[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

I suggest you stop suggesting what to read. The facts are thin on the ground - much of it is gossip, heresay, people now admitting they were happy to keep their mouths shut because they benefitted financially and for many many years, they benefitted financially..... take all that fodder out of the mix and perhaps there may be some degree of the truth coming out.

Other than that: all it is doing is damaging any possible REAL claims from REAL victims.

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?

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by kizzy

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]

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, been ashamed and embarrassed to shame her family?
Concerned for the charities involved?

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by kizzy

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]

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!

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by kizzy

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]

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.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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*]

Originally Posted by kizzy

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*]

Originally Posted by Omah

What "people" are they then?

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

Originally Posted by Omah

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?

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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/arti...#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 .....

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

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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?

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

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 .....

[arista]

Originally Posted by kizzy

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.

The BBC first said Newsnight was looking into Police
who were looking at Savile

Then the BBC said Newsnight was looking into what people told them
about Savile.


Tomorrow BBC1 Panorama
looks into the real truth of Newsnight.


Lets hope it does not confuse us all.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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 .....

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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/ukne...x-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*]

Originally Posted by Omah

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

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

Originally Posted by kizzy

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*]

Originally Posted by Omah

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

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...x-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]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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



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 .....

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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 .....

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Omah

Oh dear .....

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]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

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 .....

[thesheriff443]

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!

[Omah]

at the school where his aunt was headmistress

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