ..... :laugh2:

[Nedusa]

why not wait until Stewart Hall is 92 there's bound to be a lot more people that were abused by him ready to come forward by then.

Better still why not wait until he's dead and then let the floodgates really open, who knows we might have 400 or 500 people suddenly remember that 50 years ago they too were abused by this man (A bit like Jimmy Savile)

The whole thing is nasty, spiteful contrived nonsense....!!!!!

[Livia]

I know we're going O/T but I have to interject "NFN" ..... :laugh2:

LOL... yes.

[Jesus.]

I'm not going to Swaffham, not even for you. Only two surnames in the whole town.

One double-barreled surname doesn't really count as two.

[Livia]

why not wait until Stewart Hall is 92 there's bound to be a lot more people that were abused by him ready to come forward by then.

Better still why not wait until he's dead and then let the floodgates really open, who knows we might have 400 or 500 people suddenly remember that 50 years ago they too were abused by this man (A bit like Jimmy Savile)

The whole thing is nasty, spiteful contrived nonsense....!!!!!

I know you and I don't always agree Nedusa, but I'm right behind you on this one.

[Livia]

One double-barreled surname doesn't really count as two.

Especially when it's Partridge-Partridge.

[Nedusa]

I know you and I don't always agree Nedusa, but I'm right behind you on this one.

Thanks Livia, the more I read about these stories and others related to the JS story the more cynical I become. Its almost as if the Press are on a non stop bandwagon for more and more lurid stories involving ageing male Celebrities living or dead (but preferrably living).

[Kizzy]

If I may say so, you're the one being rude by persistently asking me hypothetical questions about a court case about which we know very little except the charges, one of which you have extrapolated into some some sort of father/daughter scenario .....

All we know is that the 9-year-old who is now 39 years old who alleges that she was "touched" (by Hall) some time (in the 12 months) between January 1, 1983 and December 31, 1983 (in a location not specified).

Anyone who has been juror would want (and wait) to hear more details and consider any "evidence".

No you may not say so, I did not attempt to humiliate you with unnecessary mocking comments.
I asked you a hypothetical question yes, if you did not wish to respond that is your choice.
My view is that however historic the abuse a victim has the right to justice.
As you say we shall see what the outcome is based on the evidence they have.

[Livia]

Thanks Livia, the more I read about these stories and others related to the JS story the more cynical I become. Its almost as if the Press are on a non stop bandwagon for more and more lurid stories involving ageing male Celebrities living or dead (but preferrably living).

I would like to see a few of those accused, once acquitted, to pursue private prosecutions against those who waited three decades to air their grievances.

[bbfan1991]

Former radio and television presenter Stuart Hall charged with one offence of rape and 14 offences of indecent assault http://itv.co/Vit9r5

[Omah]

Former radio and television presenter Stuart Hall charged with one offence of rape and 14 offences of indecent assault http://itv.co/Vit9r5

The indecent assault offences are alleged to have been committed between 1967 and 1986 and to involve 10 girls aged between nine and 16-years-old.

The rape is alleged to have been committed in 1976 against a 22 year old woman.

Presumably, these charges are additional to:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21154999

Mr Hall pleaded not guilty to three charges of indecent assault when he appeared at Preston Magistrates' Court earlier this month. The court referred these charges to Preston Crown Court.

We shall now have to wait for the court proceedings to obtain the details ..... :pipe:

[cobdo]

took 37 years to get him in court??????? hope they got good evidence cos theyll need it. to be honest ....you could arrest EVERY band member from every 70s band if ya wanted to dig that deep...................no chance of conviction unless he admits the lot.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21365111

Broadcaster Stuart Hall has appeared in court charged with one count of rape and 14 counts of indecent assault.

The 83-year-old, from Wilmslow, Cheshire, appeared at Preston Magistrates' Court to face the charges.

The charges relate to an alleged rape of a 22-year-old woman and indecent assault of 10 girls aged nine to 16.

The BBC presenter has previously pleaded not guilty to three charges of indecent assault and will face trial over those charges in April.

Mr Hall, who spoke only to confirm his name and address, was bailed to appear at Preston Crown Court on 1 March.

:idc:

[arista]

Yes he says he is Not Guilty

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21629747

Broadcaster Stuart Hall has appeared in court charged with one count of rape and 14 counts of indecent assault.

The 83-year-old from Wilmslow, Cheshire, spoke only to confirm his name in the eight-minute preliminary hearing at Preston Crown Court.

The case was adjourned until 16 April when he is expected to enter a plea. A provisional trial date has been set for 2 October.

:idc:

[arista]

Stuart Hall Admits Sex Assaults On Children


http://news.sky.com/story/1085935/stuart-hall-admits-sex-assaults-on-children

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2318172/Stuart-Hall-Veteran-BBC-broadcaster-admits-14-counts-indecent-assault-girls-aged-9-17.html

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/05/02/article-0-1995EA8B000005DC-88_634x530.jpg
Guilty: Stuart Hall arrives at Preston Crown Court today,
with solicitor Maurice Watkins,
where he has admitted historic sex allegations

[Omah]

"Whether in public or private, Hall would first approach under friendly pretences and then bide his time until the victim was isolated. He can only be described as an opportunistic predator."

:eek:

[GiRTh]

he's gonna go to jail for this.

[Omah]

Hall, 83, admitted 14 charges of indecent assault and the offences took place between 1967 and 1985.

He entered the guilty pleas last month at Preston Crown Court. However, they can only be revealed now after reporting restrictions were lifted.

He admitted touching and kissing 13 young victims over nearly two decades, many were daughters of friends.

Hall was facing 18 charges. A court order was lifted so that the pleas could be reported.

It was to avoid prejudicing a possible future trial on a count of rape and three separate counts of indecent assault which Hall had denied last month.

:eek:

[arista]

he's gonna go to jail for this.


Yes
if he does not Top himself first

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/5/2/235787/default/v1/9172970-1-2-340x192.jpg

[Nedusa]

Maybe they could open a new Prison wing for Celebrity Paedophiles, at the current rate of disclosure it would fill up in no time......!!!!!

[GiRTh]

The way the pleas are structured it seems like there may be quite a lot of evidence against him. They might send him down for quite a lengthy time.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22379286

Mr Afzal said the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) would not be proceeding with the rape charge as the woman who made the allegation no longer wished to give evidence in light of the guilty pleas.

I guess that she's hoping that he'll die in chokey ....

[Nedusa]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22379286



I guess that she's hoping that he'll die in chokey ....

If I read the above quote correctly, it is saying that this lady will not give evidence in Court relating to her "rape" by Hall and in light of his guilty plea to molestation charges she is happy for the rape charge to be dropped.

But the inference is that he is guilty of child rape but because he's old and has pleaded guilty to lesser charges there is no need to prove rape.

Hmmnn ??? so basically everyone will now believe he is a child rapist and he will be despised and hated in equal measure.

But legally he is being convicted of indecent behaviour ie putting his hand up a young girls skirt. Still disgusting and reprehensible but its NOT child rape there is an enormous difference between the two.......

I guess the end result will not look that different in any case ie convicted sex offender name on sex offenders register, good name gone , reputation gone, despised by all , avoided by all family & friends, Showbiz career disappeared even faster.....what a sick stupid man....!!!!

[arista]

The way the pleas are structured it seems like there may be quite a lot of evidence against him. They might send him down for quite a lengthy time.



Yes with his Bad Heart he may Die Soon
that saves us money

[joeysteele]

What a mess, what on earth too was the BBC hierarchy doing with all these things supposedly going on,in fact were going on.

This guy has made himself look pathetic and for those still waiting to be charged or who have been, people will be now thinking, well Stuart Hall eventually pleaded guilty so clearly was.

Sick,just totally sick.

[Kazanne]

All I can say is dirty old bastard:nono:

[arista]

What a mess, what on earth too was the BBC hierarchy doing with all these things supposedly going on,in fact were going on.

This guy has made himself look pathetic and for those still waiting to be charged or who have been, people will be now thinking, well Stuart Hall eventually pleaded guilty so clearly was.

Sick,just totally sick.


Yes Rape of a 9 year old girl

makes him Evil

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/5/2/235878/default/v1/front-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/5/2/235880/default/v1/ii03-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/5/2/235872/default/v1/eds03p001-1st-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/5/2/235866/default/v1/ia-1st-001-nat-0503-v1-1-329x437.jpg

[Jesus.]

I just can't believe it. The Chinese are creating killer flu?

[arista]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/05/02/article-2318565-19965355000005DC-271_634x428.jpg
The Fecking BBC knew he was raping girls
Like Savile he was a top Presenter/star.

[arista]

BBC bosses 'knew all about Stuart Hall': Abuser 'had special room set aside to entertain lady friends at studios' as Corporation

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2318427/BBC-bosses-knew-Stuart-Hall-Abuser-special-room-entertain-lady-friends-studios.html#ixzz2SE4hC3LY

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/05/02/article-2318427-1996D0A2000005DC-770_634x458.jpg
Back in 1987

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22932222

BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall who admitted indecently assaulting 13 girls, one aged nine, is due to be sentenced later.

Hall, 83, from Wilmslow, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to 14 offences which occurred between 1967 and 1985.

One count of rape will lie on the court file.

Bang 'im up, yer 'onor ..... :idc:

[arista]

Yes Lock him away

[lostalex]

The fact that he's basically lived a full life and has gotten away with it, just locking him up doesn't seem like enough punishment.

Situations like this, I would support torture. he deserves it.

he's 83 years old and he got away with it for all these years. if anyone deserves torture it's this piece of ****.

If you just putting him in jail he knows he's gonna die soon anyway, so what does he care, he feels like he got to do anything he wanted to whom ever he wanted and he never suffered any real consequences.

It's disgusting.

[arista]

No.2 of BBC child rapist


TV in those early days gave him power
and the BBC backed him up.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22932222BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall has been sentenced to 15 months in jail for sexually abusing under-age girls.

Hall, 83, of Wilmslow, Cheshire, admitted 14 offences that occurred between 1967 and 1985.

One of the girls was nine years old when Hall assaulted her, Preston Crown Court heard.

Sentencing Hall, Judge Anthony Russell QC said: "It is clear from the victim statements that I have seen that your brazen attitude when first charged and the public protests of your innocence have added to the distress of some if not all of your victims."

Judge Russell said Hall had "given pleasure to millions of people" and was known for his "genial personality, charm, bonhomie and wit".

But the judge added: "There is a darker side to you, one hidden from public view until now, and a side which you were able to conceal taking advantage of your status as a well-liked celebrity."

The judge said for most of the offences the maximum sentence at the time they were committed was two years and five for the remainder.

He added: "The maximum sentence for this type of offence has been significantly increased, since these offences were committed, to ten years."

He should have got at least 5 years ..... :hmph:

[Nedusa]

So 15 months in Jail, minus time on remand say 1 Month leaves 14 Months. So 7 months to be served but bearing in mind the early release/Tag scheme he would actually be let out of Prison with an electronic Tag after 4 months.

So that works out 4 months for 14 victims say about 1 week per rape/offense

Yep........sounds like British justice to me.....!!!!!!!

[Omah]

So 15 months in Jail, minus time on remand say 1 Month leaves 14 Months. So 7 months to be served but bearing in mind the early release/Tag scheme he would actually be let out of Prison with an electronic Tag after 4 months.

So that works out 4 months for 14 victims say about 1 week per rape/offense

Yep........sounds like British justice to me.....!!!!!!!

Well, at least he's alive to see his life in tatters ..... :pipe:

[CaudleHalbard]

Yep........sounds like British justice to me.....!!!!!!!

Ah but in other countries in the EU the case would not even have got to court!

There's normally a time limit from the date the offence was committed: on average 12 years.

[lostalex]

There should have been an extra charge of COVERING IT UP for all these years.

The rape of children is bad enuf, but he should also be charged with a crime for covering it up for all these decades as well. can't they also charge him with crimes of covering it up??

He should never breathe free air before he dies. sick ****er.

[lostalex]

Ah but in other countries in the EU the case would not even have got to court!

There's normally a time limit from the date the offence was committed: on average 12 years.

That's true, look at the European countries protecting Roman Polanski who drugged and raped a child and admitted it.

[joeysteele]

No.2 of BBC child rapist


TV in those early days gave him power
and the BBC backed him up.

The BBC are coming out really badly from these cases too.

I was stunned to hear his defence lawyer had stated something like that he had only committed these abuses against 13 victims as opposed to Savilles likely 1300.
What a ridiculous statement.

[arista]

The BBC are coming out really badly from these cases too.

I was stunned to hear his defence lawyer had stated something like that he had only committed these abuses against 13 victims as opposed to Savilles likely 1300.
What a ridiculous statement.



This is because The BBC is so Big
they let stars like Hall have a Total Private room
in BBC studios.
a 9 year old girl would go back with him
thinking he is the funny star of Its a Knockout
and to her horror The Evil S. Hall Rapes her.


Many are shouting give hime years inside
not under a year total time etc.

[Omah]

http://news.sky.com/story/1104682/stuart-hall-attorney-general-reviews-sentence

The Attorney General is to examine whether the 15-month sentence handed to broadcaster Stuart Hall for sexually abusing young girls was "unduly lenient".

The 83-year-old former It's A Knockout presenter was jailed earlier after admitting indecent assaults on 13 girls.

The attacks spanned three decades and involved children aged as young as nine.

A "small number" of complaints have been made about the sentence, prompting an investigation by the Attorney General's Office which has the power to refer the sentence to the Court of Appeal.

Good ..... :thumbs:

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/6/17/243448/default/v1/dailymail-1-329x437.jpg

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22948133

BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall "got off very lightly" with a 15 month jail sentence for sexually abusing girls, a victim support charity has said.

The National Association for People Abused in Childhood (Napac) said the tariff showed his crimes were not taken "seriously enough".

Napac chief executive Peter Saunders said he had "lost count of how many people have said to me in the last 24 hours 'what a lenient sentence'.

"If more people understood the consequences for the victims and the life-long misery that many of them suffer as a result of these crimes, I think most would agree that Stuart Hall has got off very lightly," he said.

"We need to look at sentencing [as] the judge could have given a stiffer sentence. What this is saying is that the judiciary in this case have not taken the crime seriously enough.

"It has to be zero tolerance and the right punishment for the crime."

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) chief executive Peter Wanless said the sentence was "not a great day for justice".

"Hall will be free within months but the trauma he caused his victims will stay with them a lot longer - possibly for the rest of their lives," he said.

"He has shown total disregard for their feelings, even arrogantly branding them liars.

"Whilst it's commendable that this case was pursued even after such a long passage of time the end result is not a great day for justice or for the victims."

:idc: