I just can't understand it

[Rodo]

The new alleged victim of Stuart Hall who says he raped her 30 times - why did she keep going back?

Surely if you have been raped, you wouldn't go there again. It doesn't make sense.

[Kaz]

How old was she at the time?

[Rodo]

It says she was 15


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 38618.html

[KateLMead]

The new alleged victim of Stuart Hall who says he raped her 30 times - why did she keep going back?

Surely if you have been raped, you wouldn't go there again. It doesn't make sense.

I agree, and I am sure that many of the other women who claim to have been raped are doing so to to get publicity and
Cash. It takes a lot of courage to tell anyone what is happening to them as the "child"as molester /abuser threatens them
With the most horrific consequences if they do, and the child is already psychologically damaged due to the abuse.
Many of these women coming forward I am sure are opportunists, however for those who are genuine often their abuse was due to their constant appearances at the stage door etc desperate for the
It did that fellow Roach (cleared) no longer in Coronation St no good when he bragged on a talk show, (Ross) about have sex with over 1,000 women!
Some women and men will cry rape for the most ridiculous reasons, probably after egging the individual on.
But the real abuser rapist should be chemically castrated.

[Workingman]

No, I don't get the 30 rapes, either.

Hall was/is a dangerous and devious man, and at the time he was at the height of his "It's a Knockout" fame and power, but at 50ish he was hardly a "catch" for a young teenage girl. I feel that there must be more to this than we are being told.

[TheOstrich]

The new alleged victim of Stuart Hall who says he raped her 30 times - why did she keep going back?

I would think Hall's defense lawyers should be exploring that angle, certainly ....

[Suff]

Looking at the Independent story on it, I'm struck by some key things in the transcript. Reading the statement

The woman today said her motivation for coming forward was “because, this is no disrespect to the system, I just feel it was not long enough for what he did”.

I can understand the feeling. But the legal theatrics which are being played out do not bode well for future trails. He will not server more than 15 months even with a 30 month sentence. Then again, at 84, he may not survive more than that time in jail anyway. Not that I'm particularly bothered about that.

But, when I read:

She told the court she “didn’t know” whether she had wanted to have sex with Hall. “I might have thought I was a very wordly know-it-all 15-year-old but in reality I was not,”

Might have? Would have? Could have? We are talking allegations of "Rape" here. So let's apply this to another scenario...

Young woman has a few too many, takes a guy to bed and has a really good evening. Neighbours see the guy leaving in the morning and she's feeling a bit selfconscious about it.

So she goes to the Police and claims RAPE. Then she goes to court and says

Well I'm not sure if I wanted to have sex with him that night. I "might" have thought it was a good idea, but in the morning I decided it wasn't so now I've decided it was rape...

Regardless of whether he's a monster or not, or whether she felt she was in control or not, she went there and had sex with him for Three Years and could have stopped at any time. Hall was wrong to do what he did but this is a precedent we don't want to set.