UKC

It seems like the whole thing now revolves around the BBC and not around the actions of Saville himself. It's symptomatic to me of the way society these days always seems to shift blame to some public body rather than the perpetrator.
On a side note, I'm listening to Entwhistle on the radio answering questions at the select committee and find it concerning how much grandstanding the MPs do and how little actual investigation goes on.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:
Agree. It was the same with Leveson. Entwhistle is being right royally scapegoated by the usual array of clueless MP's and civil servants who live in their own bubbles.
Quite what Entwhistle can know at this stage is surely very little - that is why they (the BBC) are launching these investigations, never mind the ongoing Police investigation. What qualifies an MP to "investigate" anything is beyond me.
The flip side is can you imagine the uproar last year had the Beeb broadcast programmes accusing up until recently a much admired dead man of kiddie fiddling?
Why is the NHS not being hauled over coals for his access at Broadmoor and Stoke Mandeville etc? The NHS answers to government in the same way the BBC does.
This does all feel like its being used as a stick to beat the Beeb with. Entwhistle is not responsible for the actions of sick messed up individuals who carry out their acts in secret abusing positions of trust and power.

In reply to colinw:

"What qualifies an MP to "investigate" anything is beyond me." Wonderful! Democracy is sure heading for trouble with views like that. In case it's escaped anyone the BBC management seem to have told porkies about why they shelved the Newsnight story and as a public broadcasting corporation tasked to uphold the highest standards I'd be worried about anyone not thinking this needs some investigation and action.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:


Isn't it just symptomatic of the accused being dead?
jk

In reply to Submit to Gravity: It is fairly well known that most MPs generally hate the BBC. I think this has less to do with Saville or what happened and is more likely a simple case of BBC bashing.

In reply to jkarran:

I'm with the OP, we should dig up his decaying corpse and put it on trial, and leave these poor BBC execs alone.

In reply to Offwidth: ahh I never said there was not a need for investigation and questions answered, the fact is that MP's in my opinion are not the best people to be conducting it. Especially when it involves criminal acts and an ongoing and early stages police investigation. (Lets just hope its not South Yorkshire eh?)

In reply to Submit to Gravity: I'm catching a bit of it during my lunch. I am getting more and more cross at the twunt politicians approach. They are simply grandstanding, not investigating, scoring points off of someone who appears not to be a skilled in political debate. Just look like a bunch of smarmy smart alec bullies picking on someone to make themselves look good. Twunts.

In reply to puppythedog: Quite.

In reply to colinw:

Don't most investigations investigate criminal acts?

In reply to colinw:

If ANY group knows the ins and outs of criminal acts and sexual perversions, I think our politicians are MORE than well qualified in this regard.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

I'm not defending Saville, but no one has actually said what Saville is alleged to have been doing? Was he raping people? Or was he a cranky man who was putting his arm around children and the vulnerable in a manner which might be considered inappropriate?

There is no doubt that the man was an eccentric crank, but there is a world of difference between eccentric inappropriate behaviour and malicious sexual assault. No one has actually spelt out what form these assaults took.

It seems that the more likelihood there is of compensation, the more alleged victims there are now popping out of the woodwork. Why have all these victims kept so quiet over the last few decades?

In reply to Trangia: Wrong thread.

In reply to Trangia: I watched Panorama last night. Saville was accused of forcing underage girls into various sexual acts and a 9 year old boy.

Well past the 'eccentric' end of inappropriate behaviour spectrum.

In reply to Trangia: where's my popcorn and comfy seat ?

In reply to Trangia:

IF you want the juicy details and graphic descriptions you may have to wait. If you really need to whet your appetite skim read this lot
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/22/savile-scandal-bbc-newsnight-al...

and Google some of the key names such as Karin Ward (I have not done so)

In reply to Trangia:

no one has actually said what Saville is alleged to have been doing?

Amongst other things, he was having sex with under age children, having them perform oral sex on him etc. Many of these children appear to be from institutions.

I agree with the OP. The focus has shifted massively from the acts themselves, on to the BBC. It is clear that Savile was a sexual predator who preyed on young and vulnerable girls. The catalogue of his sexual activities will.never be fully known, but it is massive. There is a lot of collective guilt by association. I have yet to speak with anyone who is at all surprised by the allegations. He was an evil man.who hid in.plain sight, and let's not forget he did do a lot of charity fund and profile raising: who wanted to rock that boat?

I do suspect that there will be some 'bandwagoning', but the people in the Panorama programme seemed completely genuine.

In reply to Offwidth:

no its a question of if they have the relevant skills.
Although given how many lawyers are there they should be able to rustle up a few competent people.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:


Second time we've agreed in two days! I assume the aim is try and improve that the pulling of the Newsnight programme was all part of some grand BBC cover up (whereas really it was probably badly just judged decision making) and anyway the announced enquiries will presumably cover all that.

BBC navel gazing, media self obsession and MPs grandstanding.

In reply to Postmanpat: What are you doing for Christmas?

In reply to Submit to Gravity: The thing I don't understand is what is being investigated? It seems to me thate the Police should look at any criminal investigations, that The BBC may well need to look at their child protection policies and past attitudes to ensure that such a thing to any degree cannot happen again, the BBC Trust (I think) should look at scheduling stuff and whether or not there was improper influence regarding panorama and the MP's should go back to looking at governing the nation (Hahahahahahahahahaha) and issues of importance like whether people pay tax or if public institutions are spending their money as effectivelya s possible (I have my own views on those subjects).

Ucking Politicians make me angry and full of bile. To link to another thread about none engagement in politics I give you these muppets as an example of why not to bother.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

Mr Savile is dead and has no money.
The BBC isn't and does.

Seen on Newspaper front page this morning...

"Jimmy Savile's victims are launching compensation claims for millions of pounds"

In reply to Indy: They can apply to the Criminal Compensation scheme (I think it's called that)which would not require Jimmy be prosecuted and would not BBC be prosecuted (I think and maybe wrong).

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

I'm not really getting any of this. What kind of dumb b45t4rd couldn't tell that Jimmy Saville was a weirdo? Did you see the Louis Theroux programme about him? For goodness sake folks, get a grip. Dodgy as the proverbial nine bob note.

The BBC? They gave the public the entertainment they obviously, and foolishly in my view, wanted. They are not the police. They are not a branch of Rape Crisis. There is only so much that an employer can be expected to do.

In reply to Jim Fraser: It is odd.

Despite serious statements from the MET people are still coming out with comments like

"Or was he a cranky man who was putting his arm around children and the vulnerable in a manner which might be considered inappropriate?".

In reply to Jim Fraser:

Looks odd = criminal? That's the JCT school of hindsight, isn't it?

That christopher Jeffries looked a wrong 'un too! Oh, wait.....

As for the BBC, they might not be interpol, but neither are they a branch of Poundstretcher and they have significantly more responsibility as the UKs largest free to air broadcaster and pretty much the only national speech radio provider. FWIW I think they have behaved quite responsibly as an organisation. There are some individuals with difficult questions to answer, but that's a different kettle of fish from the institution as a whole

In reply to Submit to Gravity: Ironically it's the BBC using it as a stick to beat the BBC with.

In reply to Trangia:

It seems he was sexually molesting girls and boys down to the age of 9.


That's pretty cynical. It's not as simple as you might think for someone who has been abused by a national treasure years and years ago to bring charges. In fact I've no idea what it would be like but it would surely never be easy or simple or just a case of getting some cash.

You should watch the documentary, it's a shocker.

In reply to Jim Fraser:

I could never watch Jim'll Fix It or any of his shows. I either had to turn over or walk out. I know it's wrong to scapegoat someone because of their looks or eccentric behaviour, but all those lascivious looks, arms round kids etc etc.....

In reply to toad:

I think positions of authority and influence in those cases are very different. It is right that position, influence and fame should bring expectations of different standards.

=====================

Listen folks. Bad sh1t like this happens all over the place. If you think someone is vulnerable or has been abused, at the very least, make sure they know there is someone they can talk to about it.

In reply to Jim Fraser: If you think someone is vulnerable specially if vulnerable to active abuse contact your local social services and express your concerns. If you feel you are able to then contact the Police.
If it's a child there is no such thing as confidentiality if they are being abused, call the police.

In reply to puppythedog: or have been abused.

In reply to Offwidth:

You are right sure of that? Or you been listening to MP's?

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

The whole sad affair is evidence of a much larger conspiracy, jimmy could fix it all right to keep this shit under wraps he must have had friends in very high places. The press are having a field day with this slowly drip feeding titbits to the hungry masses, whilst knowing full well that this whole sorry story is just the start of revelation after revelation. There must be some very worried people out there wondering when they will exposed.

In reply to puppythedog:

I appreciate the point you're trying to make. It's not always about children. It's not always right to go barging in and cause a huge ruckus.


http://www.chooselife.net/
http://www.chooselife.net/Training/asist.aspx
http://www.livingworks.net/page/Applied%20Suicide%20Intervention%20Skills%2...

In reply to Jim Fraser:

What about this link which is STILL online and people can still see his gravestone and leave messages, The Obit should at least be updated
It simply says "He is the subject of a police investigation into allegations of sexual assault made after his death."

better still perhaps they should remove it.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=79495418

In reply to Submit to Gravity:


What about the actions (or inactions) of the Police or the CPS? Why are they not under similar scrutiny? Since when did the BBC become a criminal investigatory body?

In reply to Submit to Gravity: I heard on the radio today that some of the victims have expressed concern that the focus has shifted onto the BBC.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

There was someone on the Today programme yesterday morning from one of the charities that works with abused children expressing the same concern. Hopefully, the BBC side of the story will be a media village shitstorm for a few days and then the real investigatory work into Savile will be done.

In reply to captain paranoia: scapegoat, coverup? as if there aren't less paedos in the polis and government..

In reply to andyathome:

From the BBC website (and this is before the specific details of who said what and when to the jounalists who produced the newsnight report come out in detail):

In his blog earlier this month defending his decision to pull the probe, Mr Rippon said he was "guided by editorial considerations only", adding some of the team "disagreed strongly with [his] judgement" while others "agreed equally strongly".

But on Monday the BBC issued a correction to some specific elements of the blog, calling it "inaccurate or incomplete in some respects", and the director general told MPs this was a matter of "regret and embarrassment".

Mr Entwistle said he had asked Mr Rippon to step aside because of inaccuracies in the blog."

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

I don't know why everyone's giving Jimmy Saville such a hard time, when I was eight he fixed it for me to milk a cow blindfolded!