Jimmy Savile: New Report Claims He Performed Sex Acts On Dead Bodies [Archive] - Page 4?login=1 - ThisisBigBrother.com

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 12:19 PM

I suggest you don't derail the thread with your personal remarks. My political leanings are no concern of yours,if there is specific relevance in an article to raise a point relating to a thread political or otherwise I will do so I don't need your permission.
Can we draw a line under this now please?

I don't believe I inferred you needed my permission: but it is part of the rules to stay on topic, I felt you were not doing that and so too, did others.

Happy to draw a line and accede to your request, seems perfectly reasonable tbh.

What do you think of the 'relative' that has been happy to keep her mouth shut for many many many years - even benefitting from houses on islands etc: then only decided to make mention when the man was dead?

Do you think she was right?

Personally I think she is as bad, if not worse than any child abuser - given that she claims to have been abused in some (smaller way compared to alleged rapes) - yet she was happy to accept bribes, gifts, houses, lifestyles being paid for her - even when she was long into adulthood.

This person allegedly knowing what JS supposedly capabale of: yet her bought silence allowed others to be 'allegedly' abuse whilst she enjoyed a luxurious and priviledged lifestyle having accepted her payments.... what's your thoughts on that.

Kizzy

21-10-2012, 12:35 PM

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 12:40 PM

Well I'm sure I don't know..Maybe she was afraid of intimidation or repercussions?

It has been said he was not adverse to making physical threats, that could have been a factor..He could have been buying her silence or appeasing his guilt?

She may have blackmailed him?

We just don't know.

Something that I thought about when all this 'kicked off' at the start.

I don't doubt there has been some very wrong doings on JS's part: I also refer back (not to you, but everyone) to 'Microscope's' post a few pages back - ..... things are different now than they were 30/40 plus years ago.

There's no real use crying over spilled milk ..... the laws then, were not as they are now..... and we should be thankful that in that respect, we as a society have moved on and do now deal with such things.

I do very much feel that given the change of attitudes and laws over the decades that have passed: something you actually mentioned Kizzy: 'lessons need to be learned'. yes, they do.

But dredging up a dead man who cannot defend themselves in any way shape or form I do not think is the correct way to move forward.

By all means: the investigation should take place, and lessons should be learned from that based on the recommendations. Though as I say: society and what is now regarded as acceptable compared to in the 60s/70s/80s etc - is a world away from where we are now, in 2012.

Kizzy

21-10-2012, 01:07 PM

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 01:15 PM

I knew you would pick up on that..
Point the finger straight back at the victim, makes me sick.
Things were not different at all... there were preditory child molesters then just like there are now.
You are missing the point, this is no longer about the dead old perv but the failings that enabled him to feed his sick urges.
How did he get into positions of power? who gave him so much responsibility? why didn't anyone listen to the concerns raised in the 70's at the BBC?
To suggest to an abuse victim 'theres no use crying over spilt milk' would be shocking!

Why.. is there some problem that it is very much a possibility that people would in fact blackmail JS? It is a possibility. Grab a sick bowl if you feel ill... but don't try to be smart Kiz, when there is a certain degree of truth to what I have said: you may not like it... but it's there.

Unfortunately as the man is dead, he can't put over his side - that's the only problem.

I'm missing no point. I'm willing to consider ALL possible scenarios and not just find myself a seat on the cart drawing the horse, with me chewing on a bit of straw.

I'm willing to consider all aspects of what may have been involved - all the more so when the person is not here to say if things have been completely blown out of proportion.

Re your last comment there.

You think then that those persons - say they were Black and were treated abyssmally by white people in the 60's.... you think it's acceptable for them to now come forward?

We learn from past mistakes and move forward. We don't drudge and live our lives in the past.

Kizzy

21-10-2012, 04:12 PM

Omah

21-10-2012, 04:24 PM

people now admitting they were happy to keep their mouths shut because they benefitted financially and for many many years, they benefitted financially

What "people" are they then?

AFAIK, only Savile's sister received "benefits" from the paedo DJ.

:conf:

Omah

21-10-2012, 04:31 PM

What do you think of the 'relative' that has been happy to keep her mouth shut for many many many years - even benefitting from houses on islands etc: then only decided to make mention when the man was dead?

Do you think she was right?

Personally I think she is as bad, if not worse than any child abuser - given that she claims to have been abused in some (smaller way compared to alleged rapes) - yet she was happy to accept bribes, gifts, houses, lifestyles being paid for her - even when she was long into adulthood.

This person allegedly knowing what JS supposedly capabale of: yet her bought silence allowed others to be 'allegedly' abuse whilst she enjoyed a luxurious and priviledged lifestyle having accepted her payments.... what's your thoughts on that.

I think you have got the wrong end of the stick.

Savile's sister was "paid off" and she died in 2008, 3 years BEFORE Savile

It was her granddaughter who was molested and she received NOTHING from Savile.

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 04:31 PM

Right, now you have totally lost me...Horses and carts? Black people in the 60's?..
The crux of your post seems to be he is dead let's leave it...
I disagree, I say let's not. No, we will never have an admission however the victims will be vindicated and the truth about 'saint' jimmy will be told.

LOL.. I understand why you might be confused in a sense.

What I am getting at is: this 'intially' started out many many decades ago, when laws were not the same (wrongly .... so do not misunderstand my words here).... but in a time were it was .....''not so much a topic of revlusion as it SHOULD have been way back then"

does that make sense?

I again reiterate : I have always had a sense of 'repulsion' and ' something aint right' from JS.... even as a youngster watching the Jim Will Fix It. No lies, that's cards on the table.

I do completely feel that he ( in all probability) acted inappropriately with some: but I still am of the mindset that whilst it utterly repulses us now to the point that we are confident enough to share those repulsive feelings: decades ago: that was not the case many decades ago. That's where I was coming from with the Blacks vs White perception from not that many decades ago : but still prevails (for and against dependant on where a person was raised etc)

Without trying to derail the thread: in many ways - domestic abuse (both male and female) was kept 'all hush hush'...... whereas now: people realise that 'they' are not in the very small minority: that even those that are seen as the pillars of society : are as guilty as the 'Stella / Wife Beating Lager Lout type".

I am not for a second condoning any of past behaviour: but what I AM condoning is a trial by media / witch hunt: added in no small part by at least one person who has alluded to beneifitng (and in no small way) from JS feeling her arse..... puttting his hand on her butt cheeks: and being able to blackmail him for an wrong doing.... but thinks that she's still a victim without her feeling she is accountable for her own (subsequent) actions: moreso: when she still accepted his 'bribes' when she was an adult and able to make complete sense of what was/had happened: and thus: allowed other to fall into the same trap that she did.

Personally, I'd call that cowardice.

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 04:34 PM

What "people" are they then?

AFAIK, only Savile's sister received "benefits" from the paedo DJ.

:conf:

I think you have got the wrong end of the stick.

Savile's sister was "paid off" and she died in 2008, 3 years BEFORE Savile

It was her granddaughter who was molested and she received NOTHING from Savile.

If the sister died when she was still a child and had not benefitted from JSs 'hush money' for him have a shifty feel at her arse cheeks... then perhaps you could show me where I've missed that point? :conf:

Omah

21-10-2012, 04:43 PM

We as a society have moved on and do now deal with such things.

Though as I say: society and what is now regarded as acceptable compared to in the 60s/70s/80s etc - is a world away from where we are now, in 2012.

What about the Rochdale paedophile ring?

What about the child sex-slaves imported from Africa and Eastern Europe?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2124805/The-paedophile-map-Britain-child-sex-attack-takes-place-20-MINUTES.html#ixzz29x6fo5g3

One child sex attack was reported every 20 minutes last year, equivalent to 444 attacks a week, according to shocking police figures released today.

About 23,000 children were reported victims in England and Wales during 2010/11 but fewer than 10 per cent of cases ended in a conviction.

There were 4,973 alleged victims aged ten and under, including 1,472 younger than six.

The statistics, obtained by the NSPCC in a freedom of information request, cover rape, incest and child prostitution across all 43 police forces in England and Wales - the figures shown on this map include sex offences against boys and girls in 2011

And six times as many reported offences were committed against girls as against boys.

The statistics, obtained by the NSPCC in a freedom of information request, cover rape, incest and child prostitution across all 43 police forces in England and Wales.

The charity said a major effort was needed to protect children and boost conviction rates.

A spokesman said: ‘The Government has to start treating the situation as seriously as they would if faced with an outbreak of chronic disease.’

More than a third of all sex crimes are committed against children with more than 60 child sex offences reported to police every day., figures showed today.

Overall, there were 54,982 sex offences last year, including 23,097 against children, the figures showed.

Most of the children (14,819) were aged between 11 and 17, including 8,749 aged 13 to 15.

23,000 children abused - 2,300 convictions ..... :eek:

"We as a society have moved on" - I don't think so ..... :nono:

Omah

21-10-2012, 04:47 PM

If the sister died when she was still a child and had not benefitted from JSs 'hush money' for him have a shifty feel at her arse cheeks... then perhaps you could show me where I've missed that point? :conf:

If I could understand what you're saying ..... :conf:

To clarify :

Savile abused his sisters granddaughter and paid his sister to keep quiet - the granddaughter received nothing - the sister died 3 years before Savile without revealing Savile's dirty secrets ..... :idc:

arista

21-10-2012, 04:50 PM

Omah

21-10-2012, 04:52 PM

I am not for a second condoning any of past behaviour: but what I AM condoning is a trial by media / witch hunt: added in no small part by at least one person who has alluded to beneifitng (and in no small way) from JS feeling her arse..... puttting his hand on her butt cheeks: and being able to blackmail him for an wrong doing.... but thinks that she's still a victim without her feeling she is accountable for her own (subsequent) actions: moreso: when she still accepted his 'bribes' when she was an adult and able to make complete sense of what was/had happened: and thus: allowed other to fall into the same trap that she did.

Personally, I'd call that cowardice.

Personally, I call that description fundamentally incorrect ..... :pipe:

Kizzy

21-10-2012, 05:02 PM

LOL.. I understand why you might be confused in a sense.

What I am getting at is: this 'intially' started out many many decades ago, when laws were not the same (wrongly .... so do not misunderstand my words here).... but in a time were it was .....''not so much a topic of revlusion as it SHOULD have been way back then"

does that make sense?

I again reiterate : I have always had a sense of 'repulsion' and ' something aint right' from JS.... even as a youngster watching the Jim Will Fix It. No lies, that's cards on the table.

I do completely feel that he ( in all probability) acted inappropriately with some: but I still am of the mindset that whilst it utterly repulses us now to the point that we are confident enough to share those repulsive feelings: decades ago: that was not the case many decades ago. That's where I was coming from with the Blacks vs White perception from not that many decades ago : but still prevails (for and against dependant on where a person was raised etc)

Without trying to derail the thread: in many ways - domestic abuse (both male and female) was kept 'all hush hush'...... whereas now: people realise that 'they' are not in the very small minority: that even those that are seen as the pillars of society : are as guilty as the 'Stella / Wife Beating Lager Lout type".

I am not for a second condoning any of past behaviour: but what I AM condoning is a trial by media / witch hunt: added in no small part by at least one person who has alluded to beneifitng (and in no small way) from JS feeling her arse..... puttting his hand on her butt cheeks: and being able to blackmail him for an wrong doing.... but thinks that she's still a victim without her feeling she is accountable for her own (subsequent) actions: moreso: when she still accepted his 'bribes' when she was an adult and able to make complete sense of what was/had happened: and thus: allowed other to fall into the same trap that she did.

Personally, I'd call that cowardice.

Right, you are really scaring me now!
I put the idea that she was blackmailing him in your head...
and now you totally believe it!

Omah

21-10-2012, 05:06 PM

I'm perturbed that none of them managed to utter a word when all the coverage of Jonathan King came to light in 2001 - would have been the ideal time for the lid to be lifted...... but I cannot recall this ever coming to light way back then, when someone else in the business was being charged with the same thing.

You may not have seen the light, but even before Jonathan King :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9606494/Jimmy-Savile-police-officers-repeatedly-failed-sex-victims.html

Jimmy Savile was first investigated by police “for interfering with young girls” when a nightclub manager in Leeds as long ago as 1958. His former bodyguard has told The Sunday Telegraph that Savile claimed to have paid officers to drop the case.

An inquiry into underage sex taking place in the Top of the Pops changing rooms in the late 1960s, according to the show’s then producer. Police interviewed BBC staff but did not pursue a case;

An allegation in 1971 that Savile was involved with a 15-year-old dancer on Top of the Pops, who committed suicide. The girl’s half-brother said Savile was interviewed as a witness, but no further action was taken;

Claims that Savile was abusing patients at Stoke Mandeville Hospital in the late 1970s. John Lindsay, a detective constable at the time, reported the allegations – made by a nurse – to his commanding officer but was told there was not enough evidence to proceed against a celebrity of Savile’s stature;

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 05:13 PM

Personally, I call that description fundamentally incorrect ..... :pipe:

Personally, I call that desciption pretty much on par.....:pipe:

Right, you are really scaring me know!
I put the idea that she was blackmailing him in your head...
and now you totally believe it!

Yeah.. sure you did Kiz.

As much as Omah 'allegedly' put the idea into my head 400 posts previous to my very eary suggestion that people accepted money to shut their mouths and were happy to do so: (which Omah very publically scoffed at to is detriment)... them reaping all the rewards: then expecting more dosh when JS was dead and buried.

That's the thing about not jumping on bandwagons and following the majority: it allows other ideas to flow: which by Omah's very own links to incest being bought, paid for, accepted form of currency until the cash cow (JS) died: so know the beat the " I was a tragic victim"" drum.

What a pile of complete and utter dross; Such persons are WORSE than any child abuser.

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 05:20 PM

You may not have seen the light, but even before Jonathan King :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9606494/Jimmy-Savile-police-officers-repeatedly-failed-sex-victims.html

I so appreciate you picking up a post I made hundreds of posts ago: highlighting that justice did indeed prevail re Jonathan King.

I'm so very disappointed that y0u seem to think that this was not THE VERY TIME for the alleged victims of JS to shout their ***** mouths off.........

Its getting pathetic.

anyone who has EVER been photographed.... IN ALL INNOCENCE of the nature of the photo taken then....and now being published: seems to have the automatic right to assign sexually in appropriate tendancies towards JS....even if the man reached over the bed of a terminally ill child: now that is perceived as absuing them... dear god how pathetic.

Some folk really need to get a life an undersand what ABUSE is.

Omah

21-10-2012, 05:40 PM

Personally, I call that desciption pretty much on par.....:pipe:

Yeah.. sure you did Kiz.

As much as Omah 'allegedly' put the idea into my head 400 posts previous to my very eary suggestion that people accepted money to shut their mouths and were happy to do so: (which Omah very publically scoffed at to is detriment)... them reaping all the rewards: then expecting more dosh when JS was dead and buried.

That's the thing about not jumping on bandwagons and following the majority: it allows other ideas to flow: which by Omah's very own links to incest being bought, paid for, accepted form of currency until the cash cow (JS) died: so know the beat the " I was a tragic victim"" drum.

What a pile of complete and utter dross; Such persons are WORSE than any child abuser.

Oh dear ..... :bored:

Omah

21-10-2012, 05:41 PM

I so appreciate you picking up a post I made hundreds of posts ago: highlighting that justice did indeed prevail re Jonathan King.

I'm so very disappointed that y0u seem to think that this was not THE VERY TIME for the alleged victims of JS to shout their ***** mouths off.........

Its getting pathetic.

anyone who has EVER been photographed.... IN ALL INNOCENCE of the nature of the photo taken then....and now being published: seems to have the automatic right to assign sexually in appropriate tendancies towards JS....even if the man reached over the bed of a terminally ill child: now that is perceived as absuing them... dear god how pathetic.

Some folk really need to get a life an undersand what ABUSE is.

Which end of the stick have you got now ..... :conf:

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 05:58 PM

Oh dear ..... :bored:

I agree Omah.. Oh dear.

such is the idocy of believing and putting ones faith in every iota of media publication that suits x / y / z agenda.

I say: let those who are trained to filter the wheat from the chaff: be allowed to do so.... without trial by speculation, malicious gossips, moneymaking suckerseekers................

what I am saying is: this is now. Let's learn from any poss past mistakes.

you OMAH . seem to be so completely and utterly absorbedto the point of obsessed hysteia by any story that involves a celebrity: ............................................

It may not be the correct thing for me to suggest this: and I therefore apologise in advance: but I dare to suggest that you use your time less towards celebs you do not like - and channel that towards more worthwhile causes of such dedication?

Omah

21-10-2012, 06:02 PM

I agree Omah.. Oh dear.

such is the idocy of believing and putting ones faith in every iota of media publication that suits x / y / z agenda.

I say: let those who are trained to filter the wheat from the chaff: be allowed to do so.... without trial by speculation, malicious gossips, moneymaking suckerseekers................

what I am saying is: this is now. Let's learn from any poss past mistakes.

you OMAH . seem to be so completely and utterly absorbedto the point of obsessed hysteia by any story that involves a celebrity: ............................................

It may not be the correct thing for me to suggest this: and I therefore apologise in advance: but I dare to suggest that you use your time less towards celebs you do not like - and channel that towards more worthwhile causes of such dedication?

It is NOT the correct thing for you to suggest ANYTHING to me ..... :nono:

thesheriff443

21-10-2012, 06:07 PM

Omah

21-10-2012, 06:12 PM

at the school where his aunt was headmistress

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2220802/Meirion-Jones-BBC-war-astonishing-claims-reporter-aunt-saw-Savile-abuse-school.html#ixzz29xTRLu9R

The BBC was in uproar last night over astonishing allegations involving the reporter leading tomorrow’s Panorama exposé of claims that the Corporation covered up sexual abuse by Jimmy Savile.

Top BBC journalist Meirion Jones angrily denied he had concealed the potential involvement of one of his relatives in the scandal.

Mr Jones says the allegation is designed to discredit him and the Panorama investigation into claims that Newsnight was ordered to scrap a film about Savile’s sex crimes.

The BBC civil war intensified after it was alleged the reporter tried to censor a video interview with one of Savile’s victims, who referred to Mr Jones’s aunt, Margaret Jones, and her role as headmistress of a school where the DJ preyed on young girls.

In a statement to The Mail on Sunday last night, Mr Jones said: ‘Allegations I concealed an interview to protect my aunt are ludicrous. The tape was in the [editing process] ready to go into the Newsnight film last December. I made it available in full to Panorama and Newsnight. If my purpose was to protect my aunt, I would never have tried to uncover the scandal in the first place.’

The crisis is the biggest faced by the BBC since the Hutton Inquiry probed claims that Downing Street ‘sexed up’ intelligence reports in the run-up to the Iraq War.

The BBC's role in this "scandal" is not just a can of worms, but a whole truckload ..... :eek:

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 06:13 PM

Which end of the stick have you got now ..... :conf:

Och.. that could poss be the stick that I suggested hundreds of posts ago Omah, that said victims, chose to keep schtoon, because they were benefitting from being 'paid' ;... that they chose to accept such payments for keeping their traps shut.

You seem to think that is ok.

In my book: that is far worse: given that those persons were in a position to benefit from such '' abuse vs blackmail'' in comparison to those in a more lowly beneficiariary position - given that the latter did not have direct access to such threatning expose.

Money talks Omah in very quiet ( I can be bought for a price) circles.

If the financial reward is high enough, to a person able to cause the most upset: then both parties are at least are equal in their collusion.

re the money grabbing opportunist- through life whe JS was alive but was too much a coward to say so then: aint gona win win my sympathy coz he's dead and she aint got a living breathig cash cow anymore. she's worse than any real victim: because THOSE SORTS allegedly KNEW what was going on, but were happy to allow it to cointine, happy to allow others to be a terrible future in all of this: because they were in a position of POWER - a power to possibly expose: which they chose to ignore: allowing years of subsequent abuse to continue : why? Becuase they were a beneificary AND THEY ENJOYED THAT POWER.

If I am honest: that sort ARE WORSE than an sexual prediator

Omah

21-10-2012, 06:55 PM

Och.. that could poss be the stick that I suggested hundreds of posts ago Omah, that said victims, chose to keep schtoon, because they were benefitting from being 'paid' ;... that they chose to accept such payments for keeping their traps shut.

You seem to think that is ok.

In my book: that is far worse: given that those persons were in a position to benefit from such '' abuse vs blackmail'' in comparison to those in a more lowly beneficiariary position - given that the latter did not have direct access to such threatning expose.

Money talks Omah in very quiet ( I can be bought for a price) circles.

If the financial reward is high enough, to a person able to cause the most upset: then both parties are at least are equal in their collusion.

re the money grabbing opportunist- through life whe JS was alive but was too much a coward to say so then: aint gona win win my sympathy coz he's dead and she aint got a living breathig cash cow anymore. she's worse than any real victim: because THOSE SORTS allegedly KNEW what was going on, but were happy to allow it to cointine, happy to allow others to be a terrible future in all of this: because they were in a position of POWER - a power to possibly expose: which they chose to ignore: allowing years of subsequent abuse to continue : why? Becuase they were a beneificary AND THEY ENJOYED THAT POWER.

If I am honest: that sort ARE WORSE than an sexual prediator

Who are you talking about?

Who was getting "paid" by Savile, apart from his sister, the granny who died 3 years before him?

Name names, list the benefits, monetary or otherwise - give us the links to corroborate your assertions ..... :idc:

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 07:02 PM

Who are you talking about?

Who was getting "paid" by Savile, apart from his sister, the granny who died 3 years before him?

Name names, list the benefits, monetary or otherwise - give us the links to corroborate your assertions ..... :idc:

Tut tut OMAH... we ALL READING this thread ,know what happened the last time you began spouting such drivel !!

sister and granny...by your OWN self admission were spouting this drivel: THE O NES WHO CONTINUED ALL THEIR LIVES TO BENEFIT FINACIALLY IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER FROM JS'S CELEBRITY STATUSAND FINANCES.......................

by jove Omah: you win the Tibb aware for OWN GOAL. :D

Pyramid*

21-10-2012, 07:06 PM

just to add a twist to this!
i think that in the sixty's,young girls where seen as one of the perks of being famous!,just like famous bands at the time and more than likely still going on,how many of them have had young girls coming to their dressing rooms.
obviously this is not me making it or thinking it to be right!

Of course it was.

Groupies they used to be called.

aka: sluts regardless of age; who were willing to shag anything if they thought it might get them out of the ****ty council estates.

No different from today: only the name changes: instead of groupies: they are called 'wannabees......

arista

21-10-2012, 09:28 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/21/199296/default/v1/ia22-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/21/199299/default/v1/ifront2210-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/21/199304/default/v1/1001ic-dtndt-1-221012-a001c-dt-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/21/199306/default/v2/times-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/21/199307/default/v1/mail-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/21/199310/default/v1/guardian-1-329x437.jpg

Omah

22-10-2012, 12:24 AM

Tut tut OMAH... we ALL READING this thread ,know what happened the last time you began spouting such drivel !!

sister and granny...by your OWN self admission were spouting this drivel: THE O NES WHO CONTINUED ALL THEIR LIVES TO BENEFIT FINACIALLY IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER FROM JS'S CELEBRITY STATUSAND FINANCES.......................

by jove Omah: you win the Tibb aware for OWN GOAL. :D

Abuse does not answer the question - your failure to supply an answer loses the debate for you.

:shrug:

arista

22-10-2012, 09:33 AM

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02370/Entwistle_2370680b.jpg
BBC director-general George Entwistle
will be accused by his own journalists
of misleading the public
in Panorama tonight. (BBC1 Tonight 10:35PM)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9624976/Jimmy-Savile-Delay-over-intensively-damaging-allegations-go-to-the-heart-of-the-BBCs-integrity.html

Busy 2 days for the BBC Boss
who has only just started his job.

Lee.

22-10-2012, 09:40 AM

I'm ****ing sick of hearing about Saville! He can never be brought to justice, so what is the point in it all??
I will say though, that all these people that new what was going on and didn't speak up until now should be ashamed of themselves!

Lee.

22-10-2012, 09:41 AM

billy123

22-10-2012, 10:05 AM

Omah

22-10-2012, 10:17 AM

http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/ss8hg/panorama--jimmy-savile---what-the-bbc-knew-a-panorama-special

Investigation into the recent allegations of child abuse levelled at Jimmy Savile and why the activities of the former DJ, TV presenter and charity campaigner were not exposed before his death in October 2011. With Scotland Yard announcing that the inquiry is now a formal criminal matter, this special edition is likely to include a report on the reasons why a BBC Newsnight probe into his activities was dropped last December.

Omah

22-10-2012, 10:24 AM

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/4602120/BBC-Savile-show-rocks-BBC-boss.html#ixzz2A1QdAABs

A DAMNING Panorama probe into the Jimmy Savile scandal piled pressure on BBC boss George Entwistle last night.

The programme — to be shown tonight — reveals Director-General Entwistle was told of the huge impact a Newsnight probe into Savile might have on planned TV tributes to the star.

Entwistle — head of vision at the time overseeing all BBC TV — was even told that if the Newsnight investigation was aired he might have to change the Christmas schedules. The Newsnight programme was scrapped.

JOURNALISTS from Newsnight give their opinions on why programme's probe into scandal was scrapped

The revelations will heap pressure on Entwistle, who is due to answer questions from MPs tomorrow.

One not to miss ..... :idc:

arista

22-10-2012, 10:28 AM

Newsnight Editor Peter Rippon is stepping aside
while its debated.

Live on Sky and BBC News

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/22/bbc-newsnight-jimmy-savile-scandal

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2012/10/22/1350902600468/Peter-Rippon-008.jpg
Peter Rippon

Kizzy

22-10-2012, 10:31 AM

Maybe it was pressure from those who did or should have known?...
This case throws questions up for the BBC, the police and the people who gave him such power at broadmoor.
There are many that would much rather this stayed shelved i'm sure..

King Gizzard

22-10-2012, 10:32 AM

It's weird them playing this out/condemning on their own channel

arista

22-10-2012, 10:52 AM

It's weird them playing this out/condemning on their own channel

Yes well the ITV1HD Docu
showed so much
including the BBC Mess on this.

arista

22-10-2012, 10:58 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2012/oct/22/jimmy-savile-panorama-newsnight-video

2mins Video edits from tonights BBC1 Docu.

arista

22-10-2012, 09:37 PM

On BBC1HD and BBC1 now

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/22/199467/default/v1/the-i-1-329x437.jpg
Tuesdays Paper

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/22/199469/default/v1/indy-1-329x437.jpg

cassieparis

22-10-2012, 10:24 PM

Maybe they - the BBC senior management -wrongly believed that the GBP wouldn't tolerate such a expose on an icon as venerated as JS.
There are others...... but again do WE want to know?

arista

22-10-2012, 10:33 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/22/199486/default/v1/sun-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/22/199481/default/v1/daily-mail-1-329x437.jpg

Kizzy

22-10-2012, 10:44 PM

Well..... that was the biggest damage limitation exercise ever.

bbfan1991

22-10-2012, 10:45 PM

Absolutely shocking and more disgusting revelations. I feel sorry for all the victims:(.

Jack_

22-10-2012, 10:50 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/22/199486/default/v1/sun-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/22/199481/default/v1/daily-mail-1-329x437.jpg

Murdoch paper in anti-BBC shocker :rolleyes:

Kizzy

22-10-2012, 10:51 PM

Omah

23-10-2012, 01:32 AM

Maybe they - the BBC senior management -wrongly believed that the GBP wouldn't tolerate such a expose on an icon as venerated as JS.
There are others...... but again do WE want to know?

Of course ..... :idc:

Omah

23-10-2012, 01:42 AM

Omah

23-10-2012, 01:53 AM

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/jimmy-savile-affair-george-entwistle-prepares-for-starring-role-in-his-own-bbc-drama-as-he-faces-mps-16228089.html#ixzz2A5BMzD6R

It took him 20 years to land the job of Director-General. Today's performance in front of MPs will decide whether he keeps it.

The BBC Director-General, George Entwistle, will be fighting for his career today as MPs demand to know how much he knew about the suppression of a Newsnight investigation into sexual abuse by Jimmy Savile and why he sanctioned tribute programmes to the late BBC presenter.

Mr Entwistle today gives evidence before the House of Commons Committee on Culture, Media and Sport. Its chairman, John Whittingdale, was damning yesterday, saying: "The handling of this by the BBC has been lamentable, they have made a bad situation even worse and ultimately the Director-General is responsible for that and certainly we would want to press him on that whole issue."

MPs will question Mr Entwistle over why he sanctioned a tribute programme on Savile after the director of BBC News had informed him weeks before that Newsnight was investigating the late presenter. "It seems to me extraordinary that, given George Entwistle was told, that he did not want to know a lot more about it," Mr Whittingdale said yesterday.

Is Entwistle another glaring example of the Peter Principle?

:pipe:

arista

23-10-2012, 07:37 AM

Obviously not the WHOLE story - there's more to come tomorrow - but this program did introduce us to the Newsnight team and it did confirm the meddling by those at the top .....

..... but, as was pointed out, Savile fooled everybody except his victims and hid his obscenities in plain sight of everyone else .....

Yes the Emails
they did not show.

Yes Savile was
helped
(by those that walked in on him- and wanted to keep their jobs)
are the helpers still around?

lostalex

23-10-2012, 07:49 AM

When is enough enough? The Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, the BBC, Penn State.... how many more major institutions do we need to hear about before someone finally does something about this?

These things come out, and everyone is shocked about what happened, but nothing is being done about the fact that it's still happening now. We can sit around talking about what Jimmy Saville did, what about all of the JImmy Saville's doing it right now that we won't hear about for another 20 years? What is being done to uncover these things as they are ACTUALLY happening, instead of just dealing with it long after it's too late?

Omah

23-10-2012, 08:07 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20001588

Jimmy Savile's charities are to close after their trustees decided that keeping them open could be "damaging" to the causes they support.

The trustees of the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust and Jimmy Savile Stoke Mandeville Hospital Trust said they had considered a change of name in the wake of the sex abuse allegations against their late founder.

However, after meeting on Monday, it was decided that they "could not see a future for either charity" because the organisations would "always be linked in the public's mind with the late Jimmy Savile".

They spoke of their concern that adverse press coverage could be "damaging" for causes the two trusts support - and said protecting these causes was their primary concern.

Before setting up the general charitable trust in 1984, Savile established the Jimmy Savile Stoke Mandeville Hospital Trust in 1981 following a request from the Buckinghamshire hospital where he volunteered for many years to help raise funds for rebuilding work.

The Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust is primarily based in the Leeds area, although not all of its trustees - listed as Luke Lucas, Dr Roger Bodley and Lady Gabrielle Greenbury on the Charity Commission's website - still live there.

Its overview on the Charity Commission website states that the trust's objectives are to "provide funds for the relief of poverty and sickness and other charitable purposes beneficial to the community", as well as "provision of recreational and other facilities for disabled persons".

More than half the funds given out by the trust over the years had come from donors other than Savile, Ms Summers said.

"The trustees are eternally grateful to all those people for their support in the past, so we don't want it to be seen as just Jimmy's money," she said.

Following Savile's death last October aged 84, an auction of his collection of mementos and personal belongings - including his Rolls-Royce which went for £130,000 and the original red Jim'll Fix It chair for £8,500 - raised about £320,000 for his charities.

There will be further funds when the final part of Savile's estate "falls into" the trust, said Ms Summers, including some of his properties still to be sold. It is likely now that these funds will be distributed to other charities, along with the funds remaining in the two trusts.

However, the trustees have said they will not be publicly announcing which causes they money will go to.

Good - the name goes, the money gets re-distributed.

:idc:

Omah

23-10-2012, 08:15 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20038436

BBC director general George Entwistle will be questioned by MPs later about the corporation's handling of sexual abuse claims against Jimmy Savile.

Mr Entwistle will appear before the Commons culture, media and sport select committee at 10:30 BST

0916: Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee chairman, Conservative MP John Whittingdale, is expected to lead the questioning of Mr Entwistle.

He can expect a "grilling" ..... :hmph:

Ammi

23-10-2012, 08:32 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20001588

Good - the name goes, the money gets re-distributed.

:idc:

..the thing I don't understand is why keep the charities a secret..?..they say it's because the money is tainted, which doesn't make sense to me because it would seem that it's the only possible good thing to come out of this...the people donating that money gave it in good faith and it has and will continue to benefit the people who need it...so why the need for secrecy..?....

..whatever else he was or has done, it's a fact that huge amounts of money were raised for good causes and I can't see the public outraged at any charity who would benefit fom that money...

Omah

23-10-2012, 08:38 AM

..the thing I don't understand is why keep the charities a secret..?..they say it's because the money is tainted, which doesn't make sense to me because it would seem that it's the only possible good thing to come out of this...the people donating that money gave it in good faith and it has and will continue to benefit the people who need it...so why the need for secrecy..?....

..whatever else he was or has done, it's a fact that huge amounts of money were raised for good causes and I can't see the public outraged at any charity who would benefit fom that money...

The JS charities are not being kept secret - they are being closed down.

Omah

23-10-2012, 09:31 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20039602

1022: We've just heard that overnight viewing figures for Panorama's Jimmy Savile special show 5.1m people tuned in - double the programme's normal audience.

Omah

23-10-2012, 09:41 AM

Entwistle's arrived - still denying BBC's handling was laggardly

He has not even bothered to seek out the level of abuse complaints since the 1960's

He's flapping - has he done no preparation at all ?

arista

23-10-2012, 09:50 AM

Yes Stiff Upper Lip.

He can not pass the buck
about newsnight
as he was in charge of vision.

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:03 AM

He just keeps saying "Someone's looking at it"

He's "guessing" at the incidence of child abuse in the BBC

He's not bothered to arrange personal contact with former employees

He's getting pushed on the recent "just the women" phrase now - thing haven't changed then

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 10:08 AM

Is this being broadcast live?

It's ok, I found it on channel 80

AnnieK

23-10-2012, 10:10 AM

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:19 AM

He's still evading responsibility - blaming middle management - talking about "notes","asked", "speaking to", "getting a sense of"

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:22 AM

Now he's being pushed about the lies about Karin and the police

He's "observed the chain of command" but not asked his subordinates what's going on

arista

23-10-2012, 10:25 AM

Yes he seems a True Pleb

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:27 AM

He only ever speaks to his "Divisional Directors" before "executing his authority"

He HAS given considerable thought about abandoning a program with potential criminal evidence, but admits neither he or nor his subordinates decided to inform the police

He's being asked why the BBC persisted in saying the Newsnight investigation was about the CPS and the police when obviously the public interest would have been in the serial paediophila of a BBC "superstar"

He doesn't "have an awareness" of much of anything for which he has responsibility and upon which he can exert authority

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 10:39 AM

Reading between the lines... He HAD to drop it.
In my opinion, I would go so far as to say the police or the government had requested the investigation stopped.

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:48 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9627219/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-BBCs-George-Entwistle-faces-MPs-live.html

11.43 Entwistle keeps returning to the line that it was best for him as the director-general to not get involved with the Newsnight team's decision making process. He expected them to sort any differences out between themselves and come to the best decision.

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:50 AM

Now being asked why the Panorama program didn't go even further

Maintaining the line that, even as editor-in-chief, he rarely got involved in editorial decisions

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:53 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9627219/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-BBCs-George-Entwistle-faces-MPs-live.html

11.51 The blog was Rippon's work, says Entwistle; the correction was a "corporate production" done in conjunction with BBC lawyers.

Omah

23-10-2012, 10:57 AM

It appears that, although the Newsnight program was commissioned, it wasn't actually "commissioned" because it wasn't hardset for transmission, although given a date, because there was no final script ..... :conf:

Omah

23-10-2012, 11:01 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9627219/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-BBCs-George-Entwistle-faces-MPs-live.html

11.56 Helen Boaden did have "conversations" about the Newsnight programme, but Entwistle doesn't know if they regarded the decision to drop the Savile report.

Omah

23-10-2012, 11:05 AM

He doesn't appear to have a "grip" about anything

Claims that he wasn't concerned about the Newsnight expose clashing with his JS tributes since he relied on his subordinates to decide on the "right course"

Omah

23-10-2012, 11:08 AM

Apparently, his job is "not to show undue interest", so he didn't ask what a flagship news program was doing in performing an investigation about the "iconic" JS and paedophilia - he preferred to wait for the "final cut" prior to broadcast, when he would be told he needed to watch it

At this stage, I've got things to do, so I'll catch up later

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 11:57 AM

The Observer ran an article chris Patten: The BBC a moral institution.
Hmmmm?..

Omah

23-10-2012, 11:59 AM

Apparently, the "interrogation" is over - that Entwistle is DG of the BBC is a matter of some incredulity, when he doesn't take any interest in what his staff are doing and doesn't even ask questions of his staff when serious matters are raised with him - perhaps he just enjoys being important and attending all the free lunches and dinners

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 12:43 PM

He has had a 23yr career at the BBC to be fair, and he was only appointed as DG in july of this year and has been active in the role for around 3-4 weeks..?

Ammi

23-10-2012, 02:33 PM

The JS charities are not being kept secret - they are being closed down.

..that wasn't what I meant Omah...the charities the money is being distributed to...I don't understand why they have to be kept secret..

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 02:50 PM

..that wasn't what I meant Omah...the charities the money is being distributed to...I don't understand why they have to be kept secret..

They touched on this in the news today, the money around 10 million may be distributed between charities supporting victims of abuse.

Omah

23-10-2012, 03:38 PM

He has had a 23yr career at the BBC to be fair, and he was only appointed as DG in july of this year and has been active in the role for around 3-4 weeks..?

The point is that he has NOT been "active in the role for around 3-4 weeks" - he seems to have done as little as possible, apart from delegate the organisation of a couple of inquiries.

Omah

23-10-2012, 03:40 PM

..that wasn't what I meant Omah...the charities the money is being distributed to...I don't understand why they have to be kept secret..

Well, AFAIK, none have been chosen yet - the distribution of several million pounds may have repurcussions and ramifications that have to be considered.

If a charity is wound up it must inform the commission. If there are outstanding funds in the charity's name, they must be donated to a charity that does similar work

Source: The Charity Commission

Omah

23-10-2012, 03:49 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9628385/Jimmy-Savile-sketch-George-Entwistle-a-little-man-lost.html

This morning, MPs questioned Mr Entwistle about the BBC’s actions over the Jimmy Savile scandal. The MPs were openly scornful, more and more so as it became clear that Mr Entwistle, by his own account, had known little about the saga of the dropped Newsnight investigation into Savile. Worse, it seems he’d made minimal effort to find out.

He had “no recollection” of this, “no knowledge” of that. He didn’t know, and hadn’t asked, how many complaints of sexual harassment or abuse had been made at the BBC since the 1960s; nor did he know how many had been made in the past two years. The BBC’s Head of News had told him last December that Newsnight was investigating Savile but he hadn’t asked what had been found out. “I don’t remember reflecting on it. It was a busy lunch…”

In any case, as a former Newsnight executive, he’d been worried that if he asked what it was up to, people might think he was showing “undue interest”.

“It seems your determination not to show an ‘undue interest’ applies to anything at the BBC,” snorted Philip Davies (Conservative). “You need to get a grip of the facts,” snapped Ben Bradshaw (Labour). “An extraordinary lack of curiosity,” tutted John Whittingdale (Con). “You sound a bit like James Murdoch,” scoffed Damian Collins (Con).

arista

23-10-2012, 04:10 PM

Todays waste of 2 hours
told us we now need the Editor to tell us who told him
to Ditch the Newsnight Report.

Rippon - A good Editor has been set up
as the fall guy.

Stink and Double Stink.

Should the BBC let Ch4 do Children In Need
this year?

Or should it be re-named
Children Abused in BBC back rooms?

Ammi

23-10-2012, 04:11 PM

They touched on this in the news today, the money around 10 million may be distributed between charities supporting victims of abuse.

Well, AFAIK, none have been chosen yet - the distribution of several million pounds may have repurcussions and ramifications that have to be considered.

Source: The Charity Commission

..they said on the news this morning that the charities names would remain secret because of the money being 'tainted'...I don't understand their thought process there....the money raised is the only good thing to have come out of it all it would seem

Omah

23-10-2012, 04:24 PM

..they said on the news this morning that the charities names would remain secret because of the money being 'tainted'...I don't understand their thought process there....the money raised is the only good thing to have come out of it all it would seem

Savile may have been abusing children WHILE he was raising money ..... :yuk:

Ammi

23-10-2012, 05:31 PM

Savile may have been abusing children WHILE he was raising money ..... :yuk:

..yeah, I understand that, but I don't understand the 'money is tainted' part...it's not so tainted that it's being transferred to other charities so what's the point in not revealing which charities they are.....

...it's only money, however it was raised, it can't do anything but good to any worthwile charity..

Nedusa

23-10-2012, 05:38 PM

AnnieK

23-10-2012, 05:41 PM

..yeah, I understand that, but I don't understand the 'money is tainted' part...it's not so tainted that it's being transferred to other charities so what's the point in not revealing which charities they are.....

...it's only money, however it was raised, it can't do anything but good to any worthwile charity..

Totally agree, whilst people now would not give money in Jimmy Savilles name, they did and that money was given to the charities for good causes. If nothing else people should gain some solace (however small) in that some people will benefit from him now.

Ammi

23-10-2012, 05:52 PM

Totally agree, whilst people now would not give money in Jimmy Savilles name, they did and that money was given to the charities for good causes. If nothing else people should gain some solace (however small) in that some people will benefit from him now.

..I also don't understand why they just don't remove his name from the charity but keep it going...however, they've made the decision to close it and transfer the money elsewhere..so the secrecy thing seems unnecessary..and well, just pointless

Omah

23-10-2012, 06:00 PM

So here's a moral teaser, considering Jimmy Savile raised millions of pounds for children's charities and has almost certainly enriched the lives of many children, do you think bearing in mind all the alleged victims of his sexual abuses that he has done more good than bad or more bad than good...????

1 child sexually abused is bad, 10 is awful, 100 is appalling, 1000 is horrific ..... :eek:

No moral teaser for me - no amount of charity work can make up for 100's of violated vulnerable children or provide a smokescreen for the sex-fiend activities of Sleazy Savile ..... :nono:

Ammi

23-10-2012, 06:04 PM

..yeah, but the money exists, regardless of the past Omah..unless they intend to burn it on bonfire then it may as well continue to do some good..it isn't tainted, it's the only positive thing to come out of it all..

Sticks

23-10-2012, 06:11 PM

Omah

23-10-2012, 06:17 PM

Omah

23-10-2012, 06:18 PM

General William Booth the founder of the Salvation army was once asked why he accepted money from breweries as it was tainted money.

His reply that the only thing wrong with tainted money was that there was "Tain't enough of it"

Brewing and abusing children are rather different social activities - after all, 1 is illegal ..... :idc:

AnnieK

23-10-2012, 06:25 PM

So s.......g children can be offset by contributions to good causes ..... :conf:

I don't think that is what is being said at all.....what Ammi is rightly saying is the money is there and was donated by hardworking people in good faith so it should be used to benefit those good causes irrespective of whose name was used to raise it.

Ammi

23-10-2012, 06:34 PM

So s.......g children can be offset by contributions to good causes ..... :conf:

..well, this is the last post I'm going to make on this, because I'm obviously not explaining myself properly Omah....

...JS helped raise a lot of money for these charities, we've since found out that his reasons for this were very sinister indeed, and that's something which is now being investigated...

.. I understand that his charity feels the need to close, as they in no way want to be associated with either his name or his actions..however, there are still funds in the charity, which they intend to transfer elsewhere..hence a charity or charities will benefit from these...so why not name the charities...?...them being given the donation in no way associates or taints them with what he did...they have nothing to do with it..to me, it all seems silly that it has to be so secretive..I would have thought there had been quite enough secrets already....

Omah

23-10-2012, 06:53 PM

I don't think that is what is being said at all.....what Ammi is rightly saying is the money is there and was donated by hardworking people in good faith so it should be used to benefit those good causes irrespective of whose name was used to raise it.

Well, it will do ..... the name of Jimmy Savile is being erased, the money is being laundered ..... :idc:

Omah

23-10-2012, 06:56 PM

..well, this is the last post I'm going to make on this, because I'm obviously not explaining myself properly Omah....

...JS helped raise a lot of money for these charities, we've since found out that his reasons for this were very sinister indeed, and that's something which is now being investigated...

.. I understand that his charity feels the need to close, as they in no way want to be associated with either his name or his actions..however, there are still funds in the charity, which they intend to transfer elsewhere..hence a charity or charities will benefit from these...so why not name the charities...?...them being given the donation in no way associates or taints them with what he did...they have nothing to do with it..to me, it all seems silly that it has to be so secretive..I would have thought there had been quite enough secrets already....

Why not write to the JS charities if really you want an answer ..... perhaps feelings run higher in those places where Savile abused children in care ..... :conf:

Ammi

23-10-2012, 07:00 PM

Why not write to the JS charities if really you want an answer ..... perhaps feelings run higher in those places where Savile abused children in care ..... :conf:

..oh, I'm sure they do Omah..but they're giving the money to other charities, whether they disclose who they are or not..I thought you might have an opinion on that, but obviously you don't...fair enough

AnnieK

23-10-2012, 07:02 PM

Well, it will do ..... the name of Jimmy Savile is being erased, the money is being laundered ..... :idc:

I can't understand why you are being so antagonistic about this?? You appear to be blinkered to the point where you are not understanding when people are agreeing with you but merely pointing out that the money can benefit worthy causes....words such as laundered lead one to believe you think this is dirty money?? It is not his money but donated to charity by good people who wanted to help worthy causes.....

Omah

23-10-2012, 07:17 PM

..oh, I'm sure they do Omah..but they're giving the money to other charities, whether they disclose who they are or not..I thought you might have an opinion on that, but obviously you don't...fair enough

The question of a charity's money cannot and will not be resolved either by interested members of the general public or by any of their appointed representatives - what happens to the money is a matter for the charity's trustees and the Charity Commission.

AFAIK, money from closed charity accounts must be transferred to charities with similar objectives, and I certainly don't have an issue with that.

Omah

23-10-2012, 07:20 PM

I can't understand why you are being so antagonistic about this?? You appear to be blinkered to the point where you are not understanding when people are agreeing with you but merely pointing out that the money can benefit worthy causes....words such as laundered lead one to believe you think this is dirty money?? It is not his money but donated to charity by good people who wanted to help worthy causes.....

If you see it that way ..... :shrug:

Mrluvaluva

23-10-2012, 10:12 PM

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/22520_541634925853252_751781810_n.jpg

Great name for a rock band?

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 10:40 PM

Like ammi suggested earlier the charity money raised is the only good to come from this, and the people who donated gave so in good faith.
However I do believe as the donations were to benefit specific charities the balance as it stands should remain with them.
Why should the beneficiaries of a foundation in his name miss out on a considerable amount of funding, due to the suggestion ot is in some way 'tainted'?..
What rubbish.

arista

23-10-2012, 10:44 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/23/199710/default/v3/independent-1-778x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/23/199731/default/v1/times-edited-1-1-778x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/23/199733/default/v1/i-1-778x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/23/199735/default/v1/sun-1-778x437.jpg

Mystic Mock

23-10-2012, 10:55 PM

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/22520_541634925853252_751781810_n.jpg

Great name for a rock band?

I prefer the name Jimmy & The Little Girls better.:joker:

Being serious for a moment though, Omah you can't cut funds from charities just because Jimmy Savile funded them, that's wrong.

bbfan1991

23-10-2012, 11:00 PM

Necrophilia too:o, it makes you more sick to the stomach. Vile man, hope he is rotting but probably had a laugh at the victims whose lives he destroyed and fooling lots of people on his deathbed.

Kizzy

23-10-2012, 11:22 PM

I actually feel sorry for this guy...
He has been set up royally.
Ask Chris Patten who is to blame and where the 'political chain' leads...
George Entwistle will leave and I'm guessing his successor will be Michael Jackson.

Omah

24-10-2012, 12:51 AM

Being serious for a moment though, Omah you can't cut funds from charities just because Jimmy Savile funded them, that's wrong.

I thought the argument was that the money came from hardworking people who wanted to help needy causes?

Omah

24-10-2012, 12:57 AM

so why not name the charities...?...them being given the donation in no way associates or taints them with what he did...they have nothing to do with it..to me, it all seems silly that it has to be so secretive..I would have thought there had been quite enough secrets already....

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/23/jimmy-savile-charities-close_n_2004429.html

The full statement from the trustee of Jimmy Savile charities (extract):

The trustees have already chosen how to distribute the funds in each charity and have decided not to publicly announce who the recipients will be. It will be for each charitable organisation to decide whether to publicise any donation received.

So there is no "secrecy", just circumspection.

Omah

24-10-2012, 01:02 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/23/jimmy-savile-bbc-director-general-faces-mps-live

• Entwistle said the Newsnight investigation into Jimmy Savile allegations should have continued.

• The BBC is currently looking at sexual harassment allegations against eight to 10 BBC employees. It is not clear how many, if any, current staff are involved.

• The decision to drop the report was made by Newsnight editor Peter Rippon with no inappropriate pressure from above, says the director general.

• Entwistle said he is “very disappointed” by inaccuracies in Rippon’s blogpost, which was seen by BBC News deputy Stephen Mitchell ahead of publication.

• Entwistle said he “regrets” BBC1's Savile tribute show.

• He said he did not ask BBC director of news Helen Boaden details of the Newsnight investigation because he did not want to show “undue interest”.

• On the Newsnight internal dispute: “It’s not a situation I have ever encountered before that there should be a dispute within such a programme of such virulence.”

• MPs accused Entwistle of “extraordinary lack of curiosity” and a “lamentable lack of knowledge” and told him to “get a grip” of the organisation.

• A BBC inquiry headed by former Sky News chief Nick Pollard could take up to six weeks.

• Entwistle says police told him not to rush the internal review. “Some things have taken longer than in a perfect world I would have liked,” he said.

Omah

24-10-2012, 01:07 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/23/jimmy-savile-bbc-director-general-faces-mps-live

Channel 4 News has seen an email from Liz MacKean, the Newsnight reporter who investigated the Savile abuse allegations, saying editor Peter Rippon shelved the story because he thought the "girls were teenagers, not too young" and they "weren't the worst kind of sexual offences".

MacKean said Rippon's decision to ditch the investigation created "quite a perfect storm", according to Channel 4 News.

It said McKean's email, sent in December last year, claims Rippon was trying to kill the story by "making impossible editorial demands ... When we rebut his points, he resorts to saying: well, it was 40 years ago... the girls were teenagers, not too young... they weren't the worst kind of sexual offences etc."

Some male attitides at the BBC haven't changed, then ..... :mad:

Omah

24-10-2012, 01:20 AM

Why should the beneficiaries of a foundation in his name miss out on a considerable amount of funding, due to the suggestion ot is in some way 'tainted'?..
What rubbish.

It's not "a considerable amount of funding"

http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/DocumentList.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=326970&SubsidiaryNumber=0&DocType=AccountList

Jimmy Savile charitable Trust

The charitable trust's latest accounts, filed with the Charity Commission in March, showed it had funds totalling £3.7m in 2011/12. It had an income of £132,546 and spent £43,866 in the same year, of which £30,800 actually went to deserving causes.

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends27/0000283127_ac_20110331_e_c.pdf

Jimmy Savile Stoke Mandeville Hospital Trust

The trust's latest accounts, filed with the Charity Commission in March 2011, showed it had funds totalling £1.7m in 2010/11. It had an income of £77,984 and spent £22,789, in the same year, of which £10,361 actually went to deserving causes.

General William Booth the founder of the Salvation army was once asked why he accepted money from breweries as it was tainted money.

His reply that the only thing wrong with tainted money was that there was "Tain't enough of it"

It seems so ..... :suspect:

Omah

24-10-2012, 03:15 AM

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-abuse-scandal-bbc-1396021

Reeling Director-General George Entwistle was under mounting pressure last night when it emerged the BBC is probing NINE current staff over sex allegations.

This came after angry MPs grilled Mr Entwistle yesterday over the Jimmy Savile abuse scandal and ordered the dithering BBC boss to “get a grip”.

Insiders say that celebrities are among the staff being investigated over the claims.

A BBC spokesman said: “As a result of the allegations about Jimmy Savile and subsequent contact from staff, former staff and members of the public, we are currently aware of nine allegations of sexual harassment, assault or inappropriate conduct regarding current staff or contributors.

“Some of these cases have been passed to the police where appropriate and we are reviewing others within our normal HR procedures.”

A BBC source said the accusers have been “steadily coming forward” since the Savile probe began and bosses are bracing themselves for even more claims to be made.

The insider added: “The allegations are right across the corporation and they involve some famous faces. These complaints relate to recent and historic incidents.”

The BBC would not comment on the claims that its stars are involved in the investigations.

There'll be more ..... :idc:

Omah

24-10-2012, 03:29 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/23/lord-patten-defends-bbc-jimmy-savile-scandal

The BBC's chairman, Lord Patten, has launched a spirited defence of the corporation's independence as ministers criticised an uncertain performance by its director general George Entwistle in front of MPs, and police prepared to make their first arrests in the growing scandal over the late TV and radio star Jimmy Savile.

Maria Miller, the culture secretary, spoke to Patten, the chairman of the BBC Trust, after watching what was felt to be a less than reassuring performance from Entwistle before the culture, media and sport select committee. She urged him to become more personally involved because "very real concerns are being raised about public trust and confidence in the BBC".

Entwistle was repeatedly unable to give precise figures about the number of allegations of assault, harassment or inappropriate conduct that had been reported to the BBC, and his two-hour testimony prompted further questions about the involvement of the BBC's head of news in Newsnight's aborted investigation into Savile last year.

But with the political temperature rising as the Savile crisis moves into its fourth week, Patten wrote back to warn Miller off criticising Entwistle. "I know that you will not want to give any impression that you are questioning the independence of the BBC," the peer said. He added that the trust would keep her in touch with developments as two inquiries into the Savile scandal completed their work over the coming months.

Sounds like "Entwistle-speak", i.e. the matter might be mentioned in an aside during an award dinner ..... :rolleyes:

Ammi

24-10-2012, 05:36 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/23/jimmy-savile-charities-close_n_2004429.html

The full statement from the trustee of Jimmy Savile charities (extract):

So there is no "secrecy", just circumspection.

..... well leaving it up to the charities to disclose it makes a bit more sense Omah....the wording used by the BBC news yesterday was that the money 'was tainted', so they were keeping it a secret as to where it's going....it was a very misleading way to put it...donations given in good faith are about the only untainted thing here...

Kizzy

24-10-2012, 10:59 AM

It's not "a considerable amount of funding"

http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/DocumentList.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=326970&SubsidiaryNumber=0&DocType=AccountList

Jimmy Savile charitable Trust

The charitable trust's latest accounts, filed with the Charity Commission in March, showed it had funds totalling £3.7m in 2011/12. It had an income of £132,546 and spent £43,866 in the same year, of which £30,800 actually went to deserving causes.

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends27/0000283127_ac_20110331_e_c.pdf

Jimmy Savile Stoke Mandeville Hospital Trust

The trust's latest accounts, filed with the Charity Commission in March 2011, showed it had funds totalling £1.7m in 2010/11. It had an income of £77,984 and spent £22,789, in the same year, of which £10,361 actually went to deserving causes.

It seems so ..... :suspect:

The figure mentioned on the BBC 1pm news yesterday was 10 million....
PM questions at 12 on BBC2, maybe this will get a mention?

Omah

24-10-2012, 11:10 AM

http://news.sky.com/story/1001873/savile-charities-get-spike-in-abuse-calls

The National Association for People Abused in Childhood (Napac) has seen nearly a trebling of calls to its hotline.

Napac chief executive Pete Saunders told Sky News: "As we speak it is well over 2,500 calls we have received and is rapidly heading towards 3,000.

"It has been relentless. Normally we deal with up to 300 inquiries weekly but since Savile it is up to 800 a week."

ITV broadcast a documentary on Savile's on October 3, after a similar programme was halted by the BBC Newsnight show, and it included the Napac hotline number for adults who suffered childhood abuse.

"We had 150 calls on the night the documentary was aired and it has remained consistently high. It has been relentless and we have to thank our amazing team of volunteers who have answered calls," Mr Saunders said.

The NSPCC, which deals with stopping cruelty to those who are children now, also received calls relating to Savile victims who are now adults.

A spokeswoman told Sky News: "We have received 157 calls directly related to claims against Jimmy Savile, and these have been passed to police.

"We have also received 99 other calls of abuse unrelated to him since the documentary was broadcast."

The spike in calls to charities comes as pressure has continued to mount on BBC bosses, past and present, over the halting of an investigation into sexual abuse by Savile.

Just ..... :sad:

Omah

24-10-2012, 11:14 AM

The figure mentioned on the BBC 1pm news yesterday was 10 million....
PM questions at 12 on BBC2, maybe this will get a mention?

I originally used the BBC as a source, but it quoted the JSCT figures for the JSSMHT, and they didn't seem right - I went to the CC and discovered that they weren't - the BBC seems to be rather unreliable at the moment ..... :suspect:

Scarlett.

24-10-2012, 11:15 AM

A sex probe ey? What will these scientists think of next!

Kizzy

24-10-2012, 11:32 AM

OMFG... Someone during PMQT just suggested there was an active peadophile ring within a past conservative government!!

Omah

24-10-2012, 11:41 AM

OMFG... Someone during PMQT just suggested there was an active peadophile ring within a past conservative government!!

Well, that would be expected from ex-public schoolboys - spanking "fags" used to be one of the pleasures of a privileged education ..... :eek:

1231: Labour's Tom Watson says leads relating to a "paedophile ring" with links to an adviser to a former prime minister were not followed up. The

Omah

24-10-2012, 11:49 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20068621

The director of public prosecutions is to review decisions by the Crown Prosecution Service not to prosecute Jimmy Savile in 2009.

The CPS had looked at four allegations against the late television presenter and DJ, all dating back to the 70s.

About time ..... :idc:

Kizzy

24-10-2012, 12:31 PM

Well, that would be expected from ex-public schoolboys - spanking "fags" used to be one of the pleasures of a privileged education ..... :eek:

1231: Labour's Tom Watson says leads relating to a "paedophile ring" with links to an adviser to a former prime minister were not followed up. The

How funny would it be if it was Chris Patten?

Omah

24-10-2012, 12:50 PM

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2012/10/24/downing-street-linked-with-paedophile-ring

Watson's allegations may be linked to a Sunday Times story published this weekend in which former Conservative minister Edwina Currie claimed Margaret Thatcher's former parliamentary private secretary, Peter Morrison, had sex with 16-year-old boys when the age of consent was 21.

Currie drew parallels with revelations about the late Jimmy Savile, whose sexually abusive behaviour has prompted a scandal about the culture at the BBC during the 1960s, 70s and 80s. Morrison died in 1995 and was described by Currie in her 2002 memoir as a "noted pederast".

"Even if Morrison was behaving in a criminal fashion, getting cases to court would have been difficult particularly if the young witnesses — one might be talking about a 17-year-old — did not want to give evidence," she explained.

"Unless somebody actually made a complaint to the police, perhaps involving violence, the chance of getting a criminal conviction would be very slim."

Omah

24-10-2012, 12:59 PM

Savile sex scandal hits horrific new low as former colleague Paul Gambaccini claims on Radio Five Live that DJ was a 'necrophiliac'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2221922/Jimmy-Savile-necrophiliac-says-colleague-Paul-Gambaccini.html#ixzz2ADn3OC2y

A former BBC colleague of Jimmy Savile has claimed the predatory paedophile was a necrophiliac.

It is one of the most extraordinary allegations to have come out in the wake of the scandal.

The claim was made on Radio 5 Live today by Paul Gambaccini, who started working as a DJ on Radio 1 in 1973.

Mr Gambaccini, 63, said he was aware of the necrophilia claims in the eighties.

He questioned why newspapers had not acted when he said a reporter had boasted that his colleagues were aware of a story linking Savile to 'necrophilia'.

His comments astounded presenter Nicky Campbell who tried to stop the conversation by warning the allegations were not in the public domain.

Campbell said: 'That particularly lurid accusation that you have just brought to people's attention is one that has not been in the public domain.'

Gambaccini agreed and asked 'why not?'. And he asked: 'Who vetted the knighthood? Coco the clown?

He claimed a reporter was heard talking at a wedding 10 years ago about Savile being a necrophiliac.

The hospital, where Savile worked as a volunteer and had his own room, said that it has never received claims that Savile 'inappropriately interacted' with corpses.

A spokesman said: 'We are not launching an investigation into claims that Savile was a necrophiliac. We have never received any complaints as to that nature.'

'During our time, to the best of our knowledge, Jimmy was not given free access around our clinical areas and whenever he attended the hospital he would give advance notice and usually be in attendance with his fundraising team.'

In the 1990 interview with Q magazine, The Sun reported Savile was given the job of taking the dead to the mortuary.

Savile, who died last year at 84, said: 'One of my jobs is to take away the deceased. You can look after somebody, be alone with somebody, who has lived a whole lifetime, and I’m just saying goodbye and looking after him.

'That is a privilege and an honour. Some people get hold of the fact that Jim likes looking after cadavers and say, "Aha, Jim’s a necrophiliac!’ I’m not a necrophiliac".'

JS denied he was a paedophile, too ..... :idc:

Recent reports about the sexual preferences of Jimmy Savile have not only thrown up allegations of paedophilia but have also hinted that he engaged in other sexual paraphilias such as necrophilia (having sex with corpses).

Paraphilias (from the Greek and translating as “beyond usual or typical love”) are uncommon types of sexual expression and often more commonly described as sexual deviations, sexual perversions or disorders of sexual preference. Many of these behaviours may appear bizarre and/or socially unacceptable, and represent the extreme end of the sexual continuum.

A couple of news reports on Savile allege that he made unaccompanied visits to mortuaries (such as the one at Stoke Mandeville) and that he spoke publicly to the media about his “fascination” with dead bodies.

Some definitions of necrophilia make reference to “the erotic attraction to corpses” but that on its own doesn’t necessarily mean the person enjoys sex with a dead person. Necrophilia is very rare and there are no reliable estimates as to how prevalent the activity is. This is because the statistics are biased by those who get caught and/or end up seeking psychiatric help for the condition. In fact, all the knowledge we have about necrophilia comes from published case studies. The overwhelming majority of necrophiles are male, as are most paraphiliacs more generally, but there are occasional female cases. The most infamous being Karen Greenlee, the American who fell in love and kidnapped a dead male from a funeral home.

Given the paedophilic and necrophilic allegations against Savile, some members of the press have speculated whether there is an association between the two paraphilic behaviours. The scientific literature on necrophilia shows that it has close associations and overlaps with some sexual paraphilias, including sexual sadism (sexual pleasure from hurting someone), sexual cannibalism (sexual pleasure from eating someone), vampirism (sexual pleasure from drinking someone’s blood) and erotophonophilia (sexual pleasure from murdering someone). However, there is little research showing any association between necrophilia and paedophilia except for those individuals that practice necropedophilia (sexual contact with the corpses of children).

Perhaps unsurprisingly, some types of occupation that have the easiest access to dead bodies are most likely to engage in necrophilic acts, the most obvious being gravediggers and mortuary attendants. However, there is some evidence that necrophiles seek out such jobs in the first place. In the largest published study of 122 necrophiles from all over the world, more than half (57%) were employed in a profession that gave them easy access to dead bodies. Such behaviour is also common among paedophiles that seek out jobs providing easy and/or unhindered access to children. Such claims have also been levelled at Savile surrounding allegations of both paedophilia and necrophilia.

One common reason given for why some people engage in such behaviour is the fact that corpses cannot refuse, reject or resist sex from a necrophile. Additionally, they cannot inform anyone, such as those in the criminal justice system, of its occurrence. Similar reasons have been applied to Savile in relation to choosing mentally ill and/or very vulnerable victims who in essence didn’t have a voice or a voice that would be believed.

Just ..... :eek:

arista

24-10-2012, 01:20 PM

"It emerged yesterday that Liz Mackean, one of two BBC journalists working on the Savile investigation, believed the story was quashed after Peter Rippon, the editor of Newsnight, questioned whether the witnesses were really victims. She claimed in an email leaked to Channel 4 News that he told her "the girls were teenagers, not too young … they weren't the worst kind of sexual offences"."

That BBC Person should be Sacked
as many were 13 years old.

One very young girl had Evil Saville pumping her
in a bands back room.
A band member walked right in on him
he could see the girl was 13 or 12 years old for sure.
Savile told him next door on the left for the bands room.
That was on BBC Radio Leeds
reported this morning on Radio5 Live

microscope

24-10-2012, 08:53 PM

Necrophilia too:o, it makes you more sick to the stomach. Vile man, hope he is rotting but probably had a laugh at the victims whose lives he destroyed and fooling lots of people on his deathbed.

If this newspaper who printed this story said that Jimmy Savile was giving Kangaroo blow jobs to would you believe that?? Seriously, don't believe everything you read in these papers who are only interested in one thing and that is 'MONEY' with a capital 'M'. You will also notice how when Freddy Starr got his good name dragged into all this mess, he didn't mess around and immediately came on television to say his peace and also got an injunction to stop the media from carrying out their 'two ring circus act' which is what they love to do as it sells papers and makes them plenty of cash, which is all they want.

There are also a lot of cash-hungry people out there who are more than aware of the compensation-culture which we have adopted from America. Just imagine if at one time in your life when you were in your teens and you met Jimmy Savile and he came upto you and gave you a hug and a kiss on your cheek when you asked him for his autograph, wouldn't it be tempting tomake up a false story years later when all this 'so-called paedophelia allegations' are in full swing - and there is the likelihood that you may receive some cash compensation in time because someone or more is found to have not done their job properly so therefore held liable for what occured back then. Well Jimmy is dead so can't defend himself so anyone can say what they like, including Paul Gambaccini who probably hated him anyway when he was alive so can say anything he likes as no injunction is in place to stop him.

Just imagine if Michael Jackson had have died a day after the first person came forward nameing him a paedophile and just imagine if no one in his family came forward and tried to stop his good name being dragged through the mud like Jimmy Savile's is. Michael Jackson would have had even more boys coming forward claiming that they had been sexually abused by him for the very same reason that Jimmy Savile has had, in fact a lot more and all hoping for a lovely compensation claim to come their way. It's just the way it goes thanks to the Americans.

Omah

24-10-2012, 10:51 PM

If this newspaper who printed this story said that Jimmy Savile was giving Kangaroo blow jobs to would you believe that??

The last time I looked, MOST newspapers were running the story.

You will also notice how when Freddy Starr got his good name dragged into all this mess, he didn't mess around and immediately came on television to say his peace and also got an injunction to stop the media from carrying out their 'two ring circus act' which is what they love to do as it sells papers and makes them plenty of cash, which is all they want.

IIRC, that injunction was almost immediately overtuned.

There are also a lot of cash-hungry people out there who are more than aware of the compensation-culture which we have adopted from America. Just imagine if at one time in your life when you were in your teens and you met Jimmy Savile and he came upto you and gave you a hug and a kiss on your cheek when you asked him for his autograph, wouldn't it be tempting tomake up a false story years later when all this 'so-called paedophelia allegations' are in full swing - and there is the likelihood that you may receive some cash compensation in time because someone or more is found to have not done their job properly so therefore held liable for what occured back then.

Yeah, Jimmy was a saint and all the claimants are liars ..... :rolleyes:

Well Jimmy is dead so can't defend himself so anyone can say what they like, including Paul Gambaccini who probably hated him anyway when he was alive so can say anything he likes as no injunction is in place to stop him.

I hated Savile when he was alive, too ..... :yuk:

Just imagine if Michael Jackson had have died a day after the first person came forward nameing him a paedophile and just imagine if no one in his family came forward and tried to stop his good name being dragged through the mud like Jimmy Savile's is. Michael Jackson would have had even more boys coming forward claiming that they had been sexually abused by him for the very same reason that Jimmy Savile has had, in fact a lot more and all hoping for a lovely compensation claim to come their way. It's just the way it goes thanks to the Americans.

Yeah, Jimmy was a saint and all the claimants are liars, etc. etc. ..... :rolleyes:

Omah

24-10-2012, 11:03 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/24/jimmy-savile-sex-abuse-doctors?newsfeed=true

It is understood the names of at least three doctors have been passed to police investigating living individuals over claims that they were at the centre of a loose network of child abusers connected with Savile.

The doctors, identified by victims who have come forward in the last fortnight, worked at hospitals where Savile had links over several decades. The former DJ had an office and living quarters in Broadmoor, a bedroom in Stoke Mandeville, and was given free rein at Leeds general infirmary.

The Guardian can reveal that Stoke Mandeville was at the centre of a child sex abuse scandal in the late 1980s when a consultant paediatrician was investigated after a whistleblower came forward to the health authority.

Dr Michael Salmon, a consultant paediatrician at the Aylesbury hospital, was suspended in 1989 after an investigation by government auditors prompted by concerns about possible financial improprieties. During the inquiry investigators found evidence relating to teenage patients of Salmon and a criminal investigation was launched.

Salmon was jailed for three years in 1990 after admitting indecent assaults on two 13-year-old girls and a 16-year-old girl. Three years earlier he had been praised by Diana, Princess of Wales, for helping to organise a trip to Walt Disney World in Florida for 300 disabled children. He was struck off the medical register in 1991. The GMC committee said at the time it was "appalled by the disgraceful behaviour towards vulnerable patients which led to Dr Salmon's conviction".

Dr Raymond Brown, who worked as a consultant paediatrician with Salmon, said he would have known Savile because everyone at the hospital knew him. Savile, who raised £40m for Stoke Mandeville, had boasted that he "lived" in a bedroom hospital managers had given him and could do as he pleased.

Brown said he had had no contact with Salmon since he was sacked and struck off the medical register. Salmon could not be contacted.

DJ, pop singer, comedian, MP and now a doctor ..... :eek:

Kizzy

24-10-2012, 11:22 PM

The guy knew he was safe....As he said himself, he could take half the establishment down with him if challenged...
Police, politicians, NHS bigwigs, BBC executives...
It was in their interests to protect him, and they did.

Ithinkiloveyoutoo

24-10-2012, 11:32 PM

**** this **** man:bawling: what the heck are they hoping to achieve by releasing even worst info everyday, its just upsetting man :bawling: do it already, we get it the man was the god father of pedophilia and everything surrounding it, we get, now take action you ***** :bawling: if he committed a 1000 more crimes will we have to wait a thousand more months before things are finalized. :bawling:

arista

24-10-2012, 11:34 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/24/199961/default/v1/daily-mirror-october-25-1-329x437.jpg

Ithinkiloveyoutoo

24-10-2012, 11:45 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/24/199961/default/v1/daily-mirror-october-25-1-329x437.jpg

¬_¬

I suppose the pope aswell will be part of the ring next.

Omah

24-10-2012, 11:48 PM

¬_¬

I suppose the pope aswell will be part of the ring next.

Well, the Pope "knighted" Savile ..... :idc:

Ithinkiloveyoutoo

24-10-2012, 11:49 PM

Well, the Pope "knighted" Savile ..... :idc:
The plot thickens.

Kizzy

24-10-2012, 11:51 PM

¬_¬

I suppose the pope aswell will be part of the ring next.

catholics? involved in abuse scandals?....don't be daft.

Ithinkiloveyoutoo

24-10-2012, 11:52 PM

catholics? involved in abuse scandals?....don't be daft.

I knew this would bite me in the ass. I wanted to change "pope" but you people are too fast. :hmph:

Kizzy

25-10-2012, 09:10 AM

Haha! I know what you meant ithinkiloveyoutoo, there are those you are sure will be infallible.

Omah

25-10-2012, 09:23 AM

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4608212/Savile-lair-raided-amid-fears-20-abused-there.html#ixzz2AIhYTfLt

COPS swooped on Jimmy Savile’s suspected paedophile lair at his isolated country hideaway yesterday.

Detectives scoured the disgraced DJ’s remote cottage in the Scottish Highlands amid fears more than 20 victims were abused there.

Officers arrived in three unmarked vehicles to search the whitewashed hillside home where Savile entertained showbiz guests and royalty — including Prince Charles.

Police believe the creepy cottage in Glencoe — untouched since his death last year — holds vital leads.

Yesterday’s swoop was part of Scotland Yard’s nationwide probe into a flood of allegations about the perverted TV star.

It is understood they are poised to make arrests after a string of allegations that he was part of a wider paedophile ring.

Last night one Glencoe local, John Grieve said: “I heard it was going to be searched at one point.

“It has been on the cards.

“I kept away from the bloke. I just found him bloody irksome.”

:idc:

Omah

25-10-2012, 10:28 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20081021

The number of possible sexual abuse victims of Jimmy Savile is understood to be "fast approaching" 300.

Last week detectives revealed the police inquiry, Operation Yewtree, had identified 200 victims.

The BBC's home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said more victims had come forward since last week.

He said some of them had been living abroad.

Our correspondent said sources close to Scotland Yard's investigation said they were also looking at "figures of high standing" who might have helped Savile.

He said there is so far nothing to suggest a "paedophile ring" involving Savile existed - in the sense that children were passed around between adults to be abused.

But he said it is thought investigations are looking at those who may have assisted Savile, helped organise abuse, cover it up or taken part in assaults themselves.

No arrests have been made so far, though our correspondent said it is expected there will be arrests at some point.

Let's hope so ..... :idc:

lostalex

25-10-2012, 11:05 AM

On newsnight yesterday they were saying that it's NOT a crime for people to not report child abuse. I was dumbfounded. I can't believe that it's not a crime to see child abuse and not report it to the authorities in the UK.

If someone knows about child abuse going on and doesn't report it, imo that should ABSOLUTELY be a crime.

Kizzy

25-10-2012, 11:11 AM

Alex, we have a tough enough time bringing justice to the people who 'do' crime without starting on the people who 'see' crime.. haha!

Kizzy

25-10-2012, 02:17 PM

Chris Patten decides to back George Entwistle after it is suggested he 'fall on his sword' for his comments to Maria Miller.
He suggests the 'tsunami of filth' only began 11 days into the current DG's job.
( source guardian)

the truth

25-10-2012, 04:23 PM

catholics? involved in abuse scandals?....don't be daft.

just as many non cathloics abuse as do cathloics....its a sickness that spreads to religious or non religious people

arista

25-10-2012, 04:56 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/25/new-york-times-mark-thompson-jimmy-savile1

How The Fecking Hell
can this NYT CEO Yank Clear
Former BBC Mark Thompson from the Neswnight Halt.

So the CEO of the BBC
was not aware that 2 big Savile shows on BBC1
could be stopped due to a BBC Newsnight Report
- I do not buy that

lostalex

25-10-2012, 05:48 PM

Marcus.

25-10-2012, 05:48 PM

he an nasty man

arista

25-10-2012, 06:10 PM

don't say "yank" like that, it sounds offensive.

OK I will Lock the Word Up Again
Alex.

Sorry

lostalex

25-10-2012, 06:14 PM

OK I will Lock the Word Up Again
Alex.

Sorry

thanks.

Tom4784

25-10-2012, 06:26 PM

The next person who attempts to derail this thread shall be punished harshly.

lostalex

25-10-2012, 06:28 PM

The next person who attempts to derail this thread shall be punished harshly.

understood.

thesheriff443

25-10-2012, 06:30 PM

i can see these cases pushing my tv licence up!

arista

25-10-2012, 06:53 PM

i can see these cases pushing my tv licence up!

No Good news is that is Locked
I think they should take it off every BBC Manager in the UK

Omah

26-10-2012, 01:17 AM

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/jimmy-savile-bbc-tempers-flare-as-scandal-deepens-8226551.html

The BBC's problems over the Jimmy Savile scandal deepened with a furious confrontation between a senior executive and a producer in the corporation’s office.

David Jordan, the head of editorial policy, is alleged to have stormed into the Panorama offices and called Newsnight producer Merion Jones “a despicable person”.

Mr Jones - whose original investigation into child abuse claims was dropped, sparking claims of a cover-up - is said to have replied robustly by criticising Mr Jordan’s role in making public statements on behalf of the corporation.

Sources said the row took place in front of other staff and was a sign of the strains that the Savile affair has put the BBC under.

Good for Merion ..... :thumbs:

Nedusa

26-10-2012, 06:14 AM

As I write this the Police are preparing to question many high profile figures in relation to the Jimmy Savile sex abuse case. These people may have been part of a possible Paedophile ring back in the 70's or they may have been complicit in providing children from children's homes to these people. Or they may have covered up evidence of child sex abuse to protect Savile and other high profile members of this group.

Either way this is explosive stuff and the people about to be arrested whether innocent or guilty will effectively have their reputations flushed down the toilet.

This could develop into one of the biggest child sex scandals this country has ever seen...!!!

Cherie

26-10-2012, 07:30 AM

i can see these cases pushing my tv licence up!

They can stop paying overatated chat show hosts 6 million a year for a start, that would go along way to compensating the abused.

Cherie

26-10-2012, 07:31 AM

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/jimmy-savile-bbc-tempers-flare-as-scandal-deepens-8226551.html

Good for Merion ..... :thumbs:

Yeah we all love a robust denial.

arista

26-10-2012, 07:38 AM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/25/200189/default/v1/front26jpeg-1-329x437.jpg

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/25/200190/default/v1/the-sun-front-page-26.10.12-1-329x437.jpg

Omah

26-10-2012, 09:52 AM

I'm ****ing sick of hearing about Saville! He can never be brought to justice, so what is the point in it all??

22-10-2012, 11:05 AM

It will just fade into nothing there isnt any other possible outcome.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/oct/26/jimmy-savile-national-newspapers?newsfeed=true

It is very rare for stories to run and run for weeks on end with consistent front page coverage. The Jimmy Savile scandal is therefore a very rare story indeed.

Today, five national dailies splash on various aspects of the story - The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Star, Metro and The Independent - as shown here.

It also gets front page headlines in three other titles - the Daily Telegraph (BBC chief swept up in a 'tsunami of filth'); The Times (BBC failed to correct Savile errors); and The Guardian (300 alleged Savile victims in police inquiry)

Both the Daily Mail (Patten's new clash with ministers over Savile) and the Daily Express give it full inside pages (Savile 'abused underage girl in caravan at BBC')

Even the Financial Times carries yet another news story (Savile victims allege some BBC staff complicit).

And there are plenty of critical commentaries about the BBC as well, such as Andrew Gilligan's in the Telegraph and Richard Littlejohn's in the Mail and also Richard Morrison's short piece in The Times.

Within 24 hours, the Savile abuse story took off. For the last 26 days, every paper, every day, has carried news stories about the scandal. It has also dominated TV and radio news bulletins. Phone-in programmes have been devoted to the topic.

In the history of what we call "media feeding frenzies" the Savile story is already one of the most enduring, and it is obvious that there is plenty more to come.

There certainly is ..... :pipe:

Kizzy

26-10-2012, 10:00 AM

Well i'm guessing a few 'small fry' will get cooked, but as savile himself said if he ''went down'' he would take people with him.
Thats the real reason none of this would have happened whilst he was alive, he knew too much. What other explanation is there?

Omah

26-10-2012, 05:58 PM

but I did nothing wrong

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/freddie-starr-will-talk-to-jimmy-savile-1401249

Freddie Starr today offered to talk to police investigating Jimmy Savile abuse claims - but once again strongly denied any wrongdoing.

The comedian appeared on Savile's BBC Clunk Click show in 1974 alongside Karin Ward, who was then aged 14.

Ms Ward told ITV News earlier this month she had been “horribly humiliated by Freddie, who had a bad attack of wandering hands and groped me”.

But Freddie has vigorously denied the claims he groped her in Savile’s dressing room, saying it was an “utter lie”.

Speaking outside his home today, the 69-year-old said: "I have said from the word go that I wanted to be interviewed.

"I have always said that I wanted to be interviewed. I have got the press phoning me up to ask if I have been interviewed. I got sick of it.

"Everybody, the press, the police, people at the BBC, they knew that things were going on with Jimmy Savile.

"Everybody is guilty of this. You can put the finger on everybody at the BBC. This fellow was at school when all this was happening."

A spokeswoman for Freddie added: "Freddie is prepared to be interviewed by the police, but his lawyer has been in touch with the person that is heading the investigation and they have no intention of questioning him."

A second spokesman for Starr released a statement saying he had been in "direct contact with the officer leading the Jimmy Savile investigation".

He added: "I asked him the direct question whether the police wished to question Mr Starr as we had heard from the Press that such questioning was imminent.

"He replied, in writing, as follows: 'We have said nothing of the sort, there has been much inaccurate speculation on such matters but should that be considered in the future I have cc'd in the SIO so he is aware of your details.'

"It would therefore appear clear that the police currently have no intention to question Mr Starr.

"Mr Starr has continually denied the allegation made by Karin Ward and we have always maintained that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence to support such wild allegation.

"The confirmation from the police today that there is no intention to question Mr Starr at present supports this."

A Scotland Yard spokesman declined to comment.

Earlier this month, Freddie said: “I was sick to the stomach when I heard that. It is disgusting and it never happened.”

He added he missed out on “the swinging 70s” party era as he was “happily married, private, a workaholic and a bore!”

Today the Mirror revealed that celebrities named by victims in the Savile investigation are set to be quizzed within days.

We shall see ..... :suspect:

King Gizzard

26-10-2012, 11:39 PM

A9yJUOdVyUc

:laugh3:

Omah

26-10-2012, 11:39 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9636594/Jimmy-Savile-Catholic-Church-seeks-to-strip-star-of-Papal-knighthood.html

There is growing disquiet among senior members of the church, which has itself been rocked by child abuse scandals, that the disgraced late TV presenter’s name remains on the list of recipients of one of the highest awards the Pope can bestow.

The Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Reverend Vincent Nichols, has now written to Rome asking whether Savile’s Papal knighthood can be annulled in recognition of his victims’ “deep distress”.

Church sources said there was no established process to remove a Papal honour posthumously because the award dies with the recipient.

However, senior Roman Catholic clergy in Britain feel that the Vatican should look at whether it can do something to recognise its disgust at the “deeply shocking” series of allegations of child sexual abuse made against the former Jim’ll Fix It presenter.

There is no guarantee that the church will be able to remove the honour and no fixed timetable for Rome to reply to the Archbishop of Westminster.

A source said: “The honour itself goes when the person dies but nevertheless it would appear on Papal honours lists. I don’t know if you remove it entirely or whether there is an asterisk to say, ‘well, actually…’”

It is thought that a Papal knighthood has never previously been removed posthumously. “It would be very, very rare if not unprecedented,” a source said.

Savile, who described himself as a devout Catholic, was made a Knight Commander of St Gregory the Great by Pope John Paul II in 1990 for his charity work.

The honour is awarded to Catholics, and on occasion non-Catholics, who have demonstrated “pre-eminent” service to their faith, community, or the work of the Vatican.

Other recipients have included Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire media tycoon, Sir Matt Busby, the former Manchester United Manager, and John Hume, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Northern Ireland politician.

A spokesman for the Archbishop of Westminster said: “The Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Reverend Vincent Nichols, wrote last week to the Holy See asking the competent office to investigate whether the Papal Honour awarded to Jimmy Savile for his charitable works could be posthumously removed and its effects nullified, recognising the deep distress of all those who have suffered abuse and the disquiet at Mr Savile’s name remaining on Papal Honours lists.

Yeah, remove and nullify ..... :idc:

Kizzy

27-10-2012, 12:00 AM

Let's have ruperts while we're at it...

GypsyGoth

27-10-2012, 12:27 AM

:laugh2: @ that video Nate.

Omah

27-10-2012, 10:07 AM

http://news.sky.com/story/1003415/savile-celebs-frightened-by-police-probe

Major stars from the 60s and 70s are terrified of being named in connection with the Jimmy Savile child abuse scandal, according to PR guru Max Clifford.

Mr Clifford told Sky News that up to 15 celebrities in Britain and beyond had been in touch with him in recent days to express their fears.

The stars are concerned because of their hedonistic lifestyles when they were at the peak of their fame, when young girls would throw themselves at them, he said.

He told Sky: "In the last few days, I have had an awful lot of calls and expect to get a lot more - some from very famous people who in the 60s and 70s were in the middle of this music explosion in this country.

"I'm very close friends with a lot of these people and have been for 40 to 50 years. I am in the middle of the media world so I'm the first person they turn to.

"Their lives often depend on popularity and public perception. There are a lot of things that get put out there that have nothing to do with reality but can be very damaging.

"They are all saying that they were totally unaware and they themselves have never done anything remotely like Jimmy Savile. Naturally they are concerned because names are being mentioned - 95% of it is total nonsense but it is happening."

He added: "If you're 19 or 20 and suddenly you become a pop star and a dozen girls burst into your dressing room... you don't actually sit there and ask for birth certificates."

If you don't then you gotta live with the consequences ..... :idc:

Kizzy

27-10-2012, 10:35 AM

It's all well and good trying to downplay it, well done max thats your job damage limitation.
Everyone is aware groupies existed, they are not the issue here.

arista

27-10-2012, 10:46 AM

Not Ever Old Star uses Max.

But getting their names Front Page
will be a major problem.

Nedusa

27-10-2012, 12:24 PM

It's all well and good trying to downplay it, well done max thats your job damage limitation.
Everyone is aware groupies existed, they are not the issue here.

Surely if any of Savile's victims were abused by Savile and another still alive well known celeb they would have already informed the police when they made their first statement.

So it makes me ask who else is involved are they as high profile as Savile and are the police now gathering evidence prior to arresting and charging.

The game could soon be up for these people and crying to Max Clifford ain't gonna change anything...!!!

microscope

27-10-2012, 12:41 PM

originally posted by omah
originally posted by microscope

if this newspaper who printed this story said that jimmy savile was giving kangaroo blow jobs to would you believe that??

the last time i looked, most newspapers were running the story.

You're totally missing the point. The media - whether it be one newspaper or twenty - I really couldn't care less, as All of them have one thing in mind and that is to sell as many newspapers as they can and make as much money as they can regardless of how outrageous the story is. So if one prints the story and others papers wish to jump on the band wagon and do the same, then all shall benefit from it. The story is ludicrous that he was into necrophilia, which is why I gave that outrageous comparison of another crazy made-up story which I believe this one to be.

originally posted by omah
originally posted by microscope

you will also notice how when freddy starr got his good name dragged into all this mess, he didn't mess around and immediately came on television to say his peace and also got an injunction to stop the media from carrying out their 'two ring circus act' which is what they love to do as it sells papers and makes them plenty of cash, which is all they want.

iirc, that injunction was almost immediately overtuned.

And if I recollect, when Freddy Starr first did his tv interview he said his lawyer had advised him to get an injuction, obviously to prevent the media from doing to him what they are doing to Jimmy Saville. Whether it got overturned or not doesn't really apply to what I said in that paragraph. The fact remains that the media enjoys ruining peoples lives - whether they are alive or dead and if they can get away with it which they can with Jimmy Saville.

originally posted by omah
originally posted by microscope

there are also a lot of cash-hungry people out there who are more than aware of the compensation-culture which we have adopted from america. Just imagine if at one time in your life when you were in your teens and you met jimmy savile and he came upto you and gave you a hug and a kiss on your cheek when you asked him for his autograph, wouldn't it be tempting to make up a false story years later when all this 'so-called paedophelia allegations' are in full swing - and there is the likelihood that you may receive some cash compensation in time because someone or more is found to have not done their job properly so therefore held liable for what occured back then.

yeah, jimmy was a saint and all the claimants are liars ..... :rolleyes:

I haven't said anywhere in this thread that Jimmy was totally innocent. Nor have I said that everyone who came forward and made a complaint is a liar. It is very believable that people are making things up or twisting what happened back then in order to maybe get a pay out at some stage. It happens all the time.

originally posted by omah
originally posted by microscope

well jimmy is dead so can't defend himself so anyone can say what they like, including paul gambaccini who probably hated him anyway when he was alive so can say anything he likes as no injunction is in place to stop him.

i hated savile when he was alive, too ..... :yuk:

Then it sounds to me that your judgement of him is clouded as it's hardly likely that you are going to ever act in his defence since you hated him when he was alive and was dedicating so much of his life to raising money for charity.

originally posted by omah
originally posted by microscope

just imagine if michael jackson had have died a day after the first person came forward nameing him a paedophile and just imagine if no one in his family came forward and tried to stop his good name being dragged through the mud like jimmy savile's is. Michael jackson would have had even more boys coming forward claiming that they had been sexually abused by him for the very same reason that jimmy savile has had, in fact a lot more and all hoping for a lovely compensation claim to come their way. It's just the way it goes thanks to the americans.

yeah, jimmy was a saint and all the claimants are liars, etc. Etc. ..... :rolleyes:

Thats a very poor response.... :rolleyes:

Kizzy

27-10-2012, 01:06 PM

Microscope you appear to have taken a real interest in this issue, and in particular omahs comments.
These were in response to media articles yes, and are his reaction to them.
Your standpoint appears to be those who accuse are wrong/ mercenary, however those who are accused deserve a fair hearing, do you not see the double standard?

Omah

27-10-2012, 01:33 PM

Your Original 24-10-2012, 09:53 PM
My Reply 24-10-2012, 11:51 PM
You're totally missing the point. The media - whether it be one newspaper or twenty - I really couldn't care less, as All of them have one thing in mind and that is to sell as many newspapers as they can and make as much money as they can regardless of how outrageous the story is. So if one prints the story and others papers wish to jump on the band wagon and do the same, then all shall benefit from it. The story is ludicrous that he was into necrophilia, which is why I gave that outrageous comparison of another crazy made-up story which I believe this one to be.

And if I recollect, when Freddy Starr first did his tv interview he said his lawyer had advised him to get an injuction, obviously to prevent the media from doing to him what they are doing to Jimmy Saville. Whether it got overturned or not doesn't really apply to what I said in that paragraph. The fact remains that the media enjoys ruining peoples lives - whether they are alive or dead and if they can get away with it which they can with Jimmy Saville.

I haven't said anywhere in this thread that Jimmy was totally innocent. Nor have I said that everyone who came forward and made a complaint is a liar. It is very believable that people are making things up or twisting what happened back then in order to maybe get a pay out at some stage. It happens all the time.

Then it sounds to me that your judgement of him is clouded as it's hardly likely that you are going to ever act in his defence since you hated him when he was alive and was dedicating so much of his life to raising money for charity.

Thats a very poor response.... :rolleyes:

Backatcha ..... :wink:

What took you so long ..... :puzzled:

Still trying to find proof of payments ..... :evilgrin:

You'll have to try harder to keep up with events ..... :pipe:

microscope

27-10-2012, 02:00 PM

Microscope you appear to have taken a real interest in this issue, and in particular omahs comments.
These were in response to media articles yes, and are his reaction to them.

Yes it is of interest to me. I don't like how the media works sometimes and the fact that they can destroy people, especially when there is profit to be made and they can get away with it. 'Trial by Media' I believe it's called. Very sad - especially when the person they are attacking is dead, so he can't defend himself.

I replied to Omah's comments he made to my post a few pages back, so I responded.

Your standpoint appears to be those who accuse are wrong/ mercenary, however those who are accused deserve a fair hearing, do you not see the double standard?

All those who are accusing are alive. They can have their say and tell whatever story they like to the police or media and the media will be more than happy to print it, as it's in their interest to and they are allowed to by law. Jimmy Savile is dead, so therefore cannot fight back in any way-shape or-form. Nobody in his family (what little he has) is going to fight his corner, unlike Michael Jackson who would have had his family fight for his good name if he had died a lot earlier before he first got accused.

Also if you read what I first wrote on page 29 of this thread - 13th post down, you will read my other views regarding this man and the whole politically correct nanny state of today which was not so apparent years ago.

Omah

27-10-2012, 02:12 PM

Yes it is of interest to me. I don't like how the media works sometimes and the fact that they can destroy people, especially when there is profit to be made and they can get away with it. 'Trial by Media' I believe it's called. Very sad - especially when the person they are attacking is dead, so he can't defend himself.

But wasn't it "the media" who have known that Savile was a rampaging paedophile all along and kept their mouths shut - so he was "spared" 'Trial by Media' ..... in fact, the master manipulator used his "antics" to line his own pockets and those of the media moguls by feeding off the mugs who bought into the Savile public image ..... :idc:

Omah

27-10-2012, 02:14 PM

All those who are accusing are alive.

Well, yes .... otherwise, they'd be dead, like Savile ..... :conf:

microscope

27-10-2012, 02:14 PM

Your Original 24-10-2012, 09:53 PM
My Reply 24-10-2012, 11:51 PM

Backatcha ..... :wink:

What took you so long ..... :puzzled:

Still trying to find proof of payments ..... :evilgrin:

You'll have to try harder to keep up with events ..... :pipe:

I have other things going on in my life apart from spending 24/7 on a flipping forum and my response to your replies to my post were hardly worth my time before today when I found some time.

What payments?? :conf:

Grow up... :pipe:

Omah

27-10-2012, 02:22 PM

I have other things going on in my life apart from spending 24/7 on a flipping forum and my response to your replies to my post were hardly worth my time before today when I found some time.

Well, events have moved on, but, apparently, you haven't ..... :shrug:

What payments?? :conf:

I thought the whole crux of your diatribe against the media coverage of the Savile scandal was that everybody was using it by fabricating stories to make money ..... :conf:

Grow up... :pipe:

Thats a very poor response....:rolleyes:

Omah

27-10-2012, 03:37 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9636594/Jimmy-Savile-Catholic-Church-seeks-to-strip-star-of-Papal-knighthood.html

Yeah, remove and nullify ..... :idc:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20108980

Savile was made a Knight Commander of St Gregory the Great by Pope John Paul II for his charity work. It is one of the highest awards the Pope can bestow.

There is no established process to remove a papal knighthood posthumously because the honour dies with the recipient.

Speaking to BBC News, the Vatican's official spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said the Holy See "firmly condemns the horrible crimes of sexual abuse of minors," adding it considered the Savile revelations as "very grave".

"It is deeply saddened that a person who has been soiled in this way could in his lifetime have been proposed for an honour by the Holy See, which in the light of recent information should certainly not have been bestowed."

Father Lombdardi went on: "As there does not exist any permanent official list of persons who have received papal honours in the past, it is not possible to strike anyone off a list that does not exist.

"The names of recipients of papal honours do not appear in the Pontifical Year Book and the honour expires with the death of the individual.

"The most important thing, therefore, is to reaffirm the Church's condemnation of all forms of sexual abuse, and particularly abuse of minors, as extremely grave crimes. The Holy See is adamant on this point."

How weird that the Holy See does not keep records of honours ..... :conf:

arista

27-10-2012, 05:45 PM

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/27/article-2223965-15B6898C000005DC-592_964x328.jpg

Caught on camera: Jimmy Savile gropes terrified teenage girl as he presents Top Of The Pops

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223965/Caught-camera-Jimmy-Savile-gropes-terrified-teenage-girl-presents-Top-Of-The-Pops.html#ixzz2AWShmyDa

Omah

27-10-2012, 06:09 PM

If you went back just 10 years ago to 2002 before the politically-correct-nanny-state-culture which has taken over our world to the extent it is today. If you heard that an older man looked or showed interest in someone below the age of '18' years of age, but no younger than '13', then you may look upon that as being a bit weird or you could class that person as a 'cradle snatcher', which had nothing to do with 'paedophelia' back then unlike it is today to the majority of people. Celebrity Kerry Katona only commented recently that she felt that Jimmy Savile was a pervert just by the way he looked at her. The word 'Perv' obviously meaning 'Paedophile' these days. Even though they are both adults and large age-gaps in relationships isn't illegal yet. Although one day I'm sure it will be, the way things are going...

But if you go back to 1984 there was a 14 year old Mandy Smith with a 48 year old Bill Wyman as shown here :- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1266664/Mandy-Smith-I-DID-sleep-Bill-Wyman-I-14--man-life-God.html

And as you can read within that article. Bill would be treated a lot worse today. In fact locked up and life ruined...over!!

So you can imagine what was going through the mind of celebrities such as Jimmy Savile at that time. If Bill can do it then why not them? If you were caught having sex with someone underage back then, then you would be breaking the law and end up in court for it, just like if you stabbed somebody. But it wasn't looked upon as serious as it is today. Today it's classed a million times worse by the majority! And if a pop star was caught kissing a 14 year old groupie who was probably a jail-bait-bitch anyway and loved every minute of it, then do you really expect the police or the courts to do much about it when it wasn't deemed so bad huh?? of course not!. And thats why he got away with it...simples...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/27/jimmy-savile-scandal-celebrity-hedonism?newsfeed=true

A child protection expert has rejected the assertion of pop stars of the 1960s and 1970s that the "hedonism" of the era was an excuse for having sex with children.

Paul Roffey said that the pop stars used their position to manipulate young women to carry out acts which were as illegal then as they are now.

Roffey said: "There is obviously much greater awareness of paedophilia today but in the 1960s everyone knew about the age of consent and people were regularly tried for breaking the law over it. The fact that someone may have looked 16 or 21 if they were male may be mitigation but it is no defence."

Paedophilia became a subject of national concern in the 1970s as it emerged as a civil rights issue. In 1974, paedophiles set up the Paedophile Information Exchange to lobby for the abolition of the age of consent and to oppose the banning of child pornography. The group operated openly until 1978 when the police arrested and charged some of its members. The group was the subject of newspaper exposés and criticism by campaigners including Mary Whitehouse.

On Friday, Clifford said young pop stars at the time had gone from working in a factory one week to performing in front of thousands of people, "and girls are screaming and throwing themselves at them then".

Roffey remains unimpressed by special pleading. "You don't need a birth certificate to realise the age of a girl even if she looks older than her age. People invariably know they are breaking the law and they still know now," he said.

:pipe:

Sticks

27-10-2012, 08:43 PM

May I recommend you all read "The Lucifer effect" by professor Philip Zimbado (The same professor behind the Stanford Prison Experiment

arista

27-10-2012, 09:25 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/27/200472/default/v1/eex28p001-1st-1-329x437.jpg

Omah

27-10-2012, 09:29 PM

May I recommend you all read "The Lucifer effect" by professor Philip Zimbado (The same professor behind the Stanford Prison Experiment

a) Do you mean Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo?

b) Who are "you all"?

c) Why whould "we all" read it?

:conf:

Omah

27-10-2012, 09:56 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/27/jimmy-savile-bbc-policy-newsnight

The BBC's crisis over Jimmy Savile has intensified after accusations that the corporation's head of editorial standards knowingly misled parliament.

David Jordan, director of editorial policy and standards at the BBC, told last Tuesday's culture select committee that he had issued inaccurate public statements concerning the nature of Newsnight's Savile sex abuse investigation, but that he did so before he had been told about the true nature of the programme by its producer, Meirion Jones.

BBC sources say, however, that his version is incorrect. They claim instead that Jordan repeated misleading statements about the programme's investigation after he had been warned by Jones that his account was wrong.

Sources within the BBC newsroom said it was concerning that Jordan, who had sat alongside director general George Entwistle during last week's challenging select committee appearance, should have committed such an error. One said: "The chronology of what he knew when is apparent. He could be said to have misled the committee."

..... or "lied"!

:idc:

Omah

27-10-2012, 10:05 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/27/jimmy-savile-bbc-policy-newsnight

The BBC is braced for the legal ramifications arising from allegations that other BBC employees were involved.

Child abuse lawyer Trevor Sterling, of Slater & Gordon, said:: "From what we've heard there were others working in association with Jimmy Savile; there have been many stories of people, for example, taking children to his dressing room. What's emerging now is the suggestion that there was a more formalised ring."

His comments corroborate the latest findings from the National Association for People Abused in Childhood whose chief executive, Pete Saunders, described "an element of widespread organisation" regarding abuse at the BBC.

It just gets worse ..... :idc:

Sticks

28-10-2012, 05:51 AM

a) Do you mean Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo?

b) Who are "you all"?

c) Why whould "we all" read it?

:conf:

So spellings are off

Dr Zimbardo talks about a bad barrel as opposed to a bad apple, where a system set up can corrupt people. The sub title of his book is "How good people turn evil"

A lot of people here seem to be gleefully awaiting a torrent of arrests of names from the past. How many of you passing judgement would have been able to avoid being corrupted by the system or the way things were.

See Matthew 7:3-5 or Luke 41-42

Omah

28-10-2012, 10:28 AM

So spellings are off

Well, getting a name right has helped me enormously in several professions ..... ;)

Dr Zimbardo talks about a bad barrel as opposed to a bad apple, where a system set up can corrupt people. The sub title of his book is "How good people turn evil"

Seems like a statement of the blindingly obvious to me ..... :bored:

A lot of people here seem to be gleefully awaiting a torrent of arrests of names from the past. How many of you passing judgement would have been able to avoid being corrupted by the system or the way things were.

IIRC, "the way things were" in the mid-20th century may have included "consensual" underage sex but did not include molesting and assaulting children of either sex at every possible opportunity - those particular anti-social activities have, thankfully, always been the inclination the few rather than the many ....:idc:

See Matthew 7:3-5 or Luke 41-42

Only a priest would say that ..... :eek:

microscope

28-10-2012, 10:29 AM

originally posted by Omah
originally posted by microscope

Yes it is of interest to me. I don't like how the media works sometimes and the fact that they can destroy people, especially when there is profit to be made and they can get away with it. 'Trial by Media' I believe it's called. Very sad - especially when the person they are attacking is dead, so he can't defend himself.

But wasn't it "the media" who have known that Savile was a rampaging paedophile all along and kept their mouths shut - so he was "spared" 'Trial by Media' ..... in fact, the master manipulator used his "antics" to line his own pockets and those of the media moguls by feeding off the mugs who bought into the Savile public image ..... :idc:

The media have to be very careful what they print in newspapers especially when wealthy celebrities are still alive and they would indeed run to their lawyers for legal advice and it wouldn't be long before the newspaper/s would hear from them wanting to know why they have printed the libelous story and would need a lot more than one persons sayso. Their word against His.

Many celebrities get accused of wrongdoings all the time by random people and for many different reasons. The media who chose not to print anything back then obviously didn't have enough proof of the so-called accusations of paedophilia so when it comes to 'lineing pockets', I suggest you look towards the media - not Jimmy Savile. All he did was get paid for the work he did during his lifetime and that was quite a lot - many of which was good.

And how do you know that he was a 'rampaging paedophile'?? All you have is loads of people coming forward telling stories and the newspaper keeps printing them, and I have already given my views regarding all that, as I feel that many many are indeed false.

originally posted by Omah
originally posted by microscope

What payments?? :conf:

I thought the whole crux of your diatribe against the media coverage of the Savile scandal was that everybody was using it by fabricating stories to make money ..... :conf:

Not everybody.

Re-read what I wrote previously.. :xyxwave:

originally posted by Omah
originally posted by microscope

If you went back just 10 years ago to 2002 before the politically-correct-nanny-state-culture which has taken over our world to the extent it is today. If you heard that an older man looked or showed interest in someone below the age of '18' years of age, but no younger than '13', then you may look upon that as being a bit weird or you could class that person as a 'cradle snatcher', which had nothing to do with 'paedophelia' back then unlike it is today to the majority of people. Celebrity Kerry Katona only commented recently that she felt that Jimmy Savile was a pervert just by the way he looked at her. The word 'Perv' obviously meaning 'Paedophile' these days. Even though they are both adults and large age-gaps in relationships isn't illegal yet. Although one day I'm sure it will be, the way things are going...

But if you go back to 1984 there was a 14 year old Mandy Smith with a 48 year old Bill Wyman as shown here :- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...-life-God.html

And as you can read within that article. Bill would be treated a lot worse today. In fact locked up and life ruined...over!!

So you can imagine what was going through the mind of celebrities such as Jimmy Savile at that time. If Bill can do it then why not them? If you were caught having sex with someone underage back then, then you would be breaking the law and end up in court for it, just like if you stabbed somebody. But it wasn't looked upon as serious as it is today. Today it's classed a million times worse by the majority! And if a pop star was caught kissing a 14 year old groupie who was probably a jail-bait-bitch anyway and loved every minute of it, then do you really expect the police or the courts to do much about it when it wasn't deemed so bad huh?? of course not!. And thats why he got away with it...simples...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/27/jimmy-savile-scandal-celebrity-hedonism?newsfeed=true

:pipe:

That link means jack-s**t to what I wrote above. :rolleyes:

1) I stated that it was illegal to have under-age sex back then.
2) I stated that today it's classed a million times worse by the majority.
3) I also stated that if an older man showed an interest in a girl below the age of '18' years of age, but no younger than '13' then you may be looked upon as being a bit weird or you could class that person as a 'cradle snatcher', which had nothing to do with 'paedophelia' back then unlike it is today to the majority of people.

I'm trying to work out why you posted that link in reply to what I said??

I know it is illegal to have under-age sex, but I also know that the way it was treated was a lot different then as it is today. Back then it was not more of a crime than other crimes like being stabbed or being raped or murder. And people didn't feel so strongly about it as they do today. Hence, 'a million times worse'.

And when I said, 'showing an interest in someone between those two ages I quoted' - I wasn't talking about any sexual act taking place of any girl under 16, as that is illegal. But if someone such as Jimmy Savile liked someone who was underage but didn't do anything with her of a sexual nature then no law is broken, as if he wishes he could wait until she is 16 and then rush off to Gretna Green in Scotland and marry her, even without her parents consent.

Omah

28-10-2012, 10:30 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20114378

Former pop star Gary Glitter has been arrested on suspicion of sex offences by police investigating Jimmy Savile abuse claims.

He has been taken from his home into custody at a London police station.

Glitter, whose real name is Paul Gadd, was jailed in Vietnam in 2006 for child sex offences.

Police are investigating allegations the late TV presenter Savile sexually abused some 300 young people over a 40-year period.

Met Police confirmed officers from Operation Yewtree had "arrested a man in his 60s in connection with the investigation".

"The man, from London, was arrested at approximately 7:15 BST on suspicion of sexual offences. The individual falls under the strand of the investigation we have termed 'Savile and others'."

:idc:

Omah

28-10-2012, 10:40 AM

2) I stated that today it's classed a million times worse by the majority.

I can't argue with unsubstantiated assertions ..... :nono:

microscope

28-10-2012, 11:07 AM

originally posted by arista

Caught on camera: Jimmy Savile gropes terrified teenage girl as he presents Top Of The Pops

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223965/Caught-camera-Jimmy-Savile-gropes-terrified-teenage-girl-presents-Top-Of-The-Pops.html#ixzz2AWShmyDa

This is ridiculous?

That picture shows nothing. Could have been Jimmy being cheeky and tickling her. So what, no big deal!

Kizzy

28-10-2012, 11:11 AM

I fail to see why because he is dead some think this case should not proceed...
If a gunman killed and injured several people before shooting himself dead, would the reasons and causes not be investigated?
This smoke and mirrors defence that some men have younger partners is ridiculous, the key word here is consent.
Why the trips to approved schools, prisons, hospitals, childrens homes?
Are some suggesting that these children from up and down the country are suffering from some shared delusion?
That we have all been whipped up into a media frenzy by the tabloids?
To be fair I think this is one instance where the public is (for once) not being controlled into a mindset.
For years the papers have fed us political and social ideology and we gobble it up with our cornflakes, for once I believe we are making a stand for the real victims. Not accepting the 'different culture' soundbites.
Along with the hillsbourgh revelations, it seems now everyone is saying 'ok we've had enough lies and coverups we demand the truth!'

Omah

28-10-2012, 12:00 PM

This smoke and mirrors defence that some men have younger partners is ridiculous, the key word here is consent.!

Yeah, I agree .... who among us, while "growing up", has NOT has underage consensual sex ..... :wink:

But I'd guess that most of us who passed into "maturity" didn't feel the need to pester, molest, assault and rape underage and vulnerable persons of either sex well into our seniority ..... :nono:

Omah

28-10-2012, 12:30 PM

You're so hot, teasing me
So you're blue but I can't take a chance on a chick like you
That's something I couldn't do
There's that look in your eyes
I can read in your face that your feelings are driving you wild
Ah, but girl you're only a child

Well I can dance with you honey
If you think it's funny
Does your mother know that you're out?
And I can chat with you baby
Flirt a little maybe
Does your mother know that you're out?

Take it easy (take it easy)
Better slow down girl
That's no way to go
Does your mother know?
Take it easy (take it easy)
Try to cool it girl
Take it nice and slow
Does your mother know?

I can see what you want
But you seem pretty young to be searching for that kind of fun
So maybe I'm not the one
Now you're so cute, I like your style
And I know what you mean when you give me a flash of that smile (smile)
But girl you're only a child

Well I can dance with you honey
If you think it's funny
Does your mother know that you're out?
And I can chat with you baby
Flirt a little maybe
Does your mother know that you're out?

A word of caution from Björn Ulvaeus ..... :idc:

Kizzy

28-10-2012, 12:39 PM

Haha! nice one omah :D
Abba never did a song called 'lie back in my specially adapted landrover emotionally disturbed girl' did they?...

Omah

28-10-2012, 01:29 PM

Haha! nice one omah :D
Abba never did a song called 'lie back in my specially adapted landrover emotionally disturbed girl' did they?...

Not AFAIK ..... :suspect:

billy123

28-10-2012, 01:40 PM

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2012/10/27/200472/default/v1/eex28p001-1st-1-329x437.jpg
Its a strange day when charities start claiming they deserve more money at the expense of other charities because they deem themselves to be more entitled.

arista

28-10-2012, 02:24 PM

Its a strange day when charities start claiming they deserve more money at the expense of other charities because they deem themselves to be more entitled.

Yes.

I think the BBC should let CH4 do this years.

arista

28-10-2012, 03:10 PM

"Mark Thompson's office was notified at least twice - once by a journalist and once again by ITV
Mr Thompson was apparently not told of allegations on two occasions
YouGov poll: 48 percent of respondents believe Thompson had not been honest about Savile affair
Corporation is battling claims that its head of editorial standards, David Jordan, knowingly misled parliament last Tuesday"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224236/BBCs-director-generals-office-alerted-twice-Jimmy-Savile-child-abuse-claims.html#ixzz2AbffZxWL

The Former BBC Boss
has a Massive Stink.

Omah

28-10-2012, 06:01 PM

He was released on bail until mid-December, after being questioned at a London police station.

:suspect:

arista

28-10-2012, 06:22 PM

I want to see other Old Stars Arrested

microscope

28-10-2012, 07:37 PM

I want to see other Old Stars Arrested

Why? :conf:

If you are 18 years old and you have sex with a 15 year old you have broken the law and you are a sex offender, thats it. If you are 18 years old and act in an inappropriate way towards someone who is 15 years old or younger then you are breaking the law. So why pick on the "Old Stars" huh? That is just age discrimination which is illegal. I mean - If you went for a job and they told you that they don't wish to employ you because you are too young there are laws in place to stop that and employers can get fined severely.

If some 'heartless couldn't-care less jail-bait bitch' lies about her age to an older celebrity and tells him that she is 17 when she is actually 15 so he kisses, fondles and has sex with her then the law is totally inconsiderate of that and shall punish regardless. Hardly fair :nono:

Vicky.

28-10-2012, 07:46 PM

Gary Glitter in child sex scandal. Who would've thought it?!

joeysteele

28-10-2012, 11:22 PM

This whole thing now seems like it may never end, so much still to come as to so many too,on top of all that is now in the tray to be investigated.

Marsh.

28-10-2012, 11:24 PM

Why is the disgusting pervert not in jail anyway? There's something wrong with the world when we let sickos like Glitter roam free.

Omah

28-10-2012, 11:45 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9639268/Jimmy-Savile-More-arrests-within-days-after-police-hold-Gary-Glitter.html

Police have made it clear that other people – expected to include well-known entertainers as well as former associates of the Jim’ll Fix It star – will also face questioning in the coming days and weeks.

Among those thought to be of interest to the investigation team are a radio producer, a photographer and a driver, all now retired, who are likely to be asked about their knowledge of Savile’s decades of abuse.

At least one alleged abuser is reported to have gone into hiding.

:idc:

Omah

29-10-2012, 03:01 AM

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-sex-scandal-civil-1405620

Civil war has broken out among Jimmy Savile’s family as his abused great-niece spoke out about the “monster” known to them as Uncle Jimmy .

But despite telling *relatives about the abuse Caroline Robinson, 49, claims she was told by her grandmother Marjorie Marsden: “Oh, don’t worry, it’s only Uncle Jimmy. I’ll sort it out.”

In an emotional interview she said yesterday her family was “split in two” over the scandal.

Caroline, who was molested twice by her great-uncle, once aged 12 and again three years later, went on: “I still think to this day, did I encourage him? I was 12 and I told my grandmother. But I look back and I wonder if she knew what he was really like.

“Certain members of the family were told not to speak to Jimmy Savile or phone him or ask for money so we never had photos taken with him. I think many of them knew what sort of man he was.”

Never trust an Uncle ..... :nono:

I'm your wicked Uncle Ernie
I'm glad you won't see or hear me
As I fiddle about
Fiddle about
Fiddle about !

Your mother left me here to mind you
Now I'm doing what I want to
Fiddling about
Fiddling about
Fiddle about!

Down with the bedclothes
Up with your nightshirt!
Fiddle about
Fiddle about
Fiddle about !

Ack : "Weird" John Entwistle

Nedusa

29-10-2012, 06:59 AM

I wonder who else along with Jimmy Savile was in Gary's Gang...!!!

Omah

29-10-2012, 09:39 AM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224233/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-Gary-Glitter-arrested-whos-next.html#ixzz2AgAZ7iv6

Detectives warned Savile’s living accomplices last week that ‘we are coming for you’, and have drawn up a detailed arrest strategy.

They have refused to discuss who will be next in line for questioning.

Others thought vulnerable to arrest include a former BBC employee who was a close associate of Savile. The Mail revealed three weeks ago how he allegedly ‘procured’ girls for the star, and has also been accused of committing rape himself on BBC premises.

:idc:

arista

29-10-2012, 10:06 AM

Why? :conf:

If you are 18 years old and you have sex with a 15 year old you have broken the law and you are a sex offender, thats it. If you are 18 years old and act in an inappropriate way towards someone who is 15 years old or younger then you are breaking the law. So why pick on the "Old Stars" huh? That is just age discrimination which is illegal. I mean - If you went for a job and they told you that they don't wish to employ you because you are too young there are laws in place to stop that and employers can get fined severely.

If some 'heartless couldn't-care less jail-bait bitch' lies about her age to an older celebrity and tells him that she is 17 when she is actually 15 so he kisses, fondles and has sex with her then the law is totally inconsiderate of that and shall punish regardless. Hardly fair :nono:

No
they will be Old
as it was back in the 1970's , 1980's etc.

I am Not Picking on the Old.

You did not understand my post , in that sense.

Kizzy

29-10-2012, 10:20 AM

Don't worry about it arista, microscope may just be playing devils advocate.
Some young men do mistake 15yr old girls for 17yr old girs...
How a thirtysomething guy mistakes a 9yr old boy scout for one is a different matter.

Omah

29-10-2012, 12:46 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9640407/Creepy-Jimmy-Savile-was-banned-from-Children-in-Need.html

Sir Roger Jones, OBE, former chairman of Children in Need said: "He was a creepy sort of character - we didn't want him anywhere near the charity."

Sir Roger, 69, was also a governor of BBC Wales at the time. He said he did not have have evidence to report Savile to management at the Corporation.

But he said Savile was banned from any involvement at the annual Children in Need TV fundraiser because of "rumours" about his interest in young girls.

Sir Roger said: "We all recognised he was a creepy sort of character.

"And when I was with Children in Need we took the decision that we didn't want him near the charity.

"We stepped up our child protection policies which again which would have put him at great risk if he tried anything.

"A charity like Children In Need knew the biggest thing to guard against was paedophiles. They were just like flies around the honey pot."

Good for Sir Roger ..... :thumbs:

lostalex

29-10-2012, 01:48 PM

arista

29-10-2012, 02:00 PM

This was years back
and those BBC workers that let Evil Jimmy rape kids
were keeping their jobs safe
and some may have been part of the ring.

lostalex

29-10-2012, 02:08 PM

ohh, they were keeping their jobs safe, that's makes it okay then, cause it's okay to let kids be molested as long as it's keeping your job safe... wtf

arista

29-10-2012, 02:18 PM

ohh, they were keeping their jobs safe, that's makes it okay then, cause it's okay to let kids be molested as long as it's keeping your job safe... wtf

No it's Not OK

THE BBC Stink
and we the UK Public fund them.
I hate paying for the Stinking BBC

Omah

29-10-2012, 04:41 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224573/Jimmy-Savile-scandal-3-doctors-collaborated-abuse-helping-select-child-patients-rape.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Police have been given the names of doctors who are accused of being in league with Jimmy Savile.

One doctor allegedly ‘collaborated’ with the BBC star in selecting child patients to rape at Leeds General Infirmary.

Two others worked alongside him at Stoke Mandeville, the Buckinghamshire hospital where nurses warned children to ‘pretend to be asleep’ when Savile toured the wards.

At Leeds General Infirmary, two former women patients have come forward to name a doctor. He is accused of ‘brutal rape’.

The National Association for People Abused in Childhood charity said: ‘One of the victims has said Jimmy and this doctor used to collaborate in choosing girls and taking them somewhere else to abuse them.’

:idc:

Kizzy

29-10-2012, 06:15 PM

I was fondled whilst pregnant by my consultant at the LGI wonder if he was in on it?

Vicky.

29-10-2012, 06:17 PM

Get your claim in kizzy, while the story is rife. Might get some compo :pipe:

Omah

29-10-2012, 07:22 PM

I was fondled whilst pregnant by my consultant at the LGI wonder if he was in on it?

When you say "fondled", do you mean "stroked or caressed lovingly or erotically" or "examined"?

:conf:

Kizzy

29-10-2012, 07:33 PM

When you say "fondled", do you mean "stroked or caressed lovingly or erotically" or "examined"?

:conf:

I do know the difference...
He asked a lot of rather inappropriate questions too... I was naive so just answered them.
It wasen't untill a few years after I heard he had been caught.

Nah, even though i'm skint it would be way too embarrassing vicky lol.

joeysteele

29-10-2012, 09:14 PM

i was watching a report about this,. and what surpsised me most was the fact that in the UK, it's not illegal to see someone molest a child and not report it. That shocked me. I think there must have been DOZENS of people at the BBC over the years that knew this was going on, but they can't face any legal charges for not reporting it.

That's just crazy. In the US, and Canada, Australia, and most other civilized nations it is a CRIME to not report child abuse.

It's just mind blowing that there's nothing illegal about all of those BBC staff seeing him abusing children and not reporting it. IMO all of those BBC staff that knew what was going on and didn't report it are JUST AS GUILTY.

I agree with you again lostalex, it will be interesting to see what does transpire as to the investigations going on and I do think,if there were and still are, people at the BBC who are found to have been told things as to this but then did nothing to find out for sure, or just ignored it, then they should be brought to account for that.

As arista points out we fund the BBC through the TV licence.
If it is found that families had teens or younger involved in shows where someone employed by the BBC was able to molest and abuse them,then get their fees and also high popularity profile enhanced, then really, I hope this leads to much more and that the BBC is, in the hopefully near future, not trusted with public funding again.

However, if anyone did hear of anything, if it was ever told to them by the abused or their families and they did nothing then definitely,those people as you say are just as guilty. Their silence not only allowed this to go on as it was but to actually clearly get worse from all reports and even extend out to other areas and organisations where abuse could be carried out.

Marsh.

29-10-2012, 09:56 PM

I was fondled whilst pregnant by my consultant at the LGI wonder if he was in on it?

Omg, that's awful. I take it he's been arrested?

Kizzy

29-10-2012, 11:17 PM

Omg, that's awful. I take it he's been arrested?

He was yes, I found out via a friend who had the same consultant at that time.
She was not assaulted but remembers the strange questions.

Omah

30-10-2012, 12:02 AM

I do know the difference...
He asked a lot of rather inappropriate questions too... I was naive so just answered them.
It wasen't untill a few years after I heard he had been caught.

My apologies ..... :sad:

I thought you were joking ..... :shocked:

Was there a court case ..... :conf:

Omah

30-10-2012, 09:29 AM

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/service/editors-choice/jimmy-savile-family-members-target-greatniece-on-facebook-after-she-speaks-out-about-the-star-molesting-her-16231507.html#ixzz2AlypGLgS

Relatives of Jimmy Savile’s great-niece have reportedly attacked her on Facebook for speaking out about the star molesting her.

The abuse comes after Caroline Robinson claimed that as a 12-year-old she was abused in a room full of relatives, including her late-grandmother - Savile’s sister - who told her “don’t worry, it’s only Jimmy”.

But far from rallying round to support the 49-year-old, who claims she was abused by Savile for a second time when aged 15, Mrs Robinson says her living relatives have instead taken to Facebook to accuse her of lying and “bringing shame on the family”.

Mrs Robinson’s brother Martin Perry allegedly posted: “You are not right in the head.”

He went on: “You have brought shame on all the Marsdens by lying, there will be a nice long line of people wanting to smack you? Never again will I think I have a sister.”

Her niece Louise Perry added: “No one in the family has a clue what you are on about. For you to paint such an awful picture of the family is beyond my belief.”

And Jane Perry, married to Mrs Robinson’s other brother Philip, said: “What a load of bollocks.”

Speaking to the Sun, Mrs Robinson said: “It’s just disgusting. They are the very people I thought I would get support from. I expected it from other folk who did not know but from family is different.”

Mrs Robinson has reported the Facebook abuse to the police, but an officer visiting her home apparently told her there was little they could do.

:idc:

Kizzy

30-10-2012, 11:35 AM

My apologies ..... :sad:

I thought you were joking ..... :shocked:

Was there a court case ..... :conf:

Yep, he was jailed for 18 months and struck off.
Can't post links atm, his name is vinall.

Omah

30-10-2012, 12:01 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1762007.stm

A consultant gynaecologist used his position to carry out a series of indecent assaults on more than 20 patients, a court heard on Tuesday.
Paul Vinall, 55, touched the women intimately either on their breasts or genitals while they were completely naked "under the pretext of being a necessary physical examination", a jury at Sheffield Crown Court was told.

Paul Worsley QC, prosecuting, said the doctor preyed on the "vulnerability" of his patients and even personally removed the underwear of some women during consultations in a "wholly unjustified manner".

"He was using his position as a consultant to carry out indecent assaults on those ladies in the course of those examinations,

Charges denied

"confident that they trusted him, that they would not complain or that he could always produce an explanation that in his work, touching a lady in a particular manner was appropriate," added Mr Worsley.

Mr Vinall is a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist who has worked at various hospitals and private clinics in Yorkshire, including Leeds General Infirmary and Wharfedale General Hospital, Otley.

He denies 31 counts of indecent assault on 22 patients between 1981 and 2000.

Mr Worsley told the jury that the alleged sexual assaults were carried out by Vinall "in a manner which gave him some personal satisfaction".

On one occasion, Vinall touched a woman's breasts with one hand while inserting his fingers into her vagina after she had been told to take all her clothes off.

'No clinical purpose'

Another patient alleged that Vinall fondled her breasts as she was kneeling on all fours completely naked.

Just as you said ..... :eek:

Gynaecologist guilty of indecent assault

A consultant gynaecologist has been given an 18-month suspended sentence after being found guilty of indecently assaulting two of his patients.

Dr Paul Vinall, 55, was found guilty of the two charges at Sheffield Crown Court on Friday and cleared of three other charges.

A further 26 were ordered to remain on file.

The consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist, who worked at various hospitals and private clinics in Yorkshire, had denied 31 counts of indecent assault on 22 patients between 1981 and 2000.

The judge, Mr Justice Crane, told Vinall that his career has ended in "shame and humiliation".

He said that Vinall, of Asel Pasture, Leeds, had betrayed the absolute trust of his patients, embarrassing and humiliating at least two of them.

During the trial, the jury heard a series of allegations that Vinall had misused his position by touching women inappropriately "under the pretext of being necessary physical examinations."

The two guilty charges date back to 1991 and 1995 and occurred at private consulting rooms Vinall used across West Yorkshire.

Both counts involved Vinall conducting "inappropriate" examinations on women.

The first involved a 48-year-old nurse and midwife and the second related to a 34-year-old woman.

Vinall has been suspended since July 2000, following the complaints to the NHS helpline by patients.

Vinall will automatically be struck off the General Medical Council for a minimum of five years, effectively meaning the end of his career.

Mr Justice Crane said because he had failed to plead guilty to any of the charges, Vinall had put the women through the embarrassment and humiliation of giving evidence.

Personally, I don't think that sentence is harsh enough for what he did to dozens of women ..... :mad:

..... and to think that you went through it, too, kizzy ..... :sad:

Kizzy

30-10-2012, 12:42 PM

It was 1997, I was 24 and trusted him completely.
Looking back I should have told someone, thats what all these kids must have thought.
Who would believe me? maybe I was overreacting?
He should have got longer, wonder how many more there are like me who didn't speak up?

Ammi

30-10-2012, 12:54 PM

..I've just read what happened Kizzy..that's dreadful, I'm glad the guy was convicted..

Kizzy

30-10-2012, 01:00 PM

..I've just read what happened Kizzy..that's dreadful, I'm glad the guy was convicted..

Thanks ammi :) It's a shame that saviles victims never saw him punished whilst he was alive.

Ammi

30-10-2012, 01:03 PM

..yeah, but hopefully anyone else who was involved will be held accountable...

Omah

30-10-2012, 01:08 PM

Looking back I should have told someone, thats what all these kids must have thought.
Who would believe me? maybe I was overreacting?

Yeah, exactly ..... without corroboration, you'd be accused of fantasizing ..... :shrug:

Kizzy

30-10-2012, 01:13 PM

Definately, my view is they have only scratched the surface.
I would go so far as to say the systematic abuse of children in local authority care has been ongoing and widespread for years.
Nick Davis wrote a book on it...

Kizzy

30-10-2012, 01:23 PM

Yeah, exactly ..... without corroboration, you'd be accused of fantasizing ..... :shrug:

I don't know about 'fantasizing'...
if I had known at the time of another person that felt something was not right about their treatment, I would have felt more confident to take it further yes.

arista

30-10-2012, 09:43 PM

Omah

30-10-2012, 09:56 PM

"NYT writer accuses Mark Thompson
of 'wilful ignorance' over Jimmy Savile"

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/24/1351075332689/Mark-Thompson-007.jpg
Former BBC Boss
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/30/mark-thompson-new-york-times-jimmy-savile

"New York Times Company chairman Arthur Sulzberger is in a difficult spot. He believes strongly that he's got the executive he needs to lead the Times to the promised land of healthy profits again," Nocera said in conclusion.

"Although he declined to be interviewed for this column, he appears to have accepted Thompson's insistence that he knew nothing about the explosive allegations that became public literally 50 days after he accepted the Times job."

Knowing nothing is not exactly an expression of competence ..... :suspect:

Omah

30-10-2012, 10:11 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20147834

Former staff at the Duncroft Approved School were not questioned by Surrey Police during their 2007 inquiry into sex abuse claims against Jimmy Savile.

The force said it decided not to speak to workers unless there was proof that they had seen or knew about the abuse.

Three ex-residents at the home claimed to have been abused by Savile in the 1970s, but prosecutors found there was insufficient evidence to take action.

Police are probing claims the late TV star abused about 300 young people.

Earlier, former detective and child protection expert Mark Williams-Thomas claimed that Duncroft's head teacher at the time of the alleged abuse - Margaret Jones - was unaware of the police investigation until she read about it in the newspapers.

He told the Daily Telegraph the 2007 investigation "offered the best opportunity to catch Savile".

He added: "It raises questions about why the one person who could have provided information was not spoken to.

"She [Ms Jones] could have provided important background information about the girls and Savile."

A spokeswoman for Surrey Police said officers had spoken to 22 former residents of the girls' school in 2007, and the children's charity Barnado's, which was running the home at the time of the allegations.

She said: "Barnardo's informed us they had no record of any allegations of sexual abuse reported to staff during this period.

"A decision was made not to interview former staff unless there was evidence to suggest they witnessed abuse or were made aware of abuse at the time.

"None of the former residents spoken to during the course of the investigation indicated staff witnessed abuse, and stated they had not reported abuse to any staff at the time," she added.

Well, that seems more than a little remiss of the Surrey Police ..... :rolleyes:

joeysteele

30-10-2012, 10:40 PM

Sorry to read about your really bad experience kizzy.There are some awful people about and in positions of trust too.

Kizzy

30-10-2012, 10:58 PM

Sorry to read about your really bad experience kizzy.There are some awful people about and in positions of trust too.

Thankyou joey :) as an adult you think nobody will ever take advantage of you again...and then they do.
I feel so stupid, how could I not know that was wrong?

AnnieK

31-10-2012, 05:54 AM

Thankyou joey :) as an adult you think nobody will ever take advantage of you again...and then they do.
I feel so stupid, how could I not know that was wrong?

Was it your first pregnancy? You were not to know, we trust doctors etc and I know I would have not questioned it either. Victims of abuse always blame themselves and it is so wrong. At least you saw some justice and know he wont be in a position to do it again. Hope the bastard didn't ruin the magical time too much for you. (hug)

Omah

31-10-2012, 07:57 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9644841/Jimmy-Savile-given-keys-to-nurses-home-accommodation.html

Terry Pratt said the late Jim'll Fix It star was regularly handed a key to the nurses' accommodation building at Leeds General Infirmary during the late 1980s.

The ex-worker told the BBC that Savile would arrive with the girls in the early hours of the morning and then leave before dawn.

Mr Pratt said he became suspicious when Savile began arriving in the middle of the night with different girls who seemed "star-struck" and were "not streetwise".

He added that the celebrity, who was a volunteer and fund-raiser for the hospital, would make several late-night visits a month where he would ask for the key to the accommodation block, spend a few hours there and then leave at 5am.

:shocked:

Omah

31-10-2012, 11:26 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/31/jimmy-savile-stripped-honour

The Freedom of Scarborough granted to Jimmy Savile by his "second home" seven years ago is almost certain to be suspended by the council next week, with his name removed from the honours board pending the outcome of the Metropolitan Police investigation.

A decision will then be taken on whether the ceremonial link will permanently follow the street signs, plaque and gravestone which have already been removed from the Yorkshire resort, where Savile was a welcome if eccentric regular before his death last year.

Scarborough has been through the now familiar process of incredulity followed by shock and upset that a man associated with charity fundraising, clunk-click safety belt campaigns and hugely popular children's TV programmes could have such a dark side.

Savile's name will be expunged from a list of 20 individuals and groups given the freedom since the local government reforms of 1974 created the present borough. Exemption from tolls and other ceremonial privileges come with the honour, whose other holders include local resident Sir Alan Ayckbourn, the world's second most performed playwright after Shakespeare, the retired boxer Paul Ingle and the Yorkshire Regiment.

Yeah, expunge him ..... :pipe:

Kizzy

31-10-2012, 11:39 AM

Was it your first pregnancy? You were not to know, we trust doctors etc and I know I would have not questioned it either. Victims of abuse always blame themselves and it is so wrong. At least you saw some justice and know he wont be in a position to do it again. Hope the bastard didn't ruin the magical time too much for you. (hug)

No, thats another reason I felt a bit daft.
I put it to the back of my mind, it was good to read he had been convicted. I'm annoyed at myself really now, but at the time I just was not confident enough to challenge him.
No, he didn't ruin it annie thanks my son is 15 now :)

Ammi

31-10-2012, 11:59 AM

Kizzy

31-10-2012, 12:19 PM

..you weren't just young and lacking in confidence Kizzy..you were pregnant and your hormones were all over the place..he exploited the whole situation and abused the trust placed in him, not just with you but with others..you have nothing to be annoyed with yourself about....

You're right ammi, it does make you think though, when there are cases like this the ones we know about are just the tip of the iceberg. (shudder)

Omah

31-10-2012, 09:57 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/31/jimmy-savile-itv

Doctors and managers at Stoke Mandeville hospital were afraid to challenge Jimmy Savile over the free access he enjoyed to wards, out of fear that he would take his fundraising millions elsewhere, a former director of nursing has said, as fresh claims emerged of abuse at the hospital and elsewhere.

Christine McFarlane, former director of nursing and patient care at the Buckinghamshire hospital where Savile volunteered for many years, said the TV star "basically ... had the freedom to walk wherever he wanted" and maintained a powerful position thanks to "subtle bullying" of hospital managers.

In an interview with ITV news , McFarlane said managers "didn't fight that hard" to challenge Savile, who had almost single-handedly raised millions of pounds for the hospital, including the funds to establish its famous spinal unit. "There was a fine balance ... to reach in not upsetting Jimmy."

Medical staff's gratitude for his fundraising efforts had given him a great deal of power within the hospital, she said. "Along with the power, people were afraid of Jimmy stopping raising money for the hospital. There was a fear of him taking something away. He argued that it was his and not theirs."

The diabolical machinations of Savile ..... :suspect: