# Tie me kangaroo down sport and two little boys.



## snakes73 (Jul 3, 2014)

Rolf Harris convicted sex offender. Rot in jail Rolf.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 3, 2014)

snakes73 said:


> Rolf Harris convicted sex offender. Rot in jail Rolf.



Yes i couldnt agree more. My hugest hate in this world are people like him.


----------



## princessparrot (Jul 3, 2014)

Honestly I do feel abit sorry for him, having all his awards and artwork taken away... 
When I see thing like this and other sexual assault/abuse it makes me think of the two times it's happened to me one at the park and one at school and all they got was in trouble from their parents and a weeks suspension...


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 3, 2014)

I think he deserves to have it taken away think of what he took away from all those children! Only good people deserve good things... simple.


----------



## CrystalMoon (Jul 3, 2014)

A sick mind is a sick mind, I for one believe in the death penalty!(he stole something that can never be given back to his victims) I feel NO pity for the Slime bag......


----------



## snakes73 (Jul 4, 2014)

I do not feel any sorrow for him. I am disappointed that such a figure would have committed such acts when they were in such a position of trust, respect and privilege but who knows how such minds work other than sickos like him. Hope he gets a good jail term tomorrow followed up by some additional jailhouse penalties, that's if he does not top himself this evening first.


----------



## Gizmo101 (Jul 4, 2014)

He can burn in hell. There is no excuse for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## snakes73 (Jul 5, 2014)

Looks like he will see his last days in jail. My heart goes out to the victims and his family who were unaware.


----------



## swampie (Jul 5, 2014)

Might be out by December 2017, doesn't seem like a harsh enough punishment to me.......5 yrs 9 months and eligible for parole at around half time....bit of an insult to the victims...


----------



## zulu (Jul 5, 2014)

Just a money fest ,hes old with too much money ,wittnesses can say what they want cause nobody knows ,neighbours in his hometown think rolf is a great bloke.
They all wait till they get old or sick with lots of money then wham !


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 5, 2014)

zulu said:


> Just a money fest ,hes old with too much money ,wittnesses can say what they want cause nobody knows ,neighbours in his hometown think rolf is a great bloke.
> They all wait till they get old or sick with lots of money then wham !


Are you saying you think its ok for him to have child porn on his pc? Police found that not the witnesses...Great blokes dont have that. The woman coming out now has nothing to do with money. Its a chain reaction no one was brave enough to say back in the day because he was famous and a 'great bloke' they were more than likely afraid of being ignored and thought no one would believe them.


----------



## zulu (Jul 5, 2014)

montysrainbow said:


> Are you saying you think its ok for him to have child porn on his pc? Police found that not the witnesses...Great blokes dont have that. The woman coming out now has nothing to do with money. Its a chain reaction no one was brave enough to say back in the day because he was famous and a 'great bloke' they were more than likely afraid of being ignored and thought no one would believe them.


Getting the celebrities is the flavour of the month at the moment espescially the old slower ones . If they investigated the legal profession they would be overloaded with peds and jumpers ,they wouldnt be able to hold a trial as most running it would be on the stand. LOL


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 5, 2014)

Ok yes u r right....im sorry. I am wrong ( for the name calling in deleted posts) BUT i really can not understand a person making the slightest excuse 4 this.


----------



## MesseNoire (Jul 5, 2014)

montysrainbow said:


> Ok yes u r right....im sorry. I am wrong BUT i really can not understand a person making the slightest excuse 4 this.



I fully understand. But nothing was mentioned about him being innocent. We are talking about a well-known public figure with a lot of money. I have no doubt that he has done wrong but I'm not completely sure whether he did all that has been claimed.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 5, 2014)

Fractal_man said:


> I fully understand. But nothing was mentioned about him being innocent. We are talking about a well-known public figure with a lot of money. I have no doubt that he has done wrong but I'm not completely sure whether he did all that has been claimed.


The child porn on his pc is enough wrong 4 me.


----------



## MesseNoire (Jul 5, 2014)

montysrainbow said:


> The child porn on his pc is enough wrong 4 me.



I'm not saying he didn't do it.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 5, 2014)




----------



## Darlyn (Jul 5, 2014)

He's been found guilty by the justice system. Many "good blokes" do disgusting things. Being a "celebrity" empowers and enables people to get away with it. I would hope that a jury of 12 people can sort the lies from the truth and make a sound decision.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 5, 2014)

Im really not suprised that my previous posts were deleted but cmon this guy did bad things. Yes bad things happen all the time and they mess people up. I believe Rolph did all the bad things these woman say he did. [MENTION=1250]zulu[/MENTION] i feel sorry 4 u....making excuses up 4 him
Its not about the money or the celeb factor its about Rolph doing horrible things to innocent people. Sadly this ship happens everyday.....


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Jul 5, 2014)

*montysrainbow*, I think you misinterpreted what *zulu* was getting at. No way is he defending paedophilia. The point he was making is that it is widespread and many of the offenders in particular are members of the legal fraternity and utilise that to cover their butts. However, instead of the police looking at bringing all offenders to justice, including those in legal jobs, the sole emphasis seems to be on entertainers following the Jimmy Savile expose. So basically he is saying that it is not right to leave a major section of offenders not investigated because of what popular in the press at the moment.

He is definitely on your side!

Blue


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 5, 2014)

Ok. Maybe i misunderstood. Sorry


----------



## princessparrot (Jul 5, 2014)

Heard it might be going down to three years


----------



## Brownbird (Jul 6, 2014)

Just curious.... but what evidence is there that 'members of the legal fraternity' are involved with and getting away with child abuse any more than any other group?


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Jul 6, 2014)

As per usual with these things, much of it is heresay and innuedo. No doubt the numbers actually involved are but a fraction of a percent but you only need one potenially dodgy prominent character to fuel the rumour mill. This fellow had some questionable associations in the past... http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-27899419 . 


Blue


----------



## Sheldoncooper (Jul 6, 2014)

He's a pedophile and he's probably got a little weener. But he'll be ok because they look after his type in jail there protected aren't they lucky.


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Jul 6, 2014)

I posted the most sympathetic article towards him but there are plenty more out there that if the stated facts are true, then there would be no doubt about his being a paedophile. Its not the size of his weaner that is the problem but the size of his conscience. The damage these individuals do for the sake of their own self gratification often lasts a lifetime and can ruin what should have been a happy and fulfilling life. And that applies to each and every victim. There is the normal childhood sexual curiosity of "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" and whatever interactions may result from that. These maggots of humanity prey on this emerging sexuality of children. Some don't even wait for that. They want to use this childhood sexuality and the fact that sometimes it results "illegal sex", which really should not be seen as a criminal act, as a reason to reduce the age of consent. Clearly, whatever the legal age of consent, the difference in age must play a major part up until an individual is adult.

Individuals may reflect back on childhood encounters of a sexual nature. Those memories may be pleasant and desirable. So long as they in the realm of reflected upon memories I do not consider that to be abnormal or perverse. However, to wish to share similar memories with someone else, to take sexual pleasure out of images of vulnerable young children or to entertain thoughts of doing what you did as a kid but as an adult, even if no actions result from this, are all forms of paedophilia in my book and therefore just as reprehensible. There is a very clear clear difference between normal and perverse but paedophiles are very good at trying to blur that line.

I have always found it interesting that our government's child protection agencies have pushed the "Stranger Danger" aspect of paedophiles. The reality is that most sexual abuse of children is the doings of someone they know - relatives, family friends etc. What kids need to know is what is inappropriate. With my own children I used the guidelines provided by a very clued-up lady I watched on TV many years ago. She said kids simply need to know what is private and should not be viewed or touched by others. She did state that you need to explain about doctors and parents and "limited access" - cannot remember the exact details now. Anyway, her point was that anything covered by your bathers (bikini bathers for females) is private. Anyone suggesting they should look at or touch these areas is doing the wrong thing. Similarly, anyone wanting to show you or wanting you to touch their private areas is also doing the wrong thing. You need to leave immediately and let a parent know as soon as possible. I reckon that's the best advice on the subject that I have heard.

Sorry about the rant. Was not intended. I'll post it anyway as it might be of some help.

Blue


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 6, 2014)

Well said [MENTION=20726]Bluetongue1[/MENTION]


----------



## Jacknife (Jul 6, 2014)

His paintings are quite good though...


----------



## fallenfeathers (Jul 6, 2014)

The whole thing just makes me feel sick to my stomach... I remember having to watch his anti-abuse video when I was in primary school. "[FONT=arial, sans-serif]My body's nobody's but mine." What a disgusting hypocrite! I hope someone kills him in prison. [/FONT]


----------



## Jacknife (Jul 7, 2014)

What a nice bunch of people we have here.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 7, 2014)

Group hug.....lol u know u want to [MENTION=35891]Jacknife[/MENTION]


----------



## zulu (Jul 7, 2014)

He needed to do the moon walk.


----------



## CrystalMoon (Jul 7, 2014)

I am usually a lover not a fighter, unfortunately because of my own history I feel physically sick to the stomach knowing that scum may only get 3 years  and I really damn this filth to hell......


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 7, 2014)

Sorry....i somehow posted a post for getting 2 know u thread here!? Deleted it now.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 7, 2014)

CrystalMoon said:


> I am usually a lover not a fighter, unfortunately because of my own history I feel physically sick to the stomach knowing that scum may only get 3 years  and I really damn this filth to hell......


Yes its a touchy subject 4 me too CM.
I got on my high horse the other night lol totally out of character 4 me but a few wines later i was just seeing in black n white n yeah...
I think he is obviously one of many and yes were only hearing about it because of his fame but even so its just so wrong 
All i will say 2 anyone who may read this is listen to your children and trust no one. As Blue said its usually someone people least suspect


----------



## Fil_14 (Jul 7, 2014)

I've also heard that a lot more victims have come forward, re: other cases. 
I still stay castrate him, tattoo "pedo" on his forehead, then release him back into society. He's protected in jail.....


Fil...


----------



## Jacknife (Jul 7, 2014)

Here's a question. How do people think about his lifes work - his art and music now?
Do you throw it all away and erase it from history because he's now a convicted sex offender? Do you competely discount the acclaim and impact it's had on modern culture?
It's a tough one, because if you feel we should then, well... We basically have to throw out a few thousand years of art history and culture based on that rule. A lot of this worlds greatest minds and artisans have been kiddy fiddlers in their day, from the romans, through to renaissance, and even through a lot of 18th and 19th century greats...


----------



## briansworms (Jul 7, 2014)

Sadly the word id is full of creeps like him. If he was with the Catholic Church or the Salvation Army they would have protected him like they have done with so many others. I donated to the Red Shield appeal only to listen on ABC radio later next day how a paedophile was protected and promoted by the Salvos. He abused more children and was just transferred and promoted again. 
A close friend of mine is a Welfare Officer with the Salvos. He has put his whole life into them. It must break his heart to know that scum are amongst his ranks.

As for old Jake the Pake, cut off his middle leg.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 7, 2014)

[MENTION=1377]brian[/MENTION]sworms that last bit made me laugh  
[MENTION=35891]Jacknife[/MENTION] i really dont know what to say to your comment/question. Its true Rolph was talented but knowing what he has done just makes it all nothing to me. Thats just me though.


----------



## CrystalMoon (Jul 7, 2014)

To say "throw it all away" is not going to fix what he has done. Although, what was once OK or accepted in years gone past is kind of moot because we have evolved and "know better" for the most part now. I dont personally want to look at or listen to his work as it makes me nauseous. I can acknowledge he has talent though, I dont feel he should financially benefit from it.


----------



## briansworms (Jul 7, 2014)

montysrainbow said:


> @Brainsworms that last bit made me laugh
> @Jacknife i really dont know what to say to your comment/question. Its true Rolph was talented but knowing what he has done just makes it all nothing to me. Thats just me though.



Careful with Brainsworms, people might confuse it with Briansworms. LOL


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 7, 2014)

briansworms said:


> Careful with Brainsworms, people might confuse it with Briansworms. LOL


Lol oh god sorry!


----------



## Jacknife (Jul 7, 2014)

CrystalMoon said:


> To say "throw it all away" is not going to fix what he has done. Although, what was once OK or accepted in years gone past is kind of moot because we have evolved and "know better" for the most part now. I dont personally want to look at or listen to his work as it makes me nauseous. I can acknowledge he has talent though, I dont feel he should financially benefit from it.





montysrainbow said:


> @briansworms that last bit made me laugh
> @Jacknife i really dont know what to say to your comment/question. Its true Rolph was talented but knowing what he has done just makes it all nothing to me. Thats just me though.



I didn't mean it as what his art was to him, and nothing about him profiting from it. I meant what it has done for us, as a culture.
To argue we now no better so its moot is silly - they knew full well back then too, it's simply that social proprieties - and law - have changed.

His work probably means nothing to most these days on an emotional level, but I don't think you can take away it's contextual value simply because he's a criminal now.


----------



## fallenfeathers (Jul 8, 2014)

Jacknife said:


> What a nice bunch of people we have here.


Are you referring to me? I'm guessing you haven't been a victim of this sort of crime, have you?


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Jul 8, 2014)

*fallenfeathers*, I had a similar reaction to that statement and constructed a lengthy response. However the conversation had moved on and so I binned what I had written. I shall endeavour to recall the main points...

As I've grown older it is quite amazing how many individuals I have come to know of that have been victims of this form of criminal abuse. The perpetrators so often convince the victim that he or she is to blame and if they let others know what has happened they will the ones who get into trouble. By the time a victim is old enough to appreciate the reality of what happened, they usually feel it is too late to do anything about it. Not being able to address the issue and see justice done so often results in a deep seated bitterness. For the most part it remains hidden but every now and then there is cause for it to surface. Not only victims feel this bitterness but also those who have been confidants of victims and have been privy first hand to the damage done. The abuse of trust is insidious enough on its own, but the physical and emotional rape of an innocent child is surely one of the the most heinous crimes that one individual can commit against another. In conclusion, I reckon the responses of forum members have been well tempered. I most certainly have not read anything that I felt was not well and truly warranted.

Blue


----------



## Fil_14 (Jul 8, 2014)

Jacknife said:


> I didn't mean it as what his art was to him, and nothing about him profiting from it. I meant what it has done for us, as a culture.
> To argue we now no better so its moot is silly - they knew full well back then too, it's simply that social proprieties - and law - have changed.
> 
> His work probably means nothing to most these days on an emotional level, but I don't think you can take away it's contextual value simply because he's a criminal now.



Actually, it has now been proven that he was a criminal when he did all of this 'art'. 
Would you still hold the same views if he assaulted one of your kids? Then used those very hands to create this 'art'. 
Sorry mate, but we do not live in the 15th/16th/17th/18th or 19th century. 
You probably know someone personally that has been abused. But too afraid to tell anyone around them about it, because people like you will make excuses or defend them. 
Again, would you defend a predators credibility if they abused your child? Just like your doing now......


Fil...


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 8, 2014)

....


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Jul 8, 2014)

Yes, it is very pesonal. Good on you for posting about it! It shows that you are now in control. It does not matter than others know because it no longer has the hold over you it once had.

Maybe your mother did know you were telling the truth but to support you at that time she had to admit what had happened to her, which is likely more than what she did eventually admit to. Such is the power these things can hold over someone.

Blue


----------



## champagne (Jul 8, 2014)

why throw him in jail what does this achieve? make him publicly apologise to the victims and take away all his money so he live his life out a poor old man with nothing... Instead of wasting the money housing him in jail why don't they use the money to stop these things from happening to more people?


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 8, 2014)

Thanks Blue and yes good point champagne.


----------



## apprenticegnome (Jul 8, 2014)

I'm not 100% convinced either way about his guilt or innocence. Guilt by association is not necessarily a crime but brings in to question someones character for further scrutiny. The only information I have heard so far is hearsay and some of it is very questionable. As for the porn pictures it is hard for us to comment on them without knowing the full nature of the photos for example there is a lot of naked child related photos on the web relating to nudist sites, national geographic sites etc. I think it was the today show or ACA that used a prominent solicitor pointing out the prosecutions smoking gun as Rolfs denial that he had been to Cambridge. If that's a smoking gun call me a liar because my wife and myself have both said weve never been to a certain town before when were planning holidays only to jolt our memory later. I'm not protecting Rolf, just looking for definitive proof to satisfy my own curiosity. We can only hope that the legal profession has got it right as they are human and can make mistakes. If someone out there can post a link with some damning evidence it would be appreciated to help sway my thoughts. If indeed he is guilty then he is in the right place. I am cautious as I have family that are victims but on the other side of the coin I have been a victim of malicious allegations of physical assault etc and people including police improperly judged my character even though there were witnesses and the claims lacked evidence. I was lucky I was able to prove the claims wrong, if I did not have the proof I most likely would have been wrongly convicted. Often an allegation can be more damaging than the truth.


----------



## CrystalMoon (Jul 8, 2014)

I cannot be so open MR, suffice to say I dont trust males very easily specially those I am supposed to. I wont post any more on this thread as it has bought up too many old wounds. I hope Harris rotts before he dies


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 8, 2014)

........


----------



## wokka (Jul 8, 2014)

I believe about 1 in 5 women have been sexually abused as children and the majority of those by family or close freinds of family!


----------



## Jacknife (Jul 8, 2014)

fallenfeathers said:


> Are you referring to me? I'm guessing you haven't been a victim of this sort of crime, have you?





Fil_14 said:


> Actually, it has now been proven that he was a criminal when he did all of this 'art'.
> Would you still hold the same views if he assaulted one of your kids? Then used those very hands to create this 'art'.
> Sorry mate, but we do not live in the 15th/16th/17th/18th or 19th century.
> You probably know someone personally that has been abused. But too afraid to tell anyone around them about it, because people like you will make excuses or defend them.
> ...



As usual you(and other people here) have completely missed my point because you didn't bother to actually read and think about what I've posted, you're just waiting to espouse your own opinion.

I'm not defending the man. I never did. He can rot for all I care.
I was asking a question on peoples thoughts on the matter.
Don't make scenarios where 'it's my kid' 'how would you feel' because you're missing the point. You're bringing personal emotions into a essentially non-subjective argument.

Please people, think before you type.


----------



## montysrainbow (Jul 8, 2014)

I really should think before i type but my fingers always beat my brain!


----------



## Darlyn (Jul 8, 2014)

Jacknife has an interesting point. Will the artwork still be regarded for it's aesthetic quality or will it be denounced because of the deeds of the artist?
I assume its market value will take a dive but if beauty is in the eye of the beholder does the beauty diminish because of the artists deeds?
I guess we will find out soon, but if Gary Glitter is anything to go by, he is banished from radio playlists because of his disgusting behaviour.


----------



## Woma_Wild (Jul 8, 2014)

Unfortunately, convicted child abusers reoffend when let out of prison. Going to jail will have little affect on him.(he may suffer at the hands of other inmates though)
I don't think his celebrity status matters. If he is guilty, he must be punished for his crime. Perhaps because of his social status gave him a false sense of security that his victims wouldn't talk and if they did, no one would believe them.
As for his art, I wouldn't want it in my home. Keeping it would be an insult to his victims.


----------



## wokka (Jul 9, 2014)

To me it is the actions of the man which are wrong irrespective of who the man is. Similiarily, it is the artwork that is to be appreciated irrespective of who did it. If we denounce everything because it may have passed through the hands of criminals it may be a very dull world.


----------



## Jacknife (Jul 9, 2014)

wokka said:


> To me it is the actions of the man which are wrong irrespective of who the man is. Similiarily it is the artwork that is to be appreciated irrespective of who did it. If we denounce everything because it may have pased through the hands of criminals it may be a very dull world.



My point exactly.


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Jul 9, 2014)

The artistic merit of his work does not change. Viewed by someone impartial to events it will been seen/heard as having the same inherit value. However, everyday people are not impartial and they have an emotional response when viewing art or listening to songs. The actions of the man will naturally sully that response, to a greater or lesser degree. Those who organise playlists on radio are aware of this and will no doubt respond accordingly. Galleries, on the other hand, tend to restrict themselves to artistic value. However, where his artwork is part of a celebration of the man's life and achievements, I can see it being removed - such as his potrait of the queen. 

In summary, I don't believe the artistic merit of his work is altered by his deeds. What I do believe will definitely change is people's personal appreciation of his work. Lastly, where his work has been used to pay homage to the man himself, I would expect it to be removed.

Blue


----------

