|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 9, 2013 14:23:12 GMT
Have seen in todays Sunday Mirror ,so it must be true  , that a chap is accusing a former male Emmerdale star of sexual abuse back in the 1970's when the lad was 13 !! It's spreading like wildfire I guess the name will come out eventually |
|
|
|
Post by sootycat on Jun 9, 2013 15:57:05 GMT
I'm in two minds on all of this.
I wondered how long it would be before a soap actor from different soap than Corrie would be accused, it will be the turn of someone from EE next!. The words bandwagon and jumped on spring to mind...or am I being cynical !!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2013 17:17:09 GMT
No, you're not.
While I'm sure that some of these cases are very real, I think a lot ARE a case of people seeking fame and notoriety.
Things were very different back then (certainly in the 60s and 70s), and young (some VERY young) girls really did throw themselves at anyone who had the slightest connection with the showbiz world, and at the time, no-one batted an eyelid.
It's yet another sad sign of the times that so many people are being 'outed' now for possibly one or two indiscretions decades ago, when they were in fact more likely to have been the victim, rather than the aggressor.
Obviously there are those who genuinely did prey on young girls (and boys) consistently, but I suspect they are the exception, rather that the rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 9, 2013 17:41:51 GMT
I tend to agree
When I worked in a straight nightclub back in 1981 -1983 there were girls who had their 18th birthday do at the club, but had been coming there for years...none of the staff had any idea they were under 18, let alone 14 or 15!!
I feel that yes while there will be some genuine claims of abuse and using your position, the majority will be 'jumping on the compensation bandwagon' claims, who at the time were fully aware of what was going on and what they wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by CG Wendy on Jun 9, 2013 18:13:58 GMT
And when it gets to court, the 'victims' will be there wearing their school uniform with not a scrap of make up on their faces.
I`m not saying all of them are like that, but there are some who really cock a snoot at the justice system. And sometimes the real victims are ignored.
|
|
|
|
Post by pearly queen on Jun 9, 2013 22:29:41 GMT
There is an 'age of consent' for a reason.
It's there to protect the innocent from being got at by older, wiser, dirtier people.
It means that daft young kids who think they know the score, who think they are sexy and mature and who throw themselves at other older people - especially at famous or influential people - don't get taken advantage of, by older people, due to their naivete.
Grown adults, when receiving attention from under age or youngish/teenage kids should know how to turn it down firmly and in a responsible way - and make it quite clear that they don't take advantage of anyone who is possibly/definitely underage - no matter how much they appear to be 'up for it'.
The law might not be very effective in stopping underage teenagers from bonking each other (good luck with that one!) - but when one person is so much older than the other (under age) person then that situation is abusive, because the younger person doesn't have the same emotional maturity or life expeirence as the older one.
Everybody is supposed to uphold the law of the land - we're all supposed to behave ourselves, but it seems that only famous people get reported for breaking those laws.
|
|
|
|
Post by CG Wendy on Jun 9, 2013 22:53:34 GMT
Great post PQ. I couldn`t agree more
Obviously the actor in question is still alive, otherwise the 'victim' wouldn`t be coming forward now after 40 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 10, 2013 11:48:23 GMT
Well said Pearly
|
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Jun 10, 2013 13:00:56 GMT
I agree with many posts already written. While there were undoubtedly some groupies, others were not and so I do think they can't be classed as the same thing. They claim it was a more innocent time. Was it when people going back centuries have been at it at all ages and getting knocked up. I would hope the genuine abuse victims would refuse compensation. There just seems to be a pay off culture now so we'll never know. I just hope it's not Frazer Hines. My adoration of him since Christine Sugden told Joe she was leaving will be shattered!
Patsy
|
|
|
|
Post by RitaLittlewood on Jun 10, 2013 13:04:58 GMT
Incidentally, I wonder if grown men getting kicks from school uniforms is connected? An ex-boyfriend got incredibly turned on when I wore a shirt with a tie. His fantasy was girls dressed like Britney Spears when she wore that uniform. Often wondered about him since. I do think my first boyfriend was a paedophile. I was 10, he was lying about his age and had his hands everywhere!
Patsy
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 10, 2013 13:58:49 GMT
I have my own ideas of who it may be..but I am not going to say because of libel etc...
|
|
|
|
Post by CG Wendy on Jun 10, 2013 15:04:37 GMT
I hope it`s not who I think it is. But if it is who I suspect it is, why didn`t this person come forward during the 80`s when he was still a cast member?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 10, 2013 17:17:38 GMT
The only people still alive who were long term male cast members from the 70's are Andrew Burt (Jack Mk I), Frazer Hines (Joe) and Frederick Pyne (Matt)
I guess the reason he didn't come forward in the 80's is (If it's true) because there wasn't any need to then...why bring something up that you have done wrong if you think there will be no comeback
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 18:10:47 GMT
I think Wendy meant 'why didn't the alleged victim come forward', not the star they're accusing.
|
|
|
|
Post by CG Wendy on Jun 10, 2013 20:21:58 GMT
Yes I did mean the so called victim. Sorry for any confusion.
Nick...those 3 were my on list too. I wasn`t sure about Andrew though as I am not sure if he is still alive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 10, 2013 22:03:15 GMT
LOL..of course you meant the victim..I see it now  Yes, Andrew is still alive If they are genuine then I guess they probably felt they wouldn't be listened to then, but now the Jimmy Savile juggernaut has started rolling they feel more comfortable saying it..or making it up...or whatever |
|
|
|
Post by sootycat on Jun 11, 2013 10:40:04 GMT
Sometimes actors are referred to as Emmerdale (or any of the other soaps) stars when they have maybe only done a few episodes. Could this chap be one of those 'stars' do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 11, 2013 11:36:01 GMT
Could be..they were described as 'long term' though
|
|
|
|
Post by sillybint on Jun 12, 2013 3:49:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 12, 2013 8:36:38 GMT
No SB, the chap was described as a long term Emmerdale Farm cast member from the 70's
Andrew Lancel would only have been a child then
|
|
, that a chap is accusing a former male Emmerdale star of sexual abuse back in the 1970's when the lad was 13 !!
