The Unorthodox Website Blog

Jimmy Savile case

11 Oct

I find the allegations against the late Jimmy Savile very disturbing. Not just the allegations themselves, of continuous sexual abuse of minors, but the fact that none of this came to light until after Jimmy was dead for months.

The fact is people must have kept quiet for years, for decades, and now see fit to make these allegations against a dead man who can’t defend himself, who can’t be brought to trial. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Another accused is Gary Glitter, whose track record is well known and who is still alive and has been found guilty in court. Also Freddie Starr, who denies the charges against him. No doubt more celebrity names will emerge before this scandal has run its course.

Jimmy Saville’s headstone has been removed and smashed up, apparently officially not by vandals, and various memorials are being revised or scrapped. If the man was guilty, then this is understandable, but the whole thing leaves a bad taste in the mouth, and raises far more questions than it answers.

OK, you can understand the reluctance of some victims coming forward with sexual abuse allegations against such a widely-respected celebrity who apparently did so much for charity and to make youngsters dreams come true on his ‘Jim’ll Fix It’ programs. You would have thought some of them would have reported the alleged abuse, however, to their elders or to the police.

However what really bugs me is that nurses at a hospital Jimmy visited regularly, for children with learning difficulties and other ailments,  apparently knew full well what was going on. They even knew he allegedly had a little room where he took young girls, and discussed which one ‘would be the lucky one tonight’, this said ironically, but it is also very, very sick, and a criminal offense since it would make them accomplices.

This makes these nurses every bit as guilty as Jimmy himself if, indeed, he did do the things now alleged. Why on Earth did they keep quiet about it for so long, did they not want to see him stopped and have him brought to trial? As it is it seems they were indeed accomplices in these crimes, that is if any of the stories can be believed.

They say so many are now coming forward with similar tales, the evidence against Jimmy and others is very damning. However it is very easy to accuse someone who is dead. Even the victims should be concerned that their silence must have led to others being similarly assaulted, if indeed the allegations are true.

It does seem, due to the sheer volume of accusers now the man is in his grave or  facing his karma in the afterlife, that many or all of these allegations are probably true. However it does not explain why so many remained silent for so long, especially hospital staff. Nor why it has all come out in the open when the man accused is dead and could only answer back through a Spiritualist medium, and he’d then have to somehow prove it was really him communicating. In any event he cannot now face a trial here on Earth and be pronounced either guilty or innocent.

Whatever the truth, I feel very uncomfortable about this and any similar accusations against someone who is dead and cannot defend themselves in a court of law. This means they cannot be found guilty, for any post-humous trial would deny the accused the possibility of defending themselves.

If these allegations are indeed true, as sadly seems likely, then all who kept quiet about them for so long, and especially the hospital staff who covered it all up and allowed the sexual abuse to continue over and over again, are all also guilty of keeping silent and allowing the crimes to continue.

The nurses and hospital staff who knew about the alleged abuse in Jimmy’s ‘little room’ at the hospital should now be charged and brought to trial for being accomplices in the crimes. That way at least someone can get a fair trial. If this happens it will be interesting to see what comes out in such trials, and whether the allegations are substantiated, disproved or withdrawn.


10 Responses to “Jimmy Savile case”

  1. 1
    Diana Spencer Says:

    “Hello Everyone,
    I am shocked at the current exposures of what amounts to systematic abuse on a large scale by someone I met when I was going to sign my name on a board in support of a charity event, I think “Children in Need” so being televised live and as I stood in the wings with him waiting to step on the public stage to do so he said “Be careful of the ladder you need to climb to sign it” and I had said ” What ladder? I’m in a short dress, the public will see my panties” and my having said this, laughing he then pushed me on to the stage, so of course I was initally aprehensive looking for the ladder then realising to my immense relief there was no ladder I would have to climb to sign my signature! I could have killed him!
    There seems to be too much damaging evidence presented for the accusations against Mr. Savile supporting the horrific tales coming to light now, for them to not be true and his own family insisting that his gravestone be destroyed is a very telling sign indeed I feel, it seems they themselves are not surprised by them! One member of his family telling of his having first hand knowledge of suspect events happening when a child himself though telling that he was not a victim of abuse but other children both girls and boys were. Mr. Savile it seems did not operate alone though his predilection clearly being young girls.
    I like you Tony am shocked that those who now say they suspected things did not speak out about their concerns and in particular nursing staff at the Stoke Mandeville Hospital but of course we do not know the full story, perhaps they did and were silenced, threatened with job loss etc etc etc or plainly disbelieved after all Mr. Savile himself being a respected celebrity, someone who was known publicly as having the handicapped children there’s interests at heart and making children’s dreams come true on his popular Children’s programme. As I say at the moment the evidence is still in the early stages of being presented and goodness alone knows what more follows but I sense other well known names being exposed.
    Again I spoke of the need for secrets of all kinds being exposed before my work with Andrew began so this happening now unfortunately plays a part in it but again it is sickening people as the truth of other events happening exposed will serve to prove that often fact is even more shocking than fiction!”
    With love from,
    Diana xx

  2. 2
    Rose Campbell Says:


    I agree fully that any adult who was privy to information that Mr. Savile was abusing children should indeed find themsleves guilty of allowing it to happen and should see the inside of a court room as a particiapant of the events. For an adult to not stop, report, and testify against those who take advantage of children is wrong. a child might not fully understand the events (especially if they are learning disabled) ad the wrongness of it all but there an be no adult who cam claim that they did not know it was wrong.

    It is not much different than the Sandusky case here in the US whereby people within a college sports structure did not stop and adequately report the goings on with Jerry Sandusky. There were adults who either knew or had a major suspiscion of his activities and they turned their heads to salavage the reputation of both the man and the program. They are guilty of allowing a pedophile to practice his perversion. That is flat truth in both scenarios. The difference of Jimmy Savile being dead and not able to defend himself and Jerry Sandusky being alive and defending himself by claiming it was everyone else who put him behind bars is not much in my book. They did what they did and people know what they did. What defense is there for even one incident where an adult male misuses a child for sexual pleasure? At least Mr. Savile didn’t have a chance to embarras himself and sicken us all far more with a “defending” statement like Mr. Sandusky did.

    As to the victims coming forward now …if no adult was stepping forward to stop the abuse how did these kids have a hope of being believed? Maybe some of them did tell parents but ‘back in the day’ when some of the events happened it was most likely swept under the rug by those adults as well. “Don’t rock the boat” and “hide the sins of sinners’ was certainly the more prevalent thinking in the earlier days. I have a friend who was abused as a child and did tell his mother and she did not raise an alarm but rather bought the child an ice cream cone to silence his claims. Thank god that society has changed enough that disclosing the sin of the sinners is far more in vogue today.

    God’s love to all who may have been harmed by any man’s weakness of moral structure and deviant perversion. Can’t undo what has been done but let’s see what we can do about helping the victims while tagging these men’s names to the wall of shame.

  3. 3
    Tony Papard Says:

    Nevertheless, whatever the reasons for their silence, the nurses at Stoke Mandeville and others have either let a guilty man continue his crimes and avoid a court trial with all that follows, or they have fabricated their stories about a dead man who cannot now either admit or deny the charges.

    All the assumptions are that Jimmy Savile was guilty, but a few weeks ago this was not the public perception of this man. There’s something very wrong somewhere and someone has to answer for it.

    Yes, the nurses could have reported it to their superiors and maybe they were ignored. But what was to stop them going straight to the police and getting them to investigate? Fear of losing their jobs is not an excuse. Who could work in a place where this sort of thing is going on and keep quiet just to keep their jobs?

    The whole thing stinks whether the allegations are true or false, because it means a lot of people kept quiet and let it continue, or else made the whole thing up.

    Sadly, the former seems to be the case. I hope they are all charged (the nurses and authorities who failed to inform the police, or the police themselves if they were informed and did nothing) and face the consequences if found guilty. They are either guilty of keeping quiet or of making up the whole thing, so either way they should be punished.

    The biggest scandal is the widespread cover-up of Mr Savile’s child abuse, if indeed it happened and so many people knew about it. It amounts to a pedophile ring including hospital staff, possibly managers at the hospitals and the BBC as well as staff, maybe the police as well if they were informed. So potentially a huge corruption scandal which poses many more questions. Was the long cover-up because Mr Savile, later Sir Jimmy (title now to be stripped?), raised a lot of money for charity, or even more sinister reasons? Were others at the hospitals/BBC/police maybe involved in the child abuse as well?

  4. 4
    Rose Campbell Says:

    Ahhh,,interesting questions in your last post, Tony! Time may reveal more than we are ready to stomach!

  5. 5
    Phil Says:

    Absolutely right Tony – and one would also like to know precisely WHY certain professionals kept quiet about the abuse going on: was it personal choice or was it fear of consequences? If the latter, then those who instilled this fear are the more guilty. One does so hope the spotlight reaches into EVERY crevice of our corrupt society.

  6. 6
    Tony Papard Says:

    This requires a full investigation. I’ve seen the disturbing Louis Theroux interviews with Jimmy Savile on YouTube where there are strong hints as to what was going on. Also read the Wikipedia articles on Savile and the sex abuse allegations.

    It does seem he was very discreet, and used his money to silence people. He made a remark when entering a hospital with Louis about ‘all the machines I’ve given you’ to obtain permission for Louis’ camera crew to film in the hospital.

    The Wikipedia articles state Savile was investigated by the police on sex or child abuse allegations on more than one occasion, but there was never enough evidence. It does seem as if it rarely went further than inappropriate touching, etc. in all the reports I’ve read.

    There have been allegations of rape concerting Savile, but somehow I doubt this occurred somewhere like his private room in the hospital where it could so easily provide hard evidence against him.

    I feel if rape did happen it was more likely to have been in circumstances less clear-cut involving sex with under-age teenagers who may or may not have been pursuing Savile and similar pop celebrities in their dressing-rooms, etc.

    This is why a full investigation is needed. I somehow find it hard to believe that a hospital provided Jimmy with a room and let him rape patients there, and nobody reported this to the police, even anonymously.

  7. 7
    Ex-Kiwi Says:

    What about the paedophiles within St John ambulance who are about to receive awards from the Queen’s representative:

  8. 8
    Tony Papard Says:

    Now as the investigation widens, more celebrities are in fear of being named, many with no connexion to the Jimmy Savile case.

    I think there should be a distinction between pedarists like Savile and Glitter who were predatory and sought out their victims, and a whole host of other categories.

    While all under-age sex is illegal and constitutes ‘rape’ if sexual intercourse occurred, there are many different categories.

    One is when under-age people experiment with others around their age. This should not be prosecuted unless force was involved.

    Another category is where the local laws are different and allow sex or marriage at an earlier age. This is a very difficult one to deal with as it concerns different cultures. Obviously legal action must be taken when 9 year old children are forced into marriage with an older person, even though such practices may be legal in some parts of the world.

    However there are less clear-cut cases, such as Spain at one time (not sure if this is still the case) having 14 as the age of consent. Or the Deep South of the USA where marriages even younger were not only legal, but encouraged by the fundamentalist Christian churches to prevent sex outside marriage. How these are dealt with is more problematic, but the rule of thumb should surely be that anyone who has sex with a person who is under the age of consent where the act took place is liable to prosecution.

    Thus, someone from the Indian sub-continent who was married to an underage person should be prosecuted if they continue the sexual relationship while in the UK, for instance. Similarly Jerry Lee Lewis who married his 13 year old cousin could have been prosecuted for sleeping with his wife in a London hotel in 1958. Loretta Lynn, the Country singer, also married at 13, and such marriages were very common in that part of the States at the time. Had Loretta and her husband come to UK and slept together when she was under 16 her husband could well have been prosecuted as well.

    There is yet another category, and this is where the younger person does the chasing and makes out they are older than they are. Pop stars face this problem all the time when young people invade their dressing rooms and offer sexual favors. As one pop star remarked: ‘I didn’t ask for all their birth certificates’. Some 14 and 15 year olds can look much older than their years.

    Still another category involves gay sex where the age of consent has been changed over the years. To prosecute people for having gay sex with 16 year olds seems quite wrong when the legal age of consent is now 16 for both gays and heterosexuals. The previous age of consent for gay men was 18, but for years before that it was at the ridiculously high age of 21. A 22 year old who had sex with a 20 year old in the 1970s is clearly NOT a pedarist and should not be prosecuted for something which would be perfectly legal now.

    As to Jimmy Savile, Gary Glitter, and other predatory pedarists, if found guilty in a court of law they should carry the heaviest sentences. A predatory pedarist is one who seeks out under-age people for sex because of their vulnerability sometimes increased by mental or physical handicaps, or by masquerading as someone their own age or else by ‘sex tourism’ where the predator deliberately goes to countries where under-age sex is legal and/or freely available.

    While all the above are/were illegal at the time of the offense, whether to prosecute or not and what any sentence should be depends on the category and the seriousness of the offense. Even with predatory pedarists cases which just involved inappropriate touching should be in a different category to where actual sexual activity took place and any sentence should reflect this.

  9. 9
    Marianne Says:

    British police considered charging Jerry Lee Lewis but did not do it. Later case law establsihed that a man could have intercourse with a girl under 16 in Britain if he ‘believed her to be his wife’, and the marriage had occurred in another jurisdiction.

    This remained the case until 2003 when a whole raft of legislation on sexual offences was brought in, in the wake of the paedophilia scare following the murder of Sarah Payne.

    But when British DJ John Peel married a 15 year old Texan, he had difficulty in moving to other US states where he might have been liable to arrest. Does anyone remember a teenage actress who starred with Richard O’Sullivan in ‘Me and My Girl’? She had a sister who was a hyperactive wild child.

    The sister married someone she hardly knew aged 15 in the USA. This was just because it was a ‘daring’ thing to do. They came back to the UK and cohabited without any trouble in the 1980s. Of course it didn’t last. The former wild child has now swung to the other extreme and become a born aanin Christian.

  10. 10
    webpage Says:

    Birds do this and it is the experience of oral sex.
    In the past few decades. Adult sex toys webcam are from other
    user’s reviews. Several Choices Available When you join a sexy webcams community.
    However, it is always the chooser—never vice versa.
    It is indeed important to recognize that
    women workers have tended to be overlooked within many
    of the” falconatics”. With Mac Webcam Monitor, when you are making love with yourself oryour
    lover. Practically it is not a hardware failure, it may take longer

Leave a Reply

© 2013 The Unorthodox Website Blog | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Your Index Web Directorywordpress logo

Bad Behavior has blocked 1460 access attempts in the last 7 days.