Cliff Richard Going On A Summer Holiday Soon?

[mistermack]

..and yes - Harris did write a letter to one of his 'victims'.

He wrote that letter to the FATHER of his supposed victim, in 1997. Surely if that contained evidence of law-breaking, he would have been tried seventeen years ago.

He never denied having an affair with that girl. But there was no suggestion that she was under age, until this trial.

So he was supposedly fucking an under-age girl, wrote a supposedly incriminating letter to her father seventeen years ago, and nothing happens till seventeen years later.

Bollocks. It's just scammers after his money.

[DaveDodo007]

My brother has a painting by Rolf Harris that cost £600 and is now worthless, what's going to happen to my record collection now. Can't these little whores keep their mouths shut.

[Rum]

..and yes - Harris did write a letter to one of his 'victims'.

He wrote that letter to the FATHER of his supposed victim, in 1997. Surely if that contained evidence of law-breaking, he would have been tried seventeen years ago.

He never denied having an affair with that girl. But there was no suggestion that she was under age, until this trial.

So he was supposedly fucking an under-age girl, wrote a supposedly incriminating letter to her father seventeen years ago, and nothing happens till seventeen years later.

Bollocks. It's just scammers after his money.

Direct quote from the letter of an innocent man..

"When I see the misery I have caused (the girl) I am sickened by myself.

You can’t go back and change things you have done in this life - I wish to God I could.
-snip-

If there was any way that I could atone for what I have done, I would willingly do it."

[cronus]

..and yes - Harris did write a letter to one of his 'victims'.

He wrote that letter to the FATHER of his supposed victim, in 1997. Surely if that contained evidence of law-breaking, he would have been tried seventeen years ago.

He never denied having an affair with that girl. But there was no suggestion that she was under age, until this trial.

So he was supposedly fucking an under-age girl, wrote a supposedly incriminating letter to her father seventeen years ago, and nothing happens till seventeen years later.

Bollocks. It's just scammers after his money.

Direct quote from the letter of an innocent man..

"When I see the misery I have caused (the girl) I am sickened by myself.

You can’t go back and change things you have done in this life - I wish to God I could.
-snip-

If there was any way that I could atone for what I have done, I would willingly do it."

End of Kind Hearts and Coronets springs to mind. How do we know what he was really talking about? Guy is Australian.

[mistermack]

..and yes - Harris did write a letter to one of his 'victims'.

He wrote that letter to the FATHER of his supposed victim, in 1997. Surely if that contained evidence of law-breaking, he would have been tried seventeen years ago.

He never denied having an affair with that girl. But there was no suggestion that she was under age, until this trial.

So he was supposedly fucking an under-age girl, wrote a supposedly incriminating letter to her father seventeen years ago, and nothing happens till seventeen years later.

Bollocks. It's just scammers after his money.

Direct quote from the letter of an innocent man..

"When I see the misery I have caused (the girl) I am sickened by myself.

You can’t go back and change things you have done in this life - I wish to God I could.
-snip-

If there was any way that I could atone for what I have done, I would willingly do it."

I see no link, Rum.
And in any case, it's a misleading extract. He could have been writing about a forty year old, in that quote. Or any age.
It's zero evidence of anything, other than some bint getting upset. Women get upset all the time. Luckily, ditching a woman isn't an offence.
The fact remains, he wrote that seventeen years ago. How come no prosecution seventeen years ago?

[Rum]

I don't know what the fuck you are on about. Rolf Harris was clearly an abuser. I followed the trial, watched the news and believe that the trial by jury system is pretty reliable. End of unless one is a child abuse denier..

[mistermack]

I don't know what the fuck you are on about. Rolf Harris was clearly an abuser. I followed the trial, watched the news and believe that the trial by jury system is pretty reliable. End of unless one is a child abuse denier..

So you saying it proves it? You don't have any facts to post that even indicate it, apart from a jury verdict. And going on what you've posted, if the jury took your attitude, it's not surprising he was convicted.
I take the view that if there was good solid evidence, it would have been all over the news.
If you followed the trial, what was that good solid evidence?, because you haven't posted it.

Your description of ''clearly an abuser'' seems to be solely based on the verdict.
So Michael Jackson was ''clearly not'' an abuser, and O J Simpson was ''clearly innocent'' then.

Right.

[Rum]

You must be an idiot. I can't think of another explanation for the crap you post here.

[mistermack]

You must be an idiot. I can't think of another explanation for the crap you post here.

Well, you've had every opportunity to show why. If that's the best you can do, I don't think I need to worry.
In any case, idiots can often get it right, and geniuses often get it wrong. It's the arguments that interest me, not the person making them.