[Omah]

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

Originally Posted by microscope

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....

Backatcha .....

What took you so long .....

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

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

[microscope]

Originally Posted by Omah

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


Backatcha .....

What took you so long .....

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

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

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??

Grow up...

[King Gizzard]

The least shocking news of all time

[billy123]

Jimmy Saville raped me..........And me and me and dah da dah!!!

These stories have been around forever but never had the substance to be taken to the police but now he is dead i suppose there is a few quid to be made out of coming out with these things as its not a police matter anymore.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by bobnot

Jimmy Saville raped me..........And me and me and dah da dah!!!

These stories have been around forever but never had the substance to be taken to the police but now he is dead i suppose there is a few quid to be made out of coming out with it now he is dead.

no one would allow it to come out, do you really think we live in a world where no cover up goes on ?all police/press are honest ? because we really do not

[billy123]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

no one would allow it to come out, do you really think we live in a world where no cover up goes on ?all police/press are honest ? because we really do not

What do you mean it wasnt allowed to come out? none of these are new claims they are all old claims that were investigated and thrown out they are only being repeated now because of a tv programme.

[arista]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz27wvxoiGA

Even a Presenter was told to not say a word.


And Yes Bob
The TV Prog is the base.
ITV1HD 11:10PM Weds 3-Oct
this week Exposure: The Other Side Of Jimmy Savile

[Omah]

Originally Posted by bobnot

What do you mean it wasnt allowed to come out? none of these are new claims they are all old claims that were investigated and thrown out they are only being repeated now because of a tv programme.

It seems you are wrong :

Five alleged victims have come forward to tell how the late TV star used his fame to carry out a string of serious sex *attacks, including rape, at the height of his stardom (the '60's and '70's)

There is only one "old claim" :

In 2007, Surrey Police received at least two complaints that Savile had abused pupils at the now defunct Duncroft Approved School for Girls near Staines, for which he did charity work in the Seventies. The investigation was dropped after a Crown Prosecution Service lawyer advised no further action be taken. The force refuses to say whether Savile was formally interviewed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz27y3gfoul

Mark Williams-Thomas, who for 12 years was a detective and child protection officer, spent a year talking to Savile’s former victims.

He was a child protection officer with Surrey Police and worked on the prosecution of pop impresario Jonathan King on charges of sex with underage boys.

Since leaving the police, he has become a consultant on child protection and fronted the ITV documentary To Catch A Paedophile.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by bobnot

What do you mean it wasnt allowed to come out? none of these are new claims they are all old claims that were investigated and thrown out they are only being repeated now because of a tv programme.

umm do you not remember the whole injunction and super injunction scandal recently?? yes, the authorities CAN cover things up. especially when a celebrity is involved.

[arista]

Yes that Former Detective
now doing this Docu
Knows his stuff


11:10 ITV1HD Weds 3/Oct/12

[Ithinkiloveyoutoo]

found this comment of a year ago under Jimmy's videos

MET HIM TODAY, HE KISSED MY HAND!

she must be disgusted now.

[billy123]

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/...se-claims.html

[arista]

"Sir Jimmy Savile's nephew slams abuse claims"


Of course
his own nephew is angry that all week it could be Front page





Todays

[billy123]

Originally Posted by arista

"Sir Jimmy Savile's nephew slams abuse claims"


Of course
his own nephew is angry that all week it could be Front page

He is annoyed that the claims are from the 70's and if a crime is being alleged why is it being claimed to a tv show and not the police.
I couldnt give a damn if he was a pedo or not but the fact these old claims are being repeated now just stinks of using a story to make money to me.

[arista]

Originally Posted by bobnot

He is annoyed that the claims are from the 70's and if a crime is being alleged why is it being claimed to a tv show and not the police.
I couldnt give a damn if he was a pedo or not but the fact these old claims are being repeated now just stinks of using a story to make money to me.

Could be because
he is 6 feet under

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by bobnot

He is annoyed that the claims are from the 70's and if a crime is being alleged why is it being claimed to a tv show and not the police.
I couldnt give a damn if he was a pedo or not but the fact these old claims are being repeated now just stinks of using a story to make money to me.

umm, why would you not care? If it's true then it's very important and you SHOULD care.

[arista]

A Clip was just on ITV1 News.


Its a Solid Docu.

[Omah]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...aim-women.html

Savile would visit Duncroft, a Home Office Approved School “for intelligent, emotionally disturbed” girls, based in a manor house near Staines in Surrey, to raise its profile.

One of the women, who has written about her claims online, said he would “reward” girls who polished his sports car with an outing.

She wrote: “I looked forward to Jimmy Savile visiting because it meant pleasant food, rides down the lane in his sports car and extra cigarettes.

“Sadly, it also meant one had to put up with being mauled and groped when he pulled into a lay-by some five miles along the road.

“I wasn't the only girl that Sir Jimmy favoured with this either. In fact, he often tried to press me to 'go further' than simply fondling him and allowing him to grope inside my knickers and at my partly formed breasts. He promised me all manner of good things if I would give him oral sex.”

When she eventually complied, she claimed, he invited her backstage for his show Clunk-Click.

Clunk-Click every trip means Jimmy's Dick between your lips .....

[arista]

"Clunk-Click every trip means Jimmy's Dick between your lips "


Yes ITV1HD Late night on Weds







Mondays Papers

[Z]

I have a personal connection to the Hollie Greig case people were mentioning on the previous page and I'm certain that it's not true, or at least what is being told to the media is not completely true. As for this case - I don't know whether or not to believe these women, simply because of the timing of this media scandal. Surely this would have been a news story before now. It's not like the media are afraid to report on celebrities with alleged paedophilic tendencies: see Gary Glitter. I dunno, I don't want to doubt people who say they are the victims of sexual abuse, because it's a very serious matter, but I think it's pretty bad journalism regardless of what's true and what isn't.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Zee

I have a personal connection to the Hollie Greig case people were mentioning on the previous page and I'm certain that it's not true, or at least what is being told to the media is not completely true. As for this case - I don't know whether or not to believe these women, simply because of the timing of this media scandal. Surely this would have been a news story before now. It's not like the media are afraid to report on celebrities with alleged paedophilic tendencies: see Gary Glitter. I dunno, I don't want to doubt people who say they are the victims of sexual abuse, because it's a very serious matter, but I think it's pretty bad journalism regardless of what's true and what isn't.

So the Maddie case is true, Holly case isnt true,Gary Glitter is a Saint ,whats your take on Saville is he a Saint too ? wake up ,live in the real world, child abuse is alive and kicking in UK and coverd up daily by men in grey suits

[Z]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

So the Maddie case is true, Holly case isnt true,Gary Glitter is a Saint ,whats your take on Saville is he a Saint too ? wake up ,live in the real world, child abuse is alive and kicking in UK and coverd up daily by men in grey suits

Are you following me around the forum? I'm flattered.

Where on earth did I say 'Gary Glitter is a saint'?!? You're reading my post completely the wrong way, I don't even know where to begin.

Jimmy Savile is dead. Whether it's true or not, there is no way for him to defend himself or admit to his guilt - only the words of people who say they are victims. This is a crime that cannot be resolved, or this is an allegation that cannot be refuted, because the main body of evidence, i.e. Jimmy Savile, is no longer there. I mentioned Gary Glitter to show that the British media have no problem with reporting on celebrities who are accused of committing crimes of this nature. That's why I find it strange that this story has only been reported now, after Jimmy Savile's death, when Gary Glitter, who is still alive, has been outed as a child molester and from what I gather, quite rightly so. Why did nobody try to do this while Jimmy was alive? I understand that victims need to come to terms with things in their own time, but it was a very long time ago - Jimmy hadn't been a staple part of broadcasting for a long time before he died - I find it hard to believe that his influence was so strong that no one dared rat him out while he was still alive.

I'm more than aware that child abuse is a problem in this country. So many cases of child abuse rings are being uncovered in recent times - I'm absolutely 100% not denying that, I'm surprised you think that that's what I'm saying. My issue with this case is purely the timing of it. Nothing, legally, can be done to make things better for them. They can't get any closure because he's dead. All this has done is bring attention to them, probably in a negative way in the long run, and I think that's just going to make it worse for them.

The Hollie Greig case, as I said in my last post, I have a personal connection to, and while I'm no legal expert in any capacity, I just believe from the bottom of my heart that the story does not add up on the side of the alleged victim and her mother.

There's absolutely no need to bring up what I said in another thread that has nothing to do with this one. You don't even remember what I said, do you? I just reckoned that they were being lambasted for not showing the right amount of emotion and that I thought they were being punished over and over again for a mistake - other posters thought they were just being neglectful, I disagreed, and I've not bothered to post in there again because it can only go round in circles. I'd like to respectfully ask you to not target me again in this way over my views, because it's not relevant to this particular discussion.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Zee

Are you following me around the forum? I'm flattered.

Where on earth did I say 'Gary Glitter is a saint'?!? You're reading my post completely the wrong way, I don't even know where to begin.

Jimmy Savile is dead. Whether it's true or not, there is no way for him to defend himself or admit to his guilt - only the words of people who say they are victims. This is a crime that cannot be resolved, or this is an allegation that cannot be refuted, because the main body of evidence, i.e. Jimmy Savile, is no longer there. I mentioned Gary Glitter to show that the British media have no problem with reporting on celebrities who are accused of committing crimes of this nature. That's why I find it strange that this story has only been reported now, after Jimmy Savile's death, when Gary Glitter, who is still alive, has been outed as a child molester and from what I gather, quite rightly so. Why did nobody try to do this while Jimmy was alive? I understand that victims need to come to terms with things in their own time, but it was a very long time ago - Jimmy hadn't been a staple part of broadcasting for a long time before he died - I find it hard to believe that his influence was so strong that no one dared rat him out while he was still alive.

I'm more than aware that child abuse is a problem in this country. So many cases of child abuse rings are being uncovered in recent times - I'm absolutely 100% not denying that, I'm surprised you think that that's what I'm saying. My issue with this case is purely the timing of it. Nothing, legally, can be done to make things better for them. They can't get any closure because he's dead. All this has done is bring attention to them, probably in a negative way in the long run, and I think that's just going to make it worse for them.

The Hollie Greig case, as I said in my last post, I have a personal connection to, and while I'm no legal expert in any capacity, I just believe from the bottom of my heart that the story does not add up on the side of the alleged victim and her mother.

There's absolutely no need to bring up what I said in another thread that has nothing to do with this one. You don't even remember what I said, do you? I just reckoned that they were being lambasted for not showing the right amount of emotion and that I thought they were being punished over and over again for a mistake - other posters thought they were just being neglectful, I disagreed, and I've not bothered to post in there again because it can only go round in circles. I'd like to respectfully ask you to not target me again in this way over my views, because it's not relevant to this particular discussion.

Your post echos a lot of the sentiments I have with this story. If this man was a vile sexual predator using his fame and media presence to suppress any real investigations by the authorities, then certainly he should have been exposed, charged and if proven in a court of law heavily punished and of course his OBE recinded and his name and reputation rightly destroyed.

However, the man is no longer alive to answer to these allegations and this simple fact alone means before any public announcements are made there would have to be some pretty damming evidence. I don't see any such evidence only his alleged victims word against him coupled with hearsay and gossip from other people. Of course his word can now never be heard so this becomes very one sided against this man.

The only outcome of this will be to blacken JS name and reputation for as we all know there's no smoke without fire and mud sticks. This is what worrys me the most. Does that mean now that all dead people celebs or otherwise are fair game for this type of media assassination...!!!

[Jack_]

I find this case, thread and any issues surrounding this quite vile. The man is dead, regardless of whether or not any of these claims are true, there's going to be very little ways of proving it, no trial and he has no way of defending himself. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant and attempting to defame the character of a dead man is quite sick IMO.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I find this case, thread and any issues surrounding this quite vile. The man is dead, regardless of whether or not any of these claims are true, there's going to be very little ways of proving it, no trial and he has no way of defending himself. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant and attempting to defame the character of a dead man is quite sick IMO.

he's dead so it doesn't matter, but for victims of rape and sexual abuse, just having people listen to you and believe you can be incredibly healing.

I think they did him a huge favor by waiting til after he was dead. They showed more compassion to him by waiting than he ever showed to them.