Allegations about Jimmy Saville: covered up?

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Balbus

I knew of similar allegations 40 years ago. A friend of mine (Barrister and later Crown Court Recorder) lived in the same block of flats in Manchester as Jimmy Savile, and commented on the number of very young girls who visited Savile's flat. There is a similar allegation in a letter in today's Mail by someone who had seen Savile fondling young girls in a cafe in Manchester. He remarked on it to a waiter who said "Oh, is he at it again?".

He says She says, why didn't these people come forward at the time especially a Barrister, now that is criminal if he saw this and did nothing about it

[MargaretR]

Prosecuting the dead has been practiced in the past, but now only happens in Russia
JURIST - Forum:Prosecuting the Dead

So, despite some previously abandoned police investigations being reopened, it is not possible for the courts to 'pass judgement'.

For some people - no conviction equals no guilt.
For others - the volume of testimony will be enough to form an opinion,
and some who don't give a damn either way.

Whichever category you consider yourself to be in, do not abuse the persons who have decided differently from you.

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by jaysay

He says She says, why didn't these people come forward at the time especially a Barrister, now that is criminal if he saw this and did nothing about it

That's a good point - there are so many talking loud now, well why didn't they do something back then? Especially a Barrister who's career could not be damaged by Savile in the same way someone in Radio or TV could as Savile was a big shot in the media.

[Less]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

For some people - no conviction equals no guilt.
For others - the volume of testimony will be enough to form an opinion,
and some who don't give a damn either way.

You missed out the people of the
No smoke without fire who needs firm evidence, I like a good rumour, he/she must be guilty persuasion.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

Prosecuting the dead has been practiced in the past, but now only happens in Russia
JURIST - Forum:Prosecuting the Dead

So, despite some previously abandoned police investigations being reopened, it is not possible for the courts to 'pass judgement'.

For some people - no conviction equals no guilt.
For others - the volume of testimony will be enough to form an opinion,
and some who don't give a damn either way.

Whichever category you consider yourself to be in, do not abuse the persons who have decided differently from you.

No Margaret you discuss the issue's talk about them then decide that I was right in the first place, easy really

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

That's a good point - there are so many talking loud now, well why didn't they do something back then? Especially a Barrister who's career could not be damaged by Savile in the same way someone in Radio or TV could as Savile was a big shot in the media.

Thats why stories of this type just don't sit to well with me and never will, in a court of law you have a right of reply and your guilt has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In the muck raking press you don't get that chance and they're safe from being sued for libel if your "victim" is dead

[Balbus]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

That's a good point - there are so many talking loud now, well why didn't they do something back then? Especially a Barrister who's career could not be damaged by Savile in the same way someone in Radio or TV could as Savile was a big shot in the media.

This was insufficent evidence to found a conviction for anything. There was no complaint by any of the girls, and no other evidence.

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Thats why stories of this type just don't sit to well with me and never will, in a court of law you have a right of reply and your guilt has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In the muck raking press you don't get that chance and they're safe from being sued for libel if your "victim" is dead

But if the figure of women keeps going up then I would think that would tip the scales because if it does keep going up then they are not all going to get big pay days off it and the more that come forward the less they are going to get paid.

There have been 2 incidents so far when Savile was alive in which he was questioned under caution by the Police about a complaint from a woman and also the Haut de la Garenne situaition. He first claimed he never been there but latter admitted that he had. He also took legal action against the Sun for printing something he didn't like.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Less

You missed out the people of the
No smoke without fire who needs firm evidence, I like a good rumour, he/she must be guilty persuasion.

Of course there are also the he/she must be guilty by association brigade to be considered, they won't just think he is guilty, but anyone that was friends or a fan, 'must have known and are just as bad'.

Before Garry Glitter was exposed for what he was, a very good female friend of mine used to dress up as him and do charity gigs singing do you want to be in my gang.
Of course after he was exposed she stopped doing it.
She had been a fan but was no longer. She worked at a place employing mainly women, for sometime afterwards she would get nasty anonymous letters left at her work station and sent to her home. Making rather nasty suggestions that she must have known what he was like and did she send him pictures of her children?
Some really sick people out there.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Balbus

This was insufficent evidence to found a conviction for anything. There was no complaint by any of the girls, and no other evidence.

So best to say nowt? That don't sit well wi me for a barrister, They don't say nowt in a court of law.

[MargaretR]

So now it has been screened and those of you who have concerns will have watched.

I said in an earlier post that I expected that only the tip of the iceburg would be seen - and it was so.

The allegations of necrophilia at Leeds hospital morgue, and the procuring/pimping of boys in Jersey and Surrey are seemingly ignored.

As such this 'revelation' appears to be a damage limitation excercise - to supply the public with enough to digest in order to sicken them, whilst more atrocious stuff will never see the light of day.

It will soon be yesterday's chip wrappers and the still living guilty will breathe a sigh of relief.

[cashman]

Whilst it may or may not be correct, Might have known yeh would know more Margaret.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cashman

Whilst it may or may not be correct, Might have known yeh would know more Margaret.

Well she obviously knows more than me too cashy, I'd never any intention of watching a one side program anyway

[Boeing Guy]

Lets not forget Jay, that Margaret has sources of information that are better than ITV, after all she keeps telling us the Mainstream TV companies are lying...
She seems to want it both ways, obviously they aren't lying about Sir Jim.
#still it sells papers and makes for gossip. Shame he cannot defend himself from the grave

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

Lets not forget Jay, that Margaret has sources of information that are better than ITV, after all she keeps telling us the Mainstream TV companies are lying...
She seems to want it both ways, obviously they aren't lying about Sir Jim.
#still it sells papers and makes for gossip. Shame he cannot defend himself from the grave

Ya the clock has two faces BG