Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • General Discussion
  • Off Topic Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Kevin Webster (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter Nick
  • Start date Feb 15, 2013
Forums New posts

Nick

Administrator
  • Feb 15, 2013
  • #1
Doesnt look too good for him at the minute. Charges against him dropped last time but then more evidence found so he is charged again.

Sex with a child is one of the charges!
 

deanocity3

New Member
  • Feb 15, 2013
  • #2
just read this 19 charges all in
 

LastGarrison

Well-Known Member
  • Feb 15, 2013
  • #3
Hang the c**t.
 

The Reverend Skyblue

Well-Known Member
  • Feb 15, 2013
  • #4
I am not keen when everything about the charges are released before it goes to court, just incase they are not true, much like that Lord McAlpine in the Jimmy Saville case, but if true i agree with LastGarrison's punishment.

The Rev
 

kg82

Well-Known Member
  • Feb 15, 2013
  • #5
I agree rev. Don't see how he can get a fair trial. Like you say, I agree with LG if it's true. It was like that girl who was murdered a couple years ago just before Christmas. The Sun ran a story laying into the landlord of her flat, basically said he was guilty. I said at the time to my girlfriend it was wrong, and there was something strange about the story. Turned out it was actually her dutch boyfriend.
 

skybluejelly

Well-Known Member
  • Feb 16, 2013
  • #6
Well I went to Kevin Webster for a mot.. But he said he had a 13 year old escort to sort out first
 

speedie87

Well-Known Member
  • Feb 16, 2013
  • #7
kg82 said:
I agree rev. Don't see how he can get a fair trial. Like you say, I agree with LG if it's true. It was like that girl who was murdered a couple years ago just before Christmas. The Sun ran a story laying into the landlord of her flat, basically said he was guilty. I said at the time to my girlfriend it was wrong, and there was something strange about the story. Turned out it was actually her dutch boyfriend.
Click to expand...

Was the Dutch neighbour. The boyfriend had nothing to do with it.
 

kg82

Well-Known Member
  • Feb 17, 2013
  • #8
speedie87 said:
Was the Dutch neighbour. The boyfriend had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

That's right. Knew it was the dutch bloke anyway!
 

skybluejelly

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #9
found innocent of all charges
 
A

Ashdown1

New Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #10
Just shows how the media can have you hung before tried. There will always now be doubt in some peoples mind whatever the verdict which I suppose isn't fair. It has come out though that he's been a complete cheat to his wife who was suffering with breast cancer. As someone said though a weak and stupid idiot but maybe not a child rapist. Question is why was he accused and what happens to the accuser and her mother? Perjury? Surely if it was all lies there has to be some outcome of that?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #11
Ashdown1 said:
Just shows how the media can have you hung before tried. There will always now be doubt in some peoples mind whatever the verdict which I suppose isn't fair. It has come out though that he's been a complete cheat to his wife who was suffering with breast cancer. As someone said though a weak and stupid idiot but maybe not a child rapist. Question is why was he accused and what happens to the accuser and her mother? Perjury? Surely if it was all lies there has to be some outcome of that?
Click to expand...

Nothing happens to them. The trial was a joke how the CPS ever agreed its go ahead ill never know.
 
A

Ashdown1

New Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #12
They threw it out once before and there was still actually no real evidence at all with this trial. Probably another case of lawyers/administrators and all the other useless hangers on in life seeing a chance of a fat pay day once again !
 

WONDERLAMPS

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #13
So his acting career has been tarnished by some attention seeking scum... who's next???
 

LastGarrison

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #14
In hindsight, I was maybe a tad harsh on the fella.
 

Nick

Administrator
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #15
So the girl should be done as well as the family surely?
 
R

RedSalmon

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #16
Agree his reputation has been dragged through the mud unfairly.

Was always lead to believe that the CPS only ever took a case to court if they were more than 60% sure of getting a conviction.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #17
Nick said:
So the girl should be done as well as the family surely?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure she was granted lifetime immunity as part of the process.

Looked a very odd decision to prosecute from what has been allowed for public consumption.
 

deanocity3

New Member
  • Sep 10, 2013
  • #18
there was no evidence at all against him,no dna,nothing,just her word against his.
and how on earth she can not be named is beyond me as she is now an adult.
 

skyblueprincess

New Member
  • Sep 11, 2013
  • #19
Yet another victim in the current witch hunt of Celebrities.
I do however find it funny it was said the alleged victim had nothing to gain by quite literally destroying the life of an innocent man." Really?
Would she not have followed a guilty verdict with a claim for compensation?
Of course she would have.
And who would she have used to fight for that claim?
 
N

njdlawyer

New Member
  • Sep 11, 2013
  • #20
Grendel said:
I'm pretty sure she was granted lifetime immunity as part of the process.
Click to expand...

Not for the first time on this site you make a confident assertion that is utter nonsense

Complainants do not need and do not get "lifetime immunity" - something which does not exist anyway

No-one in this country can be convicted for any offence unless a jury is sure that they are guilty. May be guilty, might be guilty, possibly guilty or even probably guilty are not enough. If therefore a complainant in a case that resulted in acquittal was prosecuted for perjury and if their jury thought that there was a possibility that they might be telling the truth then they too would be acquitted. Unless new evidence had come to light to prove that they were lying that would almost always be the case. Besides no-one would ever make a complaint if they thought that they themselves would be prosecuted if there was no conviction

Its the same principle that ensures that convicted defendants are not themselves subsequently prosecuted for perjury if they lose their trial

People really should avoid passing off ill-informed opinion as fact on this and any other thread
 

LastGarrison

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 11, 2013
  • #21
njdlawyer said:
Not for the first time on this site you make a confident assertion that is utter nonsense

Complainants do not need and do not get "lifetime immunity" - something which does not exist anyway

No-one in this country can be convicted for any offence unless a jury is sure that they are guilty. May be guilty, might be guilty, possibly guilty or even probably guilty are not enough. If therefore a complainant in a case that resulted in acquittal was prosecuted for perjury and if their jury thought that there was a possibility that they might be telling the truth then they too would be acquitted. Unless new evidence had come to light to prove that they were lying that would almost always be the case. Besides no-one would ever make a complaint if they thought that they themselves would be prosecuted if there was no conviction

Its the same principle that ensures that convicted defendants are not themselves subsequently prosecuted for perjury if they lose their trial

People really should avoid passing off ill-informed opinion as fact on this and any other thread
Click to expand...

So in your professional opinion what should happen in cases like this? Surely there must be a way of keeping the defendants name out of the press as this may well have ruined his career.

It does seem grossly unfair if he was innocent of all charges that he is the only one possibly tainted by all of this.
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 13, 2013
  • #22
Have to admit I had no idea who 'Kevin Webster' was and wondered which team he played for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • General Discussion
  • Off Topic Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?