Jimmy Saville

Mr Bump

Mr Bump

From under the bridge
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,944
Name
Sophia aka Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Just hoping he is burning merrillly in the fires of hell.
 
boyfalldown said:
Assume it's because Louis Theroux did a follow up program his 2000 interview with Jimmy. It was on BBC2 last night
Click to expand...
I never saw this follow up, but I did read what Louis had to say about having become friends with Saville and not really having seen any signs of what Saville was doing. Yet having watched his original 2000 programme, there was a lot of it that Saville came across as being not just odd, but down right creepy.
 
nilagin said:
I never saw this follow up, but I did read what Louis had to say about having become friends with Saville and not really having seen any signs of what Saville was doing. Yet having watched his original 2000 programme, there was a lot of it that Saville came across as being not just odd, but down right creepy.
Click to expand...

Yep, I watched the thing last night. There was an awful lot came across very creepy. I like Louis and get why he needed to lay the ghost of the first program, but at the same time wonder if letting it lie now would have been better
 
It was an interesting documentary. Sad to see his PA being the only one that is still taken in by him. Even with all the weight of evidence she still thinks all 300+ were making it up.
 
It was a very powerfull program in which I felt Louis came out ok, i think he had ghosts and also sadness at not pushing the point with Saville while he had the chance to back in the days. I also found the interview with the spinal nurse very sad as all her life she had lived in the all consuming shadow of this man essentially creating the new Stke Spinal centre. To have that but also to know it was a hunting ground for him I think for her was just to much to comtemplate, instead she has sadly chosen to stay in a bubble. Well done Louis for going back I like his stuff a lot and that was a very personal program for him i feel.
 
A law is desperately needed so that living relatives can sue for defamation in cases like this. Then Louis and his like might be a little more reserved about calling people who are dead, rapists and pedophile to further their own ends.This Jimmy Savile farce only continues because anyone can make allegations against the dead without fear or recrimination. In fact allegations are actively encouraged by the media. "He pulled his trousers down and said "hows about then":LOL: How shocking ! Get a life love if you don't like it don't go when he said "send the one with the big tit's and the glasses" she could not get there quick enough.

How much did that spinal unit cost was it £10 million.
 
Mr Bump said:
Just hoping he is burning merrillly in the fires of hell.
Click to expand...

What in the name of **** would make someone suddenly have that thought :thinking:

Go to jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect £200.
 
shapeshifter said:
A law is desperately needed so that living relatives can sue for defamation in cases like this. Then Louis and his like might be a little more reserved about calling people who are dead, rapists and pedophile to further their own ends.This Jimmy Savile farce only continues because anyone can make allegations against the dead without fear or recrimination. In fact allegations are actively encouraged by the media. "He pulled his trousers down and said "hows about then":LOL: How shocking ! Get a life love if you don't like it don't go when he said "send the one with the big tit's and the glasses" she could not get there quick enough.

How much did that spinal unit cost was it £10 million.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to understand if you're actually defending Jimmy Saville or just those that are still alive and have had their innocence proven? I sort of get where you're coming from when groupies etc actively go to 'celebrities' dressing rooms etc but 9 times out of 10, the celebrities are actually the slimy letches they've been accused of being so if they were just a random member of the public groping young women would that be ok too?

Also, even allowing for a small percentage of people who probably weren't touched by Jimmy Saville but wanted to try for compensation, I reckon 300+ people going through the horrible effort to come forward and give statements is pretty conclusive that he was the slimy, horrible, pedophile that we all see him as now regardless of what good deeds he did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
A) It's Savile, not Saville.

B) Whatever he was, he's been dead five years. What on earth is there to be gained from once again raking over old embers, apart from, for Mr Theroux, cash?
 
neil_g said:
Maybe Louis just had a big credit card bill in or something.
Click to expand...

if thats all you got from the progam, if indeed you watched it.
I think louis didn't really want to do that program but he is a film maker and he explores things sometiems that make us all very uncomfortable.

I certainly found it very hard to watch without feeling very sadened for all involved.
The story of the lady who was abused by her stepfather and then sent to a home to get her away from it, right into the clutches of saville.

if we do not revisit these things and learn from the mistakes we never evolve and continue to seek out to be better people.
I think we need to remember this man for a long time and also to remember his victims, for them this is/was a personal holacuast.
 
viv1969 said:
B) Whatever he was, he's been dead five years. What on earth is there to be gained from once again raking over old embers, apart from, for Mr Theroux, cash?
Click to expand...

I guess there could still be victims out there that for whatever reason (fear, shame etc) still haven't found the courage to come forward. Yes, it's not going to change the past but it could help a genuine victim to begin the healing process?

I didn't watch the program but even if one more victim found the courage and strength to come forward surely it's a good thing?
 
Russ77 said:
I guess there could still be victims out there that for whatever reason (fear, shame etc) still haven't found the courage to come forward. Yes, it's not going to change the past but it could help a genuine victim to begin the healing process?

I didn't watch the program but even if one more victim found the courage and strength to come forward surely it's a good thing?
Click to expand...

True, but is it not also possible that there are victims out there whose "healing process" is stymied every time this is dragged out yet again?
 
viv1969 said:
True, but is it not also possible that there are victims out there whose "healing process" is stymied every time this is dragged out yet again?
Click to expand...

of course there will be but as @Russ77 says help is help, after all how many people lived in the dark unbelieved for years while he was all over TV, now at least they are believed and have a voice.
 
Mr Bump said:
of course there will be but as @Russ77 says help is help, after all how many people lived in the dark unbelieved for years while he was all over TV, now at least they are believed and have a voice.
Click to expand...

So the people possibly being hurt rather than helped every time its trundled out again, don't matter.
Nice. o_O
 
viv1969 said:
A) It's Savile, not Saville.

B) Whatever he was, he's been dead five years. What on earth is there to be gained from once again raking over old embers, apart from, for Mr Theroux, cash?
Click to expand...

Watching the programme I had the feeling he was troubled by remorse, his own failings as an investigatory journalist, also being taken in and used this as a method of coming to terms with that, whilst also providing further insight.

Some interesting stuff not shown before.
 
Byker28i said:
Watching the programme I had the feeling he was troubled by remorse, his own failings as an investigatory journalist, also being taken in and used this as a method of coming to terms with that, whilst also providing further insight.

Some interesting stuff not shown before.
Click to expand...

Each to their own.
I found it little more than an exercise in self indulgence.
 
Mr Bump said:
if we do not revisit these things and learn from the mistakes we never evolve and continue to seek out to be better people.
Click to expand...
i dont think a(nother) Theroux docu is really going to help add to the existing investigation findings (I'm sure Theroux gave all of this "new" footage to the authorities already, right?).

we all know what a dirty vile man he was, lets draw a line under it and move on.
 
stevelmx5 said:
I'm trying to understand if you're actually defending Jimmy Saville or just those that are still alive and have had their innocence proven? I sort of get where you're coming from when groupies etc actively go to 'celebrities' dressing rooms etc but 9 times out of 10, the celebrities are actually the slimy letches they've been accused of being so if they were just a random member of the public groping young women would that be ok too?

Also, even allowing for a small percentage of people who probably weren't touched by Jimmy Saville but wanted to try for compensation, I reckon 300+ people going through the horrible effort to come forward and give statements is pretty conclusive that he was the slimy, horrible, pedophile that we all see him as now regardless of what good deeds he did.
Click to expand...
I am not defending Jimmy Savile nor am I accusing him. I am very unhappy about a system of Law that allows people to make allegations that some one who has died was guilty of rape and pedophile and that their relatives are unable to test those allegations in anyway at law. Their should be a defamation law that the relatives can put into effect against anyone making such allegations test the credibility of the accusers.
 
But it's not up to relations of an accused to contest allegations in any case, that's the job for the Police/Law courts. If someone is found to be proven innocent, then you're welcome to take the accuser to court to sue them if you like. With regards to Savile, he's not been tried because he's annoyingly dead but that doesn't stop the fact that 300+ separate people have accused him of the same crimes over a large number of years so by law of averages, it's pretty likely he carried out a large majority of those acts.
 
When I lived in Bournemouth and an infrequent goer of nightclubs, it was known that Saville was all he has been proven to be ie a Totally reprehensible human who exploited the vulnerable for his own revolting use. I think Steve above has the best approach to this regarding post mortem accusations.
 
Last edited:
stevelmx5 said:
But it's not up to relations of an accused to contest allegations in any case, that's the job for the Police/Law courts. If someone is found to be proven innocent, then you're welcome to take the accuser to court to sue them if you like. With regards to Savile, he's not been tried because he's annoyingly dead but that doesn't stop the fact that 300+ separate people have accused him of the same crimes over a large number of years so by law of averages, it's pretty likely he carried out a large majority of those acts.
Click to expand...
The relations would sue in a civil court for defamation it does not have anything to do with the police. Also if someone is found innocent in a criminal case it does not automatically follow, in fact it is very rare for someone to sue after a criminal trial (no one would ever give evidence). The relatives would only be suing the police as it is they who have prosecuted. If the accuser has been found to have committed perjury it is the police that prosecute them not the relatives.
The 300+ could be just jumping on the band wagon they have nothing to lose and compensation to gain. Bring a law in so that their allegations can be tested. Let's have them asked some proper questions on oath not Louis asking questions that benefit the show.

Try this it's cheap enough. https://wordery.com/a-really-basic-...8wjjcV3eRykwkHbsnma7pZKgGaF1cyTaGQaAqg88P8HAQ
;)
 
shapeshifter said:
The 300+ could be just jumping on the band wagon they have nothing to lose and compensation to gain. Bring a law in so that their allegations can be tested. Let's have them asked some proper questions on oath not Louis asking questions that benefit the show.
Click to expand...

How do you realistically suggest that?

It's been a massive Police investigation which has led to Operation YewTree. Louis Theroux has nothing to do with investigating those that have accused Savile? Are you suggesting that 300+ people have all lied about Savile just so they can get some publicity seeing as there's nobody to sue for financial gain? I'm obviously nothing to do with the investigation but it's pretty hard to disbelieve the wealth of accusations that have come out following the original claims.
 
I watched the programme, and it did not make very comfortable watching, particularly near the end when Savile said something to the effect of - I am Jimmy Savile, I can go anywhere and do anything I like.
It is obvious that there was a huge cover up whilst he was alive, the police, politicians and very famous people either turned a blind eye to his crimes, or even possibly knowingly facilitated/enabled the crimes.
Savile came across as an arrogant man who felt he was above the law - it turns out he was right, unfortunately for the victims.
 
stevelmx5 said:
How do you realistically suggest that?

It's been a massive Police investigation which has led to Operation YewTree. Louis Theroux has nothing to do with investigating those that have accused Savile? Are you suggesting that 300+ people have all lied about Savile just so they can get some publicity seeing as there's nobody to sue for financial gain? I'm obviously nothing to do with the investigation but it's pretty hard to disbelieve the wealth of accusations that have come out following the original claims.
Click to expand...

There should be a system in place to test the credibility of those accusers. Their credibility is undermined due to the fact they can defame a dead person without redress.

When a person is defamed if they are alive they can sue. Hens Jimmy Savile not having been convicted of one single offence dead or alive.;)
 
There is a system, it's called the British Legal System. The difficulty is that he died before his accusers could see him in court. I'm pretty sure the Police investigations that have taken place have tested people's credibility as far as is possible for crimes committed during the last 40-50 years, as would happen in court.

He clearly hasn't been convicted of anything because he got away with it while he was alive. I'm not really sure anyone should be happy about the fact he did though?
 
Why bring it up again ,is there possibly some payout money left ?
 
stevelmx5 said:
There is a system, it's called the British Legal System. The difficulty is that he died before his accusers could see him in court. I'm pretty sure the Police investigations that have taken place have tested people's credibility as far as is possible for crimes committed during the last 40-50 years, as would happen in court.

He clearly hasn't been convicted of anything because he got away with it while he was alive. I'm not really sure anyone should be happy about the fact he did though?
Click to expand...
The police do not and will not test the credibility of complainants they just record the details they do not and are not allowed to put a complainant to the test. The police would get hauled over the coals for questioning a complainant. The defence does that in court unless of course the person is dead.
 
shapeshifter said:
The police do not and will not test the credibility of complainants they just record the details they do not and are not allowed to put a complainant to the test. The police would get hauled over the coals for questioning a complainant. The defence does that in court unless of course the person is dead.
Click to expand...

The CPS stands between the police and the court.
 
shapeshifter said:
The police do not and will not test the credibility of complainants they just record the details they do not and are not allowed to put a complainant to the test. The police would get hauled over the coals for questioning a complainant. The defence does that in court unless of course the person is dead.
Click to expand...
And the fact that 'accomplices' are now in jail?

Is that just a coincidence?

It's mind numbingly delusional to hold this view given the thousands of hours of police time that's gone into this case.
 
shapeshifter said:
The police do not and will not test the credibility of complainants they just record the details they do not and are not allowed to put a complainant to the test. The police would get hauled over the coals for questioning a complainant. The defence does that in court unless of course the person is dead.
Click to expand...
On what basis do you make this statement? Are you a policeman? Solicitor? Someone with experience this area?
So a claimant walks into a police station and makes a claim about someone and the police just say "ok" and arrest the suspect? They're not allowed to question the claimant and verify the facts etc?
 
Phil V said:
And the fact that 'accomplices' are now in jail?

Is that just a coincidence?

It's mind numbingly delusional to hold this view given the thousands of hours of police time that's gone into this case.
Click to expand...
What accomplices?
What delusion?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top