[Newkidontheblok]

For YEARS people have attempted to start threads re Savile and his proclivities - they have all gone the same way - wooshed by Mods . Would DS like to explain why and on whose authority people were silenced????

[DiamondDoll]

Haven't you noticed the long-running JS thread?

[whatever54]

I would imagine the ones 'wooshed by mods' may have been before he died? Not sure but just my guess

[j4Rose]

It was probably for legal reasons.

[Betty Britain]

Originally Posted by Newkidontheblok

For YEARS people have attempted to start threads re Savile and his proclivities - they have all gone the same way - wooshed by Mods . Would DS like to explain why and on whose authority people were silenced????

Because when he was alive he could of sued them for slander. This is a pointless thread

[Honestweegie]

You cant accuse somebody unless you have proof.... now we have proof

[Cryolemon]

Originally Posted by Betty Britain

Because when he was alive he could of sued them for slander. This is a pointless thread

Libel, but yes.

[Newkidontheblok]

[quote=Betty Britain;63500448]Because when he was alive he could of sued them for slander. This is a pointless thread[/QUOTE

My point is that it WAS true (as is now proved) . Why were so many quick to protect him ?? It's a pity that no one had the balls to allow him to try and sue when he was alive - all that has come out now may have come out then and justice could have been served .

[soundstory]

[quote=Newkidontheblok;63501428]

Originally Posted by Betty Britain

Because when he was alive he could of sued them for slander. This is a pointless thread[/QUOTE

My point is that it WAS true (as is now proved) . Why were so many quick to protect him ?? It's a pity that no one had the balls to allow him to try and sue when he was alive - all that has come out now may have come out then and justice could have been served .

There isn't a big conspiracy at work.

As stated by other users, this really is a pointless thread

[lotty27]

They weren't protecting him - they were protecting themselves from huge lawsuits! You can't libel the dead but you can certainly libel the living. JS was still alive and as this is an anonymous forum so where was the proof? JS couldn't sue every poster (without a load of hassle anyway) but he could have certainly sued DS. If JS had got nasty the whole of DS could have been shut down (worse case scenario of course but it could still have cost them a lot of money.) DS were (are) responsible for what is written on their forum, therefore anything considered libellous got closed down.


Now he's dead they can leave the threads/posts there for all to see.

[Betty Britain]

Originally Posted by Cryolemon

Libel, but yes.

Thank you I wasn't sure which one it was

[Tal'shiar]

Same reason other names have to be under control. The public has a tendency to run away with things like these and it can be wrong (it often is). Without going into details, recently names have popped up, and websites already have started locking down elements in order to avoid any legal cases.

[Fizgig]

Originally Posted by lotty27

They weren't protecting him - they were protecting themselves from huge lawsuits! You can't libel the dead but you can certainly libel the living. JS was still alive and as this is an anonymous forum so where was the proof? JS couldn't sue every poster (without a load of hassle anyway) but he could have certainly sued DS. If JS had got nasty the whole of DS could have been shut down (worse case scenario of course but it could still have cost them a lot of money.) DS were (are) responsible for what is written on their forum, therefore anything considered libellous got closed down.


Now he's dead they can leave the threads/posts there for all to see.

If what you're saying is true, then they can't sue you (successfully) for libel. Apparantly, people did have proof, so they could have taken him down when he was alive.

[Galaxy266]

Is it just myself who cannot see the "Comments" on the following story on the DS Homepage?

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/...-recorded.html

According to the feature there are 26 comments, but where are they? I can't see them. I can see the comments on the other features, but not for this one

Not another example of DS censorship, I hope!

[dorydaryl]

The sad thing is that people like JS get away with what they do because others let them. He was pathologically geared towards doing exactly what he wanted without thought or conscience for anyone else. He was manipulative, completely driven by his personal whims and believed that the world was there to revolve around him. Most people aren't like that and don't think/ behave that way because they're not so intrinsically warped. I think that most (not all) people who get into positions of high power (in business and politics, for example) do so because they have a ruthless and self-serving streak which enables them to put the needs of others secondary to their own aims and goals. He was one of the worst examples because he had the 'chari-dee' twist and used it to his advantage. He would ingratiate himself with certain high profile people and very likely called in favours when he got under their skins.

Sadly, I don't blame DS for closing the pre-death Savile threads. It's just a shame that not enough people and organizations were brave enough to 'join the dots' and bring him to justice before he died. Even so, that wouldn't have been the 'job' of DS because it's not that kind of website. The best the mods could have done is passed some of the forum comments on to the authorities for closer investigation....but that could have but specific FMs at risk of prosecution for reasons we already know. Lots of the comments were speculative, anecdotal and non-specific, making such an investigation a bit pointless even though they were later shown to be accurate.

My uncle is convinced that JS was complicit in his own death because he knew the net was closing. Getting older and frailer, he no longer had the clout that he once flouted. All we can do is make sure that nobody like him is ever allowed to get away with the same again.

[smc81]

Originally Posted by Honestweegie

You cant accuse somebody unless you have proof.... now we have proof

No we don't. We have hundreds of allegations which can't be challenged because the accused is dead. It is highly likely that Saville was guilty but there is no proof and the only reason that threads like this exist is because the man is dead and can't sue.

[alfster]

Originally Posted by Honestweegie

You cant accuse somebody unless you have proof.... now we have proof

We have allegations. We have people alledging that Saville did various things. As Saville is dead and can not be tried in a court of law it will always be alledged. Although from the report it seems that various details given by people do follow similar trends leading towards corroborative details.

The reason the posts and threads are not 'wooshed away' by the mods is that Saville is dead and you can not libel a dead person.

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/20...ibel-the-dead/