|
|
Post by haulierp on Aug 4, 2016 18:30:16 GMT
I see the Head of the Inquiry into Historical Sex Abuse Judge Lowell Goddard has just resigned.Is that the third Resignation ?
Butler Sloss and Dame Fiona Woolf being the others. The Establishment will be resting easy in their beds tonight.
Isn't it amazing the British Judiciary can't furnish a safe pair of hands to hear this Inquiry,what will happen now,will we have a
fourth attempt.Why wasn't this brief given to someone like Michael Mansfield ?
It has been reported that Lowell Goddard has spent three months on Holiday in this the first year of her £500,000 a year post.
Nice work,if you can get it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 4, 2016 21:03:42 GMT
It does seem a clusterfuck. Whether just due to the bad luck, or some sinister plot, dunno but probably the former. Trouble is most people have some skellington in their closets and yet this chairperson is expectedl to be inhumanly squeaky clean. I think only Cliff Richard is that squeaky clean.
Oh, wait a moment...
|
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Aug 4, 2016 21:14:48 GMT
I think it is a poisoned chalice. It is too large an enquiry too many cases that they are trying to bring into one stream.
|
|
|
|
Post by haulierp on Aug 4, 2016 21:30:02 GMT
It does seem a clusterfuck. Whether just due to the bad luck, or some sinister plot, dunno but probably the former. Trouble is most people have some skellington in their closets and yet this chairperson is expectedl to be inhumanly squeaky clean. I think only Cliff Richard is that squeaky clean. Oh, wait a moment... I wasn't aware she had resigned for any other reason than her liking for a Good Holiday  |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 4, 2016 22:06:23 GMT
It does seem a clusterfuck. Whether just due to the bad luck, or some sinister plot, dunno but probably the former. Trouble is most people have some skellington in their closets and yet this chairperson is expectedl to be inhumanly squeaky clean. I think only Cliff Richard is that squeaky clean. Oh, wait a moment... I wasn't aware she had resigned for any other reason than her liking for a Good Holiday Well that's unclear isn't it? Apparently she spent 44 days in the antipodes on enquiry business and had 30 days annual leave entitlement. Yes it does seem a bit odd that there is 44 days worth of business on her home patch but then again quite a lot of Brits have emigrated there so there are bound to be some victims out there. (Or is "survivor" now the requisite PC term?) |
|
|
|
Post by haulierp on Aug 5, 2016 5:40:20 GMT
I wasn't aware she had resigned for any other reason than her liking for a Good Holiday Well that's unclear isn't it? Apparently she spent 44 days in the antipodes on enquiry business and had 30 days annual leave entitlement. Yes it does seem a bit odd that there is 44 days worth of business on her home patch but then again quite a lot of Brits have emigrated there so there are bound to be some victims out there. (Or is "survivor" now the requisite PC term?) It was her admission that she knew nothing about English Law that I found most surprising.I honestly don't know about these historical abuse cases,sometimes I think how can someone defend themselves against malicious allegations it must be very difficult.I understand of course that the Inquiry if it ever takes place,is looking at the role of the Institutions and any Establishment Cover Up rather than a specific case. Victims or Survivors ? I don't have a view really,it seems to me there is a lot of double standards,people seeking to make capital,and blatant sexism by some of these Pressure Groups especially the Feminist Lobby. |
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 5, 2016 6:04:28 GMT
I fully understand the desire of (genuine) victims of historic abuse for justice.
I also understand the the situation of those individuals exposed to bogus or mistaken claims.
How the hell can you defend against a claim that you did something maybe 30 years ago ?
How the hell can you be sure that someone's memories of anything that long ago are accurate ?
How the hell can you be a fair judge of that ?
I don't know about the rest of you on here, there is no way in Hell I could work out where I was and what I was doing 30 years ago. Not only is memory itself, shadowy or coloured by hindsight, after time but any paper records I may have had, will have been used to light the stove or have gone for recycling, years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by haulierp on Aug 5, 2016 7:50:12 GMT
You are 100% with that post John,there was that recent case with the Fire Chief who was only freed thanks to the Investigative Powers of his Mrs.
The Police failure to either investigate properly or fail to reveal to the jury evidence prejudicial to their case is disgraceful.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Aug 5, 2016 11:01:26 GMT
They do scare me as well these investigations, its seems to be a whole pile of money wasted from my point of view, I for one cant remember what happened last week never mind 1974 or whatever year you choose
|
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Aug 5, 2016 11:11:32 GMT
From the odd thing on the news etc, it would seem that relations with the establishment and ministers were not good. That could be one or more of several things; Goddard requiring independence to do things her way and the establishment saying do it our way, or the time away etc. Maybe one day we will get to know. The interesting thing is that she should have given 3 months notice and the Home Office have not asked that she serve it. Murky waters
I think there is too much for one person to take on, particularly with the establishment concerned for its reputation. I wonder how this will end not well for either side I suspect.
Who is going to give their career for 5 years to take this on. I doubt anyone at the top of their career which is what it needs,unless they are just about to retire.
Just had a thought I wonder how much the Jenner maatter being added to the load affected Goddard's attitude. I wonder if effectively having to try the case against a dead person when they can't defend themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by loafer on Aug 5, 2016 15:41:14 GMT
I can't remember what I was doing 30 years ago either, but I'd sure as hell remember if I'd been kiddy diddling, or raped someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Aug 5, 2016 16:18:14 GMT
The problem is if accused you would have to be able to prove what you was doing 30 years ago!! difficult to say the least
|
|
|
|
Post by loafer on Aug 5, 2016 21:10:14 GMT
The problem is if accused you would have to be able to prove what you was doing 30 years ago!! difficult to say the least I'm not so sure. I remember exactly what I was doing when Princess Diana died nearly 20 years ago - I can't think of an earlier example. Moon Landing? Yes. 1966? Yes. I'm sure I'd remember exactly where I'd raped someone. |
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 5, 2016 21:43:28 GMT
The problem is if accused you would have to be able to prove what you was doing 30 years ago!! difficult to say the least I'm not so sure. I remember exactly what I was doing when Princess Diana died nearly 20 years ago - I can't think of an earlier example. Moon Landing? Yes. 1966? Yes. I'm sure I'd remember exactly where I'd raped someone. Trouble is if someone accused you of doing something on the second thursday after Diana died, could you remember what you actually were doing so that you could prove otherwise ? That is what I was getting at. These historic abuse cases seem to vary from the normal "innocent until proven guilty" in that anyone accused seems to be pilloried by the press for months or even years only to have the case dropped due to lack of evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by loafer on Aug 5, 2016 21:49:30 GMT
I'm not so sure. I remember exactly what I was doing when Princess Diana died nearly 20 years ago - I can't think of an earlier example. Moon Landing? Yes. 1966? Yes. I'm sure I'd remember exactly where I'd raped someone. Trouble is if someone accused you of doing something on the second thursday after Diana died, could you remember what you actually were doing so that you could prove otherwise ? That is what I was getting at. These historic abuse cases seem to vary from the normal "innocent until proven guilty" in that anyone accused seems to be pilloried by the press for months or even years only to have the case dropped due to lack of evidence. Ah got you - misread. Yes, if I had nothing to do with the occasion and there was nothing major going on at the time, then I'd have a few problems remembering what I was doing yesterday! |
|
