Channel 4 dispatches - high profile comedians done for



If he’s found guilty, will those openly supporting him both on here and in the media hold their hands up and condemn him? Or is rape in vogue nowedays?
 
gabbiadini1 said:
If he’s found guilty, will those openly supporting him both on here and in the media hold their hands up and condemn him? Or is rape in vogue nowedays?
Click to expand...
What if he is found innocent are you going to still call him a Rapist.
I personally can't stand the bloke and if he is guilty he should go away for a long time.
But I believe people are defending, the mantra Innocent until proven Guilty.
Anyone still defending a convicted rapist if that be the case, should be called out and shamed.
You would hope any right minded person would completely disassociate themselves from him if he was convicted.
 
gabbiadini1 said:
If he’s found guilty, will those openly supporting him both on here and in the media hold their hands up and condemn him? Or is rape in vogue nowedays?
Click to expand...
No. They support sex pest Trump, sex pest Wooton and they now support a rapist of 16 year old girls in Brand.
It's quite horrific really, how they support rapists because the rapist tells them it's all a conspiracy because he tells the truth to power.
 
Last edited:
chunkyshanhawk53 said:
This is an interesting article if you can find a way to read it

My mum couldn’t stop me dating Russell Brand — but the law should

The Times & The Sunday Times

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
www.thetimes.co.uk www.thetimes.co.uk
Click to expand...
A change to the age of consent seems like a sensible approach. I don't think her idea of making it illegal for someone over 21 to be with someone under 18 is workable mind, it would need to be x number of years older. By that, I mean that from what she's suggested a 21 year old could legally be with a 16 year old and then, in a year, they become 22 and can't legally be with the now 17 year old and would have to end the relationship for a year. I'd say that a 16 or 17 year old can only be sexually active with someone up to, say, 5 years older than them. So at 16 they can be with a 21 year old, and it's still fine at 17 and 22. Maybe 5 years is too much tbh, but regardless that seems like a better approach.
 
BarrySheensAutograph said:
What if he is found innocent are you going to still call him a Rapist.
I personally can't stand the bloke and if he is guilty he should go away for a long time.
But I believe people are defending, the mantra Innocent until proven Guilty.
Anyone still defending a convicted rapist if that be the case, should be called out and shamed.
You would hope any right minded person would completely disassociate themselves from him if he was
Click to expand...
BarrySheensAutograph said:
What if he is found innocent are you going to still call him a Rapist.
I personally can't stand the bloke and if he is guilty he should go away for a long time.
But I believe people are defending, the mantra Innocent until proven Guilty.
Anyone still defending a convicted rapist if that be the case, should be called out and shamed.
You would hope any right minded person would completely disassociate themselves from him if he was convicted.
Click to expand...
Don’t believe I’ve called him a rapist… but if I were a betting man…
Anyone who has watched that show and read the times report and who are defending him want keeping an eye on too imho.
My take on the whole thing is if I got accused of what he has I’d be suing dispatches and the times for every penny they have. End of.
 
BarrySheensAutograph said:
What if he is found innocent are you going to still call him a Rapist.
I personally can't stand the bloke and if he is guilty he should go away for a long time.
But I believe people are defending, the mantra Innocent until proven Guilty.
Anyone still defending a convicted rapist if that be the case, should be called out and shamed.
You would hope any right minded person would completely disassociate themselves from him if he was convicted.
Click to expand...
Have you read some comments on this thread? They aren't defending him for his innocence, they are defending him because they believe its political. They think he is being silenced because of his political beliefs. It's just another conspiracy fairy tale to the gullible.
Innocent until proven guilty is not their first concern.
 
gabbiadini1 said:
Don’t believe I’ve called him a rapist… but if I were a betting man…
Anyone who has watched that show and read the times report and who are defending him want keeping an eye on too imho.
My take on the whole thing is if I got accused of what he has I’d be suing dispatches and the times for every penny they have. End of.
Click to expand...
Yes, you didn't call him a Rapist, my apologies, and I absolutely agree about the suing part.
I am trying to give a balanced view on the subject, even if I think he's a complete scumbag
 
Frank Bullitt said:
Have you read some comments on this thread? They aren't defending him for his innocence, they are defending him because they believe its political. They think he is being silenced because of his political beliefs. It's just another conspiracy fairy tale to the gullible.
Innocent until proven guilty is not their first concern.
Click to expand...
I was just trying to give a balanced view,
Frank Bullitt said:
Have you read some comments on this thread? They aren't defending him for his innocence, they are defending him because they believe its political. They think he is being silenced because of his political beliefs. It's just another conspiracy fairy tale to the gullible.
Innocent until proven guilty is not their first concern.
Click to expand...
I've got no defence for people who will defend him if he is convicted,and these people should be rightly called out,
 
BarrySheensAutograph said:
I was just trying to give a balanced view,

I've got no defence for people who will defend him if he is convicted,and these people should be rightly called out,
Click to expand...
And a balanced view is good and I think you are right, public platforms should be cautious cos as has been mentioned rape and sexual assault is a very hard crime to convict on and if he is found innocent in a court of law then that is a very good basis to start suing left right and centre and then that will just give grist for the mill for some on here.

However as others have said being found innocent especially in cases like this, doesn't mean you didn't do it so we shouldn't necessarily be defending him even if he is found innocent, but we can loudly declare our dislike of the to$$er
 
BarrySheensAutograph said:
What if he is found innocent are you going to still call him a Rapist.
I personally can't stand the bloke and if he is guilty he should go away for a long time.
But I believe people are defending, the mantra Innocent until proven Guilty.
Anyone still defending a convicted rapist if that be the case, should be called out and shamed.
You would hope any right minded person would completely disassociate themselves from him if he was convicted.
Click to expand...
People aren't defending the mantra Innocent until proven guilty. They are saying the mainstream media, big pharma and the government are out to silence him because he has unearthed the truth.
 

Back
Top