no doubt about it, Ian Watkins is a nonce

[eFestivals]

I actually find this a bit confusing to be honest. If a man abuses his own child then his identity is released through the media, how is this different?

I think it's normally the case that it's not made clear who exactly that person might have abused, isn't it?

If we take the 'Kevin Webster' case, it was clear from what was reported that the alleged victim was someone known to him, but they jumped thru a lot of hoops to avoid going into things (at least with the reporting, perhaps it was different in the court room?) which would have made the relationship between him and the alleged victim explicit.

(I drew my own conclusions about what that relationship was, but perhaps I've got it wrong.)

[eFestivals]

but as it happens I've come across those names via a completely different (private) route since, and one of them is now very stuck in my head.

just out of interest in what results might come up, I've just typed one of the names into google, and before I'd got halfway thru typing the surname the top result was a report of the court case that names them both.

(I now feel very sorry for people who share the same name, which were some of the other results ).

[rachbon]

One of his ex girlfriends is on This Morning and she said that he told her that he was planning to rape a baby, but when she reported it to the police they did nothing about it and told her that she could be charged with harassment. He apparently accused her of being a stalker. Obviously his fame has given him the cover to abuse children.

The other guy on This Morning who I think has worked on the case says that there are a lot more victims. The problem is that they're too young to come forward themselves and the mother's won't want to come forward as they allowed the abuse so would be charged.

I am assuming that these women who have allowed him access to their children are single parents, as there has been no mention of the Fathers.

Edited November 29, 2013 by rachbon

[FloorFiller]

when this story was announced somebody posted (might've been in this thread actually, will have a scan through) one of Ian's internet profiles (dating profile maybe?) and the 'chat' part of it was full of girls claiming that he was a pedophile and in to some horrible shit etc, all posted years and years ago. maddening that it took so long for something to finally get done about it. the posts also mention who i assume to be the two girls and their involvement in it. seems quite a few people were aware of it all but kept quiet

edit: here we go http://www.whosdatedwho.com/tpx_74997/ian-watkins/ people claiming he has aids and was purposefully giving it to people etc. horrible, but incredible that this is all from two years ago and further

Edited November 29, 2013 by FloorFiller

[eFestivals]

I've just heard some gossip that it's thought there are at least 11 other females similar went on with. Whether that's true or not I don't know, but that gossip has the potential to be well-sourced.

[russycarps]

I've just heard some gossip that it's thought there are at least 11 other females similar went on with. Whether that's true or not I don't know, but that gossip has the potential to be well-sourced.

[rachbon]

Rumours of him being a child abuser go back as far as ten years apparently.

[rachbon]

If the victims in the current case are only babies and therefore unable to come forward, and their mother's allowed the abuse then how did the police find out?

[thetime]

If the victims in the current case are only babies and therefore unable to come forward, and their mother's allowed the abuse then how did the police find out?

[rachbon]

He wasn't arrested originally for the abuse but drugs.

[russycarps]

edit: here we go http://www.whosdatedwho.com/tpx_74997/ian-watkins/ people claiming he has aids and was purposefully giving it to people etc. horrible, but incredible that this is all from two years ago and further

[FloorFiller]

fucking hell those comments are insane

He asked me if I'd been tested yet, and when I said no he said well if you haven't got it now you soon will have. He was disappointed when I told him I wasn't pregnant too, he just wants to get girls preg and give them and their baby a i d s. Si ck ba stard

[russycarps]

nuts isn't it? especially seeing so many people talk about it so casually and seemingly doing absolutely nothing about it. sounds like fame went to his head massively and he just wanted to see how far he could use his fandom to his advantage

[LondonTom]

edit: here we go http://www.whosdatedwho.com/tpx_74997/ian-watkins/ people claiming he has aids and was purposefully giving it to people etc. horrible, but incredible that this is all from two years ago and further

[kaosmark2]

Interesting article by the Guardian on the concept of an artist's sins and how that causes their work to be viewed:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2013/nov/29/ian-watkins-art-sins-artist

[russycarps]

Interesting article by the Guardian on the concept of an artist's sins and how that causes their work to be viewed:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2013/nov/29/ian-watkins-art-sins-artist

[kaosmark2]

The fact that lost prophets were largely shite makes it easy to wipe them from history I suppose

[thetime]

nonces

[eFestivals]

Interesting article by the Guardian on the concept of an artist's sins and how that causes their work to be viewed:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2013/nov/29/ian-watkins-art-sins-artist

a discussion that's happened in my house lately around the (far-less extreme in the scale of things) Roy Harper case.

I think it would be very hard of anyone to look on Watkin's work as untainted - particularly if there's any truth in the comments on that site others have linked to that a recent-ish lostprophets album had to have the lyrics re-written because the lyrics were making reference to some of what Watkins was up to.

The likes of Roy Harper? The details have yet to come out, but I'm currently presuming it was either a mostly-consensual groupie type thing, or a 70's 'hippie free love' thing, which the victim is looking differently on with hindsight - and unless the whole of the 70s was to be put on trial, I'm not sure his work should be tainted. While that might of been illegal in those days, it certainly wasn't considered the heinous crime it would be viewed on if happening today

(for a bit of context: in the 70s I had friends at different schools to me where teachers got under-16s pregnant and who kept their jobs).

[Spindles]

It's crazy stuff.

If it is true that he is HIV positive though, then maybe that did make him go mad and think "fuck the world!" and want to lash out and hurt as many people as possible, and hence all this horrendous behaviour. At least that would someone make some kind of fucked up sense.

Rather than he just wants to rape babies etc for fun

[Spindles]

I hate that word with a passion, I'm sure we all have a few brain cells not to use it.

[FloorFiller]

At work, so won't click through here .....but is that profile where he has something to do with dressing up as a unicorn or something?

He also apparently had a profile on an escort site to :S (As an Escort I think it was ..)

[FloorFiller]

If he was HIV positive he would already have been charged with the offences relating to that along with the abuse.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

From what I've read a Guilty plea in the first instance would have got him a discounted sentance, however as he waited untill the trial, he will get no reduction. I'm guessing he will get life with a minimum tarriff somewhere between 15 and 20 years.

As for the 2 women's identities, they don't need to be released, they are all over the internet, which as you point out, is a bad thing as it's likely that one day the babies in question may find out what happened to them

[justanothername]

Has anyone read the official statement from the other members of Lostprophets yet on their facebook?