Yeah but being charged as guilty doesn't always mean they actually are guilty. The kid could've lied his ass off. And if he's mentally retarded or something or has some sort of disorder or whatever, then that makes it even more likely in my eyes. Not like it'd be the first time it ever happened, not by a long shot. Like he siad, nobody wins in these cases, except maybe the parents if they get money awarded (Michael Jackson cases anyone?)...
Ex-Judas Priest Drummer Denies Sex Charges
- Thread starter Valofvalhalla
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, and what if the kid wasn't lying?Stun said:
That kid could be a victim.
The kid's always lying, right?
what if that was your kid?
You're a fucking asshole.
I'm a fucking asshole?No the kid isn't always lying. But it's funny how all these cases spring up in epidemics, almost. I read a book about it once, and it explained it really well. I don't have the time to explain it, and wouldn't be able to do it justice, so I won't bother.
Stun said:
No the kid isn't always lying. But it's funny how all these cases spring up in epidemics, almost. I read a book about it once, and it explained it really well. I don't have the time to explain it, and wouldn't be able to do it justice, so I won't bother.
One day, maybe, when you move out of Mommy and Daddy's house
and you grow up and have children of your own, you'll get where I'm
coming from. Until then....no hope...and your opinions on this will come
off sounding as dumb as they have been....the LOL was proof of that.
More than anything, I'm thankful you're not an American citizen and you'll
never serve on our juries.
oh, I didnt know Canadians were finally literate.
Okay you didn't make any sense at all. All I said was that I read a book where it was observed that certain things spring up in epidemics... like the big witch burning thing, the whole repressed-memory thing, the satanic cult scare of the 80's, and now child molestation. Like I said, I'm not going to explain it, because I don't care to take the time, and do not have the information on hand. If you don't like it, tough. It's not a matter of opinions, yet again, sadly. I just repeated an observation that someone made.
I laughed because you called me an asshole. This coming from you is like calling the kettle black. It does not have any bearing on anything else. In fact you made me laugh once again with your literacy comment (here's where I wish I had an even more exasperated looking smily than the eye-rolling one).
I laughed because you called me an asshole. This coming from you is like calling the kettle black. It does not have any bearing on anything else. In fact you made me laugh once again with your literacy comment (here's where I wish I had an even more exasperated looking smily than the eye-rolling one).Sure I did. It means when you grow up and move out of mommy andStun said:
daddy's house and have kids of your own, you'll understand the situation
differently. Until then you're just going to come off like an ignorant jackass.
I dont see how that's true. I'm not an asshole.
This isn't some scam. Dave Holland isn't a millionaire freak like Michael
Jackson where some parents are trying to get money. Going to court is a
clear sign of that. The parents wanted justice not a payoff.
Like or not, Dave Holland was convicted by the high court for abusing a young
special needs child in the worst of ways. Dave Holland should have his balls
cut off with a rusty jagged-edged knife.
Ugh. I understand the situation perfectly. And like it or not, what I said still stands. Like I said, being pronounced guilty doesn't mean he did it, and we'll never know the truth...... that's it!
Deadly Embrace
TL PREACHER
Well the Judge and or jury heard the case.......and convicted him......if you read the transcipts, then just maybe I would listen to your argument a little better, but being convicted is the outcome, we never heard the case, so why stick up for the guilty scumbag!..........Lots of Murders on death row ............never did it?..............Ya right.......some minuscule percentage, but for the most part guilty is the end of story!...........Stun........your the kind of person, that was on the OJ............jury........you vote reason of doubt, without even hearing the case fully.........Off Nice is right, your a kid, if you were grown up & had kids, you'd understand, somewhat better........how can you stand up for a convicted sexual pervert?.....taking advantage of a mentally challenged kid........thats whats wrong with the world..........and thats just sick!Stun said:
No no no... I didn't stand up for anyone. I said (for the third, maybe fourth time now) that just because they are found guilty in a court of law doesn't mean they did it. It means the evidence that was submitted was enough that that judge or jury found him guilty. All I'm saying is that I hate court cases like this, because 99% of the time it's one person's word against another. And that sucks. Who should we believe? We'll never know for sure, no mater how much we think we do...... it said they're both bi... what if, fox example, they had consensual sex, and the kid was freaked out and told his parents, and then they took it the wrong way? Who knows.
Once again, you've never met me, none of you have... just like the skating and death metal comments (and more). I hate repeating myself, but -please- don't presume to judge the kind of person I am. You wanna know what kinda person I am? An absolute perfectionist up to the point where it's just illogical (and where's that? :b ). I judge things with the data available. In a court I would use all of the info they had. On this msg board, where we know next-to-nothing about the case, all I can do is say we'll never know who did it. And I did. Five times.
About your comment on the miniscule percentage... how are we gonna know if they rot on death row? Only the accused ppl ever know for sure if they are guilty, and even then some don't.
Once again, you've never met me, none of you have... just like the skating and death metal comments (and more). I hate repeating myself, but -please- don't presume to judge the kind of person I am. You wanna know what kinda person I am? An absolute perfectionist up to the point where it's just illogical (and where's that? :b ). I judge things with the data available. In a court I would use all of the info they had. On this msg board, where we know next-to-nothing about the case, all I can do is say we'll never know who did it. And I did. Five times.About your comment on the miniscule percentage... how are we gonna know if they rot on death row? Only the accused ppl ever know for sure if they are guilty, and even then some don't.
Stun said:
Stun, Now I'm laughing. Why? DE OWNS YOU!
Deadly Embrace
TL PREACHER
What if.........OK......Stun:Stun said:
IF They did have consenual sex: It's still rape, it's still wrong, he's not of the right state of mind to make that decision, Holland is a grown man, the BOY(like you) was a minor.......that alone is wrong & statutory Rape, but throw in the mentally challenged mind, consensual or not, it's still rape!......Still a CRIME!
So if your if...........is right.........then a Bus Driver of Mentally challenged minors, can have consensual sex with his passengers..........Ya OK Stun
If the kid was "freaked out".........it's because he does not understand or can not make his sexual decsions.........His parents don't have to take it either way, it's wrong, consensual or not!............
Who Knows?:.....Everyone knows its wrong......but you!
You are so fucking ignorant it's unreal. Stop molesting polar bears and findStun said:
out how the legal system works. They didnt flip a coin...'heads' you're
guilty and 'tails' you're not guilty. Nobody's trying to poach and pinch
Dave Holland because he was a drummer for Judas Priest. Scott Travis
has been Priests drummer since 89. That makes Dave Holland out of the
limelight for 15 years. He's not rich. He's not famous. He's not a star.
There's no 'who knows' bullshit. The legal systemin England isn't like the
Legal System in America. And if I heard correctly,what you guys in Canada use for a legal system, best 5 out of 7 of Rock-Paper-Scissors, isn't like the Legal System in England either. DE owns you on this argument. If brains were money, you wouldn't have enough for busfare.
Face it, Holland did it. He's guilty. He was accused, He was tried, he was
found guilty and He WAS convicted.
Your argument is weak, your morals are weaker.
Stun, YOU ARE THE WEAKEST LINK! GOODBYE!
Oh, I didn't know he was a minor. My mistake.
Officer, man, I never said anything about flipping a coin or anything like that... you never cease to amaze me. And this has nothing to do with my morals... whatever man. There's no point. You always flip out. I'll just refer to your very true comment in the MH thread. There's one side's story, the other side's story, and the truth. You said it perfectly.
Officer, man, I never said anything about flipping a coin or anything like that... you never cease to amaze me. And this has nothing to do with my morals... whatever man. There's no point. You always flip out. I'll just refer to your very true comment in the MH thread. There's one side's story, the other side's story, and the truth. You said it perfectly.
Deadly Embrace
TL PREACHER
You never cease to amaze me, you develop foot in mouth syndrome the moreStun said:
time goes on. right on. I don't flip out cannuck, I attack.
Stun said:
That's been the part (minor, and handicapped) that's sickening. It was clearly stated in the very first press releases...and kept up repeating his minor status. At least you admitted you didn't get that part.
Your comment about the stats for sexual abuse cases rising is true. It's simply easier now days to report it, than it was 20 years ago--or even 10 years ago. There's different safety features in place now that make is easier for someone who's been abused by an adult to come forward, and get some help. It's not that there's an epidemic, it's just it's not "taboo" as much to actually try to tell someone. It's still a giant risk to tell anyone, and those that are telling the truth, do suffer a great deal because of those that lie. Anyway, it's not that there's that much more sexual abuse, it's that a higher % come forward. It takes significant guts to go to the police and take that risk, and follow through. The parents were protecting their child, and pursuing it. The English courts are pretty thorough, so I believe the jury had sufficient evidence to convict him by "majority".
I don't believe he was physically handicapped (the minor) so much as he was mentally handicapped, in whatever way. Drumming is physical. So it's a kid who couldn't filter what others were doing to him. So, rape is rape. And to do it a mostly defenseless minor is what is harsh to comprehend, and that's why (STUN? DO I STILL HAVE YOUR ATTENTION? Just checking...) people are getting pissed. This is a kid, who couldn't protect himself, and was raped. So....maybe, next time, read a little better, or look deeper into a story and this spat wouldn't have gotten this way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay these are my comments on the situation. I'm glad he's been convicted if the evidence is there. And the fucking evidence has to be there, and it's usually by medical exam, character witnesses, and the family and friends...so, I'm glad it's over, the kid can get some peace now.
Deadly Embrace said:
Errr you guys are really, really dense sometimes. I NEVER SAID THE DRUMMER WAS INNOCENT. I never even remotely hinted at it. I said WE'LL NEVER KNOW. That's it. Live with it. I remember seeing the guy's age as 18, but he must've been younger when it happened.
Yes, the drummer was convicted. I don't look into legal cases because I can't make an accurate judgment. So I ALWAYS say we'll never know. I do not feel I was 100% right except in the matter that we won't know. I've said that more than 10 times now, I think. Maybe it got through to one or two of you now??? Probably not. In any event, I'm done with this.
To Hemi: Since you seem to be much more coherant than the majority of the board, I'll recommend this book to you: "Why Do People Believe Weird Things?". I won't argue with you, or challenge anything you said, because what you said was true. But there's more truth to this matter than that. If you read this book, you'll understand where I'm coming from with the whole "epidemic" comment. And that's probably the only way you ever will. Since I don't think anyone else here reads books too often, I chose you. It's an excellent book, deals with many things, ranging from witch burnings to repressed memories to alien encounters to holocaust-deniers... heh. Basically a really smart guy who has too much time on his hands wrote a book that explains a lot of weird things.
Deadly Embrace
TL PREACHER
Former JUDAS PRIEST Drummer Jailed In Sex Case
Former JUDAS PRIEST drummer David Holland was jailed for eight years Friday (Feb. 13) for the attempted rape of a special needs teenager, according to the Times Online.
Holland was convicted of one charge of attempted rape and five counts of indecent assault on the 17-year-old boy at the star's rural Northamptonshire.
The youngster had visited Holland for drum lessons when the attacks took place between June and December 2002.
Sentencing Holland, Judge Charles Wide, QC, said: "(the teenager) was a boy with a very, very troubled past. You planned this abuse by grooming his parents and him through the careful construction of the opportunity to abuse and the common factors of detaching a boy from his parents by giving him cigarettes, alcohol and porn."
Holland, 55, of The Green, Stoke Bruerne, Northants, was convicted by a jury of seven women and five men at Northampton Crown Court on January 23 this year.
Judge Wide added: "You must never work with children again."
From BlabberMouth.Net
Former JUDAS PRIEST drummer David Holland was jailed for eight years Friday (Feb. 13) for the attempted rape of a special needs teenager, according to the Times Online.
Holland was convicted of one charge of attempted rape and five counts of indecent assault on the 17-year-old boy at the star's rural Northamptonshire.
The youngster had visited Holland for drum lessons when the attacks took place between June and December 2002.
Sentencing Holland, Judge Charles Wide, QC, said: "(the teenager) was a boy with a very, very troubled past. You planned this abuse by grooming his parents and him through the careful construction of the opportunity to abuse and the common factors of detaching a boy from his parents by giving him cigarettes, alcohol and porn."
Holland, 55, of The Green, Stoke Bruerne, Northants, was convicted by a jury of seven women and five men at Northampton Crown Court on January 23 this year.
Judge Wide added: "You must never work with children again."
From BlabberMouth.Net
- Status
Similar threads
