Jimmy Saville exposed

Stroll

When are they just going to wrap this shit up and start charging people with involvement? That are still around obviously, it's pathetic.

Show Time

Time to ditch his ashes out to sea.

Spread

Abi wrote: »

Break the fúcker out and put a sign outside the grave yard saying "All necrophiliacs welcome, Jimmys gonna fix it for you!"

Hey Abi! I know two blokes for the job ......... one fellow is named Burke and the other fellow is called Hare. They work as a team and have loads of experience.

3rdDegree

Spread wrote: »

Hey Abi! I know two blokes for the job ......... one fellow is named Burke and the other fellow is called Hare. They work as a team and have loads of experience.

If it's a union job, we can't hire the dead.

Dodge

Is there really two pages on what his family should do with his remains? Jesus...

Let his family do whatever the hell they like

tony1kenobi

Digging up a dead nonce who for unknown reasons was buried encased in concrete,then burying it or dumping his ashes is an unknown location,is basically the back story for a horror movie monster.

I think it best to leave him in the concrete.

gbee

tony1kenobi wrote: »

I think it best to leave him in the concrete.

Ten to One, he's not inside ................ :eek:

M cebee

he wasn't all bad

doctor jimmy savile hero of the brighton bomb:)

Odysseus

o1s1n wrote: »

Why?

Why not? I am fully aware of the type of impact that Saville's deeds have had on people? I would not see any benefit for anybody in doing this. As human's we bury the remains of people, unless they state otherwise.

We leave a marker indicating that this is where the remains of somebody lies. Are we saying that sex offenders should be the exception? I personally don't see why, but even if that is what we are now going to do; how would we quantify it? Does this apply to everybody on the sex offender reg? Or only prolific offenders? If the latter how do we define prolific? 10+? 50+? 100+?

However, the important peice being how benefits from this? I can't see how this would help any person trying to get their life back together. All this focus about his grave is not really helping anybody, if the same amount of effort was put into trying to put services into place for those who are affected by this I think we would be in a better place.

Saville's crimes are out in the open now, we know what type of deeds he engaged in. However, that does not mean that some people may still want to visit his grave; even after being made aware of the nature of his actions some family members or people who knew him may still wish to do so.

That does not me they are not appalled by his actions, but as one person who experienced abuse at the hands of a family members said to me, "I know only too well what he did both to me and others outside the family, but he is still flesh and blood and there where other parts to his personality". As that applied to that particular person, I would imagine that it must apply to Saville in some ways.

So while I can understand taking the big headstone which sort of symbolised a shrine to Saville, I don't think that he ould be denied a marker and I don't think anyone benefits by doing so.


Just my personal thoughts and opinions, I do have some insight into the area but I'm far from being an expert in it.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

Seedy Arling

I think we should split up graveyards. Different sections for nonces, perverts, rapists, murderers and Fianna Fail TD's.

Richard tea

Seedy Arling wrote: »

I think we should split up graveyards. Different sections for nonces, perverts, rapists, murderers and Fianna Fail TD's.

And Phil Hogan:eek:

kingtiger

Baby4 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

have a look at

http://www.expatshield.com/

this might sort out your woes regarding iPlayer

bluecode

Seriously though, digging the body up and burning it, is going too far. All a bit medieval. Why not go the whole hog and hang his skeleton in a gibbet for all to see or lop off his skull and mount on a spike in the Tower of London?

It has all become a bit of an irrational witch hunt. Every day seems to bring a new 'revelation'. Where the hell were these people when he was alive? It seems to be there's a lot of ass covering going on. Everybody had their suspicions apparently but never acted on it. Others saw him molesting girls and stayed silent. Apparently it didn't occur to anyone to say 'Stop that!'.

I never liked the guy myself. Thought him a bit freaky but other than that. I never heard or read anything that suggested how much of a perv he was. While he was alive. Which makes this current furore all the more strange.

Also considering the power of the internet, how come it's taken this long for accusations to surface? Was he really so powerful in life that he was protected from his victims for so long?

I have to think there's been something of an overreaction. I'm not defending him but he's been demonised beyond almost anyone else I can think of.

There needs to be a more rational discussion of the whole issue.

Dodge

bluecode wrote: »

Also considering the power of the internet, how come it's taken this long for accusations to surface? Was he really so powerful in life that he was protected from his victims for so long?

In fairness the allegation were widely available on the internet.

gjc

dont know if this has been posted i only saw it today......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2229786/Jimmy-Savile-Yorkshire-Ripper-Cast-DJs-teeth-check-bites-left-Peter-Sutcliffes-victims.html

gbee

bluecode wrote: »

All a bit medieval. Why not go the whole hog and hang his skeleton in a gibbet for all to see or lop off his skull and mount on a spike in the Tower of London?

Dammit, great mind think alike, you beat me to it.

Excellent suggestion.

M cebee

gjc wrote: »

dont know if this has been posted i only saw it today......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2229786/Jimmy-Savile-Yorkshire-Ripper-Cast-DJs-teeth-check-bites-left-Peter-Sutcliffes-victims.html

"Peter Sutcliffe has rubbished claims Savile abused anyone at Broadmoor mental hospital, where he is a patient"

that's the end of that rumour then:cool:

Da Shins Kelly

M cebee wrote: »

"Peter Sutcliffe has rubbished claims Savile abused anyone at Broadmoor mental hospital, where he is a patient"

that's the end of that rumour then:cool:

What's Peter Sutcliffe's idea of non-abuse?

Hootanany

http://www.channel4.com/news/child-abuse-north-wales-waterhouse-inquiry-sian-griffiths


Who is it PM please

Rascasse

The Guido Fawkes blog has found video of Max Clifford accusing (now deceased) former Tory minister Alan Clark of molesting teenage girls. Interesting quote that he's got proof. No doubt a summons headed his way when the inevitable public enquiry starts.

http://order-order.com/2012/11/08/watch-max-clifford-accuses-former-tory-minister-alan-clark-of-underage-sex/

goat2

o1s1n wrote: »

It's almost as if he knew he'd be dug up!

was it on one of the news bulletins, that they were afraid of grave robbing,
who would want any thing of him now,

goat2

M cebee wrote: »

"Peter Sutcliffe has rubbished claims Savile abused anyone at Broadmoor mental hospital, where he is a patient"

that's the end of that rumour then:cool:

who would listen or believe anything that come out of that murderers mouth, who is he to speak, should not have been asked his opinion, he never taught anything of human life, never mind human hurt.

goat2

Odysseus wrote: »

Why not? I am fully aware of the type of impact that Saville's deeds have had on people? I would not see any benefit for anybody in doing this. As human's we bury the remains of people, unless they state otherwise.

We leave a marker indicating that this is where the remains of somebody lies. Are we saying that sex offenders should be the exception? I personally don't see why, but even if that is what we are now going to do; how would we quantify it? Does this apply to everybody on the sex offender reg? Or only prolific offenders? If the latter how do we define prolific? 10+? 50+? 100+?

However, the important peice being how benefits from this? I can't see how this would help any person trying to get their life back together. All this focus about his grave is not really helping anybody, if the same amount of effort was put into trying to put services into place for those who are affected by this I think we would be in a better place.

Saville's crimes are out in the open now, we know what type of deeds he engaged in. However, that does not mean that some people may still want to visit his grave; even after being made aware of the nature of his actions some family members or people who knew him may still wish to do so.

That does not me they are not appalled by his actions, but as one person who experienced abuse at the hands of a family members said to me, "I know only too well what he did both to me and others outside the family, but he is still flesh and blood and there where other parts to his personality". As that applied to that particular person, I would imagine that it must apply to Saville in some ways.

So while I can understand taking the big headstone which sort of symbolised a shrine to Saville, I don't think that he ould be denied a marker and I don't think anyone benefits by doing so.


Just my personal thoughts and opinions, I do have some insight into the area but I'm far from being an expert in it.

of course they should dig him up,
he was buried at the very top of hill in graveyard, overlooking decent people buried in that cemetary,
now if my brother sister mother father were buried in that graveyard, i would not like him at top of hill, reminding me that he is better than all the rest down along, when he in fact should be at the bottom of the hill

Rascasse

Tomorrows splash in the Guardian reveals that the person that everyone has been whispering about being the paedophile at the heart of Thatchers government, Lord McAlpine, is actually a victim of mistaken identity. The real pervert was a local councilor (and relative of Lord McAlpine) Jimmie McAlpine.

This clearly kills the conspiracy theory, that some have peddled, that Jimmy Savile was part of a paedophile ring at no. 10 that was covered up by Thatcher.

Zebra3

goat2 wrote: »

of course they should dig him up,
he was buried at the very top of hill in graveyard, overlooking decent people buried in that cemetary,
now if my brother sister mother father were buried in that graveyard, i would not like him at top of hill, reminding me that he is better than all the rest down along, when he in fact should be at the bottom of the hill

He's dead, he can't overlook or see anything. :rolleyes:

M cebee

goat2 wrote: »

who would listen or believe anything that come out of that murderers mouth, who is he to speak, should not have been asked his opinion, he never taught anything of human life, never mind human hurt.

he's still loyal to his old boss

M cebee

Rascasse wrote: »

Tomorrows splash in the Guardian reveals that the person that everyone has been whispering about being the paedophile at the heart of Thatchers government, Lord McAlpine, is actually a victim of mistaken identity. The real pervert was a local councilor (and relative of Lord McAlpine) Jimmie McAlpine.

This clearly kills the conspiracy theory, that some have peddled, that Jimmy Savile was part of a paedophile ring at no. 10 that was covered up by Thatcher.

puts a dent in the conspiracy theories if true
notwithstanding the abuse that did occur

billybudd

M cebee wrote: »

puts a dent in the conspiracy theories if true
notwithstanding the abuse that did occur

They will just begin! the fall guy.

Stroll

They really need to cut the bullshite with this, like seriously it's beyond a joke... if theres evidence of people involved or people who with held information wrap the scum of the earth up and press charges.

I'm obviously missing something I know, but what's the problem I'm missing??? No matter what it is how is there people standing back and letting these people get away with this