Jimmy Saville

[David]

It's not just a couple of girls though, is it? Between the ITV documentary and the ditched Newsnight piece there were no less than ten women making accusations of abuse against Savile. Since the content of the ITV documentary became public early this week there have been more women come forward with information.

This is the key aspect for me at the moment. Would I be going too far in saying that the actions over the past few days basically have Jimmy down as guilty? Aren't there memorials to him and whatnot being removed already?

 

That's what does my head in a bit about this kind of thing. As soon as the allegations broke it pretty much ensured that Saville's reputation was done, regardless of him actually being guilty.

 

He was a creepy looking fucker, and was definately a tad eccentric. Throw in some allegations, and a shitload of the old "I heard from a guy who used to mop the floors at BBC headquarters" type stories and it's all done & dusted.

 

Even if these allegations come to nothing, and nothing can be proved the guy is painted as guilty anyway, and everything positive he ever did over the years has been swept under the carpet.

[Snitsky's back acne]

 

Kunt and the Gang have already recorded a song about him.

 

Catchy.

[Dr Reefer]

Even if these allegations come to nothing, and nothing can be proved the guy is painted as guilty anyway, and everything positive he ever did over the years has been swept under the carpet.

 

Maybe that's what was meant when press were told "Run this story and those kiddies in the hospices can say goodbye to a couple of million a year"

[Cousin Jim Bob]

It's not just a couple of girls though, is it? Between the ITV documentary and the ditched Newsnight piece there were no less than ten women making accusations of abuse against Savile. Since the content of the ITV documentary became public early this week there have been more women come forward with information.

This is the key aspect for me at the moment. Would I be going too far in saying that the actions over the past few days basically have Jimmy down as guilty? Aren't there memorials to him and whatnot being removed already?

 

That's what does my head in a bit about this kind of thing. As soon as the allegations broke it pretty much ensured that Saville's reputation was done, regardless of him actually being guilty.

 

He was a creepy looking fucker, and was definately a tad eccentric. Throw in some allegations, and a shitload of the old "I heard from a guy who used to mop the floors at BBC headquarters" type stories and it's all done & dusted.

 

Even if these allegations come to nothing, and nothing can be proved the guy is painted as guilty anyway, and everything positive he ever did over the years has been swept under the carpet.

 

In most cases there is'nt 40 alleged victims going to the police. Thats why everyone is ripping down the memorials.

 

Its not "Throw in some allegations, and a shitload of the old "I heard from a guy who used to mop the floors at BBC headquarters" type stories and it's all done & dusted."

 

Its a ton of people saying he abused them and everyday more and more people who worked with him saying he was at it.

[King Pitcos]

It doesn't matter whether a girl is one year under the age of consent or six years

 

Yeah, that's true. Fifteen year olds and ten year olds are equally sexy. If you are a complete wrong 'un.

[freaky]

has taken on a new and more sinister tone.

[MungoChutney]

It doesn't matter whether a girl is one year under the age of consent or six years

 

Yeah, that's true. Fifteen year olds and ten year olds are equally sexy. If you are a complete wrong 'un.

 

Without wishing to speak for the OP, I don't think that's what he meant at all. The key thing here isn't the age of the girls, its the manner in which this abuse was perpetrated. This isn't someone who met an underage girl anf fell for them. What's being alleged in the Savile case is that he used the power his position in showbiz granted him to systematically abuse a large number of underage girls, many of whom were vulnerable young people who had been part of the care system. Even if these girls were close to being of age, this was sexual abuse, no question. (Assuming the allegations were true I should add)

[King Pitcos]

Even if these girls were close to being of age, this was sexual abuse, no question. (Assuming the allegations were true I should add)

But if they were a day over sixteen, it's all endorsed?

[MungoChutney]

Even if these girls were close to being of age, this was sexual abuse, no question. (Assuming the allegations were true I should add)

But if they were a day over sixteen, it's all endorsed?

 

No, absolutely not. By taking advantage of these girls, even if they had become of age, it would still be a form of abuse. Harder to prove and prosecute of course.

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Harder to prove and prosecute of course.

And easier to convince them not to tell their mother.

[Bellenda Carlisle]

It doesn't matter whether a girl is one year under the age of consent or six years

 

But it really does.

[David]

Even if these allegations come to nothing, and nothing can be proved the guy is painted as guilty anyway, and everything positive he ever did over the years has been swept under the carpet.

Maybe that's what was meant when press were told "Run this story and those kiddies in the hospices can say goodbye to a couple of million a year"

Maybe. I doubt the press would really give a fuck about something as trivial as that. As long as they can hunt out the creepiest photos of the guy for their front pages and sell a few more copies, eh?

[Dean Ayass]

Even if these allegations come to nothing, and nothing can be proved the guy is painted as guilty anyway, and everything positive he ever did over the years has been swept under the carpet.

Maybe that's what was meant when press were told "Run this story and those kiddies in the hospices can say goodbye to a couple of million a year"

Maybe. I doubt the press would really give a fuck about something as trivial as that. As long as they can hunt out the creepiest photos of the guy for their front pages and sell a few more copies, eh?

I disagree. A national newspaper wouldn't want to be deemed as responsible for cutting out millions of pounds of donations for Stoke Mandeville, an institution so ingrained in the nation's heart that one of the Olympic mascots was named after it.

 

There are two things to consider here:

 

1 - None of the victims knew for sure that he was doing this to other people too. Even if they had their suspicions, it's hardly the sort of thing you're going to ask your classmate in the lunch queue, is it? So the victims thought that, if it's them against Jimmy Savile, whose word are you going to believe, the schoolgirl or the fundraising superstar?

 

2 - Jimmy Savile was a very powerful and influential man. In the infamous Louis Theroux documentary, he talks about celebrating 11 successive New Years with Margaret Thatcher. He was also close to Prince Charles. If you look over the transcripts of Princess Diana's phone calls with James Gilbey, a man she was having an affair with (the "Squidygate" tapes, as they were known), she mentions that Jimmy Savile rang her at the request of Prince Charles. Also, in the Theroux documentary, there is a moment where Louis sees that Savile has Louis's private phone number written on a pad and asks how he got that number. Savile replies with something like, "I can get anything, me" while tapping his nose, which would corroborate stories about him having connections with the Security Services. So he had enough influence to silence the papers, and to threaten any victims from not speaking out, hence why they are only comfortable to talk now that he's dead and can't threaten them any more.

 

The fact that so many different women have independently told very similar stories (same age, same actions), makes me believe all of this.

[The King Of Swing]

It doesn't matter whether a girl is one year under the age of consent or six years

 

But it really does.

 

No it really doesn't.

 

If the allegations are true then this isn't simply a case of an older man getting together with a just about under age girl it's a case of a very well connected celebrity using his position to sexually abuse young girls for years.

[King Pitcos]

It doesn't matter whether a girl is one year under the age of consent or six years

 

But it really does.

 

No it really doesn't.

 

 

Dirty bastard.