Jim'll fiddle it

[Tiberius Onklevaart]

Can't help thinking there could be several bands from the same era sitting a little uncomfortably at the moment, given the ages of some of the groupies that followed them!

They're even younger nowadays

[pitternator]

VNA
While I am not calling  the claimants liars, what doesnt help is just why were sub 16 yr olds allowed  to be  unescorted in his dressing rooms, and just why any of them didnt come forward when they were a bit older ,and couldnt just be hushed up ?...thats the tragedy of all this.Because if they were abused, by nobody saying anything they allowed future people to be so....I find it hard to believe every parent would have just said " dont be silly".

On a cynical note its now apparent that some form of litigation is to be launched by the victims for compensation from the institutions which employed him ...hmmm. Of course all the claims were nothing to do with that then.Claims which by their very timing can never be substantiated or proven/ disproven.The whole thing still doesnt sit easily with me...

[Chillum]

why any of them didnt come forward when they were a bit older

Just out of curiosity - do you know anyone who was abused as a child? Your point of view strikes me as being from someone who doesn't.

Many children bury the memories under layers of psychosis and aberrent behaviour making them difficult to access in later life.

Attitudes of people who were trusted enough for them to confide in who then let them down can often do as much damage as the abuse. On person I know reckoned the process to being abused physically and then raped emotionally. It's unfortunately very common.

[alan09]

The compo word has finally raised its head, there's said to be 60 victims they'll be coming out the woodwork now there's a chance of a payout 

[VNA]

Meanwhile, who's going out to the pub dressed as Jimmy Saville on Halloween?

You could get your mates to dress up as Gary Glitter and Johathan King, perhaps pursued by an Esther Rantzen shouting - I'm gonna spank your bottoms you naughty boys!

Sounds like a plan - eh?

[pitternator]

Chillum
Look it is irrelevant to ask / suggest that cos I may not know someone who has been abused, that I am not qualified to comment. As it happens no, I dont , coming from a " normal" background of a family unit with no homosexual/ paedophiliate relatives either.The point is just why wait now , when surely only 2 or 3 yrs ago an adult will have the maturity to make a stand if thats what they want to do.
The stupidity of all this is not one claim can really be substantiated , hence the validity of such a claim will never be fully accepted by many people.

As someone who has had counselling  for PTSD, I do have sympathy for any such victims, as after my counselling I felt " relieved of my burden"...I never felt I had to go on national TV to achieve that state however....putting right ones  own psycology is a deeply personal and private thing...hence why I also am very surprised at these claims and the huge publicity the victims are willing to go through.

Then you wonder why I am still sceptical....

[Chillum]

Chillum
Look it is irrelevant to ask / suggest that cos I may not know someone who has been abused, that I am not qualified to comment.

Not sure I actually said that. I didn't think it was irrelevant, you were saying you didn't understand why they didn't come forward before, or are only doing so now. I was asking if you knew anyone who had been through it because if you did you probably wouldn't be asking. Wasn't questioning your fitness to comment.

Then you wonder why I am still sceptical....

I don't wonder why you're sceptical, you've told us why I haven't even said that I believe or disbelieve the accusations yet, although there do seem to be enough disparate accounts that all add up to being pretty damning, if not conclusive.

[VNA]

As someone who has had counselling  for PTSD, I do have sympathy for any such victims, as after my counselling I felt " relieved of my burden"...I never felt I had to go on national TV to achieve that state however....putting right ones  own psycology is a deeply personal and private thing...hence why I also am very surprised at these claims and the huge publicity the victims are willing to go through.

Whatever trauma you have suffered it is good to hear that you have found some peace, and as you say have been relieved of your burden. 

But back to Jimmy.  This all happened simply because a team of documentary film makers decided to investigate rumours surrounding Jimmy Savile.  The investigation was led by Mark Williams-Thomas, a former police detective who specialised during his time with the police in child protection and major crime.

You can read his own account of how this investigation came about, and why after initial research they decided to peruse it.  Mark decided to investigate his first lead before the death of Jimmy Saville, unfortunately by the time he spoke to that first person Jimmy had just recently passed away.


The BBC had meanwhile blocked an investigation into Jimmy Savile by their own journalists.  Mark was aware that the BBC had shelved an investigation in to Savile. 

http://www.williams-thomas.co.uk/?q=syst...Savile.pdf

I never felt I had to go on national TV to achieve that state however

These people were abused as children.  Those who spoke out were disbelieved and/or humiliated.  The police failed time after time to investigate, or even to join up the dots from numerous allegations and complaints.  Most of those who appeared in the film did so under the guarantee of anonymity. 

Perhaps, they, unlike you, may not have reach "that state".  Perhaps, again unlike yourself, they have not, until now, been offered that opportunity. 
I think you need to actually watch that documentary Pitternator.

[dr bong]

It'll be Sooty and Sweep next......

What about The Fonz? He used to like hanging out with a load of teenage boys?

[Streetbudgie]

[quote author=Streetbudgie link=topic=4861.msg42706#msg42706 date=1350029953]
if I knew the King of England was a fiddler I would be shouting about it until someone heard me (as an adult, not a frightened child).

Which is why a number of people are asking why the alleged victims didn't speak up when they became adults and when he was alive..and when there was a chance to hold him to account?. Or their parents, or family, siblings, friends, etc etc - no one?

And while the focus is currently on the BBC's conduct, what about the rest of the media? I find it hard to believe the unlamented News of the World among others were intimidated into silence. Pretty sure they'd have had a field day on this.

Not defending him but just asking - where was the shouting?
[/quote]

To clarify - I would be shouting as an adult who knew the abuse was going on, not as the terrified child victim or that victim as an adult

Where was the shouting is exactly my point - if Rantzen and her other BBC cronies knew this was happening, why didn't they blow the whistle?

The answer - they were too busy sucking on the BBC's corporate teat and lining their own pockets while knowing full well child abuse was going on under their noses and at the same time becoming heads of institutions like Childline to placate their guilt.

That's who the investigation is for, prove the abuse and prosecute the bastards that stood back and did nothing.

[Streetbudgie]

Chillum

coming from a " normal" background of a family unit with no homosexual/ paedophiliate relatives either.

Sorry mate, got to pull you on this statement, what has being a paedophile got to do with being homosexual?

Are you saying if one has a gay relative then their family must be considered not normal?

[Phil TK]

[quote author=pitternator link=topic=4861.msg43157#msg43157 date=1350389101]
Chillum

coming from a " normal" background of a family unit with no homosexual/ paedophiliate relatives either.

[/quote]

It's happened! Jerry Falwell has been resurrected, Hallelulah

[imax]

Where was the shouting is exactly my point - if Rantzen and her other BBC cronies knew this was happening, why didn't they blow the whistle?

The answer - they were too busy sucking on the BBC's corporate teat and lining their own pockets while knowing full well child abuse was going on under their noses and at the same time becoming heads of institutions like Childline to placate their guilt.

That's who the investigation is for, prove the abuse and prosecute the bastards that stood back and did nothing.

"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it" A. Einstein

[VNA]

To clarify - I would be shouting as an adult who knew the abuse was going on, not as the terrified child victim or that victim as an adult

Would you?  Bollocks!  After having been used and abused as a child, and in a society which blames the victim and attacks the whistle blower.  Nobody listened when people spoke out at the time, why would anybody care in the future, the matter had already been dealt with, had it not? 
The funny thing is, Jimmy Savile, it would appear is possibly, if not probably the biggest paedophile and rapist that has ever come to our attention.    There are dozens of victims.  Wouldn't we better asking why they were, time after time, not able to come forward and/or their allegations repeatedly dismissed.
Posturing is easy, and words are cheap.
What people are doing here is attacking the victims.  Yet again the victims are being attacked.

Where was the shouting is exactly my point - if Rantzen and her other BBC cronies knew this was happening, why didn't they blow the whistle?

We are going round in circles.  Rantzen had heard rumours.    You cannot whistle blow on a rumour.

The answer - they were too busy sucking on the BBC's corporate teat and lining their own pockets while knowing full well child abuse was going on under their noses and at the same time becoming heads of institutions like Childline to placate their guilt.

Those who do something, will always be attacked by those who do nothing.  Don't we just hate anybody who dares to make progress on sensitive issues.  Rantzen heard rumours, she had no facts, no evidence, nothing, zip, ziltch, that could be acted on. 

That's who the investigation is for, prove the abuse and prosecute the bastards that stood back and did nothing.

No it is not.  It is not to find guilty people who heard rumours or gossip.  To suggest so is, to put it mildly, stupid.

[BBROWN1664]

The only reason Scotland wants to remain part of the EU post seperation from the UK is they would get more in subsidies back then they pay in to the EU :pokefun

[Streetbudgie]

To clarify - I would be shouting as an adult who knew the abuse was going on, not as the terrified child victim or that victim as an adult

Would you?  Bollocks!  After having been used and abused as a child, and in a society which blames the victim and attacks the whistle blower.  Nobody listened when people spoke out at the time, why would anybody care in the future, the matter had already been dealt with, had it not? 
The funny thing is, Jimmy Savile, it would appear is possibly, if not probably the biggest paedophile and rapist that has ever come to our attention.    There are dozens of victims.  Wouldn't we better asking why they were, time after time, not able to come forward and/or their allegations repeatedly dismissed.
Posturing is easy, and words are cheap.
What people are doing here is attacking the victims.  Yet again the victims are being attacked.

Where was the shouting is exactly my point - if Rantzen and her other BBC cronies knew this was happening, why didn't they blow the whistle?

We are going round in circles.  Rantzen had heard rumours.    You cannot whistle blow on a rumour.

The answer - they were too busy sucking on the BBC's corporate teat and lining their own pockets while knowing full well child abuse was going on under their noses and at the same time becoming heads of institutions like Childline to placate their guilt.

Those who do something, will always be attacked by those who do nothing.  Don't we just hate anybody who dares to make progress on sensitive issues.  Rantzen heard rumours, she had no facts, no evidence, nothing, zip, ziltch, that could be acted on. 

That's who the investigation is for, prove the abuse and prosecute the bastards that stood back and did nothing.

No it is not.  It is not to find guilty people who heard rumours or gossip.  To suggest so is, to put it mildly, stupid.

Do you know me?

No you don't, so do not dimiss any action I say I will take as bollocks, trust me it ain't.

I have stuck my neck out on many occasions when I have seen or heard unfair practices going on at work and taken on cases where people have been treated unfairly or abused by those subordinate to them or in higher managment - I DON'T SCARE EASILY.

Did you see Rantzen interviewed? I did. Crocodile tears and hints that she knew but her hands were tied - now that is bollocks, she should have took the risk and blown it open but no, her greed stopped her.

Why insult me?

I have a different opinion to you on what should have been done by those in the know, lets face it, they were in the know, these were not distant rumours, this was common fucking knowledge and they know it, which is why they are all shitting themselves and appearing on TV pleading the innocent.

Whether they were rumours or not I would have thought that child abuse was serious enough to blow the whistle - being bothered by someone calling you stupid for doing so is not an excuse to keep information like that to yourself.

[VNA]

I have stuck my neck out on many occasions when I have seen or heard unfair practices going on at work and taken on cases where people have been treated unfairly or abused by those subordinate to them or in higher management - I DON'T SCARE EASILY.

And?

Crocodile tears and hints that she knew but her hands were tied - now that is bollocks, she should have took the risk and blown it open but no, her greed stopped her.

Considering that Jimmy Savile was a bit odd, and his line of work, well it's hardly surprising there were rumours. 
I suppose not only do you "DON'T SCARE" easily, and are clearly such a tough guy that you are happy to repeatedly attack Saviles victims,  but on top of that you are able to determine if there is substance in rumour without evidence.  That is quite incredible!  All the more so considering you don't seem to be able see the difference between "unfair practises", as nasty as they can be, and child abuse.

which is why they are all shitting themselves and appearing on TV pleading the innocent.

Did you see Rantzen interviewed? I did.

No I haven't, what interview are you referring to?  As you know I did watch the documentary, and as I understand it Rantzen was invited to comment by Mark Williams-Thomas as both a subject matter expert and as somebody who knew Jimmy Savile as she was working at the BBC during much of the period that he was.  There was no suggestion that Rantzen was being set up, that she was being questioned, or accusations, or the suggestion of, were being put to her. 
Sadly Rantzen has been vilified and slandered since appearing in that documentary, and without a shred of evidence that she knew anything of substance, or had witnessed any inappropriate behaviours by Savile.

Whether they were rumours or not I would have thought that child abuse was serious enough to blow the whistle - being bothered by someone calling you stupid for doing so is not an excuse to keep information like that to yourself.

A rumour is a rumour, information, or indeed evidence and facts are something altogether different.  To accuse somebody of being guilty of a crime, or to slag em off and vilify them on the basis that somebody believes  that rumour is fact, or that rumours have in this case(with hindsight) turned out to have substance, when there is nothing to suggest and no evidence that that person had heard, or seen,or been presented with,  anything other than pure rumour, is not only stupid, it is downright nasty.

[Streetbudgie]

I suppose not only do you "DON'T SCARE" easily, and are clearly such a tough guy that you are happy to repeatedly attack Saviles victims,  but on top of that you are able to determine if there is substance in rumour without evidence. 

Are you reading my posts or making them up in your head?

[pitternator]

see this is the problem with any form of debate on here..guys get personal and start posturing.
There is a difference of opinion on the validity of the claims, which is something tbh we will either choose to accept or not.Its just a one sided thing evidential thing , with  inevitably no real hope of formal justice. I have stated my discomfort at anyone who is vilefied post mortem/ innocent till guilty notion...but I do accept that with such seemingly overwhelming claims there must be something to it, a fact which saddens me immensely.I dont think any of us here would have anything but complete sympathy with any genuine abuse victims.

As to Rantzens part ( if any at all) ...well I feel uneasy when anyone associated with childline would not attempt to at least investigate any such rumours! It surely is what they were set up for. But equally if the institutions deliberately ignored any goings on( which I find hard to believe),then it would be difficult to get at the truth. Also dont forget that she hosted a long running series of Thats life, and she had access to investigators etc...so IMO an attempt could have been made. Then we also have to consider just how many calls were made to childline or the samaritans by abused kids. You see this ommission just dont seem right , not with purportedly hundreds of claimants. Its not logical to expect nobody would come forward at some point ??..to somebody , or anyone ..

As such I commented that quite possibly we will not achieve as much as one might think from all the revelations. Maybe a formal inquiry led by a judge will have more success.Cos if it is true...then as VNA said much earlier , just maybe this wouldnt happen again .It is all so possible, especially after all the shenanigans unearthed by the enquiry into the murdochs and the phone tapping ...private companies and corporations  can be morally corrupt...

[manuel32]

Yes