[Josy]

Originally Posted by Zizu

I’m done

Looks like you’ve nothing else to do but go around in circles winding people up ..


Crazy thing is .... we’re all on the same team !!!’

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I wasnt referring to you, calm yourself.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Josy

I wasnt referring to you, calm yourself.

I quoted that post because you keep going on and on but never take into account anything said to you .. you must be a complete nightmare to talk to if you simply don’t listen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Zizu

I quoted that post because you keep going on and on but never take into account anything said to you .. you must be a complete nightmare to talk to if you simply don’t listen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I keep going on and on?

It's a discussion and I was replying to points I disagreed with.

Dont blame me because the way you worded your opinion made it sound like you were blaming the parents...

[thesheriff443]

Because depending on the circumstances there would be different out comes

That’s why there are different charges.

If jagger was charged with statutory rape he would not be convicted because it does not meet the threshold for that charge

[Josy]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Because depending on the circumstances there would be different out comes

That’s why there are different charges.

If jagger was charged with statutory rape he would not be convicted because it does not meet the threshold for that charge

It does though.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Josy

It does though.

The law is complex.

Sometimes cps will drop a rape charge knowing there is a good possibility of not getting a conviction instead they will opt for a lesser charge of sexual assault because there is a greater chance of a conviction.

They had sex that was Illegal but the circumstances of what lead to sex will have an impact on the charge.

By the way I don’t make the law.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

The law is complex.



Sometimes cps will drop a rape charge knowing there is a good possibility of not getting a conviction instead they will opt for a lesser charge of sexual assault because there is a greater chance of a conviction.



They had sex that was Illegal but the circumstances of what lead to sex will have an impact on the charge.



By the way I don’t make the law.

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?

[Zizu]

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

Yeah .... you’ve said that about fifty times already .... yawn




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Alf]

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?

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.

[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.

[Twosugars]

The point is minors are considered unable to consent to sex and so law treats it that consent was not given and therefore classes it as rape.
Makes no difference how "willing" a minor is.
For an adult it is gross to hide behind putting it on the minor. Nope, only one party is fully responsible, full stop.

[Livia]

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

[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.

[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.

[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 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

[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.

[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.

[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

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by 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

Yeah true , plus if people are going to boycott Jagger's music . Then what will they do about Weinstein movies?? .

How far do we go with that sort of thing, are people going to stop listening to Bowie? who was rumoured to be sleeping with underage people ??.

I stopped listening to Lost prophets though as when I heard the details it was disturbing , I think same applied for Gary Glitter for some people who can't always seperate the art from the person.

But it was ridiculous last year how the bandwagon of MJ got jumped on of wanting to mute him,with zero evidence and 4 hours of propaganda.

Regarding Jagger I think he was drunk & high, but I don't think he was fussy about the age of girls, doubt he bothered to check ID when he had groupies. If they dressed or looked barely legal. He probably slept with them.

[thesheriff443]

Older men like younger women, younger women like older men, older women like younger men, younger men like older women.