Max Clifford

He was probably a paedophile Glamma. Different thing.

I think that the Judge has made it plain that who ever you are you are not above the law specially the such as MC with his attitude and I am sure I have read of older people coming out of prison and re-offending jings there was a story just a week or so ago about an 85yr old man being charged after a lifetime of molestation to youngsters but I'm not sure of the details so won't comment.

All that just doesn't seem relevant in this case. He is hardly likely to come out of prison and start re-offending. And how can we be sure the judge's obvious personal feelings towards the man did n't influence the sentence? I think the judge was unprofessional.

The judge's reasoning, attitude of the offender towards his offences and victims, and overall summary are used to take forward the prisoner's sentence plan. Prison and probation staff are required to go back to the conviction and sentence comments and will often be asked to give ongoing feedback on the progress of the prisoner to the sentencing judge. When it comes to parole time, the intentions of the sentence and expected treatment and rehabilitation will be assessed by the parole board. Therefore, those comments by the judge are entirely relevant - if they are seen as misguided or unfair, he can use the comments in his appeal.

I agree entirely. I am also uncomfortable that the CPS really needed this conviction.

Not only that, I find it difficult to understand that a woman who was so traumatised and humiliated by what happened to her all those years ago should now agree to have all the gory details in the Newspapers (along with her picture on the front page).

I think the sentence was too harsh. People get less for killing people.

How can that judge know what really happened? Did any of the girls physically try to fight him off? Is here any real evidence of whether it actually happened or not?

And I don't this his arrogance in court should have been taken into account in the sentencing, as it so obviously was. That was not part of the crimes he was being tried for. And for the judge to comment on what happened outside the court with the journalist was totally unnecessary and out of order.I think there was a lot of personal feeling on the judge's part. Not good.

Blimey, that was quick!

I see one of Max Clifford's victims is on the front page of The Times telling her story. He abused her when she was 15.

The story must have been written already waiting for a guilty verdict.

@Bags - much of that could have been me talking... good rant!

This is interesting

www.theguardian.com/media/2014/may/02/max-clifford-sex-politics-tabloids-simon-hattenstone

gag

Well said Bags. As usual you clearly express what many of us are thinking but rely on others to put into words. So refreshing.

Sorry, when, I was just trying to explain what some people seem incapable of understanding. Felt a bit got at.

As you were.

Can we get back to the subject of the thread, please?

Yes, I do possess a radio but it's rarely switched on. Why is everyone so shocked that I don't take an interest in Slebs? Would my taking an interest in people like Max Clifford make an iota of difference to anything? Nope.

In my first term at uni there was a big train crash somewhere in South America (might have been Central). I didn't know about it because I didn't have a radio and in those days there was only one telly in the students' hall of residence that I was staying in. I worked from nine till five every day, sometimes till nine or ten o'clock in the evening. One evening a week I helped with a Brownie pack, another I went along to Menzieshill (pronounced Mingishill) Cycling Club. I swam in the students' union pool at lunch times and I went hill walking at weekends. I was busy minding my own business and not harming anyone.
My dad blasted me when he realised I hadn't heard about this train crash. I asked whether my knowing about it would have made any difference to anyone. The answer was no.

The point I'm making is that it is not a requirement of being a civilised human being to know things that other people think are important. The point I'm making is that most Slebs appear to me to be a waste of newspaper and magazine space. If other people want to take an interest, that's fine, but I don't and there's no reason why I should. I have more than enough to do without cluttering my life with all that crap.

Yes, I take an interest in some current affairs. Always have. Always will. I choose what I take an interest in; someone else does not, at least not in the way of that attitude which says "You ought to know about this", which is what the attitude of several gransnetters seems to be. If I were given to expletives, I'll tell you all to fuck off.

Just get this into your heads: I hate canned noise. TVs and radios emit canned noise. It does my head in. Call me weird if you like but that's how it is. The end.

Yeh, it don't do much for your street cred.

Yeh, I don't do much for your street cred.

Bags you gotta say soz for saying Slebs.

'Slebs'

As it happens, Bags, MC has been a highly influential person not only in the entertainment world. His muck raking has affected the careers of politicians and journalists by revealing shenanigans which wouldn't be given a second glance across the Channel. I know, Bags that you don't possess a TV set, but presumably you do have a radio and it's obvious that you surf the net for current affairs.

Just because a 14-year old has irresponsible parents doesn't make her fair game for a predator.

What were you scoffing at?

I'm allowed to scoff.

Quite, though I don't think need came into it, just felt like mentioning it and why shouldn't I?

Right. But you just seemed to be making the point that you had no idea who he was. Which is fine, if you think it needed saying.

Because I read the news and wondered, ana. So I found out that he's a celebrity publicist and a sexual predator. There, other than being glad he has been called to account for his crimes, my interest ends. And there's no reason why I shouldn't mention this on a thread about his case on gransnet. It's called chatting.