[Nesta Robbins]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Just because he raised millions for charity doesn't mean he wasn't capable of what he's accused of.

I can't believe how naeve some people can be.

Absolutely agree Saltydog and was replying to the poster who wondered why he might be treated differently to other Celebs. Sadly perpetrators are often those involved closely with or working with children and use their compassion, kindness and "love" of children" as a smokescreen. There are still lots of people who want to believe everyone is honest and good.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by i4u

That's a phrase Max Clifford used as he hawked a completely false accussation of rape by one of his clients around the TV studios, which cost him dearly in damages and court fees.

Well, I think Mr Clifford can be economical with the truth anyway. I'd never believe a man who defended a pathological liar in an accusation of sexual assault against a perfectly innocent couple.

But as I've said before, my source is impeccable, so I believe what I've been told.

[Phyllis Stein]

Originally Posted by Harry Redknapp

14&15 yr olds are children.

Yes, it's rather depressing that such young people appear to be regarded as fair game by unsavoury predatory types.

[i4u]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Er, no. Why would I rely on the tabloids? This is a personal story I've had from a person who knew about his proclivities.

Savile had very powerful establishment friends as I pointed out in my previous posts. Friends perfectly capable of keeping him out of the mire. And the programme definitely looks as if it might be aired anyway, as it should be to expose this nasty pervert.

I can't see for one second Margaret Thatcher protecting anyone accussed of child abuse...

A person knew of his 'proclivities' and told you rather than the police?

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by Nesta Robbins

Absolutely agree Saltydog and was replying to the poster who wondered why he might be treated differently to other Celebs. Sadly perpetrators are often those involved closely with or working with children and use their compassion, kindness and "love" of children" as a smokescreen. There are still lots of people who want to believe everyone is honest and good.

As I said before, Savile had the support of many powerful people who could keep him out of the papers. We all know that for many years, children weren't believed when they said they were abused by adults either in positions of power - priests, teachers etc - or not. Then along came Esther Rantzen and changed things for the better with Childline.

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Presumably in the upcoming programme when it's aired. The people concerned with it seem to have been sifting evidence for a very long time on this, presumably long before Savile passed.

If/when its aired.
Until then, there is no evidence.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by i4u

I can't see for one second Margaret Thatcher protecting anyone accussed of child abuse...

A person knew of his 'proclivities' and told you rather than the police?

What? Did I actually say that Thatcher knew and was protecting him?

I'm not willing to discuss this story I've been told further on an open forum. Let's just say I believe it and leave it at that. Any further badgering for details I'll regard as harrassment. OK?

[incy wincy]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

14/15 is under the age of consent, and ILLEGAL.

You make these judgements when you obviously have no idea of the law and now you've made yourself look a fool.

You're the one who looks like a fool. It is illegal to have sex with someone 14/15 but it is not paedophilia. Paedophilia is a specific term for having sex with prepubescent children.

It is wrong and illegal to have sex with someone under the age of consent but if they have started puberty it is not paedophilia. That's what the previous poster was saying.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by DiamondDoll

If/when its aired.
Until then, there is no evidence.

Read this. There seems to have been plenty of allegations that were never followed up possibly because of the establishment 'protection' Savile had.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Seventies.html

[i4u]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Well, I think Mr Clifford can be economical with the truth anyway. I'd never believe a man who defended a pathological liar in an accusation of sexual assault against a perfectly innocent couple.

But as I've said before, my source is impeccable, so I believe what I've been told.

But you yourself used the phrase 'no smoke without fire' which implies you are in the same position as Max Clifford.

I'm suprised Scotland Yard haven't employed you to identify sex offenders before they commit a crime.

Googling the investigator of the so called TV programme turns up some interesting facts.

[Blondie X]

I shocked that people are shocked at this. It's been said for years that there was a lot of stuff that would come out after he was gone and I'm only surprised it's taken this long.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by incy wincy

You're the one who looks like a fool. It is illegal to have sex with someone 14/15 but it is not paedophilia. Paedophilia is a specific term for having sex with prepubescent children.

It is wrong and illegal to have sex with someone under the age of consent but if they have started puberty it is not paedophilia. That's what the previous poster was saying.

Why did that poster try to make out that sex with a 14/15 year old was something just a bit 'dodgy' but with a 12/13 year old, it's 'paedophila'?

Under 16 it's ILLEGAL whatever age they are, and that is what I was pointing out, a fact which Nobby seems to have been unaware of.

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Read this. There seems to have been plenty of allegations that were never followed up possibly because of the establishment 'protection' Savile had.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Seventies.html

There is no evidence in that article and would carry as much weight in a court of law as your second hand story would.

[MissCulture]

He could have cleared his name while still alive, the fact is there are very high profile people who are paedo's and they are untouchable. Saville appears to be one of them. They protect each other for obvious reasons. I think that a man who was obsessed with his mother and could not, or would not, form a healthy relationship with a woman (not even once) and yet was not known to be gay has to have some outlet for his natural urges....or maybe I should say 'un-natural' urges
I have to admit I would never have sat on his knee as a kid...creepy.

[i4u]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Read this. There seems to have been plenty of allegations that were never followed up possibly because of the establishment 'protection' Savile had.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Seventies.html

So based on rumours, we are now speculating as fact a cover up by numberous governments and agenies for 30-40 years.

Elvis is alive and well working in a chip shop.

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by MissCulture

He could have cleared his name while still alive, the fact is there are very high profile people who are paedo's and they are untouchable. Saville appears to be one of them. They protect each other for obvious reasons. I think that a man who was obsessed with his mother and could not, or would not, form a healthy relationship with a woman (not even once) and yet was not known to be gay has to have some outlet for his natural urges....or maybe I should say 'un-natural' urges
I have to admit I would never have sat on his knee as a kid...creepy.

BIB......What on earth are you talking about??

As far as I am aware, in this country, nobody is beyond the law so if you have any evidence whatsoever of your claims, you should take them immediately to the police.

I'm 99.999999% certain that you have no evidence whatsoever though.

[i4u]

Originally Posted by MissCulture

He could have cleared his name while still alive, the fact is there are very high profile people who are paedo's and they are untouchable. Saville appears to be one of them. They protect each other for obvious reasons. I think that a man who was obsessed with his mother and could not, or would not, form a healthy relationship with a woman (not even once) and yet was not known to be gay has to have some outlet for his natural urges....or maybe I should say 'un-natural' urges
I have to admit I would never have sat on his knee as a kid...creepy.

How did you cope as a child...I dread to think of the trauma you had visting Santa Claus in department stores.

[MissCulture]

[quote=Richard1960;60147111]I am not defending saville but here in the uk everybody is innocent until proven guilty thank goodness.

You must be incredibly naive to actually believe that...

[Phoenix Lazarus]

Originally Posted by i4u

How did you cope as a child...I dread to think of the trauma you had visting Santa Claus in department stores.

I don't think that that is a sine qua non of childhood. I, for one, did not ever get taken to visit a grumpy hired man with a white fur-lined red costume and cotton wool beard, putting on a deep voice and laugh, and fake jovial manner, and pretending he didn't hate having to do this, between proper acting jobs, in a shopping centre, in December.

[MissCulture]

Originally Posted by i4u

How did you cope as a child...I dread to think of the trauma you had visting Santa Claus in department stores.

I did not sit on any Santa's knee....my dad was in showbiz and I remember him telling me about the private lives of certain famous people - comedians, magicians, ventriloquists, singers, actors...my mother worked as personal secretary to a psychiatrist who counselled men who could not help themselves around young children - these men were magistrates, politicians, sportsmen - all well known people. She used to meet them when they arrived for their appt's. and typed up their consultancy details - if my mother was not the soul of discretion that she had to be in that job she could have written a book and revealed stuff that would have blown your mind considering who these people were.

[TelevisionUser]

Originally Posted by KidPoker

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ording-1218690

The Mirror are reporting that numerous victims have came forward to confirm what has been rumoured for many, many years for a new documentary.

It's all very well to say things now but Saville has no chance of defending himself and any information revealed might not have been enough to generate a prosecution case anyway during his lifetime.

Originally Posted by MissCulture

I did not sit on any Santa's knee....my dad was in showbiz and I remember him telling me about the private lives of certain famous people - comedians, magicians, ventriloquists, singers, actors...my mother worked as personal secretary to a psychiatrist who counselled men who could not help themselves around young children - these men were magistrates, politicians, sportsmen - all well known people. She used to meet them when they arrived for their appt's. and typed up their consultancy details - if my mother was not the soul of discretion that she had to be in that job she could have written a book and revealed stuff that would have blown your mind considering who these people were.

At least those individuals did the right thing and sought help to try to stop their thoughts turning into vile acts unlike Glitter and King.

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by MissCulture

I did not sit on any Santa's knee....my dad was in showbiz and I remember him telling me about the private lives of certain famous people - comedians, magicians, ventriloquists, singers, actors...my mother worked as personal secretary to a psychiatrist who counselled men who could not help themselves around young children - these men were magistrates, politicians, sportsmen - all well known people. She used to meet them when they arrived for their appt's. and typed up their consultancy details - if my mother was not the soul of discretion that she had to be in that job she could have written a book and revealed stuff that would have blown your mind considering who these people were.

Anyone can type anything.............doesn't make it true.

Repeating myself now.

As far as I am aware, in this country, nobody is beyond the law so if you have any evidence whatsoever of your claims, you should take them immediately to the police.

I'm 99.999999% certain that you have no evidence whatsoever though.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by i4u

So based on rumours, we are now speculating as fact a cover up by numberous governments and agenies for 30-40 years.

Elvis is alive and well working in a chip shop.

Then you believe what you will and I'll stand by the veracity of of what I've been told. All I have to say is that the victim wasn't in a position to defend themselves. They aren't dead, but let me just say, cowards, (and paedophiles) often pick on those who can't speak up for themselves, and as threats were made to the person who witnessed this at the time, they were too frightened to speak out.

Now I shall leave the thread and let you make of it what you will.

[MadonnaMIX]

I heard the rumors about Jimmy on here about three years ago

There is a picture from the 70s of Jimmy with a bunch of kids and the convicted Pedo Husband & Wife who ran the childrens home in Devon or Cornwall

[Richard1960]

Reading through some of the posts on here i would hate to be tried with some posters on a jury.

Guilty as charged without a trial from some.