Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

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


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28-04-2013, 15:46
stvn758
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,585
This could put UK Gold out of business, who is next.
stvn758 is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 28-04-2013, 15:47
dollylovesshoes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: East London
Posts: 14,233
Its a shock to all,but nobody knowsvwhat went on in their earlier life,they have probably forgot it, some haven't,because a well known star has forgotten his past perhaps many havent.
dollylovesshoes is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 16:08
Naughty Vicar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Rural East Sussex
Posts: 133
Naughty Del Boy???????????????????????????????????????????????
Naughty Vicar is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 16:15
Keyser Soze
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,108
Jubbly's name has come up before. Someone who housesat for him while he was away filming was a wrong 'un, but Jubbly wasn't there and had nothing to do with it. Unless these are different allegations.

There are a few comedy legends in their 70s. We will find out in due course who this latest one is.
Keyser Soze is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 16:20
IzzyS
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 8,915
They should make the apology the same size and position as the original false article.
I agree.

So far we're only been hearing about cases filed under "Others" (not related to JS) but that doesnt mean there arent any? Is the Clifford case not related to JS?
This is one the issues that worries me, the lines can seem blurred when it comes to the 'others' strange of the Yewtree investigation. When there's mention of someone being arrested by 'Jimmy Savile police', of course people will link the person with him, when the article may go on to say their part of the 'others' strand, which means the may be suspected of activities which JS had nothing to do with. The mention of Operation Yewtree itself probably makes people think of him regardless, which isn't fair for those accused of non-child related abuse and whom may have never met the guy.

I thought their also investigating the JS & Others strand, ie. people who may have been with him when abuse was carried out but I haven't come across any mention of anyone being questioned or arrested specifically as part of that strand? is it all going on behind the scenes or are they not finding any evidence? who knows.

Jimmy Savile police: Ageing comedy legend in new sex abuse quiz
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...#ixzz2Rj5fgckb


Savile 'to cost BBC insurers millions'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...s-8590981.html
(Re - BiB) Is this one of the people Russell Brand apparently mentioned at the filming of one of his shows, which was reported in the papers recently? eh either way, people are supposed to be thought of as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The longer this investigation goes on, the more I feel uncomfortable in terms of how the press are covering it (specifically in relation to reporting people being questioned or arrested, throwing around misleading labels like mentioned above).

There's surely a risk that future trials could be compromised due to the amount of coverage in the press? even if they have a good amount of evidence, someone could be acquitted if its difficult (if not impossible) to find an unbiased jury?.

Surely given whats apparently happened in the past, the main objective should be to ensure solid conviction(s) are possible - they should put a blanket ban on people talking to the press claiming things on behalf of the police or CPS or whoever. If there's proof someone is a danger to the public or have committed criminal activity, they should be questioned, arrested and the usual criminal justice procedure used but, as Matthew Wright and probably others have mentioned before, the concept of (a) trial by media is quite dodgy territory and not something to be encouraged.

For one thing, names have been mentioned or hinted at in the press but how much do we know about the specifics of what their apparently accused of doing? I feel concerned about it. If someone who is genuinely guilty is let off the hook due to too much media coverage pre-trial, that would be a great injustice. I guess my opinions may be changing a bit from earlier on but its just a feeling I get from some of the things I hear in passing when I read about things on here or hear things in conversations, something makes me feel quite uncomfortable - the police must be walking on eggshells trying to get the balance right so people might know to come forward as potential victims, while also not totally ruining someones image when it may turn out that their innocent, especially if said person hasn't been charged (which I'd presume is due to a lack of evidence?). Hmmm... its all rather murky.
IzzyS is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 16:47
gemini666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,536
I hate it when they hint at people and I can't wotk out who it is!
gemini666 is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 17:07
gilliedew
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,154
What annoys me is that the PR man is already spinning his story, "thanks to the public who are supporting him" How do we know if they are, I wouldn't but it doesn't stop him spinning it.

"My lawyers are looking into those who complained", a subliminal threat to those others who may want to do the same.

To me, in my opinion is that if there is no case to answer, why hint that they are going to look into peoples backgrounds. It isn't as if there was only one complaint, was there.

It sickens me that he is using his own spin used for celebs in this situation. What ever happened to truth, honesty and holding up your hands.
gilliedew is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 17:12
gemini666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,536
He is obnoxious, he made up that story about the Hamiltons, now he knows what he put them through.
gemini666 is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 17:57
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,670
He is obnoxious, he made up that story about the Hamiltons, now he knows what he put them through.
He will only know how it feels if the allegations against him are false. Even then, I'll have no sympathy for him given what he put them through.
End-Em-All is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 18:14
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 33,934
Jubbly's name has come up before. Someone who housesat for him while he was away filming was a wrong 'un, but Jubbly wasn't there and had nothing to do with it. Unless these are different allegations.

There are a few comedy legends in their 70s. We will find out in due course who this latest one is.
In fact one of the victims in that case has defended him online against others who have claimed he was a party to it, categorically stating he had no involvement at all and knew nothing other than having rented out his house.
skp20040 is online now Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-04-2013, 18:17
smc81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 786
At what point do the police and CPS need to start proving their case. To me it seems really unfair to arrest someone, make it very public what they are being accused of and then leave the case in limbo as they hope new evidence emerges. How are those accused supposed to defend themselves against the allegations when the authorities try to drag this out and not bring it to court.
smc81 is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 18:28
anonyy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,032
I hate it when they hint at people and I can't wotk out who it is!
look at a few posts down you will see a very popular and well known quote of who this latest one is about.
anonyy is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 18:42
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 33,934
At what point do the police and CPS need to start proving their case. To me it seems really unfair to arrest someone, make it very public what they are being accused of and then leave the case in limbo as they hope new evidence emerges. How are those accused supposed to defend themselves against the allegations when the authorities try to drag this out and not bring it to court.
The problem the police have now is that if they dont act they will be accused of being like their predecessors, so they act and interview but then oftyen like other people who are arrested they have to bail to await forensics evidence, search evidence, also witness evidence has to be checked and to then assess all the material etc etc so its not often they can charge immediately. They may then charge or release with NFA , the problem is that being released with NFA to some people does not mean innocent as mud sticks ( and at times they may be right) but they cannot hurry up that process .

Then you get the CPS , I wonder if they will when even the slightest things are found will now say in certain celeb cases "go ahead and prosecute let a court decide" so they too are not accused of covering up or defending , it will be interesting to see once some cases get to court if there really is enough evidence and to see if it had beeen a normal person if it would have got to court , not saying everyone is lieing about being abused/assaulted at all but am just intertested to see how this pans out compared to other cases, in the sense of is it the same set of rules or are they being overly cautious .
skp20040 is online now Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-04-2013, 18:49
myviewpoint
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 431
At what point do the police and CPS need to start proving their case. To me it seems really unfair to arrest someone, make it very public what they are being accused of and then leave the case in limbo as they hope new evidence emerges. How are those accused supposed to defend themselves against the allegations when the authorities try to drag this out and not bring it to court.
This is just what I was thinking myself. Far from "innocent until proved guilty", we are witnessing possibly innocent men being publicly humiliated, getting savagely pulled apart by social media sites, and have their TV programmes taken off air and performances cancelled. Even if they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that they are completely innocent, how can they be expected to recover from all this?
myviewpoint is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 18:58
bryemycaz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,682
Jubbly's name has come up before. Someone who housesat for him while he was away filming was a wrong 'un, but Jubbly wasn't there and had nothing to do with it. Unless these are different allegations.

There are a few comedy legends in their 70s. We will find out in due course who this latest one is.
Yes it could be a couple I have seen somewhere mention. Some one who complains about everything being suspect of wrongdoings. Hes in his 70s too.
bryemycaz is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 19:04
puffenstuff
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 527
Bullshit is Delboy a perv, no way, I want proof if his name comes up, i do NOt believe a word of it, no way
puffenstuff is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 19:20
KidPoker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Winnersville
Posts: 3,976
Bullshit is Delboy a perv, no way, I want proof if his name comes up, i do NOt believe a word of it, no way
Delboy is a fictional TV character.
KidPoker is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 19:32
maninthequeue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,292
This is just what I was thinking myself. Far from "innocent until proved guilty", we are witnessing possibly innocent men being publicly humiliated, getting savagely pulled apart by social media sites, and have their TV programmes taken off air and performances cancelled. Even if they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that they are completely innocent, how can they be expected to recover from all this?
I think its fair to say there are a number of people on DS who are disciples of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCywGhHQMEw
maninthequeue is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 19:45
DE53
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 2,499
Bullshit is Delboy a perv, no way, I want proof if his name comes up, i do NOt believe a word of it, no way
Aw i do hope it's not Is he in his seventies
DE53 is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 20:55
eveningstar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: where hurricanes hardly happen
Posts: 986
He's 73
eveningstar is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 21:09
Benry_Gale
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,156
I think people need to remember actors play characters, its not the character accused, and just because someone plays nice characters doesn't make them a good person (and vice versa).

In my opinion, this could be either Jubbly or I Don't Believe It, but I think its wrong for the press to leave it hanging, either identify or don't report it at all.
Benry_Gale is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 21:12
lexi22
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,426
I think its fair to say there are a number of people on DS who are disciples of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCywGhHQMEw
So funny, so good, so terrible, so real.
lexi22 is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 21:18
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 33,934
So funny, so good, so terrible, so real.
So true
skp20040 is online now Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 28-04-2013, 21:27
puffenstuff
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 527
Delboy is a fictional TV character.
urrggg i know!!!! well...whatsisname then ...David jason ? the guy who plays delboy, why do you have to be so pedantic?

back to what I was saying I DO NOT BELIEVE FOR ONE MINUTE DELBOY/DAVID JASON /THEACTOR WHO PLAYS DELBOY IS A PERV. END OF
puffenstuff is offline  
Old 28-04-2013, 21:28
flashgordon1952
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: brentwood essex
Posts: 3,634
So far of the 12 people that was interviewed only 3 have been charged.. the others further inquiries are being made !
I personally think its the thin end of the wedge BBC is morally corrupt organisation and more will be arrested. But who is the real "badguy" in all this yes the BBC .
They certainly knew it was going on but because of gagging orders on there staff to reveal what was going on they got away with things .
Offcourse at least one director general resigned over this as it was obvious he knew a lot more than what he told the police and the press .
flashgordon1952 is offline  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:12.