the sir jimmy savile obe thread

[elbows]

Think of it as a sort of charity drive, a marathon in aid of the spineless moral injuries unit at stoke hate twitterville hospital for the damned. I'll donate the a nail for the coffin of repugnant ideals and priorities.

 

[ViolentPanda]

My first thought on seeing his food was "looks disgusting". This was confirmed many years later when I actually tried it

Used to avoid eating it at all, given that I had a couple of cousins who did summer work in one of the processing plants.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Used to avoid eating it at all, given that I had a couple of cousins who did summer work in one of the processing plants.

Used to?

 

[ViolentPanda]

One of the most bizarre "offered" items in my local freecycle group was a lifesize portrait in oils of Bernard Matthews. Apparently it went very quickly but I was hoping that it was, er, put to good use

But you're right about "bizarre"!!!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Used to?

I'll eat the turkey joints because they're just boned and rolled nowadays, whereas they used to be "shaped and formed" from mechanically-recovered meat and fat.
Won't eat anything else, though.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

I'll eat the turkey joints because they're just boned and rolled nowadays, whereas they used to be "shaped and formed" from mechanically-recovered meat and fat.
Won't eat anything else, though.

Not being a turkey lover, I've never had one of those, but I remember picking something up a few months ago (but can't remember what), eating it, thinking it was a load of shite, then looking at the packaging and realising I'd bought Bernard Matthews

 

[ViolentPanda]

I will be surprised if many actual charges are brought, let alone proved, over most of these allegations from 20 - 30 years back.

It's surely going to come down to one person's word against another's, over events that allegedly took place half a lifetime ago.

It depends on the weight of evidence. The more offences alleged to have been committed by each offender, the greater likelihood of similar character traits revealed by the offender having been revealed, and so the better offences corroborate one another.

I also wonder what the point is of the police spending time and money investigating allegations against Jimmy Savile and anyone else who, by being dead, would be very difficult to prosecute.

Giles..

That's because you're an idiot. By investigating the actions of those dead persons, they can also get a handle on other offenders who may have associated with those dead persons. By doing so, not only may they be able to prosecute some live offenders, but they also (hopefully) don't leave crimes uninvestigated and criminal acts unpunished for even more decades.

 

[Citizen66]

Don't think I could slate Bernard Matthews' mechanically formed stuff given I eat hotdogs without really thinking about it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

But what is the point of "investigating" claims that Jimmy raped and otherwise assaulted people? Given that he is dead?

Do the police REALLY have "no choice" but to investigate crimes committed by dead people? If someone called the police and said "my grandad abused me, however he is now dead" would the police go off and launch an investigation? Or just tell them "well, he's dead, so there isn't much we can do now"?

Giles..

We're not talking about your grandad bumming you, we're discussing someone who was reported many times while alive for sexual assault, but due to the vulnerable nature of his victims, was able to use the element of doubt (in the minds of the prosecutorial authorities, not the victims) to his advantage. It's not a case of prosecution, it's about making a belated attempt to give closure to his victims.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Don't think I could slate Bernard Matthews' mechanically formed stuff given I eat hotdogs without really thinking about it.

This is why the only "hotdogs" I eat are bockwurst made in Germany. The Germans have rules about meat content and what actually constitutes "meat".
Tried those Smedleys tinned hotdogs once when I lived in bedsitland. Full of gristle and bone splinters!

 

[ViolentPanda]

...and the fact that other people who appear to have been up to similar stuff may well be connected with him, or still up to stuff today. Depressingly short-sighted and narrow view Giles.

Giles hates the thought of what little tax he doesn't avoid paying, going to investigate the crimes of someone who can't be strung up or sterilised.

 

[existentialist]

Giles hates the thought of what little tax he doesn't avoid paying, going to investigate the crimes of someone who can't be strung up or sterilised.

Or the idea that some kind of reductionist commodity-oriented society can be allowed to trouble itself by intangibles such as what one commodity might do to another commodity and get away with (unless, of course, it is in the pursuit of economic gain, in which case it is presumably just peachy).

 

[Louloubelle]

Surely some of life's most valuable lessons are learned from mistakes.

I think that there are many complex reasons why people didn't report Savile and his ilk and also why others didn't listen or felt powerless to act when people did report him.

So basically we are now in a position to learn a great deal from past mistakes that harmed countless children and ruined many lives if (and this is important) we can actually scrutinise, think about and investigate what happened with discernment and sensitivity we can reduce the likelihood of such events occurring in the future.

We owe it to Savile's victims to do this. if we do not do this other children will suffer as the same mistakes are made and patterns of abuse are repeated.

Policies need to be examined and possibly overhauled and the whole can of worms has to be opened and examined and subjected to rigorous analytic consideration.

IMO sometimes, in fact probably all of the time, when investigating clandestine networks of predators you have to cherish the mental state of "not knowing" as to do so means that your mind is open to possibilities that you might otherwise overlook.

To suggest that these crimes are not investigated is to suggest that it is wrong to even start to think about these important issues.

To start an investigation like this is to start a process that, if you are doing it properly, you have no idea where it will end.

A commitment to creative thinking, without prejudice or desire, an attitude of genuine curiosity and concern, is essential and the victims deserve nothing less.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Or the idea that some kind of reductionist commodity-oriented society can be allowed to trouble itself by intangibles such as what one commodity might do to another commodity and get away with (unless, of course, it is in the pursuit of economic gain, in which case it is presumably just peachy).

Or unless it's a commodity that belongs to Giles.

 

[Citizen66]

This is why the only "hotdogs" I eat are bockwurst made in Germany. The Germans have rules about meat content and what actually constitutes "meat".
Tried those Smedleys tinned hotdogs once when I lived in bedsitland. Full of gristle and bone splinters!

I bought a bockwurst last week from a street vendor in Leeds of all places. Or at least that's what it claimed to be.

Anyway, was a bad move. I always forget how messy trying to eat a hotdog with onions ketchup and mustard is whilst on the move.

 

[Pickman's model]

I bought a bockwurst last week from a street vendor in Leeds of all places. Or at least that's what it claimed to be.

Anyway, was a bad move. I always forget how messy trying to eat a hotdog with onions ketchup and mustard is whilst on the move.

could we keep this thread on topick lest editor relegate it to the bin?

 

[existentialist]

I've said this before now, but I am not sure if I've said it here...

In my experience, most people who have been sexually abused and who disclose it are harmed far more by being disbelieved, or their disclosure not being taken seriously, than by the abuse itself - it's the disbelief and/or lack of action that is carried forward over the decades. That's not to say that the abuse does not also do harm, but for a lot of survivors the mere fact of their being able to tell someone what happened and not get a sceptical or denying response is the first step towards a recovery that might have taken half a century to begin.

Even if the Savile-related enquiries don't result in any convictions, what they have done is to send a very clear message to abuse survivors that, no matter how long ago their abuse happened, it is worth reporting it to a notionally neutral body (the police), because something might just get done about it...and at the very least, someone is likely to sit down and take down their report of what happened.

The fact that there are people like Giles around suggesting we should not take allegations of historical abuse seriously - and make no mistake, he's not a lone voice in the wilderness - is a slap in the face to anyone who has been sexually abused, but they must not be allowed to collude in a conspiracy of silence that can only aid the abusers. If people like Giles want to be a part - actively or otherwise - of a smokescreen that protects those who have violated the trust and innocence of young children, then that is their choice, but we don't have to be complicit in their actions.

I hope that some convictions do arise out of these cases, and the Roger Lunn case I mentioned above demonstrates that it can happen, even if all he ended up with was a supervision order and a treatment order. I imagine that it will be of some small comfort to the children he abused to know that he has been called to account for his offences.

 

[Corax]

people who have been sexually abused and who disclose it are harmed far more by being disbelieved, or it not being taken seriously than by the abuse itself - it's the disbelief and/or lack of action that is carried forward over the decades.

Yep.

 

[savoloysam]

I will be surprised if many actual charges are brought, let alone proved, over most of these allegations from 20 - 30 years back.

I also wonder what the point is of the police spending time and money investigating allegations against Jimmy Savile and anyone else who, by being dead, would be very difficult to prosecute.

Giles..

Is what Jim Davidson was saying a few months ago.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Is what Jim Davidson was saying a few months ago.

Despite all these charges, who is actually going to be found guilty? Probably not a single one, due to lack of evidence

 

[Corax]

I also wonder what the point is of the police spending time and money investigating allegations against Jimmy Savile and anyone else who, by being dead, would be very difficult to prosecute.

It's not just about the abusers, it's about the abused as well.

 

[Corax]

Despite all these charges, who is actually going to be found guilty? Probably not a single one, due to lack of evidence

I wish the Scottish verdict of "not proven" was available in English/Welsh law.

 

[existentialist]

Despite all these charges, who is actually going to be found guilty? Probably not a single one, due to lack of evidence

Don't be quite so pessimistic. I can't remember the name for it, but the police are often careful not to disclose significant details of the way particular offences are committed, so that, when several allegations are made and the same details are disclosed in each case, the allegations corroborate each other. This, apparently, can be enough to secure guilty pleas, if not convictions.

And the nature of sexual offences is that they're generally not just committed once, so that corroboration is far more likely to occur.

 

[el-ahrairah]

Is what Jim Davidson was saying a few months ago.

does this mean that Giles should be fearing a knock at his door?

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Don't be quite so pessimistic. I can't remember the name for it, but the police are often careful not to disclose significant details of the way particular offences are committed, so that, when several allegations are made and the same details are disclosed in each case, the allegations corroborate each other. This, apparently, can be enough to secure guilty pleas, if not convictions.

And the nature of sexual offences is that they're generally not just committed once, so that corroboration is far more likely to occur.

I realise that, but in some cases, it's been decades, so how will the police prove that victims haven't been talking to on another and not accuse them "getting their stories straight".

 

[existentialist]

I realise that, but in some cases, it's been decades, so how will the police prove that victims haven't been talking to on another and not accuse them "getting their stories straight".

I don't know, but in the case that I posted, the allegations related to abuse that had been perpetrated 40 years ago, and in that case it was likely that victims already knew each other, yet they still secured a conviction, albeit via a "guilty" plea.

 

[existentialist]

does this mean that Giles should be fearing a knock at his door?

Only from the Cunt Police. I don't think we should take his apparent defence of abusers as some kind of indication that he's one himself.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

I don't know, but in the case that I posted, the allegations related to abuse that had been perpetrated 40 years ago, and in that case it was likely that victims already knew each other, yet they still secured a conviction, albeit via a "guilty" plea.

Good. Wonder what happens if perpetrator is declaring themselves "not guilty" though

 

[existentialist]

Good. Wonder what happens if perpetrator is declaring themselves "not guilty" though

I guess that's where a lot of prosecutions fail. And, as someone else pointed out, that'd be where it'd be good to have the "Not Proven" option, rather than declaring someone innocent simply for want of a guilty plea and evidence sufficient to convict.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

I guess that's where a lot of prosecutions fail. And, as someone else pointed out, that'd be where it'd be good to have the "Not Proven" option, rather than declaring someone innocent simply for want of a guilty plea and evidence sufficient to convict.

I wonder how a "not proven" verdict affects someone in day-to-day life. They haven't exactly got a criminal record, but there's doubt there, although I'm assuming if it's not proven, then they don't have to declare it, but then if it's known about by the public anyway....

And how does it work if someone who has been accused of sexual offences/paedophilia applies for a job working with children for example, but have a "not proven" verdict?