bennetn

Supporters
  • Content count

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

91 Very good

About bennetn

Profile Information

  • Location Wiesbaden
  • Nationality British
  • Gender Male
  • Year of birth 1969
  1. Wedding planner in Frankfurt

    I have been to a wedding organised by  https://www.immerwir.de/ Edina is really nice and speaks English
  2. Well I'm more than sure the police and independent bodies have looked in the claims more than them, so we're all ok with our sources on this.
  3. Good, glad you claim not to be an apologist. Crack on with posting unsupported claims from a blogsite to support your crazy "he was innocent" theories though.
  4.   Saville was accused of assaulting children from the age of 5. Funny you mention Clifford, another paedo. You another paedo apologist?
  5.   Irrelevant nonsense again.  There's an absolute mountain of evidence against Saville, a lot of which never got to court but it wouldn't suit your narrative.  If anything, Saville was protected by the very system you claim jails innocent paedophiles. You're still comparing Richards' case, completely different case and result to try and indicate failings in the process when, in fact, the process you deride is what cleared Richards.   You'll be telling me next it's natural to like kids.
  6.   So, as a summary, absolutely no direct involvement of a similar case to what we're discussing.  That is, a historic sexual abuse case investigated and tried in the UK.   Thanks for your input.
  7.   Go on then, enlighten me on your involvement of high profile criminal cases and how they have been reported in the media. What that has to do with a competent, unbiased jury convicting two men of sexual abuse of minors may come clear with your information.
  8.   No, you didn't say that either as you wrote...   "Although sexual assault should never be treated lightly, I feel that paying "alleged" victims compensation is a reason for some allegations. "   The insinuation is clear, let's shame the victim
  9.  irrelevant nonsense.  People, without any bias or reason to lie, had a lot of evidence put in front of them prior to coming to their decision that they were guilty, many of of the claims were dismissed and never got to court citing lack of evidence, but not all as there was evidence and in the case of Saville, his well known antics were covered up by big wigs in the media.  Your inane ramblings about something you clearly know nothing about is just victim shaming and is part of the reason why people take years before they admit what happened, for every one that does speak out then I'm sure there's another 2 who didn't.  
  10. even thought they were proved?   The only false claims here are yours.
  11. Richards was cleared so would indicate that justice was served, the witchhunt associated with the claims would have resulted in a guilty sentence if what you said was true.  I don't trust English justice to get it right, that would be stupid and we would ask why we have duty, rights and processes if it was right every time.   You're comparing a case, Richards, where a high profile star was arrested publicly and cleared later.  The police admitted later it should not have happened and apologised and he got front page news of his clearing.  Against that you're trying to frame Harris' sentence as unjust, sorry but it wasn't.  He's a paedo the same as Saville and I hope he rots like Saville did.   Why are you mentioning food poisining claims?  Little bit of strawman going on here?  You don't have your claim examined by 12 of your peers after a lengthy legal discourse do you?  Irrelevant to your point but you also fail to mention that recently people have been jailed for making false claims.
  12. So, victims of sexual abuse should not receive compensation? Pretty poor shot at victim shaming here, would like to see the stats related to miscarriages of justice in relation to sexual abuse claims.
  13. Got attacked by two Croatians in Unterhaching

    So the headline should read "got verbally abused by two non-Germans--"?  
  14.   Harris's name was released months before he was convicted by a jury of 12 people after considering all the facts.  The man is a paedo and he's being punished for his sexual crimes against children.   I'm all for championing the rights of suspects prior to a court case but Rolf Harris was found guilty unlike Richard who was later cleared of any charges.
  15. Are people with tattoos stupid?

    To have a pigeon or a tattoo, tough choice.