No need, Ludwig.

>>Pericles, I’m still not getting it. Do you want to debate this subject or not?<<

There's no longer anything to debate, now that you have confirmed that you maintain your position as an unrepentent apologist for the unconscionable behaviour displayed by Rolf Harris.

>>By and large, YES I still hold the sentiments expressed in my opening post<<

You also confirm your quite unforgivable "blame the victim" stance.

>>...there seems to NOT be a reasonable doubt that he undertook this action without the will participation of ‘C’.<<

There seems little point in "debating" with someone whose values are reflected in these statements. We have nothing at all in common in that area - I think that a life sentence with a six foot six father of teenage daughters, with all that this implies, would be lenient, while you think Harris' actions were essentially victimless.

I sincerely hope that you will keep your attitude towards young girls to yourself. In the event that you choose to exercise it, you might not get a judge who makes the sort of allowances for age and health that Harris received.

<< You also confirm your quite unforgivable "blame the victim" stance. >>

No Pericles, you’ve got that one entirely wrong.

If the ‘victim’ was a willing participant, then there WAS no victim! This is a possibility only with ‘C’. Not with any of the other three girls.

Harris was to blame. No one else.

"Ok, bring on the total condemnation without addressing the debate, Poirot and Pericles!!"

"But, by and large, YES I still hold the sentiments expressed in my opening post.

Let’s look at that one statement at a time…"

Let's not bother.....been there, done that...and copped a truckload of abuse for my trouble.

If, Ludwig.

>>If the ‘victim’ was a willing participant, then there WAS no victim!<<

But the jury, and the judge, assessed that she was not a willing participant, and therefore she was a victim. It is very likely that you would have arrived at the same conclusion after hearing first-hand the evidence over several weeks, instead of reading second- and third-hand reports,then using them to propose a string of "if this" and "if that" scenarios.

Which makes this suggestion of yours both redundant and extremely offensive.

>>So how did he take her pants down and put his head right in her crotch if she wasn’t willing to let him do it? It does not compute.<<

That is what it is: blaming the victim.

Ludwig,

If; if chalk was cheese the White Cliffs of Dover would have been fertilizer millennia ago.

Is Mise, what do you hope to achieve with your one-line posts?

Surely you can see that they are doing your credibility or perception of intelligence no favours, nor by association those of people on your side of the debate.

Come-on, get involved in the debate. There is plenty of juicy stuff in my last few posts for you to get stuck into.

If you really think that I am at the bottom of a very deep hole, then put some substance into your opinion. Tell us just exactly what it is that you think I have got so so SO terribly wrong.