Allegations about Jimmy Saville: covered up? - Page 16

Less · 06-10-2012, 07:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

I very much doubt it, one persons word does not mean its true, also it does not mean it is not true.
Unfortunately as the man is dead there cannot be any trial to determine the truth.
What has annoyed and is still annoying me is this, there are too many of my fellow posters on here who have decided he is guilty, based on Media reports and a television program. I thought we were better than that.

No we aren't, and I dropped a stitch on my knitting while watching this unrevealing thread, speed up the tumbrels the blade on Madame guillotine is getting rusty from lack of use.

jaysay · 06-10-2012, 08:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Why stick it to Jimmy Savile then? Why would a bunch of people suddenly decide to start telling lies and some have remained annonymous when nothing to gain from that!

Its called a nice little earner or my 15 mintues of fame and no chance of a libel case

kestrelx · 06-10-2012, 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

Yes you have,
Lord Longford was well known for trying to assist the moors murderers, that doesn't make him a child murderer.
I couldn't understand Longford's support of them, I can't understand Saville's support for GG, but that does not make him guilty.

Mmm but Lord Longford didn't say killing some kids was OK - he was just trying to help her - because he believed she was mislead by Brady and he got his fingers burned as Hindley used him.

Savile said that what Glitter did wasn't really a crime and it was only for him and that was OK! This is supporting a paedophile's actions - Longford didn't support Hindleys actions, there is a big difference, I think.

Less · 06-10-2012, 19:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Mmm but Lord Longford didn't say killing some kids was OK - he was just trying to help her - because he believed she was mislead by Brady and he got his fingers burned as Hindley used him.

Savile said that what Glitter did wasn't really a crime and it was only for him and that was OK! This is supporting a paedophile's actions - Longford didn't support Hindleys actions, there is a big difference, I think.

Sorry I must have missed it, when did he say that?
(Easy for me to miss this kind of thing I don't go looking for it, unlike some).

kestrelx · 06-10-2012, 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

Sorry I must have missed it, when did he say that?
(Easy for me to miss this kind of thing I don't go looking for it, unlike some).

There was an interview in which Jimmy Savile said Glitter was only using the pictures for his own use etc etc etc so it wasn 't like a big deal.

Less · 06-10-2012, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

There was an interview in which Jimmy Savile said Glitter was only using the pictures for his own use etc etc etc so it wasn 't like a big deal.

link Please, otherwise your hearsay.

kestrelx · 06-10-2012, 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

link Please, otherwise your hearsay.

Didn't you watch the program about Sir Savile? It was played on that show and it was clearly him talking.

Here is a link to an article about it.

Sir Jimmy Savile: paedophile Gary Glitter 'did nothing wrong' | News | 1 | The Week UK

Less · 06-10-2012, 19:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Didn't you watch the program about Sir Savile? It was played on that show and it was clearly him talking.

Here is a link to an article about it.

Sir Jimmy Savile: paedophile Gary Glitter 'did nothing wrong' | News | 1 | The Week UK

Thank you for the link and by the way no I didn't watch the prog', I didn't know it was mandatory? I watch the haunted fish tank in hopes of enjoyment not to gloat about the worlds nasty bits.

Guinness · 06-10-2012, 20:35

I'm so sick of some of the people coming out of the woodwork with facile stories...now it's Liz Kershaw who's saying she was groped on air in the 80's.

Now I could be really crass here and say, they were probably groping for their guide dog, because she could never be described as one of your average stunners.

Instead I'll say that times were less PC than now, there was a certain acceptability about horseplay between males and females in a more innocent age. One dinner time in the 70's I witnessed a bunch of mature women from Highams grabbing a young lad in the Woodnook pub, they debagged him and covered him in lipstick, rouge and whatever else women have in their handbags.

There was no way that this event could be described as sexual, perverted or weird, it was just a few girls having a laugh, likewise I'm guessing that whoever 'groped' Ms Kershaw was attempting to put her off and make her screw up on air.. i.e. having a laugh, horseplay.

Nowadays these things are frowned on, some are even classed as a health and safety risk and many companies have policies forbidding horseplay and of course employment law forbids sexual harassment both real and perceived.

Today those Highams machinists would be fired and on the front page of the redtops, the young lad would be claiming stress and trauma using 'accident at work r us' lawyers. His mum and dad would be serialised in the Sunday rags. 20 more people would claim that the Woodnook was a hotbed of girl gangs and a no go area for any decent male. Thwaites brewery would be dragged into it, and all other Thwaites pubs would be investigated, a similar instance would be found etc..etc..etc..

Don't get me wrong. I'm not making excuses for Jimmy Savile, I'm just appalled at the media witchunt, the bandwagon jumpers and the lack of context for many of the headlines.

cashman · 06-10-2012, 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

I'm so sick of some of the people coming out of the woodwork with facile stories...now it's Liz Kershaw who's saying she was groped on air in the 80's.

Now I could be really crass here and say, they were probably groping for their guide dog, because she could never be described as one of your average stunners.

Instead I'll say that times were less PC than now, there was a certain acceptability about horseplay between males and females in a more innocent age. One dinner time in the 70's I witnessed a bunch of mature women from Highams grabbing a young lad in the Woodnook pub, they debagged him and covered him in lipstick, rouge and whatever else women have in their handbags.

There was no way that this event could be described as sexual, perverted or weird, it was just a few girls having a laugh, likewise I'm guessing that whoever 'groped' Ms Kershaw was attempting to put her off and make her screw up on air.. i.e. having a laugh, horseplay.

Nowadays these things are frowned on, some are even classed as a health and safety risk and many companies have policies forbidding horseplay and of course employment law forbids sexual harassment both real and perceived.

Today those Highams machinists would be fired and on the front page of the redtops, the young lad would be claiming stress and trauma using 'accident at work r us' lawyers. His mum and dad would be serialised in the Sunday rags. 20 more people would claim that the Woodnook was a hotbed of girl gangs and a no go area for any decent male. Thwaites brewery would be dragged into it, and all other Thwaites pubs would be investigated, a similar instance would be found etc..etc..etc..

Don't get me wrong. I'm not making excuses for Jimmy Savile, I'm just appalled at the media witchunt, the bandwagon jumpers and the lack of context for many of the headlines.

That sums things up very well to me, Wrong without question these days, back then twas par fer the course.

Less · 06-10-2012, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

I'm not making excuses for Jimmy Savile, I'm just appalled at the media witchunt, the bandwagon jumpers and the lack of context for many of the headlines.

I don't think any of us that are capable of thinking for themselves are happy with the witch hunt, yes, he may be guilty, we don't know, I'll always think of him as an eccentric, but charitable guy, until someone proves different. does that make me a pervert? A child molester?
No, I'm just someone that if it proves to be the case with Jim I'll have been let down again.

kestrelx · 06-10-2012, 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

Thank you for the link and by the way no I didn't watch the prog', I didn't know it was mandatory? I watch the haunted fish tank in hopes of enjoyment not to gloat about the worlds nasty bits.

DJ Mark Radcliffe calls TV the "Idiot Box!"

Anyway don't you want to know facts - not cheap escapism? It wasn't mandatory just I thought you may watch it instead of asking me questions about issues that were covered on the program.

Restless · 06-10-2012, 23:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

DJ Mark Radcliffe calls TV the "Idiot Box!"

so does Stephen King.

What is your opinion. Do you think Savile is a saint or an evil peado?

I don't see the point in this debate continuing over and over. It can't be proven now without hard evidence. DNA, Videotapes, Audio. Whatever!

kestrelx · 06-10-2012, 23:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

I don't think any of us that are capable of thinking for themselves are happy with the witch hunt, yes, he may be guilty, we don't know, I'll always think of him as an eccentric, but charitable guy, until someone proves different. does that make me a pervert? A child molester?
No, I'm just someone that if it proves to be the case with Jim I'll have been let down again.

Gotta remember he was 40 in 1966 and presenting Top of the Pops - in this day and age no way would a 40 year old be allowed to present a pop program. So he was effectively an old man at the peak of his career in today's terms.

Also he peroxided his hair, it's not that blonde color naturally is it.

Personally I think he's very dodgy...

Guinness · 06-10-2012, 23:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Gotta remember he was 40 in 1966 and presenting Top of the Pops - in this day and age no way would a 40 year old be allowed to present a pop program. So he was effectively an old man at the peak of his career in today's terms.

Also he peroxided his hair, it's not that blonde color naturally is it.

Personally I think he's very dodgy...

Gotta remember that the majority of TV presenters in 1966 were around 40. The only TV for kids was watch with mother and crackerjack, which was presented by Eamonn Andrews who was 44 at the time..different time..different criteria...context..context..context!!!