Corrie la vell - Nonse or innocent?

I know its off topic but the international break is boring me and I dont have alot to say about wales other than coleman out. roll on euro Quals

What do you think about this lavell case going on?
Is the guy innocent or did he do it... ''In your oppinion

IMO Im slightly suspicious that he's possibly done something bad and in return they are doing it out of spite, or perhaps there was more too it. (it is corrie after all so nothing is surprising.
a crazy allegation well he go down?

YES/NO

after reading about it from both sides, honestly I think its a bunch of lies

Innocent

He did Bet Lynch in the cellar with the spanner, Ken Barlow....no cluedo

Innocent I reckon butt I reckon bill roache is guily though he looks a right arrogant prick and capable of it

The truth is, who knows?

It does seem though, that if you worked in TV/radio during the 70s and 80s, you're probably looked at in a different way now...

I read that he'd attended alcoholics anonymous "Without success" - I'm not surprised, everyone would recognise him as soon as he walks in! Hardly anonymous

Whens the verdict?

I don't get this one. What mother would let their daughter spend any time alone with a grown man? They haven't said what the relationship is between LeVEll and the girl so I'm guessing she is family. All a bit suss to me!

Innocent I reckon butt I reckon bill roache is guily though he looks a right arrogant prick and capable of it

agreed - strange one that tw*t.

Whens the verdict?

Monday mate, closing arguments at 10am then verdict sometime after

I don't get this one. What mother would let their daughter spend any time alone with a grown man? They haven't said what the relationship is between LeVEll and the girl so I'm guessing she is family. All a bit suss to me!

they cant say if they have any relation just incase the public would know the girl, all accused rape victims get anonymity for life, 3 men been charged for revealing who the girl is.

On what has been reported there seems little evidence to his guilt apart from the testimony of the little girl. Looking at his body language he does seem to be hiding something, but of course you can't convict someone on that bases.

I fully expect a not guilty verdict but Michael Le Vell will probably see the end of his time on Corrie and find acting work hard to come by, although he is a dead cert for Celebrity big brother on Channel 5

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

This . Money grabbers out for a quick buck . How the cps can proceed on charges when it's one word against another from 30 years ago is a joke . Feel sorry for them . Obviously there are some rotters however , saville etc

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

What about Stuart Hall? He was recently convicted of historical sexual crimes, which he eventually admitted to.

If people like Stuart Hall have significant assets which could be used to compensate his victims then I say good for them.

However, I read the other day that he was hiding or transferring his assets to avoid paying compensation. That is more sickening IMO than the hypothetical people you refer to.

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

This . Money grabbers out for a quick buck . How the cps can proceed on charges when it's one word against another from 30 years ago is a joke . Feel sorry for them . Obviously there are some rotters however , saville etc

They can and quite rightly do if the weight of evidence is in the public interest. In Stuart Hall's case numerous people came forward to report his behaviour. These people had no connection to each other but reported the same perverted behaviour.

In the case of Michael Le Vell it is literally his word against the young girls. On that basis I would agree it is not worth pursuing.

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

What about Stuart Hall? He was recently convicted of historical sexual crimes, which he eventually admitted to.

If people like Stuart Hall have significant assets which could be used to compensate his victims then I say good for them.

However, I read the other day that he was hiding or transferring his assets to avoid paying compensation. That is more sickening IMO than the hypothetical people you refer to.

Good point obviously some are guilty some not,i just cant believe Rolf Harris could do such a thing but hey who knows

IF he's guilty then he deserves what's coming, however the Dr or Dr's that examined her said that sexual contact was neutral, whatever that means, I take it, that she isn't a virgin but can't prove when it was lost. Who knows.

IF he's guilty then he deserves what's coming, however the Dr or Dr's that examined her said that sexual contact was neutral, whatever that means, I take it, that she isn't a virgin but can't prove when it was lost. Who knows.

they could not prove anything before of the time scale, she hasn't suffered no injuries but if she did then because of the time scale its plausible that the injuries would of healed over time so theres no evidence that he had sexual intercourse with her so basically its all about her word against his now

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

This . Money grabbers out for a quick buck . How the cps can proceed on charges when it's one word against another from 30 years ago is a joke . Feel sorry for them . Obviously there are some rotters however , saville etc

They can and quite rightly do if the weight of evidence is in the public interest. In Stuart Hall's case numerous people came forward to report his behaviour. These people had no connection to each other but reported the same perverted behaviour.

In the case of Michael Le Vell it is literally his word against the young girls. On that basis I would agree it is not worth pursuing.

In Stuart Halls case the scummy b*stard transferred virtually all of his assets before the court case!

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

This . Money grabbers out for a quick buck . How the cps can proceed on charges when it's one word against another from 30 years ago is a joke . Feel sorry for them . Obviously there are some rotters however , saville etc

They can and quite rightly do if the weight of evidence is in the public interest. In Stuart Hall's case numerous people came forward to report his behaviour. These people had no connection to each other but reported the same perverted behaviour.

In the case of Michael Le Vell it is literally his word against the young girls. On that basis I would agree it is not worth pursuing.

In Stuart Halls case the scummy b*stard transferred virtually all of his assets before the court case!

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

This . Money grabbers out for a quick buck . How the cps can proceed on charges when it's one word against another from 30 years ago is a joke . Feel sorry for them . Obviously there are some rotters however , saville etc

They can and quite rightly do if the weight of evidence is in the public interest. In Stuart Hall's case numerous people came forward to report his behaviour. These people had no connection to each other but reported the same perverted behaviour.

In the case of Michael Le Vell it is literally his word against the young girls. On that basis I would agree it is not worth pursuing.

In Stuart Halls case the scummy b*stard transferred virtually all of his assets before the court case!

A lot of these "victims" just see the pound signs,like most of these historic crimes why didnt the victims report the incidents when it actually happened whether it be the 70s 80s etc,i gather in the Saville case a few were reported but the police seemed to turn a blind eye to it,seemed he was a bit untouchable,but not all the other celebs.Personally i think La vell is innocent like most of them.

This . Money grabbers out for a quick buck . How the cps can proceed on charges when it's one word against another from 30 years ago is a joke . Feel sorry for them . Obviously there are some rotters however , saville etc

They can and quite rightly do if the weight of evidence is in the public interest. In Stuart Hall's case numerous people came forward to report his behaviour. These people had no connection to each other but reported the same perverted behaviour.

In the case of Michael Le Vell it is literally his word against the young girls. On that basis I would agree it is not worth pursuing.

In Stuart Halls case the scummy b*stard transferred virtually all of his assets before the court case!

I know its off topic but the international break is boring me and I dont have alot to say about wales other than coleman out. roll on euro Quals

What do you think about this lavell case going on?
Is the guy innocent or did he do it... ''In your oppinion

IMO Im slightly suspicious that he's possibly done something bad and in return they are doing it out of spite, or perhaps there was more too it. (it is corrie after all so nothing is surprising.
a crazy allegation well he go down?

YES/NO

Have been following the case but hard to come to a verdict till dwelling on it. he raped her over 6 years? What I want to know but hasn't been disclosed is did he know her? Must of done as you wouldn't let an unknown tash wearing manc near your daughter.

I think he is guilty as f**k. Hope he gets battered inside.

I think he's guilty this isn't the first time he's been facing accustaiond of child molestation either

I think he's guilty this isn't the first time he's been facing accustaiond of child molestation either

Yes it is.

As his defence just said, no other accusations, nothing on his computer, this isnt the work of a serial predator.

The prosecutions only evidence is that hes a drunk.

Cant see anything other than a not guilty.

Too many instances of "girls" remembering they were assaulted nowadays - so easy to claim and quite difficult to prove you are innocent (the man) not just in court but in the public domain as well.

Don't get me wrong a guy who does this type of thing deserves to be locked up but so many historic claims coming to light, particularly with celebrities

Think level might well be innocent. But bill roach guilty as hell. An actor friend of mine said he is well know for his wandering hands and known to those in the biz as "cock-roach"...

Too many instances of "girls" remembering they were assaulted nowadays - so easy to claim and quite difficult to prove you are innocent (the man) not just in court but in the public domain as well.

Don't get me wrong a guy who does this type of thing deserves to be locked up but so many historic claims coming to light, particularly with celebrities

i think its the opposite, i think its quite difficult to prove guilt, especially in a case like this. It appears that its just his word v her word, and sounds like the girls mother is pushing the claim, but of course that matters little.

IF he is guilty of this, how do they prove it?


on the other side of the coin, you have accusing someone who is blatently innocent, often celebrities. This type of thing will stick with the for life, regardless of the outcome in court.

If found not guilty then there should really be something down about the people who make up these horrible stories.