Bibliogryphon 8,686 Posted September 30, 2014 Jonathon King will once again grace our TV screens in a Documentry on Genesis to be screened on 04th October. Interesting to note he actually complained to the BBC about being edited out of TOTP and was assured it would not happen again. The photo half way down is quite interesting but probably none for 2015. I presume he will not draw attention to the fact that the band pretended to break up after their first album just to get away from him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,022 Posted September 30, 2014 Jonathon King will once again grace our TV screens in a Documentry on Genesis to be screened on 04th October. Interesting to note he actually complained to the BBC about being edited out of TOTP and was assured it would not happen again. The photo half way down is quite interesting but probably none for 2015. I presume he will not draw attention to the fact that the band pretended to break up after their first album just to get away from him. No, but somebody else might. The obvious thing to do with an ego-maniac like King is let him tell his story and let everyone else tell theirs, leaving the gap in the two accounts to speak volumes. The main reason their first - King produced - recordings get little more than curious interest from Genesis fans is that his production is widely accepted to be fairly poor. Novelty hits and the like were his strong point, whenever he's worked with high end professionals - like Genesis or 10cc - the ambitious types involved have been conspiciously more successful after getting away from him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_engineer 1,405 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,134 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_engineer 1,405 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
time 7,972 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . Quite. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,134 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . To be fair, your answer has not justified your argument that King WOULD have abused a young child had he got the chance. He may well have fucked a few 18 or 19 year olds but we wont know about those because, as adults, the sex was consensual, unless any start coming forwards with allegations of rape. Look, countless men have had their wives and girlfriends dress up like schoolgirls for sex, are you saying that they are paedos too? Like I said, there is a distinct difference between preteen children and 14/15 year old teens hurtling into adulthood. Sexual preferences can be and are distinct, the difference between an adult having a sexual attraction to a child or a "youth" is as distinct as you or me having a sexual interest in Kelly Brook or Zsa Zsa Gabor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phantom 2,469 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . To be fair, your answer has not justified your argument that King WOULD have abused a young child had he got the chance. He may well have fucked a few 18 or 19 year olds but we wont know about those because, as adults, the sex was consensual, unless any start coming forwards with allegations of rape. Look, countless men have had their wives and girlfriends dress up like schoolgirls for sex, are you saying that they are paedos too? Like I said, there is a distinct difference between preteen children and 14/15 year old teens hurtling into adulthood. Sexual preferences can be and are distinct, the difference between an adult having a sexual attraction to a child or a "youth" is as distinct as you or me having a sexual interest in Kelly Brook or Zsa Zsa Gabor. A peadophile is generally defined as someone with a preference for prepubescent children. Believe it or not even paedophiles have their limits when it comes to how young they are attracted to. I wouldn't say King was a paedophile, more of a preferential sex offender who preyed on young teens because of their young age, and also how easily influenced they can be at times. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_engineer 1,405 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . Quite. It's true ladies !! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_engineer 1,405 Posted September 30, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . To be fair, your answer has not justified your argument that King WOULD have abused a young child had he got the chance. He may well have fucked a few 18 or 19 year olds but we wont know about those because, as adults, the sex was consensual, unless any start coming forwards with allegations of rape. Look, countless men have had their wives and girlfriends dress up like schoolgirls for sex, are you saying that they are paedos too? Like I said, there is a distinct difference between preteen children and 14/15 year old teens hurtling into adulthood. Sexual preferences can be and are distinct, the difference between an adult having a sexual attraction to a child or a "youth" is as distinct as you or me having a sexual interest in Kelly Brook or Zsa Zsa Gabor. A peadophile is generally defined as someone with a preference for prepubescent children. Believe it or not even paedophiles have their limits when it comes to how young they are attracted to. I wouldn't say King was a paedophile, more of a preferential sex offender who preyed on young teens because of their young age, and also how easily influenced they can be at times. I don't think a schoolgirl fantasy is paedophilic afterall a girl can still be in school at 16 and legal to have sex. Also the reason school fantasy is popular is it takes the man/boy back to when they started becoming sexually awoken. Experiencing girls for the first time ,usually at school and they usually wearing said uniform . I have had on many occasions a 19 year old japanese school girl as my profile pic. Also i could never fantasise about kelly brook but zsa zsa on the other hand... I guess i just don't want to give Johnathan king the benefit of the doubt i don't think he deserves it. He certainly preyed upon them for their young age like you said that is for sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EGN 121 Posted October 1, 2014 Without wishing to cause offence, I'd venture that Jonathan King is a paedophile by any stretch of the word. Lay definition: Oxford dictionary defines 'Paedophile' as 'n: A person who is sexually attracted to children' and 'Child' as 'n: A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority'. Although, he is probably better described as a 'Pederast', 'Pederasty' being more specifically 'n:Sexual activity involving a man and a boy.' Legal definition: Under current English law a child is any person under 18, but has only been so since 2004. It was 16 at the time of the offences. Mr King was convicted of indecent assault, buggery and attempts to commit same, against 5 boys aged between 14 and 15. Of course, 'paedophile' is not the current 'on message' term in law enforcement. In front of the boss it's 'child sex offender' and on a fag break it's still the time honoured 'nonce'. Medical definition: The description of the psychiatric diagnosis of paedophilia included at the wiki link provided by Tempus Fugit has been incorrectly copied from its source, which is clear that sexual interest in pubertal children is included in the scope of the disease. So, by colloquially, legally, medically and I'd argue morally, the cap fits rather well. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,022 Posted October 1, 2014 Without wishing to cause offence, I'd venture that Jonathan King is a paedophile by any stretch of the word. Lay definition: Oxford dictionary defines 'Paedophile' as 'n: A person who is sexually attracted to children' and 'Child' as 'n: A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority'. Although, he is probably better described as a 'Pederast', 'Pederasty' being more specifically 'n:Sexual activity involving a man and a boy.' Legal definition: Under current English law a child is any person under 18, but has only been so since 2004. It was 16 at the time of the offences. Mr King was convicted of indecent assault, buggery and attempts to commit same, against 5 boys aged between 14 and 15. Of course, 'paedophile' is not the current 'on message' term in law enforcement. In front of the boss it's 'child sex offender' and on a fag break it's still the time honoured 'nonce'. Medical definition: The description of the psychiatric diagnosis of paedophilia included at the wiki link provided by Tempus Fugit has been incorrectly copied from its source, which is clear that sexual interest in pubertal children is included in the scope of the disease. So, by colloquially, legally, medically and I'd argue morally, the cap fits rather well. Good work, doubtless anyone educated at Charterhouse and Cambridge would appreciate such scholarship. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 8,686 Posted October 1, 2014 He should be shot on sight the filthy pedo! Jonathan King is not a paedophile. Fact. Bit of a grey area all round, The Daily Mail seem content to use the words "child sex abuser" in the context of his conviction for abusing teenage boys: http://www.dailymail...ry-Genesis.html There's no grey area at all, Tempus is just being weird for the sake of being weird on this particular matter..... Paedophile has a very specific definition, as King's youngest victim was 14 he can't be classed as a paedophile. You don't think he would of abused children if given the chance ? I'm sure Johnathan king wouldn't of turned away at the chance to abuse a 10 year old, or younger and for all we know he may well of done given what happened at the BBC with Savile and co. He looks like one Creepy bas**rd even his wiki profile pic is creepy him in a dressing gown posing for a selfie . Whose wiki profile pic is a pic they took themselves in their dressing gown at home. The guy is a paedo end of story and he is one of the few celebs i genuinely hope dies as soon as possible, well maybe not until I have picked him in 2015. haha Im not comfortable making a blanket assumption that somebody who "is into" teenagers is automatically going to be into pre pubescent children. Its like suggesting that all homosexuals have an unhealthy interest in underage boys because, well, they are queer, right? There is a big difference between teenagers and young children, if there wasn't then scum like Robert Black whouldnt have targeted the victims he did, would he. Well if Johnathan king was simply into teenagers why didn't he just shag 16 to 18 year olds legally ? People change alot from 12 to 16 , when i was 14 i was still very much built and acted more childlike by the time i was 16 i had grew nine inches and was built more like an adult . It also said he abused the trust of the kids parents , so I'm guessing he groomed them . 5 of the boys he assaulted were 14 to 15 surely if he was into teens he would of at least had 1 or 2 victims aged 18 or 19 etc . The homosexuality analogy (no punt intended) is nothing like that . A man convicted of shagging young boys (not the swiss football team haha) is clearly in my eyes a paedo whereas two homosexual men have consensual sex has nothing to do with paedophilia at all . The other thing to remember is that when these offences were committed the legal age for consent for homosexuals was higher. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,022 Posted October 1, 2014 Good point in the post above and - though there's no allegation being investigated of this - if King was a practicing homosexual at the time of his first big hit he was comitting a crime. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,134 Posted October 1, 2014 Without wishing to cause offence, I'd venture that Jonathan King is a paedophile by any stretch of the word. Lay definition: Oxford dictionary defines 'Paedophile' as 'n: A person who is sexually attracted to children' and 'Child' as 'n: A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority'. Although, he is probably better described as a 'Pederast', 'Pederasty' being more specifically 'n:Sexual activity involving a man and a boy.' Legal definition: Under current English law a child is any person under 18, but has only been so since 2004. It was 16 at the time of the offences. Mr King was convicted of indecent assault, buggery and attempts to commit same, against 5 boys aged between 14 and 15. Of course, 'paedophile' is not the current 'on message' term in law enforcement. In front of the boss it's 'child sex offender' and on a fag break it's still the time honoured 'nonce'. Medical definition: The description of the psychiatric diagnosis of paedophilia included at the wiki link provided by Tempus Fugit has been incorrectly copied from its source, which is clear that sexual interest in pubertal children is included in the scope of the disease. So, by colloquially, legally, medically and I'd argue morally, the cap fits rather well. Good work, doubtless anyone educated at Charterhouse and Cambridge would appreciate such scholarship. Fucking hell Mary, I genuinely lolled at that! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 8,686 Posted October 2, 2014 Good point in the post above and - though there's no allegation being investigated of this - if King was a practicing homosexual at the time of his first big hit he was comitting a crime. No I think he was already quite good at it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phantom 2,469 Posted October 2, 2014 Good point in the post above and - though there's no allegation being investigated of this - if King was a practicing homosexual at the time of his first big hit he was comitting a crime. No I think he was already quite good at it. You know that from first-hand experience or just speculating? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,022 Posted October 4, 2014 Re his appearance in the Genesis R-Kive documentary, he's notably more rotund and his voice has a strong raspiness which may have been a cold, or mortality starting to clog his lungs. Too big an ego to lie down and die easily, but finally looking as if his age is catching up on him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 8,686 Posted October 6, 2014 at the time of his first big hit he was comitting a crime. and with all his subsequent releases 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YoungWillz 19,127 Posted September 10, 2015 Arrested on historical abuse charges: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34205654 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,022 Posted September 10, 2015 Arrested on historical abuse charges: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34205654 Doubtless there'll be statements from his side namechecking his latest work that nobody is buying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spade_Cooley 9,027 Posted September 10, 2015 Time to bring back the classic "well he did produce 10cc" gag again? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deathray 2,933 Posted September 10, 2015 And in the least suprising celebrity child abuse arrests award we have a winner.... Jonathan King Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Predictor 1,007 Posted September 11, 2015 He did an interesting interview with Robert Blake in the 60s. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Davey Jones' Locker 1,324 Posted January 11, 2016 Well, it seems like the wrong bloke with a weird sexual appetite who wrote a novelty song about the space race has died.... 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
