Fri Jul 28, 2017 London
X

The Steeple Times is an online magazine with a following of upto 880,000 unique views per day on our best day yet.

  • We have 91,000 daily subscribers by email.

  • We typically average around 320,000 unique views per day.

  • We currently have 65 contributing authors who range from students to the actor, writer and producer Steven Berkoff and the champion jockey Frankie Dettori.

Combining a mix of society's last word and both wit and wisdom, The Steeple Times covers food, drink and fine dining as well as luxury, travel, the arts, individuals of influence and current affairs in the United Kingdom, America and elsewhere. We are best described as being akin to "a cross between The Huffington Post and Private Eye".

 

The magazine's following is affluent, engaged and international. With 41% of readers coming from the UK and 38% from America, The Steeple Times also has strong presence within Canadian, Italian, German and Australian territories.

 

THE FOG

The economy, politics and current affairsMoney, power and its guiding forces

Rotten Rolf

As convicted paedo Rolf Harris walks free from court and his nutty supporters once again reveal themselves, it must be remembered he is still a convicted abuser of girls as young as eight

 

Rolf Harris might well have walked free from court on Monday after a jury failed to reach a verdict on historical assault charges against three teenagers, but the public should remember one thing: This monster is still a monster and he is still a man convicted of 12 counts of indecent assault on victims as young as 8 years old.

 

Outside the court and once again failing to show an ounce of compassion to those he had previously been jailed for molesting, a spokesman for Harris read out a statement. In it, Harris remarked:

 

“While I’m pleased that this is all I over I feel no sense of victory, just relief. I’m 87 years old, my wife is in ill health and we simply want to spend our remaining time together in peace”.

 

Rightly stripped of his MBE, OBE and CBE, the former television presenter and shockingly bad performer – best known for now seemingly rather inappropriate renditions such as Two Little Boys – should now do the decent thing. ‘Rotten Rolf’ should simply fade into obscurity and forever be consigned to social Siberia.

 

Elsewhere, on Change.org, loopy ‘fans’ of the paedophile took the opportunity to brag about the verdict on a page titled: “A man who is innocent and knows he is innocent”. One, Cardiff based, Milford Haven School educated Sally Roberts, ridiculously commented: “This is as good as an innocent verdict considering there was no evidence to prove either way” before delusionally adding: “And an appeal over his first trial is imminent!!”

 

Pictured above: Paedophile Rolf Harris with his “tireless [or ‘blind to his guilt’] supporter”, niece Jenny Harris.

 

Rotten Rolf – Paedo Rolf Harris might be free but he’s still a paedo
Rolf Harris was mobbed by the media as he left court with Jenny Harris on Tuesday 30th May 2017

Comments

21 comments on “Rotten Rolf”

  1. I don’t believe this case should ever have gone to trial. Absolutely no concrete evidence on which to convict,yet lot’s of heresay,half truths and downright proven untruths. The establishments way of throwing the plebs a few crumbs to keep them happy after the Jimmy Savile debacle? I’d love to see the Mccann’s on the stand but hey,apparently they’re untouchable. Miscarriage of justice works both ways.

  2. You stupid, stupid, stupid foolish person Steeples……… Enough of the jury believed Rolf innocent and today he got freed. He will now go forward and clear his name and the world will have to apoloise to the most brilliant man on the planet. Rolf is kind, Rolf is good, Rolf loves adults, Rolf loves children, he is loving and good. You don’t understand his beautiful mind and you’ve denegrated his wonderful spirit.

    1. I think you’re the stupid person, but you are correct, Rolf does love children, you both probably hang out at the same haunts. Anyway, I hope Rolf does decide to appeal his first conviction, it might dig up some more truths about the pervert.

    2. Yes Rolf loves children but pity it is for the wrong reasons, Enough of the Jury did not believe he was innocent or even, enough of the jury didn’t find him quilty in a reasonable length of time. He is still a disgusting paedo however in spite of what you think.
      There is a Jonathon King who is another disgusting serial paedo and convicted on solid evidence Wiki says —“In September 2001 King was convicted, after a two-week trial at the Old Bailey, on four counts of indecent assault, one of buggery and one of attempted buggery, committed between 1983 and 1987 against five boys aged 14 and 15.””King received a seven-year sentence, was placed on the Sex Offenders Register, prohibited from working with children, and ordered to pay £14,000 costs.[110][e] In 2003 the Court of Appeal rejected his application to appeal both the conviction and the sentence; he had argued that the conviction was unsafe and the sentence, with guidelines of two years, had been “manifestly too severe”.[119] He appealed twice unsuccessfully to the Criminal Cases Review Commission,[120][121] and was released on parole in March 2005.[122] King’s conviction was the subject of a chapter in Bob Woffinden’s 2016 book “The Nicholas Cases”, examining what Woffinden then regarded as the ten worst miscarriages of justice in the previous thirty years.[123]

      In September 2015, King was arrested as part of Operation Ravine, an investigation into claims of sexual abuse at the Walton Hop disco in the 1970s.[124] He was later released on bail.[125][126] On 25 May 2017, he was charged by Surrey Police with 18 sexual offences, relating to nine boys aged between 14 and 16, allegedly carried out between 1970 and 1986. He was released on bail and is due to appear in court on 26 June.[10]”
      That maggot if he is here, has no contribution to make. Thankfully there is no Statute of Limitations for such objectionable crimes.

  3. I am sickened by the two comments above. He was jailed for abusing four women and to be jailed you have to be found guilty. He wasn’t found guilty by one person, he was found guilty by a jury. I can understand you’ll call them all liars and “worms” (wasn’t that Rolf’s name for his victims?) but think of this: These people could have been your daughter, your wife or your granny. Rolf Harris abused and thought he could get away with it. Protected by what people here and others have called ‘The Club’, he thought he was above the law. He will, whatever you claim, be forever tainted and he will forever be an abuser. The world needs to remember that – he is not a “wonderful spirit” but in fact a barbarous bastard. I am sorry to swear but your comments have brought out the fury in me.

    1. I’m so sorry Ethel Jones for offending you with my comment. I abhor any kind of abuse,especially that meted out to the most vulnerable in our society. I have studied this case at length and have failed to find any concrete evidence against Mr Harris. No matter how repellant the crime,it is monsterously unfair to take away a persons liberty based on 30 year old unproven accusations and heresay. Solid evidence only should be used to secure a conviction. Once again I apologise.

      1. Maybe you should have been his lawyer the first time, he may have got off with it. Get it through your thick head, he’s a convicted pervert and sleeze bag. I suppose you would have been saying the same thing about Saville if he hadn’t died. Tell us what evidence you’ve studied to show his innocence?

        1. No need to hurl abuse Mr Dodge,we’re not in the playground. We all have differing opinions and I have stated mine. That’s what grown ups do. It’s called a conversation. If you cannot articulate yourself without resorting to petty insults may I suggest The sun online?

          1. I’m so sorry if I offended you Mrs M.
            Yes we all have differing opinions, and I do take back the thick head comment. But my blood boils when I see these perverts years later trying to get away with what they did in the past. Just because it was years ago doesn’t make it any less of a crime. When you say you have studied his case at length, and failed to find any concrete evidence, you must have been looking in the wrong place. It’s obvious that there was concrete evidence, otherwise he wouldn’t have been convicted and sent off to jail. Spare a thought for those he abused, he has shown, not one ounce of remorse since he was convicted, and in fact was abusive to his victims while in prison. I wonder if you might have a different opinion if it was a member of your family he was accused of abusing, you would obviously believe them, just like these people have done. I will try and articulate myself better in the future Mrs M.
            Must dash just off the buy the Sun..

    2. … and in a democratic society you have a RIGHT to be offended. However, an appeal over the first trial was submitted today – IF the appeal is accepted then I strongly suggest you get used to even more offence – because (knowing what I know about the first trial) there is a high likelyhood that the appeal will succeed.

  4. He got away with having a house full of child porn didn’t he? Why was he not charged for that. There’s your bloody cover-up! And what deal did he do about protecting those close to him? Who did he save from the clink? We must be told!

  5. Rolf Harris did nothing wrong and was victimised by the corrupt police. You fell for the lies. I know they are lies.

    1. So all of a sudden right out of the blue the police decide to fit up a famous 80 odd year old person, just for the hell of it. He was found guilty the first time, even with his expensive lawyers. This time it was a hung jury, so no, he wasn’t found innocent. He is a pervert and that’s how he will go down in history.
      So he tell me, how do you know it was all lies??

      1. I agree Dodge. If it’s the same Jonathon King he would be in cahoots with Harris and claim they were fitted up by liars and corrupt police. The news today is that Harris paid expensive lawyers to try to dig up dirt on his victims in attempts to wriggle out of it the first time round. I suppose it’s possible Harris and King shared paedo pictures since this bunch like to spread their muck.
        Jenny Harris aka “Rolf is Innocent” seems to be as dim as rocks. You are too polite Matthew.

        1. Is that Jenny Harris his Niece?
          If yes, now I know why she has been so unrelenting. Just imagine if it had been a member of her family he had abused, then her title would have been.
          ROLF IS GUILTY.

          1. very true. Although if her family member had been “abused” at an establishment where it had since been categorically proven that he had never been to the place, then perhaps she may have her doubts.

      2. ‘How do you know he’s innocent’, all the brain dead pillocks ask. Go and find out for yourself….I did. Read the website and give yourselves a treat……try to understand it!

      3. It wasn’t out of the blue. It was right after the Jimmy Savile allegations. Rolf Harris’s name was circulated online when the Savile storm was fresh. He wasn’t the only celebrity caught up in it. People saw that if it was possible to accuse a dead celebrity of unprovable historic abuse and get compensation, they could try it against live celebrities. They weren’t being coincidentally all at once reminded of their own abuse. What kind of crime victim needs to hear of accusations against someone in the same occupation as their abuser in order to report him? Does a person who has had their house burgled by a baker need to wait until they hear of another baker being accused of burglary before coming forward? No, that’s absurd. Just like the accusations against celebrities after the Savile scandal. I followed Rolf Harris’s first trial closely, saw anomalies and agree with those who argue that the claims were bogus. Anyone else saying “me too” is therefore also a fraud.

  6. Sally
    I don’t believe for one second that it was Categorically proven that he had never been to said place.
    Also just because his appeal has been accepted, means nothing, do you honestly think his previous charges will be overturned?? Dream on.

    1. Dodge, I did not even know his appeal has been accepted (just submitted). But you’re quite right in that the previous charges may not be overturned?

      ref the “said place” – sadly it pretty much HAS been categorically proved that he’s never been to Leigh Park Community centre. Do some google searches – there’s a lot of info on this. This is why I think the appeal WILL be accepted (and certainly taking that case on it’s own – that accusation at least should be overturned) – we’ll see.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • ob_flush(); ?>