Guest eight Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Amazing these stories always come out when people die and can't offer a defence. He used to scare the hell out of me as a child - no revelation about him would surprise me. Possibly the most almighty freakshow who ever lived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Masked Tulip Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Perhaps the question to ask is if these allegations were commonly known within the Media, and bearing in mind that he worked at the BBC, why weren't these allegations investigated by BBC journos over the past 30 or 40 years? Perhaps they were and nothing was found untoward? Perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ticket2ride Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Perhaps the question to ask is if these allegations were commonly known within the Media, and bearing in mind that he worked at the BBC, why weren't these allegations investigated by BBC journos over the past 30 or 40 years? Perhaps they were and nothing was found untoward? Perhaps? this'll be the same BBC that gets slated on a daily basis on HPC for it's failure to report truthfully [on the housing crisis] then? given the nature of the media it's not really surprising no-one outed one of their biggest stars, if he was, as claimed, a dirty nonce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangermaus Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 it isn't new, there were plenty of rumours and accusations whilst he was still alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numpty Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 I assume therefore that his estate which I believe amounts to around £4 million has yet to be distributed This guy raised £40 million for charity and by all accounts was very generous with his time and sincere to the cause of helping others . I would be really sad if there is any truth in these stories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Boy Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 nonsense to make accusations when someone is dead. Women generally are liars and sensation seekers. They should not be taken too seriously when there is no defence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosh Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 it isn't new, there were plenty of rumours and accusations whilst he was still alive. +1 He was good pals with Jonathan King and a string of other celebrity DJ's that were all looked at by Police over the years. Gary Glitter was another friend of both those mentioned. All this is available if you search for it. I have only named convicted Noncers. They only had enough evidence to go for King at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrad Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 All though he did alot for charity, he was not well liked at Stoke Mandeville Hospital Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wherebee Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 How's about that then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corevalue Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 He lived in an age where under age girls were considered one of the perks of the job for DJ's and pop stars. It was worse than that. They were beseiged by underage girls. There was once a club in Soho where all the roadies and minor pop stars used to hang out. The journalist Jilly Cooper was said to have uttered the remark "If all the groupies in here were laid end-to-end, ...................I wouldn't be at all surprised". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHF Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 All though he did alot for charity, he was not well liked at Stoke Mandeville Hospital Theresa character in an Irving Welsh novel (acid house I think) who sleeps with the cadavers in the morgue. I was once informed that this was based on Jimmy Saville and his reward for doing all that charity work was to be left alone in the morgue every now and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankief Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 http://www.dailymail...ary-reveal.html Amazing these stories always come out when people die and can't offer a defence. If true why was he able to get away with it, why are they suddenly accusing him now or why is the media suddenly interested when previously they weren't and covered his back? There's an ad on the DM page under the story for personal injury lawyers who specialise in sexual abuse compensation claims. Must be the new whiplash.No evidence required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Hovis Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 I said on this, and another forum, that I had heard in the 90s from the headmaster of a Norfolk school that one of their (underage) pupils had had to have an abortion because of "Sir Jim". On both forums I had people saying I was wrong purely because of their perception, through their TV screens, of the character of "Sir Jim". Sometimes, just sometimes, knowledge is more important than opinion. Even on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pole Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 I said on this, and another forum, that I had heard in the 90s from the headmaster of a Norfolk school that one of their (underage) pupils had had to have an abortion because of "Sir Jim". On both forums I had people saying I was wrong purely because of their perception, through their TV screens, of the character of "Sir Jim". Sometimes, just sometimes, knowledge is more important than opinion. Even on the internet. If this was concealed by the press for the 'greater good', think what else they might be hiding right now as we speak (obviously for the 'greater good')... But don't ask too many inquisitive questions - otherwise you'll be called a conspiracy theorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Was Jimmy Saville the only person raising money for Stoke Mandeville? I just find it strange that all these people are coming out now saying they knew something was wrong but everyone just kept quiet. If the allegations are true all of those who kept quiet where complicit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ayatollah Buggeri Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 The BBC may well have some explaining to do once this programme has been broadcast. They seem to be sticking to their line that they abandoned a documentary about Savile because they could not substantiate the kiddie fiddling allegations. Unless the producers of the ITV documentary could not do so either (i.e. if the programme contains little more than heresay), then either the BBC's journalists are incompetent or the reason they gave for shelving their programme is quite clearly a lie. All sorts of stuff is coming out now - that Savile had been investigated by police during his lifetime, defended Gary Glitter, Esther Rantzen is sticking her oar in, etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 He always gave me the creeps as a kid in the 80s. I could never understand why any child would want to be in the company of an (at least appearance wise) lecherous old man when i was a kid, and i still cant now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saberu Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 The BBC may well have some explaining to do once this programme has been broadcast. They seem to be sticking to their line that they abandoned a documentary about Savile because they could not substantiate the kiddie fiddling allegations. Unless the producers of the ITV documentary could not do so either (i.e. if the programme contains little more than heresay), then either the BBC's journalists are incompetent or the reason they gave for shelving their programme is quite clearly a lie. Ofcourse. It's not in the BBC's interests to broadcast such a documentary because it harms their reputation seeing as TOTP is a BBC broadcast and Jimmy Saville is so publicly connected to TOTP and therefore the BBC. I think there were some powerful interests involved here. It's obvious that no girls under 16 would willingly sleep with this man, he was probably bribing them with money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dances with sheeple Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Ofcourse. It's not in the BBC's interests to broadcast such a documentary because it harms their reputation seeing as TOTP is a BBC broadcast and Jimmy Saville is so publicly connected to TOTP and therefore the BBC. I think there were some powerful interests involved here. It's obvious that no girls under 16 would willingly sleep with this man, he was probably bribing them with money. Yeah right, and none would sleep with George Best, the Bay city rollers, Rod Stewart etc either. His fame alone in the 70`s would guarantee totty lined up for him (no, I am not saying vulnerable underage girls are "totty", just making a point about the options he would he had) and as he was a good looking guy who kept himself in shape, he would have no problem getting birds? So he either preyed on very young girls (12 has been alleged?), or couldn`t resist temptation when 15 year old`s came on to him, or created situations where he could come on to 15 year olds? He has probably been with hundreds of women of the appropriate age, but no one is going to come forward and say I banged J.S out the back of a disco in Aberdeen when he made a guest appearance, are they? Whatever happened, he is gone, and those who worked with him and said nothing at the time (if anything happened) are going to take the flak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACR Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Was starting to worry my inbuilt 'wrong-un detector' was defective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GinAndPlatonic Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Was starting to worry my inbuilt 'wrong-un detector' was defective. Me too...always something a tad odd about him. What gets me is how people say "it can`t be...he raises so much for charity"... what the hell has that go to do with anything.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrashedOutAndBurned Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 If it looks like a padeo, sounds like a paedo, acts like a paedo... probably is a paedo. Seriously, though - the 1970s was a funny old time when it came to issues surrounding sex with minors. Paedo-liberation was far more mainstream than it is now, attempting to ride on the mainstream gay liberation wave before various tabloid exposes. Paedos had sympathisers in 'right-on' circles. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4949555/Harriet-Harman-under-attack-over-bid-to-water-down-child-pornography-law.html Miss Harman, 58, was a newly qualified solicitor when she became legal officer for the National Council for Civil Liberties, now known as Liberty, in 1978. At the time its general secretary was Patricia Hewitt, who went on to become health secretary under Tony Blair.Among the groups affiliated to NCCL were the Paedophile Information Exchange and Paedophile Action for Liberation, whose members argued openly for the abolition of the age of consent. NCCL complained to the press watchdog about their treatment by tabloid newspapers and said in one article: “We support any organisation that seeks to campaign for anything it wants within the law. They have that right.” In NCCL’s official response to the Government’s plans to reform sex laws, dubbed a “Lolita’s Charter”, it suggested reducing the age of consent and argued that “childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage”. It claimed that children can suffer more from having to retell their experiences in court or the press. If a 'sleb was partial to underage girls, then, some would see it as nothing more than a bit of nudge-nudge-wink-wink material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GinAndPlatonic Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Was Jimmy Saville the only person raising money for Stoke Mandeville? I just find it strange that all these people are coming out now saying they knew something was wrong but everyone just kept quiet. If the allegations are true all of those who kept quiet where complicit. Complicit yes..and worried about stepping away from the crowd..it`s scary.Look what Hitler managed..it happens all the time..people just get on with their own lives..until the tide hits them..to be honest people haven`t got the energy or perseverence to stand up and be counted..it`s tough enough just getting on with life..if you stand up it can put your own life on hold and is really hard work..people will ask for proof..lots of searching questions..people follow the heard..the heard just noticed what a creep he maybe was after all.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Bump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormymonday_2011 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Bolton Fury asked in the other thread, why the allegations weren't made during his life: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19788721 difficult given the passage of time? Given the hue and cry raised by the media about Savile's role as an alleged child abuser today this is precisely the question I wanted to ask. As these stories have supposedly been circulating since the 1960s amongst show business people and journalists why did the press not carry out an investigation into the matter and publish the accusations while Savile was alive so at the very least the charges could be tested in court and other potential victims could be forewarned of any risks he posed. At the very least this suggests gross moral cowardice on the part of the media who chose to do nothing while Savile was alive. Am alone in feeling there is more than a tad of hypocrisy about the coverage of this news in papers like the Guardian whose Julie Bindel was out leading the lynch mob with a noose this morning http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/01/jimmy-savile-abused-children-documentary If Savile was a paedophile and got away with it until his death then the press who are savaging him now are as culpable as anyone else who knew about the crime but did nothing. I don't think they can trot out the hoary old excuse of Britain's 'draconian libel laws' as an excuse as there seem to be enough supposed victims to test the truth of the matter in court. Moreover you can not help wondering why papers like the Guardian have shown so much interest in covering this case while at the same time showing so little enthusiasm for exposing and pursuing recent sex abuse scandals in Rochdale, Derby and Sheffield where there are current victims who need protecting. It seems that, similar to sex abusers, the press like the easy meat such as the dead Savile or the stupid Jeremy Forrest and his under age girl friend Megan Stammers rather than chasing the hard cases. Ultimately, it all appears to be knocking out the best selling copy at the lowest price and then covering it all with a patina of feigned revulsion. Doubtless the ITV documentary will give the alleged victims a chance finally to air their side of the story and I suppose some will get a few quid in compensation for selling their own stories to various national newspapers. Sadly I doubt much else will be achieved, The problem for those driving the outrage bus is that they can run over Savile as many times as they like and he will not feel a thing. Instead, the punishment is likely to visited on proxies who may well be simply be smeared by association thanks to the ill fortune of job or family relationship. You only have to see how the poor Emily Forrest has been treated to realise that at this moment the media will be trawling through social media sites picking over the bones of everyone who knew or worked with Savile looking for incriminating 'evidence'. I expect this case will claim a few more innocent victims before the dust has settled. BTW I could not stand Savile on TV even as a kid in the late 1960s and early 1970s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.