Rod Liddle

The Nigel Evans case proves that juries are smarter than our liberal elite

Ordinary people still put common sense and fairness ahead of crusading zeal – thank God

19 April 2014

9:00 AM

19 April 2014

9:00 AM

You may remember this little gem of a story from a month or so back. Justifiably worried at the ramping up of rhetoric by western politicians over the crisis in Ukraine, Blackpool ‘beauty technician’ Gemma Worrall took to a social media site to ask the — presumably rhetorical — question: ‘Why is our President Barraco Barner getting involved with Russia, scary.’ Why indeed, Gemma? The scorn and hilarity was of course immediately forthcoming at this fantastic level of pig ignorance, and lots of people, including me, wrote spiteful things about Gemma’s IQ level.

Gemma was indignant at being publicly reviled as the most stupid woman who has ever walked the earth and revealed to sniggering reporters that, in fact, she possessed 17 GCSEs. This should tell you more about the intellectual rigour required these days to acquire a GCSE than it tells you about Gemma, I think. Having seen some of the stuff my oldest son has had to revise for his GCSEs, I suspect that a block of Cathedral City cheddar cheese could manage at least a C grade in one of the sciences. These are not overly taxing exams — but I digress. Some people wondered, in mock astonishment, that human beings as thick and as badly informed as Gemma were allowed to vote and — worse, still worse — serve on juries. Grotesque levels of public stupidity, such as Gemma’s, are frequently cited as reasons for abandoning the jury system altogether, because the matters are far too complex for crassly ignorant northern halfwits to comprehend, still less adjudicate upon.

Sometimes I’m tempted to agree, such as when I’m stuck for half an hour behind some lard mountain who is unable to understand the simple instructions on a self-service ticket machine, and keeps jabbing away with a fat sausage finger at the wrong bloody button, a look of bemused incredulity on his dumb porky face. But the appalling case of Nigel Evans MP, and those of many others arraigned under the offices of the increasingly controversial Operation Yewtree, should swiftly disabuse us all of such a notion.


The lowbrow public may not know how to spell Barack Obama, or be entirely au fait with the name of the country of which he is leader. But like Gemma, they are worried about the hyperbole from our political elite over the Ukraine, and on an entirely different issue they are not prepared to simply swallow bundled charges of historical sexual abuse against famous or slightly famous people without asking questions. In other words, unlike the elite, they do not appear to have been distracted by a politically charged (on both issues) crusading zeal, but are guided instead by common sense and fairness. Perhaps this is because they are too thick to understand the bigger issues; that, I think, is what our liberal elite would tell you.

The former deputy speaker Nigel Evans, a charming, witty and good-natured man, was finally cleared last week of nine counts of sexual abuse of young men, including one charge of rape. Fighting the patently absurd case against him has cost him his job (with its extra salary), his entire life savings in legal fees (which will not be repaid, despite his total innocence) and 11 months of sheer, unmitigated torture. He is understandably bitter, furious that his case was prosecuted by the police with a ‘zeal’, as he put it; a zeal occasioned by a politically driven obsession, I would reckon. On the evening after he was cleared of all charges, the liberal elite’s favourite media conduit, Newsnight, interviewed one of Evans’s supposed victims, repeating all the charges. I hope Evans sues them.

It is not just Evans, of course. Past-it slebs including Jimmy Tarbuck, the actor Bill Roache, the comedian Jim Davidson and the soap star Michael Le Vell have either been recently acquitted of similar historical charges or have been told by the police that they will be left alone after many months of highly publicised allegations. The former disc jockey Dave Lee Travis was also cleared of 12 out of 14 charges, but has since been told that he will face another trial on the two charges where the jury could not agree, along with one further charge. Freddie Starr was arrested 18 months ago and then re-arrested three further times, placed on bail and still not charged. Whatever the outcome of his case, the way the police have conducted the process is hugely unfair, regardless of whether or not you found Freddie in his prime about as funny as gas gangrene. There are more potential trials in the pipeline, and we will have to see whether they fare any better.

Starr was arrested under Operation Yewtree, which was set up in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal and seems all too credulous about any and all claims made about famous individuals, regardless of whether they happened 20 years ago and the facts of each specific claim. The common sense, the rigour, has long since departed.

In the case of Evans (not a Yewtree case), incidentally, the jury heard that three of his alleged victims did not themselves believe that they had been the victim of any crime whatsoever. And so the jury did what any sensible jury would do and acquitted the politician. But that is still not good enough for the elite, which insists that those who feel Yewtree might have overstepped its limits and that at least some of these elderly famous people may be having their lives ruined for no good reason are simply ‘abuse deniers’. This PC mantra and the resulting conclusion that bringing these ancient cases of abuse against old men is necessarily in the public interest seems to have been swallowed whole by the Crown Prosecution Service and Director of Public Prosecutions.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • Hippograd

    The former deputy speaker Nigel Evans, a charming, witty and
    good-natured man, was finally cleared last week of nine counts of sexual
    abuse of young men, including one charge of rape. Fighting the patently
    absurd case against him has cost him his job (with its extra salary),
    his entire life savings in legal fees (which will not be repaid, despite
    his total innocence) and 11 months of sheer, unmitigated torture.

    Evans is a New Tory, so he’s fully in favour of cultural Marxism and the use of state power to assist the oppressed against the Evil White Male. He can hardly complain when cultural Marxism bites him on the backside. When he calls for the cancelling of all state funding for “equality” organizations, the repeal of all “hate crime” legislation and an immediate end to immigration from the Third World, I’ll sympathize. Till then: welcome to Marxist Britain, Nigel. And carry on grovelling before CFI (I’m sure he and other New Tories will not need that de-acronymizing).

    • Kaine

      “Cultural Marxist” apparently being code for not hating people with a bit more melanin, a sexual preference different to yours or a uterus.

      This sort of victimhood psychosis would be interesting if it wasn’t just a repackaging of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion nonsense.

      • vieuxceps2

        “Cultural Marxist” being a code for hating people who lack melanin.a sexual preference other than nature intended and people with a penis.
        This sort of victimhood psychosis would be interesting if it wasn’t just a repackaging of the Gramsci Frankfurt School of thought.

      • Hippograd

        “Cultural Marxist” apparently being code for not hating people with a bit more melanin, a sexual preference different to yours or a uterus.

        That’s exactly it. One reason I object so strongly to mass immigration from melanin-enriched nations such as Somalia and Jamaica is that I can’t bear the thought of all those new feminists and gay-rights activists overturning the white racist hegemony in the UK and ushering in a just, equal, wombyn-and-gay-friendly society like the ones so famously found in Somalia and Jamaica. And Pakistan. And Iraq. And the Congo. And Equatorial Guinea. Etc.

        IOW, I dread the thought of Guardian-readers such as yourself adding to the triumphs of feminism and LGBT rights already visible in London and other centres of vibrancy:

        Female rights Black stylee

        Gay rights Muslim stylee

        • Kaine

          I don’t read the Guardian. It’s a liberal paper and I’m not a liberal.

          But in your rush you don’t even realise you’ve contradicted yourself. So the aim of this ‘conspiracy’ is to demolish the old racist, homophobic, misogynistic order which worshipped an Abrahamic cult, and… Er…. replace it with another racist, homophobic, misogynistic order which worships a slightly different Abrahamic cult, but where the population is a bit swarthier.

          For this the (overwhelmingly male and pale) ‘Cultural Marxists’ have laboured for 150 years across all societies. Doubtless only meeting to plot, worship Moloch and play bingo.

          Seriously, at least David Icke’s Interdimensional Space Lizards are interesting.

          • Hippograd

            But in your rush you don’t even realise you’ve contradicted yourself. So the aim of this ‘conspiracy’ is to demolish the old racist, homophobic, misogynistic order which worshipped an Abrahamic cult, and… Er…. replace it with another racist, homophobic, misogynistic order which worships a slightly different Abrahamic cult, but where the population is a bit swarthier.

            Is English your mother-tongue? Either way, you seem to have missed something.

            I don’t read the Guardian. It’s a liberal paper and I’m not a liberal.

            Compare and contrast:

            “Nature” has no problem with homosexuality, as can been seen by its prevalence throughout the natural world, and the ubiquitous bisexuality of our closest relatives the Bonobos. — Words of wisdom from a non-liberal

            Does homosexuality occur in the rest of the animal kingdom? Fiona Lamb, St Catharines Canada. It does! Almost every species of animals has at least some members who mate with the same sex. Anna, USA. Homosexuality is particularly prevalent in our closest animal relative, the bonobo or pygmy chimpanzee. If you’re a bigot looking for an unnatural sexual practice to rail against, try monogamy – it’s OK for many birds but very few mammals do it. (Light the touchpaper and stand back for reactions to this…) Simon Blake, Shrewsbury England. Bruce Bagemihl’s book “Biological Exuberance” shows that homosexual behaviour is found in an enormous variety of animal species. Colin Rosenthal, Oslo Norway — Words of wisdom from… Guardian-readers

            “Nature” has no problem with homosexuality, as can been seen by its prevalence throughout the natural world…

            What about murder? Rape? Cancer? Death by pathogen? Parasitic infection? Starvation? I presume that you’ve no objection to experiencing any of those things, seeing as how “Nature” has no problem with them, as can be seen etc. And I’m puzzled that you use the argument from nature while sneer-quoting the very concept. But then I’m not a liberal and I have a problem with self-contradiction.

            Seriously, at least David Icke’s Interdimensional Space Lizards are interesting.

            Another oh-so-familiar “trope” of liberals: don’t address the ideas, address the psychology of the individual espousing the ideas. The liberal community — of which, despite your denials, you are clearly a dedicated member — also includes the neo-conservatives. E.g., Mark Steyn fans. Ring any bells?

          • Kaine

            Tell me the words you find difficult and I’ll help you.

            So because the Guardian reports a fact everyone else who cites that fact must be a Guardian reader? I learned about bonobos from reading the popular science literature.

            Again, I’m not a liberal, I’m a socialist. No, they are not the same thing, if you think they are please consult a dictionary (unless the OED people are also in on it of course).

            The point about nature was in direct response to vieuxceps2’s comment saying that homosexuality is against nature, which it evidently isn’t. He was the one lionising nature, not I. Address your response to him.

            I’ve addressed your ‘ideas’, they’re standard Stormfront nonsense, without any novelty with which one might engage.

          • Hippograd

            Again, I’m not a liberal, I’m a socialist.

            My apologies. And thanks for the laugh.

            So because the Guardian reports a fact everyone else who cites that fact
            must be a Guardian reader?

            They weren’t “facts”, they were opinions. And they were identical to your opinions. Or rather, the liberal hive-mind’s opinions.

            I learned about bonobos from reading the
            popular science literature.

            And the conclusions you drew from your reading were standard-issue Guardianista. But you’re not a liberal, you’re a socialist. (N.B. When I say “you drew” I mean “had dictated to you by the hive-mind”.)

            I’ve addressed your ‘ideas’, they’re standard Stormfront nonsense, without any novelty with which one might engage.

            IOW, you haven’t “addressed” my ideas. But don’t worry: I’m perfectly used to siberals/locialists such as yourself behaving like that. Those who can, do. Those who can’t, ad hom. Though they prefer to censor and imprison. Another curious coincidence between the views of liberals and “socialists”. But then again: both groups descend directly from Christianity and Judaism.

  • Shorne

    Err…well I wouldn’t necessarily agree with the title of this piece, having spent 30 years working in the Criminal Justice system I have had to hang around in a lot of Courts. I recall seeing and hearing a man I recognised from a Jury speaking to somebody in a Crown Court lobby and heard this “Well none of us thought he did it but we found him guilty as he must have done something of the Police wouldn’t have arrested him.”

    • sarah_13

      This is absolutely the crux of all of this. Many juries do think that because the police have brought the charges there must be something in them. The idea that alleged victims must automatically be believed as if their statements do not have to be tested must explained by the police and the cps. Alleged victims must be heard and treated with the same respect as alleged defendants but beyond that it is for the CPS to decided the real prospects of a successful prosecution on the facts, not on their desire to prosecute because of an institutional failure to deal with predatory peadophiles historically.

      Given your work in the criminal justice system I wonder can you help me as I would like to know how the police are able to arrest people and grant them almost indefinite bail before they are charged? This seems to me the opposite of what we can expect as citizens, i.e. that we are arrested and charged within a reasonable timeframe. The police seem to arrest, bail, advertise for other victims, trawl for further evidence on the basis that the defendant IS guilty and has committed a crime, whether or not they can identify that crime yet or not! They seem to set dates for these people, then they extend the bail time further apparently on the basis that its only a matter of time before they get evidence or a can indicate a “pattern of behaviour”. As a woman I am very concerned with sexual crimes but as a human being and a citizen of the UK I find this judgmental and political motivated approach by the police very worrying.

      • Shorne

        I am open to correction on this but I think the answer to your question could be found by looking into the workings of the Crown Prosecution Service as much as the Police. Do not forget that, despite the erosion of Legal Aid by this government an accused person can have a lawyer working on his her/behalf.
        Another situation I often observed was, following a defendant being acquitted, the Police Officers in the case would be almost yelling at the CPS lawyers something like “We must be able to get him/her for something!…I nicked him!”

        • Gwangi

          Yes, that is precisely the way it works. Most people arrested have been arrested before, and most of the crime in the UK is committed by the same small percentage of people.
          However, the sorts of ‘crimes’ Evans got charged with – after the police had finished ‘trawling’ and offering ‘victims’ the £52000 compensation they could expect after a guilty verdict

          • Shorne

            So what were you charged with then?

          • Gwangi

            Not me, but an innocent man I know, arrested for sending two – yep, two – emails to someone. Apparently that is harassment these days – according to a 1997 introduced to stop REAL harassment, not email squabbles. The law is being deliberately misused by police to boost arrest stats. The law is outdated and wrong.
            Why shouldn’t anyone email or Tweet anything they like? If you don’t like it, you can always block. But these days many women in particular deliberately provoke their ex into emailing then play the victim and call police – when in fact their ex is the victim of a nasty vengeful woman. The pc police are keen to always arrest men and defend women because like the whole criminal justice system they are stuck in some backwards chivalric mindset – which is why more men get arrested and charged then women, and why if a mother wants to she can prevent a child’s father from ever seeing them again. A

          • Shorne

            “An innocent man I know” …yeah right.

          • cremaster

            Somebody who doesn’t work for the police …yeah right.

          • Shorne

            If you mean me I retired in 2010 after 30 years as a Probation Officer and for the first 8 years, before CAFCASS was set up I had a parallel role as a Family Court Welfare Officer. Both of these jobs involved listening to endless bullsh*t.

          • Gwangi

            Your posts here suggest you must have been one crappy and corrupt probation officer. No doubt a lot of the BS you listened to was your own. No doubt you enjoyed being part of a misandrist legal system that tore children away from their blood fathers as well. You are part of the problem.

          • Shorne

            Your post reminds me of the responses I used to get from people (men and women) who couldn’t get their own way, it never bothered me then and doesn’t now. I don’t know if I was a crappy PO, I’ll have to ask former colleagues. Your readiness to resort to describing me as ‘corrupt’ without a scrap of evidence strengthens my belief that you are not talking about other people. Nice to see the word misandrist being used though. It pays to increase your word power as they used to say in the Reader’s Digest.

          • Gwangi

            Your post reminds me of witch trials – whenever anyone denies wrongdoing you take that of evidence that they did wrong. THAT is corrupt.

            Your insinuation that I must have committed a crime because I am discussing one here is typical of the rude, arrogant, dishonest and corrupt behaviour of the police and their lackeys.

            Can’t you see the pigs are arresting people for silly online stuff and misusing harassment and malicious communications laws in order to boost their arrest stats now that crime is falling (NOT being of anything they have done though)?
            Now…
            Sod off copper.

          • Shorne

            Thanks for proving my point again.

          • Gwangi

            Yes indeed. A mate who emailed his ex twice – she tricked him into emailing by not contacting him, or responding to his emails. He is in a professional job and now has a caution for harassment. Why?
            Two emails got him arrested for harassment because his evil ex decided – as a malicious devious nasty piece of work – to call the police, claim (like butter wouldn’t melt) that she was ‘alarmed and distressed’ and misuse legislation meant to stop REAL crimes by REAL stalkers.
            I know of another case where a husband and wife each sent an email to a loud and abusive neighbour. That’s enough for an arrest and they too were charged with harassment and got cautions.
            A silly law and one used by 1) women to get revenge on their exes; 2) police wanting to boost their arrest stats.
            6000 arrests per year under that absurd law; it was introduced in 1997 to stop REAL stalkers and it was thought 100-200 people per year would be arrested; it is now being used as a tool of revenge by vengeful women against men mostly.
            More pointless arrests under the malicious communications act for people stating opinions on Facebook and Twitter.
            Is this really what we pay taxes to our police for? They love these cases because they can go in, arrest someone, take their computer with evidence and so no hard work from them involved – so they get more time to eat cakes and natter and get paid for it.
            The law is being abused. No-one should be arrested for sending emails or posting tweets or messages on Facebook. WHY? BECAUSE YOU CAN BLOCK people on there – but it’s funny, all these ‘alarmed and distressed’ women who are using this law to get revenge on their former partners seem unable to do that.

    • cremaster

      That’s how it used to be, when the police represented the public, or the public assumed they did.

      Then Tony Blair changed everything.

      • Shorne

        Err…I’m not saying you’re wrong but can you expand on this view?

  • rabbitaway

    Yewtree was not ‘set up in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal’, it IS the Jimmy Savile scandal. He was tried in absentia and found guilty.Tthe soon to be disbanded association of Police Chiefs and the CPS should hold their heads in shame. Justice For Jimmy Savile and all other Falsely accused persons. Look for me and my blog which provides a link to others who are fighting for Justice and remember, the Justice system is your Justice system not theirs ! Happy Easter everyone !

  • jesseventura2

    Evans came across as a pervert and is certainly likely to continue as one.

    • Gwangi

      Maybe you think that, but why should his private life have been exposed in that way?
      This proves that the lives of innocent men are being ruined EVEN IF they are found not guilty in such trials – which are mostly the result of our idiot corrupt police being over the top and trying to get higher arrest stats by trawling and offering compo to ‘victims’.
      That’s why we need FULL anonymity for all who are arrested and charged with such crimes. If it were mostly women whose lives were ruined, you do know the usual feminists suspects would support that, don’t you? As it’s mostly men, feminists couldn’t give two hoots how many innocent men they destroy.

  • jesseventura2

    There are no jury trials in the third world and how much longer can Britain hold off third world status with the influx from the third world?
    VOTE UKIP GET THEM BACK HOME TO THE HELL HOLES THEY CREATED.

    • Kaine

      Most of these countries were ruled by Europeans within living memory. I’m not sure to what extent a peasant lad in Waziristan can be said to have ‘created’ the political and economic instability in the region he lives in.

      • cremaster

        But you approve of female circumcision, right?

        • Kaine

          No, terrible practice, those who mutilate children should be locked up for a very, very long time regardless of what their imaginary friend said.

          • Gwangi

            Mostly it’s the older women in these ‘communities’ who force girls to get mutilated. Would you arrest them too? Or do they get one of the famous ‘get out of jail free’ cards you feminists flash whenever women commit crimes? Women are usually the motivation behind male violence too and terrorism – the men may do it, but the muscle that moves the finger that pulls the trigger is female.

          • Kaine

            You think that men are too stupid to have their own free will and be responsible for their own actions, and you’re accusing other people of misandry?

  • Agrippina

    Mr Evans instructed his own counsel and he was entitled to apply for legal aid, he chose not too.

    Perhaps he needs to cut down on his drinking and stop putting his hand down men’s trousers.

    • Gwangi

      Does that apply to women too? Should all women who get drunk and touch young men get arrested – or just men who do that? Are you a feminist? You seem smug, inconsistent and hypocritical enough to be a leading voice.

      • Kaine

        If you were assaulted report it. If you feel uncomfortable speaking to a male police officer who you think will judge you ask to speak to an officer with training in sexual assault cases.

        • Gwangi

          But as there is horrible abuse going on, the police should not rely on anyone reporting it. They should take action anyway. How about we have special DH squads (drunken hussy squads) to arrest and take away in police vans all the female abusers who grope and grab men’s nether regions whilst drunk on the town every weekend?
          Or don’t you want gender equality when it doesn’t suit your misandrist agenda eh? Hypocrite.
          By the way, almosyt half of domestic violence is also done by women – though you wouldn’t know it from our misandrist femi-media – and most violence and abuse against children is also done by women. Most babies and children who are killed are also killed by women. Men are gentle teddy bears compared to some women – so why do feminists focus their concerns of abuse against men when women are the main perpetrators?

          • Kaine

            You do realise the notion that men can’t be abused because they are all powerful and emotionally dead while women are weak little flowers is a patriarchal concept, and the opposite of a feminist one?

          • cartimandua

            But the notion that men get regularly groped by women is absurd unless the man is a stripper.

          • Kaine

            The thing is even if his version of events were true, he’s blaming entirely the wrong set of people for it.

          • Gwangi

            So blaming those who are the abusers is wrong is it if they are women? Hypocrite.

          • Kaine

            You blamed feminists for the idea that a man abused by a woman would not be believed by police, when in fact that’s the exact opposite of reality. The societal biases that would mean a man faces scorn for raising such a complaint are precisely what feminism seeks to overturn.

          • Gwangi

            So blaming those who are the abusers is wrong is it if they are women? Hypocrite.

          • Gwangi

            Visit a town centre or nigh club on a Friday night.
            The thing is, you have been led like a sheep by feminist manhaters who want all men who dare to exhibit ordinary human behaviour to be arrested.
            So, OK – but let’s be consistent. If women touch men they too should be arrested – and if a woman ever slaps a man she should be arrested for assault too. A man would be – so why not a woman? Or are you using different rules of behaviour depending on gender? There’s a word for that, you know. Begins with S and ends in -ism. Hypocrite.

          • Gwangi

            Visit a town centre or nigh club on a Friday night.
            The thing is, you have been led like a sheep by feminist manhaters who want all men who dare to exhibit ordinary human behaviour to be arrested.
            So, OK – but let’s be consistent. If women touch men they too should be arrested – and if a woman ever slaps a man she should be arrested for assault too. A man would be – so why not a woman? Or are you using different rules of behaviour depending on gender? There’s a word for that, you know. Begins with S and ends in -ism. Hypocrite.

      • cartimandua

        generally speaking males are larger than females. So no one buys it that a larger sober bloke cannot move away from a woman he wishes to avoid. That is what many women have to do a lot of days on the tube.

        • Gwangi

          Men larger than women? Well, British women are the fattest in Europe so weigh roughly the same as men these days.
          Stop in infantilising women – and grow up. Men act as grown ups so maybe equality demands that women at least try not to behave live 5 year olds and burst into tears at the slightest thing.
          So on the tube men may touch you. Big deal. Move away. As I move away from or avoid areas where muggers roam. Just grow up, love, and stop wasting police time with your feminist non-crimes.

          • cartimandua

            It was you complaining that men were “touched up” by women. And now you complain that such victims are cry babies? If women can “move away” so can men but no one can if they are hit on by a superior.
            That is why abuses in offices are off the charts in patriarchal societies .

          • Gwangi

            No, I am asking for equal treatment of men and women – the opposite of what feministas want, in other words.
            Men do not complain if they are hurt, abused, suffering – they tend to soldier on, not burst into tears and play the victim as so many vengeful and ambitious compo-hungry women do. That does not mean we should not arrest their abusers.

            The whole concept of ‘patriarchal’ society is a myth fabricated to validate an imagined victimhood for women. It just won’t wash. The very idea that a rich privileged woman is somehow disadvantaged compared to most men is laughable – like feminists themselves then actually.

            But just think, if a man touches a woman’s bottom and she turned round and slaps him, he may get arrested for assault.

            If a woman gropes a man’s bottom and he turns around and slaps her, then he may get arrested for assault.

            Equality? Don’t make me laugh. Feminists have never ever wanted gender equality – gender inequality that disadvantages all men, in revenge for all the imagined crimes against women, yes. But equality? Nah!

          • cartimandua

            You seem rather confused. Not many men get groped by women.
            No one has the right to grope anyone else.
            There certainly are inequalities even in the UK where we rank 18th for women in work in the OECD.

          • Gwangi

            ‘Not many men get groped by women. ‘
            Oh dear. Ever been a young male barman then? You ignorant twerp. Plenty of men get groped by women and lots of butch women grope pretty young fems too.
            There are plenty of inequalities for men in our society – but they don’t have a massive self-serving industry to serve them, as women do with feminism. Most discrimination against women is fabricated by the feminist industry because of course it serves their purpose of self-preservation to exaggerate discrimination against women (e.g. the whole gender pay gap scam – there is nNO unfair gender pay gap at all!)

          • Kaine

            Wait, the fact that men in our society feel unable to express and deal with their emotional trauma is something you admire?

            Misandrist prick.

  • greggf

    “……. a zeal occasioned by a politically driven obsession, I would reckon.”

    And, arguably this same elite have just written collectively to the Daily Telegraph complaining that the PM shouldn’t do God because it upsets certain others!
    There’s no keeping them down…..

  • Gwangi

    Nigel Evans – like so many – is a victim of the pc police, desperate to become the ‘vice and virtue’ police des nos jours, desperate to gain credibility with the public and especially the loud demanding ‘liberal’ feminist elite, desperate to show they are not the useless and incompetent. heavy handed thickos that we all know them to be.

    Many men have been victims of this witch hunt – and all are innocent. They are guilty of ordinary human behaviour – coming on to someone, touching a knee in 1973, that sort of thing which apparently, as interpreted by Detective Inspectress Hairy Lip and Chief Constable Sappho of Scotland Yard, is criminal. It is not. And why shouldn’t a rich and famous person use their attributes to hook up with pretty young things? As Steve Coogan says in The Trip when told he used his fame to get off with girls: ‘So – girls want to get off with you because you are young and good-looking’ so where’s the difference? We all use what we have.

    Funny, though – no women who leer and grope young men every single weekend in the UK ever get arrested. Must be because men enjoy being abused and used. Bless.

    Legal aid? Well, let’s start with full anonymity for all men accused of anything like this. It has to be an exception because even an accusation of this stuff can ruin a man’s life, even if he is found not guilty – because people say ‘oh well there’s no smoke without fire’. Let’s then introduce full equality so all females who have ever come on to or touched a man get arrested too.

    Finally, full legal aid in these cases should be automatic AND retrospective. Perhaps they can introduce a new tax for feminasties to pay for it eh? For it is they whose fabricated abuse and livid sense of vengeance causes the thicko police to go round arresting any man who has ever used his member for the purpose intended.

    • Kaine

      So mummy never got you that bike for Christmas?

      • cremaster

        I see no evidence of that, but I think turds like you would despise women for caring for their children.

        • Kaine

          Now don’t be mean darling. X

      • Gwangi

        Sorry, but are you mental?

        • Kaine

          Deep emotional problems with women tend to stem from issues with the first woman in your life. Have you considered therapy?

          • Gwangi

            Yes you are.

          • Gwangi

            And what about the deep emotional problems with men constantly exhibited by feminists? Manhating mess-ups, the lot of em. Sad really.
            Happily, most women are normal and not manhating feministas – in fact most women hate feminists, and see them as comic hairy-lipped saddos.

    • cartimandua

      You are sadly almost funny. It is not “normal human behaviour” to assault women. That is not flirting or courting.
      And the reason why those accused of sexual crimes are named is because then other victims come forward.
      It is so very difficult to prove rape.
      NE could have had legal aid. He chose not to use it.
      One is almost beginning to think you have indeed been accused of rape because of appalling social skills. You seem to think groping women you do not know is “normal”.

      • Gwangi

        ‘Assault’? Well sorry, but I know what I think of of an assault and the touching of a knee is not it.
        Your victimhood is learnt at the knee of old manhating harridens who now want to wreak revenge against the whole male species via our silly legal system and arrest-hungry plods.
        It is difficult to prove raype for VERY good reasons – it is all about impressions and alcohol is usually involved. The conviction rate is not ‘too low’ at all. It is based on which cases have enough evidence.
        Anyone accused of crimes like this – especially in our hysterical arrest-happy age – MUST have anonymity. Alleged victims of it do – even if they are then proven to be barefaced liars. I would also like to see stiff penalties and long prison sentences for all who make false accusations. And many do.
        And now you accuse me of being a raypist, You sick and disgusting twerp!

  • cartimandua

    Or B as it is virtually impossible to convict for the rape of a woman….. There is no doubt whatsoever that NE behaved badly and abused his position to seduce.
    Since the seduction was of people who are younger and more junior this is at least an abuse of power.
    Apparently 1 third of young people working in Westminster are “hit on” by someone.
    There is a lot of entitlement and abuse of power going on.
    NE probably behaved pretty much like a great many others. That is nothing at all to be proud about and perhaps others who could not cast a stone could chip in for his legal bills.

  • cremaster

    I hope you’ve never spoken to Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Rod. She might suddenly take it into her head that you did something awful to her, and you know how seriously the authorities take everything she says.

    What’s all this nastiness about Gemma? At least she can do something for a living, unlike the useless “Barraco Barner”.

  • mikewaller

    Up to a point Lord Copper. Remember it was a malign combination of the establishment’s desire for some kind of a result plus the good old British jury system that had the Irish American, William Joyce, hanged for treason, numerous Irish found guilty basically for being just that, the Yorkshire Ripper treated as fit to plead when, in fact, he was a lunatic etc. etc. Sometimes commonsense shines through, sometimes it doesn’t. Before a vindictive judicial system put the boot in, the rather wonderful “Rough Justice” programme did not seem to find any shortage of jury convictions that had gone very badly awry. I am not saying that it should be replaced, but as with so many other things, Churchill’s dictum about democracy applies, for all its limitations, the alternatives are so much worse.

    • cartimandua

      William Joyce was Lord Haw Haw. He well deserved hanging.

  • cartimandua

    Gwangi
    If you are assaulted at work you could make your workplace protect you better or (as no doubt you would tell a woman to do ) walk away and change your job.
    I kind of wish you would since you have such issues with women you are not going to be helpful in terms of keeping women in your bar safe at all.
    Change your job.

    • Gwangi

      Go away, hypocrite. Like all feminists you are in denial that men ever suffer abuse or discrimination – and do not care when they do. Proving that what you want is NOT gender equality at all – it is gender inequality on your terms.

      • cartimandua

        You clearly dislike women and are not going to help anyone male or female be “safer” at your place of work. You should consider changing your job.
        1 /3rd of young people of both sexes in Westminster are “hit on” by someone. Bars are clearly not the only places where people considered to have less power have difficulty.

        • Gwangi

          No, you clearly dislike men.
          Me – I dislike feminist hypocrites.

          You should consider changing your job – you’re probably damaging whole generations of children in the one you are in. May I suggest doing your bit to better represent women in the sewerage industry? Surely as feminuts want 50% women in all the top jobs, they should campaign for socalled ‘equal representation’ in the bottom ones too?

          So people get hit on – so what? That is life. Grow up, stop blubbing like a baby and just say no. That is what I mean by the infantilising of women by feminists – and that, love, is misogyny and you like all feminists are a misogynist. Funny though – many women know they’re getting old and ugly when they no longer get hit on – and hate the lack of attention. I suppose that’s the fault of men too…

          And women do NOT have less power than men at all – that is your fantasy, your fabricated victimhood. Sad really. The most powerless people in the UK are working class white men.
          BTW it was SO funny to see Mastermind yesterday – 6 finalists – all white men. Now, if you or the femiblob at the BBC had been selecting candidates according to diversity dodginess, there would have been 3 women at least and 2 of the men would have been black or Asian. But when merit and merit alone decides the winners are all white men. Ha!

Close