We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

And now it's time to SUE


carver

Likes # 0

Wondered how long before we had the "I want money" for my traumatic experience lot came on the scene enter link description here

I have posted this separately as I don't think it right to include it in any of the other postings about SJ

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

Joseph Kerr

"Technically incorrect as far as I know. That word has a very specific definition."

According to the Oxford English Dictionary - which is good enough for me - a paedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to children. As Savile is alleged to have abused at least one girl aged nine years I felt justified in using the word.

Like this post
wee eddie

Likes # 0

JK: What's a hebephile?

Like this post
wee eddie

Likes # 0

Found it

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

Actually, my dictionary agrees with yours. But I believe it does not tell the whole story; the children must be prepubescent, though pubescence does not occur at the same time with everyone.

Like this post
namtas

Likes # 0

I find it both alarming and disturbing that a few seem to be adopting a defence for JS's actions, if the allegations are upheld there is no defence, nor do I follow the need to be arguing over the technical definition of what constitutes a paedophile. We all know what a paedophile is we don't need a legal definition and the qualification for pubescence to define it.

Like this post
wee eddie

Likes # 0

In JS's case it appears to be cut and dried, he sought out the younger girls.

However, if the Case is not carefully thought through, there could be many, long-term, repercussions.

Consider this fairly common scenario.

Outside a 'Stars' Dressing Room are 2 security men in their middle 20s. They are besieged by 20 to 30 Girls, all beautifully turned out and trying to gain access. They know that their Star is a long way from home and been on the road for 3 months, he does not wish to go back to his Hotel Room alone and would like to party before going to bed. Several of the Girls offer bribes, some of which involve intimate physical contact, they are all stunning. How do they chose? Ask for Proof of age - we all know how easy those are to forge.

Later, a select few are admitted to the Star's Suite and the party starts. Later, the Star goes to bed and finds one of the girls already in there, naked as a jaybird. Little does he know that she is not one of the ones vetted by Security, she purloined a Room Service key and got in that way.

20 years later, she decides that it was probably not such a good idea and decides to go to Law.

This case, badly handled, could open the doors for her to successfully suing the, by now mega rich, SuperStar for Statutory Rape.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

Joseph Kerr

The prepubescent thing is often cited, but the law - in the UK at any rate - doesn't mention it. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 introduced new laws to protect children under 16, but they don't mention pre-pubescence in connection with paedophiles.

The reason is that it's not illegal to be a paedophile. You only break the law when you allow what is a mental condition to influence your actions. Nobody is ever charged with the offence of being a paedophile. People who commit sexual acts with children below the age of consent are charged with offences under the act.

I agree with you about the pre-pubescence qualification by the way, it's the definition commonly used by the medical profession.

Like this post
wee eddie

Likes # 0

My experiences: Can I tell you two tales. No I shan't but I'll give you the gist.

The first was my Aunt, one of 8 sisters, who was incensed that she had not got a mention in David Niven's Autobiography. As a holiday guest of one of the Households on Cap Ferrat, she caught his eye and had a fleeting affair with him. I am not sure of her age but it was almost certainly closer to 16 than 18.

The second is of 3 Girls and Trinny Lopez. In the late 60's early 70's it was almost de-rigeur to get a cast of the Star's member, to prove your success. At a rather wild party, two casts were produced. The third was at the Girl's Parents, in the country. All were made in the same 48 hour period, apparently the man was of prodigious proportions and vigour as the casts demonstrated. One of the girls was considerably younger than the others and none of them could possibly have been older than 24 at the time.

These, and other escapades, were fun memories of good times.

However, many would find these antics horrifying.

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

namtas, I'm equally alarmed at your interpretation of my post. Pompous, self satisfied, show-offy? Perhaps. But a defence of Saville? Not a bit.

FE, Im aware it is not an offence in itself. That is the point I was making. Clinically, it has to do with prepubesence. But it seems we agree.

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

In addition, I assume the law doesnt mention "paedophilia" at all then, as, if it did, it would need to recognise what it is in the clinical (and only) sense.

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

iPhone 6 review: best ever iPhone is very good... but no longer the best phone you can buy

IDG UK Sites

Why Apple and Samsung, Google and Microsoft's schoolyard spats make them all look stupid

IDG UK Sites

How to successfully bridge the gap between clients and creatives

IDG UK Sites

How to update your iPhone or iPad to iOS 8: including how to install iOS 8 if you don't have room ()......