[Jake.]

Originally Posted by Alf

Because we want to make sure he gets sentenced and pays the correct penalty for his crime.

He’s a multi millionaire, he can afford the best lawyers in the land. So he needs to be charged with the correct crime.

That’s down to the authorities and the judicial system, I doubt a post on a Big Brother forum is going to sway the opinion of a judge

[jet]

She says "i didn't tell him my age and he didn't ask". Could be she looked older (and seemed more mature) than 15? Some 15 yr old girls I know look at least 18!

I doubt rock stars in that era asked every girl who was 'dressing to impress them' what age they were if they didn't look at all like 15 (after all, not much separates 15 yrs from 16 yrs, the age of consent.)

It was still statutary rape by law, but it can be bit of a minefield for men if their intentions are not bad ones.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Jake.

That’s down to the authorities and the judicial system, I doubt a post on a Big Brother forum is going to sway the opinion of a judge

Yeah, Josy sort of said the same thing a post earlier, I didn't need it repeating, however, how kind of you to think of me.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Josy

None of that matters one bit though he had sex with a minor meaning she wasn't legally able to consent, that's statutory rape.

Why do care so much to argue about the charge that would be against him?

For one Josy I’m not having an argument with you I’m having a conversation with you.

But you don’t seem to understand, that if you charged him with statutory rape he would get away with it.

If I charged him with having sex with someone under the age of consent he might get convicted but that’s not gauranteed

Why do you think top lawyers get massive amounts of money, it’s because they use the correct usage of words in the courtroom that can mean the difference between prison and walking away with their freedom.

Lawyers get thousands of pounds every year for defending some the most disgusting people on earth.

[Jake.]

Originally Posted by Alf

Yeah, Josy sort of said the same thing a post earlier, I didn't need it repeating, however, how kind of you to think of me.

She literally said it just before I did

[Livia]

Forty odd years on.... let's not waste the time of the court.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

For one Josy I’m not having an argument with you I’m having a conversation with you.



But you don’t seem to understand, that if you charged him with statutory rape he would get away with it.



If I charged him with having sex with someone under the age of consent he might get convicted but that’s not gauranteed



Why do you think top lawyers get massive amounts of money, it’s because they use the correct usage of words in the courtroom that can mean the difference between prison and walking away with their freedom.



Lawyers get thousands of pounds every year for defending some the most disgusting people on earth.

Yeah that's what I meant, like arguing your point about what the charge would be not specifically arguing with me.

And theres no way you can know that he would get away with it regardless of how the charge was worded.

However my point in regards to the discussion I was having with you (and others) was that the charge may be called something else (actually it mostly likely would be) but it still means statutory rape.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

Forty odd years on.... let's not waste the time of the court.

Yes thats well past the time limit
to go to Court.

It only went Public
after Rea's recent podcast.


This went Front Page on a Sunday Daily Mail
helped them sell extra papers today.
We find out late tonight
if any other papers are going to put it Front page?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes thats well past the time limit
to go to Court.

It only went Public
after Rea's recent podcast.


This went Front Page on a Sunday Only Paper "The People"
helped them sell extra papers today.
We find out late tonight
if any other papers are going to put it Front page?

There is no statute of limitations in the UK for crimes that would be tried in a court higher than a magistrates court. So it could still be tried even after all this time... assuming anyone wants to bother.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Josy

Yeah that's what I meant, like arguing your point about what the charge would be not specifically arguing with me.

And theres no way you can know that he would get away with it regardless of how the charge was worded.

However my point in regards to the discussion I was having with you (and others) was that the charge may be called something else (actually it mostly likely would be) but it still means statutory rape.

For me it means, sex with a 15 year old wich is illegal and wrong.

From my own personal experience, being arrested for attempted murder by shooting someone with a shot gun and surrender to armed police, going to court and getting told to stay out of trouble for 12 months, the circumstances mean everything and what can actually be proved.

Was once in court and the charge was read out that on a date and time a man put his hand in a woman’s vagina that she did not consent to.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes thats well past the time limit
to go to Court.

It only went Public
after Rea's recent podcast.


This went Front Page on a Sunday Only Paper "The People"
helped them sell extra papers today.
We find out late tonight
if any other papers are going to put it Front page?

Why on earth should he be allowed to get away with it though ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

There is no statute of limitations in the UK for crimes that would be tried in a court higher than a magistrates court. So it could still be tried even after all this time... assuming anyone wants to bother.

The Lady Rae
does not want to.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Zizu

Why on earth should he be allowed to get away with it though ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Maybe because the Lady Rae
is not pushing it.

Only Confirmed it
after she let it out her recent podcast.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by arista

Maybe because the Lady Rae

is not pushing it.



Only Confirmed it

after she let it out her recent podcast.

But a offence is an offence, surely


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Calderyon]

Always thought Rolling Stones was overrated.

Now they are also heinous. (Well some of them at least)

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Calderyon

Always thought Rolling Stones was overrated.

Now they are also heinous. (Well some of them at least)

If I had any of their crap songs on our PC they’d be deleted on principle


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Amy Jade]

Did he know she was 15?

Legally this is rape if he did or not though.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

In that time period I'll take teen.

Even if that is disturbingly close to Jimmy Saville level of sick.

At 13 you're a little child you're a minor , teen is being used too much as a grey area for anything goes .

You've got to ask yourself if you'd be creeped out by your own child of that age being with a grown adult then you know it's messed up.

And 15 is underage , but I'm not surprised by Jagger . As I always knew rock stars are like that , they don't care about age they just take their drugs & booze and sleep with any female with a pulse .

And in the music industry & Hollywood there's allsorts of disturbing things happening.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Zizu

Why on earth should he be allowed to get away with it though ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is what I'm not understanding.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

At 13 you're a little child you're a minor , teen is being used too much as a grey area for anything goes .

You've got to ask yourself if you'd be creeped out by your own child of that age being with a grown adult then you know it's messed up.

And 15 is underage , but I'm not surprised by Jagger . As I always knew rock stars are like that , they don't care about age they just take their drugs & booze and sleep with any female with a pulse .

And in the music industry & Hollywood there's allsorts of disturbing things happening.

I agree with you to an extent.

It's that I am more forgiving of people before the 70's era doing something disgusting like that when there was less information on Paedophilia in those days.

However the Incest part is disgusting in any recent decade.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

I agree with you to an extent.

It's that I am more forgiving of people before the 70's era doing something disgusting like that when there was less information on Paedophilia in those days.

However the Incest part is disgusting in any recent decade.

So basically pre 70's era people didn't know predators existed ?? is that what you're saying? . I'm pretty sure they knew but i will agree that attitudes were bizarre and ignorant back then. And things weren't taken as seriously as today.

And incest isn't exactly a recent thing as weird as that sounds.

But regarding consensual relationships with teens and adults it becomes a grey area and blurred lines, and some people like this woman who said she slept with Jagger is saying it was her choice and that she wanted to sleep with him despite being underage . So what are people meant to do with that information? .


I will never understand what a grown adult male or female would see in a child , is it manipulation? control? some fetish?. And i'm talking about the ones that know they're underage and still young.

Even hearing about 16 & 17 year old's dating 30+ age group is weird to me .

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

So basically pre 70's era people didn't know predators existed ?? is that what you're saying? . I'm pretty sure they knew but i will agree that attitudes were bizarre and ignorant back then. And things weren't taken as seriously as today.

And incest isn't exactly a recent thing as weird as that sounds.

But regarding consensual relationships with teens and adults it becomes a grey area and blurred lines, and some people like this woman who said she slept with Jagger is saying it was her choice and that she wanted to sleep with him despite being underage . So what are people meant to do with that information? .


I will never understand what a grown adult male or female would see in a child , is it manipulation? control? some fetish?. And i'm talking about the ones that know they're underage and still young.

Even hearing about 16 & 17 year old's dating 30+ age group is weird to me .

I think that predators in the past were seen as people having sex/relationship with someone below the age of 12. I could be wrong on that though as I'm no expert on the subject.

And I meant that people having an incestuous relationship past the Medieval period is bizarre to me personally as we're meant to have progressed since then.

I agree with you on why an adult would want to go with someone below 16 personally.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

I think that predators in the past were seen as people having sex/relationship with someone below the age of 12. I could be wrong on that though as I'm no expert on the subject.

And I meant that people having an incestuous relationship past the Medieval period is bizarre to me personally as we're meant to have progressed since then.

I agree with you on why an adult would want to go with someone below 16 personally.

Yeah i remember watching an old twilight zone episode from the 60's ,where it was implied a male character who was older had feelings / fancied a woman when she was 12 or something .

Maybe that was a reflection of the laid back attitude to the Lolita complex .


I think 16 is still young , I see 16 & 17 year olds as kids . When they're 18 That's officially a grown up , and even then they could still be mentally immature .

It's bizarre to us but some people think incest is still okay , even when their kids get sick with medical problems .

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Yeah i remember watching an old twilight zone episode from the 60's ,where it was implied a male character who was older had feelings / fancied a woman when she was 12 or something .

Maybe that was a reflection of the laid back attitude to the Lolita complex .


I think 16 is still young , I see 16 & 17 year olds as kids . When they're 18 That's officially a grown up , and even then they could still be mentally immature .

It's bizarre to us but some people think incest is still okay , even when their kids get sick with medical problems .

Lolita does still have an appeal nowadays bizarrely, if we go off XVideos anyway.

And yeah that's sadly a dated element in that episode of the Twilight Zone.

I don't mind 17, I am with you that 16 is still a bit too close for comfort for me, especially if they've only just turned 16.

And I honestly don't get how anyone can be okay with their children having medical problems because they couldn't keep it in their pants around relatives.

[Kazanne]

Well, how do we know how accurate this story is in reality? we don't, Did he seduce her ? I cant see him having to 'seduce' anyone at the height of his fame and some girls DO wear sex with a famous person as a badge of honour and did he actually know her age ?Did she approach him etc,so many questions, I know that is all very tasteless to some of you but its a fact, we really don't know the situation, as in the Michael Jackson case ,there needs to be proof, I am not condoning what happened IF its true but really tabloid fodder is not that reliable,as for people saying "that's it I don't like them anymore",lol, I mean really ? Lets see if this is indeed factual before we condemn the guy, trial by tabloid fodder is not reliable.imo