WARNING UPSETTING CONTENT - Ian Watkins to be sentenced this afternoon

[hobnobsaremyfavourite]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-25412675
Could this vile excuse for a human being sink any lower? His defense team pleading that he is a suicide risk and so very sory for his crime whilst he "LOL's" down a phone to a "Young fan". WTAF is he doing being allowed to contact young fans.
I hope he never leaves prison.

Please, can we not have posts condoning criminal assaults on these people in prison? It takes us down to their level, and it's probably a criminal offence in itself.

I'm not sure you CAN choose whether to defend someone. I think you have to say yes... Not read that link though.

Ledkr - they may have reduced charge to attempted as more convinced of getting a conviction with that.

The whole "celebrity" culture needs to change and the "I believe you" campaign needs to become a mantra for society.
I despair if yet again concerns were ingnored due to his "celebrity" status. Have we learned nothing from Saville :(

nappyrat the barrister doesn't have the choice. Because of the principle that everyone is entitled to a defence, we have the cab rank rule - i.e. barristers are not allowed to refuse instructions unless they are booked elsewhere.

This is very disturbing to please don't read if you'll find it too distressing.

My understanding was that it was reduced to attempted rape to avoid the jury having to watch the tape and determine if enough penetration was physically possible for it be considered full rape. There was no doubt about what he tried to do just if he was physically able to do it.

eeek!! Who makes that rule!? Is it a 'career suicide' thing, or an actual legal requirement (surely not?)

I had no idea that was the case...

Whilst I understand that a defence barrister must do their job I find some of the arguments used deplorable in this and similar cases.
But we live in a country with a robust judicial system and for that I am grateful.

The cab rank rule has been enshrined in our legal system for a very long time.

cab rank rule is a cornerstone of the criminal legal system.

I read the official report of the sentencing remarks and oh my goodness, I wish I hadn't. I do feel the women got off rather lightly considering the degree to which they colluded with Watkins, and the sexual abuse they carried out on their own children. Just unimaginable.

Are the sentencing remarks available on line?

There's a world of difference between (of age) groupies, and abuse of teens.

Yes they are.

But please be aware it is graphic.

www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-watkins-and-others.pdf

Don't read them. Wish I hadn't.

Really, don't.

Huge admiration for the Jury who were willing to do their civic duty and hear this case despite the very real possibility of seeing and hearing evidence that would definitely cause them life long trauma. It is possible to be discharged from jury service through the responses you give to questioning/requests for dispensation but they didn't.

Thank goodness they were spared this.

Huge respect to them.

I read it, and thank you for linking.

It is however harrowing, and unless you are sure you ant to know about the key salient points of the case, then swerve it.

Sometimes, proof of guilt is not really proof of anything specific, especiaLLY WHEN PLEA BARGAINS ARE INVOLVED

I would question yourself as to why you need to read the judgement. It contains detailed descriptions of the sexual abuse of these children.

If you are involved in this case then you will have read them.

For anybody else it is voyeurism no matter how you try to distance yourself from it.

No civilian needs to read that. Give the children some privacy and do not click on it.

I read some of it but skipped a large chunk of the middle as it was harrowing and stomach churning, I think he needs locking up forever as do the women (not mothers - women, no mother would subject her children to that) I think the judge was too lenient on them and what they did was just as bad as what he did.

I'm so sad for the children who will one day know what their so called mother put them through. It has brought tears to my eyes. :(

Agree with Mignonette, I didn't know what the link was taking me too and I wish I hadn't read it tbh.

barristers don't just defend, they advise too. No one would want to convict any one who didn't understand what was going on . iMO

I hope his balls are kicked so far up into his sick brain he dies an rots in prison.

Please don't slag off Sally O'Neill. Barristers take both defence and prosecution work, operate on a "cab rank" rule and all barristers (let alone one of Sally's pedigree and rank) would have defended some very unsavoury people. They have to work within the brief that their client gives them - no matter how preposterous.

Sally prosecuted the Baby P case and is a prime mover in the provision of Special measures at court for victims and witnesses.

To say that she is a horrible person who shouldn't sleep at night displays a woeful ignorance of our criminal process.

Nothing to say really that hasn't been said already. I feel sick to my stomach at the details of the abuse but also that initial reporting was not taken seriously by the police. How many times will this sorry story be repeated - victims disbelieved, legitimate concerns brushed to one side, horrific abuse minimised. Its beyond depressing.

I wouldn't disagree that there is an element of voyeurism nor would I seek to argue against that interpretation of interest in the case. But I do not think that is the only public interest here.