Actually it's quite interesting that I find myself arguing fairly hard against the actions of Harris.

When the story first broke I was sad. I thought perhaps someone was mistaken and it would all be sorted out. Who was more likeable and trustworthy than our own Rolf?

But as the details emerged, it appeared this man relied on his celebrity status to get away with behaviour that wouldn't be tolerated otherwise.

Ludwig says:

"This all suggests that he was behaving in a manner that was acceptable or tolerable or at worst; considered a bit dodgy but not to the extent of warranting police action.

I put it to you that he behaved in a manner that he came to understand was not going to get him into trouble."

It's more likely that he discovered early on that his particular reputation and celebrity status acted as some sort of shield for his actions. Targeting quite young girls with gropes to their private parts would be understood by any reasonable measure as "taboo".

Why, in that case, Ludwig, was his defence in a couple of instances built on denying that he had met the girls and was never where they said they met him?....That they were "making it up"?

A defence which was blown away during the trial.

Why did he not just say that he considered his groping acceptable because he thought everyone knew about it and he hadn't yet been charged with anything?

"Harris denied inappropriately touching any of the alleged victims and pleaded not guilty in court. "They are all making it up," he told the jury in late May."

"Harris initially denied being in the city at that time. However, he later admitted he had been there after TV footage was dramatically uncovered mid-trial of him taking part in a 1978 episode of Star Games in Cambridge."

"Harris's defence counsel suggested the entertainer had never been to the community centre in question and the witness must have confused him with another man."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-01/rolf-harris-guilty-of-indecently-assaulting-four-girls/5542644

I think you are excusing his behaviour.

SteeleRedux, excellent post <<This is a ludicrous proposition...>>
could not agree more. I am pleased that this discussion has been in the main kept apolitical by posters who generally show political diversity on most subject, but not on this one. I did say most.

Indi, Indi, Indi, "No-one says that harris's antics weren't wrong" Indi you must not read your own posts! What other conclusion can one draw from what you put up so far?

I'll just grab one of your spurious posts on the subject;

<<I think it's a crystal clear case of the true face of feminism in its whole glory. The girls just led him on until they realised money could be made by stitching a bloke up. I know ordinary blokes who are no different but their behaviour is tolerated because they have no fame nor money. Many feminists are just so callous & opportunistic.>>

My interpretation of the above is it was all the fault of the victim.

<< You appear to be saying because Rolf Harris has had the fame and glory as a public entertainer taken from him he has been punished enough. Doesn't the argument follow that someone without that measure of public recognition to lose should face jail instead. >>

Steele, I think we need to look at the overall punishment. Harris has got an awful lot to lose, as opposed to someone who doesn’t have much to lose. Perhaps the jail sentence needs to reflect this. Perhaps it IS appropriate that he receives a lighter jail sentence than someone in the equivalent position would receive who does not have the recognition or enormous accumulated life works and reputation to lose.

Harris built up his wealth and reputation by doing a great deal of good stuff by way of entertaining millions of people for several decades. This is now all in tatters. I don’t think that you should just set that aside and say that he should otherwise be punished with a jail term as if he hadn’t already copped a very severed penalty or as if these enormous losses were not relevant to the magnitude of a formal sentence.

<< When the story first broke I was sad. I thought perhaps someone was mistaken and it would all be sorted out. Who was more likeable and trustworthy than our own Rolf? >>

My sentiments exactly, Poirot.

He is the same age as my parents. I grew up Perth. My mother has always been a great fan. He has always been one of the main solid unquestionably good people in my life, if of somewhat daggy and marginal entertainment value.

I’m having a great deal of trouble coming to terms with the current state of affairs. I can’t write this without bloody tears streaming down my face…. and I’m sitting in a café amongst lots of people writing this on my laptop.

Ludwig,

Yes, it's startling.

But of course, you and I are judging Harris from his public persona.

Often in life, we hear of people whose conduct in private is at odds with their public reputation.

As I mentioned earlier, Harris would have been one of my top picks for a fantasy "perfect neighbour".

That says it all.

It's hard to splice up the image when we have the instance of an 84 year-old "nice guy" exposed also as someone who repeatedly targeted "young girls" in this manner.

Not an honourable way for any man to conduct himself - and he appears to have done it in a serial manner with no regard whatsoever for the shock and disgust it generated in his victims - accusing them of "making it up".

That's pretty low on any scale...for with celebrity comes an even greater onus on right conduct.

we all/share your pain/and tears ludwig
but fail to see/why this needs upset you so.

you surely know/of this thing called the appeal process
[we see the pitcures of him going/yo lock-up
he gets special protection/hooks up with fellow protected-custody/deviants/who gave in to un-civil habbits[he wil do a few weeks/then win the appeal/on teqnicality

its important to reMEMBE/HARRIS FELL OUT WITH THOSE IN THE INCROWD/THUS WAS THROWN TO THE LIONS/but i couldnt cares less where rolfy spends his time hiding from all the tears/the faulse-god/wiTH FEET OF CLAY/USED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE GO AWAY.

but now/cannot
i suggest that google-eyED bbc/CLOWN/HIs parter in crime coached ol roffle harras..but the punitive instincts of man/who abused/even the dead/cripple-insane/are n0thing to the punitive pu..andrgatives he gets pumped into him non stop in hell

i dont want any-of it/by tying my wagon to his fate
many men hear the cry/but few refuse the call..
if any young girl/is on stage/the old guy/gal.
needs it/tHEIR NEEDS REVEAL/WHY BOTHER TRYING TO C0NCEAL

THIS OBSESSING OF CHILDREN..runs deep
[LIKE HAIRLESS...BITS/that look like innocent kids
there is no justification for seeking the [pleasure from innocenits their child-hood we despoilt..kids dont even get into it/he wont get the time/HIS BETRAYAL/HAS EARNED

to whom much was given
much better was only to be expected.
yes they creep/into our heart/but onlyto break-it/by taking/our kids;innocence/

unless it happens/to-you[it did/my uncle\IT WAS JUST FONDLING/MUTUAL MASTERBATION[i say just/because iT MADE ME THE WANKlER I NOW AM[it forces adult awareness/the need to be wary/but worse revealed/the potential/to unleash/the same beast[in me]

i cant hug kids without hearing the caution/adults touching kids is sick

a ex mate/once offerd sweeties/to my kid/for a kiss
i never saw him agaIN/teaching my daughter to sell kissing for sweets/is the first step.[when i se a/man/with a kid/in the park/the rush/of submerged emotion/near makes me sic*

hell