Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
JohnM

Carl Beech trial: 'VIP abuse' accuser guilty of false claims

Recommended Posts

I expect  a number of people who were only too willingly to believe his stories will now retract.

A convicted paedophile has been found guilty of making false allegations of murder and child sexual abuse against a string of public figures.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49074879


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was fairly obvious that his claims were rubbish.

I m no fan of Edward Heath but the police chief who said he was guilty should now face charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnM said:

I expect  a number of people who were only too willingly to believe his stories will now retract.

A convicted paedophile has been found guilty of making false allegations of murder and child sexual abuse against a string of public figures.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49074879

I genuinely hope that you mean people outside of this forum in your first sentence.  If you mean anyone on this forum then I expect you to provide evidence to back it up as I certainly hadn't seen any such statement on here and would have jumped in if I had.

Please be more precise in future if it's the first interpretation.

  • Like 3

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it is the first interpretation. Why think otherwise? JohnM said a number of people, not a number of people on here. Still JohnM’s the one to clarify if you think it necessary.


263464913_SignatureStripForumnamed.png.e8755e5e4e9dc5b4d3f0aaa97418f753.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one now has to provide evidence to support contentions made on this forum, then its going to be pretty quiet on many of the threads

However, in this new spirit, I'll go back through zillions of post in the hope that I get there before anyone else.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JohnM said:

If one now has to provide evidence to support contentions made on this forum, then its going to be pretty quiet on many of the threads

However, in this new spirit, I'll go back through zillions of post in the hope that I get there before anyone else.

If you're going to start a thread in the way you have, it's not unreasonable to expect you to be able to say who you're talking about and why.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

If you're going to start a thread in the way you have, it's not unreasonable to expect you to be able to say who you're talking about and why.

Absolutely. This is one of the things that got a number of threads locked and seriously pruned last night. 

We’re not asking for much. If you accuse a forum member of something serious then prove it, or risk getting banned. 

I can only assume John meant people off this forum and would happily see him clarify as such. 

  • Like 1

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Searching but  its a slow process. May take days.

Sorry, there is a problem

Please wait 5 seconds before attempting another search

Error code: 1C205/3


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is a high profile case but I have a couple of friends lets say "in the law business" and this sort of thing is becoming common place - the willingness to ruin innocent peoples  life, reputation and family in pursuit of £££££££££££££££ is foul practice and should come with heavy penalties to deter others


the grass may be greener on the other side of the fence but the crows are just as black

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Searching but  its a slow process. May take days.

Sorry, there is a problem

Please wait 5 seconds before attempting another search

Error code: 1C205/3

So, you are accusing people here then? Better be good then. 


“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

this is a high profile case but I have a couple of friends lets say "in the law business" and this sort of thing is becoming common place - the willingness to ruin innocent peoples  life, reputation and family in pursuit of £££££££££££££££ is foul practice and should come with heavy penalties to deter others

My view is that if it's beyond doubt that it's a false accusation then the penalty should be the same as if the accused were convicted. For example, if someone would get 10 years for child abuse then the false accuser should get that same penalty.

  • Like 2

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JohnM said:

I expect  a number of people who were only too willingly to believe his stories will now retract.

A convicted paedophile has been found guilty of making false allegations of murder and child sexual abuse against a string of public figures.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49074879

The problem is that the people who were only too willing to believe Carl Beech were the investigating police officers.

As this article suggests, they appeared to treat his allegations as an article of faith, which led them to undertake a negligent investigation that had a massive impact on innocent people.

Whether anyone on this website believed the allegations is insignificant, compared to the fact that the police did believe them, quite recklessly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The previous thread, for what it's worth, is here:

Unsurprisingly, it features JohnM acting like he is slightly unhinged and everyone else saying to wait for the investigation.

 

Edited by Just Browny
  • Like 1

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ckn said:

My view is that if it's beyond doubt that it's a false accusation then the penalty should be the same as if the accused were convicted. For example, if someone would get 10 years for child abuse then the false accuser should get that same penalty.

I don't disagree that false accusations are absolutely disgusting, and that the person making them should be dealt with robustly by the law. However, I don't think you can adopt the system you're suggesting.

There surely has to be a distinction, for example, between murdering someone and falsely accusing someone of being a murderer. Both are clearly abhorrent, but I think the former deserves a more severe sentence that the latter.

I don't think most people that make false accusations do so because they've looked at the possible sentence and decided it's not too bad so they'll risk it. I think they make the false accusations never believing that they will ever get found out at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

I don't think most people that make false accusations do so because they've looked at the possible sentence and decided it's not too bad so they'll risk it. I think they make the false accusations never believing that they will ever get found out at all.

There are also numerous cases where someone being found innocent does not mean the accuser was lying or making false claims.  

  • Like 1

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

There are also numerous cases where someone being found innocent does not mean the accuser was lying or making false claims.  

That's true, but I think CKN was only talking about cases where someone had been proven beyond all reasonable doubt to have been making a false accusation.

As you say, at lot of cases end without being able to achieve that level of certainty one way or the other - enough doubt not to convict the accused, but also enough doubt not to convict the accuser of making a false accusation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've worked my way back through the forum to 2016. Much more to do,  will take time but I will eventually be able to comply with the new forum rule that requires people to substantiate any claims they make.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, JohnM said:

I've worked my way back through the forum to 2016. Much more to do,  will take time but I will eventually be able to comply with the new forum rule that requires people to substantiate any claims they make.

No, and stop misinterpreting it.  You made a very serious allegation against unnamed forum members.  If you’d made those allegations about a named member without evidence then I’d probably have suspended or banned you from the site.  As it stands, you thought you could get away with randomly smearing the whole class of people who disagree with you.

If you can provide CREDIBLE evidence then fair enough, I’ll admit you’re right and I missed it and should have moderated it.  If you can’t, I do expect an apology to the forum.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ckn said:

No, and stop misinterpreting it.  You made a very serious allegation against unnamed forum members.  If you’d made those allegations about a named member without evidence then I’d probably have suspended or banned you from the site.  As it stands, you thought you could get away with randomly smearing the whole class of people who disagree with you.

If you can provide CREDIBLE evidence then fair enough, I’ll admit you’re right and I missed it and should have moderated it.  If you can’t, I do expect an apology to the forum.

The person who needs to apologise, and resign, is Tom Watson, whose behaviour and judgement were absolutely appalling and deeply damaging.

His description of Leon Brittan, without any evidence other than the corrupted information supplied by Carl Beech, was hate speech of the worst imaginable kind.

Brittan's widow still seems to be traumatised by it, not surprisingly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

The person who needs to apologise, and resign, is Tom Watson, whose behaviour and judgement were absolutely appalling and deeply damaging.

His description of Leon Brittan, without any evidence other than the corrupted information supplied by Carl Beech, was hate speech of the worst imaginable kind.

Brittan's widow still seems to be traumatised by it, not surprisingly.

Martyn, you’re mixing up my moderation message with me actually stating an opinion on the matter. I haven’t done so, and you also mistake me as a Tom Watson/ Labour supporter. 


“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ckn said:

Martyn, you’re mixing up my moderation message with me actually stating an opinion on the matter. I haven’t done so, and you also mistake me as a Tom Watson/ Labour supporter. 

My post was about Tom Watson, not you.

I was simply making a point about who needs to atone for their role in this scandal.

I certainly wouldn't claim you were a Tom Watson supporter.

Perhaps I should have made a freestanding post, rather than quoting you.

I suppose it did look as though I was disagreeing with you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The position of Tory donor (& chairman of Anglia Ruskin University among many other things) Jerome Booth in all this is rather odd. It was his news agency & website that did so much to bring Carl Beech's allegations into the media, by selling the story to the Sunday People. Private Eye is reporting that he's now accepted a position with Nigel Lawson's climate change denial group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...