Cable Forum
Page 2 of 11 1 2 3456 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Operation Yewtree (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33689949)

martyh 02-10-2012 17:02
re: Operation Yewtree
 
I think there may be a few late night meetings down at Broadcasting house

chris9991 02-10-2012 17:57
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Surely he couldn't have done it all on his own. At the very least other people appear to have known something wrong was happening at the time. Their failure to act may have meant more children being abused.

RichardCoulter 02-10-2012 20:05
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caff (Post 35480198)
Exactly.

Whether dead or alive a perpritrator of a crime, if found guilty, should be punished in a fitting way. In this case peoples memory of him might change.
Similarly, someone accused of crime of which they were innocent, and executed/incarcerated, may be exonerated - whether they living or dead.

Whatever the outcome, those that loved, admired or knew him as a friend will have new worriess. Mud sticks.

I'll wait for the outcome.
They could take away his Knighthood, if that's possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35480258)
I came across a columnist earlier in the week who more or less alleged a conspiracy of silence amongst 'luvvies' anxious to protect one of their own and suggested that had he been a Catholic priest both he and his former employer would have been hung, drawn and quartered by now.
It's well known that the Catholic church have been covering up such things for years :rolleyes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35480261)
Absolutely. Back in the 70s (and to some extent the 80s) Saville was a very powerful entity. And in an industry where reputation and perception is everything, anyone breaking ranks and making allegations about him would be committing career suicide if not backed up by similar powerful names. It could even be argued that these silent people should share some of his alleged guilt.
Good points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris9991 (Post 35480391)
Surely he couldn't have done it all on his own. At the very least other people appear to have known something wrong was happening at the time. Their failure to act may have meant more children being abused.
Indeed. There was another comedian from the 70's and 80's who is alleged to have been doing the same things as Saville at the same time. He has only been referred to as "F".

There was the guy who claimed that his jokes were funny because of the way that he told them, but I can't think of any others from that era, but I was very young at the time.

Damien 02-10-2012 20:11
re: Operation Yewtree
 
You can take away someones Knighthood and I imagine that's what will happen here if it's proved to a certain degree. It's rather difficult that there isn't a court case so by revoking his Knighthood it would be an official presumption of guilt from the state. I imagine they'll be wary of doing it.

danielf 02-10-2012 20:22
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35480471)
You can take away someones Knighthood and I imagine that's what will happen here if it's proved to a certain degree. It's rather difficult that there isn't a court case so by revoking his Knighthood it would be an official presumption of guilt from the state. I imagine they'll be wary of doing it.
I think it'll probably be tricky to take away his knighthood. Still I think it's good this is coming to light. True, as some have argued it's not going to change anything, since he's dead anyway, but I think it's important we understand how he got away with it. Plus there should probably be consequences for certain people within the BBC if it can be shown they did not act upon credible evidence they did have.

All of that is presuming the allegations are true, but with what's been coming out over the last couple of days, it's not looking good for 'Sir Jimmy'.

Damien 02-10-2012 20:26
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35480481)
I think it'll probably be tricky to take away his knighthood. Still I think it's good this is coming to light. True, as some have argued it's not going to change anything, since he's dead anyway, but I think it's important we understand how he got away with it. Plus there should probably be consequences for certain people within the BBC if it can be shown they did not act upon credible evidence they did have.

All of that is presuming the allegations are true, but with what's been coming out over the last couple of days, it's not looking good for 'Sir Jimmy'.
No I agree it's good. There isn't any merit in the argument that his death makes this pointless, his alleged victims are still alive and why should he have the honor of being idolised if these allegations are true?

Caff 02-10-2012 20:36
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35480471)
You can take away someones Knighthood and I imagine that's what will happen here if it's proved to a certain degree. It's rather difficult that there isn't a court case so by revoking his Knighthood it would be an official presumption of guilt from the state. I imagine they'll be wary of doing it.
It's a toughie isn't it?

Anyhow - I'll wait for the final judgement. Never liked the guy but it doesn't mean that he broke the law.
I'll wait for the outcome, which I'm sure will be thouroughly pondered over.

I can see this strolling on for years. And quite a few of us will be paying for it (£s)

TheDaddy 03-10-2012 00:38
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek (Post 35480190)
Except that's not what happened. When the PCSO's arrived the child was submerged, out of sight, and no one could tell them where they were last seen. In those circumstances I wouldn't wade into water in the hope I'd stumble across a body.

Anyway back from rumour control it's clear there have been stories circulating about jimmy saville for years, the main story for me isn't what did or didn't happen but rather did the BBC kill a previous enquiry and if so who and why decided to do that.
Didn't the first proper policeman on the scene wade straight in and fish him out, tbh if I ever found myself in that situation I'd hope I do the same as him, not sure I could live with myself or look at my own children if I'd done nothing.

---------- Post added at 01:38 ---------- Previous post was at 01:35 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35480261)
Absolutely. Back in the 70s (and to some extent the 80s) Saville was a very powerful entity. And in an industry where reputation and perception is everything, anyone breaking ranks and making allegations about him would be committing career suicide if not backed up by similar powerful names. It could even be argued that these silent people should share some of his alleged guilt.
And when his star waned he had his charity work to fall back on, as one hack said when he approached him on the allegations "do you want to be responsible for stoke Mandeville not getting their new scanner"

RichardCoulter 03-10-2012 05:03
re: Operation Yewtree
 
I said this, based upon a discussion on LBC radio "Remember the case where two PCSO's left a child to drown as it would have "breached health and safety regulations" for them to enter the water?"

I also recall that they said action had been taken against the two PCSO's.

Then Derek said this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek (Post 35480190)
Except that's not what happened. When the PCSO's arrived the child was submerged, out of sight, and no one could tell them where they were last seen. In those circumstances I wouldn't wade into water in the hope I'd stumble across a body.
Then The Daddy said this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35480545)
Didn't the first proper policeman on the scene wade straight in and fish him out, tbh if I ever found myself in that situation I'd hope I do the same as him, not sure I could live with myself or look at my own children if I'd done nothing.
So, either they all relate to different incidents, or the incidents have all got mixed up!

---------- Post added at 06:03 ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35480545)
And when his star waned he had his charity work to fall back on, as one hack said when he approached him on the allegations "do you want to be responsible for stoke Mandeville not getting their new scanner"
So, we have total manipulation, control and domination- all traits of a typical paedophile.

Achieved through bullying (a friend who worked with him in the radio industry said he was arrogant and bad tempered), threats of legal action (he is said to have threatened or actually sued people often), guilt trips (Stoke Mandeville scanner) and actual or perceived threats to damage BBC careers.

His charity work may have been either a distraction or a desire to get close to vulnerable children eg those with illnesses or without parents.

There has been an allegation that he molested a sick girl and a poster on this thread has said that Barnardos told staff not to leave him alone with boy scouts.

I know we are all innocent until proven guilty (and a deceased person can't be found guilty in a court of law), no matter how man allegations are made against us.

However, on this occasion, unless the UK is suffering from mass hysteria, I now think that, with all the different people coming forward, from all walks of life and from different times, that there must surely be something in it.

TheDaddy 03-10-2012 05:34
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35480551)
I said this, based upon a discussion on LBC radio "Remember the case where two PCSO's left a child to drown as it would have "breached health and safety regulations" for them to enter the water?"

I also recall that they said action had been taken against the two PCSO's.

Then Derek said this:



Then The Daddy said this:



So, either they all relate to different incidents, or the incidents have all got mixed up!

---------- Post added at 06:03 ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 ----------



So, we have total manipulation, control and domination- all traits of a typical paedophile.

Achieved through bullying (a friend who worked with him in the radio industry said he was arrogant and bad tempered), threats of legal action (he is said to have threatened or actually sued people often), guilt trips (Stoke Mandeville scanner) and actual or perceived threats to damage BBC careers.

His charity work may have been either a distraction or a desire to get close to vulnerable children eg those with illnesses or without parents.

There has been an allegation that he molested a sick girl and a poster on this thread has said that Barnardos told staff not to leave him alone with boy scouts.

I know we are all innocent until proven guilty (and a deceased person can't be found guilty in a court of law), no matter how man allegations are made against us.

However, on this occasion, unless the UK is suffering from mass hysteria, I now think that, with all the different people coming forward, from all walks of life and from different times, that there must surely be something in it.
Nope same incident, before we drag this of topic any further all I'll add is they have to live with themselves for what they did that day.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1565292/PCSOs-who-stood-by-as-boy-drowned-named.html

Itshim 03-10-2012 07:59
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Mods. Am I the only one that thinks that this discussion should not come under entertainment any more ? I see why it would have started out there - questionable even then but now ?

Damien 03-10-2012 08:21
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 35480594)
Mods. Am I the only one that thinks that this discussion should not come under entertainment any more ? I see why it would have started out there - questionable even then but now ?
Yeah, good point. Moved to current affairs.

Itshim 03-10-2012 10:26
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35480602)
Yeah, good point. Moved to current affairs.
Thank you

Sirius 03-10-2012 12:44
Re: Jimmy Saville allegations
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35480300)
What annoys me about all this is. we're getting 'celebrities' coming forward and speaking up now about how they more or less knew or suspected what was going on.

don't they realise how that comes across, and what it says about them personally?
.
Gary

Excellent post :clap: now what have you done with the real GaryL

Damien 03-10-2012 13:13
re: Operation Yewtree
 
The celebrities coming forward as yet haven't offered anything that would have stood up on it's own. Saying 'I suspected' it isn't enough, nor is 'I heard rumours' or 'i am not surprised. Everyone is coming forward with small parts of a much bigger picture. If these allegations were stated by just one of these public figures alone then they would have been killed by the media for calling a 'great man' a child abuser based on hearsay.

RichardCoulter 03-10-2012 14:24
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Rumours now going round Leeds he was also into necrophilia.

Loads of people saying he used to hang around Leeds General Hospital mortuary.

Whether this is true, or whether it is people adding fuel to the fire to make the story more "juicy" remains to be seen.

It'll be interesting to see if tonights programme touches upon this.

Derek 03-10-2012 15:21
re: Operation Yewtree
 
One of Irvine Welsh's short stories (from ecstasy I think) is a pretty thinly disguised attack on Saville and alleged he was into very unsavory acts.

Gary L 03-10-2012 15:57
Re: Jimmy Saville allegations
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35480704)
Gary

Excellent post :clap: now what have you done with the real GaryL
Thanks.
I'm just standing in for him till the weekend.

Sirius 03-10-2012 17:45
Re: Jimmy Saville allegations
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35480797)
Thanks.
I'm just standing in for him till the weekend.
:LOL:

RichardCoulter 03-10-2012 17:47
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek (Post 35480772)
One of Irvine Welsh's short stories (from ecstasy I think) is a pretty thinly disguised attack on Saville and alleged he was into very unsavory acts.
The first comment on this link refers to this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...en-documentary

On Loose Women today, they were saying that it is important to remember that it was the culture in the 70's and 80's for men to regard women as sex objects, but that this was usually women of legal age that were groped etc

Thankfully, in the main, the younger generation don't feel this way and most middle aged men seem to have matured enough to realise that this was wrong.

I say most, but you still get the odd idiot who refers to women as "birds" to be "picked up", that they would sleep with a man just because he has a certain accent or that they are automatically "easy" because of where they live!

colin25 03-10-2012 18:10
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35480850)
The first comment on this link refers to this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...en-documentary

On Loose Women today, they were saying that it is important to remember that it was the culture in the 70's and 80's for men to regard women as sex objects, but that this was usually women of legal age that were groped etc

Thankfully, in the main, the younger generation don't feel this way and most middle aged men seem to have matured enough to realise that this was wrong.

I say most, but you still get the odd idiot who refers to women as "birds" to be "picked up", that they would sleep with a man just because he has a certain accent or that they are automatically "easy" because of where they live!
I remember the 70s and 80s..it wasn't that much fun.

Arthurgray50@blu 03-10-2012 18:22
re: Operation Yewtree
 
The saddest thing about this story is that the girls that have come forward is that they don't know each other, they cannot make up a story. In one of todays papers its states that Gary Glitter was also present when something of this nature was taking place.

Yes, he may have passed away, but so many 'top' friedns of his have come forward and stated that this did go on. Jimmy was a good man for charity, but now we know the dark secret that he family have now resent the truth.

RichardCoulter 03-10-2012 18:44
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35480871)
The saddest thing about this story is that the girls that have come forward is that they don't know each other, they cannot make up a story. In one of todays papers its states that Gary Glitter was also present when something of this nature was taking place.

Yes, he may have passed away, but so many 'top' friedns of his have come forward and stated that this did go on. Jimmy was a good man for charity, but now we know the dark secret that he family have now resent the truth.
Very true, although I think that his charity work probably had ulterior motives. It think it was a way to get close to sick and vulnerable children and infiltrate childrens homes. It would also help to distract people to what was going on.

danielf 03-10-2012 18:50
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35480883)
Very true, although I think that his charity work probably had ulterior motives. It think it was a way to get close to sick and vulnerable children and infiltrate childrens homes. It would also help to distract people to what was going on.
That is the really sad thing about all of this. It puts a different perspective on just how calculating and manipulative he must have been. Quite scary actually.

Chris 03-10-2012 19:14
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35480883)
Very true, although I think that his charity work probably had ulterior motives. It think it was a way to get close to sick and vulnerable children and infiltrate childrens homes. It would also help to distract people to what was going on.
It may equally have been an attempt to atone for himself. Pantomime villains rarely exist in real life, which is infinitely more complex.

Either way, we will never know, and as he is dead and can't be libelled, no doubt there will be an unending and increasingly lurid series of essays and forum posts speculating about it over the coming days.

After all, it's early doors. The documentary hasn't even been broadcast yet.

colin25 03-10-2012 19:26
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35480902)
It may equally have been an attempt to atone for himself. Pantomime villains rarely exist in real life, which is infinitely more complex.

Either way, we will never know, and as he is dead and can't be libelled, no doubt there will be an unending and increasingly lurid series of essays and forum posts speculating about it over the coming days.

After all, it's early doors. The documentary hasn't even been broadcast yet.
Fact is stranger than fiction. Longer i live, more i believe that

Chris 03-10-2012 19:43
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by colin25 (Post 35480911)
Fact is stranger than fiction. Longer i live, more i believe that
I quite agree - because truth is always a lot more complex and nuanced than fiction.

We don't like the idea that a man who has done something evil might also have done something good. It messes with our own innate need to draw a simple, straight line between 'good' and 'bad', preferably with ourselves on the right side of it.

Interfering with teenage girls was, it seems, Jimmy Savile's guilty secret, and if he did what is alleged half a dozen times, it seems to me that he probably did it a whole lot more - he certainly had the opportunity.

I would suggest that his frankly massive, long-term charity work is more likely evidence of an attempt to pay for what he must have known, on some level, was totally unacceptable behaviour.

danielf 03-10-2012 19:55
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35480926)
I quite agree - because truth is always a lot more complex and nuanced than fiction.

We don't like the idea that a man who has done something evil might also have done something good. It messes with our own innate need to draw a simple, straight line between 'good' and 'bad', preferably with ourselves on the right side of it.

Interfering with teenage girls was, it seems, Jimmy Savile's guilty secret, and if he did what is alleged half a dozen times, it seems to me that he probably did it a whole lot more - he certainly had the opportunity.

I would suggest that his frankly massive, long-term charity work is more likely evidence of an attempt to pay for what he must have known, on some level, was totally unacceptable behaviour.
We can only obviously only speculate as to his motivations, but there is at least some suggestion that he was rather cynical in his own remarks regarding young girls and potential abuse, and there's more than a whiff off the suggestion he felt he was above the law. He's also (allegedly) used the thread that his charity work would suffer to bully reporters into not printing stuff about him. The picture that emerges, really isn't one of someone that tries to atone himself. Calculating and manipulative more like it, and by the looks of it, very good at it as well.

Russ 03-10-2012 20:00
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35480883)
Very true, although I think that his charity work probably had ulterior motives. It think it was a way to get close to sick and vulnerable children and infiltrate childrens homes. It would also help to distract people to what was going on.
I don't think that's the case. In showbiz, being known for massive charity work (he helped raise more than £40m in his time) opens a LOT of doors and ensures you get many creature comforts.

slowcoach 03-10-2012 20:50
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Now can you understand why I am against trial by jury......

Chris 03-10-2012 20:57
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowcoach (Post 35480966)
Now can you understand why I am against trial by jury......
No?

RichardCoulter 03-10-2012 22:13
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by colin25 (Post 35480911)
Fact is stranger than fiction. Longer i live, more i believe that
Oh yes...

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35480938)
We can only obviously only speculate as to his motivations, but there is at least some suggestion that he was rather cynical in his own remarks regarding young girls and potential abuse, and there's more than a whiff off the suggestion he felt he was above the law. He's also (allegedly) used the thread that his charity work would suffer to bully reporters into not printing stuff about him. The picture that emerges, really isn't one of someone that tries to atone himself. Calculating and manipulative more like it, and by the looks of it, very good at it as well.
Indeed. It is well known that paedophiles will often seek to get near to children in an way possible, on the pretence of something innocent.

This is done, for example, by becoming a teacher or doing voluntary work by joining the scout movement.

I know of a 49 year old man that likes underage girls who teaches martial arts in order to get close to them. He now lives with one he has been seeing since she was about 14, who is now above the age of consent.

Their's rumours that he's now having sex with another of the girls that he teaches who is under age- perhaps the original one is now becoming too old?

danielf 03-10-2012 22:16
re: Operation Yewtree
 
The documentary is on now.

Damien 03-10-2012 22:21
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35480999)
I know of a 49 year old man that likes underage girls who teaches martial arts in order to get close to them. He now lives with one he has been seeing since she was about 14, who is now above the age of consent.

Their's rumours that he's now having sex with another of the girls that he teaches who is under age- perhaps the original one is now becoming too old?
Have you reported this?

Gary L 03-10-2012 22:35
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Now we know why he always wore Shell Suits.

sir_drinks_alot 03-10-2012 22:39
re: Operation Yewtree
 
correct me if I'm wrong but I believe shows like this are supposed to present both points a view from what I'm seeing it's a very one sided view on the situation

danielf 03-10-2012 22:41
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_drinks_alot (Post 35481007)
correct me if I'm wrong but I believe shows like this are supposed to present both points a view from what I'm seeing it's a very one sided view on the situation
I believe they asked Savile to comment, but he was 'unavailable' (allegedly). :erm:

martyh 03-10-2012 22:42
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_drinks_alot (Post 35481007)
correct me if I'm wrong but I believe shows like this are supposed to present both points a view from what I'm seeing it's a very one sided view on the situation
Not in this case ,it was made specifically to show his guilt

sir_drinks_alot 03-10-2012 22:44
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481013)
Not in this case ,it was made specifically to show his guilt
just like fox news :(

Gary L 03-10-2012 22:45
re: Operation Yewtree
 
I do find it weird how some of the victims description of events make it sound like they were with him all the time.

and I really think that other people. be they celebrities or otherwise, had to be involved one way or another.

Gavin78 03-10-2012 22:50
re: Operation Yewtree
 
I'm not far from where he used to live in Leeds about 5 mins in a car...can't say I ever saw anything odd about him when I saw him jogging around the local park unless he was hunting for kids.

However my wife used to work at the local Ice Cream stall some 18 years or so ago and she said that when he was out jogging he usually had a load of males with him so I would be more inclined to think he was the other way.

I'm sure if this was true it would have come out a long time ago...fair enough he may have had a "status" attached to him but in this day and age it doesn't matter who you are nobody has weight any more.

This is a load of tosh they either want publicity or after some ££ cash.

sir_drinks_alot 03-10-2012 22:53
re: Operation Yewtree
 
so one sided no right of reply at all shocking stuff :(

Gary L 03-10-2012 22:53
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 35481017)
This is a load of tosh they either want publicity or after some ££ cash.
Unless it was your daughter making the allegations.

but to have blurred reconstructions going on all the way through. is a but silly.

martyh 03-10-2012 22:59
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 35481017)

However my wife used to work at the local Ice Cream stall some 18 years or so ago and she said that when he was out jogging he usually had a load of males with him so I would be more inclined to think he was the other way.

.
Careful mate ,the way the rumor mill is working by tomorrow morning those men he was jogging with will have evolved into his close nit gang of peodos out planning the next hit

sir_drinks_alot 03-10-2012 23:05
re: Operation Yewtree
 
now watching Esther Rantzen bit of a hypocrite could have said something years ago

Gary L 03-10-2012 23:14
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Well, guilty or not guilty?

It was a bit dramatised. the blurred reconstructions. the constant filming of him in a dim lit room concentraing on a laptop screen.

but all that aside. there's the video evidence of how Saville would always be groping the girls/women. and his comments and views on what Gary Glitter did.

RichardCoulter 03-10-2012 23:47
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35481004)
Have you reported this?
No, there's people who know far more about it than I do and it's pointless anyway. The police didn't do anything about the first one due to lack of evidence and will just say that they don't act on rumours.

They'll probably be too busy anyway, enforcing the smoking ban or catching motorists going 1MPH over the speed limit!

Chris 04-10-2012 06:47
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35481037)
They'll probably be too busy anyway, enforcing the smoking ban or catching motorists going 1MPH over the speed limit!
The smoking ban is enforced by local council employees acting on health and safety grounds.

Police usually prosecute at 10% + 1 over the limit, at which speed you are very likely posing a risk to to your own health and that of other road users.

It's just as well they don't act on rumours, though, as a rumour such as the one you're peddling could destroy someone's reputation and their means of making a living.

Gary L 04-10-2012 07:27
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481054)
It's just as well they don't act on rumours, though, as a rumour such as the one you're peddling could destroy someone's reputation and their means of making a living.
Does it matter if he's guilty though?

Russ 04-10-2012 07:31
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35481037)
No,
In which case if he IS guilty you're assisting an offender in my book.

Chris 04-10-2012 07:43
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35481058)
Does it matter if he's guilty though?
He isn't, though, is he? Otherwise we wouldn't be talking about rumours and whether Richard should go to the police. We'd be talking about his jail sentence and whether he'd be safer locked up away from the rest of the inmates.

No conviction = not guilty. Simples.

Damien 04-10-2012 07:46
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35481037)
No, there's people who know far more about it than I do and it's pointless anyway. The police didn't do anything about the first one due to lack of evidence and will just say that they don't act on rumours.
If it's just a rumour for which you have no evidence and it doesn't warrant going to the police then maybe it's better not to broadcast the rumour on the internet?

Itshim 04-10-2012 07:46
re: Operation Yewtree
 
As he is now dead & and beyond the law, If anything had happen, perhaps it would serve the community better if any investigation was focused on the I knew but did nothing brigade. Just a thought .

Gary L 04-10-2012 08:07
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481067)
He isn't, though, is he? Otherwise we wouldn't be talking about rumours and whether Richard should go to the police. We'd be talking about his jail sentence and whether he'd be safer locked up away from the rest of the inmates.
Could it be the case that he's not guilty only because he hasn't been caught yet.

Quote:
No conviction = not guilty. Simples.
If only.
I'm sure there's plenty of guilty people out there who think the same.

What I'm saying is. I really don't follow your way of thinking of guilty people are innocent, because they haven't been arrested and tried yet.

you make it sound like fact.

If you witnessed an assault. is the accused automatically guilty?
or are they innocent because they haven't been through the legal process yet?

---------- Post added at 09:07 ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35481075)
If the BBC and it's management was complicit in this abuse, what other celebrities was it covering up for?
I'm certain that if all this about Saville is true, then there are other celebrities involved.

Chris 04-10-2012 08:21
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35481076)
What I'm saying is. I really don't follow your way of thinking of guilty people are innocent, because they haven't been arrested and tried yet.

you make it sound like fact.

If you witnessed an assault. is the accused automatically guilty?
or are they innocent because they haven't been through the legal process?
You don't follow, because you haven't latched on to the single most important fact in this context - you and I are not having a private conversation here, we are posting words on a public forum, and there are laws protecting people's reputations against what might be written about them.

You can think whatever you like about someone's guilt or innocence provided what you think does not cause that person's legal rights to be infringed.

Gary L 04-10-2012 08:26
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481089)
You don't follow, because you haven't latched on to the single most important fact in this context - you and I are not having a private conversation here, we are posting words on a public forum, and there are laws protecting people's reputations against what might be written about them.

You can think whatever you like about someone's guilt or innocence provided what you think does not cause that person's legal rights to be infringed.
Ok. now I understand your thinking.

so do you think Saville is guilty?

Stuart 04-10-2012 08:31
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481067)
He isn't, though, is he? Otherwise we wouldn't be talking about rumours and whether Richard should go to the police. We'd be talking about his jail sentence and whether he'd be safer locked up away from the rest of the inmates.

No conviction = not guilty. Simples.
The thing is, there is the concept of Guilty and the legally defined concept of Guilty. The legally defined concept of Guilty requires evidence. In life, people can be guilty without fulfilling the legal definition of being guilty.

Let me give an example of that. A few years ago, my mother served on a jury trying a local drug dealer. He was only a small time dealer, but the evidence presented was apparently convincing. The police had, however, handled some of the evidence incorrectly (I don't know the ins and outs of it), so that evidence was inadmissable.

The judge made a point (in his summing up) of telling the defendant that he believed the defendant was guilty but was unable to find him guilty because of the way the Police had mishandled the evidence, and chastised the Police.

Chris 04-10-2012 08:51
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35481090)
Ok. now I understand your thinking.

so do you think Saville is guilty?
Based on what I've read over the past couple of days, I believe what's being said about him.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35481092)
The thing is, there is the concept of Guilty and the legally defined concept of Guilty. The legally defined concept of Guilty requires evidence. In life, people can be guilty without fulfilling the legal definition of being guilty.

Let me give an example of that. A few years ago, my mother served on a jury trying a local drug dealer. He was only a small time dealer, but the evidence presented was apparently convincing. The police had, however, handled some of the evidence incorrectly (I don't know the ins and outs of it), so that evidence was inadmissable.

The judge made a point (in his summing up) of telling the defendant that he believed the defendant was guilty but was unable to find him guilty because of the way the Police had mishandled the evidence, and chastised the Police.
Very true, but as I posted above, it pays to keep that distinction in mind when you are discussing someone's alleged guilt in a public space. There are only a very few public spaces where anybody has the right to allege someone's guilt without fear of recourse, and a judge speaking from the bench is one of them (also, a news reporter quoting him, with certain limitations).

danielf 04-10-2012 08:56
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481094)

Very true, but as I posted above, it pays to keep that distinction in mind when you are discussing someone's alleged guilt in a public space. There are only a very few public spaces where anybody has the right to allege someone's guilt without fear of recourse, and a judge speaking from the bench is one of them (also, a news reporter quoting him, with certain limitations).
This is it. Gary just asked the wrong question. Instead of asking 'is he guilty?' he should have asked 'do you think he did it?'.

Chad 04-10-2012 11:36
Jimmy Savile, do you think he did it?
 
After days of allegations and last night documentary it would be interesting to see how people are learning.

mark1234 04-10-2012 11:40
Re: Jimmy Savile, do you think he did it?
 
It'd be good to hear both sides of the story before deciding, but that can never happen now.

danielf 04-10-2012 11:56
re: Operation Yewtree
 
In my opinion, there's too many people coming out with stories and allegations that are so similar that it can't be a coincidence. There's also so much that has been said (or reported to have been said) and written by Savile which points towards it being true

I suppose we'll never know absolutely certain, but I have very little doubt that the allegations are true. To me, the real question isn't if the allegations are true, but rather what the scale of the abuse was.

Pierre 04-10-2012 11:59
re: Operation Yewtree
 
I find the fact that this thread has a poll on whether Sir Jimmy Saville is guilty or not, to be both totally irrelevant and in poor taste.

martyh 04-10-2012 12:35
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35481147)
I find the fact that this thread has a poll on whether Sir Jimmy Saville is guilty or not, to be both totally irrelevant and in poor taste.
VERY poor taste

Gary L 04-10-2012 13:51
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Is the inverstigation poor taste?
Is the victims accounts poor taste?
Is the 'documentary' poor taste?
Is what he is alleged to have done, poor taste?

If more than one of the above is a yes, then is it because he is dead?

Chad 04-10-2012 13:56
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35481147)
I find the fact that this thread has a poll on whether Sir Jimmy Saville is guilty or not, to be both totally irrelevant and in poor taste.
But it doesn't. The question is "Do you think the allegations against Jimmy are true?"

If people don’t like the poll question they don’t have to answer. It’s purely optional.

Sorry you feel it’s in poor taste however I don’t agree. It’s a hot topic in the media just now. This thread has been very emotive and has thrown up interesting points for debate. I feel there is value in gauging how users of the thread feel. The fact that people are voting confirms it’s a facility people want to use.

Pierre 04-10-2012 14:15
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35481192)
But it doesn't. The question is "Do you think the allegations against Jimmy are true?"
Which equates to the same thing.

danielf 04-10-2012 14:46
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Well, it seems to me that the words 'poor taste' and 'Sir Jimmy Savile' are inextricably linked after last night.

Some interesting thought here:

Blinded by the Obvious

Pierre 04-10-2012 15:18
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481204)
Well, it seems to me that the words 'poor taste' and 'Sir Jimmy Savile' are inextricably linked after last night.

Some interesting thought here:

Blinded by the Obvious
Just more opinion, speculation, from one of many unimportant bloggers.

I'm not saying he's innocent, guilty or anything.

But he's being trialed, judged and sentenced by the media, and social media and he is not in a position to defend himself, or indeed be interviewed.

So all we will ever hear on this matter is one side of the story, and that is not how it's supposed to work.

If he's alleged to have done anything, then by all means let it be investigated thoroughly by the police and let them advise on their findings.

He now can never win, so to speak, if he's found guilty in his abscence - which may be difficult. Then so be it.

However, if there is no real evidence brought forward to be heard, then the rumours and stories will exist forever against him.

RizzyKing 04-10-2012 15:27
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Wasn't going to comment in this topic because i am biased towards sir jimmy as he visited our kids home every year and always bought a lot of laughter and compassion with him. He spent time alone with many of us in the grounds and all he ever did was give hugs to kids and constantly tell them it wasn't their fault. I have listened with growing anger the stream of people who "knew" and did nothing yeah really so many knowing and none of them with the spine to come out and expose it if it were going on to the level we are being led to believe come on something clearly wrong with that if nothing else.

As for people saying "ah but none of these people knew each" some of you do realise there are websites some troubled people can go to where they actually make up abuse claims and link their recollections i didn't until a friend of mine who works for the police had to deal with a gang of them last year trying to cash in on the rosehill scandal. We live in a time where allegations without proof is enough it doesn't have to be true it just has to be said by enough people and thats it your guilty.

We have become paranoid about paedophiles and worried about them too much and before someone has a go at that remember back to your childhood were you kept locked in because there might have been a pervert lurking no most of you weren't we know they exist we universally despise them but they didn't get to rule our lives. I remember being home on leave with a few of the lads and we went to a local field to relax with some girls (keep it polite and non lurid) we had bought quite a few refreshments to enjoy the day. Two kids came running over asking if they could have a can of coke each so we gave them one and i think some choc as well about half an hour later the irate dad was there telling us "he knew what we were upto". People have got too turned around on this issue were allowing ourselves to see them everywhere and they are not.

If i believed for one minute that jimmy saaville had done this i would condemn him and call for that guilt to be made public but i honestly cannot see a man who had so much compassion who did so much good and not just raising money for kids being this evil predator that he is now being made out to be sorry i just can't. Also why wait till he is dead to bring all this out sorry it is not about closure for the alledged victims he is dead they can never have that now. It isn't about justice because they cannot have that now either and no comments about sir jimmy's power to intimidate if he had that it was a longtime gone for many years before his death so no reason there not to bring this out. Only reason i can come up with for why all this is being said now is because he isn't here to put his side there is no one able to defend him against these revalations so they will stand without a shred of real evidence just a load of hearsay a lot of it coming from cowardly **** who now claim they "knew".

If you did truly know this happened and you never said a thing till now your worse then the perpetrator of the crime and far from looking good with your views and concerns now your just shown to be the shallow and cowardly people that you obviously are.

danielf 04-10-2012 15:51
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35481209)
Just more opinion, speculation, from one of many unimportant bloggers.

I'm not saying he's innocent, guilty or anything.

But he's being trialed, judged and sentenced by the media, and social media and he is not in a position to defend himself, or indeed be interviewed.

So all we will ever hear on this matter is one side of the story, and that is not how it's supposed to work.

If he's alleged to have done anything, then by all means let it be investigated thoroughly by the police and let them advise on their findings.

He now can never win, so to speak, if he's found guilty in his abscence - which may be difficult. Then so be it.

However, if there is no real evidence brought forward to be heard, then the rumours and stories will exist forever against him.
Yes, I'm well aware of that. Which is why, when I started reading up on him, I took the rumours and allegations as just that, and was highly skeptical of the rumours. However it quickly dawned on me, in no small part through Savile's own remarks, it was actually highly likely that the rumours were true. In a way, Savile's own remarks and writings are even more damning than the rumours:

Quote:
'we live in a very funny world and it's easier for me as a single man to say 'I don't like children' because that puts a lot of salacious tabloid people off the hunt.''
On camera, to Louis Theroux, when asked 'why he hated children'.

Quote:
Savile said: “Now Gary, all he did was to take his computer into PC World to get it repaired.

“They went into the hard drive, saw all these dodgy pictures and told the police and the police then said, ‘Oh we’ve got a famous person, yeah we’ll have them’.

“But Gary hasn’t sold ’em, hasn’t tried to sell ’em, not tried to show them in public or anything like that.

“It were for his own gratification. Whether it was right or wrong is of course up to him as a person.

“And if you ever said to that copper, ‘What’s Gary Glitter done wrong?’ Well nothing really. He’s just sat at home watching these dodgy, dodgy films.”
On camera, to Louis Theroux


Quote:
"thou shall not be found out"
Savile's contribution (Entitled 'The Eleventh Commandment') to a 1991 charity book entitled, Over 500 Trouble-Saving Ideas From The Famous, The Efficient and The Wise.

According to Phil Dampier
Quote:
I often had cause to ring him at home, and before I even said why I was calling he’d reply: “She told me she was 16 and I had no reason to doubt her!”
And there's a lot more if we take what others claim he's said into consideration. Couple that with the fact that (so far) 10 women claim to have been assaulted by him, and it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

'Sir Jimmy Saville' in all likelihood was a serial rapist and Paedophile, and we've probably only scratched the surface of what he's been up to.

---------- Post added at 16:51 ---------- Previous post was at 16:41 ----------

May I ask who's removed the poll? It was only added today, and the OP started the thread 5 days ago. I don't think regular members can add a poll after 5 days, so it would appear that the poll was added and removed by one of the mods (though not necessarily the same one), which doesn't seem very consistent?

Damien 04-10-2012 15:58
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481222)
]May I ask who's removed the poll? It was only added today, and the OP started the thread 5 days ago. I don't think regular members can add a poll after 5 days, so it would appear that the poll was added and removed by one of the mods (though not necessarily the same one), which doesn't seem very consistent?
The poll was added as a side-effect of a merge, it was not added by a mod. We've closed it down because we feel it's not appropriate.

danielf 04-10-2012 16:01
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35481228)
The poll was added as a side-effect of a merge, it was not added by a mod. We've closed it down because we feel it's not appropriate.
Okay, that's fair enough. The removal just seems a little odd as I was under the impression it had been (silently) added by a mod. :)

martyh 04-10-2012 16:15
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481222)

And there's a lot more if we take what others claim he's said into consideration. Couple that with the fact that (so far) 10 women claim to have been assaulted by him, and it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

'Sir Jimmy Saville' in all likelihood was a serial rapist and Paedophile, and we've probably only scratched the surface of what he's been up to.
I still cannot believe that out of 10 or more woman who claim to have been raped or abused by him ,not 1 has ever told the authorities or if they have they haven't pursued it .I can understand children not doing it but grown women who know that he doesn't actually have any power over them should have come forward sooner and nobody can tell me that all the celebrities that knew or suspected it was going on ,not one of those came forward either or pursued it further when it was dismissed

Paul 04-10-2012 16:18
re: Operation Yewtree
 
The poll has been deleted, it serves absolutely no purpose whatsover, everyone can now get back to the topic.

Arthurgray50@blu 04-10-2012 16:21
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
From what l have read and seen in the media, Sir Jim cannot defend himself as he is deceased.

BUT, if all the people have come forward and said these evil things of what and what he did, appalls me and sickens me to the bone and heads should role.

We have already heard from Esther Rantzen, Paul Gambochine and others, we also saw a Tv shot of him stating something of this. But what l have read on how he commiteed this sicks acts - is totally true on how they groom there victims. And in one article yesterday the name of Gary Glitter was mentioned in Jim's dressing room, committing a sexual act along with Jim.

When l was young something similar happened to me over several years before the person struck - l told my parents, and nothing happened and l was kept well away from him, the sick git died about ten years ago, and in those days the perverts were called a different name to what is said today.

The big question we should all ask ourself - did the family know, why didn't they come forward, if ALL these people knew years ago when he was alive - why didn't they something.

Even my wife only knows the brief details of what happened to me, and the rest is in a 'locked cupboard' of my mind. This is why the victims have only come forward now. That cupboard has now been opened.

danielf 04-10-2012 16:25
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481233)
I still cannot believe that out of 10 or more woman who claim to have been raped or abused by him ,not 1 has ever told the authorities or if they have they haven't pursued it .I can understand children not doing it but grown women who know that he doesn't actually have any power over them should have come forward sooner and nobody can tell me that all the celebrities that knew or suspected it was going on ,not one of those came forward either or pursued it further when it was dismissed
Tell me how that differs from the massive abuse cases in the Catholic Church.

I'm not going to pretend I have answers to all your questions, but it seems to me that if you take all the evidence together, then even accounting for the fact that rumours are just rumours, there is a very compelling case for concluding that Savile was a rapist and a paedophile. In fact I would argue that we need to have a very serious look at what made it possible for him to get away with it for so long.

Sparkle 04-10-2012 16:30
re: Operation Yewtree
 
I watched the documentary last night, almost entirely one sided of course so I'd hardly consider it a balanced representation.
At the end of the programme I had a look out for a statement confirming that none of the alleged victims were paid for their part in its' making.
It seems I must have missed it.

For many years now I've known that Britain has had a rather odd fascination with paedophilia, but this latest media circus definitely takes the biscuit. Witch hunt frenzy in overdrive, and its only just getting started by the looks of things.

A lot of smoke without evidence of fire. Rumours this, rumours that.
The guy's as good as guilty in the eyes of many so it seems, and the evidence has yet to even be heard.

Everyone should have a right to a defense. Will people not at least wait until the investigation before they condemn this guy? Apparently not.

I don't believe for a second that Jimmy being dead somehow ensures that his "powerful friends" are unable to protect him (assuming the claims are true that they were able before), also considering the prospect of their own implication should the "truth" get out.

Nor do I believe that Jimmy being dead makes it more socially acceptable to come out with these claims, actually I'd say its the other way around.

In the wake of the Catholic priest scandals, and all the others in recent years not to mention the fact that there were rumours already about Jimmy Savile (as you'd expect from any "odd" character who works with children), there would've been plenty of support from the public and charities for those who claim to have been raped by this man.

I don't believe that Jimmy being dead somehow "makes it possible" for victims to come forward, he was Jimmy Savile not Jimmy Hoffa!

I do however believe, and quite rightly so, that a dead guy can't defend himself.

I'm not saying he's innocent, as I don't have the facts to make such an assertion, but he should be entitled to a defense, one he's unlikely to receive in the current situation - so all we may hear is a one sided view.
That is morally wrong, no matter which way its tarted up (ie we need the truth, better we know now than never, why should the "victims" suffer in silence, etc etc). As is all one sided libel and slander.

Jimmy was 84 when he died, just in October of last year. 2011 was hardly 1963, the fact that so many are claiming they were abused, yet feel they would only be listened to after his death, just doesn't sit well with me. Something not right there, though no doubt time will tell.

It worries me about how many people are saying they knew all along. I wonder if they're the same people who "knew all along" when the police wrongly arrested Chris Jefferies. He looked like a killer, so he'd might as well be one....jeez, some people are so stupid it boggles the mind.

Again, I'm not defending anyone here as I really don't have the evidence to convict or even put anyone on trial. But then nor does anyone else at this time.

I have little more to say on the matter, as the mature reaction is to exercise restrain given the public nature of this forum and the risk to reputations of persons both alive and dead, until an investigation has been completed.

Arthurgray50@blu 04-10-2012 16:33
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Hi Danielf, I totally agree with what you are saying, however the comment made by martyh, people are ashamed to come forward and all the stick that they will take.

If Sir Jim was alive today, would they have come forward, no they would not as the qoute would be is ' who do you beleive, l am a big name' that answers your question.

Gary L 04-10-2012 16:52
re: Operation Yewtree
 
About the women who have come forward.
do we know if they're parents knew at the time?

could it be the case that they as children didn't tell their parents, for reasons for at the time era of the 70's they wouldn't. and then because that now they are grown up they can speak for themselves and add their name to the list that is out because of the documentary?

then you could say why didn't they walk into a police station before now and say Jimmy Saville touched/raped me as a kid.

they didn't know there were others until now. one never spoke up until the other one did. one thought nobody would believe her?

Obviously nothing can be done to a dead man whether he did it or not.
but we can still go for the ones who knew it went on and did nothing about it.

has any of Jim's old DJ friends said anything yet. apart from Paul?

martyh 04-10-2012 17:13
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481239)
Tell me how that differs from the massive abuse cases in the Catholic Church.
.
Big difference ,the children abused by catholic priests where bought to believe that the priest was authority ,what he said goes and you don't question him ,even adults rarely questioned his authority .Jimmy Savile was never that powerful and it confuses meas to how anyone thought he was he was a tv presenter and that is all

Quote:
I'm not going to pretend I have answers to all your questions, but it seems to me that if you take all the evidence together, then even accounting for the fact that rumours are just rumours, there is a very compelling case for concluding that Savile was a rapist and a paedophile. In fact I would argue that we need to have a very serious look at what made it possible for him to get away with it for so long.
If these rumors prove to be true then that is what must happen and those guilty of not saying anything must be punished

---------- Post added at 18:13 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35481242)
Hi Danielf, I totally agree with what you are saying, however the comment made by martyh, people are ashamed to come forward and all the stick that they will take.

If Sir Jim was alive today, would they have come forward, no they would not as the qoute would be is ' who do you beleive, l am a big name' that answers your question.
As this thread proves beyond doubt ,people are more than willing to believe rumors about big names however unsubstantiated they are

Gary L 04-10-2012 17:17
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481251)
Jimmy Savile was never that powerful and it confuses meas to how anyone thought he was he was a tv presenter and that is all
To them, and at that time. he was.

---------- Post added at 18:17 ---------- Previous post was at 18:14 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481251)
As this thread proves beyond doubt ,people are more than willing to believe rumors about big names however unsubstantiated they are
Did Jim fix it for you or something? :)

If he was alive today and all this was out. would you allow people to have an opinion then?

colin25 04-10-2012 17:20
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481251)
Big difference ,the children abused by catholic priests where bought to believe that the priest was authority ,what he said goes and you don't question him ,even adults rarely questioned his authority .Jimmy Savile was never that powerful and it confuses meas to how anyone thought he was he was a tv presenter and that is all



If these rumors prove to be true then that is what must happen and those guilty of not saying anything must be punished

---------- Post added at 18:13 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------



As this thread proves beyond doubt ,people are more than willing to believe rumors about big names however unsubstantiated they are
I don't think savile was a saint, and I don't think because someone is dead, that exonerates them from criticism. From what i have seen of the show, there is enough for me to form an opinion.

martyh 04-10-2012 17:38
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35481253)
To them, and at that time. he was.

---------- Post added at 18:17 ---------- Previous post was at 18:14 ----------



Did Jim fix it for you or something? :)

If he was alive today and all this was out. would you allow people to have an opinion then?

Who said people couldn't have an opinion ?

Why has this all come out now and not when he died ,why are none of the women worried or ashamed now but they where when he was 80yrs old .I am deeply suspicious of sudden claims like this ,they may prove to be true but i will never take the default stance of he is guilty because a few women say so after no end of opportunity to out him in the past few decades

danielf 04-10-2012 17:51
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481269)
Who said people couldn't have an opinion ?

Why has this all come out now and not when he died ,why are none of the women worried or ashamed now but they where when he was 80yrs old .I am deeply suspicious of sudden claims like this ,they may prove to be true but i will never take the default stance of he is guilty because a few women say so after no end of opportunity to out him in the past few decades
As I said earlier, that was my opinion until a few days ago. I liked the idea of eccentric philanthropist. Then I started reading up on him. There's so much unsavoury stuff about him out there, and much of it is there in his own words, that I've come to the conclusion that it's quite likely that the claims are true.

colin25 04-10-2012 17:53
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481269)
Who said people couldn't have an opinion ?

Why has this all come out now and not when he died ,why are none of the women worried or ashamed now but they where when he was 80yrs old .I am deeply suspicious of sudden claims like this ,they may prove to be true but i will never take the default stance of he is guilty because a few women say so after no end of opportunity to out him in the past few decades
Your opinion, my opinion, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

Though I don't view it coming out now as suspicious. I have more suspicion about the motives and innocence of those in power or positions of authority who claim they knew nothing.

Lots of instances of things coming out after the fact...time does not heal all, or expunge all.

Pierre 04-10-2012 17:58
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481222)
Yes, I'm well aware of that. Which is why, when I started reading up on him, I took the rumours and allegations as just that, and was highly skeptical of the rumours. However it quickly dawned on me, in no small part through Savile's own remarks, it was actually highly likely that the rumours were true. In a way, Savile's own remarks and writings are even more damning than the rumours:



On camera, to Louis Theroux, when asked 'why he hated children'.



On camera, to Louis Theroux




Savile's contribution (Entitled 'The Eleventh Commandment') to a 1991 charity book entitled, Over 500 Trouble-Saving Ideas From The Famous, The Efficient and The Wise.

According to Phil Dampier


And there's a lot more if we take what others claim he's said into consideration. Couple that with the fact that (so far) 10 women claim to have been assaulted by him, and it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

'Sir Jimmy Saville' in all likelihood was a serial rapist and Paedophile, and we've probably only scratched the surface of what he's been up to.
Oh that's alright then, as long as you have thoroughly researched it then.

martyh 04-10-2012 17:59
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481276)
As I said earlier, that was my opinion until a few days ago. I liked the idea of eccentric philanthropist. Then I started reading up on him. There's so much unsavoury stuff about him out there, and much of it is there in his own words, that I've come to the conclusion that it's quite likely that the claims are true.
My opinion is that if the allegations are true then then as stated we need to hunt out those who knew and did nothing

If they prove to be false then we need to look at how women can get away with such acusations and make sure they don't because any false allegation of rape or abuse sets back all the hard work done by people to make sure that abusers are caught and children tell people

colin25 04-10-2012 18:03
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481283)
My opinion is that if the allegations are true then then as stated we need to hunt out those who knew and did nothing

If they prove to be false then we need to look at how women can get away with such acusations and make sure they don't because any false allegation of rape or abuse sets back all the hard work done by people to make sure that abusers are caught and children tell people
Just our differences of opinions. I don't automatically think it is false allegations. But agree if it is (however unlikely that different people suddenly had mass hysteria)

Gary L 04-10-2012 18:08
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481283)
If they prove to be false then we need to look at how women can get away with such acusations and make sure they don't because any false allegation of rape or abuse sets back all the hard work done by people to make sure that abusers are caught and children tell people
What if anything will change your view on whether it's true or not?

in your opinion do you think at least one of the victims is telling the truth?

peanut 04-10-2012 18:08
re: Operation Yewtree
 
The lack of defence on his part from those that were close to him speaks volumes to me. If it was all untrue and they knew for certain then they'd be shouting it from the roof tops. But so far there's been nothing.

Too much has been said now, his name and reputation will never be cleared.

martyh 04-10-2012 18:16
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35481287)
What if anything will change your view on whether it's true or not?
evidence that can be corroborated


Quote:
in your opinion do you think at least one of the victims is telling the truth?
couldn't possibly say without any of the above

Gary L 04-10-2012 18:21
Re: Jimmy Savile allegations (Poll added)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35481293)
couldn't possibly say without any of the above
Of course you can.

Sparkle 04-10-2012 18:27
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 35481289)
The lack of defence on his part from those that were close to him speaks volumes to me. If it was all untrue and they knew for certain then they'd be shouting it from the roof tops. But so far there's been nothing.
Have a gander on the comments section of just about any Jimmy Savile video on youtube just now, and you'll see what happens to anyone who disagrees with the majority opinion there...Even though the evidence hasn't even been heard, anyone who speaks out is getting lynched in short order.
I don't think anyone not wanting to be labelled a paedo themselves, will be speaking out in Jimmy's defense at least not until the initial frenzied momentum has run its course.

RizzyKing 04-10-2012 18:34
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Yes why hasn't there been a rush from all those close to him oh wait we have a bandwagon rolling that says he was a paedophile and no way to disprove it yes why arn't they coming out to get shot down by those happy to believe on the flimsiest evidence. Is this really how low we have sunk, is it that all that is needed to ruin a persons reputation is unsubstantiated allegation\rumour. For all those who now believe he was this evil predaatory paedophile can i just ask you this would you be happy to be judged on the same level of evidence we have in this case of course you wouldn't and no one should be saying anything about this until we have more credible evidence.

Just becaause someone shouts abuse doesn't automatically put them in the right or even make what they are saying right sadly we have a lot of people in the UK with mental health issues and more sadly it is quite common for some of those people to make up scenario's involving public figures. I am not saying for a certainty he is innocent although my personal experience of the man makes it very hard for me to believe all this. What i am saying is right now we have sod all solid credible evidence that anything at all went on outside the imaginations of a group of people and we can never allow that to be enough to tarnish anyones name we have to set the bar hiugher then that.

If we do not it will keep getting lower until the slightest thing is enough stop it now demand evidence, demand a proper investigation and only then make your choice on innocence or guilt do not lower yourselves by doing it on what we have right now.

Gary L 04-10-2012 18:40
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Just heard a recording on the news of Saville and a distressed girl.
anyone heard it?

Now this is really weird. the one I heard on ITV news she sounded quite distressed. but the same one on youtube you can hear giggling in it and not as distressed.

danielf 04-10-2012 18:42
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 35481289)
The lack of defence on his part from those that were close to him speaks volumes to me. If it was all untrue and they knew for certain then they'd be shouting it from the roof tops. But so far there's been nothing.

Too much has been said now, his name and reputation will never be cleared.
His PA of 40 years has.

Quote:
'Sir Jimmy Savile's accusers are fantastists': Former PA says he would never have risked his career

Janet Cope, who worked as Jimmy’s assistant for 40 years, said he liked being photographed with young “bits of crumpet” but would never take it further.

Janet Cope, who worked as Jimmy’s assistant for 40 years, said the host liked being photographed with young “bits of crumpet” but would never have risked his career by taking it further.

She said: “I never had an inkling of him misbehaving or taking advantage of impressionable young girls.

"If there had been I would have seen it and tried to stop it.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...stists-1353245

martyh 04-10-2012 18:45
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 35481289)
The lack of defence on his part from those that were close to him speaks volumes to me. If it was all untrue and they knew for certain then they'd be shouting it from the roof tops. But so far there's been nothing.
Unfortunately the lack of any real evidence against him means it's very difficult to refute .How do you refute a claim he abused a girl "sometime between May and September"

---------- Post added at 19:45 ---------- Previous post was at 19:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35481308)
Yes why hasn't there been a rush from all those close to him oh wait we have a bandwagon rolling that says he was a paedophile and no way to disprove it yes why arn't they coming out to get shot down by those happy to believe on the flimsiest evidence. Is this really how low we have sunk, is it that all that is needed to ruin a persons reputation is unsubstantiated allegation\rumour. For all those who now believe he was this evil predaatory paedophile can i just ask you this would you be happy to be judged on the same level of evidence we have in this case of course you wouldn't and no one should be saying anything about this until we have more credible evidence.

Just becaause someone shouts abuse doesn't automatically put them in the right or even make what they are saying right sadly we have a lot of people in the UK with mental health issues and more sadly it is quite common for some of those people to make up scenario's involving public figures. I am not saying for a certainty he is innocent although my personal experience of the man makes it very hard for me to believe all this. What i am saying is right now we have sod all solid credible evidence that anything at all went on outside the imaginations of a group of people and we can never allow that to be enough to tarnish anyones name we have to set the bar hiugher then that.

If we do not it will keep getting lower until the slightest thing is enough stop it now demand evidence, demand a proper investigation and only then make your choice on innocence or guilt do not lower yourselves by doing it on what we have right now.

Excellant post Rizzy :clap::clap:

RichardCoulter 04-10-2012 19:10
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481054)
The smoking ban is enforced by local council employees acting on health and safety grounds.

Police usually prosecute at 10% + 1 over the limit, at which speed you are very likely posing a risk to to your own health and that of other road users.

It's just as well they don't act on rumours, though, as a rumour such as the one you're peddling could destroy someone's reputation and their means of making a living.
I assumed that you'd realise I was being sarcastic and not literal.

The police do attend smoking ban related incidents on licensed premises.

He doesn't make a living from teaching martial arts, it's voluntary.

I am not spreading rumours around about him.

---------- Post added at 19:57 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35481062)
In which case if he IS guilty you're assisting an offender in my book.
We don't go by your book, we go by the law of the land. There is no legal requirement for anybody to report a suspected or actual crime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35481070)
If it's just a rumour for which you have no evidence and it doesn't warrant going to the police then maybe it's better not to broadcast the rumour on the internet?
What difference does what i've said about this man on the internet make and why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35481089)
You don't follow, because you haven't latched on to the single most important fact in this context - you and I are not having a private conversation here, we are posting words on a public forum, and there are laws protecting people's reputations against what might be written about them.

You can think whatever you like about someone's guilt or innocence provided what you think does not cause that person's legal rights to be infringed.
Your sanctimonious tone is getting worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35481092)
The thing is, there is the concept of Guilty and the legally defined concept of Guilty. The legally defined concept of Guilty requires evidence. In life, people can be guilty without fulfilling the legal definition of being guilty.

Let me give an example of that. A few years ago, my mother served on a jury trying a local drug dealer. He was only a small time dealer, but the evidence presented was apparently convincing. The police had, however, handled some of the evidence incorrectly (I don't know the ins and outs of it), so that evidence was inadmissable.

The judge made a point (in his summing up) of telling the defendant that he believed the defendant was guilty but was unable to find him guilty because of the way the Police had mishandled the evidence, and chastised the Police.
This is what I was trying to explain to Russ earlier in the thread, but i'm still not sure if he understands what we're trying to say.

---------- Post added at 20:06 ---------- Previous post was at 19:57 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul M (Post 35481234)
The poll has been deleted, it serves absolutely no purpose whatsover, everyone can now get back to the topic.
The poll would have enabled contributors to this thread to be able to gauge the overall opinion of other posters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparkle (Post 35481241)
I watched the documentary last night, almost entirely one sided of course so I'd hardly consider it a balanced representation.
At the end of the programme I had a look out for a statement confirming that none of the alleged victims were paid for their part in its' making.
It seems I must have missed it.

For many years now I've known that Britain has had a rather odd fascination with paedophilia, but this latest media circus definitely takes the biscuit. Witch hunt frenzy in overdrive, and its only just getting started by the looks of things.

A lot of smoke without evidence of fire. Rumours this, rumours that.
The guy's as good as guilty in the eyes of many so it seems, and the evidence has yet to even be heard.

Everyone should have a right to a defense. Will people not at least wait until the investigation before they condemn this guy? Apparently not.

I don't believe for a second that Jimmy being dead somehow ensures that his "powerful friends" are unable to protect him (assuming the claims are true that they were able before), also considering the prospect of their own implication should the "truth" get out.

Nor do I believe that Jimmy being dead makes it more socially acceptable to come out with these claims, actually I'd say its the other way around.

In the wake of the Catholic priest scandals, and all the others in recent years not to mention the fact that there were rumours already about Jimmy Savile (as you'd expect from any "odd" character who works with children), there would've been plenty of support from the public and charities for those who claim to have been raped by this man.

I don't believe that Jimmy being dead somehow "makes it possible" for victims to come forward, he was Jimmy Savile not Jimmy Hoffa!

I do however believe, and quite rightly so, that a dead guy can't defend himself.

I'm not saying he's innocent, as I don't have the facts to make such an assertion, but he should be entitled to a defense, one he's unlikely to receive in the current situation - so all we may hear is a one sided view.
That is morally wrong, no matter which way its tarted up (ie we need the truth, better we know now than never, why should the "victims" suffer in silence, etc etc). As is all one sided libel and slander.

Jimmy was 84 when he died, just in October of last year. 2011 was hardly 1963, the fact that so many are claiming they were abused, yet feel they would only be listened to after his death, just doesn't sit well with me. Something not right there, though no doubt time will tell.

It worries me about how many people are saying they knew all along. I wonder if they're the same people who "knew all along" when the police wrongly arrested Chris Jefferies. He looked like a killer, so he'd might as well be one....jeez, some people are so stupid it boggles the mind.

Again, I'm not defending anyone here as I really don't have the evidence to convict or even put anyone on trial. But then nor does anyone else at this time.

I have little more to say on the matter, as the mature reaction is to exercise restrain given the public nature of this forum and the risk to reputations of persons both alive and dead, until an investigation has been completed.
Creating unfounded fear in the public is useful to the Government and has been done for a long time. Fear of mass paedophilia created a perfect excuse for the Governments to erode civil liberties. Fear of Muslim extremists is the latest method.

---------- Post added at 20:10 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35481314)
Just heard a recording on the news of Saville and a distressed girl.
anyone heard it?
Not yet, i'll keep an eye out for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35481315)
She spoke on 'This Morning' on the telephone the other day and said the same thing.

Chris 04-10-2012 21:07
re: Operation Yewtree
 
Comments removed. If you wish to post comments that you know have already been subject to a threat of a libel action, go and do it on Twitter or somewhere else where you can get sued without dragging Cable Forum down with you.


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:53.
Page 2 of 11 1 2 3456 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are Cable Forum