Remove this Banner Ad

Hey Dad.....!

  • Thread starter Thread starter lioness
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Shell said:
It's reported in HS today $100,000.
Click to expand...
It's good to see that his need to go public and bare his soul about this sad situation was so strong that it was available for a price.
 
SunKing said:
+1

Seeing him in that photo with his hand practically down her pants and with that insane smile on his face makes me sick.
Click to expand...

I was actually talking about when he was talking to ACA in the car, but yeah that photo is just terrible as well. Says so much doesnt it... even the other cast members sitting next to him look less than happy to be in the photo.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

brahintheknow said:
Photo from ACA:

24dpnnn.jpg


http://i39.tinypic.com/24dpnnn.jpg

You can see the photo in the ACA video @3:18 here:

http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/hey-dad-alleged-abuser-revealed/x9g2m6f
Click to expand...

:eek: I realise that's piece of paper she's holding on to, but what's Hughes doing with his left hand?
Filthy, disgusting creep :(
 
Deadset, anyone would think the guy had been convicted.

I hate rockspiders as much as the next guy, but I'm more than a little skeptical of trial by tabloid TV. At least let's wait til the cops have had a proper look at the situation.
 
Caesar said:
Deadset, anyone would think the guy had been convicted.

I hate rockspiders as much as the next guy, but I'm more than a little skeptical of trial by tabloid TV. At least let's wait til the cops have had a proper look at the situation.
Click to expand...

agreed....

did anyone see the piece on today tonight on friday night, where the manager has made the actors from hey dad, who he just happens to represent. they have had to had contracts signed for womans day etc before they go to the police.....

mmm, sounds like the lara bingle stuff to me.....some things on the nose.
 
Caesar said:
Deadset, anyone would think the guy had been convicted.

I hate rockspiders as much as the next guy, but I'm more than a little skeptical of trial by tabloid TV. At least let's wait til the cops have had a proper look at the situation.
Click to expand...
Mob rule
If there had been a call to hang this guy at half time in the footy at the MCG most of the unthinking would be scrambling for tickets.

I agree with you, wait for the charges, then wait for the conviction, then we are able to comment from a perspective of 'the known'

On the wider issue is 'rock spiders' I couldn't agree more, lock them up for life, they have lost their right to live in our society.
 
There is something dreadfully opportunistic about the whole thing.

Why a sex abuse victim would want to make her allegations on tabloid television is bewildering, especially as the alleged perpetrator could justifiably claim any future trial would be prejudiced.

But of course if you are in need of cash plus want to call attention to some web production you have started with your husband then actual 'justice' is probably a secondary consideration.
 
sandeano said:
There is something dreadfully opportunistic about the whole thing.

Why a sex abuse victim would want to make her allegations on tabloid television is bewildering, especially as the alleged perpetrator could justifiably claim any future trial would be prejudiced.

But of course if you are in need of cash plus want to call attention to some web production you have started with your husband then actual 'justice' is probably a secondary consideration.
Click to expand...

To be totally fair, she first raised the issue in an article in a magazine.

BTW she sounded totally believable to me, but all allegations should be tested in the right place - Court
 
sandeano said:
There is something dreadfully opportunistic about the whole thing.

Why a sex abuse victim would want to make her allegations on tabloid television is bewildering, especially as the alleged perpetrator could justifiably claim any future trial would be prejudiced.

But of course if you are in need of cash plus want to call attention to some web production you have started with your husband then actual 'justice' is probably a secondary consideration.
Click to expand...
I agree. Tell me how he will get a fair trial in this country now. Everyone has already hung, drawn and quartered, tarred and feathered and shot the guy for being something that is yet to be proven in a court of law.

Why did Sarah feel the need to come out first in a magazine? Did they go to her or did she go to them first? But, the biggest thing I didn't like was her assertion that as soon as she heard that it was a big deal now (like she thought allegations like this would be not a big deal:rolleyes:) she hopped on the first plane out here to talk to the police...but first an interview with ACA.

It just undermines your credibility that you try and garner public support before going to the people who are the only ones who can investigate properly and prosecute if neccessary. Just remember that of Sarah's allegations, only she can testify to them. Ben, Simone, Nudge and whoever else that she told or heard a rumour will be discounted in a court of law as hearsay. their testimony will mean nothing.

But in the court of public opinion they carry weight for some reason. The only other people who can testify properly are other victims. Hopefully the other "dozen or so victims" that ACA claim have come forward are genuine and help to convict him if he is guilty.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Dawson said:
To be totally fair, she first raised the issue in an article in a magazine.

BTW she sounded totally believable to me, but all allegations should be tested in the right place - Court
Click to expand...

Indeed and I am not disputing her claims. But at the same time either she is very naive by thinking that some vague statements in Womens' Weekly would not be jumped upon by the Australian media.

Or perhaps she knew damn well that they would be and knew that a buck would be made in the process. Now I don't actually deny her right to make some money out of the her misery (if it occured).

But she had better not complain if the case is dismissed due to a tainted investigation process.
 
sandeano said:
There is something dreadfully opportunistic about the whole thing.

Why a sex abuse victim would want to make her allegations on tabloid television is bewildering, especially as the alleged perpetrator could justifiably claim any future trial would be prejudiced.

But of course if you are in need of cash plus want to call attention to some web production you have started with your husband then actual 'justice' is probably a secondary consideration.
Click to expand...

maybe mentally she is ready to confront it publically and has always wanted him get what he deserves for his 'alledged' actions.
 
I still believe that people are entitled to a presumption of innocence and a fair trial. You'd have to say that in Hughes' case ACA has completely decimated the former and put the chance of the latter into some doubt.

And all in the name of ratings. Programs like ACA and Today Tonight are the ultimate gutter of so-called current affairs reporting.

Having said that, if the allegations against Hughes are correct I have nothing but complete contempt for him. However I don't think that sensationalist media coverage is the way to prosecute and convict him.

Here are a couple of articles along these lines:

A very public campaign of vilification

Legal issues over Hey Dad! media frenzy
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

campbell said:
I hate rock spiders.

BUT, this could happen to any of you men in the future.Hard to prove, disprove etc.

Sad for all concerned, especially IF he is innocent.....
Click to expand...

I'd never do that to a kid even though it happened to me when I was young.
 
tigerboyz said:
I'd never do that to a kid even though it happened to me when I was young.
Click to expand...
I think they mean being accused of doing it to a kid. Hard to challenge someone who claims something happened 20 years ago, hard to prove something you didn't do and peoples memory's are notoriously unreliable after so long.
 
TheStinger said:
I think they mean being accused of doing it to a kid. Hard to challenge someone who claims something happened 20 years ago, hard to prove something you didn't do and peoples memory's are notoriously unreliable after so long.
Click to expand...

All I can say is from my experience is you never forget when some molests you no matter how long ago it was, something as vile as that can actually ruin a persons life IMO.
 
tigerboyz said:
All I can say is from my experience is you never forget when some molests you no matter how long ago it was, something as vile as that can actually ruin a persons life IMO.
Click to expand...
I should have been more specific. Of course the actual victims will have photographic memories of the incident (once they come to terms with it of course). I was more meaning the other people around who all of a sudden will go "yeah, now that you mention it there were a few times when I thought something was going on. It just seemed weird to me."

Is that a real memory or is their mind being jogged by allegations to remember things not exactly as they happened, just what they think happened.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom