My feed
Premium
Please
or
to access all these features

News

Bill Wyman and John Peel too :(

73 replies
OP posts:
Report
Darkesteyes · 12/10/2012 01:54

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1266664/Mandy-Smith-I-DID-sleep-Bill-Wyman-I-14--man-life-God.html


And in the article she is still referred to as a "Wild Child" and the article was only written just two years ago!

Report
CogitoErgoSometimes · 12/10/2012 07:16

Why not? Because at the time I don't think Mandy Smith would have cooperated with any prosecution and it would have failed. Her mother was also a slightly odd figure (she describes her as 'naive' in the piece) that seemed quite happy for her DDs to be out clubbing & partying well under the age of 18 and joining in with the celebrity lifestyle. Mandy Smith is talking now but she still has no plans to prosecute Bill Wyman, you notice.

Report
Frontpaw · 12/10/2012 07:19

Bill Wyman and Mandy Smith is no secret!

Report
MrsjREwing · 12/10/2012 07:32

No new news there, press called her a wild child, no name for him. Have you looked up baby groupies? You will have more US and UK names of similar minded peados.

Report
lljkk · 12/10/2012 07:35

I don't think Wyman & Peel are the same at all. Am not a fan of either of them, but compared to this outpouring about Saville being a disgusting lech, just not the same.

Report
EdithWeston · 12/10/2012 07:40

The Bill Wyman/Mandy Smith one was all over the papers at the time, as did other stories involving other underage girls branded "wild child". At the time, there were vigorous denials of underage sex in UK (didn't they marry abroad where there was a younger age of consent).

The difference here is that it was a sole pairing (not widespread predation), and the teenager (though too young to consent fully) was an enthusiastic participant. They did go on to marry in UK, and the relationship lasted several years. Ms Smith did not look, according to the tabloids, in a good place at times during that period, but that could have arisen from a number of other excesses rather than simple causality to age of first intercourse.

Report
Animation · 12/10/2012 09:08

Mandy was 13- 14 and got called the 'wild child'??

What was he called?

Report
MrsHelsBels74 · 12/10/2012 09:40

What has John Peel got to do with this?

Report
DameFannyGallopsAtaGhost · 12/10/2012 09:42

Yes, what's the john peel thing?

Report
Frontpaw · 12/10/2012 09:42

There were some rumblings about his first wife being 15 when he married her.

Report
ThreadWatcher · 12/10/2012 09:44

Peel liked 13yo schoolgirls apparently
There are links on other threads where he says so

Report
Runningblue · 12/10/2012 09:45

There is a daily mail story this morning on John peel - I think op might be referring to that

Report
wintera · 12/10/2012 10:06

I'm probably gonna get flamed for this but here goes. I don't think the John peel story is in any way comparable to the jimmy Saville tales. From what I've read the girl in question was a willing partner even though she was fifteen. Most of the girls involved with jimmy Saville were not willing at all and were assaulted. I also think its strange that the daily mail is bringing all this up now, as the details were public knowledge and were in jp's autobiography. And as others have said, the bill wyman Mandy smith story was out years ago, and they ended up getting married.

I don't think either men were right to have sex with these young girls by the way. I'm just saying its different as it looks to be consensual whereas the jimmy Saville revelations have been reported as rape or a sexual assault.

Report
wintera · 12/10/2012 10:13

Also the lady in the John peel story in the daily mail said she wrote to him about 30 years later to ask him to make a public appearance at her new club, which would lead me to believe there was no animosity between the two of them.

Report
lljkk · 12/10/2012 10:38

I agree with you Wintera. What Peel or Wyman did was distasteful or unsavoury. But what Saville did was far worse: vile, Criminal, immoral, assault, disgusting, outrageous (and far worse, words fail me, I guess).

Report
WinkyWinkola · 12/10/2012 10:41

"I'm just saying its different as it looks to be consensual"

Legally, can it be consensual as a 15 year old is still a child in the eyes of the law?

John Peel, imo, is turning out to be a real creep, pursuing such young girls.

Report
SeveredEdMcDunnough · 12/10/2012 10:42

This really shocked me...though I'm never entirely sympathetic to Julie Burchill anyway, if what happened is true then it is really sad.

BUT there is a huge difference between a man who has behaved badly and realised he was a twat, and has built himself a good, healthy life, with people who love him and lots of lovely children, and never done or condoned anything remotely like it again, and a 'man' who has never ever stopped being a total bastard until he died, never made good, never realised he was an arsehole - or if he did, covered it up and basically continued to be a complete shit til lthe age of 80 or whatever.

And kept making people's lives miserable.
HUGE difference.

Report
wintera · 12/10/2012 10:55

Well legally you are probably right, she was underage so it was still against the law. I don't think its ever been suggested that jp actually went out of his way to persue under age girls, most details I've seen say the girls were waiting for him outside the radio one offices once he became a well known dj. Did he take advantage of the situation? Yes he did most definitely. Should he have made sure the girls were above the age of consent? Yes of course he should! Not disputing that at all.

I just think we need to be careful in this current climate not to turn it into a witch-hunt that's all. It seems to be going that way and its making me feel a little uneasy to be honest.

Report
Animation · 12/10/2012 10:57

Yes, Jimmy Savile behaviour was far worse.

Does that therefore negate the bad behaviour of men going out with 13-15 year old children.

Are children deemed consensual?

Report
SeveredEdMcDunnough · 12/10/2012 10:58

The trouble is it dilutes it so we all just get so sick of hearing about 'yet another' that we forget how importantthe initial allegations were/are.

It's almost like these 'journalists' are trying to say 'well everyone you LIKED did it too' to take the focus off the bastard.

It is trying to 'normalise' it. It's very sneaky I think. So everyone gives up and goes, well, it was obviously just what went on back then, nothing we can do about it now.

That's missing the point.

Report
magentastardust · 12/10/2012 11:01

There are several John Peel stories not just that one today -he apparently used to brag about having sexual acts performed on him by girls as young as 13.

Report
SeveredEdMcDunnough · 12/10/2012 11:03

50 years ago. Of course that doesn't make it Ok but people can change.

AFAIK JS never ever reformed - or showed any remorse - or made good. He just stayed a wanker for ever.

Report
wintera · 12/10/2012 11:06

People keep saying 'its opened a real can of worms' which is about right. Where will it end? I bet there have been various boy bands throughout the years who have slept with their underage fans. Seems naive to think that hasn't gone on in the past too. Bet there are a lot of men in the public eye right at this moment Shitting themselves.

Report
SeveredEdMcDunnough · 12/10/2012 11:09

It's endemic, of course it is - in everyday life as well as the media.

But JS made a life's work of abusing children. Deliberately, knowingly, when he was pretty old - it's not the same as an incident here and there, or someone who behaved really badly for a year or two then sorted themselves out and did good.

It's just not comparable to a systematic ritual of child abuse that went on for years and years (decades I think)

Report
Animation · 12/10/2012 11:09

A can of worms is good!

Things are changing.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.