Watching the programme again Meirion Jones says Duncroft was an 'odd' place with 'weird' celebrities and 'minor' Royals visiting.
I know he visited the place due to his aunt being the head, apart from Savile why did he regard other celebrities as 'weird' ?I don't know why but have a sneaky feeling about Meirion.
why do you have a sneaky feeling about him??
bib - he didn't say the celebrities were wierd he said the place was weird
Including those who gave Savile the front door key to Broadmoor, his own bedroom at one of the Hospitals he frequented, carte blanche entry to facilitate parking of his Motorhome in the grounds of a Home for 'wayward' girls?
He had rooms at all the hospitals he volunteered at.
It's true that there are people who for reasons best known to themselves still feel like this, though they probably fall into the "guilty until proven innocent" crowd (or just hate the BBC anyway):
Which conveniently forgets that there is an ongoing major police investigation into all of this, therefore it's very premature to take action against anyone until the investigation has been concluded. Otherwise it's just like blaming modern Germany for World War 2. (Or, more accurately, the Germany of the 1960s for World War 2.) Or dosen't anyone trust the police anymore to find and prosecute guilty people?
And a word of advice for anyone on any discussion forum: PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.
Watching the programme again Meirion Jones says Duncroft was an 'odd' place with 'weird' celebrities and 'minor' Royals visiting.
I know he visited the place due to his aunt being the head, apart from Savile why did he regard other celebrities as 'weird' ?
I don't know why but have a sneaky feeling about Meirion.
Much the same feelings here.
I was concerned about Meirion's role in the Newsnight investigation from the moment I discovered his aunt was head of Duncroft.
I still don't understand why he was allowed to continue to have anything to do with it once the family relationship was known.
Hopefully we'll have a greater iinsight when Nick Pollard completes his inquiry.
bib - he didn't say the celebrities were wierd he said the place was weird
At about 10mins he says....
It was a very strange place and it was filled with wierd celebrities coming along*, film stars, all sorts of people, minor royality. Very, very, strange.
(*may have said 'around')
Later he described everything about the place as being odd.
So why were they wierd and remember his aunt was the head, did she have a say or was she just in charge of the educational side?
As to him being sneaky just feel he may have colluded with Mark William-Thomas and briefed against his boss.
Considering the title of the programme "What the BBC knew" no mention was made of the reported pitch to Panorama on 31 Oct 2011 and why he didn't take it further.
Liz MacKean mentions the 2007 investigation was a clincher but did the programme mention the CPS note attached to the file?
How about the apparent repeated requests for a letter claiming the police dropped the investigation because of Savile's age which resulted in a reported fake letter.
I accept the programme was looking at abuse by Savile, but if the police were wrong not to interview staff so was Meirion Jones as producer, or was everything based on his impressions?
It's true that there are people who for reasons best known to themselves still feel like this, though they probably fall into the "guilty until proven innocent" crowd (or just hate the BBC anyway):
Which conveniently forgets that there is an ongoing major police investigation into all of this, therefore it's very premature to take action against anyone until the investigation has been concluded.
What do you mean by “take action”? The arrests are part of the ongoing major police investigation.
Or dosen't anyone trust the police anymore to find and prosecute guilty people?
Because the police did such a bang-up job of bringing Savile to book while he was still alive? Is it any wonder people have little trust in them? Isn’t there an investigation into why their last (2007?) effort to get Savile also fell apart? Doesn’t exactly fill you with confidence does it?
It's true that there are people who for reasons best known to themselves still feel like this, though they probably fall into the "guilty until proven innocent" crowd (or just hate the BBC anyway):
Which conveniently forgets that there is an ongoing major police investigation into all of this, therefore it's very premature to take action against anyone until the investigation has been concluded. Otherwise it's just like blaming modern Germany for World War 2. (Or, more accurately, the Germany of the 1960s for World War 2.) Or dosen't anyone trust the police anymore to find and prosecute guilty people?
And a word of advice for anyone on any discussion forum: PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.
Interesting photo accompanying the story you linked to.
Savile's clothing emblazoned with pubicity for an ITV /Anglia Telethon.
Surely Anglia Television bosses aren't going to be accused of covering up for Savile.
Including those who gave Savile the front door key to Broadmoor, his own bedroom at one of the Hospitals he frequented, carte blanche entry to facilitate parking of his Motorhome in the grounds of a Home for 'wayward' girls?
Instead of starting at the bottom they need to go straight to the top and then work down........but that would mean embarrassing a huge number of senior political figures and 'respectable' persons of the establishment.
And we just can't have that can we?
You pose excellent questions here.
These are issues concerning Ministers at the very top of Margaret Thatcher's government of the time.
The two BBC inquiries are now underway and a similar level of scrutiny is needed about Savile's role at Broadmoor.
I was concerned about Meirion's role in the Newsnight investigation from the moment I discovered his aunt was head of Duncroft.
I still don't understand why he was allowed to continue to have anything to do with it once the family relationship was known.
Hopefully we'll have a greater iinsight when Nick Pollard completes his inquiry.
Wonder if Nick Pollard will ask what age Meirion Jones was when he visited the school.
Will the various computers be checked for who communicated with whom and when.
Were Liz Mackean's emails based on what Meirion Jones told her.
Panorama should have 'doorstepped' in their offices Peter Rippon, and those said to have applied pressure.
Freddie Starr on the news this morning said something like " I would never have gone into a dressing room with Savile and Glitter" as if it was the worse thing he could ever be accused of...... So he must have known something, even if he wasn't involved.
Freddie Starr on the news this morning said something like " I would never have gone into a dressing room with Savile and Glitter" as if it was the worse thing he could ever be accused of...... So he must have known something, even if he wasn't involved.
Maybe, or it could simply mean that he never did go into a dressing room with Savile and Glitter,
Freddie Starr on the news this morning said something like " I would never have gone into a dressing room with Savile and Glitter" as if it was the worse thing he could ever be accused of...... So he must have known something, even if he wasn't involved.
Maybe, or it could simply mean that he never did go into a dressing room with Savile and Glitter,
Yes, but at the time Glitter was not a convicted sex offender and Savile offenses were not acknowledged by any authorities so why would he not go into a dressing room with them? There is no reason for him to say 'no' if asked, especially as he was a guest on his show.
Yes, but at the time Glitter was not a convicted sex offender and Savile offenses were not acknowledged by any authorities so why would he not go into a dressing room with them? There is no reason for him to say 'no' if asked, especially as he was a guest on his show.
Oh I agree but it doesn't automatically mean that he said yes either.
You should go round and have a word with her, tell her all about how none of this is the BBC’s responsbility.
I hope she is also going to refuse to pay the portion of her taxes that go towards paying for the NHS as they are as responsible as the BBC. If not then she's simply a hypocrite.
And, luckily (or, more accurately, by design) they cannot prosecute without any factual evidence of wrong-doing. (Note: This does not include rumours, suspicions or doubts.)
You do realise the hypocrisy of that snipe, don't you?
I made sure to include a link to recently published Savile-related comment so, much as you like to think you scored points, you really didn’t. My comment was related to the quoted poster below who rarely adds anything to the topic to hand, capable only of sniping and carping it seems, mainly aimed at the posts of Doghouse and myself.
I hope she is also going to refuse to pay the portion of her taxes that go towards paying for the NHS as they are as responsible as the BBC. If not then she's simply a hypocrite.
And, luckily (or, more accurately, by design) they cannot prosecute without any factual evidence of wrong-doing. (Note: This does not include rumours, suspicions or doubts.)
Who on earth was claiming the CPS went to court armed only with rumours, suspicions or doubts? Nobody, that’s who.
The vast majority of your posts are nothing but carping at my heels and that of others you’re obsessed with, others who contribute constructive opinion and content to this forum whilst you yourself just dog their steps with your incessant personal criticism. If you put as much energy into discussing the subjects at hand as you do stalking sundry people across DS then you’d help contribute to the better posting environment you pretend to want.
......
Looks like the other names are beginning to emerge:
Reggie Perrin abused me at Beeb
Legend Leonard Rossiter named in sex attack at BBC HQ
I made sure to include a link to recently published Savile-related comment so, much as you like to think you scored points, you really didn’t. My comment was related to the quoted poster below who rarely adds anything to the topic to hand, capable only of sniping and carping it seems, mainly aimed at the posts of Doghouse and myself.
A simple "yes" would have done, It certainly would have saved you the embarrassment of your follow up.
But hey ho.....there's no accounting for some people's misguided perceptions of themselves.
Yes, but at the time Glitter was not a convicted sex offender and Savile offenses were not acknowledged by any authorities so why would he not go into a dressing room with them? There is no reason for him to say 'no' if asked, especially as he was a guest on his show.
Exactly.... Either way Starr is lying, he either went in there with them or knew what they were up to and declined Saviles invite.
Exactly.... Either way Starr is lying, he either went in there with them or knew what they were up to and declined Saviles invite.
but this is it...if you look at the archive footage on youtube
its two different clunk click shows ..so glitter and starr wouldn't have been in the dressing room at the same time
Comments
I know he visited the place due to his aunt being the head, apart from Savile why did he regard other celebrities as 'weird' ?
I don't know why but have a sneaky feeling about Meirion.
why do you have a sneaky feeling about him??
bib - he didn't say the celebrities were wierd he said the place was weird
http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/norfolk_woman_refuses_to_pay_bbc_licence_fee_in_jimmy_savile_protest_1_1678434
Which conveniently forgets that there is an ongoing major police investigation into all of this, therefore it's very premature to take action against anyone until the investigation has been concluded. Otherwise it's just like blaming modern Germany for World War 2. (Or, more accurately, the Germany of the 1960s for World War 2.) Or dosen't anyone trust the police anymore to find and prosecute guilty people?
And a word of advice for anyone on any discussion forum: PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.
Much the same feelings here.
I was concerned about Meirion's role in the Newsnight investigation from the moment I discovered his aunt was head of Duncroft.
I still don't understand why he was allowed to continue to have anything to do with it once the family relationship was known.
Hopefully we'll have a greater iinsight when Nick Pollard completes his inquiry.
At about 10mins he says....
Later he described everything about the place as being odd.
So why were they wierd and remember his aunt was the head, did she have a say or was she just in charge of the educational side?
As to him being sneaky just feel he may have colluded with Mark William-Thomas and briefed against his boss.
Considering the title of the programme "What the BBC knew" no mention was made of the reported pitch to Panorama on 31 Oct 2011 and why he didn't take it further.
Liz MacKean mentions the 2007 investigation was a clincher but did the programme mention the CPS note attached to the file?
How about the apparent repeated requests for a letter claiming the police dropped the investigation because of Savile's age which resulted in a reported fake letter.
I accept the programme was looking at abuse by Savile, but if the police were wrong not to interview staff so was Meirion Jones as producer, or was everything based on his impressions?
I already posted that link 4 posts up.
Pretty close to invoking Godwin’s Law there.
What do you mean by “take action”? The arrests are part of the ongoing major police investigation.
Because the police did such a bang-up job of bringing Savile to book while he was still alive? Is it any wonder people have little trust in them? Isn’t there an investigation into why their last (2007?) effort to get Savile also fell apart? Doesn’t exactly fill you with confidence does it?
And it’s the CPS who prosecute, not the police.
......
More BBC staff accused of sex abuse
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/more-bbc-staff-accused-of-sex-abuse-as-freddie-starr-is-freed-on-bail-8277282.html
I’m sure this will come as a surprise to no-one except the staunch defenders of the BBC.
Interesting photo accompanying the story you linked to.
Savile's clothing emblazoned with pubicity for an ITV /Anglia Telethon.
Surely Anglia Television bosses aren't going to be accused of covering up for Savile.
You pose excellent questions here.
These are issues concerning Ministers at the very top of Margaret Thatcher's government of the time.
The two BBC inquiries are now underway and a similar level of scrutiny is needed about Savile's role at Broadmoor.
Wonder if Nick Pollard will ask what age Meirion Jones was when he visited the school.
Will the various computers be checked for who communicated with whom and when.
Were Liz Mackean's emails based on what Meirion Jones told her.
Panorama should have 'doorstepped' in their offices Peter Rippon, and those said to have applied pressure.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/02/bbc-jimmy-savile
Big deal.
You do realise the hypocrisy of that snipe, don't you?
Maybe, or it could simply mean that he never did go into a dressing room with Savile and Glitter,
Yes, but at the time Glitter was not a convicted sex offender and Savile offenses were not acknowledged by any authorities so why would he not go into a dressing room with them? There is no reason for him to say 'no' if asked, especially as he was a guest on his show.
Oh I agree but it doesn't automatically mean that he said yes either.
I hope she is also going to refuse to pay the portion of her taxes that go towards paying for the NHS as they are as responsible as the BBC. If not then she's simply a hypocrite.
And, luckily (or, more accurately, by design) they cannot prosecute without any factual evidence of wrong-doing. (Note: This does not include rumours, suspicions or doubts.)
Yes? So what? You can't prosecute on doubts.
No. I really don't think he does.
could be he wasnt overly keen on either of them and wouldnt go anywhere with them that wasnt on set in a tv programme
I made sure to include a link to recently published Savile-related comment so, much as you like to think you scored points, you really didn’t. My comment was related to the quoted poster below who rarely adds anything to the topic to hand, capable only of sniping and carping it seems, mainly aimed at the posts of Doghouse and myself.
Good, we’re agreed.
No idea. You should ask her.
Who on earth was claiming the CPS went to court armed only with rumours, suspicions or doubts? Nobody, that’s who.
The vast majority of your posts are nothing but carping at my heels and that of others you’re obsessed with, others who contribute constructive opinion and content to this forum whilst you yourself just dog their steps with your incessant personal criticism. If you put as much energy into discussing the subjects at hand as you do stalking sundry people across DS then you’d help contribute to the better posting environment you pretend to want.
......
Looks like the other names are beginning to emerge:
Reggie Perrin abused me at Beeb
Legend Leonard Rossiter named in sex attack at BBC HQ
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4624652/New-BBC-abuse-claims-name-screen-legend-Leonard-Rossiter-who-played-Reggie-Perrin.html
Today}s Daily Star cover:
http://images.dailystar-uk.co.uk/dynamic/pixfeed/covers/257x330front/2012-11-03.jpg
A simple "yes" would have done, It certainly would have saved you the embarrassment of your follow up.
But hey ho.....there's no accounting for some people's misguided perceptions of themselves.
These are all such relevant matters that they must surely be part of Pollard's investigation.
Exactly.... Either way Starr is lying, he either went in there with them or knew what they were up to and declined Saviles invite.
but this is it...if you look at the archive footage on youtube
its two different clunk click shows ..so glitter and starr wouldn't have been in the dressing room at the same time