Jimmy Savile

[Sheaf Saint]

Why I said An incident not "a complaint". Which was related to his particular work at a particular time. I do know that the details of what went on were well known in the Care Community and that they were in full support of him at the time, but I don't know any details of the actual complaint(s).

 

It is still VERY different from the Saville allegations which was my point

 

Yes, I agree. But I made the comparison because a lot of the discussion at the time was along the same lines and a good number of people I spoke to assumed he was guilty.

[Viking Warrior]

EGG

 

in response to your early quesion , the 16 year old is in terms of the law. the 16 year old is placed on the sex register. this happens a lot. Seeing CRB reports and disclosures, Poor Lad .

[Viking Warrior]

As someone one has already said . Why didnt any of the reponsible law abiding people come forward at the time such as nurse etc? Its not as if it would damage their radio 1 careers.

 

We certainly are getting a trial by media re saville. Can you remember what happened 40 /50 years ago and the exact dates and places.

[Frank's cousin]

Sorry for going down a different route - the John Peel thing I guess started that... but it does now seem that this is seriously much bigger and larger than airst feared... as some one above states, just how they got away with it, how it was covered up etc seems sickening, but we should again probably wait until the investigations are complete before drawing too many conclusions?

[hypochondriac]

EGG

 

in response to your early quesion , the 16 year old is in terms of the law. the 16 year old is placed on the sex register. this happens a lot. Seeing CRB reports and disclosures, Poor Lad .

 

Does it really? That is scandalous I'm surprised it isn't highlighted more.

[dubai_phil]

Yes, I agree. But I made the comparison because a lot of the discussion at the time was along the same lines and a good number of people I spoke to assumed he was guilty.

 

You're Rupert aren't you

 

[dubai_phil]

Does it really? That is scandalous I'm surprised it isn't highlighted more.

 

Hypo. REALLY? Think through what you just typed.

 

Are you saying that the Law should now have varying degrees of "greyness" (where IS Bearsy?)

 

Where do you draw the line? Do you apply this to every law? Put a line in the sand on shoplifting a bottle of pills from a Chemist?

 

Would you have different levels of Asbos based on the volume of a noisy neighbour?

 

It isn't scandalous. It's The Law

 

Now argue that the LAW should be changed and change it to what? What if the Boy is 16 years and 364 days would you not put him on the register and yet put a 17 yeaqr old on the register?

 

Keep it on the scandal of the Saville Allegations and start your own thread on The Legal Age of Consent. There are a zillion things in here worth posting on

[buctootim]

Hypo. REALLY? Think through what you just typed.

 

Are you saying that the Law should now have varying degrees of "greyness" (where IS Bearsy?)

 

 

The law should reflect the difference, of course it should. As others have posted the UK should have Romeo and Juliet laws and no kids should ever be prosecuted for sleeping together when the are within two or three years of each others age.

[pap]

Hypo. REALLY? Think through what you just typed.

 

Are you saying that the Law should now have varying degrees of "greyness" (where IS Bearsy?)

 

Where do you draw the line? Do you apply this to every law? Put a line in the sand on shoplifting a bottle of pills from a Chemist?

 

Would you have different levels of Asbos based on the volume of a noisy neighbour?

 

It isn't scandalous. It's The Law

 

Now argue that the LAW should be changed and change it to what? What if the Boy is 16 years and 364 days would you not put him on the register and yet put a 17 yeaqr old on the register?

 

Keep it on the scandal of the Saville Allegations and start your own thread on The Legal Age of Consent. There are a zillion things in here worth posting on

 

I don't think that the legal age of consent is off the menu here. Egg has been pretty hard line on the age of 16. While I think it correct, I do feel that there is room for interpretation to prevent the gratuitous criminalisation of young kids.

 

I'm also surprised to see the "it's the law" trumpeted out as an argument. Just because something is in the statute books, doesn't mean it is perfect or indeed, enforced. We already turn a blind eye to a hell of a lot of victimless crime. Texas law is:-

 

If there is no complaint from the perceived victim

All parties are over 14

The older partner is no more than 3 years older

 

...then it isn't a crime. I think that's fair enough, and I think it's worth bringing up when people raise the "anything under 16 is terrible", even in a debate on Savile's perverse proclivities. Savile was a predator and paedo; a far cry from a fumbling teenager and his girlfriend.

[dubai_phil]

Pap.

 

What you say is correct. I am not debating whether the Law is right or fair and IMHO this is the wrong thread to be doing that.

 

The law IS the law end of.

 

ANY Political Party that wanted to campaign or change the laws relating to the age of Consent would get creamed, it does not just affect Sexual Relations, Could a 16 year old guy get married to a 15 year old girl? So a society with "Christian Values" immediately has a problem trying to pass a law that further undermines "Society". Could that girl have legal rights if she moved into a house owned by a 16 year old boy? (as unlikely as that is but is it a Civil Partnership?

 

Oh and don't think it is only Christian issues here we get loads of horrific stories of kids under 11 or 12 being sold to be a 3rd or 4th wife across the "region"

 

It's a minefield however you try and address it or compare to other countries. Every defence so far of It would be OK for +/- 3 years has ASSUMED that the girl is emotionally mature enough to make that decision. Well, a great many are, but some are not. Of that great many, a large percentage have been influenced by peers or by "Teen Mags"

 

It's just NOT that simple and parents as well as kids need to know they are protected IF something goes wrong

[hypochondriac]

Hypo. REALLY? Think through what you just typed.

 

Are you saying that the Law should now have varying degrees of "greyness" (where IS Bearsy?)

 

Where do you draw the line? Do you apply this to every law? Put a line in the sand on shoplifting a bottle of pills from a Chemist?

 

Would you have different levels of Asbos based on the volume of a noisy neighbour?

 

It isn't scandalous. It's The Law

 

Now argue that the LAW should be changed and change it to what? What if the Boy is 16 years and 364 days would you not put him on the register and yet put a 17 yeaqr old on the register?

 

Keep it on the scandal of the Saville Allegations and start your own thread on The Legal Age of Consent. There are a zillion things in here worth posting on

 

As someone said there are romeo and Juliet laws in other countries. There is a difference between having a law and actually enforcing that when a 16 year old has sex with their 15 year old girl friend.

[dubai_phil]

As someone said there are romeo and Juliet laws in other countries. There is a difference between having a law and actually enforcing that when a 16 year old has sex with their 15 year old girl friend.

 

Yes a vaild point.

 

Now email each Political Party and ask them to support it before the next election............

 

(I'm sure the Lib Dems will.......)

[hypochondriac]

Pap.

 

What you say is correct. I am not debating whether the Law is right or fair and IMHO this is the wrong thread to be doing that.

 

The law IS the law end of.

 

ANY Political Party that wanted to campaign or change the laws relating to the age of Consent would get creamed, it does not just affect Sexual Relations, Could a 16 year old guy get married to a 15 year old girl? So a society with "Christian Values" immediately has a problem trying to pass a law that further undermines "Society". Could that girl have legal rights if she moved into a house owned by a 16 year old boy? (as unlikely as that is but is it a Civil Partnership?

 

Oh and don't think it is only Christian issues here we get loads of horrific stories of kids under 11 or 12 being sold to be a 3rd or 4th wife across the "region"

 

It's a minefield however you try and address it or compare to other countries. Every defence so far of It would be OK for +/- 3 years has ASSUMED that the girl is emotionally mature enough to make that decision. Well, a great many are, but some are not. Of that great many, a large percentage have been influenced by peers or by "Teen Mags"

 

It's just NOT that simple and parents as well as kids need to know they are protected IF something goes wrong

 

If the law enforcers used some common sense and amended the law so that young couples cannot be labelled as sex offenders then I fail to see how someone would get creamed. It's basic common sense and is already implemented successfully in other developed nations.

 

Edit: Just realised the obvious joke that can be made from my post .

Edited 11 October, 2012 by hypochondriac

[hutch]

I think we should just leave things the way they are, and leave it up to Rupert Murdoch to decide who should be punished & who should not.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Which makes you more of a paedo out of the below 2 situations:

 

Screwing a 10 year old who looks 18.

Screwing an 18 year old who looks 10.

 

Bear in mind you don't know her age in either situation.

[hypochondriac]

Which makes you more of a paedo out of the below 2 situations:

 

Screwing a 10 year old who looks 18.

Screwing an 18 year old who looks 10.

 

Bear in mind you don't know her age in either situation.

 

Since when does an 18 year old look ten? And I would argue the second option if we are talking hypothetically since my definition of a paedophile was someone who was attracted to underage girls.

[dubai_phil]

Since when does an 18 year old look ten? And I would argue the second option if we are talking hypothetically since my definition of a paedophile was someone who was attracted to underage girls.

 

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGdWTKu3ZQLEAARzBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1OG1uM2JxBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA01TWTAwNF8xMjU-/SIG=11v73ppba/EXP=1349987402/**http%3a//www.thai-professional.com/babes9.htm

 

as an example (although I can only post the link it is banned by our Proxy server here)

[StDunko]

Which makes you more of a paedo out of the below 2 situations:

 

Screwing a 10 year old who looks 18.

Screwing an 18 year old who looks 10.

 

Bear in mind you don't know her age in either situation.

 

Surely your decision in the above dilema would be based on more than just looks. An 18 year old that looked 10 would probably be able to betray her young looks by the maturity of her conversation etc. The 10 year old would also soon give herself away as being a child by what she says and how she acts.

 

My girlfriend is the eldest of 5 sisters, with a 17 year age gap between her and the youngest, all of the sisters are very tall, slim and attrative. One sister at age 14 (5ft 11) was chatted up by a bloke in his mid 20's, she later found out he thought she was around 22. This guess of her age was clearly based upon her height and physical maturity, he engaged her in converasation and offered to buy her a drink, but within seconds of the conversation starting he asked her how old she was. He was very surprised, but it only took seconds of conversation for her immaturity to shine through. The difference is a paedo would take advantage of this immaturity, whereas a person without paedophillic tendancies, will offer a quick appology and retreat.

[hypochondriac]

Surely your decision in the above dilema would be based on more than just looks. An 18 year old that looked 10 would probably be able to betray her young looks by the maturity of her conversation etc. The 10 year old would also soon give herself away as being a child by what she says and how she acts.

 

My girlfriend is the eldest of 5 sisters, with a 17 year age gap between her and the youngest, all of the sisters are very tall, slim and attrative. One sister at age 14 (5ft 11) was chatted up by a bloke in his mid 20's, she later found out he thought she was around 22. This guess of her age was clearly based upon her height and physical maturity, he engaged her in converasation and offered to buy her a drink, but within seconds of the conversation starting he asked her how old she was. He was very surprised, but it only took seconds of conversation for her immaturity to shine through. The difference is a paedo would take advantage of this immaturity, whereas a person without paedophillic tendancies, will offer a quick appology and retreat.

 

It's not always as obvious as that though in the majority of cases that is most likely true.

[Viking Warrior]

Hypo

 

I can not be sure about England , but it is the case in Scotland. On a couple of recruitment check it is shown that the 16 years olds were on the sex register. because their girlfriend was a little under 15. crazy I know but it is true. Had to ask one poor lad as to why he was on the register.

[hypochondriac]

Hypo

 

I can not be sure about England , but it is the case in Scotland. On a couple of recruitment check it is shown that the 16 years olds were on the sex register. because their girlfriend was a little under 15. crazy I know but it is true. Had to ask one poor lad as to why he was on the register.

 

See I think that is totally mental. My girlfriend is two years younger than me and to think if we go back to where I was small I could be viewed as a sex offender in the eyes of the law is insane. Presumably the wouldn't bother unless a complaint was made?

[Jonnyboy]

Does it really? That is scandalous I'm surprised it isn't highlighted more.

 

I knew it!

[benjii]

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGdWTKu3ZQLEAARzBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1OG1uM2JxBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA01TWTAwNF8xMjU-/SIG=11v73ppba/EXP=1349987402/**http%3a//www.thai-professional.com/babes9.htm

 

as an example (although I can only post the link it is banned by our Proxy server here)

 

Personal stash?

[pap]

Pap.

 

What you say is correct. I am not debating whether the Law is right or fair and IMHO this is the wrong thread to be doing that.

 

The law IS the law end of.

 

ANY Political Party that wanted to campaign or change the laws relating to the age of Consent would get creamed, it does not just affect Sexual Relations, Could a 16 year old guy get married to a 15 year old girl? So a society with "Christian Values" immediately has a problem trying to pass a law that further undermines "Society". Could that girl have legal rights if she moved into a house owned by a 16 year old boy? (as unlikely as that is but is it a Civil Partnership?

 

Oh and don't think it is only Christian issues here we get loads of horrific stories of kids under 11 or 12 being sold to be a 3rd or 4th wife across the "region"

 

It's a minefield however you try and address it or compare to other countries. Every defence so far of It would be OK for +/- 3 years has ASSUMED that the girl is emotionally mature enough to make that decision. Well, a great many are, but some are not. Of that great many, a large percentage have been influenced by peers or by "Teen Mags"

 

It's just NOT that simple and parents as well as kids need to know they are protected IF something goes wrong

 

I don't share your appreciation of the law being inviolable. Law changes, and even when it doesn't, pragmatism kicks in for all sorts of reasons. Not in the public interest, questions of enforcement, different priorities on limited budgets. The perceived victims in these cases have the same protection under Romeo & Juliet laws. If there is a complaint - it's a crime, but only if there is a complaint. Under UK law, the perceived offender is on the sex offenders register for life even if the girl consents.

 

Also, we send people to Parliament every five years specifically to change the law so that it meets the needs of the society it serves

 

Age of consent is aligned with marriageable age here, but it doesn't always correlate. Spain's age of consent is 13, yet it only permits marriage at 16 with parental consent, or 18 if the parents think the bloke's a tosser / girl not good enough for our prince. It's difficult to know what to make of that chasm in age difference from this British vista, where such things are aligned. If I had to guess though, I'd say they consider marriage to be a bigger deal than sex, and that they feel their child protection and sexual offence legislation can cover cases of abuse. I might be wrong though - they could just be a nation of raging paedos frequently visited by Messrs Glitter and Savile.

 

Romeo & Juliet laws would have a difficult time getting through Parliament. The debate would have to be framed in the right way, but for me it comes down to this.

 

Juvenile delinquents can go on a crime spree and if they behave in later life, can pretend it never happened. The justice system recognises that teenagers are a special case - a lethal cocktail of adult brain, raging hormones, somehow knowing it all despite having bugger all experience, limited only by their imaginations and pocket money. The courts bend over backwards to keep them out of jail and to prevent them from getting a permanent stain on their records. I like the "hey, teenagers can be d!cks - let's make allowances" part of our justice system. A lifelong entry in the sex offenders register for a 16 year old sleeping with his 15 year old girlfriend seems a massively disproportionate sanction, especially when compared to the smorgasbord of second chances on offer to habitual ratboys who can't get laid.

 

For the record, and for the benefit of the 2+2=5'ers:-

 

1) all models in the distinctly unimpressive "pap's sexual odyssey", spanning 21 years, running time 48 minutes*, were UK legal at the time of filming.

2) I am not on the sex offenders register

 

* I jest. 49 minutes.

[pap]

That's what I thought Pap, watch the whole thing back and there are a few eye openers that's for sure. The bit where he has Luis's full address down on the paper before Luis arrived seems like a passive threat to Luis now. A kind of 'I know where you live'.

 

In the end though, Luis was taken In by the charity work and the 'personna' and it becomes a bit powder puff.

 

The demand for Louis' address was an immediate power play. All very strange. How does a man in the public eye, an chick magnet of massive proportions in his day, get to the age of 82 and end up unmarried, living in a flat in Scarborough? The man didn't even have a cooker in his kitchen. I bet that booze was all his too.

 

The mention of legal action ties into reports that he silenced people seeking to out him before. Perhaps the most disturbing thing is what he says when asked about emotion. Savile has claimed not to have any emotions in interviews before.

 

"The truth is, I'm very good at masking them".

 

Some might argue he was just an old man talking crap, but my shout is that Savile's performance was a lot more candid than most realised. That out-take featuring his comments on Glitter seem to support this. Why would Jimmy Savile, a relentless self-publicist and attention-seeker, make up feelings of support for and try to downplay the offences of a convicted paedophile? They might have been mates back in the day, but those statements were pure kryptonite to pretty much everything he was interested in ( barring his penthouse sh!thole in Scarborough ). Would not be surprised if he had taken legal action or editorial privilege to keep that footage out. The glare of publicity would have made him persona non grata around kids, charity cash or not.

 

Very creepy.

[SaintBobby]

Michael Jackson, Gary Glitter, Jonathon King...........

 

this....

[Viking Warrior]

Child abuse lawyer Liz Dux, who has been contacted by several of the women in the past few days, told BBC Radio 4's the World at One: "The case would be against the BBC or the hospital because essentially they would be held vicariously liable in law for the acts of someone like Savile who was acting as their agent.

 

What ever has gone on. Sounds like a massive compensation payout from the tax payer on its way

 

The Sun newspaper says that Top TV Director at the BBc David Nicolson caught Savile having sex with a young girl in a BBC dressing room.

 

Mr Nicolson, now 67, is reported to have blown the whistle on Savile and claimed he was told: "That's the way it goes."

 

The incident is said to have happened in a dressing room for the Jim'll Fix It programme, involving a girl Mr Nicholson said was aged "16, maybe 15".

This ccured in 1988. why did he not say something sooner or certainly when saville was alive.

 

This guy and others who didnt say anything at the time are partially guilty for not reporting it to the authorities

[aintforever]

I would find it a bit distasteful if people come out and open their mouths now to try and get compo when all these years they have kept quiet when they could have stopped other people getting abused.

 

There was this woman on the radio yesterday saying how she saw Saville abusing a retarded girl in a hospital in the 70's - why on earth did she wait until 40 years before she told anyone? Also someone from the BBC said they reported something Saville did to another employee - I'm sorry but if you see someone getting abused you go to the police, not a ****ing workmate.

[dubai_phil]

Child abuse lawyer Liz Dux, who has been contacted by several of the women in the past few days, told BBC Radio 4's the World at One: "The case would be against the BBC or the hospital because essentially they would be held vicariously liable in law for the acts of someone like Savile who was acting as their agent.

 

What ever has gone on. Sounds like a massive compensation payout from the tax payer on its way

 

The Sun newspaper says that Top TV Director at the BBc David Nicolson caught Savile having sex with a young girl in a BBC dressing room.

 

Mr Nicolson, now 67, is reported to have blown the whistle on Savile and claimed he was told: "That's the way it goes."

 

The incident is said to have happened in a dressing room for the Jim'll Fix It programme, involving a girl Mr Nicholson said was aged "16, maybe 15".

This ccured in 1988. why did he not say something sooner or certainly when saville was alive.

 

This guy and others who didnt say anything at the time are partially guilty for not reporting it to the authorities

 

Well that's what happens if you read the Sun VW.

 

The Torygraph reports that he TOLD his bosses

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9603743/Jimmy-Savile-BBC-did-nothing-when-director-caught-him-in-the-act.html

[Tokyo-Saint]

Anyone seen hard candy?

[buctootim]

Anyone seen hard candy?

 

Isn't that what Savile used to say?

[Lord Duckhunter]

I would find it a bit distasteful if people come out and open their mouths now to try and get compo when all these years they have kept quiet when they could have stopped other people getting abused.

 

 

What about slappers jumping on the band wagon, where's it going to end?

 

What about this women?

 

She was so traumatised by her affair with Peel, that she wrote to him asking for him to open her new bar.

 

She said she was 15 but " he didn’t ask and I didn’t tell him.", before adding "I don’t know if sex was expected but I went along with it willingly."

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9603959/John-Peel-got-15-year-old-pregnant-after-meeting-at-Black-Sabbath-concert-claims-woman.html

 

 

The poor innocent girl, "Mrs Nevin went on to become a bunny girl croupier at the Playboy club in Park Lane in the 1970s."

 

She looks so innocent at 17 in the pic.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2216453/John-Peel-got-pregnant-I-15-Woman-claims-month-affair-DJ.html

Edited 13 October, 2012 by Lord Duckhunter

[Viking Warrior]

Dubai . Don't read the sun it's not even fit for my cat to **** on . I took that bit from a non paper . Sadly read the daily mail on a train today as it was free . More about the compensation in that from the lawyer . Plus Karin ward has done an interview for them . Interesting the mail has stated they didn't pay her for the interview but promoted her book which comes out next week. . Sounds like she had a rough time not only did her step father abuse . She was groped by Starr and abused by savile on different occasion . As they say the truth will out itself and the long arm of the law will strike those who are guilty

[Saint in Paradise]

This link is to a story from 1997 ! Very long but interesting as even a certain ex woman P.M. is mentioned

as having to be forced to act against one of the Conservatives main "helpers".

 

http://pebpr.blogspot.co.uk/

 

 

Just a small part says:-

 

"There is a lot more to the abuse side of this case, but as I am still investigating this I cannot reveal anymore at this time.

However, I would like to know what happened to almost 20 million pounds of Conservative Party funds which I understand

are still in an offshore account controlled by him and former Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. I would also like to ask the

former Prime Minister why she stood up for McAlpine when information was passed to her by the security services in relation

to McAlpine, and it was only after a large amount of pressure was put on her that she removed him from his post before

information leaked out.

 

For all that she may have been the best Prime Minister this country has had for a very long time, she has let every child in this

country down so badly for the sake of the party and that she can never be forgiven."

 

The above quote is NOT my words to clear any doubt.

 

.

Edited 14 October, 2012 by Saint in Paradise
Added quote

[Saint in Paradise]

O.M.Goodness even Tony gets a mention now BUT nothing happened to him.

 

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/blair_protection.html

 

NATO boss and Blair government insider Lord Robertson has threatened to sue Scotland's leading independent newspaper over

internet allegations that he not only used his influence as a Freemason to procure a gun licence for child killer Thomas Hamilton,

but was also a member of a clandestine paedophile ring reportedly set up by Hamilton for the British elite.

 

On 13 March 1996, Hamilton, armed with four hand-guns, opened fire on a junior school class, killing 16 children and one teacher

before turning the gun on himself, shattering forever the idyllic 13th century Scottish town of Dunblane.

 

Some commentators, mindful that one of Tony Blair's closest confidante's is a practising paedophile, are

even suggesting that this particular scandal, and not Blair's repeated lies and fabricated reports in regard

to Iraq, may well prove the downfall of a government mired in sleaze and corruption. The Sunday Times is

reported to have obtained an FBI list of Labour MPs who have used credit cards to pay for internet child

pornography, and Blair has responded by imposing a massive news blackout, failing however to stop the

arrest of one of his most important aides, Phillip Lyon.

 

The latest allegations came to light following a campaign to lift the secrecy on the Dunblane massacre.

Large sections of the police report were banned from the public domain under a 100-year secrecy order.

Lord Cullen, an establishment insider, also omitted and censored references to the documents in his final

report. Parents and teachers were advised to concentrate their efforts on a campaign to outlaw handguns

instead of focusing on how the mentally unstable Freemason, already known by the police to be a paedophile,

had obtained a firearms licence for six handguns. Hamilton allegedly enjoyed good relations with both local

Labour luminary George Robertson and Michael Forsyth, the then Scottish Secretary of State and MP for Stirling.

Forsyth congratulated and encouraged Hamilton for running a boy's club. Hamilton was also found to have

exchanged letters with the British monarch, Queen Elizabeth."

[Saint in Paradise]

In 1999, following the confiscation of credit card details from Landslide Productions of Fort Worth, Texas,

an online paedophile company by US authorities, an international investigation of child pornographers and paedophiles

run by Britain’s National Criminal Intelligence Service, code named Operation Ore, resulted in 7,250 suspects being

identified in the United Kingdom alone. Some 1850 people were criminally charged in the case and there were 1451 convictions.

Almost 500 people were interviewed “under caution” by police, meaning they were suspects. Some 900 individuals remain

under investigation. In early 2003, British police began to close in on some top suspects in the Operation Ore investigation,

including senior members of Blair’s government.

 

However, Blair issued a D-Notice, resulting in a gag order on the press from publishing any details of the investigation.

Blair cited the impending war in Iraq as a reason for the D-Notice.

 

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/2209/

[dubai_phil]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9606494/Jimmy-Savile-police-officers-repeatedly-failed-sex-victims.html

 

Sir Jimmy Savile was investigated by police during a series of sex abuse inquiries spanning six decades – but each time he evaded justice.

Savile was first investigated by police “for interfering with young girls” when a nightclub manager in Leeds as long ago as 1958. His former bodyguard has told The Sunday Telegraph that Savile claimed to have paid officers to drop the case.

 

It was the first in a series of at least six investigations that included: .........

 

The story will as SiP has shown, get worse and worse and worse

[Viking Warrior]

Whether it was the 60's 70'' 90's or today sex to all ages is clearly fluanted through mass media . Tv programmes young teenager magazines, clothes shops or topical programes on tv intimate sex is ok at . Peer pressure is another problem . I recollect the film cathy come home all those years ago . But we still have increasing numbers of underage pregnancies . Which may confirm sexual freedom for all . What ever happens with savile I just hope the authorities will get all the media outlets etc to advise all youngsters that under age sex is illegal whether consensual or not . That way we may have a chance if protecting our children . Standards in society have sadly slipped and not enough respect .

[trousers]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9614516/Jimmy-Savile-Labour-faces-embarrassment-over-former-child-sex-claims.html

[Viking Warrior]

I see yet another investigation is underway by Scotland Yard , I thought the Met police were conducting an investigation.

I also see it is being reported that over 200 victims have now come forward,

Why do we need yet another investigation. ?

And surely some of the alleged victims could have come forward sooner rather than deciding to come forward following the ITV documentary

[bridge too far]

I was listening to Radio 5 Live earlier and Paul Gambaccini was talking about this issue. I know his comments were widely publicised at the beginning of the month in various media outlets but he added some quite explosive stuff.

 

He was saying that, whilst the BBC must be held to account, other media need similar scrutiny. He said, for example, that News International had been aware FOR YEARS of allegations of necrophilia amongst the great and good but did nothing about it. I think he was of the opinion that the News International stable in particular was bent on villifying the BBC whilst conveniently ignoring its own hypocrisy in not broadcasting such information.

 

I do think that there are some very powerful, influential people out there who must be bricking it ATM about what else might surface.

[CB Saint]

I was listening to Radio 5 Live earlier and Paul Gambaccini was talking about this issue. I know his comments were widely publicised at the beginning of the month in various media outlets but he added some quite explosive stuff.

 

He was saying that, whilst the BBC must be held to account, other media need similar scrutiny. He said, for example, that News International had been aware FOR YEARS of allegations of necrophilia amongst the great and good but did nothing about it. I think he was of the opinion that the News International stable in particular was bent on villifying the BBC whilst conveniently ignoring its own hypocrisy in not broadcasting such information.

 

I do think that there are some very powerful, influential people out there who must be bricking it ATM about what else might surface.

 

Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "getting a stiffy".

[bridge too far]

...

[PhilippineSaint]

...

 

????? censorship going on send for the Beeb enquiry team

[bridge too far]

????? censorship going on send for the Beeb enquiry team

 

LOL I posted a photo I'd received on FaceBook and then realised that, as well as the photo, my personal details would show!

 

Not having you lot stalking me FFS

[PhilippineSaint]

LOL I posted a photo I'd received on FaceBook and then realised that, as well as the photo, my personal details would show!

 

Not having you lot stalking me FFS

 

That means you could work with the National insurance lot or the Army as they are always doing that sort of thing

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

I was listening to Radio 5 Live earlier and Paul Gambaccini was talking about this issue. I know his comments were widely publicised at the beginning of the month in various media outlets but he added some quite explosive stuff.

 

He was saying that, whilst the BBC must be held to account, other media need similar scrutiny. He said, for example, that News International had been aware FOR YEARS of allegations of necrophilia amongst the great and good but did nothing about it. I think he was of the opinion that the News International stable in particular was bent on villifying the BBC whilst conveniently ignoring its own hypocrisy in not broadcasting such information.

 

I do think that there are some very powerful, influential people out there who must be bricking it ATM about what else might surface.

 

Surely you don't actually mean necrophilia???

[bridge too far]

Surely you don't actually mean necrophilia???

 

That's what the man said! I know he's Canadian, but his accent wouldn't have distorted 'paedophilia' into necrophilia. Nicky Campbell did a double-take too

[Goalie66]

Necrophillia is dead boring

[bridge too far]

Necrophillia is dead boring

 

It's a grave matter too