[Johnny 1989]

Can't say I'm suprised to be honest, he's always come across as a chavvy little shit with a big * attitude (ah my favourites, Ilford is full of these morons these days), problem is even if he is innocent everyone will write him off as being guilty because of the death threat incident and his whole attitude.

I don't even know why he still has the attitude, he's made enough money out of his awful music, he's no longer "living in the hood", start being a positive role model to your fans instead of acting like a complete tit all the time.

[Wykey]

Can someone explain to me what "released without charge" means?

See normally I'd think that meant they were innocent, but reading this thread it seems entirely the opposite.

[Nicola_Red]

Can someone explain to me what "released without charge" means?

See normally I'd think that meant they were innocent, but reading this thread it seems entirely the opposite.

Quite a few of these comments were made before the news that he hadn't been charged was made public, and I imagine that those people who commented after that weren't aware of it. I think that after the text death threat debacle many of us were taking the 'no smoke without fire' approach, which while clearly not correct in the eyes of the law, is a natural human reaction.

[Wykey]

I'd normally imagine that if someone jumped to a conclusion, and made judgments that were based on bad information, they might at some stage set the record right and withdraw....

I'm not trying to claim anything about his personality or character, I've no real idea if he's scum or if he's a saint, but it's nice to be fair, you know....

[Nicola_Red]

But our judgements were made on the fact that he copied down a teenage girl listener's phone number and texted her with death threats. That wasn't bad information.

[Wykey]

It seemed more that it was based on the assumption he'd assaulted his girlfriend...

[Nicola_Red]

It's kind of both, I think. The reason many of us took that 'no smoke without fire' approach (I know, it's a cliche) was based on what we already know about him. That of course is the reason that juries in criminal trials don't have access to information about the defendant's past criminal history. I agree that people should have borne in mind that he was innocent until proven guilty, but I also don't think anyone could be blamed for suspecting that he was probably the same ignorant little shit who thought it was okay to threaten a teenage girl.

[Yudster]

It wasn't a teenage girl was it? It was Chloe Moody, who at the time was 22 and the mother of a three year old girl. Now I am not excusing what Dappy did, but I would have thought a 22 year old mother would have had better things to do with her life than spend it sending insults by text message to pop stars on the Chris Moyles show, so I didn't particularly feel sorry for her at the time. But whilst what she did was immature and stupid, what Dappy did was somewhat more serious.

[Nicola_Red]

Ah, if you know her name then you clearly recall the specifics better than I do - not sure why I thought it was a teenager. The stuff she texted in was a bit odd, but then who hasn't thought thoughts like that about someone they don't like at some point, and maybe voiced them aloud? It doesn't really change the facts of the case to me. Lest we forget, Dappy also once received a four-week suspended sentence for spitting in a fan's face....

[Ajescent]

Didn't he get released without charge, so why all the hate?

[Yudster]

Released without charge just means that his girlfriend didn't bring charges. It was her mother who called the police. Why would she do that unless she thought it was important to get that little shit away from her daughter?

[a-moron]

I thought in the case of domestic abuse it was the police who pressed the charges not the individual involved. Or is this just a Scottish thing?

[Nicola_Red]

Didn't he get released without charge, so why all the hate?

Maybe try reading the rest of the thread before you post...?

Can someone explain to me what "released without charge" means?

See normally I'd think that meant they were innocent, but reading this thread it seems entirely the opposite.

Quite a few of these comments were made before the news that he hadn't been charged was made public, and I imagine that those people who commented after that weren't aware of it. I think that after the text death threat debacle many of us were taking the 'no smoke without fire' approach, which while clearly not correct in the eyes of the law, is a natural human reaction.

[Wykey]

Released without charge just means that his girlfriend didn't bring charges. It was her mother who called the police. Why would she do that unless she thought it was important to get that little shit away from her daughter?

She might be a spiteful demented witch who would do anything she could to split them up.

It happened to me, a long time ago. you can imagine my delight at being marched out of the house at four in the morning following a 'report that a woman was being assaulted and there was a child in danger at the same address".

Doesn't sound like it was the case here, but there could be more to it than it might initially seem.

[Yudster]

True. But Dappy - or more likely his publicist - would have made that claim if it were so I think.