Focus On Derek - What Is He Doing Now?
Derek Longmuir was born in 1951 so now, in the year 2013 he is 62 years old. When he left the Bay City Rollers he became a male nurse. I was quite shocked when I saw his picture in the newspaper looking bald and quite a lot older! But not half as shocked to read what he had been accused of in the papers. Of all the group, Derek Longmuir has turned out to be the most controversial - and most shocking. In around 2000, Derek was taken to court accused of having child pornography on his computer. He denied all charges claiming that he was holding it on his computer for a friend of his. I know many fans are totally shocked by these accusations. When I first learned of this I definitely was, and I still am. I still cannot believe it! First Gary Glitter, now Derek Longmuir! I was and still am really so shocked. This was the man Bay City Roller fans looked up to. We loved him. We hung on every one of his words when we were wee Roller fans. And now, many years later he has been accused of downloading child porn. Unbelievable. I bought Les's book 'Shang-a-lang' and in that he alludes to someone in the group getting involved in this sick depravity. And he seemed to believe the accusations were true. He also claimed that it was their manager Tam Paton who got Derek involved in the first place. But if (and I say if) the accusations are true there are no excuses. I'm not saying Les was making any excuses for someone's behaviour or that he blamed Tam for getting this person involved. But some (including the culprit) may do so. His manager can't be used as an excuse for such perverted behaviour. Any normal person when introduced to such things would recoil in disgust and run a mile - whether in a pop band or not! If he was introduced to these things by Tam he had a choice. He could have run a mile and reported the filthy, perverted beast! When Derek Longmuir was involved with Tam Paton he was not a little child, he was an adult. And he was responsible for his own behaviour. He was responsible for his own behaviour back then as he is now. If he became involved with child pornography it's because he chose to do it. And if he chose to it's because he wanted to. He was not forced to do anything.
For a while I refused to believe the accusations against Derek. I didn't want to believe them. Why would anybody want to believe that? It's too grotesque for any normal person's imagination. It's way too disgusting for any right thinking person. But one thing struck me when reading the newspaper article about this. Derek said he was holding the porn, that is CHILD porn, for a friend. And I thought that was such a lame excuse. It was actually pathetic. I mean, let's be realistic. Who would hold such a thing for a friend? If you found out your friend was involved with such things, and wanted YOU to hold it on YOUR computer, would you do it? And would they still be your friend? I know what my answer to both questions is - hell NO! I don't like to say it but what Derek said sounded stupid. It just didn't make sense. It all sounded very suspect. To any intelligent person his explanation came across as dumb. Total hogwash. But obviously I don't know the truth. Most of us don't know. But Derek does. And if he is innocent of these charges he needs to come out in the open and defend himself against these accusations. If he has been falsely accused he should defend himself and protest his innocence properly, not give out lame excuses that quite frankly are not fooling anyone.
I saw these 2 questions about Derek on another website. They asked:-
At the time of his arrest for possessing child pornography Derek was a nurse. So what is Derek's current occupation?
?
Hobbies?
Perhaps best not to ask.
For a while I refused to believe the accusations against Derek. I didn't want to believe them. Why would anybody want to believe that? It's too grotesque for any normal person's imagination. It's way too disgusting for any right thinking person. But one thing struck me when reading the newspaper article about this. Derek said he was holding the porn, that is CHILD porn, for a friend. And I thought that was such a lame excuse. It was actually pathetic. I mean, let's be realistic. Who would hold such a thing for a friend? If you found out your friend was involved with such things, and wanted YOU to hold it on YOUR computer, would you do it? And would they still be your friend? I know what my answer to both questions is - hell NO! I don't like to say it but what Derek said sounded stupid. It just didn't make sense. It all sounded very suspect. To any intelligent person his explanation came across as dumb. Total hogwash. But obviously I don't know the truth. Most of us don't know. But Derek does. And if he is innocent of these charges he needs to come out in the open and defend himself against these accusations. If he has been falsely accused he should defend himself and protest his innocence properly, not give out lame excuses that quite frankly are not fooling anyone.
I saw these 2 questions about Derek on another website. They asked:-
At the time of his arrest for possessing child pornography Derek was a nurse. So what is Derek's current occupation?
?
Hobbies?
Perhaps best not to ask.