Jimmy Saville to be revealed as a paedophile? (Part 7)

1119120122124125139

Comments

  • honeythewitchhoneythewitch Posts: 37,237
    Forum Member
    Daisydoes wrote: »
    No reason??? And you know this how?? Maybe these allegations are too serious to be done over a video link! So many posters on here who are blaming the victims, police, CPS or media for this "witch hunt!" Not you personally just in general

    I think all of us here are very concerned for children's safety, and for anyone who has been attacked, we are just approaching the matter in different ways and hopefully learning as we go?

    The whole of Australia has heard the allegations, unfortunately.

    http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/paid-interviews-may-risk-trial-20130513-2ji96.html
  • CryolemonCryolemon Posts: 8,670
    Forum Member
    Suspects should have right to anonymity at arrest - Theresa May.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22548065

    (I agree with her for once)

    I'm minded to agree with her too, but there was a huge shitstorm last time someone suggested this.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 87,224
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MWT's programme about the Tia Sharp case: 'Living With A Killer' is on this Thursday 16th May at 7.30pm on ITV1 (instead of advertised prog)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 595
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think all of us here are very concerned for children's safety, and for anyone who has been attacked, we are just approaching the matter in different ways and hopefully learning as we go?

    The whole of Australia has heard the allegations, unfortunately.

    http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/paid-interviews-may-risk-trial-20130513-2ji96.html

    Paid for interviews BEFORE going to the police apparently and the accusation is;
    "Ms Lee alleges Harris inappropriately touched her while they sat with the group at a table and again outside the pub’s bathroom."

    As far as I am aware inappropriate touching is not a serious sexual assault in the same league as rape or abuse such as those girls in the various rings have suffered. I don't think it is serious enough to send two officers to Australia at least initially.

    I also feel annoyed at the implication that I don't care about these accusations. I do when they are serious but not when they appear to be trivial bum pinching etc especially when the "victims" were over 16. I also care that valuable resources are channelled into sending policemen to Australia and possibly to the Falkland Islands. Use video links first and use the savings to help those in current need - and I am sure that there are many.
  • skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Daisydoes wrote: »
    No reason??? And you know this how?? Maybe these allegations are too serious to be done over a video link! So many posters on here who are blaming the victims, police, CPS or media for this "witch hunt!" Not you personally just in general

    Do you know that this witness who has kept quiet for so many years has information that is worthy of taxpayers cash to fly officers to Asutralia ( when it could have been done via videolink ) , and I mean information that she did not give to the Australian media already for a fee ? Sorry but I do have to question those that see the Media as another option of 999 and take money for it .

    Any allegation that is so serious should go to the police first not the media ! and I dont care for any excuses otherwise, unless the police dont listen then you can tell the media then the fact that the police did not take you seriously ( if that was the case ) can be mentioned.,
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 466
    Forum Member
    skp20040 wrote: »
    No I am not rambling, I am just not cowtowing to your opinion

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-abused-three-sick-1891672
  • jack pattersonjack patterson Posts: 1,029
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭

    So what are we saying here? that there was nobody else in the hospitals and Savile just wandered about doing what he liked and there was nobody there to see a thing?..

    or are we saying that doctors. nurses,professors specialists,vistors, cleaners and security were so just awe struck by 'the great' Jimmy Savile (who appeared on TOTPS for about 5 minutes every third Thursday) that they just laughed off anything reported to them as he was just to 'great' to be challenged?
    One 'victim' says he cannot remember which hospital his incident happened, surely a truamatic event like that would be etched in the memory?

    ..and of course he visited these hospitals year in year out so was there ever a request (to do things quietly without fuss) that he should not visit anymore?
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,809
    Forum Member
    Would not hospitals have staff records and medical records to pinpoint incidents and who may have been informed?

    Such as in the events recalled at Leeds Infirmary by Terry Pratt?
    Mr Pratt said he became suspicious when Savile began arriving in the middle of the night in the late 1980s with teenage girls who seemed "star-struck" and were "not very streetwise".

    Which produced this response from the hospital
    "Mr Pratt appears to have been talking about a period in the 1980s before he started work at the hospital in 1990 and not from first-hand knowledge."

    The spokesman said the trust had been given an assurance that the porters did not have a key to unlock the nurses' home.

    "The building had a warden on duty 24 hours a day and we understand access was very strictly controlled to protect the staff living there."
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,809
    Forum Member
    Mark Robson reveals Michael Jackson forced him to have sex between the ages of 7 and 14.
    http://www.tmz.com/2013/05/16/wade-robson-michael-jackson-molestation-today-show-video/
  • skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    hydon wrote: »

    Do you not get it ????? When the Savile case came out last year everyone was appalled, but at that time people stated whilst a prolific sex attacker at that time it did not appear he was a paedophile as there were no reports of attacks on children that young , later it has emerged he did attack children so people have said yes in additopn to being a sex attacker , a hebephile and ebophile he was also a paedophile.

    You think that the latest news and an article from the 16th may this year means everyone else was wrong and you were right and its ok for you to take some moral high grounb because people waited for facts before labelling him ????

    Do you think its ok to label people in advance , I mean surely someone is not a paedophile until they are proven to be one or should we follow your line and call all sex attackers paedophiles ? thats what you seem to be saying in your " I was right everyone else was wrong" routine.
  • honeythewitchhoneythewitch Posts: 37,237
    Forum Member
    i4u wrote: »
    Mark Robson reveals Michael Jackson forced him to have sex between the ages of 7 and 14.
    http://www.tmz.com/2013/05/16/wade-robson-michael-jackson-molestation-today-show-video/

    It is not unusual for an abused person to deny it and defend their attacker for many years afterwards. As children we accept as normal whatever is presented to us as "normal" and that idea can be hard to shift.
  • honeythewitchhoneythewitch Posts: 37,237
    Forum Member
    hydon wrote: »

    I dont like headlines like this because it implies that it is somehow "worse" if the child is younger, as if an older child is somehow complicit or more able to prevent it.

    If the hospital staff who apparently allowed a sex offender into a hospital knowing that the patients would be attacked and even advising them to "pretend to be asleep" actually exist, I would like to see them prosecuted!
    But it all sounds rather far fetched.
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,809
    Forum Member
    i4u wrote: »
    Wade Robson reveals Michael Jackson forced him to have sex between the ages of 7 and 14.
    http://www.tmz.com/2013/05/16/wade-robson-michael-jackson-molestation-today-show-video/

    Oops that should be Wade Robson
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 87,224
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Sally Bercow pleads innocence over Lord McAlpine Twitter storm
    Speaker's wife says she was merely sharing random thought over Newsnight show that wrongly linked peer to abuse scandal

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/16/sally-bercow-lord-mcalpine-twitter
  • jjnejjne Posts: 6,580
    Forum Member
    hydon wrote: »

    Woman who failed to report seeing Savile abusing, condemns report for being slightly less than clear on victims' ages.

    Hmmm.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 466
    Forum Member
    skp20040 wrote: »
    Do you not get it ????? When the Savile case came out last year everyone was appalled, but at that time people stated whilst a prolific sex attacker at that time it did not appear he was a paedophile as there were no reports of attacks on children that young , later it has emerged he did attack children so people have said yes in additopn to being a sex attacker , a hebephile and ebophile he was also a paedophile.

    You think that the latest news and an article from the 16th may this year means everyone else was wrong and you were right and its ok for you to take some moral high grounb because people waited for facts before labelling him ????

    Do you think its ok to label people in advance , I mean surely someone is not a paedophile until they are proven to be one or should we follow your line and call all sex attackers paedophiles ? thats what you seem to be saying in your " I was right everyone else was wrong" routine.

    Of course I'm not saying everyone else was wrong, just you!...............................http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...e-sick-1891672
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,809
    Forum Member
    jjne wrote: »
    Woman who failed to report seeing Savile abusing, condemns report for being slightly less than clear on victims' ages.

    Hmmm.

    Last October the Mirror reported...
    'I saw Jimmy Savile grope brain surgery patient': Ex-nurse claims she saw sex attack on teenage girl in hospital.

    In the latest shocking allegation against the TV star, June Thornton, 80, said he fondled the young woman while working as a volunteer porter in 1972
  • skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    hydon wrote: »
    Of course I'm not saying everyone else was wrong, just you!...............................[url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...e-sick-1891672[/url]

    So we have gone from
    hydon wrote: »
    Where are those "masterminds" on here, who claimed savile was not a true "paedo" because he only attacked pubescent girls, when the truth is he went after anything that moved,and in all probability even some that couldn't move.

    To it just being me who was wrong in your mind . Oh well you keep to your agenda I will stick to waiting for facts (not gossip, guessing games or assumptions) before labelling anyone.
  • jjnejjne Posts: 6,580
    Forum Member
    i4u wrote: »

    Indeed.

    This woman failed to tell the authorities about the incident in 1972.

    It's no use coming up and reporting these things 40 years later.

    A victim saying nothing is understandable. A witness saying nothing is inexcusable.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 87,224
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tia Sharp prog just starting on ITV.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 466
    Forum Member
    skp20040 wrote: »
    So we have gone from



    To it just being me who was wrong in your mind . Oh well you keep to your agenda I will stick to waiting for facts (not gossip, guessing games or assumptions) before labelling anyone.

    ...http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...e-sick-1891672
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 87,224
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Celebrities in the dock and the affair with a teacher that makes me queasy about always blaming the older man

    "From the first day of term when I walked into his form room and clocked his age (mid-30s) and slightly dishevelled hair, I had felt the unmistakable stirrings of teenage lust.
    No matter that I had just turned 16 and never had a proper boyfriend. This man, surely, was the man for me. And I was going to go all out to get him, no matter what it took."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2325145/Celebrities-dock-affair-teacher-makes-queasy-blaming-older-man.html#ixzz2TUogZjkm

    Controversial article by Shona Sibary
  • jerseyporterjerseyporter Posts: 2,332
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Celebrities in the dock and the affair with a teacher that makes me queasy about always blaming the older man

    "From the first day of term when I walked into his form room and clocked his age (mid-30s) and slightly dishevelled hair, I had felt the unmistakable stirrings of teenage lust.
    No matter that I had just turned 16 and never had a proper boyfriend. This man, surely, was the man for me. And I was going to go all out to get him, no matter what it took."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2325145/Celebrities-dock-affair-teacher-makes-queasy-blaming-older-man.html#ixzz2TUogZjkm

    Controversial article by Shona Sibary

    Oh my God - I wouldn't normally say I have a lot in common with Ms Sibary, but almost every aspect of her story is familiar to me, including the subject the teacher taught - except she had a sexual relationship with her teacher and I didn't (we kissed a couple of times, which was as far as the physical went, but it was no less intense for that - maybe more so than if he had taken full advantage of my 'love'.). Whilst the way the teachers handled their crush-ridden pupils, their ability to realise where the lines were and when they needed to be respected, were different in mine and Ms Sibary's cases... can we define it as abuse? This is where some of the definitions now, as opposed to then, are becoming grey and mixed up, and I have to wonder (genuinely wonder - that's not the same as doubt) if a number of the middle-aged women coming forward now, citing 'abuse' at the hands of someone famous 30, 40 years ago is looking back and getting lost in the greyness.

    I must emphasise that I do not doubt that in the midst of all the greyness we are hearing about many awful cases of abuse that are sickening. I have two friends who were horribly sexually abused 30 years ago when they were young/mid teens and I know what abuse is in graphic detail I wish I didn't know. I also don't doubt that, for some of those looking back into the greyness of things that happened (similar to myself and Ms Sibary) it does feel 'wrong' (because, of course, it was in its way) but is it abuse in the way I understand it to be when I look at my two friends?

    For me and my friends (and this is purely our own take formulated through years of talking) we think that the definition of 'abuse' mostly comes down to two variables: the actions of the person with the power (in my case, a teacher, but it could be a celebrity, a family member...) and the effects (positive and negative, short-term and longer-term) that that 'relationship' had/has had on the person who was caught up in the effects of that power.

    The things is, only each individual person can make that decision because only they know how what happened to them has affected them. That's why it's such a grey area. That's why Ms Sibary sees what happened to her as not abuse, and yet other women looking back on similar experiences with different people, are possibly coming forward and saying they were abused. The complication comes from any who might be coming forward (hopefully the minority) who are deliberately 'mis-remembering' or 'jumping on the bandwagon' (it does happen - it's a way of seeking attention for those who are driven by that) yet knowing full well that what happened to them wasn't abuse and the person they are complaining about isn't an abuser in the sense of the word that someone living with the negative effects every day (like my friends) would recognise.

    Maybe it's too basic a means of assessing if a past experience which involves sexual feeling/sexual conduct, kissing or whatever has been destructive and abusive or not, but to me and my friends the 'smile and memory test' helps put things in perspective. In other words, I can look back of what happened between me and my teacher and smile (I often re-read the diary I kept then and cringe!) but I was not, and am not harmed by it and my teacher didn't intend to use his power to control me and didn't intend to harm me. Did Ms Sibary's teacher intend to harm her by making their relationship sexual or was he just, as she says, a weak man? She seems to be happy to say it was the latter, but perhaps other girls would feel differently looking back and define their experience as something more harmful than Ms Sibary does. But my two friends who suffered what I know to be severe abuse can't look back and smile and they never will. There are no memories they want to keep of that time, yet they cannot get rid of them. They were harmed long-term, and their abusers both intended that to happen. They're in their mid-40s now, but it might as well have been yesterday because the affects are still there, as fresh as the time it happened.

    An abuser has power without conscience, a total disregard for the well-being of the person they have focused that power on - they are driven by their own greed and need to serve their warped feelings and it destroys lives. I have to agree with her when she says that we shouldn't be thinking of lowering the age of consent - I have 18 and 15 year old daughters myself now, and they also say it shouldn't be lowered. Whilst it may only be a 'nominal' figure in these days of early sexual activity being more normal for some teenagers, it still affords some kind of protection and it does need to be there.
This discussion has been closed.