Are you blind.....or purposely mis-quoting in order to rake up trouble?
THIS is what I actually wrote;At no time or in ANY of my posts did I mention "under-aged girls" and if you continue along this line of mis-quoting then I shall take the matter further.
And what I wrote is that you said that - without the term 'under-age' - in the context of a thread about a man fondling under-age girls. It was the context which gave your posts the unpleasant undertones to me. You may not have meant them, but they were there, because of the context.
I honestly don't know what this facepalm means, but whatever. I can see exactly where Bulletguy is coming from, too many females screaming sexual abuse when, in reality, there isn't any. It's going to get to the ridiculous stage where a male is going to be petrified of even looking at a member of the opposite sex for fear of hysteria because she believes that he's got ulterior and sinister motives.
No, it isn't.
Facepalm means having your face in your hands out of serious or jovial exasperation.
There is no law stopping you engaging in consensual touching.
I read your posts the same way Goonst did - you need to clarify your views better - I got the impression that you wanted to both touch up under-16s and you wanted the freedom to touch up any woman you liked. I got that impression just like goonst.
HOLY S**T......
Since when have "under 16s" been IN THE WORKPLACE? Or do you still believe we send kids up fr**in' chimneys?
:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
Just think about what their neighours in their leafy suburbs'd say if Mr Robinson (the proverbial respectable, honest, decent, god fearing, law abiding citizen, pillar of the community who voluteers as a youth football team coach/ church volunteer/ helps out with the scouts) or Mister Wilkinson (an area manager for a bank or in a more senior position in a company)'s neighbours find out the reason for his 'business trips' to Bangkok or Amsterdam.
well its disgusting that parents seemingly need to get a check to watch their own kids sports day. But doctors in the nhs dont get struck off if found with child porn, barmy barmy barmy
I jumped up, I absolutely freaked out and started swearing and "What do you think you're doing?" And then I was just dragged out of the caravan by two of the staff.
I was told what a filthy mouth I have, how can I make those terrible accusations.
Before he died.
He said: ‘Early last year I was asked by a contact if I was aware of allegations that had circulated for years about Savile and young girls and if I knew of an investigation into a complaint made to Surrey police in 2007.
Reported on the day he died.
Rumours of under-age sex circulated for some years, although the fact that no allegations of impropriety ever appeared in print seemed to confirm Savile’s own insistence that he had “no past, no nothing”.
All of those clearly show that any allegations were out there, BEFORE his death. SAYING THAT THEY ARE MAKING ALLEGATIONS BECAUSE HE HAS DIED, IS TOTALLY UNTRUE.
Whether or not the allegations are true, the reasons given for summarily dismissing them, are ridiculous and indeed disturbing, A combination of common sense and the contents of the news reports mean that they cannot be dismissed on the grounds of being made after his death or for not being able to be concretely provable. How many similar cases anywhere can be concretely proven?
I had a part-time job at 14. My mum and dad also did what working class people of the day tended to do. Left school at 15 and straight into full time work (1950s). Both of them would have been easily smart enough for GCEs/GCSEs but the mentality was that those kinds of exams were for grammar school children en route to uni. Everyone else was prepared for the workplace and, like a lots of people of their day, dad went into a machine shop (apprenticeship) , mum into a typing pool (secretarial training). That's where they met. Good old Montague Burtons in Leeds. JS was a popular figure in the city, even then, and had a big role to play in the music scene.
The point I'm making is that JS might not have seen much wrong with dating 15 year olds back in the day as many of them were in full time work and perhaps regarded as 'of age' as a consequence. Not that I am in any way saying that if he was molesting under-age girls, that it was okay.
well its disgusting that parents seemingly need to get a check to watch their own kids sports day.
Is that before or after:-
the lies about the recession (Too many things to mention that make me convinced that it's all one big lie)
The idea that holding the Olympics, jubilee and a European Cup'll keep the mob (The populace) appeased (the Roman Emporors tried it with the gladiators).
As did the Rochdale authorities, you mean? It's a scandal that in this present day and age, the authorities turn a blind eye to abuse cases. And we're told that things have got better over the yes.
Pfft!
You've obviously no idea of all the investigations into child abuse in care homes during this period. Extensive investigations have been undertaken, prosecutions & compensation paid. Just going to the default mode like above is not untypical. Just as an aside there has also been plenty of evidence of collusion between residents of these homes putting foward false allegations to get compensation. As I said it needs investigation by the relevant authorities not a tv broadcast/tabloid coverage for the titilation of the masses,
Is that before or after:-
the lies about the recession (Too many things to mention that make me convinced that it's all one big lie)
The idea that holding the Olympics, jubilee and a European Cup'll keep the mob (The populace) appeased (the Roman Emporors tried it with the gladiators).
Why didnt anyone make a complaint when he was alive? And for those who say some did why then did nobody listen? Im sure the Police would have investigated any claim.
Serves no interest to chase him now he is dead and cant defend himself.
I think the age of consent is treated more seriously nowadays than it used to be, in so far as a man in his 40's sleeping with a 15yr old would be seen as an abuser. I'm not sure it would have been seen like that back then. I can remember being 15 and having to regularly fend off the advances of a boss in his 40's and it was laughed off by the other staff as though he was just a jack the lad type.
The article does mention girls could have been as young as 12 with Saville though.
You know, given there's about four different threads on Digital Spy, in different forums, all on this topic, which have collectively taken posts all day, and that's three days before the programme even airs, can you imagine what it's going to be like in the twenty four hours after the programme goes on air!?:eek:
Why didnt anyone make a complaint when he was alive? And for those who say some did why then did nobody listen? Im sure the Police would have investigated any claim.
Serves no interest to chase him now he is dead and cant defend himself.
THEY DID. How easy do you think it would have been to get a Knight of Malta, who was good friends with the Pope, and the Israeli and British government, convicted of rape? This goes a lot deeper than just Savile...
Why didnt anyone make a complaint when he was alive? And for those who say some did why then did nobody listen? Im sure the Police would have investigated any claim.
Serves no interest to chase him now he is dead and cant defend himself.
it just said on itv news that a complaint was made to the police back in 2007 but nothing came of it.
His PA of forty years says she doesn't recognise any of this alleged behaviour. He even fired her for no reason, which she has never forgiven him for, so she would have every reason to get her own back.
You know, given there's about four different threads on Digital Spy, in different forums, all on this topic, which have collectively taken posts all day, and that's three days before the programme even airs, can you imagine what it's going to be like in the twenty four hours after the programme goes on air!?:eek:
Why didnt anyone make a complaint when he was alive? And for those who say some did why then did nobody listen? Im sure the Police would have investigated any claim.
Serves no interest to chase him now he is dead and cant defend himself.
If you had even made the effort to read the top of this very page you'd see that they did complain before, and there were prior investigations. The rumours have been circulating for effing ages, but I reckon you do get a certain amount of the benefit of the doubt - more so than us lesser mortals - when you're such a high profile figure, even if you really oughtn't. Esther Rantzen has said something along similar lines I believe.
Anyway it's pretty rational for people to have been abused to fear their abuser and for that to possibly prevent them from speaking out. Once that fear is removed it will no doubt be less daunting. If it is true, then his true character being acknowledged may provide the victims with a degree of closure. That's a valid reason not to just 'let it lie,' IMO.
Comments
Appreciate your post.
And what I wrote is that you said that - without the term 'under-age' - in the context of a thread about a man fondling under-age girls. It was the context which gave your posts the unpleasant undertones to me. You may not have meant them, but they were there, because of the context.
No, it isn't.
Facepalm means having your face in your hands out of serious or jovial exasperation.
Since when have "under 16s" been IN THE WORKPLACE? Or do you still believe we send kids up fr**in' chimneys?
Under 16s can and do work short hours. And there were certainly under 16s in Jimmy Saville's workplace.
This guy wasn't just the doddering old dj people thought he was, he had serious power ... you were just never shown that side of him.
Complaint made at the time. Before he died. Reported on the day he died. All of those clearly show that any allegations were out there, BEFORE his death. SAYING THAT THEY ARE MAKING ALLEGATIONS BECAUSE HE HAS DIED, IS TOTALLY UNTRUE.
Whether or not the allegations are true, the reasons given for summarily dismissing them, are ridiculous and indeed disturbing, A combination of common sense and the contents of the news reports mean that they cannot be dismissed on the grounds of being made after his death or for not being able to be concretely provable. How many similar cases anywhere can be concretely proven?
The point I'm making is that JS might not have seen much wrong with dating 15 year olds back in the day as many of them were in full time work and perhaps regarded as 'of age' as a consequence. Not that I am in any way saying that if he was molesting under-age girls, that it was okay.
Is that before or after:-
the lies about the recession (Too many things to mention that make me convinced that it's all one big lie)
The idea that holding the Olympics, jubilee and a European Cup'll keep the mob (The populace) appeased (the Roman Emporors tried it with the gladiators).
You've obviously no idea of all the investigations into child abuse in care homes during this period. Extensive investigations have been undertaken, prosecutions & compensation paid. Just going to the default mode like above is not untypical. Just as an aside there has also been plenty of evidence of collusion between residents of these homes putting foward false allegations to get compensation. As I said it needs investigation by the relevant authorities not a tv broadcast/tabloid coverage for the titilation of the masses,
Plenty of 14-15 year olds do work experience in adult workplaces.
Whoa, I remember that storyline and the actors involved. Blimey, takes me back ...
pass....
Why didnt anyone make a complaint when he was alive? And for those who say some did why then did nobody listen? Im sure the Police would have investigated any claim.
Serves no interest to chase him now he is dead and cant defend himself.
The article does mention girls could have been as young as 12 with Saville though.
THEY DID. How easy do you think it would have been to get a Knight of Malta, who was good friends with the Pope, and the Israeli and British government, convicted of rape? This goes a lot deeper than just Savile...
it just said on itv news that a complaint was made to the police back in 2007 but nothing came of it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/9577037/Jim-liked-being-snapped-with-young-bits-of-crumpet-but-would-not-have-risked-his-image.html
I have had the Jim fix it tune playing in my mind on permanent loop back all day. I hate it when a tune gets stuck like that.
Suggests to me then that the evidence put forward had no supporting facts or wasn't credible.
Or are we now saying the BBC, the Police all conspired together?
I may take Thursday and Friday off.
If you had even made the effort to read the top of this very page you'd see that they did complain before, and there were prior investigations. The rumours have been circulating for effing ages, but I reckon you do get a certain amount of the benefit of the doubt - more so than us lesser mortals - when you're such a high profile figure, even if you really oughtn't. Esther Rantzen has said something along similar lines I believe.
Anyway it's pretty rational for people to have been abused to fear their abuser and for that to possibly prevent them from speaking out. Once that fear is removed it will no doubt be less daunting. If it is true, then his true character being acknowledged may provide the victims with a degree of closure. That's a valid reason not to just 'let it lie,' IMO.
Not prosecuting someone is not alwayz due to lack of evidence and as for your second comment yes it happens