[arista]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...e-abuse-claims

This goes way back to 1973.


The BBC bosses are Scum
like dead JS

[Mystic Mock]

I agree Arista.

[the truth]

I dont take anything the tabloids write as proof of anything.
jimmy saville worked with kids for 50 years , raised Ł40 million for charity. now after hes dead a few women decide to sell diirty stories about him to tabloids? where have they been for 40 years? why didnt they do it when he was alive to answer these questions and to seek justice in courts? I think the way theyve gone about it is disgusting. a dead man cant defend himself. I got my jim'll fix it badge, I was inspired by his magnificent deeds and charity work and probably benefitted from it in one way or another. none of these unsubstantiated trial by tabloid, kangaroo court angry mod rule lurid claims will make a tiny difference to my opinion of sir jimmy. provide evidence, some proof, take it to the courts and then we will see if he is guilty or not. I seem to recall michael jackson was accused by even more people, thnakfully he was alive to defend himself and he was in fact cleared 100% innocent. both whacky, both eccentric, both vastly rich , both made tens of millions for charities. but neither has been proven guilty of any paedophilia. these are easy targets for the get rich quick chavs in america and uk. if there is a genuine victim, she or he needs to get to the police and provide as much evidence as possible and fight in court. sadly its still 30 years too late. doing it for money through the tabloids gets no respect from me.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by the truth

I dont take anything the tabloids write as proof of anything.
jimmy saville worked with kids for 50 years , raised Ł40 million for charity. now after hes dead a few women decide to sell diirty stories about him to tabloids? where have they been for 40 years? why didnt they do it when he was alive to answer these questions and to seek justice in courts? I think the way theyve gone about it is disgusting. a dead man cant defend himself. I got my jim'll fix it badge, I was inspired by his magnificent deeds and charity work and probably benefitted from it in one way or another. none of these unsubstantiated trial by tabloid, kangaroo court angry mod rule lurid claims will make a tiny difference to my opinion of sir jimmy. provide evidence, some proof, take it to the courts and then we will see if he is guilty or not. I seem to recall michael jackson was accused by even more people, thnakfully he was alive to defend himself and he was in fact cleared 100% innocent. both whacky, both eccentric, both vastly rich , both made tens of millions for charities. but neither has been proven guilty of any paedophilia. these are easy targets for the get rich quick chavs in america and uk. if there is a genuine victim, she or he needs to get to the police and provide as much evidence as possible and fight in court. sadly its still 30 years too late. doing it for money through the tabloids gets no respect from me.

My thoughts on the matter highlighted above.

I never liked the man, always thought there was something untoward, but I find this witch hunt now that he is dead a bit hard to swallow, especially with the 'alleged' numbers now coming forward.

find it hard to believe that so many 'abused' managed to keep their mouths shut for so many years and only managed to find their voice now that the man is dead and cannot defend himself.

Hard thing for a dead man to try to prove his innocence......

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.

[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

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*

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 .....

[Kazanne]

The press were remorseless with Michael Jackson,I felt so sorry for him,but mud sticks and although he was found 100% innocent,some people STILL call him a peadophille,Gary Glitter and co had an easier time of it than Michael Jackson.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by kazanne

The press were remorseless with Michael Jackson,I felt so sorry for him,but mud sticks and although he was found 100% innocent,some people STILL call him a peadophille,Gary Glitter and co had an easier than Michael Jackson.

michael jackson was a poor black kid from a shack in mississippi, who became the biggest entertainer ever. how is anyone supposed to handle that. could anyone? he was confused, eccentric, creative, brilliant, caring, lost, pained and always searching for that lost childhood. but above all else he was profoundly naive in many ways. on the stage he commaned the world, off it, it was a circus. yet another star destroyed by the mob mentality created by the trash tabloid withc hunts....how many papers and magazines did jacko stories sell for them eh? millions

if any of thoese people were concerned with his alleged liking for children, why did they keep sending their kids there, why did they keep taking the gifts, why didnt the authorities insist public servants and social workers of some kind were involved in regulating neverland?

I watched a documentary once where he bought a vase for half a million without even looking at it as he walked out the door.....his was a world beyond surreal..meanwhile the documentary maker stitched him up and tried to make him look bad , just to make a name for himself (martin bashir) ..everyone wanted him and his talent and his lifestyle and his money and his mystery.....no allegation was ever proved at all. he was found innocent. but alas it destroyed him and he died shortly afterwards after his producers tried to make a few hundred million dollars off him by selling 50 michael jackson shows back to back...they still made millions from his dvd after his death

the world is a sick place.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by the truth

michael jackson was a poor black kid from a shack in mississippi, who became the biggest entertainer ever. how is anyone supposed to handle that. could anyone? he was confused, eccentric, creative, brilliant, caring, lost, pained and always searching for that lost childhood. but above all else he was profoundly naive in many ways. on the stage he commaned the world, off it, it was a circus. yet another star destroyed by the mob mentality created by the trash tabloid withc hunts....how many papers and magazines did jacko stories sell for them eh? millions

if any of thoese people were concerned with his alleged liking for children, why did they keep sending their kids there, why did they keep taking the gifts, why didnt the authorities insist public servants and social workers of some kind were involved in regulating neverland?

I watched a documentary once where he bought a vase for half a million without even looking at it as he walked out the door.....his was a world beyond surreal..meanwhile the documentary maker stitched him up and tried to make him look bad , just to make a name for himself (martin bashir) ..everyone wanted him and his talent and his lifestyle and his money and his mystery.....no allegation was ever proved at all. he was found innocent. but alas it destroyed him and he died shortly afterwards after his producers tried to make a few hundred million dollars off him by selling 50 michael jackson shows back to back...they still made millions from his dvd after his death

the world is a sick place.

I agree with this the truth,I watched that documentry the poor guy was stitched up like a kipper,I hated the press for what they did to him.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by kazanne

The press were remorseless with Michael Jackson,I felt so sorry for him,but mud sticks and although he was found 100% innocent,some people STILL call him a peadophille,Gary Glitter and co had an easier time of it than Michael Jackson.

MJ wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty, there's a difference.

Innocent means it's been proven that someone didn't do something. Not Guilty just means there's not enough evidence to be found guilty under the law.

[arista]

Docu on ITv1HD and ITV1
now

[Omah]

Originally Posted by arista

Docu on ITv1HD and ITV1
now

Yeah, watched it ..... nothing transmitted that we hadn't heard already this week, but I got the feeling that what we now know really IS just the tip of the iceberg - JS, alive, may have been a master manipulator and a bully to boot, but, dead, he threatens no-one .....

[Kazanne]

Watching this with interest Arista

[arista]

He is Guilty

[Omah]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...?newsfeed=true

As is now commonly the case with high-profile factual films and books, the contents of Exposure: The Other Side of Jimmy Savile had been gutted and discussed for days in advance.

The film's advantage over the week-long filleting of its findings in print was the sharp use of archive footage. A clip from a BBC show called Clunk-Click, in which Savile and guest star Gary Glitter snuggle up to teenage female studio guests now seems chillingly giveaway, with Savile leering: "He's got two. I shouldn't be giving girls away!"

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19820017

Sussex police have confirmed a complaint of sexual assault against Sir Jimmy Savile in 2008 was dropped because the woman involved wouldn't take the matter further.

The attack was alleged to have taken place in Worthing in 1970. But Police said the victim was "unwilling to co-operate in any investigation".

Sussex police said in a statement that a 59-year old woman had reported an assault in March 2008, revealing it had taken place on sometime between May 1970 and September 1970.

[Niamh.]

An extract from Jimmy Savilles Autobiography :

[Omah]

Another extract from Jimmy Savilles Autobiography :

He describes another encounter with a young girl in his E-type Jaguar on a stormy seafront

Savile explains: “The inside of an E-type is not over capacious and just now seemed to be full of wet body, long black hair, legs and bikini panties.

“Apparently she had been sitting in a car down at the barrier with her parents, seen me go through, jumped out, run along the sea road and here she was.

“Such a start had to mean a good night.” He added: “Should the reader feel that her folks appear unconcerned, you would not believe the stories I might tell you about some parents.”

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk...-pages-1359536

[Omah]

More :

Savile describes being caught naked in his caravan with another gaggle of young groupies. He wrote: “The heat of the albeit innocent night had caused the girls to shed the majority of their day clothes. In some cases all.

“We all resembled some great human octopus. Again the knock.

“One of the girls rose from the human pile like Venus. Peering out of the curtain she became rigid with fright.

“‘It’s my mother and father,’ she hissed. There was a silent movie pandemonium. Escape was uppermost in my mind but that was impossible.”

See also :

http://a.yfrog.com/img875/9325/ol9w.png

[Niamh.]

Livia and Lostalex, I've moved your posts to a new thread, it's an interesting topic but a bit off topic in here

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...d.php?t=213450

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Livia and Lostalex, I've moved your posts to a new thread, it's an interesting topic but a bit off topic in here

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...d.php?t=213450

LOL... soz x

[arista]

Yes Gary and Jimmy at the BBC.


And Now BBC2 Newsnight says
it will play that Report they banned.
Ref: Live Radio 5


I hope this comes up in Tonights Question Time BBC1.

[arista]

"Exposure really was disturbing yesterday"


Yes but as it went out a 11:10PM
I say well done to ITV.


The BBC are in trouble over this
Jimmy even letting fellow peado Glitter
assault kids



The Fact he is Dead - Is Good
as he stopped all these getting in the press.
Fact.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19837906

This week it emerged that Surrey, Sussex and Jersey Police had received complaints about Sir Jimmy but concluded there was not enough evidence to pursue them.

The Met is currently considering a number of allegations including a rape claim from some years ago referred to it by Surrey Police, while Northamptonshire Police have been contacted by two alleged victims.

Now 5 police forces involved .....