Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
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.
|
Well you'll also want to be sure you're right. If you're going to call a popular personality a child abuser you want to be sure it holds up. If it isn't proved then you would be committing career suicide and some legal troubles to boot. I don't think the silent people share any of the guilt really, unless someone really did have material that would have held up to critical inspection.
---------- Post added at 13:57 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
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.
|
Well the Catholic church covered up multiple abuse allegations didn't they? Moving people around parishes and not co-operating with investigations? Seems like it's pretty similar rather than a double standard.
I wonder if some of those coming out now with their comments knew more than they are letting on and are now rushing to condemn him to avoid any suggestion of willingly turning a blind eye before.