daniel

Aug 3, 07 - 12:26 AM

Re Chris Langham

I am glad to see that the above named actor was remanded into custody for a month today pending sentencing for downloading child porn and i hope the judge hands out a sentence befitting his crime.In my opinion following this case it appears that this man has tried numerable ways to escape the fate that is now his.First research for a part he was playing,then a way to understand and deal with abuse he claimed mid trial to have suffered in his childhood and if that is true or not in my opinion no excuses,none at all!!!

§tèvë

Aug 3rd, 2007 - 12:31 AM

Re: Re Chris Langham

I fully agree daniel, he sounds a nasty bit of work and stoops as low to use being a victim of sexual abuse, when no one would do that, if they had suffered the way we have

§tèvë

Ken

Aug 3rd, 2007 - 11:35 AM

Re: Re Chris Langham

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6929143.stm

Aha, glad I wasn't the only one who felt like ranting about him, but now the trial is over and he's been convicted, we can talk about it properly. It's his kids I feel sorry for. Attacking the victim as part of your defence is always desparation.

Anyone wanting to research child porn as Langham and that guy from the Who claimed, would do better to talk to the police - as if you actually need to see a child being abused if you've been through it yourself - that's a conscious choice to cross the line.

The remanding in custody's also right, more for his own protection...

§tèvë

Sep 10th, 2007 - 11:29 AM

Chris Langham

Not sure if this story reached other papers over the weekend, but just found this update

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/09/09/saved-98487-19758251

§tèvë

daniel

Sep 14th, 2007 - 10:43 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

I see Chris Langham was today sentenced to 10 months in prison and will be out in 5 more than likely.Would of liked to see a longer sentence for this high profile case but i suppose at least he did get a custodial term and i hope he has a hard 5 months ahead of him.

Ken

Oct 3rd, 2007 - 11:11 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=483076&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments

Found that in a Daily Mail that I was recycling (copy and paste link if it doesn't work, or just search on Langham on the Daily Mail website and search in page 3.

Diddums...

daniel

Nov 14th, 2007 - 9:04 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

See today he will be released sometime very soon after a sentence review.What a deterrent eh two months bird and a bit of time on remand for viewing all examples of graded child pornography.I don`t know how they grade it exactly but have an idea.Oh well at least thats his career on the rocks then again it probably isn`t at least he can use it for his "research for a part" in the future.British justice is a joke at times!!

§tèvë

Nov 14th, 2007 - 10:23 PM

Chris Langham

Hi Daniel

Makes you sick that he can appeal and get the sentence reduced, when the bastard is clearly guilty and should serve the full sentence, even more!

Seems like the people who make the judgments need to be re-trained into how to make sentences fit the crime, but then again, the general public fail to see that sexual abuse is a problem and even worse, that child porn is an issue that needs sorting out!

Look after yourself fella and hope to see you in due course mate

§tèvë

Ken

Jan 6th, 2008 - 4:07 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7173862.stm

Just goes to show that sometimes it's your supporters that can do you as much harm as your own criminal actions.

Like I said before, Diddums, if his wife wants to stand by him and have their kids take loads of flak in school then get on with what you've decided to do rather than trying to get sympathy.

Plenty of survivors have managed to write about their experiences without crossing the line.

Andrew

Jan 7th, 2008 - 9:50 AM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Hi Ken,

I don’t know if you’ve heard of the Phoenix Survivors website run by Shy Keenen (I think it’s spelt like that) but along with doing some other amazing things it catalogues hundreds of current convictions and arrests and the ‘research’ excuse is the latest plea that child sex offenders have started using, pretty much since the Pete Townsend case, along with the usual things like ‘depression’, ‘drinking’ and ‘marriage breaking down’. How on earth do these defence lawyers do it?

Also I find his wife’s reaction fairly typical of those in denial eg ‘he only downloaded four’ and I’m sure that if her own children came forward and said he had done it to them (which is likely) she would be just as supportive of them as she was towards the children in that video he was watching – which is not at all. I fear it would be one of those ‘how can you do this to your father and me?’ reactions.

As you say, diddums.

§tèvë

Jan 7th, 2008 - 10:09 AM

Re Chris Langham

Hi Andrew

Don't believe all you read, because PS has Pete Townsend as part of the organistion and has been 'begging' for money to 'treat' abusers too, but so far has failed to get the ££THOUSANDS she has been asking for.

§tèvë

Andrew

Jan 7th, 2008 - 3:43 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Hi Steve,

this has nothing to do with belief in the printed word. There is no such thing as 'research' when it comes to viewing images of children being violated and I am fairly sure that after his experience, these days Townsend now has as much of an interest in recovery as anyone else.

As for money to 'treat abusers', a phrase I have often used on this site refers to doing the washing up with a dirty cloth. Incest, child abuse and all sexual and emotional dysfunction is a problem which is thousands of years old and is merely another symptom of a contaminated co-dependant society. A society with problems partialy rooted in organised religion and a deeply buried misunderstanding of reality and exactly what it is to be human.

Do you remember what I said about the wholly destructive nature of celebrity? Pop and rock musicians and actors are people who are out of control and the industry they work in encourages them to stay that way by default. The only reason these people can make a difference is because of the amount of money they have. Yet we live in a society which is deferential towards them, largely due to an ancient book written by co-dependant people who misunderstood what they were writing about in the first place. A book that tells us not to worship false idols yet does exactly that long after the context is relevant.

The only way any of this is going to change is not by wasting money on incentives that amount to nothing but plate spinning, but by a massive cultural change in attitides towards mental health. If the whole of civilisation had the same attitude towards healing their inner child as they do towards physical health there would literaly be no wars.

There is a glimmer of hope as a small fraction of this generation share this point of view although none of us will see any tranformation, I reckon that may be at least six generations down the line. But it will happen.

Back to the present though, whatever Townsend thinks he is doing is about as much use as his 'research' was.

Andrew

Jan 7th, 2008 - 3:58 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Oops,

Steve,

After that highly articulate outburst of mine I've just re-read your post and I think I may have gotten the wrong end of the stick (or at least I hope so!).

If I'm to understand it correctly you're saying that the fact that Phoenix has got involved with Townsend in a campaign to get treatment for abusers is completely wack-o. If thats what you're saying then I'm right there with you bruv and I humbly apologise for jumping in like that!!

Consider my wrists slapped!

What on earth do they think they're doing? In fact my Mrs just told me that Keenen is now trying to get a record deal which speaks volumes.

Anyway, apologies again, my fault for not reading yer post properly.

I get back in me box now.

A

§tèvë

Jan 7th, 2008 - 5:58 PM

Langham

No worries mate, and no offence taken..

Its good to let rip now and again, but does help to have the missus around to put you right

§tèvë

Ken

Jan 8th, 2008 - 4:03 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Also no worries Andrew, we want this board to get busier and it's good to have debate. If Shy Keenan wanted any kind of interaction re help for abusers, she should have consulted Ray Wyre, he's the expert after all and when he retires, god knows who will carry on his work (which I view as a dirty job that somebody has to do)...

§tèvë

Jan 8th, 2008 - 10:40 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Do a google search and you'll see that RW and SK are already trying to scam money for a treatment programme for abusers

Theres a lot more I cold say about a certain person, but prefer not to do so online, but lets just say I have had dealings with him in the past and the least said about him the better!!

Ken

Jan 9th, 2008 - 12:41 AM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Steve, is that a completely different person than the one we've already discussed over email?

(Apologies everyone else, that'll mean nothing to you!)

Andrew

Jan 10th, 2008 - 9:33 AM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Is the 'certain person' you are referring to a musician or a comedy actor? If it's the latter I don't know him myself but I am friends with/have worked with someone who does. An 'intellectual bully' is the term best used to decribe how he behaves on a social level. All of which ties in very nicely with his conduct throughout his trial.

§tèvë

Jan 10th, 2008 - 10:46 AM

Re: Re Chris Langham

The person i didnt want to mention is RW, who works with, supports and excuses paedophiles for a living

We dont see eye to eye on any issues, but thats to be expected

§tèvë

Andrew

Jan 10th, 2008 - 5:09 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Yeah, it is.

Ken

Jan 11th, 2008 - 10:08 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Can you believe that he's going to be interviewed on More4's strand "Shrink Rap"? Next Tuesday, More4? I just saw the trailer.

I'll just have to reserve any further judgement until I watch it now.

§tèvë

Jan 11th, 2008 - 11:39 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

I forgot to post that hes appearing with Billy Connellys wife doing the interview.

All her previous interviews have been sick making and I dont expect this to be any different, but like you ken, I will wait and see, but wont watch it!

Whats the odds on her doing her best to make it all sound sad and terrible that he was caught out?

S

Ken

Jan 21st, 2008 - 1:55 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

It's been useful to make the board busier by having Langham as a talking point, but after reflecting on the interview last week I think the fact he was humbled by little acts of kindness (people driving him around and so on) was as useful as his conviction.

To be cold enough to treat L5 Child Porn (never knew about these categories) as research, I think that showed the level of ego that two BAFTAs could send you to. Hopefully he will leave it there and let time decide when, if ever, he returns to any kind of artistic career. Townshend is still rocking after all.

That's where I'll try to leave any further discussion of CL, though it depends whether his wife comes up with any corkers in future

Trydeep

Jan 26th, 2008 - 10:52 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

There is no excuse for what he did. No matter who he thinks he is or whatever he can try to ' justify ' as 'research ' I don't even think that we should prolong this by debating what he did. His actions speak volumes.

§tèvë

Jan 26th, 2008 - 10:55 PM

Re: Re Chris Langham

Hi

I agree, so I'll lock this conversation down now, in the hope that new messages about recovery and related stuff takes place

§tèvë

Author	Comment
daniel Aug 3, 07 - 12:26 AM	Re Chris Langham I am glad to see that the above named actor was remanded into custody for a month today pending sentencing for downloading child porn and i hope the judge hands out a sentence befitting his crime.In my opinion following this case it appears that this man has tried numerable ways to escape the fate that is now his.First research for a part he was playing,then a way to understand and deal with abuse he claimed mid trial to have suffered in his childhood and if that is true or not in my opinion no excuses,none at all!!!
§tèvë Aug 3rd, 2007 - 12:31 AM	Re: Re Chris Langham I fully agree daniel, he sounds a nasty bit of work and stoops as low to use being a victim of sexual abuse, when no one would do that, if they had suffered the way we have §tèvë
Ken Aug 3rd, 2007 - 11:35 AM	Re: Re Chris Langham http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6929143.stm Aha, glad I wasn't the only one who felt like ranting about him, but now the trial is over and he's been convicted, we can talk about it properly. It's his kids I feel sorry for. Attacking the victim as part of your defence is always desparation. Anyone wanting to research child porn as Langham and that guy from the Who claimed, would do better to talk to the police - as if you actually need to see a child being abused if you've been through it yourself - that's a conscious choice to cross the line. The remanding in custody's also right, more for his own protection...
§tèvë Sep 10th, 2007 - 11:29 AM	Chris Langham Not sure if this story reached other papers over the weekend, but just found this update http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/09/09/saved-98487-19758251 §tèvë
daniel Sep 14th, 2007 - 10:43 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham I see Chris Langham was today sentenced to 10 months in prison and will be out in 5 more than likely.Would of liked to see a longer sentence for this high profile case but i suppose at least he did get a custodial term and i hope he has a hard 5 months ahead of him.
Ken Oct 3rd, 2007 - 11:11 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=483076&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments Found that in a Daily Mail that I was recycling (copy and paste link if it doesn't work, or just search on Langham on the Daily Mail website and search in page 3. Diddums...
daniel Nov 14th, 2007 - 9:04 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham See today he will be released sometime very soon after a sentence review.What a deterrent eh two months bird and a bit of time on remand for viewing all examples of graded child pornography.I don`t know how they grade it exactly but have an idea.Oh well at least thats his career on the rocks then again it probably isn`t at least he can use it for his "research for a part" in the future.British justice is a joke at times!!
§tèvë Nov 14th, 2007 - 10:23 PM	Chris Langham Hi Daniel Makes you sick that he can appeal and get the sentence reduced, when the bastard is clearly guilty and should serve the full sentence, even more! Seems like the people who make the judgments need to be re-trained into how to make sentences fit the crime, but then again, the general public fail to see that sexual abuse is a problem and even worse, that child porn is an issue that needs sorting out! Look after yourself fella and hope to see you in due course mate §tèvë
Ken Jan 6th, 2008 - 4:07 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7173862.stm Just goes to show that sometimes it's your supporters that can do you as much harm as your own criminal actions. Like I said before, Diddums, if his wife wants to stand by him and have their kids take loads of flak in school then get on with what you've decided to do rather than trying to get sympathy. Plenty of survivors have managed to write about their experiences without crossing the line.
Andrew Jan 7th, 2008 - 9:50 AM	Re: Re Chris Langham Hi Ken, I don’t know if you’ve heard of the Phoenix Survivors website run by Shy Keenen (I think it’s spelt like that) but along with doing some other amazing things it catalogues hundreds of current convictions and arrests and the ‘research’ excuse is the latest plea that child sex offenders have started using, pretty much since the Pete Townsend case, along with the usual things like ‘depression’, ‘drinking’ and ‘marriage breaking down’. How on earth do these defence lawyers do it? Also I find his wife’s reaction fairly typical of those in denial eg ‘he only downloaded four’ and I’m sure that if her own children came forward and said he had done it to them (which is likely) she would be just as supportive of them as she was towards the children in that video he was watching – which is not at all. I fear it would be one of those ‘how can you do this to your father and me?’ reactions. As you say, diddums.
§tèvë Jan 7th, 2008 - 10:09 AM	Re Chris Langham Hi Andrew Don't believe all you read, because PS has Pete Townsend as part of the organistion and has been 'begging' for money to 'treat' abusers too, but so far has failed to get the ££THOUSANDS she has been asking for. §tèvë
Andrew Jan 7th, 2008 - 3:43 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Hi Steve, this has nothing to do with belief in the printed word. There is no such thing as 'research' when it comes to viewing images of children being violated and I am fairly sure that after his experience, these days Townsend now has as much of an interest in recovery as anyone else. As for money to 'treat abusers', a phrase I have often used on this site refers to doing the washing up with a dirty cloth. Incest, child abuse and all sexual and emotional dysfunction is a problem which is thousands of years old and is merely another symptom of a contaminated co-dependant society. A society with problems partialy rooted in organised religion and a deeply buried misunderstanding of reality and exactly what it is to be human. Do you remember what I said about the wholly destructive nature of celebrity? Pop and rock musicians and actors are people who are out of control and the industry they work in encourages them to stay that way by default. The only reason these people can make a difference is because of the amount of money they have. Yet we live in a society which is deferential towards them, largely due to an ancient book written by co-dependant people who misunderstood what they were writing about in the first place. A book that tells us not to worship false idols yet does exactly that long after the context is relevant. The only way any of this is going to change is not by wasting money on incentives that amount to nothing but plate spinning, but by a massive cultural change in attitides towards mental health. If the whole of civilisation had the same attitude towards healing their inner child as they do towards physical health there would literaly be no wars. There is a glimmer of hope as a small fraction of this generation share this point of view although none of us will see any tranformation, I reckon that may be at least six generations down the line. But it will happen. Back to the present though, whatever Townsend thinks he is doing is about as much use as his 'research' was.
Andrew Jan 7th, 2008 - 3:58 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Oops, Steve, After that highly articulate outburst of mine I've just re-read your post and I think I may have gotten the wrong end of the stick (or at least I hope so!). If I'm to understand it correctly you're saying that the fact that Phoenix has got involved with Townsend in a campaign to get treatment for abusers is completely wack-o. If thats what you're saying then I'm right there with you bruv and I humbly apologise for jumping in like that!! Consider my wrists slapped! What on earth do they think they're doing? In fact my Mrs just told me that Keenen is now trying to get a record deal which speaks volumes. Anyway, apologies again, my fault for not reading yer post properly. I get back in me box now. A
§tèvë Jan 7th, 2008 - 5:58 PM	Langham No worries mate, and no offence taken.. Its good to let rip now and again, but does help to have the missus around to put you right §tèvë
Ken Jan 8th, 2008 - 4:03 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Also no worries Andrew, we want this board to get busier and it's good to have debate. If Shy Keenan wanted any kind of interaction re help for abusers, she should have consulted Ray Wyre, he's the expert after all and when he retires, god knows who will carry on his work (which I view as a dirty job that somebody has to do)...
§tèvë Jan 8th, 2008 - 10:40 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Do a google search and you'll see that RW and SK are already trying to scam money for a treatment programme for abusers Theres a lot more I cold say about a certain person, but prefer not to do so online, but lets just say I have had dealings with him in the past and the least said about him the better!!
Ken Jan 9th, 2008 - 12:41 AM	Re: Re Chris Langham Steve, is that a completely different person than the one we've already discussed over email? (Apologies everyone else, that'll mean nothing to you!)
Andrew Jan 10th, 2008 - 9:33 AM	Re: Re Chris Langham Is the 'certain person' you are referring to a musician or a comedy actor? If it's the latter I don't know him myself but I am friends with/have worked with someone who does. An 'intellectual bully' is the term best used to decribe how he behaves on a social level. All of which ties in very nicely with his conduct throughout his trial.
§tèvë Jan 10th, 2008 - 10:46 AM	Re: Re Chris Langham The person i didnt want to mention is RW, who works with, supports and excuses paedophiles for a living We dont see eye to eye on any issues, but thats to be expected §tèvë
Andrew Jan 10th, 2008 - 5:09 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Yeah, it is.
Ken Jan 11th, 2008 - 10:08 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Can you believe that he's going to be interviewed on More4's strand "Shrink Rap"? Next Tuesday, More4? I just saw the trailer. I'll just have to reserve any further judgement until I watch it now.
§tèvë Jan 11th, 2008 - 11:39 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham I forgot to post that hes appearing with Billy Connellys wife doing the interview. All her previous interviews have been sick making and I dont expect this to be any different, but like you ken, I will wait and see, but wont watch it! Whats the odds on her doing her best to make it all sound sad and terrible that he was caught out? S
Ken Jan 21st, 2008 - 1:55 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham It's been useful to make the board busier by having Langham as a talking point, but after reflecting on the interview last week I think the fact he was humbled by little acts of kindness (people driving him around and so on) was as useful as his conviction. To be cold enough to treat L5 Child Porn (never knew about these categories) as research, I think that showed the level of ego that two BAFTAs could send you to. Hopefully he will leave it there and let time decide when, if ever, he returns to any kind of artistic career. Townshend is still rocking after all. That's where I'll try to leave any further discussion of CL, though it depends whether his wife comes up with any corkers in future
Trydeep Jan 26th, 2008 - 10:52 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham There is no excuse for what he did. No matter who he thinks he is or whatever he can try to ' justify ' as 'research ' I don't even think that we should prolong this by debating what he did. His actions speak volumes.
§tèvë Jan 26th, 2008 - 10:55 PM	Re: Re Chris Langham Hi I agree, so I'll lock this conversation down now, in the hope that new messages about recovery and related stuff takes place §tèvë