Anyone watch it last night? I found it disturbing.
Do you know if it will be repeated?
I didn't see it. I would have really like to have watched it but it clashed with Desperate Housewives
I found it disturbing too. I think he is a dirty fu*ker who likes to get nieve young boys drunk on gifts and take advantage of them. I thought he was totally out of touch, pity the woman making the documentary didn't really tear him apart........pity I'm also gone so flipping blind I couldn't read half the subtitles.
[quote="Delish":6t06yegy]I found it disturbing too. I think he is a dirty fu*ker who likes to get nieve young boys drunk on gifts and take advantage of them. I thought he was totally out of touch, pity the woman making the documentary didn't really tear him apart........pity I'm also gone so flipping blind I couldn't read half the subtitles.[/quote:6t06yegy]
With you on the subtitles!
It was disgusting and actually i was very near to turning it off. I dunno why i watch those documentaries at all TBH but it rang so similar to another i watched on UK police prosecuting pedophiles in the UK and they being interviewed saying the children were accepting of the relationships/ asking for it/ ok with it/ etc and thats the vibe i got from him too.
I thought the interviewer was superb especially interviewing the owner of the hotel - it was fairly clear what he was saying from what he didn't say.
Blooming annoyed that he is getting grant aid and a free house for the duration of his lifetime - if what i heard is true.
I was sickened - he's just a dirty old man.
It more or less confirmed the feeling I had before - that he did wrong but doens't see it that way. He was such a strange mixture of arrogance and naivety. On the one hand he was idealising platonic love and saying he didn't want romantic love in his life anymore, but at the same time he also clearly had strong sexual urges. I was almost as disturbed by the God-complex he displayed as I was by the sexual advantage he took of those boys.
However, I still maintain that it is neither fair nor accurate to call him a paedophile. They were all over age. Certainly, it's creepy, but it's not paedophilia. In my opinion his greatest crime was using his economic advantage to exploit vulnerable people.
I will be very interested to see what happens next.
[quote="Roxanne":3az4t8y9] it is neither fair nor accurate to call him a paedophile. They were all over age.
I will be very interested to see what happens next.[/quote:3az4t8y9]
I agree on both statements
Do you know if it will be repeated?[/quote:3tw31ub9]
I'm mildly embarrassed to same I'm the same-would love to know if there'll be a repeat
[quote="MrsJayKay":3tw31ub9]I didn't see it. I would have really like to have watched it but it clashed with Desperate Housewives
I was digusted by him. And i was surprised by how much. Having heard all the hype about him and the documentary I really thought people were just jumping to conclusions and blowing it all out of proportion. I hate that kind of mob mentality so i started looking at the documentary more or less on his side.
But oh yuck yuck yuck. He is just a vile individual. What shocked me the most is that he really doesn't believe he is doing anything wrong. He openly admitted to sexually experimenting with these naive teenagers, reagrdless of the age of consent, the boys weren't sexually aware or mature. He completely took advantage of them. He promised to help with their homework in the bedroom of his hotel and then fondled them, etc etc.
The stories of the boys would have made you cry. They described what happened them and how they knew nothing at all about sex, let alone homosexuality. They even described what he used to do and say. It was awful. You could see they were upset by it.
Cathal O Searcaigh is a creep.
Cathal O Searcaigh is a creep.[/quote:3d4cmuvu]
Yup, that pretty much sums it up from my POV.
[quote="Survivor":4wubt8qq] the boys weren't sexually aware or mature. He completely took advantage of them. [/quote:4wubt8qq]
Exactly - some of them did not know what sex was - age in this context was something for him to justify the acts which were abuse in my book. One or two of them were so immature it was not nice to even look at them on tv speaking about what happened them.