15 months for Stuart Hall

It's going round in circles because of the language being used, mollie. Inappropriate fondling is not what is being referred to - it's indecent/sexual assault. Sex offenders will use words like 'inappropriate' and 'fondling' to try to excuse them for the way they have groomed, assaulted and invaded a child's body - in the same way a domestic violence perpetrator will claim he only 'gave the missus a slap' when in fact he has broken her nose and put her in hospital.

Hall won't have 'only' fondled even when it was 'just a hand up a skirt' - he would have been visibly sexually aroused (that's the point of the assault) and what child is able to deal with that?

Well put, elegran.

There is bad and there is worse. Bad is bad enough but worse is worse.

I've suggested here that what SH has been found guilty of might be on the lighter end of the sexual abuse scale. I say that because I only know what I've read and that doesn't mention actual penetration. But yesterday I read about a music teacher who repeatedly raped a young teenage student more than twenty years ago. He thought he'd got away with it until the woman, now in her 40s and a mother of four, found the courage to bring a complaint. During the trial the woman was subjected to such aggressive questioning that in her despair she killed herself. She never saw her attacker found guilty and imprisoned for his terrible crime. By comparison I still consider instances of inappropriate fondling less terrible even though I know that any inappropriate touching can leave an effect on the victim's life that can't be justified.

I see what you are saying.

I think the nature of my work made it absolutely necessary that I could 'get my head round' all sorts of extreme situations, including sexual abuse (though not that often).

I was a juror on a case which involved sexual abuse a few years ago.

I should say by 'getting my head around' I don't mean becoming blaise and accepting of the awful things people do to each other.

I don't have insider information, I just read extensively because I specialised in this work. Hall's convictions are against children. The ones lay on file include offences against adults. Personally, I have never reached the stage of having got my head round abuse of children, doubt I ever will. All I can say is, the more I learn, the more questions I am left with.

Derisory is the word which springs to mind.

I'm confused by your post when.

All of Hall's victims were not young children according to the information out there.

Also, I don't think it's hard to 'get your head' around these things at all.

I've read some harrowing and heart-rending accounts of young boys, for instance, who were regularly and violently abused and buggered in a care home and who attempted suicide because of it.

Of course, it's possible you have some insider information not available to the public.

It's so hard to stay focussed on what men like Stuart Hall have done to harm children. No wonder these nasty offences get minimised and applied to young women and teenagers who are on the verge of being able to give informed consent. But these children couldn't be confused with mature teenagers and young women - their attraction was their immaturity. They were sexually assaulted, with insistence and by ignoring refusal, pain and/or fear. To get your head round that is nigh impossible, even for hardened professionals. It's not a quick grope that men go to prison for - the fine detail that enables the CPS to prosecute is nasty and sexually intrusive, but the most awful part of it is the theft of a chldhood that can't be got back.

It's not about making excuses.

If I'd been raped throughout my childhood I might not feel too chuffed to have people insisting that what I went through was no different to someone having their breast felt at age 15.

I'm not making excuses for anyone. But digital penetration is a bit different to a pat on the bum.

To hell with degrees - any uninvited and unwanted sexual attention is wrong, always has been and still is. Let's not make any excuses for the arrogant swines who thought they could 'cop a feel'.

It happened on the tube or on a crowded bus too ... A squeezed boob or a hand up the skirt... Could never pinpoint who did it but it happened frequently...it was a different time, not better or worse, just different. Just look at On The Buses and other comedy programmes at the time. If girls made a fuss there was something wrong with THEM! I had an awful time between 12 and 16, hopefully my granddaughter won't suffer the same situations.

Yes, I agree. I do think there are degrees of 'groping' though - most office creeps limited themselves to a quick fondle or squeeze...

Agreed. What I mean is, it wasn't just show biz types who thought groping girls was ok, whether 12 and still at school or 15 and not long in the world of employment.

I assumed the 'bewildered' comment was an implication of the early stages of dementia - does it elaborate anywhere on the 'bewildered and confused'

Whilst not wanting to trivialise your point Nfk, you were presumably older than Hall's victims. I know it was rife in my workplace and, although I was rather timid, I was aware enough not to go in the strongroom with various male members of staff and to pass the word around.

It was rife in some offices I worked in too!

Some people seem to believe that because such sexual abuse was rife in show business in the 1970's it should just be forgotten. I am willing to bet that the children affected haven't forgotten it.

mollie thanks for coming back.

I genuinely wanted to know what he did. The only thing mentioned in the report I heard was that he asked a child to cuddly him as if he were a teddy bear.

No intention on my part to trivialise at all. I know how scary inappropriate touching can be. But I haven't read anything that mentioned any attempt at penetration of any kind, just groping, so if there was more to these offences than I've read then my comments will seem insensitive.

What I find awful is that he's still bewildered by what he did. He still doesn't understand it was wrong, after all a bit of 'harmless' fondling was not uncommon 40 years ago - especially at the BBC and other places where the victims were in awe of the perpetrators.

15 months - not even twice as long as the sentence Hulne and his ex-wife received! And as when says, he'll be out in under 8 months...

I agree Ella. Amongst other things that I don't wish to reveal, an uncle kissed me goodnight, when, I was a 7 year old and rammed his tongue down my throat...it has tainted many a kiss ever since. Please don't trivialise 'tame' acts committed long ago. Would it seem tame if it was your granddaughter?

Well said ella that's exactly what I was thinking.