Tuesday, 18 June 2013

Monsters...

Not all monsters are big and hairy, some of them have toothy smiles and seem extremely charming, smarmy even.

Look, I don't care if he is 83, charming and a minor national treasure. I don’t care if he is in poor health or that he made millions laugh in the Seventies with his not-very-funny jokes and striped jackets. I don’t care that his fourteen victims are about one percent of Savilles – ‘only’ as his brief is on record as saying. All I care about is that his punishment matches his deeds.

Fifteen months imprisonment for what Stuart Hall did to girls as young as nine is an insult to everybody that isn't a pedophile. In reality he’ll serve half of that, only two weeks for each young girl he fiddled with. What is wrong with that judge, maybe he's nostalgic for It's a Knockout? I’m beginning to worry that our society is starting to accept that TV personalities in the seventies and eighties were ‘up to it’, that it was ‘par for the course’ and that ‘they were all at it’.

Well that makes it all right then doesn’t it.

The fact that for each girl that has come forward several others probably haven’t - not wanting to make their lives messy by raking up the past – isn’t even in that pathetic fifteen month equation. And what of Bill Roach or Tarby or Rolf? If they are found guilty what will they get? Will the courts and the public be so used and bored with it by then that we accept the slap on the wrist that some sympathetic judge hands out.

Meanwhile Ian Brady continues with his life sentence, without even the right to commit suicide for the horrors that he committed and rightly so. Yes, make him sweat out every last minute of his miserable life.

Stuart Hall’s sentence is far too lenient; my God you can get five year for not paying your tax and seven years for habitual shoplifting. Stuart Hall, the king of the funsters, might have been having fun with those girls but they weren’t. He didn’t kill any of them, but he did damage all them. He isn’t Ian Brady but he does deserve to be locked up for his forever. I hope someone sees sense and makes his punishment fit his crime.

3 comments:

  1. Annette Jones on FB
    Well said and absolutely right! I feel as strong as you!! Though you word it so well!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ian Maclachlan on FB
    I did hear, maybe incorrectly, that that was the kind of sentence he may have expected at the time of the crimes. WTF. What may he have received 1000 years ago? Is that the calculator that is used?

    ReplyDelete
  3. David Bell
    Only 13 victims vs Saville's 1300? WTF


    Andrew Height
    Agreed.


    Simon Parker
    Aside from punishment; this may well be the rest of his life, I'm concerned about the message it sends out, that's its not so bad.


    Andrew Height
    Me too. Thing is he is not going to die in prison although he does deserve to.


    Robert Mills
    I know I often joke about this sort of thing, but It's a disgrace. 15 months? Get longer for not paying your Council Tax!

    Richard Shore
    While we like to build up the bogey men, it just hides an uncomfortable truth. Most abusers are known to the victim, and a very large percentage of that takes place within families. The NSPCC estimate that 1 in 20 children have experienced contact sexual abuse.

    Andrew Height
    That is absolutely correct Mr Shore. There are an awful lot of bogey men out there or in the next room.

    Richard Shore
    To be fair, it is longer than savile got

    Andrew Height
    Death doesn't make it fair. For every hall there are thousands who just smile smugly.

    Ian Maclachlan
    That's only 7 months more than Chris Huhne and his wife got for perverting the course of traffic ticket fiddling. Where is the perspective?

    ReplyDelete