Page 1 of 1
Chris Langham -----
Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:13 pm
by J.R.
Will it be
'Guilty', or
'Not Guilty' 
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:02 am
by Great Plum
As ever, Fiona knows the answer...
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:55 am
by midget
In today's climate I think he will be found guilty, whether he is or not.
Maggie
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:06 pm
by Mid A 15
midget wrote:In today's climate I think he will be found guilty, whether he is or not.
Maggie
I think you're right.
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:13 pm
by J.R.
Just read the newspaper reports of his sons giving evidence.
I think today's the day by the look of it !
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:44 pm
by sejintenej
Not having followed the trial in the closest detail I would have to examine all the evidence before consulting with Fiona
Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:21 am
by marty
Guilty as charged, m'lud. Fiona wouldn't approve of his behaviour.
Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 2:45 pm
by J.R.
Guilty of downloading....
NOT guilty of any offence against a specific young person.
Given that, I am somewhat surprised he has been remanded in custody as I doubt he poses a threat to anyone before sentence.
Certain judges are renowned for granting bail to rapists, (quite wrongly in my view.)
Could this be because of his fame ?
Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:00 am
by Great Plum
Possibly, or maybe it was the brand of child pornography he was looking at was so repellant that the judge had no choice to remand him due to the seriousness of its nature...
Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:24 am
by englishangel
I know one of the jurors had to leave the court at one point she was so upset by the images.
Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:37 pm
by J.R.
I now agree, given that I have just leant from a 'friend' of the exact content of the photographs and video clips.
Apparently, under the present tariff, the MAXIMUM sentence would be 10 years. A legal eagle expert mate of mine reckons he'll get between 5 and 7 ! Though in this present namby-pamby nanny-state of ours.......