Can't find the thread but I remember saying DLT was wrong'un. Can't believe they waiting so long before arresting the witless bastard. So glad they didn't wait for the f*cker to die. Sorry, I have just always hated him for no reason but now I have one. Hurrah!
Quick links: NewsBiscuit Home • Chat Room • Writers' Room • Top Ten
DLT
(36 posts) (15 voices)
-
beau-jolly
offlineMemberPosted 7 months ago # -
godly1966
offlineMemberhttp://newsbiscuit.com/forum/topic.php?id=50140&page=2 Jimmy fixed it for you
Posted 7 months ago # -
beau-jolly
offlineMemberTa Godly. Took them 2 weeks by the look of it!
BTW in case you haven't heard they arrested the flakey cornhair this morning.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Gerontius
offlineMemberIt's a bit risky to start slinging mud at him just yet.
Don't forget, it's only his career that's dead....not actually him.
I would imagine ANYBODY who gets falsely accused of wrong doing will be on the warpath from now on.
Don't forget there will be plenty of nutjobs out there in La-La Land making these accusations/allegations.
Somebody described him as a 'popular DJ' somewhere in the news - how wildly inaccurate is that?
But I agree you would probably need to have been bulemic to appreciate any of those old breakfast showsPosted 7 months ago # -
godly1966
offlineMemberJust to make it clear about all these allegations, I believe something may or may not have happened that I might or might not have an opinion on. The thing that may or may not of happened involves a person or persons who may or may not have been mentioned on this website, and I may or may not be very happy the bearded freak has been arrested, or not as the case maybe.
Posted 7 months ago # -
beau-jolly
offlineMemberThe spokesman (for BBC4) said: "In the light of today’s news, we have postponed tonight’s Top of the Pops. In its place we are showing next week’s edition of TOTPs presented by Kid Jensen."
Oh shit! I hadn't even thought about David "Kid" Jensen. I do hope the BBC knows what it is doing.
BTW. Not slinging mud just kicking him while he's down is all. Mud slinging would have been done a few weeks ago when he was denying the accusations of groping young girls. Now he has been arrested I am guessing the Police/CPS have enough to make a case.
Posted 7 months ago # -
dvo4fun
offlineMemberLet's approach this from the other end [ooh missus].
I've been trying to think of a 70s DJ who I'd have been happy to hear say, at my front door, 'Hi there, I'm the baby-sitter'...
Not so easy huh?
Not saying that any of the arrestees is guilty of anything. Innocent until proven guilty is m' personal motto.
Posted 7 months ago # -
beau-jolly
offlineMemberAnnie Nightingale?
Posted 7 months ago # -
The All New Jeni B
offlineMember...or had mastered the art of talking and pointing to a minion to change the record...
Posted 7 months ago # -
dvo4fun
offlineMember@b-j "BTW. Not slinging mud just kicking him while he's down is all. Mud slinging would have been done a few weeks ago when he was denying the accusations of groping young girls. Now he has been arrested I am guessing the Police/CPS have enough to make a case. "
Hmm .. I'm not sure that the CPS would be involved at this stage. Police are surely still in the process of investigating an allegation and gathering evidence to support or, just as importantly, refute it. The Police [who shouldn't be on any 'side' as such] will wish to know what 'the arrested' has to say about the allegation before considering whether to send the case to CPS.
So, someone could say that I'd done something awful on a specific date/time. Preliminary enquries lead the Police to arrest me but at interview I am able to say that I was getting married in the presence of 400 guests 300 miles away from the crime scene at that point in time. As soon as my alibi checked out I'm off the hook. Over to Jeni for legal opinion.My understanding of 'Newsnight2' debacle [Private Eye have a good page on it this week) is that had the Beeb simply contacted Lord Whatsit to ask for comment they might then shown his foto to the complainant and asked 'hold on mate, is this the man?' That might have prevented all the subsequent fallout - not least for Lord Whatsit.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Carter
offlineMemberI'm glad I wasn't around in the seventies, seems like it was a dark and dangerous time to be a kid in.
My generation had proper role models: Pat Sharp, Bruno Brookes, Floella Benjamin and Tregard from Nightmare, diamonds all. It's odd how no one who has been implicated in the wake of Savilegate has been a cause for surprise. There's a lot of 'yeah, that figures' as Starr, Lee Travis etc are named and shamed but no 'really? I'd never have imagined such a thing.'
People like Savile, Jonathan King, Lee Travis, Cyril Smith et al appeared to have hid in plain sight by being loud, obnoxious and weird. On that basis my money is on Mr Blobby being swept up by the rozzers next.
Posted 7 months ago # -
The All New Jeni B
offlineMemberPretty much dvo, once an alibi has been submitted, and subsequently been proven, then, generally, release would follow.
However, there are still instances where even with an alibi, there maybe sufficient substantive evidence to still prosecute. In which case, it would be up to the defence to provide sufficient evidence of that alibi to convince a jury.
I'm basing this on Scots law, but would imagine that there wouldn't be an enormous difference between here and England in criminal matters.
Posted 7 months ago # -
sigmund
offlineMemberI'm basing this on Scots law, but would imagine that there wouldn't be an enormous difference between here and England in criminal matters.
Ours tend not to have red hair.
On a serious note, I’m a bit disturbed by the tendency to dispense with ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ Just because someone is odd/unlikeable, they are not automatically a criminal. Unless they’re ginger, obviously.Posted 7 months ago # -
The All New Jeni B
offlineMemberThat's ok sigmund, we allow other hair colours too.
I'm not ginger.
Well, not too much.
Only when my roots need re-touched.Posted 7 months ago # -
Having an alibi doesn't always help. There was that man, arrested on a homicide charge, who had the 'perfect' alibi because he'd been photographed speeding along a highway, miles away from the scene of the crime, by a traffic cam, and had paid the fine. But the detective noticed that the shadow under the man's nose in the photo was not in the correct position for the angle of the sun. Turned out it was the murderer's accomplice wearing a face-mask of the murderer to give him an alibi. Good work, Columbo.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Yikes
offlineMemberAs I mentioned in the other room under the 'legal clarity needed' post
"The real problem is that DLT has been arrested in relation to 17 year old girls so calling him a paedo will be libellous no matter what."
I should add that if it remains that the only charges he faces are two historical ones of groping girls of legal age, then linking him with Savile who is accused of hundreds of offences against children could itself be problematic - the Telegraph pretty much did that and it took 3/4s of the story before they let slip that the offences were against 17 year olds.
Posted 7 months ago # -
The All New Jeni B
offlineMemberThere's a huge difference between what DLT has been accused of, and what JS is accused of in that case.
It reinforces the 'witch-hunt' mentality though.
I never liked DLT as a radio or TV 'personality', but never knowingly jumped on the 'he has a beard, and must therefore be a paedo' bandwagon.Problem is, it's quite difficult to stay focused on the facts when the media skew their reporting so.
Posted 7 months ago # -
beau-jolly
offlineMemberThanks DVO and Jeni.
I stand corrected so my comment in the other place is wrong too!I had assumed that the arrest meant they were pretty sure the shit would stick. Looks like I made the schoolboy error of confusing "arrested on suspicion of..." for "bang to rights". I still think he's a wrong'un though. There was another thread months ago following a ST article where he was all over the reporter like a cheap suit and also justifying his hobby of photgraphing youngish girls in inapropriately sexy poses. The report kept very carefuly on the right side on the libel laws though.
re Alibi. The only thing worse than not having an alibi is having more than one alibi.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Tripod
offlineMemberOnce people get the bit between their teeth, it's hard to slow them down. And, once they start to point the finger, the really bad crimes somehow get conflated with minor misdemenours. Shagging groupies who break into a pop star's dressing room, for that specific purpose, looks pretty much like a crime without a victim to me. And very different to, say, Jimmy Savile's lifelong preoccupation with abusing young, vulnerable girls whose complaints he knew would never be believed...
Posted 7 months ago # -
beau-jolly
offlineMemberAgreed Tripod. Which is why, hopefully, John Peel can be forgiven. Obviously I didn't know him but he always came across as a self-deprocating sort of chap you'd enjoy having a pint with. On the other hand I wouldn't like to be in the same room as DLT. That doesn't make him guilty. It just makes me want him to be guilty.
EDIT: oh bollocks!
more balancedPosted 7 months ago # -
Ironduke
offlineMemberHave to say, from the interview he gave, it seems a totally different scale of involvement to Saville and tarring witht he same brush may well be very innapropriate.
If what he says is true, and the actual allegation is that he touched the boobs of two seventeen year olds thirty years ago, then I would suspect this investigation has a long, long way to run with many, many famous names appearing in the dock, and a balance between their libel cases and damages claims against them, with circumstantial evidence flying around.
In no way belittling the Saville affair whatsoever, but a seventeen year old girl having her boobs prodded thirty years ago and only now coming forward must be many orders of magnitude different in severity.
Posted 7 months ago # -
beau-jolly
offlineMemberTo be fair the girl says he put his hand up her skirt and into her knickers. Unacceptable behavior but nowhere near the Savile level I agree.
This quote from the more balanced link above sums a lot of it up:
When still alive, Peel made no secret of having had sexual liaisons with teenage fans in the early part of his radio career, especially when working in the US. The big difference between Peel and Savile, of course, is that he is not accused of forcing himself on teenage girls, but rather accepting the sexual advances of underage fans. And while there may be a strong argument that adult celebrities have an obligation to resist such advances, if that rule is to be applied across the board to the rock and pop world of the past, a lot more former stars could be in the dock. DLT falls into the Savile camp here.Posted 7 months ago # -
Lucy4
offlineMemberA major problem with the legal system in this country is people like beau-jolly perhaps being on the jury. However, the best of it is the probability that it'll only be one out of the twelve.
Since you've joined this site, Jolly, you've continually falsely accused, pre-judged and casually condemned countless people. And I haven't been particularly looking. I'm not in the habit of looking at what you do but can't help but notice sometimes.
Everyone has an opinion about things and other people but the way you simply dismiss people as this or that I find disgusting.
I'm not saying this in anger and I'm certainly not saying this as a friend. I also know that you're such a pig-headed bastard that you'll find fault with me, rather than yourself.Posted 7 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.