advertisement


Westminster sexual harassment scandal

When it comes to this subject it's probably best if you keep your trap shut given your history.

I see it's TBL that has kept his trap shut and refused to justify the above

Probably for the best. He might have to think and search at the same time.
 
Carl Sargeant's suicide is a sad development.

Well it looks like the media and public got their pound of flesh...

You appear to be projecting again.
If you were accused of an offence would you kill yourself a.s.a.p?
 
Carl Sargeant's suicide is a sad development.



You appear to be projecting again.
If you were accused of an offence would you kill yourself a.s.a.p?

You appear to be prodding again. I might if I were wrongly accused and in a fragile state.
 
You appear to be prodding again.

It's a discussion. ymmv.

I might if I were wrongly accused and in a fragile state.

I can't find any reports of him being unwell recently.
If so his state was due to the accusations.

Here's a hypothetical for you:

The rozzers come for Jeremy Corbyn at 105 Victoria St.
Rather than come quietly he throws himself off the top of the building.
Would you ponder if J.C. was in a fragile state, and facing false accusation(s)?
 
Tragic news. I wonder if this will put further pressure on the procedure for dealing with allegations of this nature.

I'm troubled by the turn of events over the last 5 years or so with regard to historical allegations. I'm not condoning inappropriate behaviour but we're a long way from working out how to deal with these situations sensibly.
 
It's a discussion. ymmv.



I can't find any reports of him being unwell recently.
If so his state was due to the accusations.

Here's a hypothetical for you:

The rozzers come for Jeremy Corbyn at 105 Victoria St.
Rather than come quietly he throws himself off the top of the building.
Would you ponder if J.C. was in a fragile state, and facing false accusation(s)?
Here's one for you: the Police come for you and you kill youself; would anyone ponder etc.?
 
I'm troubled by the turn of events over the last 5 years or so with regard to historical allegations. I'm not condoning inappropriate behaviour but we're a long way from working out how to deal with these situations sensibly.

Would you care to estimate how long we've already had to deal with these situations?

Here's one for you: the Police come for you and you kill youself; would anyone ponder etc.?

If you were my wife, etc.
 
tbh Cav got much more into that concept then I expected, or am comfortable with.
 
There's blood on peoples' hands. I question how Sargeant could be sacked on the basis of accusations....accusations which should have been made to the police in the first place. Party officials and the accusers have questions to answer. I'm not saying the accusers have made up their accusations...I have no idea about this. Surely though a suspension whilst proper investigations were made would have been correct. Instead Sargeant is dead.
 
The accusers don't have any questions to answer. Quit blaming the victims.

Sargeant decision to commit suicide was his own decision. Maybe he over-reacted, maybe he didn't. That is not yet clear.

If he hadn't been removed from his position, and the allegations turn out to be serious, then there would be criticism that he was allowed to stay in his post.
 
If as has been reported he was sacked from his position this was done without a proper investigation; he wasn't even given details of the accusations. We're in the midst of a witch-hunt. People may well be guilty - if we don't have due process then we risk anarchy with people being able to make wild accusations for their own political ends. As I said Sargeant should have been suspended not sacked, there should have been a proper investigation and then a permanent decision taken. What is wrong with that?

Of course the accusers have questions to answer - that's what a proper investigation would involve.
 
We are the midst of a bursting dam.
The alleged victims don't have any responsibility to investigate Sargent's activities, or to answer for his suicide.
Those with professional responsibility for investigating may have questions to answer, but you appear to be continuing to victim blame.

 
I'm not blaming the alleged victims. BTW they are "alleged" until there is proof. This is why a proper investigation is needed. A vital part of the process has been omitted. This all smacks of The Crucible. I'm taking no sides about guilt as I can't know what happened.
 
I agree a proper investigation was needed, but that's very difficult when the alleged perpetrator kills themselves asap.
And a potentially handy deflection/mis-direction tool for those attempting to avoid justice.

Sargent's suspension may seem forward to some, but these situations are complicated.
For example if someone accused of sexual assault at work is allowed to remain in post during the investigation there's a risk the alleged perpetrator will offend again.
If this happened the employer would bear responsibitily for exposing the victim to a known risk.

This is why accused teachers are sent home until the investigation reaches its' conclusions.
 
I agree with suspension....that's what I've been saying. Reports were that he was sacked as a minister, not suspended. In these times of enlightenment about mental health it seems warnings about his state of mind were ignored.
 
It is normal for ministers to 'step down' if they are being investigated as a result of a serious allegation.
iiuc this is because the allegation becomes a mega distraction, so they can't do their job properly.
Perhaps he refused to step aside pending the investigation, so was dismissed?
fwiw I'm not suggesting Sargent, or the allegations, were treated satisfactorily. Let alone well.

Do you have a source to cite re: his state of mind please?
I had a rummage a couple of days ago, but failed to find anything.
 


advertisement


Back
Top