Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be really pissed off at the Lib Dem party re sexual abuse?

136 replies

Scarletohello · 15/01/2014 20:03

So Lord Carlisle was being interviewed on C 4 news tonight about the other guy ( can't remember his name) who was accused if sexually assaulting 4 women and not only is he being allowed back in the party, he doesn't even have to apologise to the women he allegedly sexually assaulted. And why should he? Said Lord Carlisle. It's just one fuckwit entitled male standing up for another one! He gave me the creeps, couldn't even look at the camera! Did anyone else see this?? Am just so angry! The news is full of sexual abuse cases today, and most of them get away with it ( unless they are an ethnic minority, in a gang etc)

Sorry for the rant but just pissed off...!!

OP posts:
Joysmum · 15/01/2014 22:05

Why should he apologise if he's not done anything wrong?

Given the sort if reactions being given in here, if he apologizes he'll be seen as guilty. If he tries to justify his reasons for not apologising, so many people who have been abused and their abuser not bought to justice (and I'm guessing there will be many) will project their situation on to him and that's not good either.

So, how can a high profile person accused of something like this best deal with the situation? Damned whatever they do or don't do.

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 22:44

Maybe he could ask for it to go to trial to prove his innocence? Like most of us would have to do if the situation was at our feet?

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 22:46

As Bridget Harris also said: "Beyond all reasonable doubt" is a good test if you are taking away someone's liberty, but is ridiculous when you are talking about merely taking away someone's party membership.
Exactly this ^ It seems they are all in for winning for their own ego alone, stuff public/voters/taxpayers. Nothing quite says 'I am not one of them' than publicly not taking responsibility just because you are an MP and having no one challenge you on it.

MrsS1980 · 15/01/2014 22:54

The ruling was that there was no case to answer. Channel 4 produced the most biased coverage I have seen for a long time, but then they broke the story so would hardly go with "oops, we may have been wrong on this one!"
Neither the police nor the tribunal has found him guilty so why is it ok to continue to accuse and slander?

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:01

And Panorama produced a one sided debate where SS didn't get to explain cases at all. Suck huh?

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:02

I am of course aware that SS legally cannot discuss cases, but the idea of presenting it as a debate without full facts is laughable.

SuzanneUK · 15/01/2014 23:02

Why is it ok to continue to accuse and slander?

It isn't.

And unless anyone on Mumsnet has £100k to burn, they'd be wise not to suggest he's guilty of anything more that the behaviour accepted by the review.

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:04

Lovely threats, thank you. How lovely your party seems!

MrsS1980 · 15/01/2014 23:07

Where does Suzanne say she is a LD lion? You have obviously made your mind up and are not interested in the facts.

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:09

Isn't it lucky no one has accused him?
Fantastic how defensive you all get when the shoe is on the other foot!
Any other threats or wise words we should adhere to unless you choose to sue us mere mortals?
Flee the country perhaps?

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:11

Maybe Suzanne can answer that for herself? Or is she going to be coy?

SuzanneUK · 15/01/2014 23:18

I have no personal interest in the Rennard case: I was merely trying to protect Mumsnet members and the Mumsnet management from incurring a potentially hefty bill for damages in the event that the wealthy and powerful Lord Rennard take exception to something said on this thread.

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:21

Ah yes, the old 'MP's can sue you but are not suable themselves' gag. Sums it up. Thank you for the clarification.
Are you a lib dem out of interest?

SuzanneUK · 15/01/2014 23:32

Are you a lib dem out of interest?

In 2014, membership of or support for any mainstream political party suggests a belief that it actually matters which one of them is running the country.

I'm not that gullible.

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:43

Coy it is then.

SuzanneUK · 15/01/2014 23:46

Coy it is then.

Is it?

I thought I'd answered your question as fully as anyone reasonably could.

Lioninthesun · 15/01/2014 23:49

As well as any politician, indeed.

SuzanneUK · 15/01/2014 23:52

Would you like to see my ballot box?

BeyondTheLimitsOfAcceptability · 15/01/2014 23:52

I dunno, I could give a fulle answer - I am not a lib dem
Gosh, that was hard.

BeyondTheLimitsOfAcceptability · 15/01/2014 23:53

*fuller

SuzanneUK · 15/01/2014 23:55

I really must stop taking these 'eloquence' tablets!

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/01/2014 00:03

YANBU OP - rant away.

Completely agree with your post ProfPlumSpeaking. Well said.

SunshineOnACrappyDay · 16/01/2014 00:05

YANBU.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 16/01/2014 00:13

Just re-read the thread. Bourdic - you are so right. Why would several women in this position make these stories up? They are highly unlikely to get any positive publicity/good jumps up the career ladder through it. In fact - research shows that women who make sexual harassment complaints are more likely to lose their jobs than their aggressors. It takes courage to speak out against sexual harassment from people who are in a position of authority over you.

SuzanneUK · 16/01/2014 00:21

Why would several women in this position make these stories up?

Some would answer 'They wouldn't" while others would answer "In order to discredit Lord Rennard".