So basically if someone dies before having their guilt proven in court, no matter how many witnesses there is, some here would say "oh well, that's that. We shouldn't say it was him who did it"? That seems odd to me too.
So basically if someone dies before having their guilt proven in court, no matter how many witnesses there is, some here would say "oh well, that's that. We shouldn't say it was him who did it"?
Exactly.
That seems odd to me too.
What's odd about not assuming and furthermore broadcasting as though it were a fact the guilt of someone who hasn't had guilt proven by due process?
If he was alive and it came to trial, it would be like the OJ Simpson one. Dragging on and on and a complete nonsense.
Anyone who thinks he is innocent and/or deserves the benefit of the doubt on the strength of being dead, hasn't read around the case, his own admissions in interviews, his own words in his autobiography, his own nephew taking about the pimping parties he attended with Uncle Jimmy , his boasting about so many disturbing aspects...
Yes, he is dead and normally I would agree about the ethics of that. Not in this case.
Not all trials have the correct result as we know. Is that right or wrong either? What about 'Lord' Archer? Having friends in high places who themselves may be corrupt, even dare we say, judges? The law can sometimes be an ass.
He has done the country a favour by dying and allowing all this to emerge. Something positive may now be done about vulnerable people. It's not just about Jimmy Savile.
I find it odd that despite commenting on the case here, you don't seem to have read much about it...
Many people reported him & were either ignored, laughed at or told, as was one BBC employee - not to tell anyone or they could all lose their jobs.
What kind of evidence are you expecting from historic sex offences beyond the first hand testimony of victims & witnesses of his behaviour?
Frank Bough the BBC's star sports reporter for thirty odd years was alleged to have been to a dubious sex club - and he was out the door, his TV career finished, never heard of again.
So why would Savile be treated any differently?
When Savile came back into the limelight through the Theroux documentary (he had been retired from the BBC ten years)why didn't people come forward then?
The person to open these alligations Karin Ward had written a book called Kiri about her life being sexually abused. The book was published while Savile was alive - no mention of Savile then.
She revised the book as Kiri 2 just after Savile died- no mention of Savile then
Yes it has gone from rumours to criminal allegations, but not criminal convictions.
I have heard the term Savile's victims countless times in the past few weeks, but legally they are alleged victims - you cannot have a 'victim' until a legal verdict, either by trial or inquiry, has been reached.
It's utterly wrong to regard anyone as guilty until a trial has taken place. If we do not accept that, none of has any protection from wrongful allegations.
The little problem exists that Saville's behaviour was condoned and covered up. That matters.
So basically if someone dies before having their guilt proven in court, no matter how many witnesses there is, some here would say "oh well, that's that. We shouldn't say it was him who did it"? That seems odd to me too.
That's because it's a ludicrous proposition with no basis in reality
The folks above believe that the Holocaust is a load of made up western crap, Hitler therefore 'may' have just been a brilliant leader.
Saville may just be the victim of mass hysteria, without being there and seeing it all for ourselves we will never know though we can all take a guess at an opinion.
I have come across far too much bull over the years to believe all I hear now without first researching the truth.
I am sure for example there are far more people out there on planet earth that believe that we are all going to die on Dec 21st this year than there are people claiming they were bummed by Jimmy - do I believe them....?
He's unlikely to be given he's dead... or do you imagine we start propping dead bodies up in court... doesn't make him innocent.
It doesn't, but one of the great tenets of UK justice is innocent until proven guilty, with the right to defend yourself from allegation. Some outlets are labelling him as "paedophile Saville" instead of "alleged paedophile". I think that's a bit rough on the guy's memory, and his family must be struggling with that.
The NAPAC are using him as part of their campaign, showing a Jim'll Fix It badge with the words 'Silence fixed it for Jim' on it! I found that quite strange, to use someone who was never charged with or found guilty of any crime of this nature (as far as I know).
By all means go after any suspects that are still alive, but nothing can happen to Jimmy Saville, he is dead, it's too late.
It doesn't, but one of the great tenets of UK justice is innocent until proven guilty, with the right to defend yourself from allegation. Some outlets are labelling him as "paedophile Saville" instead of "alleged paedophile". I think that's a bit rough on the guy's memory, and his family must be struggling with that.
Some of Saviles own family have said he molested them are they making it up. These stories have been going round for years if you check another forum on ds there's a lot of facts about him.
Some of Saviles own family have said he molested them are they making it up. These stories have been going round for years if you check another forum on ds there's a lot of facts about him.
It doesn't, but one of the great tenets of UK justice is innocent until proven guilty, with the right to defend yourself from allegation. Some outlets are labelling him as "paedophile Saville" instead of "alleged paedophile". I think that's a bit rough on the guy's memory, and his family must be struggling with that.
Some of Saviles own family have said he molested them are they making it up. These stories have been going round for years if you check another forum on ds there's a lot of facts about him.
Jimmy Savile and now Cyril Smith are nice little placebos to placate the public over child sex scandals and save the police the time and trouble of going after live offenders
Some of Saviles own family have said he molested them are they making it up. These stories have been going round for years if you check another forum on ds there's a lot of facts about him.
Listen to what you're saying - "Family said" "stories", and then a "forum on DS with the facts"
How much is fact, and how much is rumour, hearsay and opinion we will now never know, but that doesn't stop the absolute labelling as if he had been found guilty of something.
Listen to what you're saying - "Family said" "stories", and then a "forum on DS with the facts"
How much is fact, and how much is rumour, hearsay and opinion we will now never know, but that doesn't stop the absolute labelling as if he had been found guilty of something.
Yes family members of savile have publicly stated he molested them that's a fact and yes there has been stories about him regarding child abuse for years which he wormed out of one way or another.
Yes family members of savile have publicly stated he molested them that's a fact and yes there has been stories about him regarding child abuse for years which he wormed out of one way or another.
The Three Little Pigs is a story, doesn't mean it actually happened.
Comments
What's odd about not assuming and furthermore broadcasting as though it were a fact the guilt of someone who hasn't had guilt proven by due process?
You actually need to ask that after what I said about witnesses?
Anyone who thinks he is innocent and/or deserves the benefit of the doubt on the strength of being dead, hasn't read around the case, his own admissions in interviews, his own words in his autobiography, his own nephew taking about the pimping parties he attended with Uncle Jimmy , his boasting about so many disturbing aspects...
Yes, he is dead and normally I would agree about the ethics of that. Not in this case.
Not all trials have the correct result as we know. Is that right or wrong either? What about 'Lord' Archer? Having friends in high places who themselves may be corrupt, even dare we say, judges? The law can sometimes be an ass.
He has done the country a favour by dying and allowing all this to emerge. Something positive may now be done about vulnerable people. It's not just about Jimmy Savile.
No, we are not. When he was alive, we can *think* whatever we like, but are restricted by libel law from airing our thoughts publicly.
Once dead?
Savile was a perverted paedophile!
See? The only thing you can do is register your disgust at my opinion. Nothing more.
Jimmy Savile hasn't been convicted of anything though :rolleyes:
Frank Bough the BBC's star sports reporter for thirty odd years was alleged to have been to a dubious sex club - and he was out the door, his TV career finished, never heard of again.
So why would Savile be treated any differently?
When Savile came back into the limelight through the Theroux documentary (he had been retired from the BBC ten years)why didn't people come forward then?
The person to open these alligations Karin Ward had written a book called Kiri about her life being sexually abused. The book was published while Savile was alive - no mention of Savile then.
She revised the book as Kiri 2 just after Savile died- no mention of Savile then
Yes it has gone from rumours to criminal allegations, but not criminal convictions.
I have heard the term Savile's victims countless times in the past few weeks, but legally they are alleged victims - you cannot have a 'victim' until a legal verdict, either by trial or inquiry, has been reached.
The little problem exists that Saville's behaviour was condoned and covered up. That matters.
Hope you had a better grasp of the law when you were in the police.
He's unlikely to be given he's dead... or do you imagine we start propping dead bodies up in court... doesn't make him innocent.
That's because it's a ludicrous proposition with no basis in reality
SHAME isn't it.
The folks above believe that the Holocaust is a load of made up western crap, Hitler therefore 'may' have just been a brilliant leader.
Saville may just be the victim of mass hysteria, without being there and seeing it all for ourselves we will never know though we can all take a guess at an opinion.
I have come across far too much bull over the years to believe all I hear now without first researching the truth.
I am sure for example there are far more people out there on planet earth that believe that we are all going to die on Dec 21st this year than there are people claiming they were bummed by Jimmy - do I believe them....?
It doesn't, but one of the great tenets of UK justice is innocent until proven guilty, with the right to defend yourself from allegation. Some outlets are labelling him as "paedophile Saville" instead of "alleged paedophile". I think that's a bit rough on the guy's memory, and his family must be struggling with that.
By all means go after any suspects that are still alive, but nothing can happen to Jimmy Saville, he is dead, it's too late.
http://www.napac.org.uk/
Some of Saviles own family have said he molested them are they making it up. These stories have been going round for years if you check another forum on ds there's a lot of facts about him.
He molested me too.
Some of Saviles own family have said he molested them are they making it up. These stories have been going round for years if you check another forum on ds there's a lot of facts about him.
Listen to what you're saying - "Family said" "stories", and then a "forum on DS with the facts"
How much is fact, and how much is rumour, hearsay and opinion we will now never know, but that doesn't stop the absolute labelling as if he had been found guilty of something.
Yes family members of savile have publicly stated he molested them that's a fact and yes there has been stories about him regarding child abuse for years which he wormed out of one way or another.
The Three Little Pigs is a story, doesn't mean it actually happened.