Let's get this straight, Ludwig. Regarding Harris's repeated indecent assaults of "C" - there is "no" mitigating factor before the law.

He was sexually interfering with a minor.

That's it.

"If the other party is actually letting him do it, then there is a very big mitigating factor."

No it's not a mitigating factor at all. Not in the case a middle-aged man indecently assaulting a minor.

What is it with you that you keep attempting to excuse Harris's perversions?

Do you not realise that a mature man (and especially one of Harris standing) rely on the trauma and the shame of their victims to keep their lips well and truly sealed. I know because the one time it happened to me, I was totally immobilised by the shock and shame of it.

"C" was being secretly abused by Harris. Perhaps she felt she had little choice but to continue to visit as Bindy's friend. She couldn't tell anyone why she didn't want to go to the Harris house, could she.

That's what perverts depend on which is why it often takes a long time for these things to come to light

Others have said here that it's a wonder any minors come forward at all when people like you are on hand to blame the victims.

And I agree with the others that it's obvious Rolf was still relying on his fame and nice guy reputation to protect him in the witness box. Who else up on charges for indecent assault of minors would stoop to singing ditties in the witness box?

"They're all making it up", he says. "I was never in Cambridge", he says.

So when you say: "See, if I may be so bold; you do go straight to the negative state, and very strongly so.."

You're darn tootin' I do...after reading the sentencing remarks, no-one of reasonable morality could do anything else.

I'm flabbergasted that you continue to defend this paedophile...and your argument has done more to define his evil actions to me than anything else I've read on the matter, save the judge's comments.

Wow Poirot. You’ve totally hardened your stance. There is a whole bunch of statements in your last post that amount to assertions that you cannot make. You can suggest that they possibly or probably or are likely to be the case, but you can’t assert them as facts.

My oft-repeated fundamental principle here; that a less severe interpretation of Harris’ misdemeanours is perhaps closer to reality, perhaps not, but certainly worth considering… has fallen on deaf ears and a closed mind.

Crikey, all you needed to say is: “Yes Ludwig, I can see your point. There is a possibility that it is not as bad as it seems, and that interpretations other than mine [Poirot’s] are possibilities. Highly unlikely, but yes; possible ”

That would have settled this discussion. But alas, you have totally closed your mind and asserted that you are right, end of story.

Damn pity that is.

<< I'm flabbergasted that you continue to defend this paedophile. >>

It seems like you are flabbergasted that I offer anything whatsoever that is different to your HARDLINE interpretation of this whole affair.

Hey, how many times do I have to say it – I’m offering a different somewhat less severe interpretation, not a defence of Harris for his wrongdoings. And I have been doing so in a very logical and cool-headed manner.

We have always got along well on this forum, for some years now. I thought I could have a friendly or at least neutral debate with you. But alas, it was not to be.

Go ahead and think the absolute worst of Harris. Don’t let anything stop you from doing that. Don’t consider my comments regarding the disconnect that I found in the judge’s comments. Do continue to see things in very black and white terms.

Goodnight.

Poirot, and others, I beg you to stop communicating directly with Ludwig on this subject. You are only making Ludwig feel empowered.

He only sees his excuses for pedophilia and his diminishing of the victims, in black and white terms. We all know he lacks insight and compassion on this issue, not because he admires Harris, but because he is defending the actual pedophile actions themselves and is also attempting to diminish victims of pedophilia.

Nothing whatsoever that you say directly to him will influence him in any way at all.

Please, I implore you to not make Ludwig feel he has status on pedophile issues. You are paying close attention to what he says and this makes him feel empowered on the issue.

I'm praying that pedophile victims are not reading his posts, as I could barely imagine the deep extent of their hurt, dismay and pain regarding Ludwig's posts. That a grown man could be that lacking in insight would be deeply hurtful to any victim of pedophilia.

Please Poirot, Paul, Steele, RObert, WM Trevor carry on the discussion, but I implore you to exclude Ludwig, just ignore him. He will never change. He needs help, and he can't get it here on this forum, and he doesn't want it anyway. Please don't empower that man by paying attention to his repugnant defense of certain types of pedophilia.

I agree Jay123.
I think Ludwig protests too much.

At the end of the day, Harris was convicted beyond reasonable doubt, and is in prison possibly until he dies.
One can only hope he is doing his time very unpleasantly...

Jay123, I'd need more evidence before I was ready to accept that this is an empowerment issue for Ludwig.

I tend to only ever cut off communication where continuing the communication seems to increase a risk of harm or if the communication is so bad that conversation is unworkable. I'd rather see bad ideas out in the open and rebutted than have some sense left that they have been silenced because opponents could not rebut them.

We may not change Ludwig's mind on this but I tend to work from an assumption that other may not not be as entrenched in their views.

I am reaching the point where the arguments seem far to repetitive and there may be little point in continuing the discussion on the existing points.

R0bert

OK ROBERT..how about a new angle
i will change nappies/but some nappies are more messy than others
so when the naby girl has poop every where/where is the parent allowed to clean/what areas not to clean/the thing is at what point are we cleaning too much.

i see woman getting great joys from baby sniffing but is a man goes arround BABY sniffing hes the peRvert/AND EVEN I AM QUICK TO CAST THE LABLE

we live in an era where they put no go areas/a man taking his grandaughter to play in the park geTs nought but foul looks
jusT out shopping with the clearly younger mother and daughter/you get the constant judgements

LIFE I FULL OF THESE SMPLE ABSURD BOUNDRIES.like we have a male teacher shortage caus we know is gong to arise if you even tak individualy with a student.

we tend to throw our sins at we are thinking/on others
is us thinKing him a pervert/his problem or ours/cleaRly its his/but then we become that wE DISPISE

AND AS FOR BACKWARDS JONGO;YES it seems..HES BACK

if you never been an older male/seen out walking\with kid
you got no clue untill ya do\and there is nothing better than a pevert in the media/to alianate the father comforter figure[anyhow its our cros to bare]

all i know is backWARDS j's abc or rather 1 2 and threes
seems like a secret mystery j to me/but i dont care who he is/we each should be able to speak freely/if only that we not nuthing we are shamed of.

are all/most some or all;
lawyers defending murder..are they murderers too?

i see j321 just trying out his vengeance/bile\on some specific one

just remember this

And next time you unthinkingly
are forced/to change a poopy nappy...
a lot of crrrr ap falls into the cracks/some you can
clean others need a woman to do it cause we need more feminists.

aND CAUSE ALL MEN ARE Blusterds