Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Hornetto

Now then, now then

92 posts in this topic

abuse victim on the ITV show now....

"I don't know why but he wanted me to put my finger up his anus....."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul Merton was asked directly about the HIGNGY transcript on the radio yesterday. He said it's fake. Though he did say Savile was a little odd.

Last night's programme made for difficult viewing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to what I've been reading today, there will be at least one other 70's TV star sweating like f***.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to what I've been reading today, there will be at least one other 70's TV star sweating like f***.

Gary Sh1ter's been in touch with his soliciters............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Esther Rantzen says she knew about it but Savile was so powerful she didn't think there was much chance of convincing senior Beeb people about him. She was married to a senior Been official for god's sake, Desmond Wilcox!

I bet she's saying "Jim fixed it for me to get back on telly!"

I must admit Savile always came over as a bit creepy, but why wait until he can't answer back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Esther Rantzen says she knew about it but Savile was so powerful she didn't think there was much chance of convincing senior Beeb people about him. She was married to a senior Been official for god's sake, Desmond Wilcox!

I bet she's saying "Jim fixed it for me to get back on telly!"

I must admit Savile always came over as a bit creepy, but why wait until he can't answer back?

Do you get all your jokes from Private Eye ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Esther Rantzen says she knew about it but Savile was so powerful she didn't think there was much chance of convincing senior Beeb people about him.

I must admit Savile always came over as a bit creepy, but why wait until he can't answer back?

I don't know whether or not she knew about Jimmy Savile at the time (probably just knew the rumours) but to me she always appears desperate to still be on the telly. In the documentary I thought she demeaned the Savile paedophilia issue with overacting; presenting a reaction that would be more expected of someone who hadn't known the rumours for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Esther Rantzen says she knew about it but Savile was so powerful she didn't think there was much chance of convincing senior Beeb people about him. She was married to a senior Been official for god's sake, Desmond Wilcox!

I bet she's saying "Jim fixed it for me to get back on telly!"

I must admit Savile always came over as a bit creepy, but why wait until he can't answer back?

I'm not particularly fond of ER and if I'm honest that was my first thought too. But I'm beginning to think Saville had things over people in high places and to all intents and purposes *was* fireproof. I bet many people had threatened to expose him but were either intimidated out of it or were threatened with losing their jobs. And he wasn't alone was he? If he went down, several others would come down with him, so they probably ensured people were hushed up.

I now think most of these allegations are true and even if he can't face justice, the victims deserve to be heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you get all your jokes from Private Eye ?

Can you think of a better source? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not particularly fond of ER and if I'm honest that was my first thought too. But I'm beginning to think Saville had things over people in high places and to all intents and purposes *was* fireproof. I bet many people had threatened to expose him but were either intimidated out of it or were threatened with losing their jobs. And he wasn't alone was he? If he went down, several others would come down with him, so they probably ensured people were hushed up.

I now think most of these allegations are true and even if he can't face justice, the victims deserve to be heard.

I agree. I just wonder how many are "victims" and how many are publicity seekers wanting to jump on the bandwagon?

There are always rumours circulating about famous people. I can think of two now about famous RL players, no proof though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. I just wonder how many are "victims" and how many are publicity seekers wanting to jump on the bandwagon?

There are always rumours circulating about famous people. I can think of two now about famous RL players, no proof though.

It's quite probable that some people now making accusations will be after a few quid and/or publicity; that's inevitable. But it doesn't mean most of them aren't true.

I heard stories about him being 'a bit dodgy' years ago but tend to take these rumours with a pinch of salt. But do many and for so long? His statement on Glitter alone makes him look like a paedo. What other sort of person would say 'he did nothing wrong'?

You'll remember very well in the 70's people like Saville or Glitter weren't just famous, they were mega famous and someone accusing them of being paedophiles would have been ran out of town by a pitchfork mob.

The clip posted by Futtocks from his autobiography is particularly bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Esther Rantzen says she knew about it but Savile was so powerful she didn't think there was much chance of convincing senior Beeb people about him. She was married to a senior Been official for god's sake, Desmond Wilcox!

I bet she's saying "Jim fixed it for me to get back on telly!"

I must admit Savile always came over as a bit creepy, but why wait until he can't answer back?

Have you seen the footage from the documentary where Rantzen was shown the interviews of the women making these accusations Trojan? She never said she "knew about it", but she had "heard rumours" which is a world of difference. Her reaction is one of the most powerful bits of the show in my opinion and doesn't really reflect what you have posted IMO

Also - I believe ITV approached her rather than the other way around.

I'm not a great fan of her either, but it would take someone very cynical who had actually watched her reaction to say it was anything less than genuine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting - I can't say I've seen anything she's said other than the doc. However her initial reaction on that is that her, the BBC and everyone in showbiz is partially responsible for not investigating further at the time and seems genuinly apologetic and makes no excuses for it. The line she is taking now of "one childs word vs his" is a slightly different one than the initial reaction and isn't one that sits easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The extract from Saville's autobiography and his comments about Gary Glitter, are pretty damning, in terms of the attitudes to young girls, with the seeming complete absence of empathy and the lack of any moral perspective. In themselves they don't prove anything concerning the alleged offences, but they are the characteristic attitudes of many sex offenders. Of course, it is the kind of information that would be used in a trial, if he was alive and subject to prosecution, to illustrate his attitudes to girls and sex. It is striking that in both extracts there is no consideration of any harm to the young people.

A lot of sex offenders use a power position to commit their crimes, be that a position in society, and/or physical power, and if the information that has emerged about his acts are true, as the extract from the autobiography indicates they may well be, Saville appears to have been well versed in using his power and status.

The attention given to this, the investigations of grooming, exploitation and sexual crimes involving minors and resulting prosecutions, partly evidence the greater understanding of the abuse of minors and also that some societal attitudes have changed. Things will no doubt continue to change, for example in the attitudes to the rape of adults and the prosecution of perpetrators.

There seem to have been implicit and explicit attitudes towards sex with minors among some people in the entertainment industry that many of us would consider repellent, eg in the activities of Saville, G Glitter, Jonathon King, Bill Wyman, members of Led Zeppelin, Roman Polanski....

It wouldn't be a surprise if there is a short lived media trend to investigate allegations of sexual assaults etc by people in the entertainment industry, and other powerful figures.

Grim stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting - I can't say I've seen anything she's said other than the doc. However her initial reaction on that is that her, the BBC and everyone in showbiz is partially responsible for not investigating further at the time and seems genuinly apologetic and makes no excuses for it. The line she is taking now of "one childs word vs his" is a slightly different one than the initial reaction and isn't one that sits easy.

She seems apologetic and yet did anyone ask her to apologise?

Esther is one of those people who seeks attention by proxy. The women's stories are horrible and yet the focus is on how Esther (neither a victim nor involved) sees the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh this woman seems to take the view that all allegations are true unless proven otherwise. The point about the victoms never having met each other is key in law, it means that the evidence that they give is independent and corroborating details are indicative of guilty (of Saville)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you think of a better source? ;)

Good point well made

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were to mention super injunctions being lifted and 70s entertainers.........

Would my post get moderated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She seems apologetic and yet did anyone ask her to apologise?

Esther is one of those people who seeks attention by proxy. The women's stories are horrible and yet the focus is on how Esther (neither a victim nor involved) sees the situation.

Again, I'm no fan of hers but she is perhaps realising now that she might have done something at the time and it is a source of regret.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and I'm sure we can all think of things we would have done differently but didn't. Save any criticism for Saville and his cronies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it involve hamsters?

I have no idea what you mean. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017