Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge rules child abuse case 'trivial'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:06 AM
Original message
Judge rules child abuse case 'trivial'

By Justin Davenport Crime Correspondent, Evening Standard
28 February 2005

Police are poised to bring an extraordinary complaint against a top judge who threw out a child abuse case saying it was trivial.

Senior officers and lawyers are furious over the decision by His Honour Judge Medawar to reject the case before putting it to a jury.

High-ranking Scotland Yard officers are considering the possibility of mounting a challenge to the judge's ruling.

The victim of the alleged abuse, Claire Clark, has waived her right of anonymity to speak out against the judge's comments.

http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/16925433?source=Evening%20Standard
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. More abuse apologia: "Jeremy Irons critical of hysteria over paedophilia"
Telegraph
By Richard Alleyne
(Filed: 28/02/2005)

The actor Jeremy Irons, who starred in the film Lolita, says the "hysteria" sweeping the country over paedophilia is damaging relations between adults and children.

Irons, who has two sons with his wife Sinead Cusack, says it is important to uphold a rigid social morality but also vital that adults are allowed to show affection to children.

Paedophilia should be treated as a disease, he says in a BBC interview to be screened next week. But it must also be recognised that children are attractive and that parental love has a "sexual" element.

"It is very difficult because children under 16 are immensely attractive," he says. "Any father will tell you. I think our children have to be protected. But I don't think we need to have hysteria."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/28/nirons28.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/02/28/ixhome.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. "children are attractive and that parental love has a "sexual" element"
Excuse me?

Anyone else think he needs his head examined?


Also, emad, FYI I can't read the first article - when I click the link it crashes my browser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Sorry about that...check your Inbox for story
..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Thanks... after reading the story...
Edited on Mon Feb-28-05 11:29 AM by redqueen
I can sort of understand some of what he's saying, but he apparently doesn't seem to recognize the affect his statements will have on those who are truly sick. I agree with the statement that his comments will be viewed as encouragement by pedophiles. Wish he'd have thought more carefully about the reaction his words might have before he spoke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. He's been reading too much Freud
Freud first believed that sexual abuse was a rampant problem affecting women and girls. He then backed off that idea, and decided that girls lie about sexual abuse happening because they want it to occur.

I think Freud's mother sexually abused him. It's the only explanation for some of his theories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. He did too much coke. And there was no one around to psych
him out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. You know, a long time after the fact, reading what you posted,
it really sounds like Freud changed his position because it would be conducive to his continued physical health to do so...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. This man is at risk of being an abuser himself
That's NOT the sentiment of a healthy adult. Period. I'd say he definitely needs therapy and he needs someone to bash into his skull until he gets it that there is NO place in parenting for that kind of attitude, and even less place for acting out on it (should the temptation arise). OR promoting and normalizing pedophilia, as he is doing -- unwittingly, I hope.

I'm not a betting woman but I'd bet that Jeremy Irons was sexually abused in some way as a child himself. That's how we get pedophiles and child molesters: we CREATE them. Child molesters are made not born.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. If he has children
Protective services needs to step in and yank them. Apparently, from that lone comment, this "judge" has little problem with pedophilia.

He doesn't just need to be thrown off the bench- this one deserves the slammer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BiggJawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Methinks he doth protesteth TOO much.....
Has he been served to testify for Jack-O?
With an attitude like that, he could be Star Wittness....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Megahurtz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
12.  "parental love is sexual" ???
And "children under 16 are immensely attractive"??? And it's "hysteria" to believe otherwise???:wtf:

Oh the rest of you are being way too nice about this!!!:

Jeremy Irons is a SICK FUCK!!!

:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-01-05 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. His statements sound an awful lot like Michael Jackson on his
Channel 4 interview with Martin Bashir.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. I understand what he's talking about
and it's kind of difficult to explain. Any woman who has breast fed can tell you there is a certain sexual feeling that comes with it. It's not a turned on feeling, but a deeper emotional tie. I guess, I would equate the feeling with the afterglow of really great sex. And yes, children under 16 are attractive, nature made them that way so we would take care of them, no matter how angry we get at them.

And yes, there is a sexual element between children and parents, that is where children learn their "mating" skills. The hysteria that he is talking about is the fear of touching a child, because you might be misinterpreted. Children growing up without touching can become disconnected to society. We see this in many people who commit violent crimes.

Child abuse or pedophilia is a totally different situation, than parents who feel a warm feeling . Parents (on the whole), do not touch their children to arouse themselves. Pedophiles DO touch children to arouse themselves, that is the difference. And, it is an illness, one that they haven't been able to cure. Is it mental or physical, or maybe a combination of the two, no one really knows for sure.

Let's not forget that we are sexual beings. Even infants have been known to masturbate. My son at 4 found out that if he "played" with himself, it got bigger. And, children have been known to "experiment" out of curiosity.

But, adults who arouse themselves with children are NOT normal, and should NEVER be considered normal.

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Megahurtz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. I don't totally buy what you're saying,
because Jeremy Irons knows nothing about what it feels like to breastfeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
youngdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Oh Please...
it is statements like this that have caused such a furor in recent years about breastfeeding. I breastfed all of my children and never felt the feeling of a "sexual afterglow". A deep emotional bond, yes, a sexual afterglow, no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Wow, I guess I'm the only one
who actually reads other things besides politics. Try this link for more info <http://parenting.ivillage.com/pregnancy/plabor/0,,40fs-p,00.html?arrivalSA=1&cobrandRef=0&arrival_freqCap=1&pba=adid=14301663>
I said that it was difficult to explain, so I tried to come as close as possible to the feeling.

I've noticed one thing about the people here, there really isn't any intelligent discussion. If you don't agree with something, you bash. It could be anything from a political difference to a different outlook. I've seen actors, religions, tv programs and other members trashed like in a teenage slam book. Why?

There should be an emotional bond (before and) after sex, but apparently too many people here don't think so. That emotional bond can extend to other people without it being sexual or dirty. Yet, your minds are in the gutter. Yes, yes, yes, let's just trash people who don't think the same as we do.

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. There are certain subjects here that lead to flame wars.
I don't know why, it's like certain things are taboo to discuss
Nevertheless, I just want to say I know what you are talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genieroze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. But it must also be recognized that children are attractive and
that parental love has a "sexual" element. Uh, NO!!!!!!. I have three kids, and that's gross. I love all my kids, but to put them into the same category as my love for my husband is sick.

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jbnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. Especially amazing
considering the man still has children in his care.

Mrs Clark, who is married with two children, said she complained about the abuse when she was 13 but was not taken seriously by social services.

She decided to go to the police after meeting her alleged abuser again last April and hearing that a number of children had been staying at his home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Megahurtz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
9. I'm not surprised
This judge is probably a pedophile himself. Surprisingly, there are quite a few judges in the court system who are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-28-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. Sure sounds that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC