3D does a Townsend

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_755081.html?menu=entertainment.latestheadlines

a shock

― monstatruk, Thursday, 27 February 2003 10:44 (twenty-three years ago)

Well this (if true) explains why he was so worried about Internet privacy. :(

― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 27 February 2003 10:47 (twenty-three years ago)

I wonder what Sinead will make of this.

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Thursday, 27 February 2003 10:55 (twenty-three years ago)

noooooooo, say it aint so :(

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:10 (twenty-three years ago)

It's about time the police realised that names of suspects should NEVER EVER be released until a conviction has been made. Look at the long line of innocent people in the spotlight who have had their good names, reputations and careers left in tatters due to the publicity an alleged sex crime attracts. It's a fucking disgrace.

And I'm utterly convinced he's innocent. I don't like the guy at all, he's a pompous ungracious prick, but not for a second do I believe he's a paedophile.

― russ t, Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:15 (twenty-three years ago)

but what does prompt the police to act on these people...how are they informed that these people are potentially guilty of such things? are they tracking and tracing credit card transactions on porn sites? are they acting on bogus rumours spun about? remember when newsreader Julia Somerville was questioned by police just because she had a photograph of her daughter/niece in the bath?!

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:20 (twenty-three years ago)

They acted on a 'tip off'..... considering del Naja has as many people who hate him aslove him in Bristol - figures, really. And the police are obliged to act.... strange that the police rarely make such a big deal when they find out their investigations are leading nowhere, isn't it?
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/3593937?source=Evening%20Standard

― russ t, Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:22 (twenty-three years ago)

Russ R Kelly is at #1 in the US charts!

I'm not surprised by any accusations any more - I don't know if someone who downloads child pr0n is neccessarily a paedophile, even. (Unless you use the super-elastic def'n of paedophile which encompasses both "kidnaps and rapes children" and "once wanked off over picture of 14 yr old in a bikini").

Stevem in the case of Operation Ore they busted a big c.p. network in Texas and got credit card records of everyone who'd paid up, and theyve been processing them bit by bit. There was a very interesting (and unpleasantly self-justifying so I'm not sure how true it is) article by an offender in the Guardian about what exactly you would be paying for on these sites.

― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:23 (twenty-three years ago)

I know he is.... the thing is, if he'd been photographed or filmed having sex with an underage BOY - you can bet he wouldn't be number one in America!

Much as I despise Jonathan King..... it's obscene that he's been put away for so long. The judicial system in this country is rampantly homophobic.... if he'd been sleeping with willing - and remember, all King's 'victims' were fully willing - 15 year old girls, he'd more likely have had a slap on the wrist or a very short custodial sentence. What was he sent down for? Was it 7 years? Killers get less. It's outrageous.

― russ t, Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:33 (twenty-three years ago)

Is it just a coincidence that someone who has been leading an anti-war campaign gets this?
And yes i agree that names should be kept quiet until proven guilty. Matthew Kelly probably didnt do anything after all and will face no charges after he was reported to police. yet will always be under suspicion due to the nasty "no smoke without fire" stuff. And the people who falsely accuse never seem to get punished for wasting police time. i.e. the woman who accused Neil Hamilton.

― Henry Poll, Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:36 (twenty-three years ago)

The Daily Mail "PILLORIED" front page had me absolutely frothing.

Actually though I'm not sure this kind of speculation is much better so I'll zip up on this thread now.

― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:40 (twenty-three years ago)

It's a dodgy one..... I think any woman who belittles the vile crime of rape by falsely crying rape should be sentenced, I really do.
But the flipside of this is that if this happens, the cases of reported rape, of which only a small percentage are ever reported, would plummet.
So it's a no-win situ, really.

I just hope del Naja can prove his innocence beyond doubt. But we all know that even if he does, his name has been smeared with this forever and it will never be forgotten.

On a purely selfish note, too..... it'd mean no more Massive Attack records - the future of which looks bleak anyway, without all this...

― russ t, Thursday, 27 February 2003 12:41 (twenty-three years ago)

'100th Window' would probably have been the last Massive Attack record anyway, but i'm curious as to what Mushroom might come up with, assuming he's up to something

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:01 (twenty-three years ago)

innocent until proven guilty, i sez. watch this space...

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:33 (twenty-three years ago)

crikey spikey. more old tabloid bollocks. don't believe it for a second.

― j0e (j0e), Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:58 (twenty-three years ago)

i guess the 100th window was a pop-up ad

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 27 February 2003 14:10 (twenty-three years ago)

hayoooow!

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 27 February 2003 14:13 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm surprised none of the news reports has mentioned his interest in the internet and the title of the new album.....

As wrong as I think this arrest is, and as unjust as I know it will be proved, it is reassuring to know that there is still life in the Avon and Somerset Constabulary.

Most Bristolians thought that, apart from the traffic cops, the police force had left the city........

― russ t, Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:13 (twenty-three years ago)

if he'd been sleeping with willing - and remember, all King's 'victims' were fully willing - 15 year old girls, he'd more likely have had a slap on the wrist or a very short custodial sentence.

would he, though? any legal experts on hand to tell us the going rate for adults who shag teenage girls?

― DV (dirtyvicar), Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:17 (twenty-three years ago)

Ask Bill Wyman!

― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:18 (twenty-three years ago)

Just as long as my baby's safe from harm ...

― Anna (Anna), Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:30 (twenty-three years ago)

(I'm sorry I'm gutted, but I've been wanting to make that joke all day)

― Anna (Anna), Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:38 (twenty-three years ago)

*tumbleweed drifts past* ;)

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:48 (twenty-three years ago)

Is it just a coincidence that someone who has been leading an anti-war campaign gets this?

The new bad jacketing?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/01/26/ritter.arrest/index.html

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 27 February 2003 22:59 (twenty-three years ago)

Please someone tell me that this is a bad joke. But somehow it makes sense. At least in Bush's and Blair's twisted brains. Whoever is against the war is a child molester. That's a phantastic PR move! How crazy has this world become?

― alex in mainhattan (alex63), Thursday, 27 February 2003 23:24 (twenty-three years ago)

three weeks pass...

When I first read his public statement concerning this ... well, there seemed to be a calm confidence and forthrightness about it far beyond the usual denials. It had me oddly convinced.

Today the charges were dropped due to insufficient evidence. Charges remain concerning the drugs they found while stopping by for his computers.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 07:29 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.