Micheal le Vell, acquitted on all charges after a jury deliberation of 5 hours. Why then do the press feel it is their business, or in fact in anyones interest to focus on the private issues of his life i.e the drink, women, and his wife being ill? The trial lasted 8 days and despite his acquittal this still gets plastered all over the press. Is it that the press smelt celebrity blood and feel cheated? Tossers all of them! *< rant mode off >*
why dont all these celebs club to gether and follow the reporters and editors around, just for the craic. haven't bought a rag in years,full of depression and pish.
The press just feed the masses with what they want, and what sells papers. Morals and integrity are sadly lacking in most cases, although there are rare examples of investigative journalism being truly "in the public interest" (the MPs expenses farce is a good one). What I don't understand is how the case came to court if it was just one persons word agains another, for something that allegedly happened many years ago, where there was no physical evidence and no other person to corroborate either parties position. I would apply the same logic to the allegations about Harris, Travis et al. Unless they admit wrong doing (Hall), or their is a lot of evidence from many people against someone who is dead and cannot defend themselves (Saville), I really don't know how a case of this nature can be proven. We can get charged for wasting police time. Who is accountable for wasting tax payers money? Is it the CPS? I wonder what their stance is on this case now? I was abused when I was 10. The bastard that did it will be dead now. I do not intend to go to the police or write a book about my childhood trauma. I'm just getting on with my life. I do understand how issues like this can remain locked up in someone's mind for years, but I also wonder if the media frenzy has started a gravy train for some unscrupulous people who are prepared to get their 15 minutes of fame however they can. Maybe harsh, but there it is.
Historic cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute, since there is usually no forensic, fingerprints, DNA, CCTV or anything like that, no eye witness except the victim, and no early complaint (victim complains of the offence to other people soon after it occurs). Years ago the CPS usually refused to prosecute such cases but were much criticised for that practice. Nowadays they are more likely to put the case before a jury. The defendant may plead guilty, or be caught out on cross-examination. If not, it is hard for a jury to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt on the unsupported testimony of one witness. That does not mean it was wrong to bring the case to court.
The Press just jump on a 'Bandwagon' hoping it'll be true, we saw what happened with McAlpine not so long ago. ITV/BBC paid 6 figure sums as 'out of Court' settlements. When you look at some of he sh1te that is on the TV now (IE soaps/ X-Factor and so on, see how people crave for it as real life. It's total B0110x), know wonder the Press print all this BullSh1t. I realise its a film, but Batman Begins has a very good line, near the end of the film. When Alfred says Batman made front page news, but Bruce Wayne is on page 8. Realistic news isn't printed as headline stuff, it's just some boring info the Press have to print.
My Point is the defendant was acquitted end of, so why is there any justifiable need to publish any further detail in relation to his personal life, troubles, or relationship matters? If it were "Jo Public" they wouldn't give a flying fart how many relationships, rehab visits, or drunken binges they have had but the fact that there is a hint of celebrity gets the press into a feeding frenzy. Its disgusting. Michael Le Vell has had his life turned upside down with the trial, so now he has been acquitted why the need to report such unimportant trivia. This applies to any other celeb defendant acquitted of criminal charges. I wouldnt cross the street to piss on some journalists if they were on fire. If as stressed hippo says they provide what society wants then we live in a very poor society. The press is now just like any other big business, in it to make money, no matter the human cost.
In UK trials are normally held in public and are reportable, so the consequence is that participants' personal affairs, finances, medical details, marriages, sex lives, etc often are exposed as part of the trial. This is embarrassing and even humiliating for those involved. But what is the alternative? Secret courts and secret justice? That has even worse drawbacks I think.
and this attituide is where the problem lays...no smoke withoiut fire, eh there are counless examples of disgruntled, or mentally ill, pleople accusing others of wrong doings. Just so happens an accusation of sexual assault or worse is an immediate guilty and ruins lives more than can ever be described. Once a nonce, always a nonce, coz they did it but just couldnt be proved...personally, I'm hoping most of the latest accusations are found to be lies or misrepresentations of the truth. One persons willing groupe is anothers taking advantage of a minor...even if they say they are 18 and look 20...just saying
Worth remembering that it's the Media that make someone a Celebrity. Praising their names and dubious talents to manufacture a popularity and fame that is completely undeserved When the media feel that the "Celebrity",has let them down,they turn on him/her like a pack of dogs Theres a million people who deserve fame,such as fantastic musicians,someone who's performed heroic acts or tirelessly worked for charity But they remain talented or hard-working nobodies,playing in pubs or living normal lives,when Joe Public would celebrate them,if only they knew or heard of them I've had some experience of working with so-called,"Celebrities" The lesser the talent,the bigger the ego....
The phrase "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" comes to mind - as it does whenever the British tabloid press are involved...
Mickey Flannigan said the other night about his mum calling Saville a nonce cause he had a nonce haircut pmsl and he said ffs why don't they just nick the whole of the 70s! But seriously ..... Ok so this blokes been a right .. But all that actually shouldn't come into the case .. It's not relevant is it. The guys been acquitted . But now everyone will say well what about ??? Its not right. What he did was pretty low mind but not part of that case. What makes me mad as hell is you get people crying rape when its all a lie . This is why so many women will not report such crimes ! It's one of the lowest crimes there is . Destroys people for life. Women get ripped to shreds in court... Look at that poor woman that was abused and they cross examined her so hard she killed herself. In the same breath you get people lying and even though he's acquitted.... There will always be suspicion around him. If an innocent man gets done for abuse or rape basically their life's ruined.. They should charge the girl for lying and wasting police time. She obviously thought given all the other cases she would wing it and get a nice payoff. It's a tough balance. The innocent could get done and the guilty let off .. Very difficult cases. We as a country need to sort it out as its a farce . More victims need to feel able to come forward and not be made to feel they are guilty or they caused it to happen. But it needs to be rock solid as its equally bad if an innocent man gets done for such a vile crime ( or woman I should say ! )
Celebrity is a phenomenon predicated on the idea that famous people live more interesting lives than you do. A "celebrity" is supposedly top of the social hierarchy. Their wealth supposedly gives them a life of total freedom, international travel, interest, respect and happiness. Naturally, the truth is that "celebrities" have much the same shit to deal with in life as everyone else: they still go to the bog, get ill, have failed relationships and are often unhappy. People strangely like to believe the fairy story, but part of them is resentful. Why isn't their life a fairy story? In this case, pricking the bubble and showing up celebrities as failed human beings is also popular. Basically, the media wins both ways, because people want it both ways. They want to believe that Brangelina are heroes, but they also want to comfort themselves with the fact that their lives maybe aren't so rosy. Essentially though, people are interested in celebrities because they are dissatisfied with their own lives. People busy leading interesting lives probably aren't that bothered about celebrities.
I don't believe people are that interested in Celebrity,in exactly the same way I don't believe that students/young clubbers are predisposed to binge drinking. The "media",concoct a story that they want to be true,and keep repeating it over and over until impressionable people believe it's the norm.And thats why the newspapers/television and corporate Internet all say the same thing about the same things. The proof is to be found on any morning news programme. All the so-called guests invited to comment are either,"Celebrities",or other media people,Journalists/broadcasters and the like. That way they all stay on message,and there are no dissenting voices. You don't want Joe Public reading too much about the hundreds that died of poor care at Stafford Hospital...much better that they are fed stories about aging Comedians sleeping with girls who were up for it 40 years ago..... All b*llocks,all the time...:frown:
