Loki Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Apparently he wore tracky bottoms because they were easier to wip them off. Oh well. Â Â Oh, COME ON! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEWM Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 There's an old bench in Scarborough with a Jimmy Saville nameplate on that called him "Sir" before he actually was, as a little joke that would happen some day. It took on much resonance in the town when it eventually happened. It took on more resonance for me when I had one of my first clumsy vaginal dalliances there after a night out once. And now it will probably have to go. Like many others apparently, he's ruined a bit of my youth there. Â I'm currently without a telly or the net at home so missed the documentary. What was the general consensus? Best bits etc? Worth a watch if I could access some catch up/on demand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bellenda Carlisle Posted October 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 4, 2012 The documentary was awful, it definitely made compelling arguments for the allegations but it was trying so hard to make someone fucking a couple of girls who were 1 year under the age of consent 50 years ago seem as dramatic and shocking as possible. I believed it but I don't think the accusations were bad enough to be worth destroying someone's image like that after he died. It also basically ended with the charity that he set up (which is still going) saying that now they probably won't get any more donations (which is true) and that is basically about the only thing this shit documentary achieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 So once again documentary makers get the definition of paedophile wrong, by the sounds of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bellenda Carlisle Posted October 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 4, 2012 Obviously having sex with a 14 or 15 year old is dodgy but they were constantly referred to as "innocent children" which was so annoying. It was fucking 50 years ago too, like someone (I think Pitcos) said here; It was a different time, it was taking 2012 era paedo sensationalism and trying to put it in a story about touching a few (barely) underage girls when the climate was completely different. Â Having said all that the recording of Jimmy Saville defending Gary Glitter was hilarious and he was way off the mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Reefer Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I wonder if he gave the girls one of these. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Of Swing Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 If the allegations are true then as far as I am concerned he was nothing but a dirty old twat who abused his position and his image deserves to be left in ruins. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Chris B Posted October 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 4, 2012 The documentary was awful, it definitely made compelling arguments for the allegations but it was trying so hard to make someone fucking a couple of girls who were 1 year under the age of consent 50 years ago seem as dramatic and shocking as possible. I believed it but I don't think the accusations were bad enough to be worth destroying someone's image like that after he died. It also basically ended with the charity that he set up (which is still going) saying that now they probably won't get any more donations (which is true) and that is basically about the only thing this shit documentary achieved. Â That wasn't the problem. I was reading Jon Ronsen's Jonathan King articles, which bring up that kind of question - would we be in favour of, say, Mick Jagger being arrested for having sex with a couple of fifteen year olds? Â The problem is more intent and targeting. It's not that Jonathan King was giving it to so many, and a few slipped through the net. It's that he targeted young teenage boys. Â The same thing with Jimmy Savile. He didn't do relationships, and there aren't exactly many stories of him having lots of relationships with adults. It's that it appears that he targeted, and went out of his way to target, young teenage girls. Â That's where the difference is, and that's why I don't think it's as simple as just shagging a couple of girls who were almost legal. It's not irresponsible behaviour - it's predatory behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Reefer Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Sick jokes aside, I'm in 2 minds about it, on the one hand there do seem to be A LOT of people coming out of the woodwork with remarkably similar stories. On the other they only seem to have emerged since Jimmy can't sue them back to the stone age for libel and slander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Reefer Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 The documentary was awful, it definitely made compelling arguments for the allegations but it was trying so hard to make someone fucking a couple of girls who were 1 year under the age of consent 50 years ago seem as dramatic and shocking as possible. I believed it but I don't think the accusations were bad enough to be worth destroying someone's image like that after he died. It also basically ended with the charity that he set up (which is still going) saying that now they probably won't get any more donations (which is true) and that is basically about the only thing this shit documentary achieved. Â That wasn't the problem. I was reading Jon Ronsen's Jonathan King articles, which bring up that kind of question - would we be in favour of, say, Mick Jagger being arrested for having sex with a couple of fifteen year olds? Â The problem is more intent and targeting. It's not that Jonathan King was giving it to so many, and a few slipped through the net. It's that he targeted young teenage boys. Â The same thing with Jimmy Savile. He didn't do relationships, and there aren't exactly many stories of him having lots of relationships with adults. It's that it appears that he targeted, and went out of his way to target, young teenage girls. Â That's where the difference is, and that's why I don't think it's as simple as just shagging a couple of girls who were almost legal. It's not irresponsible behaviour - it's predatory behaviour. Â Â Iggy Pop famously had a 14 year old girlfriend called Betsy. He even named checked her in the song Dog Food. No one calls Iggy a kiddy fiddler, then again like you say, he wasn't visiting childrens homes and secure units and taking girls "out in his car" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Surf Digby Posted October 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 4, 2012 It was one sided and massively inconsistant. As Big Jobs said, it was constantly chucking out the "Oh, it was such an innocent time. I was a naive 15/17/20 year old and I didn't even notice it at first, but all of a sudden we were having sex". This was post-free love. This was the era of sexual liberation and groupies. Â The first girl in the documentary wasn't a victim herself. She just claimed that she saw him with someone who may or may not have been underage, and may or may not have been there against her will. One guy told of how when he rang Jimmy, it "sounded like he was still in bed with this young girl". All of a sudden, "Actually he was in bed with her, and he asked me to talk to her". And then he mimmicked the girl talking, as though she were a 5 year old. Â One minute he was groping girls and forcing himself on them openly without a care of who saw them, or bragging to everyone what he'd done. The next it was all secretive and nobody knew for sure if the rumours had any truth in them. It can't be both. Â The girl who claimed he wore the shell suits so he could whip his trousers down quickly was talking about a time 10, maybe even 15 years before he started wearing them. At the time alleged, he was almost always in his dapper brown suits with lapels you could use for hang gliding, or shorts and T-shirts with braces. Â One annecdote was a guy saying how a girl - and he couldn't tell how old she was - came to Jimmy's house one night. So, she arrived under her own free will, and there's no indication she was underage. This was one of several instances of scraping barrel for dirt. Jimmy Savile in not-forcing-himself-on-girl-who-isn't-underage shocker. Â When talking about Clunk Click, they mention how they had Gary Glitter as a guest (cue dramatic background music). How about mentioning all the other non-paedo guests they had? Â Much like Martin Bashir's Michael Jackson documentary, it would be interesting to seem some of the footage that didn't make it into the final cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bellenda Carlisle Posted October 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 4, 2012 Exactly Surf. Â Also on the "no one would care if it was Jagger/Iggy pop etc" front, Elvis famously pretty much exclusively went for 14 year olds, he met Priscilla Presley when she was 14 and no one bats an eyelid because he's not a fucking weird scarecrow witch looking motherfucker like Saville. Â Be different if it happened today I'm sure but that's the point. Â *edit* Â When talking about Clunk Click, they mention how they had Gary Glitter as a guest (cue dramatic background music). How about mentioning all the other non-paedo guests they had? Â He interviewed Gary Glitter once when he was a big glam rock star on a music show featuring popular acts in the 70s, he must be a paedo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I'm not surprised by a lot of the attitudes on here, it is par for the course. Â In a huge number of abuse cases, the survivors come forward when their alleged abuser dies because they feel like they can. They can't attack them any more. But no, just like when any woman comes forward about abuse by a celebrity, they are doing it for the money, aren't they. Â Getting a conviction is difficult enough, but against a "National treasure" at the time who was a household name known for his charity work, why would a 14 year old girl think she would be believed over him? Then you have to factor in how connected he was in gangster circles. I can't remember which underworld character it was (how convenient, I know) who said "I've only taken a death threat seriously twice. One of them was from Jimmy Savile". Â The societal position on victim blaming is disgusting. I believe that innocent until proven guilty is the cornerstone of justice and always should be. I also believe in due process and I believe that claims shouldn't be dismissed on the basis that you like the person being accused (Ched Evans, Assange, etc). Â I did feel a bit wrong turning over to the 10 minute freeview after watching the Savile doc, but I soldiered on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted October 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 4, 2012 Getting a conviction is difficult enough, but against a "National treasure" at the time who was a household name known for his charity work, why would a 14 year old girl think she would be believed over him? Then you have to factor in how connected he was in gangster circles. I can't remember which underworld character it was (how convenient, I know) who said "I've only taken a death threat seriously twice. One of them was from Jimmy Savile". Â No idea who said that, but I'm quite sure I read somewhere that Saville was quite pally with at least one of the Krays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 It sounds like a really rubbish documentary from Surf's description. But depending on how much detail they go into, I might find some use in watching it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.