What happened to Innocent until proven guilty? - Jimmy Saville OT

The Metropolitan Polce have agreed to take the lead in assessing the allegations against Savile.
So hopefully we will find out the truth.

 

Ddn't the police receive complaint against Saville in 2008? There has also been a BBC official saying she witnessed Saville fondling a girl aged about 14 along with some drivers who witnessed things but were told that the sack beckoned if they said anything. Paul Gambocini, the BBC DJ said it was common knowledge within the BBC that Saville had a liking for young girls.
I think we will hear a lot more of this in the coming weeks.

 

Just heard the news and your right Gordon there was a complaint received. I watched the news last night and there was a lady on who I think was a social worker, a young girl told her that Savile had groped her, but she doesnt seemed to have done anything.

 

Bought over with a few free tickets for some shows?

 

You never know AB. I didnt watch the show about it and will wait until police look into complaints.
Savile not here to defend himself so innocent until proven guilty.

 

No real evidence? How real can it get?

There are many eye witness accounts from people who have never met each other and the same pattern of abuse keeps coming up. The eye witness accounts have also come from colleagues and co-workers, not just his victims who must have had a terrible ordeal. At the time the victims would have been 12-15 and may well have blamed themselves as many children do when adults abuse them. They were also powerless to report him because of how small they were in the world compared to "the great Jimmy Savile".

To add to the evidence there is even a recording of him molesting a young girl in 1975. I wonder if this is real enough for you?

[video=youtube;JTfGWkLUB84]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTfGWkLUB84&feature=youtu.be[/video]

Rational? Please. Of course you are defending him.

 

Not football related anyway so I'm not going to take it any further.

 

Just a few points.

1. Quite often things only come out about powerful people after they are dead. Due to fear on the part of the victims, or self-interest on the part of the establishment.

2. Some of the women who have now come forward appear to have been quite vulnerable youngsters at the time of the alleged abuse.

3. I don't buy the idea that one should not be able to expose one's wrongdoings after they are dead, as they don't have the chance to defend themselves. Give you an extreme example. The terrible crimes against humanity committed by Adolf Hitler only came out after his death. However, I don't think any right minded person would suggest that these should not have been aired, afterwards, just because he was not in a position to defend himself. (Obviously, I'm not comparing what JS is accused of with Hitler's abominable crimes, but the point is still the same).

4. It has been suggested that the motives behind these women coming forward might be mercenary. This is highly unlikely, as any claim, either for Criminal Injury compensation, or against JS's estate, would have become statute barred many years ago. A desire for closure and the truth to come out is perhaps a more likely motive.


In my opinion, we should let these investigations go where they take us, and only comment when these have been completed. As we have learned, both in respect of Bloody Sunday Phone Hacking and Hillsbrough, the truth will eventually come out, however long it takes.

 

I'm not saying no one should be able to expose someones wrongdoings after they are dead, where did I say that?

I'm just saying that it's not fair, In a way, because he isn't alive to have his own say and defend himself.

I'm not saying he's innocent, but all I'm saying is that people should way for investigations to be made, before judging him as the next Adolf Hitler.

And that audio recording is quite chilling, but enough to be sure? I don't think so. We don't even know for sure that it is him on the tape.

 

Have patience, young Grasshopper.

 

" Have patience, young Grasshopper ".....



" Today Glasshopper I am going to both increase and enhance your ability to increase pleasure when by yourself in more reflective times "

" That sounds interesting Master, what are you going to teach me?"

" Glasshopper my boy, today you are going to learn the very noble art of masturbation "

" Masturbation?....what is this and what do I do "

" Well, you take out your wirry and pull it back and forward "

" Like this Master?"

" No no Glasshopper, much faster "

" Like this Master(voice wobbling) "

" Faster faster "

" When do I get to stop?"

" When you have eyes like mine "

 

If there is any noble art in which Tashopper needs no instruction, I suspect it is this

 

It's a dead certainty that he won't give a ****.

 

!

 

There are also many eye witness accounts from those who have never met, stating they were abducted by aliens and all statements had the same pattern. Does this prove they were abducted?, no it does not, nor does it prove that they were not abducted. We can't question the aliens, so without some definitive evidence, we cannot decide one way or the other.

The same applies to the allegations against Jimmy Savile he cannot be questioned, so allegations remain assertions without proof, until they can be proved, beyond a reasonable doubt.

The concept of innocent until proven guilty seems to have been forgotten and that's not only in the case of Jimmy Savile.

 

What, so nothing can ever be proven against a dead man ?

Seriously ?

 

I didn't say that, he has already been branded guilty, which in my opinion should not have been the case until the case had been proven, not based on some evidence and allegations.

 

What you mean is that some newspapers and politicians have expressed the view that he is guilty and that the police are investigating the case.

That happens all the time with people living and dead.

If someone wants to actually bring a claim against his estate then they will have to provide evidence, be subject to cross examination, etc. At the moment, no one is seeking a finding of guilt. People are just expressing their opinions, which they are of course free to do.

I can offer my opinion that Hitler was personally aware of the details of the holocaust, even though this would be very difficult to prove. You could argue the contrary, as you could with those making allegations against Jimmy Savile. The absence of both Savile and Hitler makes the process more difficult than it otherwise would be, but that is the nature of historcal debates

 

He was a ****ing wrong-un alright. Friends with Pool Party host Michael Barrymore, also close friends with Peter Sutcliffe (yorkshire ripper) and Gary Glitter. What a circle eh?

Listen, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, believe me, it's a ****ing duck.

Nonce

 

The man was a scumbag. Abused his power to high heaven.