Search This Blog

Saturday, 9 July 2011

"Two Young Jersey Slut's 'ENTRAP' Heartbroken Fool Into Paedophilia Charge"

I was going to write reams on this story but have decided to see what the readers think first.

I must comment on the 'Jersey Evening Post' headline though....Same old shyte we have come to expect from the Child Abuse Protectors up at Five Oaks....though they attempt through this story, to portray themselves as Against Child Abuse

"SEX ATTACK"???

What "SEX ATTACK" is it exactly, that the JEP are ranting about?
One of their own member's of staff knows all about "SEX ATTACK'S" and what they entail, why is that particular rapist twat not correcting the printing team on their erroneous mistake???

One can only hope that Facebook sue the arse off the
Jersey Evening Pist.

HOW??? from even the most retarded perception imaginable, did a lonely bloke standing outside a pub smoking a ciggy, and two tarts happening upon him that night, and wanting to take advantage of his situation, and weakness,
HAVE ANYTHING REMOTELY TO DO WITH FACEBOOK???

"Jersey Evening Post"
Thoroughbred Scum



15 comments:

  1. Well it doesnt sound like a sex attack but lets be honest here the bloke in question should have known better.

    Another point to be made is where were the parents of both girls, it is disgusting to think that their parents dont give a fuck for their whereabouts.

    There are so many things to be said about this that I will take the fifth and also await more comments!

    ReplyDelete
  2. He had to go to jail, but did he know one was under age???

    Young girls look so much like 18, 19, 20 year olds these days, the make up, and the way they dress and act.

    Might just have looked guilty at the time because of the age difference (embarrassed), which is a whole different ball game to sexually engaging with a minor!

    And why were these two little whores encouraging him anyway?

    Sponging little bitches....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Adults have much greater responsibility for avoiding sexually inappropriate behavior than 14 year olds do, even if he is a somewhat sympathetic character in this, and probably wouldn't ever do that again.. As adults, we all have to make difficult choices when we are sexually tempted. He does not appear to be a paedophile but he made la choice to act on a strong but wrong attraction, so just the same as a paedophile should have to do, he should have made every possible effort to stop himself from making an illegal and immoral choice. He poor upbringing and sad behaviour does not negate his.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Absolutely, hence I stated he had to go to jail, but I think he has so been turned over by all concerned.

    And I know from personal experience that when your family just disappears out of your life, you will talk to anyone....

    Yes, I believe he erred in judgement, I do, but the circumstances are much to be taken into consideration here.

    And who would want to admit to being their parents?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is appropriate to your topic that the "News of the World" dies tomorrow since this newspaper has been cashing in on British sexual hypocrcisy for much of the past century.
    The pretence that children below the age of 16 do not have sex is a part of a great deceit and of course, by Jersey standards, many countries the world over countenance "paedophilia" by permitting heterosexual sex at 12, 13, 14, or 15.

    Many residents of Jersey originate in countries where sexual activity with or by a 14 years old girl is not illegal. What offence, if any, is committed if a male resident of Jersey has a sexual relationship in such a country, with a girl of less than 16, is not clear. Presumably if Mr Berloscuni ever visits Jersey, he will not be arrested for his sexual activities in Italy, where the age of consent is 14.

    There are current international concerns about access to pornograhy - especially on the internet, the wearing of so called "provocative" clothes by adult women and the selling of "sexy" clothes for children.
    Explicit sexual imagery , literature and entertainment, sexual exploitation and abuse of adults and children are all commonplace.

    Yet the whole subject area seems to be taboo so far as reasoned discussion is concerned in Jersey. Why should this be? Tom Gruchy asks

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks Tom, yes, I was alerted to a video yesterday from a anti child abuse supporter on facebook wherein they were teaching a 3 yr old to pole-dance....

    And sex education for 5 yr olds in british schools makes me wanna chuck!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Reference the advocate's comments: this is not as unusual or exceptional as you would think. I knew of a similar case well over 25 years ago in rural Yorkshire where my family then lived.

    This was before there was such a thing as a sex offenders' register, and the child in question (who had been abused prior to being put up for adoption, and had a personality disorder) had pestered her adoptive father to have sex. He eventually yielded.

    The courts were again lenient as far as they could go, but the man went to prison - simply because he knew that however much she pestered, to do what the girl asked was wrong. What happened to the girl after that I do not know.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ian, have a look at my document posts on the Chris support website. Theres stuff about ARK THERAPEUTICS and I think you ought to research the JOHN ADAMS ST GANG, that offer a concierge service of chimneysweeps, yet up above in the ARK dept they have snook their way in to the education of the nations children.

    Zoompad

    ReplyDelete
  9. The 16 year old girl may have been the ringleader in this and has no cause for complaint as she is 16 and could if she wished get married have sex and children without concent of anyone.

    However the fourteen year old is a child and should be recognised as that. She can not give concent to sex and no matter how much they pleaded it can and should never have been taken as concent.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Simple; he is guilty and FULLY responsible for ascertaining both the girls' ages. A 50 year old sexually attracted to a girl under the age of 16 is by definition a paedophile (ephebophile if you so wish). Make any excuse you wish for his behaviour but it is the behaviour of a paedophile and he deserves to be treated as such. Many paedophiles have the desires and do not act on them or never have the chance. Here is a paedophile who was given the opportunity to abuse a young girl and he did. He now has the taste for it and is a danger to ALL young Jersey girls when he is released. The public MUST keep an eye on him at all times and never let him near a child again. He will only spend 4 months in jail and thats if he hasn't been on remand already . I'm surprised as a paedophile hater Ian you are not crying out at the pathetic prison sentence for an exposed child molester - NO EXCUSES!!!

    Re above: If you are a Jersey Resident and commit an offence under the new Jersey Sexual Offences Law overseas you will be prosecuted as if it took place in Jersey - so no running off to Thailand to get your fix of young girls!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anon above (and I think I know who it is)

    "FIRST AND FOREMOST" I am not making any excuses for anyone but I know the "full facts" of this case now and matters are a million miles away from the crap the Jersey Evening Post put out.

    I understand and agree with a lot of your comment, but the guy was never a paedo with any tendancies toward under age girls. Furthermore, the assertion that they met and became friends on FaceBook, is also a pack of lies.

    As for him procuring her to commit an act of gross indecency? it was the other way around. She pushed and pressured him into matters and her friend played a large part, probably thinking that they might get some compensation out of it.

    HE WAS WRONG, regardless of being drunk and mentally tormented at the time. YES he was wrong and is paying for that lack of judgement, probably for the rest of his life. That is of his own making.

    Furthermore, he was accessed as NO RISK in the future, that tells you a lot. And why did the sixteen year old make the complaint, and the younger one wanted nothing to do with any prosecution?

    There are many more facts to this case though I cannot print them for very good reason, but I am sure they will come out in the fulness of time....

    ReplyDelete
  12. When some genuine sex attacks do happen,
    there is some speculation that some people involved with the local police / honorary police set some people up to go down as sex offenders in order to ruin that persons life.

    I know of at one case in the past where a man was charged with indecent assault after he had been assaulted from behind by a drunk violent man, which the police witnessed happening.

    The violent man who instigated the unprovoked assault had a criminal record as long as your arm, had grown up on the wrong side of Liverpool and had previously served time for breaking and entering.

    When arrested, he told the police, who had witnessed him first hand that the man whom he had assaulted had "pinched" his girl friends bum.

    There were no witnesses to back up his claim. His girl friend also could not say what had happened and could not identify the man in caught.

    The case was sent to court by the honorary police after a parish hall inquiry, where the man who had been assaulted was not given the change to have his version of events heard and where the parish honorary police just laughed in his face.

    The honorary police sent the case straight to court based on the witness testimony of the man who was caught red handed assaulting the man.

    The man who committed the violent assault was let off completely even though several police men witnessed first hand him assault the other man from behind.

    In court, when asked for their versions of events, the man who had committed the original assault and who counter claimed the sex attack basically changed his story to make the sex attack sound even more serious. His girl friend, the alleged victim didn't back up his story, and said she didn't know what happened. She also said when asked that she could not identify her attacker.

    The magistrate court judge found the man whom was assaulted guilty of sexual assault, although of the lowest end of the scale and was ordered to pay a fine for £150 or go to prison for a week.

    The man paid the fine.

    After the case the man was told by his lawyer not to pursue the case any further, even though, in reflection when looking back, the man would have likely won an appeal at Royal Court or Privy Council stage due to the lack of evidence and the dubious nature of the accusation and the lack of credibility of the accuser.

    But that's Jersey's take on Justice full stop. All ways has been a crooked kangaroo court.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I believe that a number of sex related crimes over the past few years were a set up by the local police.

    The police know the law and know how certain crimes can ruin people.

    I believe that some of the police are entrapping people.
    This practice is illegal but if it happens, if you come from a poor family, you will unlikely be able to fight the system as you simply won't have the financial resources or the level of education to pursue such as course of action.

    Even if you had, you still would likely find it tough, as the police/lawyers/citizens advice will likely just ignore you and will not allow you to take the matter any further.

    In short, this little islands is rotten to the core.
    But why is that so shocking?

    After all, the island runs on corruption and dirty money.
    Money laundered, tax evasion and tax avoidance.

    Its a gangsters paradise, but not tough bad ass mafia types but snide white collar wimps who abuse their power to murder and ruin any problem people who appear (such as people who tell the truth).

    ReplyDelete