Jimmy Saville exposed

oranbhoy67

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcFE7HEgX3g&feature=related

Manc-Red

It's an extensive piece on him ..... Lets be honest here, his legacy is gone - I'm sure he done good, but it looks like he used it to get what he wanted.

Min

Very disturbing documentary.

Also very similar to the abuse that happened in the Catholic church, people knew but did nothing.

The BBC are in serious trouble over this.

M cebee

dunno what to make of esther rantzen after that

seems shes's just a broadcaster-whichever way the wind blows and childline was just a gig

Intensive Care Bear

I think they should do what they done to Pope Formosus and dig up his corpse and put it on trial. Also i noticed his coffin was incased in concrete, i reckon this was to prevent the dirty old basta*d coming back as some sort of peadozombie.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-15717221

Hootanany

I fell asleep did anyone watch the program.

eviltwin

M cebee wrote: »

dunno what to make of esther rantzen after that

seems shes's just a broadcaster-whichever way the wind blows and childline was just a gig

I've lost all respect for her after that, I know it was different times and all that but I can't believe people knew that this was going on and just ignored it.

Show Time

eviltwin wrote: »

I've lost all respect for her after that, I know it was different times and all that but I can't believe people knew that this was going on and just ignored it.

I wonder did she ever find the time to read a code of ethics towards dealing with young people or was she just to busy getting her name in the limelight.

M cebee

Show Time wrote: »

eviltwin wrote: »

I've lost all respect for her after that, I know it was different times and all that but I can't believe people knew that this was going on and just ignored it.

I wonder did she ever find the time to read a code of ethics towards dealing with young people or was she just to busy getting her name in the limelight.

those tears-ouch!
why did she go on the prgramme?

ejmaztec

I'm glad that our licence fee *has only ever been used to pay for sh1t programmes and lousy presenters.

The people in the UK whose licence money was paying for these creeps must be mortified.


*at least I hope so.

WhimSock

As much as I have been making puns and the like over it, it was a difficult watch. Of course he is dead and can't defend himself etc, but I can't imagine Esther Rantzen would put her reputation on the line if there weren't any truth in it.

heffomike54

I had been waiting to watch this since I heard about about it & this thread has been very interesting reading. I can understand the victims being scared to come forward but its worrying that so many of them on the show hid their identity.

Also, I think the witness's that were interviewed should be prosecuted for their inaction. The first lady who says she witnessed Savile assaulting a girl in his dressing room but never reported to anyone. She was working for the BBC at the time I think so perhaps more worried about her career.

The obituary piece from the telegraph on Savile has some worrying pieces in it..
"He also worked as a volunteer at Broadmoor, the hospital for the criminally insane, where he was given his own room, & referred to the staff & patients at the hospital as “my people” & himself as “the Godfather”

"Cleaners would come in once a week & leave a basket of food, but Savile claimed that if he was catering for himself his favoured meal was a tin of baked beans microwaved in the same pint mug which he would also use to wash his hair"

All in all, these are very serious allegations which IMO are true but he can't defend himself now & I doubt much will be made of this once the dust settles. I don't think we will see a court case about this allegations which is sad & I hope the victims can move on.

Intensive Care Bear

I know lots of people who keep saying that it shouldn't be brought up because he cant defend himself. Would it make much of a difference if he was alive? What i mean by that is surely he would just deny everything, so we would be in the same situation of either believing all these women or believing he was innocent. There is no physical evidence so even if it went to court it would have been his word (denying it) against all the alleged victims and witnesses.

M cebee

1210m5g wrote: »

I know lots of people who keep saying that it shouldn't be brought up because he cant defend himself. Would it make much of a difference if he was alive? What i mean by that is surely he would just deny everything, so we would be in the same situation of either believing all these women or believing he was innocent. There is no physical evidence so even if it went to court it would have been his word (denying it) against all the alleged victims and witnesses.

thats why it's out now-the media can safely air the allegations which might not stand up in court
spooky seeing him doing his hospital porter bit
pro wrestler as well.he'd be fairly imposing

Fuinseog

M cebee wrote: »

dunno what to make of esther rantzen after that

seems shes's just a broadcaster-whichever way the wind blows and childline was just a gig

her shiite always smelt better than anyone elses. she knew but said and did nothing.

M cebee

Fuinseog wrote: »

her shiite always smelt better than anyone elses. she knew but said and did nothing.

well that was the thing about her

she acted like she cared with the childline
looking at her and jimmy together,and the crocodile tears last nite:eek:

Spread

Was there not some kind of "Whistleblower's Charter" in those days? I mean, this lunatic was a modern day Caligula. Surely a database on complaints would have flagged Savile's modus operandi and would have led to a prosecution? All these people could have written anonymous complaints if they were afraid of losing their jobs, but they were still complicit.

ejmaztec

Spread wrote: »

Was there not some kind of "Whistleblower's Charter" in those days? I mean, this lunatic was a modern day Caligula. Surely a database on complaints would have flagged Savile's modus operandi and would have led to a prosecution? All these people could have written anonymous complaints if they were afraid of losing their jobs, but they were still complicit.

I wonder whether the BBC bosses were more concerned with losing Jimmy Savile's high ratings programmes than they were with the allegations against him.

There's more than a fair share of nutters and creeps in showbiz, and many of them seem to have at least two different personas.

Spread

ejmaztec wrote: »

I wonder whether the BBC bosses were more concerned with losing Jimmy Savile's high ratings programmes than they were with the allegations against him.

There's more than a fair share of nutters and creeps in showbiz, and many of them seem to have at least two different personas.

Both your above statements are true. Of course the BBC, who created this monster, were afraid of losing out in the ratings scale if they opened up inquiries into his behaviour. I think that the particular zeitgeist that rides pillion with showbiz also played a part in his not being outed ......... you know, famous TV personality getting his jollies by procuring, grooming and eventually sexually assaulting under age girls and impressionable young girls wanting to be feted/loved by a famous person.
I think his zany behaviour was a way of not projecting his real personality. A ploy - if you like - which kept rational observation at arms length and which we now know, veneered a really depraved, cunning and maladjusted person.
The inquiry should now focus on four things: (1) Finding out others that were abused and offering counselling ........ (2) Finding out why complaints were not followed up and if there was a cover up ....... (3) Finding out if there are any more suchlike people lurking in similiar positions and (4) Having an up-to-date register on people that have unsupervised access to children.

barone

for anyone who missed the docu

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xu2i9x_exposure-the-other-side-of-jimmy-saville-couchtripper_news?search_algo=2

Hootanany

Cheers

ElvisChrist6

RayM wrote: »

Here it is. It was a fake. Albeit a very funny one.

The BBC said it was fake... they're the very ones that would want that to be the consensus! I don't usually go for tabloid stories or celebrity rumours, but I fully believe he was a rotten old cunt!

Hootanany

Seems another well known Star has just got an injunction

http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/04/freddie-starr-itv-injunction?cat=uk&type=article

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

Our man in Havana

He had an injunction for a few hours. Now open season to make it public.

4zn76tysfajdxp

Freddie Starr ate my fanny.

who the fug

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Nope. Only the living can be defamed.

so how come your man Jesus never sues

Jellicoe

These look horrific now, that scumbag

fryup

listen to this........

recorded during the making of a 70s radio show called.. Savile's Travels

Manc-Red

"Everybody knew that he was constantly in the company of young girls" ..... This is a BBC producer that went on to say he had seen a girl "of about 12" with Saville, he himself had 2 young girls & could tell that the girl was that age because of this....


YET HE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE SAID F*CKALL.

Sorry for shouting but it just doesn't wash with me.

Burn in hell Saville - Monster of a Man.

Intensive Care Bear

Manc-Red wrote: »

"Everybody knew that he was constantly in the company of young girls" ..... This is a BBC producer that went on to say he had seen a girl "of about 12" with Saville, he himself had 2 young girls & could tell that the girl was that age because of this....


YET HE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE SAID F*CKALL.

Sorry for shouting but it just doesn't wash with me.

Burn in hell Saville - Monster of a Man.

Yeah but unfortunately this was a time when if you went home and told your parents that you were raped by a priest you would probably get a beating and told to walk it off. People seemed to turn a bling eye to a lot of things back then.