Archived

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

l'angelo mysterioso

THE JIMMY SAVILLE THREAD

324 posts in this topic

The initial response to the Newsnight issue doesn't deserve the use of the word excoriate, true enough, but that wasn't what I was applying it to. The Panorama programme certainly deserves that description. Would the latter have been made without the stink that erupted in the first place? Well, wasn't the stink over the Newsnight investigation being canned started by those at the BBC who worked on it?

Are we not entitled to ask why ITV didn't broadcast its own Savile documentary sooner too?

The Beeb as an organisation certainly has its faults, but it ought not to be the big story here, Savile should be. He appears to have hoodwinked almost everyone he came into contact with over many decades both inside and also way beyond the boundaries of the BBC.

Wasn't the guy who put together the ITV programme-the ex police officer a meber of the team that did the BBC documentary that was spiked? maybe one followed the other.

Saville should be the big story right enough, but it is likely to beget more big storys-some emanating from goings on at the BBC as more and more stones are lifted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we not entitled to ask why ITV didn't broadcast its own Savile documentary sooner too? Oh, yes. and yes to the same question about the Daily Mirror many years go.

The Beeb as an organisation certainly has its faults, but it ought not to be the big story here. and I don't think it is.

Entwistle seems to me to be an honest and genuine person and I would not like to see him hounded out of office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Entwistle seems to me to be an honest and genuine person and I would not like to see him hounded out of office.

It seems almost inevitable he will be, though.

You say above that you don't think the BBC has become a bigger story than Savile.

This suggests otherwise.

http://www.guardian....onal-newspapers

The Beeb under fire for not properly investigating Savile, by everyone else who didn't properly investigate him either. Sickening levels of hypocrisy there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypocrisy or Schadenfreude? Not so long agoBBC journos reveled in the Leveson exposures, so why the surprise when they gift the press in this way? It's a tough life in the national media.

Remember, Savile WAS the face of the BBC for many many years. As it happens, I beat Savile by about four or five places in the 1982 Pony British Marathon. He better not have cheated!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems almost inevitable he will be, though.

You say above that you don't think the BBC has become a bigger story than Savile.

This suggests otherwise.

http://www.guardian....onal-newspapers

The Beeb under fire for not properly investigating Savile, by everyone else who didn't properly investigate him either. Sickening levels of hypocrisy there.

John, I don't see the hypocrisy.

Savile worked for the BBC and, as far as I am aware, not for the Guardian or any other daily or weekly newspaper.

He was allegedly able to get away with to much because of his position in society gave him a false respectability that was bestowed on him largely because of his role with the BBC. So it's hardly surprising that the BBC is receiving the flak, and other media outlets are having a field day.

Savile was by no means the first predator to work for the BBC. Chris Denning, who was one of the first presenters with Radio 1 when it came into being in the 1960s, was a predatory paedophile who is, I think, currently in jail somewhere in Europe because of his activities. Denning used to turn up to the studio and to parties with his young lads and no one seemingly batted an eyelid in those permissive times.

What was particularly interesting to me was the Daily Mirror article that interviewed the woman who had been Savile's PA for 32 years until 2001. She claimed not to have been aware of what he had been up to. It struck me as odd that she shouldn't have spotted anything when she had been with him for so long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems almost inevitable he will be, though.

to be honest, I'm a bit fed up of people falling on their swords as it were. its just an easy and rewarding way out. far better they remain and fix things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypocrisy or Schadenfreude? Not so long agoBBC journos reveled in the Leveson exposures, so why the surprise when they gift the press in this way? It's a tough life in the national media.

Remember, Savile WAS the face of the BBC for many many years. As it happens, I beat Savile by about four or five places in the 1982 Pony British Marathon. He better not have cheated!!

Funny you mention that. I know someone who claims he used to cheat at that by getting a lift round the course. Claims he overtook Savile yet he was there at the finish line smoking a cigar.

I don't care if it's not true, it's of the moment so I'm putting it out there. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm putting it out there.

Is that legal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be honest, I'm a bit fed up of people falling on their swords as it were. its just an easy and rewarding way out. far better they remain and fix things.

True, but if the gutter press* howl for blood long enough, token firings will be needed to shut them up.

*Murdoch, Desmond et al... hardly without their own competing interests in the field of broadcasting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny you mention that. I know someone who claims he used to cheat at that by getting a lift round the course. Claims he overtook Savile yet he was there at the finish line smoking a cigar.

I don't care if it's not true, it's of the moment so I'm putting it out there. :)

Has your mate been reading Richard Herring's webpage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Obviously I don't have any real evidence of this and it's based mainly on word of mouth and supposition, but apparently we don't need to bother with the due process of law any more and someone writing something in a blog is proof enough."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Obviously I don't have any real evidence of this and it's based mainly on word of mouth and supposition, but apparently we don't need to bother with the due process of law any more and someone writing something in a blog is proof enough."

The day we start questioning second hand rumours based on work related gossip is a sad day for justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'm not sure about.

Was Jimmy Savile a full-time employee of the BBC or was he a freelance who hired out "Jimmy Savile Ltd" to the corporation. If he was a freelance, surely no-one can claim compensation from the BBC because they had no employer responsibility.

It would be equivalent to the girls exploited by Gary Glitter trying to claim compensation from whichever record label he was on at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'm not sure about.

Was Jimmy Savile a full-time employee of the BBC or was he a freelance who hired out "Jimmy Savile Ltd" to the corporation. If he was a freelance, surely no-one can claim compensation from the BBC because they had no employer responsibility.

It would be equivalent to the girls exploited by Gary Glitter trying to claim compensation from whichever record label he was on at the time.

it happened on bbc premises: people and organisations are responsible what goes on in their premises.

the record label analogy only works if it happened in their studios or any other of its properties

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'm not sure about.

Was Jimmy Savile a full-time employee of the BBC or was he a freelance who hired out "Jimmy Savile Ltd" to the corporation. If he was a freelance, surely no-one can claim compensation from the BBC because they had no employer responsibility.

It would be equivalent to the girls exploited by Gary Glitter trying to claim compensation from whichever record label he was on at the time.

I would say a more apt comparison is that if a child was abused at a school by a supply teacher provided an agency, you probably wouldn't go lightly on the school just because they didn't employ them directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The flood gates appear to have been well and truely opened. Can't provide a link but here is a piece from AOL's website -

Information on doctors who worked at hospitals where Jimmy Savile had links has been passed to police amid claims they were involved in a network of child abusers connected with the disgraced presenter. At least three doctors were alleged to have abused young people in their care and were identified by victims who came forward in the last two weeks, reported The Guardian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now there has been an unnamed former PM mentioned being involved on a paedophile ring.I dont know wether to believe it or not,but I hope it isn't true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now there has been an unnamed former PM mentioned being involved on a paedophile ring.I dont know wether to believe it or not,but I hope it isn't true

There were plenty of rumours about Heath's sexuality a few years ago - maybe that's what they're getting at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were plenty of rumours about Heath's sexuality a few years ago - maybe that's what they're getting at.

There's also an advisor to Margaret Thatcher.

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.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017