Skip to comments.WHO's Townshend may have to register as a sex offender in Florida
Posted on 12/29/2009 1:11:27 PM PST by Drew68
Since the story of Townshend sex offender past broke nationally a week ago, which has been a subject of debate and argument, only one question matters.
Was Pete Townshend a registered sex offender in the UK from 2003 to 2008? Answer: Yes.
Well thats that then. Sorry Pete. This precludes you from not only playing at the Super Bowl, it also stops you from entering the United States to begin with.
Since the NFL decided to hire Pete Townshend for the upcoming Super Bowl event all hell has broken loose. Child AbuseWatch, the international child prevention group, have been trying for some time to bring attention to Townshends sex offender status. Most notably was the Kennedy Center Awards event last year when they wrote to the organizers protesting the honoring of someone with sex offender history.
Most recently they have asked the NFL to drop Townshend from the Super Bowl. In a way they are doing the NFL a favor. How? When the family values groups get hold of this theyre going to rip the NFL and their sponsors apart. It could indeed prove to be an incredibly expensive mistake on the NFLs part to not read more than Townshend publicists take on Petes past when they were planning the half time show.
Another national advocacy group, Protect Our Children, headed by Kevin Gillick has taken the NFL protest a step further; two steps actually. They have made a lot of noise with the Immigration and Naturalization Department and ICE begging to ask how a registered sex offender, with criminal record, has been given free reign to enter the US.
U.S. immigration law says authorities will deny entrance to Aliens convicted of, and those who admit having committed a crime involving moral turpitude...
(Excerpt) Read more at shine.yahoo.com ...
Haven't The Who performed numerous times in the U.S. in the last seven years?
Ummm, so? That would be reason not to enforce this now?
Or, perhaps this would work.....”Officer, honestly, I’ve driven 85 on this road for the past 2 years and never been ticketed before, so what gives?”
According to the NFL’s moral standards, Rush Limbaugh is too despicable to have a minority ownership interest in an NFL team, but a pedophile is suitable halftime entertainment.
Who are You, to ask that.
NFL pretty much sucks anymore
Just because I wouldn’t let him close to my kids doesn’t mean I still don’t like his music.
Waivers of inadmissability due to crimes involving moral turpitude are pretty much a given for high profile entertainers and athletes. In fact waivers are often granted to such performers and entertainers in circumstances where regular folks would never be able to get one. And probably in a lot less than the 6 months to 2+ years it can take for regular folks to have a waiver application processed and approved.
Well, he was acquitted.
FWIW, I'm a Who fan but I think they were a poor choice for halftime entertainment.
There something that smells about all this.
First off, English law is entirely different than ours: there you are assumed guilty until proven innocent. Thus he was required to register, even though he was subsequently found innocent. (If our laws were the same, Michael Jackson would have been registered twice.)
Secondly, not only his case but hundereds of others were thrown out at the same time. Apparently someone set up a web site with misleading information that caused people to click onto a kiddy porn site without knowing it. None of the people that were “caught” in this sting did any of the usual things kid porn searchers do (hide behind a double blind firewall to protect their identity, ailias pay systems, etc). Townshend reportedly logged on as himself!
At any rate, I’m sorry to be so jaded but I smell organizations looking for publicity. A “spokesperson” for some group that couldn’t get arrested yesterday will now get two minutes on every news show.
I wonder where these people were a couple of months ago when the world was wailing about the death of a real child molester?
There’s a lot more to the story re Townshend’s culpability that is not described in this article. Bring on the Who!
Oh, and btw, he was never convicted or even formally charged with anything (AFAIK). He was thoroughly investigated by the police who found nothing beyond the fact, which he admitted, that his credit card had been billed by a child porn site. He claimed it occurred in the course of research for a book. In any case, it’s not as if he is some sort of widely acknowledged kiddie-diddler.
FWIW, that little tidbit was not in the article, nor mentioned in your post. IF true, IF baseless, then he should be free to enter. IF just a legal dodge, well, IMHO, no entry thanks.
FWIW too, I prefer Pink Floyd ;^)
I never read that the police found any evidence to convict him of anything. Apparently he didn’t have any images on his computer, nothing printed out, no contacts with kids, nothing.
I say let them play!
Pete’s never been convicted or even accused of abusing children. I would agree if it were Gary Glitter, Roman Polanski or Obama’s Safe School Czar, but Pete doesn’t deserve to be targeted.
As the posters above explained, this is a load of crap.
I had read that PC Magazine did a forensic analysis of servers, IP addresses, Pete's computer, TCP/IP traffic footprints, etc. and it was clear that Townshend never accessed any illicit material. It seems that Townshend admitted to doing something under the glare of the media that he actually never did.
I have to agree.
“I had read that PC Magazine did a forensic analysis of servers, IP addresses, Pete’s computer, TCP/IP traffic footprints, etc. and it was clear that Townshend never accessed any illicit material. It seems that Townshend admitted to doing something under the glare of the media that he actually never did.”
I think that Pete Townshend is completely innocent. I’m not just saying this because I think he’s an absolute musical genius and I like so many of his songs; I really do think he is innocent based on everything I’ve learned about the case.
I think so. During the “Who’s Left” tour.
From what I’ve read here, this is much ado about nothing. But The Who? They couldn’t find better entertainment for the Super Bowl?
To the folks complaining about the Who’s performance...I guess you don’t remember the act they did for the 9/11 concert in NYC. They brought the house down. It was amazing! (yes, I’m a Who fan)
Michael Jackson was not available for comment...
Isnt Pete Townshend a Critic of Obama. I remember he wanted to kick Michael Moores ass because he used “Wont Be Fooled Again” on the movie that bashed Bush and was pro war in Iraq.
If this is the case, it anwsers a lot of questions.
Huh? Kind of a mixed message there....
Oooo, the Bernie Ward defense. Didn't work for Fat Bernie, why should it work for Townshend???
Uhh....just sayin'...rephrase that, perhaps?
“Oooo, the Bernie Ward defense. Didn’t work for Fat Bernie, why should it work for Townshend???”
A fair point. How about because there’s no evidence that has ever been presented to support Ward’s claim while there’s plenty to support Townshend’s?
Okay, point taken. It does sound fishy, though, wouldn't you say? Given the plethora of identity theft sites out there, you would think that someone that rich and famous would be VERRRRRY careful where he sticks his credit card.
That was one of the biggest points towards his defense. If you “thought” you “were” going to a kiddie porn site, you would certainly take great pains to avoid your identity.
“It does sound fishy, though, wouldn’t you say? Given the plethora of identity theft sites out there, you would think that someone that rich and famous would be VERRRRRY careful where he sticks his credit card.”
Agreed. Though the thing with Townshend happened a long time before widespread identity theft I think (1999?) and he actually admitted having accessed the site for research in a blog post well before he was ever arrested, which tended to show that he hadn’t thought he’d done anything wrong or that needed to be hidden. There’s a good deal of information out there on his case.
I love the Who-saw them at the old J.F.K. Stadium in Philadelphia in 1982, along with the Clash and R.E.M. From what I’ve learned, he SAID he was researching child porn and clicked on a real link which is what got him in trouble. Can’t say I know the truth of it though, as all media spin, spin, spin.
Indeed. That's 'cause "laws" in general apply mainly to we little folk; the elite are generally exempted.
That’s the same concert in which Hillary got booed... My husband and I were watching it live. They scrubbed the DVD though...the boos were gone. :-(