Gary Glitter

[Andy_Shrimp]

Has said that he don't want to come back here.Well I don't want you back you filthy barsteward. If we can do this why can't we have more control, as to who else comes here.

We can and should control our borders. I am not a racist and will accept anyone who seeks refuge (for the right reason). We have got it wrong previously, so now make that stand and take only those who can offer something to our couintry.

Austrailia seem to me have it right so why can't we?

 

[MK Shrimper]

Unfortunately he's British born and holds a British passport so you can't stop him.

 

[Andy_Shrimp]

Unfortunately he's British born and holds a British passport so you can't stop him.

I know mate. I just hate the fact that he can still earn a living from royalties. Perhaps as a father I don't want this person on our shores. I go back to my first post when I think as a country we should be more selective as to who comes in. I accept that as a passport holder we have to let him back, but lets have some more control on those of his kind. Also we need to be more selective as to who comes in.

 

[Firestorm]

There is uproar on here if a foreign national comes over here then commits a crime . generally the theme is send him back, we don't want him and in the majority of situations (asylum or "human rights" excepted ) the government concur and extradite.
Now the Thai's are doing exactly the same and its "we don't want him".
Please make your mind up, extradite offenders back to the country of domicile or not ?

 

[Benfleet A1]

There is uproar on here if a foreign national comes over here then commits a crime . generally the theme is send him back, we don't want him and in the majority of situations (asylum or "human rights" excepted ) the government concur and extradite.
Now the Thai's are doing exactly the same and its "we don't want him".
Please make your mind up, extradite offenders back to the country of domicile or not ?

Spot on, we have to except him back but I hope you will be as vocal when the boots on the other foot which it has been on countless occasions. That little gem of 'Threat of Death' holds little credence now doesn't it?

 

[Firestorm]

Spot on, we have to except him back but I hope you will be as vocal when the boots on the other foot which it has been on countless occasions. That little gem of 'Threat of Death' holds little credence now doesn't it?

If we (as a nation) were to threaten to execute him for a crime he had been convicted of in his absence then the Thai's would not be in a position to extradite him.
However , I would doubt that any claim for asylum would get him too far.....

 

[Aberdeen Shrimper]

Gary Glitter Barred From Thailand After Refusing London Flight

By all accounts he is now saying that he will not board the plane to fly to the UK and i being told by the authorities in Vietnam and Thailand in that he is not staying there, so currently he is stuck in the airport with no were to go.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aIuOhxJqlDBc&refer=europe

 

[londonblue]

Gary Glitter Barred From Thailand After Refusing London Flight

By all accounts he is now saying that he will not board the plane to fly to the UK and i being told by the authorities in Vietnam and Thailand in that he is not staying there, so currently he is stuck in the airport with no were to go.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aIuOhxJqlDBc&refer=europe

According to the BBC he refused to board the flight to the UK because he was sick.

Tell us something we don't know!

 

[* ORM *]

There is uproar on here if a foreign national comes over here then commits a crime . generally the theme is send him back, we don't want him and in the majority of situations (asylum or "human rights" excepted ) the government concur and extradite.
Now the Thai's are doing exactly the same and its "we don't want him".
Please make your mind up, extradite offenders back to the country of domicile or not ?

It is thoughtful posts such as this that stop the kneejerkers like me and remind me how great the Zone can be. nice one FS.

 

[steveo]

Please make your mind up, extradite offenders back to the country of domicile or not ?

So presumably you want them to keep him there then.

 

[Firestorm]

So presumably you want them to keep him there then.

Not at all, there is no reason for any extradition to be refused. he has not sought asylum, there is no official death sentence awaiting him over here and he is not a Thai / Vietnamese passport holder.

 

[MrB]

Look-a-likes

Saw his pic in the paper this morning and couldn't help thinking:

 

[Clinton Baptiste]

Put a bullet in his head and do us all a favour.

 

[osymandus]

Ah you mean he'll be killed by a huge Tongan with a giant plasma weapon !!!

The thing that gets me is why he gets on the front pages of teh newspapers . DOnt run teh stories his persona non grata now , remove his passport (teh British Govermenat can do this) and leave him in the airport pounge :D

 

[ldnfatso]

There is uproar on here if a foreign national comes over here then commits a crime . generally the theme is send him back, we don't want him and in the majority of situations (asylum or "human rights" excepted ) the government concur and extradite.
Now the Thai's are doing exactly the same and its "we don't want him".
Please make your mind up, extradite offenders back to the country of domicile or not ?

Good point this! Its a NIMBY scenario!

Glitter is vile scum and we all know this, but if he decides to live here in UK (which he is quite entitled to) having done his time then our local authorities need to do whatever is nessesary to protect us from such scum.

 

[Southminster_Shrimper]

And then there is this on the bbc article...

"He could also face an order prohibiting him from going near children or using the internet. "

Could? I hope that is merely saying that he hasnt already rather than it being a distinct possibility that he might not get such an order.

Hes been convicted before....and in the UK. How come he isnt already on the sex offenders register? Why doesnt he already have a ban from going near children? I assume the sex offenders register didnt exist then so cant be added to it. Not that it will make much difference anyway. If he is that way inclined he will continue regardless.

He should surely have these things already whether he is in this country or not. If nothing else, as others have said, he can comeback to the UK whenever he likes.

 

[please delete my account]

I seem to remember when he was originally arrested he said it was a conspiracy.
One of the journalists asked 'Who By' and the filthy slaphead sicknut paedo replied 'You Know who.'

I wonder who he meant? Alvin Stardust?

I have heard that Mr Stardust was a bit of a nutter. He wore those black gloves to protect his knuckles so that he could punch for longer...

 

[Firestorm]

And then there is this on the bbc article...

"He could also face an order prohibiting him from going near children or using the internet. "

Could? I hope that is merely saying that he hasnt already rather than it being a distinct possibility that he might not get such an order.

Hes been convicted before....and in the UK. How come he isnt already on the sex offenders register? Why doesnt he already have a ban from going near children? I assume the sex offenders register didnt exist then so cant be added to it. Not that it will make much difference anyway. If he is that way inclined he will continue regardless.

He should surely have these things already whether he is in this country or not. If nothing else, as others have said, he can comeback to the UK whenever he likes.

It was set up in 1997
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/jan/18/childrensservices.politics1

From the Telegraph in 1999 about his conviction for child prnography

The judge also ordered that on his release Glitter, who was tried under his real name of Paul Gadd, be placed on the Sex Offenders Register for seven years. His pornography collection is to be destroyed and he must pay £80,000 towards Crown costs.

So he would need to go back on the register, which considering the charges he was found guilty of in Vietnam would probably mean for life

 

[OldBlueLady]

When he makes it back to Blighty, which I'm sure he will, however much he pretends to not want to come back, he should automatically be placed on the sex offenders register under any and all of the aliases he's used in his life time.

Unfortunately he is fully entitled to the royalties from his records and I don't think there's anything that can be done about that. He's a sick old man in every sense of the word and I sincerely hope a very close eye is kept on him when he comes back.

 

[jerseyshrimper]

The guy is an out and out perv, he should be banned for life from every being near children and if he defaults he should be locked up for the rest of his natural life, his royalty money would be no good to him then