OMG I am shocked .Lostprophets

(149 Posts)
threesocksfullofchocs Wed 19-Dec-12 11:26:02
SantasHugandRollintheSnow Wed 19-Dec-12 11:33:02

Wtaf? Surely not, I used to go and see them before they were famous etc. my friend from school is personal friends with them all. I'm flabbagasteted.

Wetthemogwai Wed 19-Dec-12 11:36:14

I really don't know what to say! The fact that he's been charged and isn't just 'suspected' is just awful beyond words, I have always been such a fan of his!

SantasHugandRollintheSnow Wed 19-Dec-12 11:38:17

I still have my signed copy of fake sound of progress. I had the original version of fake sound of progress before they changed it slightly for the released album!!

I have 3 albums! I loved their varying style.

Wrong, wrong and more wrong.

TenPercenter Wed 19-Dec-12 11:49:34

It is really shocking, did a proper double take reading it on twitter.

JaquelineHyOnChristmasSpirit Wed 19-Dec-12 11:53:36

I'm not suprised by any of this any more.

Actually I'm glad that the public is finally waking up and realising that this kind of thing is out there in mainstream life and not just hidden away being comitted by sterotypical peadophiles wearing thick rimmed glasses and grubby clothes.

GerardWay Wed 19-Dec-12 11:56:59

DS told me about this this morning. I honestly didn't believe him. We've seen them loads of times. I really am shocked about it.

Witchety Wed 19-Dec-12 11:59:08

I'm not surprised either

Izzyschangelingisarriving Wed 19-Dec-12 12:02:49

No one ever wants to believe it is someone "normal" nothing shocks me anymore

It's not that we're surprised by age or appearance or fame or anything like that.

I guess it's the shock that someone we 'like' (fan wise) was not what we assumed.
I know he dated Fearne Cotton for a while so I guess we all assumed that he was an average (if that's the right word) heterosexual male.

CatchingMockingbirds Wed 19-Dec-12 12:06:35

I read about it this morning, how awful.

EldritchCleavage Wed 19-Dec-12 12:10:20

He's been charged, not convicted, so it is a bit unfair to be talking about him as though he is guilty.

I agree Eldritch I hate it when these stories come out before anyone has been found guilty. If he is guilty then he deserves all he gets, but if he is innocent then this story will taint his life forever and has probably already ruined his career.

threesocksfullofchocs Wed 19-Dec-12 12:14:18

EldritchCleavage good point.

Izzyschangelingisarriving Wed 19-Dec-12 12:18:03

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

That is very true Eldritch but unfortunately it will follow him for the rest of his life/career.

R Kelly's career never really recovered after the video was leaked even though the girl in the video said she was over the legal age of consent at the time.
Michael Jackson is another example. There are still people who think he got away with it even though he was cleared in a court of law.

PersonClown hmm

You know what? Plenty of people do get away with it, even though they are cleared in a court of law.

I know that WildStrawberry. I'm not saying he is innocent.
I'm just saying that IF he is cleared, it will more than likely destroy his career and we will never know the truth.

Izzyschangelingisarriving Wed 19-Dec-12 12:27:30

In a system with such low conviction rates, where abuser after abuser walks free - how would you protect the public then?

People have a right to know and make up their own minds about who and what they expose their children to.

Yeah I was more hmm about the Michael Jackson comment to be honest - the facts of that case that I am familiar with leave me with my own opinion that yes, he did get away with it.

I'm not decided either way until I hear the facts of the case as regards Ian Watkins.

EldritchCleavage Wed 19-Dec-12 12:37:10

I'm not decided either way until I hear the facts of the case as regards Ian Watkins

Exactly. But I also think it is better for comment to be circumspect until after the trial has taken place.

Izzyschangelingisarriving Wed 19-Dec-12 12:41:02

But you will never hear all the facts - because the defendants rights outweigh the victims and so much is inadmissible in case it "prejudices" the jury.

threesocksfullofchocs Wed 19-Dec-12 12:50:02

if that was the case..then the person would not be named.
always seems unfair to me that people are named, yet they haven't been found guilty of anything yet,

Izzyschangelingisarriving Wed 19-Dec-12 12:54:34

That is the case - and there is nothing at all stopping the defendant naming the victim as long as it isn't in "print" (including digital).

The only right a victim has over a defendant is anonymity in the press - the defendant has many, many more rights.

Shall we use a specific example? Accused of violent sexual abuse of children over a specified period of time - school records show a clear pattern of violence against younger children and regular suspensions during that period of time for this behaviour - inadmissible. Victim - one poor school report - admissible.

No-one who works with victims of sexual abuse believes the system as it stands is a)working and b)in favour of the victim.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now