Secret Celeb Gossip #13

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
TheJoanCollinsFanClub said:
When he was texting me, and flirting, it was more banter and this was years ago, so maybe I was naive, but I had no idea that he was going to try and jump on me!!.... I assumed that he was harmless, and I’m glad I got out when I did!! I still chuckle when I see him acting like super dad, and my friends still refer to him as cheese grater cock. 😂
Click to expand...
.
I'm sorry that happened to you the filthy bastard, you could have been raped or anything.
 
lamaitresse said:
Wow, really? That's all you got from that? How can you speak for all judges?

I've seen first-hand the strange hands-off approach the authorities take when it comes to child welfare. It's hard from the outside looking in to tell what's going on.

In the early 1990s I lived in a block of flats (dodgy housing estate, but not everyone was bad, I knew loads of people), one neighbour was younger than me (I was early 20s) and had a four year-old. She had a heroin habit and there were rumours she was a prostitute as well - I only heard the grapevine, I tend to keep on the fence where local gossip is concerned.

I'd regularly see this poor little girl wandering the streets at night, crying, wanting her mum. We had a concierge (security) service and I buzzed them to let them know I was looking after her, was giving her milk and toast, and to let her mum know, wherever she was.

A year or so later the little girl was in the flat when she took a fatal overdose. Still in her custody after all that.
Click to expand...

unfortunately children’s social care works in trends so basically children’s services were too heavy handed in the 70s and 80s and ‘permanence’ occurred, by where children were removed and permanently adopted with little or no reason. This was recognised as extremely damaging and bad practice, and to turn around authoritarian practice the children’s act 1989 was implemented - and social workers chilled for a few years and tried to keep families together. Then of course came Victoria Climbie, then much later Baby P, and again later Daniel Pelka. When something serious happens it influences practice massively, it’s fascinating to learn about it but the damage done, and the risks taken with kids lives are horrendous. Obviously it’s a massive issue with lots of debate and examples but yeah what you will have seen at that time can be simply put as a trend, isn’t that dreadful!

With regard to judges - you are right, there’s a whole host of people involved in children’s social care, judges are there to simply make an unbiased decision based on the information they receive. So if you get a tit social worker or an excellent family lawyer in the same court it can be a different outcome compared with the next case of a cracking social worker and family who want to work with services. That’s the thing with social care - legislation, policy, best practice guidelines, all fairly stringent but there will always be the human element and where that exists there are opportunities for mistakes and ultimately failure.
lamaitresse said:
Wow, really? That's all you got from that? How can you speak for all judges?

I've seen first-hand the strange hands-off approach the authorities take when it comes to child welfare. It's hard from the outside looking in to tell what's going on.

In the early 1990s I lived in a block of flats (dodgy housing estate, but not everyone was bad, I knew loads of people), one neighbour was younger than me (I was early 20s) and had a four year-old. She had a heroin habit and there were rumours she was a prostitute as well - I only heard the grapevine, I tend to keep on the fence where local gossip is concerned.

I'd regularly see this poor little girl wandering the streets at night, crying, wanting her mum. We had a concierge (security) service and I buzzed them to let them know I was looking after her, was giving her milk and toast, and to let her mum know, wherever she was.

A year or so later the little girl was in the flat when she took a fatal overdose. Still in her custody after all that.
Click to expand...

unfortunately children’s social care works in trends so basically children’s services were too heavy handed in the 70s and 80s and ‘permanence’ occurred, by where children were removed and permanently adopted with little or no reason. This was recognised as extremely damaging and bad practice, and to turn around authoritarian practice the children’s act 1989 was implemented - and social workers chilled for a few years and tried to keep families together. Then of course came Victoria Climbie, then much later Baby P, and again later Daniel Pelka. When something serious happens it influences practice massively, it’s fascinating to learn about it but the damage done, and the risks taken with kids lives are horrendous. Obviously it’s a massive issue with lots of debate and examples but yeah what you will have seen at that time can be simply put as a trend, isn’t that dreadful!

With regard to judges - you are right, there’s a whole host of people involved in children’s social care, judges are there to simply make an unbiased decision based on the information they receive. So if you get a tit social worker or an excellent family lawyer in the same court it can be a different outcome compared with the next case of a cracking social worker and family who want to work with services. That’s the thing with social care - legislation, policy, best practice guidelines, all fairly stringent but there will always be the human element and where that exists there are opportunities for mistakes and ultimately failure.
 
HanCoop89 said:
unfortunately children’s social care works in trends so basically children’s services were too heavy handed in the 70s and 80s and ‘permanence’ occurred, by where children were removed and permanently adopted with little or no reason. This was recognised as extremely damaging and bad practice, and to turn around authoritarian practice the children’s act 1989 was implemented - and social workers chilled for a few years and tried to keep families together. Then of course came Victoria Climbie, then much later Baby P, and again later Daniel Pelka. When something serious happens it influences practice massively, it’s fascinating to learn about it but the damage done, and the risks taken with kids lives are horrendous. Obviously it’s a massive issue with lots of debate and examples but yeah what you will have seen at that time can be simply put as a trend, isn’t that dreadful!

With regard to judges - you are right, there’s a whole host of people involved in children’s social care, judges are there to simply make an unbiased decision based on the information they receive. So if you get a tit social worker or an excellent family lawyer in the same court it can be a different outcome compared with the next case of a cracking social worker and family who want to work with services. That’s the thing with social care - legislation, policy, best practice guidelines, all fairly stringent but there will always be the human element and where that exists there are opportunities for mistakes and ultimately failure.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the interesting insight
 
Cosmo69 said:
It's weird what Twitter's done to human beings. Imagine a time pre-Twitter, you're just having a casual chat to a stranger, and she says, 'Oh, before you go, I took some photos of me in my underwear - here, take some and pass them around at pubs or bus stops or wherever...' You would've thought she'd gone mad. Now, via Twitter, it's routine.
Click to expand...
This looks like a mans arss! Too muscley for me and not what I would be showing off!

Restless Native said:
She was involved in blood diamonds too
Click to expand...
Yeah never liked Naomi and I deffo don’t now! Didn’t know she helped Epstein at all!

Gym&Tonic said:
It's all kicking off on Twitter at the moment. Anonymous have just said that Donald Trump had Jeffrey Epstein murdered. I don't think anyone believes he killed himself, but Trump slept with under age girls as well. As young as 13.
Click to expand...
I knew Don was a bleep but I didn’t think he was that way inclined!
 
Cosmo69 said:
It's weird what Twitter's done to human beings. Imagine a time pre-Twitter, you're just having a casual chat to a stranger, and she says, 'Oh, before you go, I took some photos of me in my underwear - here, take some and pass them around at pubs or bus stops or wherever...' You would've thought she'd gone mad. Now, via Twitter, it's routine.
Click to expand...
Same for unsolicited dic pics...

TheJoanCollinsFanClub said:
So a bit of gossip if anyone is interested..
Years ago, back when Jade Goody had just had her first son Bobby, Jeff Brazier had a sunbed Shop in George Lane, South Woodford. Anyway, I used to love sunbeds (I know they’re awful) so I walked in the shop, a young girl was on the till, I paid and went in. When I came out, the shop was empty apart from Jeff, he looked me up and down and asked for my mobile number so he could tell me about any offers they had going at the shop, I gave him my number and thought nothing of it until the next day when I got a text from Jeff asking if I wanted to book another sunbed, my mate was saying “wind him up, and see what he comes back with” So I played along, and every text he was flirting like mad with me. Long story short, I went back the following week for a sunbed, and when I got out, he had locked us in the shop, no one else around, and then he pulled his jeans down, got his cock out, and was saying “do you like what you see?” No I bloody didn’t!! He lunged at me for a kiss, and I managed to get out by saying that someone was outside, so Jeff ran in a cubicle and I got out. All my mates were so jealous, and wanted to know what his cock was like, I said it was very red, and looked like he’d tried wanking using a cheese grater. I got the odd text from him after, even asking me to come and help him babysit Bobby at the shop!! I never replied and never saw him again.
Click to expand...
I guess this is the pre-digital era version of the dic pic!
Yikes!
What makes anyone think this is welcome or will work?
 
Gym&Tonic said:
Also Naomi Campbell was involved in procuring young girls for Epstein.

Always knew she was a bleep!
Click to expand...
Wasn’t Naomi involved with some court room drama to do with blood diamonds a few years ago? Does anyone know if she had to return them?
Edit to add, I completely agree with you, Naomi is a bleep with a nasty temper who beat an assistant up with her phone.
 
lamaitresse said:
Wow, really? That's all you got from that? How can you speak for all judges?

I've seen first-hand the strange hands-off approach the authorities take when it comes to child welfare. It's hard from the outside looking in to tell what's going on.

In the early 1990s I lived in a block of flats (dodgy housing estate, but not everyone was bad, I knew loads of people), one neighbour was younger than me (I was early 20s) and had a four year-old. She had a heroin habit and there were rumours she was a prostitute as well - I only heard the grapevine, I tend to keep on the fence where local gossip is concerned.

I'd regularly see this poor little girl wandering the streets at night, crying, wanting her mum. We had a concierge (security) service and I buzzed them to let them know I was looking after her, was giving her milk and toast, and to let her mum know, wherever she was.

A year or so later the little girl was in the flat when she took a fatal overdose. Still in her custody after all that.
Click to expand...
I spent a year in family court with my daughter's dad. a massive eye opener to say the least...cannot understand the current mentality judges have and yes id say it is all of them but I have closely followed the samantha baldwin case and I do believe her.
 
amysiobhan84 said:
I spent a year in family court with my daughter's dad. a massive eye opener to say the least...cannot understand the current mentality judges have and yes id say it is all of them but I have closely followed the samantha baldwin case and I do believe her.
Click to expand...
Similarly I have a sibling that had an abusive ex and walked a similar path. But I think your comment about judges is getting into tinfoil hat territory. There are bad apples in any profession but to say ALL judges condone and want to normalise child abuse is downright nuts.
HanCoop89 said:
With regard to judges - you are right, there’s a whole host of people involved in children’s social care, judges are there to simply make an unbiased decision based on the information they receive. So if you get a tit social worker or an excellent family lawyer in the same court it can be a different outcome compared with the next case of a cracking social worker and family who want to work with services. That’s the thing with social care - legislation, policy, best practice guidelines, all fairly stringent but there will always be the human element and where that exists there are opportunities for mistakes and ultimately failure.
Click to expand...
You must have missed this comment above.
 
Cosmo69 said:
It's weird what Twitter's done to human beings. Imagine a time pre-Twitter, you're just having a casual chat to a stranger, and she says, 'Oh, before you go, I took some photos of me in my underwear - here, take some and pass them around at pubs or bus stops or wherever...' You would've thought she'd gone mad. Now, via Twitter, it's routine.
Click to expand...
I know! I just can’t get into the mindset of “ooh I fancy taking some photos of my arse in my run-of-the-mill living room” which is fine but why inflict it on the rest of us??

Gym&Tonic said:
It was brilliant. 'Why has he done this now? I dont understand? Everyone knew he was gay. We all knew he was gay'. As all the other showbiz brown nosers shuffled in their seats awkwardly.
Click to expand...
gawd bless her ❤️❤️
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top