Rolf Harris

[logbox]

Today in court Rolf sang part of Jake the peg and demonstated how to play the digeridoo, tomorrow he might do two little boys.

[saasher2012]

lol. But I don't think that's his preferred choice!.

[evoman3957]

I'm not sure if old Rolf is even all there any more, appropriate he chose "Jake the peg" to sing; considering it's that third leg of his that's caused him all these problems.

[electric*mayhem*band]

Well if he's doing his stage act in a courtroom, he certainly has lost the plot. Perhaps the poor soul thinks he's at the Palladium. When he starts painting the walls with murals, that's the time to bring in the little men in white coats.

[0125arwen]

Perhaps he  expected a presumption of innocence, no chance on here.

[saasher2012]

He's admitted his own guilt it's just whether it was underage , & the other charges which he's denying!

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@saasher2012 wrote:
He's admitted his own guilt it's just whether it was underage , & the other charges which he's denying!

---

Whether or not the girl was underage is what determines 'guilt' - so he hasn't admitted guilt at all.

[saasher2012]

I stand corrected , apologies !

[rose2008-2008]

I never heard about that?, did he really sing?. Yes Two Little Boys and Jake the Pake sound a bit weird now dont they. What about Tie me Kangaroo Down???. I know what should have been tied down,,,,JAKES EXTRA LEG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Its got him into an awful lotta trouble!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

[electric*mayhem*band]

Apparently he's now saying he was good at covering up his 'dark spot'. If that's what he calls it, seems he didn't quite make a very good job of it after all.

[astrologica]

Most of the posters on this this thread, with Creeky the exception, seem to be very eager to condemn Rolf and assume his guilt of the charges brought against him. The snide 'jokes' are not very nice at all. He is at this moment, guilty by his own admission, of adultery and nothing else. Adultery is not a crime, it is a betrayal. The more I hear about this case, the more I believe that he is innocent of the charges brought against him, but guilty of , in his youth, being unable to resist the advances of young women attracted to him, his fame, and his money. I sincerely hope that he is found NOT guilty. He and his wife, and daughter, have appeared as a dignified, solid, family unit.

[ed_blackadder_1]

Well said,   what ever happened to Innocent until proved guilty.

[designer_label_girl]

Yes, it's just awful the way grown men can't resist the advances of young girls.

There are no young women involved in this case, only girls. The charges date back years but they were crimes then as they are crimes now.

He is, of course, innocent until proven guilty.

[merehazle]

---

@astrologica wrote:
Most of the posters on this this thread, with Creeky the exception, seem to be very eager to condemn Rolf and assume his guilt of the charges brought against him. The snide 'jokes' are not very nice at all. He is at this moment, guilty by his own admission, of adultery and nothing else. Adultery is not a crime, it is a betrayal. The more I hear about this case, the more I believe that he is innocent of the charges brought against him, but guilty of , in his youth, being unable to resist the advances of young women attracted to him, his fame, and his money. I sincerely hope that he is found NOT guilty. He and his wife, and daughter, have appeared as a dignified, solid, family unit.

---

Yes, well said Astro. 

Arwen #5  did say: ''Perhaps he expected a presumption of innocence, no chance here.''

You obviously missed that.  Well said Arwen.

So do I hope he is found NOT guilty. (Seems so harsh, you would think he had murdered several people)  That heart breaking sight of his wife, daughter, and him struggling to the court. Yes, the more I hear about this case, the more I believe he is innocent.   

Oh yes, the snide jokes.   One just up there a bit was hardly a joke. But why not draw attention to yourself, and STUFF any compassion for Rolf and his family.  Why Rolf dosen't deserve it does he? He MIGHT be guilty?  

[tommy.irene]

If you do the Crime ..You do the Time..

[cee-dee]

Since the days of Magna Carta it was a right to face your accuser before a jury.

Things have moved on a bit since then, women are "allowed" to sit on a jury, Laws of evidence have been introduced and for some crimes, your accuser is allowed to remain "hidden".

To convict someone, you only have to convince a jury of the guilt of the accused. That can be by overwhelming weight of evidence or by convincing argument from the prosecution (plus possibly a poor showing from the defendant/defence).

Now if YOU were "on the jury" would you have been convinced of the guilt of RH from what you've heard (read about?) so far?

Are you basing your "decision" on 1/ hard evidence (there is none?) or 2/ on the allegations being made and the admitted distasteful behaviour?

On 1/ he's not guilty on 2/ as guilty as they come?

[rose2008-2008]

A Dignified, solid family unit???. Errrrr? , he cheated, was he being dignified and solid and united with his family then. NO i dont think so!!!.

[saasher2012]

Unless they can prove he had sex with an underage girl then it has to be not guilty through lack of evidence , or have I missed something?

[cee-dee]

They can't PROVE it but the prosecution can convince a jury he did.

[saasher2012]

Basically then it's who is better at convincing not the actual truth of the matter, ie evidence or lack of it?