If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
wht does it take to bring a famous person down?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
theres photos in the sun of pete cockerty injecting heroin into an unconscious fan in his kitchen........
what does it take!? and more importantly what posseses these people!? :crazyeyes
what does it take!? and more importantly what posseses these people!? :crazyeyes
0
Comments
Therefore they tend to be above the law.
none of that was ever proven though, thus he is an innocent man - all they proved is that he is most probablyincredibly mentally ill which doesnt make him a kiddy fiddler
photograph of injecting smack into a passed out girls arm = far more dodgy
true there was never any pictures of him shagging little kids... had pictures of him and is baby but I think he got fined for that...
Also plenty of parents who were suing stop after receiving shit loads of cash from him... also i can see why do it even if innoncent as it is shit publicity... but imo it would surprise me from him... he is fucking weird...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006190560,00.html
i allways like to think there are 2 sides to every story though.
no, nothing was proved, all they proved was that he had people stay over, and that he is a VERY ODD person indeed..... the prosecution kind of shot themselves in the feet by getting statements showing he has a child like mentality, and of wanting to be a child, which would give reason for him having boys only stay over - same as when real little boys have sleepovers, its normally only other boys
he might be a kiddy fiddler,i dont know either way to be honest, it went to court and wasnt proved, thus he is an innocent man (unless they prove him guilty)
hearsay evidence isnt enough to convict a person of child abuse strangely enough - photographs of injecting someone who is unconscious with something probably is due to consent reasons combined with the fact he isn't a trained nurse/doctor
Yep, if the court say so by the law he is innocent... apparantly he loves kids because as a star kid he didn't have a proper childhood or something...
Picture that provea star injected a fan is for sure an evidence that prove witout a doubt the guy is guilty and should be sentence...
it's illegal to inject yourself with drugs, so someone else too...
I always took great pleasure of making conversation with coppers at dance festivals whilst completely off my face on pills- I've always been under the impression that so long as you don't have anything on you, you're fine.
Then again, technically he would be in possession of the drugs until they vacate the syringe and enter her body I guess...
If she was a consenting adult and had asked him to help inject the drugs (rather than a scene of Dothery pushing drugs on people and injecting them without their consent) how is that different from two people sharing a joint, or a line of charlie?
That's basically the right idea yes. Though having a possitive test for heroin may soon become an offense.
As for this event, if it is what it seems then its going to be possible GBH or at least assault. Hell, they could even try for attempted murder.
Not sure, just look what happend wit the magic mushroom, you were able to buy the and posses them but not allowed to eat them... tbh it is more what I think might be, I am not sure what the laws are about it... but here they still had if in their possession and in a fucked up way by injecting it you carry it in your body which is a bit possession...
The two are not the same.
The 'loophole' in regards to mushrooms was the defence that you had found it when out legit mushroom hunting. Because of this it made it very hard to make mushrooms in their natural state illegal - but they did it anyway totally ignoring the difficulties.
With heroin (which I suspect this is) possession is illegal, but, a possitive drug test for heroin isnt.
is there any evidence that it contains heroin?
if not a photo won't convict.
he could actualy have been saving someone fromn an overdose.
i had an occasion where a seriously violent drunk got into my home whilst having a party ...back in the late seventies.
he managed to hurt two people badly and then set about wrecking the place.
no words were spoken ...we knew what to do.
i hastily prepared a very large shot of amphetamine in a syringe ...four guys jumped him and held him down/
while i ...mainlined him.
in less than a minute the giy was seriously sober ...he was then taken outside and given a good kick9ng.
I am going to admit now that I thought the same thing.
When you said 'injecting into a fan' I was just thinking of some kind of drug room. Like... a room of drug atmosphere. A high room, or something.
I can't believe they're still on his case though... Surely there's some other junkie rockstar they could pick on?
Hum... interesting... didn't know that...
As for the rest of famous people, well look at Pete Doherty...says it all, you cant bring down fame.
not, technically, no. possession is illegal, but the actual act of taking them isn't
refusing a drug test if arrested for a trigger offence is now an offence in itself
What do you mean by "bring them down" though? Remove their fame? That won't happen because "famous" people behaving badly is apparently news. Jail them and that changes nothing too- especially as Doherty hasn't been proven to have done anything that merits being jailed yet.
I'm just surprised it took the papers this long to publish. I heard about this little story six months ago. That should tell you far more about the media agenda than anything- Doherty's heroin use- on both himself and others- has been known about for a long time.
Now that's a fucked way to get someone for possession... do they still do that now?
no, i've never come across it