![]() |
Thoughts on Cliff Richards ?
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/our-...ttle-1-9055317
Is there really smoke without fire ? Why does he want stuff staying hidden ? |
He doesn't want to declare what he was paid in damages by Yorkshire police and I don't blame him
There's probably other things such as his gender status, but we all know when we fill in an application form, even a legal document, when it comes to gender status, we always have the option of "rather not say" |
Why should he have the privilege to not have his details out there? He's got a LOT to hide IMO
|
Sounds very dodgy to me.
I mean, obviously he wants to clear his name if he is innocent, but fighting for information NOT to be aired in a court case? I am very curious about these so called witness statements. Though if he was not charged, then surely they have been disregarded by the police anyway? How did he sue the police too? And why on earth is the amount he sued for relevant at all in this case? Quote:
I don't know what I think about his guilt/innocence. But the way this is dragging out..well surely it would be best to just ignore it all and it will eventually go away? There will always be people who think he is guilty (and that will never change, and constantly reminding people of it all will just make more think he is guilty..), and yes the BBC raid footage should not really have happened at all, BUT as a celebrity you should expect some element of publicity when something big happens to you. I feel a bit sorry for him, but I also think he is behaving a bit odd over it all tbh. I don't understand how he could have sued the police though? They did nothing wrong surely, they acted on an allegation? Unless I missed something, which is very possible as these celeb historical allegations things kind of bore me as surely there would be no way to actually prove anything this late on anyway. Its hard enough to get a conviction for present day sexual assaults and rapes, even with obvious evidence that it did happen rapists and perverts get off with it. |
Quote:
With Cliff, I just don't know. He's always been very private, whether that's because he has anything to hide or just wants a private life remains to be seen I guess? |
There is proof online of Cliff being involved in the Elm House scandal
|
Quote:
|
Honestly have a look around, there a lot of proof
https://cigpapers.blog/2013/04/29/th...le-party-list/ The BBC didnt go to his villa ,recording it for nothing |
|
Hes not named here ,but just shows how deep and dirty the goings on were there
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...tel-1980s.html |
I don't anything about it really but I always got the feeling there was something off about him :worry: I know, I know, that's not evidence of anything before I get roasted :laugh:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I believe the police tipped off the BBC that they were going to search his house and that's why they had a film crew at the event, and that's why they got sued. As the BBC were partners in that turn of events and want the figure published, it will be to ensure that they don't pay more than the police did for their part in the event I would have thought.
I think Cliff Richard behaved incorrectly in this matter, he is a celeb and has become a wealthy man through that celebrity status. Once in the public eye, you can expect a media circus if there is the potential for gossip. It goes with the territory. I don't like him, he pretends to be something he is not. Does that make him guilty? No, but I have a feeling stuff will come pouring out once he is 6ft under. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The whole PIE thing freaks the **** out of me though. How it was all supported, mainly by Labour MPS. I did not know until a few months ago that PIE is the main reason some idiots link being gay to paedophilia..was because PIE purposely attached themselves to the LGB movement :S |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Why did Cliff give up British citizenship when the **** started to hit the fan ?
|
Quote:
|
If Cliff is guilty he needs outing, he shouldn't be shielded
|
http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/201...e-to-keep.html
Cliff was also one of the last people to talk to Jill Dando before her murder, rumour has it,she was killed as she had been researching into Elm House and was ready to spill what she had found (how true I don't know) but once again ..... Smoke and fire |
Quote:
|
I think he's up to his neck in something...That said if he was that worried why pursue a case at all?
|
Quote:
|
There are those who still mock at the suggestions that there are high profile peadophiles operating ... Even following the Saville case and others. :/
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Though these historical cases, as I said I don't really get it given its near impossible to get people convicted for current day sexual assaults/rapes even with a lot of evidence. Where surely after like 30+ years there would be NO evidence at all. But no way would I ever believe that hundreds of people were lying. Its not as if its just a case of saying to the police 'oh, X sexually assaulted me 40 years ago' and thats all. There is intense questioning and such too.. |
I did not know that 9 people accused Cliff..thought it was just one. Hmm.
Apparently the fact that one of his accusers is a rapist himself should go against the accuser or something. Rapists are clearly scum, but being a rapist does not mean that you could not be sexually abused as a child. The guy reckons its Cliffs fault for how he is today, which is also nonsensical to me tbh. If you were abused as a child, why would that make you in turn abuse others..bad excuse. Never looked very far into this Cliff Richards thing. Have skim read a couple of threads about it all. But reading a bit more into it..does seem a bit dodgy even from the start |
Quote:
|
|
|
Quote:
e.g Quote:
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MFOHUm1vCE Richards /Jill Dando
|
No smoke without fire basically translates to guilty until proven innocent, it's **** logic.
I don't really see why anyone would cover for Cliff Richard of all people tbh, if they didn't charge him then it was probably because he didn't do what he was accused of. The whole privacy thing might be more to do with the fact that he seems pretty closeted and isn't interested in coming out which he might have to do if it means clearing his name. Innocent until proven guilty, unless there's charges and a case brought against him, it's all speculation and opinion. |
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7089896.html
Some of the stories are swaying me back and forth on this now D: Though Quote:
So many seem to think insufficient evidence = guilty. And that insufficient evidence automatically means the accuser is lying too. Just been reading on another forum people going mad that some guy was accused of rape but got a not guilty verdict due to insufficient evidence, they are baying for the accusers blood as apparently this proves it was all made up and he is clearly innocent :umm2: |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.