Richard and Judy

[Ric.ror]

Can anyone explain why its ok to have Bill Wyman on but not Gary Glitter?

[Ric.ror]

Exactly. I wonder how old his daughters are?

[Pippa68]

Neither did I say Wyman was an 'innocent man'. I merely stated he wasn't a predatory paedophile like Gary Glitter. If Gary Glitter hadn't have been mentioned maybe the answers received would have been different?

The Q asked was why it was ok to have Bill Wyman on a tv show and not Gary Glitter. We have made our points

[kempie]

Pippa68 - none of my posts were meant as digs at you. My apologies if you perceive them as such. They were just meant to address points as they were raised.

[Pippa68]

No probs kempie ~ I haven't seen them as digs at all!

A sensible debate, I think :o)

[Ric.ror]

None of the posts were meant to be taken personally. One last thought though why is it legal for a predatory older man to use a 16 year old girl yet legislation is imposed to protect a 16 year old boy. Of course no legislation is needed to protect a girl from a predatory woman as lesbian sex does not exsist

[joko]

still no answer on who has actually said that its not ok to have gary glitter on R&J...?

has this just been an assumption, or has there actually been a statement to support this...?

i would have thought that if GG agreed to go on live tv and face the questioning, R&J would jump at the chance !

[Ric.ror]

You could be right Joko - R&J could be just waiting to interview GG - lets hope they dont and lets hope they think twice about who they have as guests for their shows

[joko]

i would like them to interview him!

i would like to hear him squirm and try to talk his way out of, or justify what he has done.

he may not be a nice or respectable guest but since when can only nice and clever people be interviewed?

whether this makes you uncomfortable or not is irrelevant.

[Pippa68]

Has Jeffrey Archer been on yet?

[kempie]

Apparently Baron Archer of Weston-super-Mare graced R&J with his presence 13 months ago...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0772609/

[Ric.ror]

Now how do we go about getting a convicted liar stripped of his title

[kempie]

Unfortunately Archer's title is that of a Life Peer.

Life peerages are granted under the Life Peerages Act 1958. As a life peerage is not technically an "honour under the Crown", it cannot be withdrawn once granted.

Thus, while knighthoods have been withdrawn as "honours under the Crown", convicted life peers who have served their sentences are able to return to the House of Lords, such as in the case of Lord Archer.

[Ric.ror]

Well is there no way we can petition the sergeant at arms or whatever to stop him entering the house or what about if we arrange an uprising in W-SM calling for his execution. Of course for legal reasons I have to point out I am joking about this