General Chat

Barbra, of course you are right in one sense. I believe that current and proposed investigations will try and determine whether any other people were party to the alleged abuse and if they are still living it will be them who will face possible charges.

I have read this thread .& would just like to say .JS is not here to answer any of the allegations against him .All these people now coming forward after the man is dead & gone .he cant be brought to task or prosecuted .what is the point .are they going to get money from his estate .sorry to me its gutter press making money from a dead man . I certainly wont be buying any papers I feel sick to my stomach .at all the hype & speculation .maybe true maybe not .but we cant be judge & jury .Barbra

Integrity, in any era however secretive, has always marked the best people out....just as lack of it has marked out the worst.

Kay, that's just it. You've hit the nail on the head.

It wasn't happening to his daughter, so it was okey. That was the mentality at that time. The way we were conditioned.
The man also had a wife and the daughter to support, and who was going to do that if he spoke out and lost his job, especially if he was not believed.

There is no way to satinise any of this, but that was the way it was, I am afraid.

Julia in Derbyshire

when that driver worked for him in the 1970s as as stated in the daily rag above,,,,,,,,,things of this nature were in headlights and for him to admit some 40 years later that he knew what was going to happen but just took himself off for a wander and cup of tea,,,,,,,,,and at the same time had a daughter the same age,,,,,,,fgs how can anyone admit to that.

Of course it wasn't little but it was a one off and did not go on for a great length of time or on several occasions.

It was not long-term abuse to any one person but a series of events.

It was a very different world back then. People did not talk about such things, either out loud, or in in secret. If someboy down your street was caught for such things, you were just told to keep away from them. They were not nice people.

Yes, I can see how it has remained hidden for such a long while. And, it was a question if, when such things did come to light, that a husband even allowed his wife to hear about it, let alone tell her.

Many of you will not believe today, that life was like that. People lived in ignorance.

But, but. The people who witnessed his carryings on, should have had more confidence to speak out. Having said that, it would not have been easy.

Julia in Derbyshire

How do you know it was ALL little things he did ? noboby knows what he did when that children was taken to his room .

It was all little things he did, one offs, not lasting for very long.

Very difficult to verify.

I am sure he knew it would be.

I find it incredible that not a single one these young people never confided in their parent or friends,,,,,,,girls are known to girly talk when together,,,,,,,that Mirror artical,that man and his wife should feel shame to have kept to themselves for so long,even in 2000 they had chance to come forward when JS was confronted about abuse........

Have just checked website of my "friend who knew Jimmy Savile well". All reference to JS has been removed and his twitter account (up to 13th Oct) makes no reference either.

If BBC or police want to question him, he did an interview for BBC after the Leeds funeral. He is well known in show business, but low profile with public as he did a lot of things like warm-ups for major TV programmes.

What Joy has found about that elderly driver is deeply shocking. Yesterday we had news that JS's personal assistant for last 40 years had never seen any evidence of abuse.

From what my friend (ex-friend) told me about JS, I just formed the opinion that he made friends easily but was unable to make deep friendships with anybody but his mother. Lot of people don't like forming very close relationships, so never thought anything bad about him.

I have never been abused or known abuse in my life, so am finding it very difficult to come to terms with what has obviously happened. But I am wondering if this term "have fun" that I heard my friend use a lot is more sinister than "having fun". It was used particularly when he went for an ayurvedic massage - which I would have thought was nice, relaxing, spiritual - but not necessarily fun.

I am thinking that some people are culpable of helping the alleged perpetrator:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-child-abuse-driver-1373895

You would have to be very sure of what you had seen and there would be nobody to back you up when you told the person in authority who was only too well aware of how much money the marvelous man was raising for the hospital.

I wonder how many times it was reported but the report was never filed. There was money for the hospital at stake.

so to lose a job isnt worth saving a child from abuse,? having been a nurse I'd have risked it as I would have brought it to attention and screamed my head off......


I know the ins and outs of child abuse,

I'm not saying abuse is not commited outisde of the celeb world,,,,,but its a known fact their status can place the impressionable in a vunrable position.......look at the pop groupies that climed in windows,sat outside idols houses,wrote letter of eternal love,who knows what liberties were ever taken against them?.

look at some idols now where its been proved they fathered children years ago.

Some victims did complain, from what I've read, but weren't taken seriously. I hope all those responsible for hushing this up are named and shamed.

I don't understand how they could be charged with slander but agree that it is shocking that it took all this time for anyone to say anything. I understand that victims may have various reasons for not saying anything but people who claim to have seen crimes being committed but stayed silent are somewhat guilty by association I reckon.

Shame on all the people coming out of the woodwork know, saying i saw him do this, but did nothing. they should all be done for slander, and then pay a court fee themselves to back up there claim, and ester ranson should be sacked. she is know not a good advocate for the nspcc. the same being said for janet street porter.

I was merely saying that we should remember that women commit these atrocious acts too and in fact fewer violations commited by women are reported - the actual number of cases is likely higher than a mere 14 per cent because of the nature of the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim sadly. My sexist comment, ok maybe a little harsh, was because there is always the natural assumption that sex offenders are men and this is not the case. I did not mean to offend.

IMHO women can abuse, men can violate.

No need for further explanation.

You beat me to it Guinevere. I was about to say similar. I do not think this thread is at all sexist.

JUlia in Derbyshire