re: Operation Yewtree
 

so how can you detain someone without arresting them? just interested in the differences. Are the rights different? do you have to read them when you detain someone? Here you get arrested have your rights read then you are detained for a maximum length of time before charge and release as I am sure you know

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Detention and arrest are two different things in Scotland. Detention is for up to six hours, and they can't fingerprint you or take a DNA swab. But it's the only way they are allowed to hold you without already being in possession of sufficient evidence to charge.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

What if you refuse to go?or refuse to give dna/ prints?

---------- Post added at 15:23 ---------- Previous post was at 15:22 ----------

is there a different caution?

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Well, Derek probably has first hand experience of dealing with that. I think - though I don't know - that police in Scotland have a *power* of detention, so they would be able to round you up, take you away in cuffs and throw you in a cell, or in an interview room, exactly as you would be as if you were under arrest, but that there are then a few legal distinctions from actual arrest which limit what they can then do with you.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

thanks for info :)

re: Operation Yewtree
 

But is anonymity part of the deal?:erm:

re: Operation Yewtree
 

12 or 24 now.

Then you'd probably be arrested for obstruction or similar. The detention powers are clear that you are not free to go about your business when detained but you are not arrested and until you are it is only suspicion you are held on. *Most* journalists make that distinction when reporting things.

Yep pretty much. You get certain rights when detained that are broadly similar to arrest but unless you have a good reason to hold someone longer than 12 hours they walk.

---------- Post added at 17:04 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------

Nope but it's clearer that when arrested you almost certainly will be charged.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Rolf will be ok he has an extra leg to stand on

re: Operation Yewtree
 

or he could lean on his didgeridoo...it's big enough

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Brings new meaning to his song "2 little boys" :shocked:

re: Operation Yewtree
 

re: Operation Yewtree
 

They're all at it!!!! :shocked:

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Police have arrested a 72 year old man as part of the Yewtree investigation. My mate in the news dept has given me a name that's doing the rounds....*jaw drops*


("jaw drops" is not meant to be any sort of clue by the way, it was just my reaction at what was said)

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Not surprised now awaiting a statement or a flash on Sky News........ how the mighty are falling.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Its now been some time and I haven't seen the name on sky! don't tell me the Police are acting correctly and not releasing the name until charged. Radio One are doing well :shocked:

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Now that would be breaking news but way off the mark. I think its good a persons name is not be released until charged. He lives in a homeless shelter hence how the mighty have fallen and Radio One are doing well. I will say no more nudge nudge...but how could they think Cliff Richard :shocked:

re: Operation Yewtree
 

That was the name I saw the other day.

---------- Post added at 09:43 ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 ----------

The guy they did arrest has been named:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

re: Operation Yewtree
 

That took some time for his name to hit the headlines, mind you it took ages for the page to come-up there must be lots of people viewing the page. Good find

Still not on Sky News But Bill Roache is.....

re: Operation Yewtree
 

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


would have thought a bigger sentence was in order myself but the judges hands are tied with sentencing guidlines

re: Operation Yewtree
 

He'll be out by Christmas

re: Operation Yewtree
 

To be honest i think it will finish him off given his age

re: Operation Yewtree
 

serve the arrogant man right

re: Operation Yewtree
 

comes to something when abusing 13 kids can be used as mitigation because it was not as large a victim count as Savilles

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Should have heard the language I used when I heard the sentence. Not good enough, I think someone said it was something like either 2 weeks or 2 months per victim. Apparently the Attorney General is going to ask for a review of the sentence, which I hope happens. Just because he admitted it shouldn't mean he gets a light sentence. Up to me, I'd give him the maximum for each offence and make him serve them consecutively, so he rots in jail.

I hope some con gets to him.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

We can hope. :tu:

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Don't all nonces end up in seg with other nonces and the weird and wonderful I doubt they will ever see general population. Does not mean one of the weird and wonderful won't get him of course

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Unfortunately the judges hands where tied ,he was obliged to use the sentencing rules from when the offences took place ,i don't know if the Attorney general can overturn that and disregard the rules but i think they need to be looked at

re: Operation Yewtree
 

No I understand that he can only be sentenced within what was around when the offences were carried out. What I think should happen though is he should get the maximum sentence from when the offence was done. So say if in 1970's child sex offenders carried a maximum of 2 years per offence then I would sentence him to 2 years for those offences.

What made me laugh though was a bloke who sprayed graffiti on trains causing £200,000 of damage got 3 and a half years in jail! What a joke that is. Coalition need to start some sort of review into sentencing guidelines to make sure this type of stupidity doesn't happen again.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

I personally do not understand this sentence from the time of the crime thing. If someone got caught for murder they committed in the early 50s the sentence would have been death but they can not do that. The law is an ass

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Because the Act of Parliament which abolished the death penalty for murder, specifically stated that anybody who had committed the crime of Capital Murder prior to 1965, should in future be treated as if they had committed Murder instead. Anybody on death row in 1965 was automatically taken off it, and anyone who committed a capital murder prior to 1965, but was caught and charged after 1965, could only be charged with murder.

English law is not retrospective unless Parliament specifically makes it so.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Come on get real it was only 13 young girls, and we are talking about £200,000 of damage to trains. I just hope you understand Irony ;) But as tizmeinnit has written the law is an ass

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Oh I got the irony. And yes, the law is an ass. And then you have people wondering why the hate preachers like to come and live in this country. Because we are too damn soft on criminals. Anyone convicted of child sex offences should be strung up, and not by their necks.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

re: Operation Yewtree
 

yeah doubled good

with this and the Stinson Hunter thread I feel really uncomfortable with the numbers of nonces in society

re: Operation Yewtree
 

If you spend so much time focusing on them then it's going to appear to be a problem. One is too many but there is hardly a legion of them on every corner.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

but there is more than I thought and I do not focus on them. You know its very convenient to be able to hide from a problem by saying there is only a problem because I look for it

Another thing that might surprise you in your nice little safe land but there are a lot of people out there been abused. The number I have met, maybe it is because we move in different circles I do not know, that have been abused. I know a grown man who stabbed his abuser years after it happened I know countless women who have been abused by family and others the numbers are astounding.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

But it is. You're talking about a story about child abuse amongst a certain set of public figures and another case where a guy seeks out child abusers. In these realms you'll find little else. If I walked into a prison I would be surrounded by convicts, it wouldn't mean there are any more convicts that I would have otherwise expected. This is a very biased sample you're viewing.

Eh? It doesn't surprise me. I don't think I said anywhere that child abuse doesn't happen. :dozey: I am saying that the numbers will appear to be shocking if you're surrounded by stories of such abuses. Following someone on Facebook who seeks them out is such an example of this. Any one incident is shocking but I am not sure this is any bigger a problem than it always has been, if anything we started taking the issue more seriously now which is a good thing. A slate needs to be cleaned. People who got away with it are now being brought to justice.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

yeah but there is a large number in a small area. If the pattern follows in all areas then the number out there prepared to do this,and I am sure we only see the tip of the iceberg, is massive that is why I am uncomfortable

Before all this we had no evidence to go on so we just did not know

re: Operation Yewtree
 

I would love to know how people turn out like this there must be thousands if not millions of paedophiles in the world, surely its not a mental illness? i can't seem to grasp millions of people having the same mental sickness.

Is it a gene deformity? did something happen during pregnancy when the baby was growing, is it possible for millions of people to have the same deformity?! the questions the questions!!.

Scientists should be looking at it, brain scans etc.

I always say the act is evil the person is not.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

A percentage of paedophiles, I don't have an exact figure, were themselves abused as young children. That unfortunately seems to be a vicious circle.

re: Operation Yewtree
 

and some become homosexual because of the lack of trust in the gender of the abuser

---------- Post added at 09:43 ---------- Previous post was at 09:33 ----------

we are told Homosexuality is genetic and all that it is really is a physical attraction to the same gender. If this is the case then any sexual attraction to anything ie animals dead bodies and children could equally be genetic

Now personally I do not subscribe to this and I know there is a chance of come backs but throughout the ages people have fancied and had sex with whoever they want male or female I just think it is lust which to me is a choice afteral if a lesbian fancies just women then why are so many with a butch girl? same with men and camp men the genetic argument makes no sense to me

Either way everyone can control their urges you do not have to have sex so saying paedophilia is genetic and therefore normal would not be a defence

re: Operation Yewtree
 

Rolf Harris faces new Yewtree sex offences allegations.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23581847

Been charged.
 

http://news.sky.com/story/1129093/da...ssault-charges

Just announced, sick world we live in.:(

Re: Been charged.
 

Indeed it is Arthur but you do know the difference between 'charged' and 'guilty' yes?

(thread title amended seeing as it has moved on from just being about JS)

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

IF GUILTY then string him up.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Yes Russ, l do know the difference between Charged and Guilty.

The DPS must have very good evidence to charge him though, but we will let the courts decide - in the normal manner.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

The CPS prosecute if it is

A) in the Public Interest
B) has the likelyhood of success

The jury has the final word, based on their interpretation of the evidence.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

So why do you consider the world to be 'sick' based on the fact someone has been charged?

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Well it appears no action is being taken against Jim Davidson.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23787754

One of the things which bothers me about all this is that any number of people have or are going to have their names associated with this abuse and for those who're innocent there's virtually no way they can ever prove it. If it isn't incumbent upon the CPS to clarify just what they mean when they say 'insufficient evidence' perhaps it ought to be. It seems to me that the term 'insufficient' is extremely vague and doesn't allow the public to distinguish between 'virtually no hard evidence' and 'not quite enough evidence' for example. Where such accusations are shown to have been malicious I'd also like to see a great deal more publicity of that fact since it's extremely unfair on the those falsely accused if the facts aren't made very clear for all to see.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

I think the CPS should simply say there is no case to answer. Saying insufficient evidence does give the impression there was something dodgy but not enough to go to court and thus leaves a suspicion of guilt on the person. We can't have a scenario where someone has such an accusation levelled against them stick because of the whims of the CPS. If there is no court trial there is no guilty verdict and if there is no guilty verdict then you're presumed innocent.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Insufficient evidence to charge does not automatically mean the person is innocent..

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

What about getting charged going to court full hearing with jury but then found not guilty what does that imply to a person that they must be guilty because it went to court so there must have been enough evidence regardless of the outcome?

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

That's true but until found guilty, a person is innocent.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

In the eyes of the law, that is exactly what it automatically means.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

It's what it should mean as far as everyone is concerned. Otherwise the state has the ability to label someone 'sort of guilty' without a trial.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Legal definitions and technicalities aside, surely the extent to which someone can be deemed innocent depends how 'insufficient' the evidence is. Zero, almost no evidence or even concocted evidence as opposed to not quite enough evidence to meet CPS prosecution criteria.

In the case of people accused of abuse and the like, the fact that they've not been prosecuted is cold comfort if there are large swathes of the public, potential employers, sponsors, family friends and the like who (because there's been no explanation given to the contrary) assume 'no smoke without fire' and act accordingly.

Of course there's no perfect way in which to handle these matters but I feel immensely sorry for those whose lives and/or careers have been permanently tarnished because no effort has been made by the authorities to explain their decision making and thereby limit any damage to the accused's reputation.

Where cases proceed to court I believe Judges can and do qualify their reasoning and have highlighted where, for example, there's been a lack of any credible evidence to support a prosecution or even a malicious element to the allegations made. It seems harsh therefore that people who don't go to court seemingly don't have a similar opportunity to have their names officially cleared of any supposed guilt. I'm sure it's a minefield but somehow it just doesn't seem right.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Rolf Harris charged with 9 counts of indecent assault and 4 counts of making indecent images of a child in 2012. IF TRUE, I hope he rots in hell.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ges-child.html

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Well, I'm not eating at KFC anymore.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Well if found true.. he should be sent back to Australia to serve his time.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Coronation Street actor Michael Le Vell has been cleared of raping a child.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-24032449

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

It'll be interesting to read more about what went on in this case over coming days. Four hours seems a remarkably short period for the jury's deliberations so you have to wonder about the robustness of the prosecution's case.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

I seem to remember that the CPS did not want to proceed with this because the evidence was so weak and it was only that she came back with more evidence when asked to that made them prosecute !!!!.



*****EDIT*******


found it

http://news.sky.com/story/1139838/le...tatus-in-court

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

i'm looking forward to the public apologies from the twitter and facebook mob that had him guilty and strung up by his nads before the trial began .

Shall we start a book on how long we have to wait ?

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Never going to happen, they have crawled back into their holes and they will only come out again when they can spew more crap and rubbish from the big mouths. What it needed is for them to be found and sued massively by those they have libeled

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24722248

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

saved a few quid

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Don't suppose he'll be the last. I just hope some innocent lives aren't lost in the pursuit of 'justice'.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Agreed ,in this case though i think the probability of him being guilty is greater since he has already been to jail for child abuse

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

i can never understand how people can find a child attractive. The mind boggles when i think about it!

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

I'm with you alanb, it is totally beyond me what they find is sexually arousing about a childs body. :shrug:

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Yes I was aware he'd had plenty of previous and wasn't implying I had any sympathy for him, just the innocent who have or will get caught up in the clamour.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Me neither, only another sicko could understand I suppose.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

To them it's as 'natural' as you finding a woman attractive (I'm assuming you go that way...).

This is why so many of them persist - they don't see themselves as doing bad because it's not like they 'chose' to fancy kids. Doesn't make any of it ok obviously - those with a conscience could always voluntarily inform their local police and ask their GPs for a referral for sexual counselling.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

I blame Rihanna.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

over 20 previous convictions Rot In Hell

2 more arrests today apparently on BBC news

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

this guy can rot as well

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Paul Gambaccini arrested in Operation Yewtree inquiry.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24779908

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Yes one never expected his name to be revealed.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Never liked the man, but never dreamed he could be accused of crimes like this. I just want to stress the IF here.

IF they are guilty, then they deserve to be hung for their crimes.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Yes if they are guilty then they deserve to face the full force of our justice system.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Unsurprisingly the twitter gossips had the wrong man named yet again. :rolleyes:

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

That's very sad to hear because as the old saying goes mud sticks.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

There was another man arrested at same time, so maybe this other person is the one being spread around Twitter.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Odd! I could have sworn that Paul Gambaccini was one of those who went on camera pointing a finger at Savile.:erm:

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

I think we all need to be careful in what we say but I think that some of these accusations relate to periods a very long time ago when what was deemed 'acceptable' behaviour was quite different in all sorts of ways. And no I'm not referring to child abuse, rape, serious sexual assault or anything like that.

To be fair to some of those who're accused, it may well be that what they're accused of now was so trivial then that they may not a) even recall it happening and/or b) still not believe it was wrong. This might explain what appears to be hypocrisy.

It wouldn't be surprising if, for example, someone accused of groping a girl they didn't know was 15 at the time (30-40 years ago) and hasn't heard anything about it since, had completely forgotten about it. Of course that wouldn't apply to the likes of Savile who was a serial abuser and knew exactly what he was doing.

The Michael Le Vell case demonstrates why we should be very cautious about condemning anyone until the legal process has run its course and I'm not going to comment about anyone caught up in all this until the facts are known.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Revealed: how Jimmy Savile abused up to 1,000 victims on BBC premises.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...00-victims-bbc

How they could just turn a blind eye to his evil for many many years is absolutely beyond me.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

It's quite straightforward - he was a hugely powerful figure in broadcasting during his heyday and any whistleblowers would have been quietly bundled out. The BBC didn't want to lose him and the revelation of his crimes would have brought their corporate name in to disrepute. Therefore it was 'easier' to keep things hushed-up.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Saville is innocent as are William Roach, Dave Lee Travis and Stuart Hall.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Protected by media and then tried by media. Saviles reach, sphere of influence and potential to damage was far beyond that of just the BBC.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Stuart Hall is the only one proven to be guilty of wrong doing so far so you're partly correct.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

He's "NOT" guilty in my eyes.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Indeed.. It seems in the media, the "talent" is allowed to do pretty much what they want as long as they bring in the viewers/listeners.

I wonder how many victims would be found if they set up an operation like Yewtree in Hollywood?

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

He was found "guilty" in a "court of law".

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

He admitted it:

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

I don't know what standards and boundaries you live your life by, so maybe in your eyes this is the norm and he hasn't done anything wrong. On those grounds I'll leave you too it.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

---------- Post added at 13:42 ---------- Previous post was at 13:31 ----------

[/COLOR]He pleaded guilty to sexually abusing 13 girls aged between 9 and 17 and you say he is not guilty in your eyes

Why not?

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

anyone found to be complicit in any of the cover ups should be bought before a judge as joint venture. Anyone who has said oh yes we knew about it should be jailed for aiding and abetting the assaults

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

Have to agree, when someone admits to being a ******* paedo how can you say he is not guilty? As for Roache, I have my opinion on the case but won't post it here as I will be given infraction points.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

I guess it's a case of whatever you're in to.

The thing with taking action against those who knew, it was all rumour and hearsay. I'd find it hard to believe there'd be any concrete evidence of anyone knowing about it, and don't forget how long ago this happened - a lot of people who were at the BBC while JS was at his worst could have since passed away from old age.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

There were people openly exposing Savile and his behaviours years ago - as far back as 1987 as the Jerry Sadowitz videos prove - but people chose to ignore it. His behaviours were the talk of many celebrity circles but he was protected by his celebrity loving bosses and political friends. When all is said and done, he died a beknighted innocent man and that will be of no comfort whatsoever to any of his true victims.

Re: Operation Yewtree
 

DLT not guilty on 12 charges but 2 charges jury dismissed as no verdict

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...erdict-3140440