the sir jimmy savile obe thread
- Thread starter Pickman's model
- Start date
- Status
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Tory policy past and present. Who needs qualified, experienced professionals when you can get enthusiatic nonces like Saville to run psychiatric hospitals and children's services.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
I actually googled the person who I'm reliably informed has quite a few reports against them where no further action was taken. As soon as this Saville stuff broke I immediately thought whether this person will come in to the spot light. It turns out this person is indeed 73. If it ever comes to light it'll be bigger than anything else that's come to light so far in this regard.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
The thing that continues to shock me, as more and more evidence of just how prolific an abuser Savile was emerges, and how so many people had their suspicions, but were prevented from saying anything while he was alive is...what's so special about Savile? If he could abuse people with impunity, and use his celebrity and threats of legal action to silence people, then others could, too. And if this 73 year old is the same one I have heard other dark mutterings about, then my recollection is that there are hints that some fairly heavy duty legal stuff is what's keeping a lid on it.
Which, if he turns out, post mortem, to have been another Savile, is disastrous.
Which, if he turns out, post mortem, to have been another Savile, is disastrous.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Tick tock.
Last edited:
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
For the benefit of those of us whose mobiles won't play that, any chance of a synopsis?
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Those with computers can't play it either.
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
From 10th April. My bold and underline.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/operation-yewtree-arrest-73-year-old-former-3390874
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/operation-yewtree-arrest-73-year-old-former-3390874
I haven't. Can someone pm me pleasejust realised who you mean..
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
There's plenty of 73 year olds in the world of course so not all that surprising if this arrest isn't him. There's all the time in the world though for it to come out before or after he dies.
Did anyone else watch panorama last night and just thought 'eww' or something along those lines whenever an image of savile was shown? I don't know if it's because he's always been a weirdo but I never saw it before because he was part of my childhood or if it's because I know what he's done and now think he's vile?
Did anyone else watch panorama last night and just thought 'eww' or something along those lines whenever an image of savile was shown? I don't know if it's because he's always been a weirdo but I never saw it before because he was part of my childhood or if it's because I know what he's done and now think he's vile?
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
I haven't. Can someone pm me please
See my post directly above yours - it might not be who people think it is...
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
To me (I was 11 years old in 1985) he was just a slightly eccentric oldish bloke who presented tv programmes. It wasn't until i heard the stories of his relationship with his mother that I viewed him slightly differently - in that he became a bit more "weird" rather than "eccentric". When the abuse revelations came out about him, it didn't really surprise me (in as much as if someone could look like a paedo it would be him!), but to be honest id not really entertained the thought before then.
Favelado
J'adore South Shore
I haven't. Can someone pm me please
Then can you PM me? xxx
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I have encountered quite a few people who have engendered that "ew" response in me, and Savile was definitely one of them. It may be that my own experiences made me a bit more sensitive to iffy people (and it's not just blokes), but it has been interesting to see that quite a few of those I can recall having a slightly flesh-crawling response to are now up before the beak. Of course, it wasn't just famous people, and I am sure that they're not all pervs anyway...
The sad thing is that I think we generally discourage kids from trusting their own instincts on this kind of thing, and I certainly realise that I was pushing a lot of reactions away and dismissing them: I am sure I was not untypical, and I do wonder whether we actually go to excessive lengths to do "child protection" when, actually, the best child protection we could be doing would be to encourage kids to recognise and understand a) their feelings about people, and b) what's OK and what isn't (which I know has improved a lot since I was a kid).
And listening to them. Properly. If even a fraction of the children Savile abused had felt able to say something, and if most of those had been listened to and a conduit for passing on concerns available, then perhaps we wouldn't have had to wait until he died to find out the full extent of his activities.
And I wonder...how many other people are out there with secret histories that they are defending through threats of legal action or whatever, which could be revealed, albeit retrospectively, by the people they abused coming forward and making themselves known? We know that people are coming forward, not least as a result of the Savile revelations, and of course we won't know who the people who are being accused of committing abuse are until the police/CPS decide to bring cases to trial. Which leaves us needing to be able to trust that the police or CPS will do that where the evidence is sufficient, and that the situation where abused people are encouraged to feel that there's no point disclosing because nobody would believe them is not still prevailing.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
Yeah it's that sort of attitude I'm talking about. I wasn't even in double figures age wise when jim'll fix it came to an end so obviously I didn't know any better but it just seems anyone who's a bit eccentric and likes children is going to be unfairly characterised a wrongun, even more so now after this. The amount of people around my age or slightly older who said 'see I knew it!' was quite high. How did they know it? What was it based on? Other than the fact he looked and acted a bit strange, which he did of course and we now know he was hiding in plain sight.
Meh, don't really know what I'm trying to say. I guess it's just still disappointing that jim'll fix it was part of my childhood and that I, and so many others I guess, loved it when growing up only to find out that it was all a cover to abuse the children he was doing really nice things for. Which is text book grooming isn't it? Only on a really huge scale. What a cunt
elbows
Well-Known Member
I'd say that the last 12 months or so has been a very mixed bag. Right now I'm sure more people think the police/CPS are going to take stuff a lot more seriously than they would in the past, but I bet some are depressed as the 'will I be believed?' question hasn't been utterly destroyed but simply moves on to the jury front. And I don't know what could be done to improve things there. Certainly defence techniques haven't become more considerate to victims since the Savile revelations changed the broader mood. We still see various bits of fame used in court: Celebrity persona used to bolster the impression of the character of the real person. Celebrity character witnesses, charity work, 'good standing in the community', namedropping. And always numerous attempts to undermine the reliability of victim testimony. Unfortunately rather hard to imagine the perfect solution to this, since people are entitled to defend themselves and who is going to stick to the highest moral ground when the stakes are so high?
For those victims who do want to face the past and seek justice, I'm not sure how much a cold, calculated guesstimate of the chances of successful prosecution can or does factor into the equation. If I were to attempt such a calculation as of this point in 2014, the following leap out as especially relevant to chances of successfully convincing a jury:
Lots of victims giving evidence. (probably a prime factor in many CPS decisions for and against bringing various people to trial so far)
A particular modus-operandi of the accused when offending, which has quirks and is corroborated by numerous victims.
A general long-standing seedy reputation within the fame industry the alleged perpetrator worked in.
How the accused behaves in and around court.
Sadly, and to a varying extents and even the reverse, how 'beloved' the famous alleged perpetrator was, and how wide the gulf between their image and the real them may be.
Anyway I am waffling and there are more cases which could yet alter the impression of how things are going. And I shouldn't push the boat out searching for too a high degree of consistency between juries.
clicker
nanook rubs it....
existentialist i think you're spot on with the children sometimes having an inbuilt radar, that certainly makes them feel creeped out by certain individuals. Even if they can't articulate why.
Being a kid in the seventies I clearly remember getting that feeling with savile and jonathan king and even stuart hall. They all demonstrated that same falseness to me...the forced jollity and the hollow laugh.They didn't ring true. In saviles case i thought he was always angry and badly masking it.
It wasn't a foolproof sense though. I thought Ken Dodd fell into the same camp, but had gary glitter posters on the wall and queued up for Rolf's autograph .
Being a kid in the seventies I clearly remember getting that feeling with savile and jonathan king and even stuart hall. They all demonstrated that same falseness to me...the forced jollity and the hollow laugh.They didn't ring true. In saviles case i thought he was always angry and badly masking it.
It wasn't a foolproof sense though. I thought Ken Dodd fell into the same camp, but had gary glitter posters on the wall and queued up for Rolf's autograph .
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I have given some thought to this question, since I have had to make such a cold, calculated guesstimate
When I decided to make disclosure, I had to be realistic about the possibility that a) the police wouldn't take me seriously, b) even if they did, it'd be a courteous response and No Further Action, c) that I might not be able to go through with the disclosure process, d) I might do so and it went nowhere, e) the CPS would consider it not worth pursuing, or f) it'd go to court but result in an acquittal.
I cannot - obviously - speak for everyone in the position I was in, but as things stand, a, b, c and d have turned out to have been unfounded fears. We are now awaiting e) the decision of the CPS, and, assuming it goes to court, f) the trial itself.
My cold, calculated guesstimate was based on the fact that, for some reason, I felt I had to make some kind of disclosure, regardless of where it led. The fact that it has gone as far as it has is, in my view, a bonus: I have shared my experiences, and not only do I feel I have been listened to, but the people whom I alleged to be responsible have been interviewed under caution and have therefore been made aware of the allegations I have made. If nothing else happens, then I know that the past has reached out and tapped them on the shoulder, and I imagine that would have been a chilling and unpleasant experience for them.
If the case goes ahead, I have one last major challenge - that of giving evidence and subjecting myself to, potentially, the same kind of assault that witnesses in these celebrity cases have been subject to. I have paid a lot of attention to what has gone on in court, so as to prepare myself for the possibility that the same will happen to me. I have not come this far to fall at the last hurdle, and I think I am fortunate in that I have the kind of character that will be able to withstand the kind of questioning I fully expect to experience. I am also - perhaps unwisely, I don't know - prepared to confront my abusers in court, something which I am aware is often a huge challenge for victims. Both of those things, I feel, impose a kind of duty on me to do what I can, since I can, to see this through. It may even be that my willingness to stand up in court will encourage others who have been victimised by the same perpetrators, or others, to have the courage to report their experiences, too.
And I guess that's why I have an interest in how those these people have abused are treated in court: because I want it to be possible, within the bounds of justice, for anyone to be able to stand up and say "this person did this to me, and I don't think they should be able to get away with it". It has to be "within the bounds of justice", because every person that gets wrongly convicted is a nail in the coffin of this new openness that is beginning, and ammunition for those who - and I still hear it from people I talk to - are convinced that every complainant is merely a gold-digger after some compensation from an innocent person whose only crime has been celebrity and/or a tendency to be a bit "hands-on".
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
That's a good point about Savile being "always angry". Now I think about it, at least part of my "ew" reflex was just that: I was probably picking up on that repressed anger, though he always seemed to me (given that I was hyper-aware of that kind of thing) to be excessively tactile/close with the kids on his show(s) as well.existentialist i think you're spot on with the children sometimes having an inbuilt radar, that certainly makes them feel creeped out by certain individuals. Even if they can't articulate why.
Being a kid in the seventies I clearly remember getting that feeling with savile and jonathan king and even stuart hall. They all demonstrated that same falseness to me...the forced jollity and the hollow laugh.They didn't ring true. In saviles case i thought he was always angry and badly masking it.
It wasn't a foolproof sense though. I thought Ken Dodd fell into the same camp, but had gary glitter posters on the wall and queued up for Rolf's autograph .
elbows
Well-Known Member
Some of the 'see I knew it' will come from the 'looks' stuff but in the case of Savile there are numerous other reasons why a relatively high percentage of people reckon they knew it in advance:
The high number of victims over a long period of time, some of whom would at some point have confided in others about Savile.
The reputation he built for himself at various stages of his career - from the local reputation where he 'ran' dancehall disco stuff, to his autobiographies, interviews and biographies of other DJs etc.
The Louis Theroux program, which invited a lot of people to imagine some of the ways Savile might be deeply wrong of personality.
The seemingly blatant way he did some bad groping stuff even with the cameras or microphones on, coupled with just how much issues of power, intimidation, control and distance ran through pretty much all his interactions with other humans.
The resulting very high level of gossip and rumour about him that would have run through quite a lot of different segments of society, at different times over the decades.
Meh, don't really know what I'm trying to say. I guess it's just still disappointing that jim'll fix it was part of my childhood and that I, and so many others I guess, loved it when growing up only to find out that it was all a cover to abuse the children he was doing really nice things for. Which is text book grooming isn't it? Only on a really huge scale. What a cunt
It was part of my childhood, it was known and familiar, and for many years a constant of stability and routine because it was on at the right time and an era when other options were far fewer. But I don't think thats the same as me loving it, especially as I remember it was usually really boring, and was best when used simply to ignite our own imagination as to what we would wish for ourselves. From what I remember Savile was ok at reading out the letters, but showed a complete lack of connection with the kids in studio, to the point that it was somewhat awkward. That said, for those who don't want that memory utterly spoiled in every way, I suppose it might be possible. Even if the program was a vehicle for Savile to continue his TV career, it was much else besides him. I don't think we've yet learnt what percentage of his offending may have occurred when working on that program, but its certainly not been central to the main revelations so far. I guess as various enquiries eventually get more info to the public, we may discover more.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
Rather a dubious suspicion though
discokermit
Well-Known Member
jim'll fix it was always shit. losing it's a knockout has been a far bigger blow.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
never again will we see Big Break.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
For a lot of my life, I've had a variously negative or ambivalent view about the fact that I grew up in a house without TV.
I watched very little, although it's probably fair to say that this probably meant that the TV I did see was quite influential, by virtue of its novelty
But I have never been so glad not to have been watched from the corner of the living room by the haunted lantern as I have been in the last few years as its role as conduit for a seemingly endless selection of perverts, pederasts, and otherwise unpleasant characters has become more and more evident...
I watched very little, although it's probably fair to say that this probably meant that the TV I did see was quite influential, by virtue of its novelty
But I have never been so glad not to have been watched from the corner of the living room by the haunted lantern as I have been in the last few years as its role as conduit for a seemingly endless selection of perverts, pederasts, and otherwise unpleasant characters has become more and more evident...
elbows
Well-Known Member
I have given some thought to this question, since I have had to make such a cold, calculated guesstimate
Thanks, as always, for sharing your experiences, thoughts etc on all that stuff. So long as it is not a burden to you, please keep us updated as to how it all goes.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
It would be unspeakably poncy to call it anything like a "sacred trust", so I won't. More of a sequinned truss, perhaps. But, seriously, I really do hope that, in being able to articulate my experiences, I will be able to make some kind of a difference. To others here or elsewhere who might be thinking about it, or even in some bigger way. It'll have been worth it all if that is the case.
So yeah, I shall be parading my sequinned truss appropriately grandiosely at suitable opportunities.
- Status
Similar threads
