|
Post by Lane Kent on Dec 7, 2006 20:57:47 GMT
Well I am sorry still sticking with innocent until proven guilty. There is no crime in having young girlfriends of 17 or whatever. Foolish but not a crime and doesn't make him a rapist. As long he doesn't go with underage girls.
Also the more I read of it I have to say the 16 year old has a lot to answer for. If anything her parents are the guilty ones letting her booze until 3 in the morning with strange boys and then letting her parade herself hours later in bikini ion beaches flirting with every man that goes by. I'm sorry but the more I read about this case the more I think he may be innocent. Especially as they refused to let him leave the country last week, now they have bailed him to March. In fact they bailed him at all is quite amazing for such a serious crime. It will be interesting come March to see if this goes to trial.
Oh and I know this is irrelevent but I have met Ben Freeman and I found him to be really charming, the way he interacted with the other cast members, my guide dogs was just so spontaneous. One of the nicer cast members who does a lot for charity.
It can take two to tango. Age may not of even come into it. According to all sources she looked older than her age. A 16 year old boozing all night is no innocent and I'd be never suprised she got in trouble with her parents for arriving in late and drunk so had to think of something to get her out of trouble. As sources say it took them hours to report it and there were a number of witnesses to the two in the pool who didn't say anything weird was going on.
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 7, 2006 21:35:59 GMT
Yep there is definitely more to this than meets the eye. I wonder though how many people are watching the show and thinking he's a rapist?
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by valda on Dec 7, 2006 21:55:07 GMT
well I,m not one of them Patsy he is innocent until proved otherwise. I think it was interesting that she stayed on at the hotel afterward,s and sunbathed etc until her holiday was over. why would she do that if she had been raped? .
|
|
|
Post by madamesinclair on Dec 7, 2006 21:56:30 GMT
I havent seen him in a different light watching the show. He's playing a character and the character is annoying. So no change there
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 7, 2006 22:14:25 GMT
Yep but some people aren't as open minded as we are.
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by Lane Kent on Dec 7, 2006 23:08:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by valda on Dec 7, 2006 23:38:56 GMT
spoilsport,s
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 8, 2006 14:20:33 GMT
What legal reasons?
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by madamesinclair on Dec 8, 2006 14:50:28 GMT
Digital Spy like to dictate what you debate about
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 8, 2006 21:23:19 GMT
Then the media shouldn't cover it either. It's ridiculous.
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by valda on Dec 8, 2006 21:59:23 GMT
if the media didn,t cover it then how would we find out out about these thing,s to discuss it otherwise? it,s plain silly not to cover it or hear Ben,s side of the story
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 8, 2006 22:06:45 GMT
What I'm saying is if DS are banning it for 'legal reasons' that means the media also shouldn't mention it. The fact they do means they're just gits.
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by Cheetah on Dec 8, 2006 23:32:39 GMT
Just to be boring - could be 'cos the case has to be proved or possibly the victim wants to remain anonymous.
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 9, 2006 0:16:30 GMT
But even if it's proved she's a liar she'll always remain anonymous which I don't think is right.
Patsy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2006 5:13:23 GMT
Shouldn't that read 'alleged' victim? Shame the 'alleged' perpetrator doesn't get the same choice.
|
|
|
Post by valda on Dec 9, 2006 9:00:08 GMT
it,s a shame your right Blackcatz and your right Patsy that isn,t right.
|
|
|
Post by Lane Kent on Dec 9, 2006 11:25:20 GMT
Yes I don't understand the banning. They should just check each post as opposed to banning the subject. As long as someone doesn't say I know she is lying or I know he did it because he/she has done the same before as those type of posts would be out of order and liabelist.
However to me to just express an opinion, what is the legal problem? As long as the posts aren't losing sight of the fact it is all alleged anyway, it isn't illegal to have an opinion yet last time I looked.
|
|
|
Post by madamesinclair on Dec 9, 2006 11:31:50 GMT
The whole forum is full of utter morons.
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 9, 2006 14:21:18 GMT
Well Daran Little posts there. Patsy
|
|
|
Post by sallywebster on Dec 13, 2006 21:23:10 GMT
The whole forum is full of utter morons. Well I wouldnt say the entire forum is full of morons, there are some nice people there but I left the forum at the start of the year because I got fed up of all the constant arguments and bickering. LOL Pats, good point!
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 13, 2006 21:57:52 GMT
You tend to get that a lot though. There's one I'm on. Dare to have a differing opinion with someone and he becomes such a bastard. I hadn't been on there a week one time and he was still at it so I posted and called him an obnoxious git. LOL! He doesn't even like what the board's about and keeps proving I was right. We all have differing opinions but the majority just have friendly disagreements on whatever board. It's the minority who make it unpleasant for people.
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by sallywebster on Dec 16, 2006 11:50:07 GMT
I notice that Yas has not apologised to the members of this MB she insulted with her inflamatory remark. I notice that is hasn't been pulled either...Yet a recent message of mine was wth no explanation...Now who did that I wonder....and why? I ask who as there are so many here with the title of Administrator yet almost as many who deny the responsibility...Why? I ask why as there was simply no explanation...How rude. There are 3 people here who are administrators - RitaLittlewood, LaneKent and myself. We deal with the day to day running of the board. The member with the username 'Admin' has the overall responsibility for this board. Hope that explanation is clear for you.
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Dec 17, 2006 12:39:59 GMT
According to the Sunday Mirror, the girl's father demanded £20,000 in front of witnesses for the charges to be dropped.
Patsy
|
|
|
Post by madamesinclair on Dec 17, 2006 14:00:06 GMT
More convinced than ever that the girl is making it up judging by her rather pathetic statement.
|
|
|
Post by valda on Dec 17, 2006 15:28:56 GMT
I,m inclined to agree with you Yasmin .
|
|