Sunday, 13 April 2014

Nigel Evans' Life On Mars

Back in the heyday of the old Colony Room Club, we had our own version of Nigel Evans; an erudite QC of otherwise impeccable manners and rare good humour who was a serial thigh-pincher. One would be in deep inebriated conversation when a sharp and painful nip to the thighs or buttocks would alert you to his presence. Engaging him affably in talk didn't work; he'd sneak in further nips whenever he could get a hand within range. It was pointless trying to shame him with an accusation of deviancy or perversion; they were practically compulsory qualities in that small green place, and only a firm "look, will you fecking stop that" (sometimes) caused him to seek new thighs to pinch.Oh, and it was only blokes that he targeted; the girls were all quite safe. Despite the bruising, I liked him - he was good value. 

Those of us from the Gene Hunt generation I suppose are either more tolerant or more forgiving of the sort of behaviour that has since become classified as 'inappropriate touching'. There was a lot of it about in the 70s and 80s, and in the 90s and oughties it just came indoors. And it wasn't just a post-1968 thing either; our parents' generation even had a code, NSIT (Not Safe in Taxis), to annotate shared address-books. The combination of testosterone and alcohol will generally always produce the same effect, and we should hardly be surprised if the current generation, constrained by fifty weeks a year of post-feminist puritanism, go wild for two weeks in Aya Napa or Ibiza.  

The joyless politically correct little puritans at the CPS may well have destroyed Evans' life, and besmirched the reputations of other figures in the public eye in what is increasingly looking like a vindictive and spiteful witch-hunt against any trace of 'Life on Mars' left in public life, but I think they have misread public opinion. Few juries will happily convict gropers, and that is now the danger; having been thwarted by the justice system, these zealots will now seek other ways of pursuing their agenda.


zippgun said...

Has not Starmer talked of changing the justice system to "protect victims". No alleged about it either. One can guess what this will mean. I fear the lack of success in convicting over alleged sexual crimes will be giving the new puritans more incentive to jerry mander the system to boost conviction rates unsafely. More possibly of New Labour's assault on the jury system - tentative and limited in the past, under Miliband/Harman it could become much more full blooded - even Cameron and co, so eager to latch on to any special pleading and pass legislation to pander to it, could well "do something" to our legal system to weight it still further in favour of the Crown.

Roger said...

Without sin - first stone? Few of us have not woken up thinking (secretly) "I wish I hadn't done that".

I am not so sure about criticising the CPS, they are a bit stuffed either way, probably a bit late for the 'pour encourager les autres' approach though. Nevertheless recent reports seem pretty distasteful if they are to be believed - trading ones bum for a job? Well that is not usually in the best job adverts is it. Mind you, if the applicants are grown up and know the nature of the game they can hardly complain. Perhaps such should be written into the HoC terms of service. Now what is the male equivalent of a hat pin?

Anonymous said...

Next, all female juries for sex cases, only wimmin need apply.

Coming Soon!

Compulsory attendance for males at ladies football matches - you know it and on M.o.D too.

EU equality - it ain't equal but that's girl power and equals [doncha jus' lurve that word hon'?] post-feminist puritanism.

Interesting dichotomy, when post-feminist puritanism meets up with Multiculti - and all male audiences at University 'pep talks from alien but enlightened brothers', man made rules and barbaric at that, it rules OK, in the club of Islam....... There's one for the sisters to stick up their pipes and smoke.

Mike Spilligan said...

Raedwald: You're quite right about the CPS and the jury's correctness in finding Evans not guilty.
What disturbs me is that Cameron says he wants to welcome Evans back to the House, but (opinion coming up) that's only part of his wanting to be seen as a broad-minded 21st century chap, hoping not to lose a further few votes. However, Evans is clearly a loose cannon with out-of-control habits exhibited in semi-public places and whenever he gets drunk, which seems to be very frequently. He is not a man who should have reached a senior position in any political party nor should have a prime role (as deputy speaker) in the HoC.
Gladstone knew how to deal with this when Charles Dilke was involved in a 3-in-a-bed scandal (hetero) in the 1880s. WEG's cabinet notes were annotated: Dilke; unavailable - which became permanent. If these people want to belong to a gay club, it's OK by me, but not (in the widest term)at our expense.

G. Tingey said...

Meanwhile, having been shafted in court, the CPS/other "authorities" seem determined to ruin Evans by other means, having virtually bankrupted him.
I thought, if you were acquitted, you got costs, or is that just me being naive?213

Anonymous said...

You don't get the lot, and it is quite possible that the residue wipes out someone who hasn't been Milleresque in gaming the system..

In my view, after acquittal in a sex case, you should be free to name your accusers and brand them as liars. Not that it helps if they were other MPs, we already know about their abilities in that regard.

AndrewZ said...

Gropers do not deserve any indulgence. There is nothing cute or funny about invading someone's personal space like that. It shows a basic lack of respect for other people. But there is a big difference between being a jerk and being genuinely dangerous. Therefore the proper response to creeps like your friend from the Colony Room is the traditional slap or punch to the face followed by a very loud warning not to try that again. It's a proportionate punishment for the offence.

strawbrick said...

The elephant in the room, which has just shown it's trunk, is the fact that Legal Aid no longer pays the defence costs, not even for the innocent.
And it could happen to any of us ...

Anonymous said...

Have seen chaps like that, "I just can't help myself"; best cure is a good hard punch on the nose delivered with the line "Sorry, just couldn't help myself". It soon stops.