Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 112

Thread: Michael Le Vell in child abuse arrest

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    8,894
    Thanked: 11135
    We'll have half the cast in jail and the other half burnt in the Rovers' fire.....

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,415
    Thanked: 1394
    Just saw this in Weatherfield Gazzette...
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Snagglepus For This Useful Post:

    lizann (06-09-2013), Perdita (17-02-2013), sarah c (18-02-2013), tammyy2j (18-02-2013), thestud2k7 (17-02-2013)

  4. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    23,209
    Thanked: 12340
    Quote Originally Posted by parkerman View Post
    Presumably if Kevin is jailed for his part in child abduction that would mean Tyrone would also have to be jailed. So is he going off our screens for even longer then? I don't think so.
    Tyrone wasnt charged with kidnapping was he?

  5. #54
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,022
    Thanked: 1344
    Quote Originally Posted by tammyy2j View Post
    Tyrone wasnt charged with kidnapping was he?
    not yet, but the Detective did tell him they were 'ongoing' with the abduction enquiry

    but yes if Kev goes down for aiding and abetting, then it would make sense that Ty would go down also

  6. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    28,980
    Thanked: 16344
    Quote Originally Posted by parkerman View Post
    If that was me I'd be straight in with an unfair dismissal case and take ITV to the cleaners.
    Quote Originally Posted by alan45 View Post
    How would you like to lose your job over false allegations. Michael Le Vell is INNOCENT until proven guilty
    probably better to post in this thread than derail the rovers fire thread

    michael isnt an ordinary jo so he is an actor/celeb in a well known popular soap opera and mud sticks so whether innocent or guilty this is going stay with him forever i'm afraid, it not drunk driving or drunken disorderly charges it is child sex offences

    i just feel that having him back on the show would be controversial

  7. #56
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,022
    Thanked: 1344
    Quote Originally Posted by lizann View Post


    i just feel that having him back on the show would be controversial
    but if he is cleared and proven innocent? why shouldnt he carry on?

    its a very tricky one....

  8. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    8,894
    Thanked: 11135
    He still has the same employment rights as anyone else. As I say I would be straight on to an unfair dismissal case which ITV would lose.

    It is also a sad indictment on society if what you say is true that "mud sticks" even if someone is proven innocent. Let's not bother with a trial, eh? Just get the mob with their torches to burn down his house.

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to parkerman For This Useful Post:

    alan45 (19-02-2013), Dazzle (19-02-2013), Siobhan (19-02-2013)

  10. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    8,894
    Thanked: 11135
    He still has the same employment rights as anyone else. As I say I would be straight on to an unfair dismissal case which ITV would lose.

    It is also a sad indictment on society if what you say is true that "mud sticks" even if someone is proven innocent. Let's not bother with a trial, eh? Just get the mob with their torches to burn down his house.

  11. #59
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Covid free
    Posts
    17,990
    Thanked: 8980
    Quote Originally Posted by parkerman View Post
    He still has the same employment rights as anyone else. As I say I would be straight on to an unfair dismissal case which ITV would lose.

    It is also a sad indictment on society if what you say is true that "mud sticks" even if someone is proven innocent. Let's not bother with a trial, eh? Just get the mob with their torches to burn down his house.
    Its so easy to make these allegations. If Michael Le Vell is found innocent and loses his job because "Mud Sticks" it will then leave every celebrity open to blackmail. Suppose you are a famous celebrity and get approached by some Jeremy Kyle type reject who states that they will allege all sorts of things from 20 or 30 yrs ago unless you pay them X pounds or they will go to the papers and make some allegations because MUD STICKS and it would be cheaper to pay the blackmailing scum rather than lose your job because MUD STICKS
    Love many, trust few, always paddle your own canoe

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to alan45 For This Useful Post:

    parkerman (19-02-2013)

  13. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Covid free
    Posts
    17,990
    Thanked: 8980
    Quote Originally Posted by parkerman View Post
    He still has the same employment rights as anyone else. As I say I would be straight on to an unfair dismissal case which ITV would lose.

    It is also a sad indictment on society if what you say is true that "mud sticks" even if someone is proven innocent. Let's not bother with a trial, eh? Just get the mob with their torches to burn down his house.
    Its so easy to make these allegations. If Michael Le Vell is found innocent and loses his job because "Mud Sticks" it will then leave every celebrity open to blackmail. Suppose you are a famous celebrity and get approached by some Jeremy Kyle type reject who states that they will allege all sorts of things from 20 or 30 yrs ago unless you pay them X pounds or they will go to the papers and make some allegations because MUD STICKS and it would be cheaper to pay the blackmailing scum rather than lose your job because MUD STICKS
    Love many, trust few, always paddle your own canoe

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •