Consensual makes no difference Sid the law is the law. To call this an error of judgement is a hell of an understatement.
An error in judgement, cop ta fook on Sid.
I thought Sid was doing ok until he called it an “error of judgement.”
I’m not responding to any of Thrawneen’s posts because he’s clearly on a wind-up.
Anyway to address some of the more sane posts - I don’t think it matters that much to his character whether it was one girl or loads. I don’t even think it would matter if it was one girl once versus loads of girls but the fact he seems to have sustained this over 18 months just throws any justification or tolerance anyone could conceivably have out the window.
I couldn’t say yes or no Art. I’d have to research it. Sure how many teenage girls do any of us here know? Fuck all. Who am I to decide if it should be legal to fuck 14 year olds? I haven’t spoken to one since I was about 16, as far as I can remember. I’d like to understand the reasoning of the several Euro countries who have 14 as the legal age.
+1 to all that, except i dont think thrawneen is wumming.
How can I be on a wind-up but Sid is fine, even though he was saying he sees the sense in my arguments?
I didn’t compare Humphries to Fritzl. Just want to make that clear. I suggest you read posts properly in future.
Gola/balbec please expand on Kimmage being a wanker. Have always liked him so disappointing to learn if true
you’d be better off being on a wind up thraw. You are protraying this whole thing as a venus fly trap girl out to snare a poor old middle aged man who has mental probelms. You might not see it that way, but you are certainly making it look that way. And it is completley and utterly missing the point.
Are you not contradicting yourself there. Surely it does matter whether it was one girl once or whether he did it repeatedly with same girl? Completely inexcusable but as you point out fact it went on for 18 months means it is all the worse but you say in first part you don’t think it matters how many times he did it.
A big part of his crusades is driven by the chip he has for not being any good as a rider. The way he betrayed the guys that set him up as a pro rider was unforgiveable in my opinion.
You were clearly inviting the reader to draw a comparison. Read it again.
[quote=“Thrawneen, post: 576932”]
I couldn’t say yes or no Art. I’d have to research it. [/quote]
So you wouldn’t have a basic awareness of personal right or wrong? You would have to be told what to think?
My point is that it doesn’t matter that much how many times he did it because what the newspapers are alleging was grossly wrong and utterly inexcusable. But, I was suggesting that you cannot even begin to justify a sustained period of 18 months, even if some people could defend one act as a terrible mistake.
How did he betray them? I think someone needed to make a stand and “spit in the soup” and if that is what you are referring to I think it is very harsh.
I wouldn’t agree with that that’s an easy stick to beat him with just cos he exposed teh corrupt cunts.
I heard, from one fella mind you, that he was very fond of himself and a bit of an arrogant bollix. Which I would think comes across in his interviews where he’s always referring to himself and how he asked such a brilliant question and basically putting himself centre stage in a very sindo like fashion. hardly the greatest crime in the world but just pointing out the ridiculousness of saying he’s sound cos you like his articles. I think Thrawneen was wumming there though but is more or less serious in his argument in general.
sid, I never compared Humphries to Huntley either I said that saying what he did was not as bad as a fella who rode loads of 14 year old girls was like saying that what huntley did ie commit murder on one occasion was not as bad as a serial killer who killed loads of people over a prolonged period of time. Committing a very serious crime once is enough in other words
I can’t portray the case in any way as I don’t know the facts. Think it’s a bit silly that there’s plenty on here that also don’t know the facts but are happy to make allegations as well determine how he should be punished.
Don’t agree with that Balbec. He came sixth in the amateur world championships, won the Irish title, came second on a Tour de France stage, had a top 10 finish in a classic and rode well many times for his team. In 3 years. Hardly “not being any good”. He also suffered badly with injury.
His team-mates and contemporaries and team bosses had the chance to begin tackling doping in cycling in 1990 when he released his book. They refused to. Many many cyclists have died in the meantime. Perhaps lives could have been saved.
He asked in a legal sense, balbec.
And I decide how to act in my life based on research aka experience and education. And make my decisions then. I don’t know much at all about 14 year old girls. So how can I decide legally or not whether it’s ok to get involved with them?
[quote=“Thrawneen, post: 576945”]
I can’t portray the case in any way as I don’t know the facts. Think it’s a bit silly that there’s plenty on here that also don’t know the facts but are happy to make allegations as well determine how he should be punished. [/quote]
I certainly don’t think anyone can be convinced on any punishment. As Bandage said earlier all we know is what the newspapers allege. We’d have to presume they’ve done their research and are happy to name him and are convinced of the story but there will no doubt be circumstances and details that are not in the public domain. The facts as laid out by the Sunday World (and the NOTW) don’t paint a pretty picture for him but not sure you can say much more than that either way at this stage. Most of the rest of the discussion is hypothetical and has no real relevance to this story until more facts are established.
Don’t agree with that Balbec. He came sixth in the amateur world championships, won the Irish title, came second on a Tour de France stage, had a top 10 finish in a classic and rode well many times for his team. In 3 years. Hardly “not being any good”. He also suffered badly with injury.
His team-mates and contemporaries and team bosses had the chance to begin tackling doping in cycling in 1990 when he released his book. They refused to. Many many cyclists have died in the meantime. Perhaps lives could have been saved.
Now that I do agree with.
No.
It was in response to a Thrawneen post where he seemed to indicate that the view of person’s actions could be somewhat changed by their profession or what people say about them. I mentioned Fritzl as a comparison to such a person where it could be conceivably said that he was of decent character prior to discovering his acts of evilness.
Never once did I compare Humphries’ alleged actions with that of Fritzl. I am sorry that you took it up as you did but it was quiet clear to an educated person I felt.