Operation Yewtree - Page 20

Russ · 07-10-2012, 08:29

In fairness though misogyny is usually a far cry from the kind of things JS is accused of. I'm not defending it in any way but misogyny is and always has been rampant in parts of the media and broadcasting. Many people feel that on tv or radio a woman's job is purely to sit there and look/sound pretty. A good example is meteorologists. The males are 'Weathermen' whereas the females are 'Weathergirls'. The idea was if they're going to bring news of bad weather they'd either have a serious, professional male to get the point across or a pretty little woman so that the news doesn't seem so bad.

**Damien** · 07-10-2012, 08:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

In fairness though misogyny is usually a far cry from the kind of things JS is accused of. I'm not defending it in any way but misogyny is and always has been rampant in parts of the media and broadcasting. Many people feel that on tv or radio a woman's job is purely to sit there and look/sound pretty. A good example is meteorologists. The males are 'Weathermen' whereas the females are 'Weathergirls'. The idea was if they're going to bring news of bad weather they'd either have a serious, professional male to get the point across or a pretty little woman so that the news doesn't seem so bad.

Well she alleged a 'well-known' presenter groped her live on air, for some reason I didn't want to explicitly say it.

. Obviously more serious than misogyny. Although the latter does mean the former can exist unchecked.

---------- Post added at 09:36 ---------- Previous post was at 09:35 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

It beggars belief that all these celebrities knew or heard that this was going on over the YEARS and did NOTHING, but now when they can get a bit of free publicity they speak out

I don't think Sandi Toksvig counts as a celebrity who desires free publicity. She said she heard of the suspicions and allegations, a far cry from knowing it was going on.

Sirius · 07-10-2012, 08:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't think Sandi Toksvig counts as a celebrity who desires free publicity. She said she heard of the suspicions and allegations, a far cry from knowing it was going on.

Maybe, but there are plenty on the free publicity route now. Lets see how many more show up over the next week for there free slice.

Don't get me wrong i am not supporting JS here and if all we have heard is true then he should have had his day in court, but what is bad is the way these celebrities are acting now

If i knew something like this was going on i would speak out when i knew not years after, and after it could have allowed even more abuse to happen.

Vieil Homme · 07-10-2012, 09:25

Liz Kershaw on Savile and being groped at the BBC while live on air Link

Quote:

A BBC spokesperson said: "We are shocked by allegations that anything of this sort could have been carried out by anyone working for the BBC. They are allegations which the police have the proper powers to investigate. We would encourage anyone with information on such issues to also speak to the police."

A big can of worms have been opened.....

Ramrod · 07-10-2012, 09:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

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

Initially I dismissed their claims but what has convinced me is all the BBC people from that time who are now saying that there were always rumours about him.
eg: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...-fears-in-1973

Vieil Homme · 07-10-2012, 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

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

Brian Hitchen Wrote THE DISGUSTED CAPTAIN WHO THREW JIMMY SAVILE OFF A CRUISE SHIP.....

Quote:

So why in all the years that have passed since I was first told did I never write about Savile? Two reasons. In those days newspapers did not write "nasty" stories about celebrities unless the famous had been handsomely paid for their often fairly tame revelations.

The second reason is because Britain's libel laws too often help make those like Savile untouchable.

The rest of the story LINK

danielf · 07-10-2012, 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vieil Homme

Brian Hitchen Wrote THE DISGUSTED CAPTAIN WHO THREW JIMMY SAVILE OFF A CRUISE SHIP.....

The rest of the story LINK

That has to be the most poorly written pointless piece of drivel I've read in a long time. I'm not even sure it tries to make a point, other than the succinct summary of 'Jimmy Savile was not a nice man'. Well, guess what: We know that Jimmy Savile was not a nice man.

07-10-2012, 12:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vieil Homme

Brian Hitchen Wrote THE DISGUSTED CAPTAIN WHO THREW JIMMY SAVILE OFF A CRUISE SHIP.....

The rest of the story LINK

Every single piece of "evidence" that has been given at the moment sounds to me like something you would hear in a small village in N Wales where there is an eccentric man who looks and acts a 'bit weird' ,people think he dresses funny ,eats cats and only comes out at night ,children ring his door bell for a dare and run away .Jimmy Savile may not have been a nice man ,he may have been eccentric and not everyone's cup of tea but when leveling accusations of pedophilia at him we need some proof not the story of a ship captain who wasn't even interviewed by Hitchen, and allegedly through him off because he had shifty eyes and refused to dress for dinner.

Gary L · 07-10-2012, 12:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Jimmy Savile may not have been a nice man ,he may have been eccentric and not everyone's cup of tea but when leveling accusations of pedophilia at him we need some proof not the story of a ship captain who wasn't even interviewed by Hitchen, and allegedly through him off because he had shifty eyes and refused to dress for dinner.

What kind of proof would you like?

Stuart · 07-10-2012, 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Every single piece of "evidence" that has been given at the moment sounds to me like something you would hear in a small village in N Wales where there is an eccentric man who looks and acts a 'bit weird' ,people think he dresses funny ,eats cats and only comes out at night ,children ring his door bell for a dare and run away .Jimmy Savile may not have been a nice man ,he may have been eccentric and not everyone's cup of tea but when leveling accusations of pedophilia at him we need some proof not the story of a ship captain who wasn't even interviewed by Hitchen, and allegedly through him off because he had shifty eyes and refused to dress for dinner.

How do you prove that a rape occurred decades ago? Bearing in mind that the only physical evidence would have decayed years ago, that these crimes often occurred with no witnesses and CCTV wasn't widely installed then.

Also, bear in mind that Jimmy, by his own admission, had friends in high places, and I suspect, would not have hesitated to use them.

07-10-2012, 13:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart

How do you prove that a rape occurred decades ago? Bearing in mind that the only physical evidence would have decayed years ago, that these crimes often occurred with no witnesses and CCTV wasn't widely installed then.

Also, bear in mind that Jimmy, by his own admission, had friends in high places, and I suspect, would not have hesitated to use them.

Very hard i know but saying a person is guilty does not make him guilty and untill one allegation against him is proven he will remain innocent ,you can think and suspect what you like about him but it amounts to didly squat if you can't prove it .Just because the man is dead and cannot appear in court doesn't mean the proof should be any less than required in court

---------- Post added at 14:20 ---------- Previous post was at 14:17 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

What kind of proof would you like?

how about stuff that isn't gossip and doesn't rely on him wearing a shell suit and having shifty eyes

Gary L · 07-10-2012, 13:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

how about stuff that isn't gossip and doesn't rely on him wearing a shell suit and having shifty eyes

Yes, but what?
give me a such as.

just one. if you can't think of two.

07-10-2012, 13:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

Yes, but what?
give me a such as.

just one. if you can't think of two.

do i really need to explain the concept of proof

if there isn't any do we rely on rumor and gossip for justice ?

How about you provide some proof that he did and don't forget that the onus of proof is on the alleged victim not the accused

Gary L · 07-10-2012, 13:33

See. you can't think of anything can you

**Damien** · 07-10-2012, 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Very hard i know but saying a person is guilty does not make him guilty and untill one allegation against him is proven he will remain innocent ,you can think and suspect what you like about him but it amounts to didly squat if you can't prove it .Just because the man is dead and cannot appear in court doesn't mean the proof should be any less than required in court

But this is it. Testimony from the alleged victim(s) does count as evidence. Obviously there will be questions of how reliable the accuser's account is and that would decide if the CPS feels they can press ahead with a prosecution and then if it's enough to convince a jury. The more reliable accusers you have the better.