the sir jimmy savile obe thread

[Wilf]

I don't personally want to start demanding apologies, I wasn't a victim, I haven't got the right. However we should all take this on board:

Those who accused me of making it up, or inventing, or misinterpreting what happened to me: I urge you to take a look at your attitudes. It is now obvious that the default response of "He/she's making it up, lying, imagining it, exaggerating, misinterpreting... it can't be true..." is an issue: it enables the abuser, and it disempowers the victim.

... and if it leads to a couple making an unforced personal apology to you story, all the better. That really isn't an indirect attempt to kick it all off again, it's what it is, just an idea that a couple of people might want to think about it.

Edit: and I'm aware a couple of people did apologise earlier on and so, whilst it's not for me to accept their apologies or not, fair play to them.

 

[shygirl]

I am so sorry you had that experience on here, its dreadful. I find it hard to believe that posters here could have been so cruelly dismissive to your disclosure, shame on them.

 

[seventh bullet]

Indeed.

 

[story]

I don't personally want to start demanding apologies, I wasn't a victim, I haven't got the right. However we should all take this on board:

... and if it leads to a couple making an unforced personal apology to you story, all the better. That really isn't an indirect attempt to kick it all off again, it's what it is, just an idea that a couple of people might want to think about it.

Edit: and I'm aware a couple of people did apologise earlier on and so, whilst it's not for me to accept their apologies or not, fair play to them.

Yes indeed, some people did apologise at the time, and I was grateful to them; but they were not the doubters and mockers: they apologised if they'd contributed in any way, and they apologised for such a thing happening at all, and for the general shabbiness of the thread.

(ETA and the same is happening on this thread: thank you)

And someone at the time said they were sorry if I felt bad. That one felt pretty derisory and grudging, tbh.

Notwithstanding the way I am reacting to yesterday's meeting (which is proving to be more troubling than I had anticipated) I am processing it and dealing with it, and I'll be fine (thanks to those who have supported and encouraged this). I am more concerned with the problem of how we as a community, and a society, contribute to and support a situation where those on the receiving end of heinous activities are not heard, not listened to, not protected.

I think I'm keen for a proper apology from those who directly doubted me because it would indicate a change of attitudes, not because it would make any material difference to the way I was made to feel at the time.

 

[existentialist]

Thank you for having the courage to tell your, er, story, story.

I know what you mean about this not feeling like a safe place, but I think we have to remember that there are many more reading for each one who comments, and only a minority of the commenters are abusive or unreasonable, and it is inevitable that their behaviour will tend to stick out more than the silence of the lurkers and likers, and the kind words of those who do respond on-thread.

I think that it is only by people who have been abused who have the courage to stand up and be counted that we can shine a light into the shadows that abusers like Jimmy Savile, and all the others, famous and not-so-famous, take advantage of to indulge their perversions. Not many people who have been abused find the courage or the strength to do so, which means that those of us who are fortunate enough to have that strength or courage are blazing a trail for many, many other people who have also been where we have been. That's a privilege, not an obligation, and it is one I urge anyone who feels able to take up.

I was struck by your comments about the group's feeling of guilt at not having tried harder to disclose, and thereby prevent further harm being done to others. Logically, we all know that we did all that we could at the time, and if we didn't disclose, it was for reasons which we felt - or had been led to feel by our abusers - were valid at the time. We cannot feel guilty for those decisions, but speaking completely for myself, I can say that both disclosing my experiences, and being prepared to stand up and speak about that process, has been of great benefit to me in chasing away some of those demons and being able to make choices I didn't feel I had then. If, through being prepared to do that, I have also achieved some tiny step forward in encouraging others who have been abused to come forward, or to cause current or potential abusers to feel that they may not find it so easy to browbeat their victims into silence, then I shall be delighted.

I hope that the same might apply to you, and to all of the others out there who may have shared similar experiences.

 

[story]

Thank you for having the courage to tell your, er, story, story.

I know what you mean about this not feeling like a safe place, but I think we have to remember that there are many more reading for each one who comments, and only a minority of the commenters are abusive or unreasonable, and it is inevitable that their behaviour will tend to stick out more than the silence of the lurkers and likers, and the kind words of those who do respond on-thread.

I think that it is only by people who have been abused who have the courage to stand up and be counted that we can shine a light into the shadows that abusers like Jimmy Savile, and all the others, famous and not-so-famous, take advantage of to indulge their perversions. Not many people who have been abused find the courage or the strength to do so, which means that those of us who are fortunate enough to have that strength or courage are blazing a trail for many, many other people who have also been where we have been. That's a privilege, not an obligation, and it is one I urge anyone who feels able to take up.

I was struck by your comments about the group's feeling of guilt at not having tried harder to disclose, and thereby prevent further harm being done to others. Logically, we all know that we did all that we could at the time, and if we didn't disclose, it was for reasons which we felt - or had been led to feel by our abusers - were valid at the time. We cannot feel guilty for those decisions, but speaking completely for myself, I can say that both disclosing my experiences, and being prepared to stand up and speak about that process, has been of great benefit to me in chasing away some of those demons and being able to make choices I didn't feel I had then. If, through being prepared to do that, I have also achieved some tiny step forward in encouraging others who have been abused to come forward, or to cause current or potential abusers to feel that they may not find it so easy to browbeat their victims into silence, then I shall be delighted.

I hope that the same might apply to you, and to all of the others out there who may have shared similar experiences.

Yes, I understand what you say, and it echoes what I think myself.

You use the term trailblazers: yesterday we were saying that perhaps we were pioneers, and that this self-selected group who felt able to attend were speaking on behalf of countless others who may not feel able to speak up.

We also spoke of how important it was to break the taboo, to make it "normal" (we couldn't find a more appropriate word) to tell, to report, to speak up about abuse when it happens. It was felt that the more normal it is to tell about what happened, the more likely it is that people will tell, and insist on being heard and believed, and then perhaps it will become less likely to happen. Sexual assault of all kinds, not just child abuse, was included in this part of the discussion.

This is what I mean when I say that we are all of us responsible for creating this change: the abused must find a way to speak up if at all possible. But that can only happen if we are willing to listen when they do speak up.

What is then done with the disclosure, to whom it is reported, and how the report is dealt with... that's another thing.

 

[story]

existentialist, one of the reasons I decided to make these posts was exactly because remaining silent is no longer a viable option, because it supports the culture of allowance that surrounds this disgusting shit.

 

[existentialist]

existentialist, one of the reasons I decided to make these posts was exactly because remaining silent is no longer a viable option, because it supports the culture of allowance that surrounds this disgusting shit.

Well, it's documented (on this thread, I think), that my decision to go to the police after 40 years was finally prompted by a poster (who shall remain nameless - it's easy enough to see) asking why it was necessary for them to be wasting money investigating such old cases. Strangely, that poster disappeared from the thread afterwards - I can only hope that they had a fit of shame.

But yes, for those of us who can speak, there is a moral imperative to do so. Too many people - including those who question the idea that people can or should report abuse decades afterwards, or who insist it's all about compensation - have remained silent, colluded in silence, or actively discouraged survivors and victims from coming forward, and it is wrong that survivors and victims effectively have to compensate for that complicity.

There will always be abusers of children, and there will always be children who will be unable to disclose what is happening to them. But if we can smash down the barriers to disclosure, including those who knowingly or otherwise conspire in maintaining the silence or undermine the idea that abuse - any abuse - should and must be investigated, then we may one day reach a point where shame, fear, and silence are no longer the default option, and it is no longer just the brave and lucky ones who come out from the shadows. If that even begins to happen in my lifetime, I'll be delighted.

 

[story]

One of the women at the discussion group yesterday was terribly scared to be there, but she came anyway. She still has not told anyone she knows: she told her pastor, who urged her to go to the police, and she has told the police, and us in the group yesterday. That's it, no-one else knows. She said that over the past year, when reports about Savile were on the television and the family were saying "look at the bad man" she would retreat to her bedroom and cry. At the end of the day she said that she was surprised to find that she was able to talk, that she felt much better for it, and that she may consider talking to her family about it.

When asked why she had come yesterday, she said that she felt compelled to be a part of a process that identifies the specific failures of the police, because she felt that the police had failed her at the time of the assault. She didn't want to feel responsible for allowing that to happen to others.

 

[Ceej]

All I can say, Story, is bloody well done you (and Existentialist, obv) - you've done the right thing and the brave thing. Regardless of the outcome or the comments made, there's a grace and pride in speaking out and being heard. I hope you feel better for having done this, and proud of your part in changing the future, because you should.
Take care of you too x

 

[yardbird]

Stewart Hall would like some mercy from the court please.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22932222

 

[elbows]

The Guardian article on this has a range of details about the disgusting crimes of Hall.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/17/stuart-hall-trial-indecent-assault-girls

 

[el-ahrairah]

Stewart Hall would like some mercy from the court please.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22932222

christ what a scumbag

 

[Ponyutd]

edit

 

[Fez909]

What does they mean by, "one count of rape will lie on the court file"?

 

[laptop]

What does they mean by, "one count of rape will lie on the court file"?

I presume it means he didn't plead guilty to that, and they decided he had pleaded guilty to enough charges it wasn't worth putting the witness through the grief, and the taxpayer through the expense, of a trial.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Sentenced to 15 months, apparently.

Yup, BBC has it

 

[Fez909]

I presume it means he didn't plead guilty to that, and they decided he had pleaded guilty to enough charges it wasn't worth putting the witness through the grief, and the taxpayer through the expense, of a trial.

Thanks.

I see the logic, but isn't rape the most serious of those charges? I don't want to get into a discussion over who suffers the most, etc, but in terms of severity of sentence, I think rape is higher than indecent assault of a child?

 

[butchersapron]

The complainant didn't want to pursue it after he pleaded guilty to the 13 or 14 charges in the other trial. And he was denying it so the victim appearing in court would have been on the cards - something she did not want to do.The charges can be re-instated.

 

[Fez909]

Fair dos. Thanks for the explanations.

 

[Greebo]

Sentenced to 15 months, apparently.

Yup, BBC has it

Considering that Hall had more than one victim, IMHO that's a ridiculously short sentence.

 

[Lord Camomile]

I've never really set a personal crime:time benchmark and I'm not familiar with standard sentences, but it did seem rather short to me too.

 

[Fez909]

I suppose his age was a factor.

 

[little_legs]

Or the reference from NSPCC.

 

[Pickman's model]

Considering that Hall had more than one victim, IMHO that's a ridiculously short sentence.

I've never really set a personal crime:time benchmark and I'm not familiar with standard sentences, but it did seem rather short to me too.

it's got to be quite a high proportion of the remainder of his life

 

[Pickman's model]

Thanks.

I see the logic, but isn't rape the most serious of those charges? I don't want to get into a discussion over who suffers the most, etc, but in terms of severity of sentence, I think rape is higher than indecent assault of a child?

let's leave this post 'on the file' so to speak rather than proceeding with it

 

[Greebo]

it's got to be quite a high proportion of the remainder of his life

We can live in hope.

 

[Fez909]

let's leave this post 'on the file' so to speak rather than proceeding with it

I wasn't making a judgement on the severity of the harm; I simply meant how serious they are treated by our justice system.

 

[Pickman's model]

I wasn't making a judgement on the severity of the harm; I simply meant how serious they are treated by our justice system.

it depends on the incident and on how much port the judge has consumed before passing sentence

 

[killer b]

full ruling here explains the sentencing decision http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/?news_id=33371

There are no Guidelines specifically applicable to these particular offences. The Sexual Offences Guidelines only apply to offences charged under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, but there is assistance to be derived from the principles set out in those Guidelines. Further it is important to note the maximum sentence available when these offences were committed by you. I have considered with care the judgment of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division on the correct approach to sentencing for historic cases in the case of R v H and others [2011] EWCA Crim 2753.

For most of these offences the maximum sentence at the time and which the court must have regard to was 2 years imprisonment, and for the remainder it was 5 years. The maximum sentence for this type of offence has been significantly increased, since these offences were committed, to 10 years.