What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Langlands charged with child sex offences

Saxon

Saxon

Bench
Messages
3,188
Raiderdave said:
hahahahahah
no , are you serious ?
you are typical of the morons in our society who have no concept of the idea that just because someone is charged with something they are.. NOT .. guilty.. immediately even when it child sex charges
Click to expand...
Not "Not Guilty". They have the presumption of innocence. Big difference.

And if the DPP thinks there is a reasonable chance of conviction and it is their belief that it is in the public interest then they are required to act.

Sad that the old bloke may not be in a position to defend himself; but if it's true would it be fair on the young lady not to pursue it?

Just as with a number of the priests and brothers caught up in the recent Institutional Sexual Abuse inquiries old age and infirmity should not prevent the search for justice.
 
R

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
Saxon said:
Not "Not Guilty". They have the presumption of innocence. Big difference.

And if the DPP thinks there is a reasonable chance of conviction and it is their belief that it is in the public interest then they are required to act.

Sad that the old bloke may not be in a position to defend himself; but if it's true would it be fair on the young lady not to pursue it?

Just as with a number of the priests and brothers caught up in the recent Institutional Sexual Abuse inquiries old age and infirmity should not prevent the search for justice.
Click to expand...

old & infirmed is different to being unable to communicate
starting with the basic premise of understanding what it is you are charged with , which langlands quite obviously wont so how can he plead to the charges ?
there is no chance of a conviction & even a monkey let alone the DPP would know this

making the charges laid an utter disgrace
 
R

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
Saxon said:
Not "Not Guilty". They have the presumption of innocence. Big difference.
Click to expand...


and im sorry
there is no difference as far as the average drop kick on the street is concerned
he got charged so he did it is their attitude
it is a disease & has people tarred & feathered from the get go & certainly where these types of charges are concerned.
 
OldPanther

OldPanther

Coach
Messages
13,404
Raiderdave said:
and im sorry
there is no difference as far as the average drop kick on the street is concerned
he got charged so he did it is their attitude
it is a disease & has people tarred & feathered from the get go & certainly where these types of charges are concerned.
Click to expand...

Yeah this is far too common.
 
Saxon

Saxon

Bench
Messages
3,188
Raiderdave said:
old & infirmed is different to being unable to communicate
starting with the basic premise of understanding what it is you are charged with , which langlands quite obviously wont so how can he plead to the charges ?
there is no chance of a conviction & even a monkey let alone the DPP would know this

making the charges laid an utter disgrace
Click to expand...
I'd love to know how you come to your conclusion there's no chance of a conviction. So you're actually saying just let him go because he might not be competent to defend himself? Yeah, nah.

I'd hate to be the one from the DPP who has to go and tell the young lady; "Yes we think he did it and we think we have enough evidence to convict, but he says he can't remember so we're not going to do anything. Sorry if he ruined your life, but we're not going to risk damaging a reputation that he doesn't even remember he has".
 
OldPanther

OldPanther

Coach
Messages
13,404
Saxon said:
I'd love to know how you come to your conclusion there's no chance of a conviction. So you're actually saying just let him go because he might not be competent to defend himself? Yeah, nah.

I'd hate to be the one from the DPP who has to go and tell the young lady; "Yes we think he did it and we think we have enough evidence to convict, but he says he can't remember so we're not going to do anything. Sorry if he ruined your life, but we're not going to risk damaging a reputation that he doesn't even remember he has".
Click to expand...

They'd have to have some convincing evidence and after 30 years I find it unlikely. The best bet would have been a confession but he can't now.
 
Tommy Smith

Tommy Smith

Referee
Messages
21,344
There's many reasons why people might take so long to come forward. I'm sure most have been mentioned.

The fear of not getting a conviction in court would likely be a major factor as many cases are "he said, she said" as the phrase goes (the genders vary obviously).

I reckon soft sentencing also plays a role. To be the victim of a sexual assault is very traumatising so it'd be quite confronting to see your experience trivialised by the spectre of such a weak sentence.

And one factor which probably hasn't been mentioned would be the desire to protect loved ones/parents from the pain of knowing. So maybe some victims wait until their parents pass away before they come forward.

I know from my own experience I'd hate for my parents to know what happened to me as a boy. They'd be crushed and I don't want them to live with the guilt. I can carry the burden on my own. Some kids grow up being Souths fans so I always tell myself that it could have been a lot worse!

And by no means am I saying that coming forward is selfish. That'd be ridiculous. But eveyone deals with it differently and crucially the way you perceive your experiences, and your options of resolving them, evolve over time.

Ideally you'd come forward straight away but I suspect, like me, many victims aren't even capable of processing wtf happened at the time.

And if you don't come forward straight away, the powerful force of 'time' takes over and it becomes very easy for 1-2 years to become 1-2 decades.

It's certainly a very complex situation; which many people fail to understand when they're all too quick to suspiciously blurt out, "why didn't they come forward earlier?!"
 
Last edited:
veggiepatch1959

veggiepatch1959

First Grade
Messages
9,841
Tommy Smith said:
There's many reasons why people might take so long to come forward. I'm sure most have been mentioned.

The fear of not getting a conviction in court would likely be a major factor as many cases are "he said, she said" as the phrase goes (the genders vary obviously).

I reckon soft sentencing also plays a role. To be the victim of a sexual assault is very traumatising so it'd be quite confronting to see your experience trivialised by the spectre of such a weak sentence.

And one factor which probably hasn't been mentioned would be the desire to protect loved ones/parents from the pain of knowing. So maybe some victims wait until their parents pass away before they come forward.

I know from my own experience I'd hate for my parents to know what the neighbour did to me as a very young boy. They'd be crushed and I don't want them to live with the guilt. I can carry the burden on my own. Some kids grow up being Souths fans so I always tell myself that it could have been a lot worse!

And by no means am I saying that coming forward is selfish. That'd be ridiculous. But eveyone deals with it differently and crucially the way you perceive your experiences, and your options of resolving them, evolve over time.

Ideally you'd come forward straight away but I suspect, like me, many victims aren't even capable of processing wtf happened at the time.

And if you don't come forward straight away, the powerful force of 'time' takes over and it becomes very easy for 1-2 years to become 1-2 decades.

It's certainly a very complex situation; which many people fail to understand when they're all too quick to suspiciously blurt out, "why didn't they come forward earlier?!"
Click to expand...
You have brought up some interesting and valid points.

The main point is one I never thought of - the grief and shame being projected onto other family members and friends upon disclosure of such a sordid event.

Stay strong my friend.
 
S

SBD82

Coach
Messages
17,855
LESStar58 said:
Oft times I do... especially when I bring up the fact that Nightingale is a dirty head-butter.
Click to expand...
That's the thing though. You need better bait.

Suggesting nighty was in any way in the wrong puts your arguments in flat earther territory.
 
madunit

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
Raiderdave said:
old & infirmed is different to being unable to communicate
starting with the basic premise of understanding what it is you are charged with , which langlands quite obviously wont so how can he plead to the charges ?
there is no chance of a conviction & even a monkey let alone the DPP would know this

making the charges laid an utter disgrace
Click to expand...
So do you also believe those who were assaulted by Jimmy Saville should have just shut up?
 
OldPanther

OldPanther

Coach
Messages
13,404
madunit said:
So do you also believe those who were assaulted by Jimmy Saville should have just shut up?
Click to expand...

People keep responding to him as if he's against the victim but he isn't. He's arguing in favour of a fair trial. I suspect he'll be right and there will be no conviction. Unless they have something on him we aren't aware of it'll be aimply impossible to prove.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top