I heard most of these rumours a decade ago on here. Including the dead body stuff. So it seems utterly bizarre its taken so long for someone to investigate it.
I can understand why it took so long for it to be investigated. Who would have believed the victims?
But the fact that there were people who knew but either looked the other way, or actually
facilitate the abuse, that needs to be looked into and some heads will need to roll.
If you saw the Louis Theroux programme with Savile, you can tell that he was fully aware of all the rumours about him. It's a shame that it probably won't ever be re-shown, because with hindsight, it might reveal all kinds of clues. Strangely enough, it isn't even on YouTube ...
This is how he handled things. Hiding in plain sight, joking about those things that were actually true, but most people would not even consider to be real because it was too horrific.
You do know that people are allowed to comment on your post?, they stated their opinion on it, which I agree with and am also allowed, as I havent broken any ds rules, which, afaik, allow opposite opinions on posts as long as they adhere to the ds T&C's.
If you want to make such posts, fine, but dont get upset if people disagree with your attitude.
You do know that people are allowed to comment on your post?, they stated their opinion on it, which I agree with and am also allowed, as I havent broken any ds rules, which, afaik, allow opposite opinions on posts as long as they adhere to the ds T&C's.
If you want to make such posts, fine, but dont get upset if people disagree with your attitude.
Oh I'm not upset and I expect people to disagree, this is a debate board after all.
Some people on here appear to be over-sensitive about a post that's in the Showbiz section, traditionally a home for all things pink and fluffy. It's the DS equivalent of Steve Allen giving us his Savile verdict.
What I do not understand is why nobody is being held responsible for letting Saville have the run of some hospitals, children's homes etc. There was a report in the newspapers where some nurses on the ward told children to pretend that they were asleep when Saville visited as they knew what was going on. Why was he allowed unsupervised access to patients and young children????? I believe he was able to take children out of homes for the day!!! Everyone is talking about Saville but nobody seems to be held responsible for allowing him access to children etc WHY?? Nothing can be done about Saville as he is dead but other people out there should be held responsible.
It sounds like JS was deliberately winding up someone who was naive and gullible, rather than giving a truthful account. His tendency to wind people up is evident in interviews he gave over the years - he seemed to get off on freaking people out.
I wouldn't be that surprised if that was the case, but it wouldn't be all that surprising if it was true either. Savile is almost turning into the devil these days it seems.
Former government ministers as well as NHS staff should be held accountable for the failure to prevent sexual abuse committed in hospitals by Jimmy Savile, the health secretary has said.
Jeremy Hunt said NHS staff could face prosecution or disciplinary action after a series of official investigations found that Savile abused patients aged between five and 75 over a period of decades until as recently as 2010.
Hunt said it was "indefensible" that the former Conservative minister Edwina Currie was found to have allowed Savile to take on a governing role at the high-security prison hospital at Broadmoor after the former BBC DJ promised to deal with problems he claimed to have uncovered with union workers at the site.
Why do I think that
(1) the Gvt/Police will only name NHS employees who are long retired, or even deceased.
(2) AFAIK Edwina Currie isn't liked by David Cameron & co, and, I'm guessing, it would be no sacrifice to put her through some form of show trial (= latter wild assumption based on fact that a Tory Minister has actually spoken in support of the investigators' criticism - above ).
Not that EC attracts my sympathy as such, but BBC top brass who also enabled Savile's crimes appear to have got away scot free.
Jimmy Savile necrophiliac rumours have been around since the 1970s. In light of his recent activities I thought he'd started these rumours himself in order to deflect the spotlight from his real pursuit. More "hiding in plain sight". It may well be that they were true too but no one really believed them back then thinking they were too outlandish to be genuine.
I still will never quite understand how he got away with what he did for so long. Despite some major revisionist history on how he was perceived as a public figure and how "powerful" he was, I cannot get my head round a jumped up DJ who did a bit of "charridee" work having that much influence and control over his employers and almost everyone he apparently came into contact with. It just doesn't make sense.
I met him in a tea room in Glencoe a number of years ago and whilst he was perfectly pleasant, he gave us all the creeps and none of us had heard any rumours about him at that time.
I've been reading the Leeds report and it is very disturbing. Regarding the alleged mortuary incidents and his 'portering' role, some of the key individuals who might have enabled him are dead so cannot be challenged or held to account. Some of the accounts given by his (living) victims are very harrowing, consistent in some ways but he varied his modus operandi in others. It is infuriating that people knew what was going on and didn't stop it but the report does go into some background and detail with regard to how this might have happened. There were many factors as work such as operational procedures within the LGI at the time (or lack thereof), a sense of deference to superiors within the NHS hierarchy during the years Savile was most prolific in his offending and a general culture that built up around him. As I've said before, he used a combination of charm and menace to get what he wanted. He was also adept at ingratiating himself with different hierarchies within the hospital environment- governors, consultants, managers, porters, nurses, patients' families and so on. Even those who found him sleazy, irritating and uncomfortable to be around and who did manage to rebuff his advances were intimidated by the web he created around himself. He was able to sniff out publicity and often took centre-stage at hospital fundraising events that had nothing to do with him, undermining the work of other volunteers, which just shows how mercenary and arrogant he was. Again, the 'hiding in plain sight' analogy fits him well.
I still will never quite understand how he got away with what he did for so long. Despite some major revisionist history on how he was perceived as a public figure and how "powerful" he was, I cannot get my head round a jumped up DJ who did a bit of "charridee" work having that much influence and control over his employers and almost everyone he apparently came into contact with. It just doesn't make sense.
How I see it is that he was arrogant, and thought he was powerful, and managed to be so sure of himself that it convinced everyone else.
How I see it is that he was arrogant, and thought he was powerful, and managed to be so sure of himself that it convinced everyone else.
Possibly, but to the extent he did it? There must have been plenty of people turning a blind eye for reasons that suited them, either financial or their own "practices" were very dodgy. The whole think stinks, badly.
Oh I'm not upset and I expect people to disagree, this is a debate board after all.
Some people on here appear to be over-sensitive about a post that's in the Showbiz section, traditionally a home for all things pink and fluffy. It's the DS equivalent of Steve Allen giving us his Savile verdict.
Well, I'm sorry but i don't think it's 'over-sensitive' to be disgusted at people on here making light of something that still affects many people out there. I don't understand this whole flippancy over the Saville case. It's as though some really find it impossible not to blame the victims, or to just treat the whole thing as a joke. This may be the entertainment section but those kinds of posts are just not funny.
It seems to be the ultimate example of 'hiding in plain sight'. I doubt he would would have been low profile in the hospital but the cult of celebrity dazzles so brightly people only see what they want to, certainly a man who was fetted by the pope, Princess Diana, Thatcher, etc would be deemed to be beyond suspicion even when the rumours were flying years ago. My old gran, who if not actually phychic certainly had an uncanny gift for knowing people's darkest secrets, swore that he was up to no good with the departed, which always made watching Jim'll Fix It more interesting for us.
It makes you wonder who else falls under this description (BIB) very worrying how things can be ignored for so long!
It makes you wonder who else falls under this description (BIB) very worrying how things can be ignored for so long!
Well, as i said in a previous post, show-business has always been awash with damaged and crazy people. Being eccentric is often seen as a plus. However, how many are concealing a dangerous nature, god only knows. The problem is that, even if they are not universally admired, like Savile, they are still on this whole different plane. Ego can be a dangerous thing also if you are a sociopath and people are telling you how wonderful you are all the time. Saville WAS to an extent a national treasure, however much people try to claim that he was universally despised now. His charity work alone made him seen as saintly to many, and remember the crowds at his funeral? I think that the Theroux doc really shifted public opinion on him. But that was his VANITY coming through you see. He wanted to tease everyone, knowing that they wouldn't even guess the extent of his crimes.
I still think he's done worse. Whether we will ever be told all of it I very much doubt. (When sadists attain power they often diversify their "evil" into lots of different areas. I don't think JS got his thrills out of sex so much as exercising power and I believe he would have tried exercising his power over people in lots of different ways, some even worse than necrophilia, if that's possible.)
Possibly, but to the extent he did it? There must have been plenty of people turning a blind eye for reasons that suited them, either financial or their own "practices" were very dodgy. The whole think stinks, badly.
I still think he's done worse. Whether we will ever be told all of it I very much doubt.
I shudder to think what that could be:(
No, i have a feeling it's the associates he may have had, or the people that were covering for him, that would be the biggest shock to the public. I still wonder about his links to the establishment, and what secrets he took to the grave.
Comments
If you want me to take this thread seriously, then move it out of the "Showbiz" forum.
You seem to be a bit of a wallflower.
I can understand why it took so long for it to be investigated. Who would have believed the victims?
But the fact that there were people who knew but either looked the other way, or actually
facilitate the abuse, that needs to be looked into and some heads will need to roll.
This is how he handled things. Hiding in plain sight, joking about those things that were actually true, but most people would not even consider to be real because it was too horrific.
Careful now or someone will be along to declare this 'the sickest thing' they've ever seen on DS and demand you 'think of the victims'.
If you want to make such posts, fine, but dont get upset if people disagree with your attitude.
Oh I'm not upset and I expect people to disagree, this is a debate board after all.
Some people on here appear to be over-sensitive about a post that's in the Showbiz section, traditionally a home for all things pink and fluffy. It's the DS equivalent of Steve Allen giving us his Savile verdict.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rogerb/jokes/HIGNFY.txt
(warning, it's rather (very) graphic language)
Now: apparently it's a hoax, but was written in 1999...so it's been around for a long, long time.
I wouldn't be that surprised if that was the case, but it wouldn't be all that surprising if it was true either. Savile is almost turning into the devil these days it seems.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/26/nhs-staff-jimmy-savile-jeremy-hunt
Why do I think that
(1) the Gvt/Police will only name NHS employees who are long retired, or even deceased.
(2) AFAIK Edwina Currie isn't liked by David Cameron & co, and, I'm guessing, it would be no sacrifice to put her through some form of show trial (= latter wild assumption based on fact that a Tory Minister has actually spoken in support of the investigators' criticism - above ).
Not that EC attracts my sympathy as such, but BBC top brass who also enabled Savile's crimes appear to have got away scot free.
?
I still will never quite understand how he got away with what he did for so long. Despite some major revisionist history on how he was perceived as a public figure and how "powerful" he was, I cannot get my head round a jumped up DJ who did a bit of "charridee" work having that much influence and control over his employers and almost everyone he apparently came into contact with. It just doesn't make sense.
How I see it is that he was arrogant, and thought he was powerful, and managed to be so sure of himself that it convinced everyone else.
Possibly, but to the extent he did it? There must have been plenty of people turning a blind eye for reasons that suited them, either financial or their own "practices" were very dodgy. The whole think stinks, badly.
Well, I'm sorry but i don't think it's 'over-sensitive' to be disgusted at people on here making light of something that still affects many people out there. I don't understand this whole flippancy over the Saville case. It's as though some really find it impossible not to blame the victims, or to just treat the whole thing as a joke. This may be the entertainment section but those kinds of posts are just not funny.
It makes you wonder who else falls under this description (BIB) very worrying how things can be ignored for so long!
I didn't find it unfunny or tasteless. I guess that's opinions for you
@ Kiki H fan: as far as I know, the Daily Mail are pinning most things on immigration, give it time
Well, as i said in a previous post, show-business has always been awash with damaged and crazy people. Being eccentric is often seen as a plus. However, how many are concealing a dangerous nature, god only knows. The problem is that, even if they are not universally admired, like Savile, they are still on this whole different plane. Ego can be a dangerous thing also if you are a sociopath and people are telling you how wonderful you are all the time. Saville WAS to an extent a national treasure, however much people try to claim that he was universally despised now. His charity work alone made him seen as saintly to many, and remember the crowds at his funeral? I think that the Theroux doc really shifted public opinion on him. But that was his VANITY coming through you see. He wanted to tease everyone, knowing that they wouldn't even guess the extent of his crimes.
There was almost certainly some of that too.
I shudder to think what that could be:(
No, i have a feeling it's the associates he may have had, or the people that were covering for him, that would be the biggest shock to the public. I still wonder about his links to the establishment, and what secrets he took to the grave.