Millions watched as Jimmy Saville molested me

here's an on-air shot of a different take:
www.youtube.com...
not underage, but still inappropriate

reply to post by skjalddis


I was reading that on the Telegraph website earlier today. The ex Children in Need boss does state though that he never went to bosses or to the Police as he had no evidence against Saville, simply that he was uncomfortable about his creepy behaviour.

And that is the nux of all these cases. Without any proof, what can be done? If (as looks likely) he is guilty, i do not blame those who were victims for not bringing anything up. I do however place a huge amount of blame on all the adults who witnessed things and never said anything because they feared for their careers.



As to Freddie Starr. Not sure what to make of it. He is another one who always leaves me feeling rather uneasy but at the same time is him forgetting he was on episode of something once a sign of guilt? I would be very hesitant to chuck any mud at him if that is all there is against him (as appears to be the case, at the moment).

Gary Glitter is no surprise. In fact, the only surprising thing about Glitter is that he got out of a Cambodian prison in one piece (considering he was a famous westerner locked up in a 3rd world jail for being a nonce). You would think he would be under surveillance of some sorts these days, not that it helps any victims from the 1970's.

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by skjalddis

 

I was reading that on the Telegraph website earlier today. The ex Children in Need boss does state though that he never went to bosses or to the Police as he had no evidence against Saville, simply that he was uncomfortable about his creepy behaviour.

And that is the nux of all these cases. Without any proof, what can be done? If (as looks likely) he is guilty, i do not blame those who were victims for not bringing anything up. I do however place a huge amount of blame on all the adults who witnessed things and never said anything because they feared for their careers.

...

Definitely. Many may have feared for their careers, I expect others just looked the other way and either convinced themselves they must be mistaken or didn't think much of it - I don't know how many times I have read this past month of people reporting that they would just say "Oh, that's just Jimmy being Jimmy" - like it was nothing. If the rumours were as thick as I get the impression they were, then it is likely that many people would have figured they didn't need to say anthing because the higher-ups must be aware of it already and that they would deal with it, but of course, they didn't deal with it, they were just saying "Oh, that's just Jimmy being Jimmy" and pretending like it was nothing. It seems that everybody knew and no one wanted to do anything. I can imagine the management at the various hospitals and other places that he was involved with telling anyone who tried to do anything that they shouldn't because they would lose all the funding he provided them with, and not wanting the negative publicity of coming out and accusing such a famous personality who did so much charity work of such disgusting behaviour.

A cynical person (and I am such) might even think that the charity work that he did was contrived in part to provide him opportunity to get access to his victims, and pointedly in other part to place himself into such a position that it would be very difficult for anyone to make a complaint against him - they would be discouraged by those in charge of the various establishments because of the potential loss of funding and negative publicity, and I also expect that he figured it made him more believable than his victims would be - 'what Jimmy, who raises all that money for charity, doing something like that?' Of course, disbelieving the victims would be the easier course of action - if disbelieving means you don't have to do anything but believing them means you get a whole lot of trouble to deal with then a lot of people are going to disbelieve it unless it smacks them in the face so hard that they can't avoid it.

Thing is, we see the sort of behaviour that allows such things to go on all the time - youtube videos of people getting attacked on buses and all the other passengers pretending not to see. The perpetrators know that people will look the other way and not want to get involved, indeed, they rely on it.


peace
J

Originally posted by AmberLeaf
The guy spent 40 odd years abusing kids in his dressing room. This guy has more front than Tesco's!

He had to be aided in the abuse, loads of people have come on the tv claiming they had seen things but didnt think to tell anyone. Even the woman who set up Child Line knew he was a perv and hid it. SICK

The guy is showing he doesnt care what anyone sees or says. He was investigated a few times, but nothing came of it...because of the people he knew. It makes me sick

Oh yeah? Prove it.

Actual proof this time instead of character assassination by means of hearsay from 'multi-million pound' compensation grabbers...no?

A prolific serial child molester for over 40 years? OK...and not one shred of physical evidence of any of it...none.

Quite apart from an alleged sex case, Savile seems to be a world class criminal mastermind too...leaving no proof of any wrongdoings in all that time...eh?

No photos

No specimens

No recordings

No nothing...except money grabbers crawling over the bones of a dead guy, after a handout from the UK taxpayers.

Yeah, and the 'child' in this video is an adult woman of 19 years...who looks remarkably happy and smiles a lot for someone reported by the gutter media to be 'terrified'...yeah, she looks really terrified...she's laughing her face off in fear isn't she!

Everyone else watching the scene is laughing too...not one is shocked, terrified, offended or seems to think anything is out of order..hardly sexual abuse.

Savile was knighted...do you seriously imagine the Palace hawks just dole honours out to sex cases willy-nilly?

No background checks, no character references, no police reports checked...of course they check!

There's no way the Royals would even have shortlisted Savile, if there was the slightest sniff of a sexual skeleton bursting out of Saviles closet.

This is either a non-stop, 24 hour a day distraction for the UK people, or someone has an axe to grind with Savile..someone cowardly who waited until he was dead to ruin his memory, and egg on money grabbing swine to make claims for compensation.

If this was about 'justice' for so-called victims, then leave out the financial / compensation element..but i'll bet £10 Million they won't.

Hearsay isn't proof of anything...if it was, the world wouldn't be waiting for UFO disclosure from world governments! Joe Smith says he saw a UFO eh? That proves they exist then!

reply to post by skjalddis


I see what you mean about his charity work. Another spin on it may be that he used his excessive charity work as a form of pennance for himself to assuage his guilt.

I just cannot condone the behaviour of all the adults who now claim they knew. If they knew, why do nothing? You do not know what goes on in other peoples' heads, so can only really speak for yourself. However, as an adult, if i saw a child being abused, i would report it to the Police - screw any career consequences that may have for me. I was particularly appalled by John Simpson last week saying he knew and mentionned it to a colleague, who warned him to forget it. He was an investigative journalist for gods sake! Surely he will have Police contacts he could have passed information onto? I used to love the man (thought he was an excellent journalist) but this has really ruined his reputation for me.

reply to post by Flavian


Like the nurse who says she saw Savile actuallly molesting a brain damaged child, while she herself was lying in a hospital bed opposite with a bad back..seems to have had lost her voice too...for 40 years..must have been one hell of a bad back.

Simpson too...not a peep.

And if it turns out this all isn't some kind of distraction or money grab / axe to grind scenario? Simpson, the nurse and every other bugger who claims to have either directly seen this with their own eyes, or knew by other means, should be rounded up and taken to court charged as accessories to the crimes.

reply to post by MysterX


Exactly. It isn't about letting Saville off the hook. He should be and is being fully investigated, even though he is dead. However, all those that allowed this behaviour really need bringing to task.

If you witness a crime and fail to speak up, you can be charged with withholding information (amongst other things). Why aren't these charges being applied to those that witnessed things?

21stcenturywire.com...

This link NAMES A LOT OF NAMES....

Including members of certain masonic groups, royalty, prime ministers, politicians, celebrities etc.

Sky News...


There's certainly smoke... cigar smoke! Whether there'll be a fire -is another
story.

Edit:
Just realised that this news was posted earlier. Sorry!

WOW! The Express is really starting to get some balls. The best article I've seen in any of the mainstream by a country mile. www.express.co.uk...

reply to post by King Seesar


do you know where I can find a PDF of thanks for the memories?

reply to post by TheToastmanCometh


Here is a link shatteringdenial.com which includes a link to it and what looks like many other interesting books.

Originally posted by magoo22
WOW! The Express is really starting to get some balls. The best article I've seen in any of the mainstream by a country mile. www.express.co.uk...

Surprisingly good article, thankyou for posting it. I think it is worth highlighting a few of the points there to encourage others to read it.

David Icke, who went from respected broadcaster to laughing stock, was at the forefront of such claims in the Nineties when he named Savile and others as paedophiles.

Icke claimed Savile supplied children from Jersey’s infamous Haut de la Garenne care home to a senior British MP. Savile denied knowing the home, the scene of a police investigation in 2008 that uncovered widespread child abuse. He lied. There is pictorial evidence of him there.

I have compiled a list of 132 ­utterly shameless establishment child abusers. These include MPs, lords and local councillors. A ­similar list for members of Her Majesty’s Constabulary exists.

I don’t believe these lists are complete. This is not conjecture or media gossip but people, ­primarily men, who have been prosecuted for child sex offences throughout the UK.

Many of these abusers still ­represent constituents and are “serving the public”.

Judging by some of the testi­monies I have heard it is likely to be very shocking indeed. There is no alternative. The ­victims need the truth to be told, no matter how powerful or con­nected their ­abusers may prove to be.

The reporter also voices an opinion that I have found myself repeat numerous times, that yes, a few may be jumping on the bandwagon, but most will be speaking the truth. He states that many of these claims have independent corroboration. I don't have that info but came to that conclusion through awareness of human nature - claims of being abused can have quite harrowing effects on people's personal life, many people who have suffered abuse stay silent because of this. Also, the police are investigating these claims - I expect that if there are false claims then most of those have already been filtered out by the investigators - the police deal with liars all the time and most people are not that good at lying.

peace

J

reply to post by daskakik


I've looked through the list and didn't see it.

What's the title that its' under?

reply to post by TheToastmanCometh

I posted the whole page just in case anyone spotted something else that might be interested in.

Here is the direct link.

reply to post by daskakik


thank you my good man/woman/person/possible alien

reply to post by MysterX


Your posts seem to be written from the perspective of someone who has read absolutely nothing about the case. At least seven complaints to the police were made about Savile's behaviour and one of the chief officers on the Jersey case has openly said . "Savile was named by several victims as one of their abusers" . You will remember that Savile denied he had ever visited the home and yet, no-one thought to ask him why he lied when a picture of him, at the said home, was published in the press.

Savile was so innocent that one of Britain's leading criminal psychologists has told police. "They should search through their records for missing person reports that tally with Savile visiting certain areas as his psychology, in his opinion , would certainly not preclude him killing people as well.

I work in the entertainment business and this I can say for fact. That, over the past 15 years, two of people who most of the rumours circulated about, have been brought to justice whilst alive, except Savile, who was always referred to as "The Fixer" the "Kingpin".

One question that remains unanswered about Savile while he was alive, is this. Why did no-one think , when he said "His friend Gary Glitter had , done nothing wrong," when caught with 1000s of child porn pics on his computer, that, for Savile to even attempt to defend Glitter suggested the stories everyone knew about might hold water and he should be interviewed under caution about it?

reply to post by TheToastmanCometh


Yea if daskakik link doesn't work you can try these...

shatteringdenial.com...

wikispooks.com...:Thanks_for_the_Memories.pdf