Uk Police Open Criminal Investigation Into Savile Child Abuse Scandal

[7by7]

Scarborough has even been saddled with a road named after the degenerate - Savile view (sic).

Not any more Sir Jimmy Savile Scarborough footpath sign removed

Also anyone in the UK has to pay a mandatory license fee subsidizing the BBC,

Not true, it's any household with a TV. My daughter, for example, does not pay a licence fee because she lives in student accommodation and does not have a TV.

but sadly they have become more and more politicized and less and less honest in their reporting

The BBC are constantly accused of bias by all parts of the political spectrum; which in my view indicates that they are probably getting the balance about right.

None of which changes the fact that people within the BBC almost certainly knew of Savile's predilections but chose to ignore it at the time.

Even the queen of self publicity, Esther Rantzen, admitted on Jeremy Vine's show on Radio 2 that she had heard rumours about Savile but did nothing as 'they were just rumours!'

Pretty rich from the woman who set up Childline!

[F1fanatic]

A serious investigation into Saville is needed, not only to discover others amongst his clique that are still around but - more importantly - to try to ensure that this cannot happen again.

How the hell did things work out so that someone handed him the keys to an area in which it was so easy for him to take advantage of his status??! It was unfortunate that he was this way inclined, but it should never have been allowed in the first place.

As for the poster defending Saville on the grounds that other countries have an age of consent lower than 16 - that is THEIR problem. At 15 I was sexually mature, but immature emotionally, which is why UK laws try to take this into consideration.

And, as other posters have pointed out, there was nothing consensual about what happened. But even if it was (which it wasn't), an old man taking advantage of a young girl's naivety and inexperience is abhorent to say the least.

[chiangmaikelly]

I am rather surprised no mention of him and his fellows in Thailand.

[teatree]

if the girls were not kids,but really young adults that willing did what they did whats the issue? Yea i know underage for the UK but of legal age in many other countries.

The issue is that most of the girls he abused were not willing!

Especially those he abused whilst posing as a volunteer in two hospitals; one of them a psychiatric hospital!

And I'm pretty sure he didn't have consent from the dead bodies he had full access to either.

The sad thing is that while a few minor celebs and the odd tv crew member may be brought down by all of this, the people who protected Savile are more untouchable than he was.

[Keesters]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

[carmine]

I still don't understand what will happen when they find him guilty.

I think its more about nailing the BBC management circles that might have turned a knowing blind eye and removing any of his paedo pals that might still be on the loose any therefore a danger to kids.

[Chicog]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

Edited October 22, 2012 by Chicog

[organic]

In 1987 under the Thatcher government when Kenneth Clarke was the Health Minister the board of governers at Broadmoor hospital for the criminally insane were dismissed and Savile was appointed to lead the task force replacing them with a brief to look after the WELFARE of the patients. He had an office in the reception area with a nameplate on his door saying,'Dr James Savile'.

This is the bit I find most bizarre, that they could dismiss a board of (presumably) health professionals and put a Top Of The Pops presenter in charge. Kenneth Clarke claims his junior, Edwina Currie, would have made the appointment, it not being "significant enough" for him to be involved.

[Exsexyman]

In 1987 under the Thatcher government when Kenneth Clarke was the Health Minister the board of governers at Broadmoor hospital for the criminally insane were dismissed and Savile was appointed to lead the task force replacing them with a brief to look after the WELFARE of the patients. He had an office in the reception area with a nameplate on his door saying,'Dr James Savile'.

This is the bit I find most bizarre, that they could dismiss a board of (presumably) health professionals and put a Top Of The Pops presenter in charge. Kenneth Clarke claims his junior, Edwina Currie, would have made the appointment, it not being "significant enough" for him to be involved.

Yes, bizarre is an understatement! If a decision like that is not thought "significant enough", for the person in charge of the Health Service to get involved in, it does make you wonder what would be considered significant enough. After all, we are talking about Broadmoor here, where some of the most dangerous criminals are held, and all the security implications this entails. But i suspect the wheels are already turning in the cover up for this, and many other aspects of this disgraceful scandal in a desperate attempt to protect the 'Great and Good' from being exposed and dragged into it. Although the hounds of the tabloid press are in full cry and going for the BBC's throat, we now know that there was plenty of knowledge among journalists in Fleet St for years about Savile's and others activities. Why did the Newspaper journalists keep quiet? Why did they not run one of their famous sting operations? Newspaper editors and journalists kept quiet for some reason, and children continued to be abused. Why were they silent when the rumours were widespread in Fleet St for years, there were no regulations in place to tie their hands. Who were they protecting? These questions need answering, and until answers are forthcoming the tabloid press and their proprietors would do well to stop editorialising on the BBC on a daily basis. This is not just a Jimmy Savile and a BBC scandal, it is a paedophile scandal in which it would appear that ALL the media have colluded in. Meanwhile, kids are still being abused in care homes etc, and the abusers, many of whom are undoubtedly powerful and influential figures, are being protected. A national disgrace.

[Steely Dan]

So the Beeb is taking action over the cover up as the Newsnight editor steps down. Lets hope we get to see the results of the independent inquiry as oppose to the Balen report, where the BBC refused to publish the results and spent a fortune in licence payers money to fight against it's publication.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-20024904

[kevin2008]

Alleged sexual predator Jimmy Savile once boasted to a journalist that he could "sort anyone" with a phone call to the IRA.

According to the Sunday People, Savile said: “All I have to do is call my friends in the IRA. They’ll have someone waking up in hospital the next morning eating their breakfast through a f***ing straw.

“I know the IRA, men from the IRA, and you don’t need to ask these guys twice. I’m serious. Don’t f***ing think I’m not serious. I can get them done – just with a phone call. That’s all it takes, young man.”

The newspaper has passed this latest information to the inquiry team investigating the allegations surrounding into Savile.

Read more: http://www.belfastte...l#ixzz2A2mcD7O4

[kevin2008]

Alleged sexual predator Jimmy Savile once boasted to a journalist that he could "sort anyone" with a phone call to the IRA.

According to the Sunday People, Savile said: “All I have to do is call my friends in the IRA. They’ll have someone waking up in hospital the next morning eating their breakfast through a f***ing straw.

“I know the IRA, men from the IRA, and you don’t need to ask these guys twice. I’m serious. Don’t f***ing think I’m not serious. I can get them done – just with a phone call. That’s all it takes, young man.”

The newspaper has passed this latest information to the inquiry team investigating the allegations surrounding into Savile.

Read more: http://www.belfastte...l#ixzz2A2mcD7O4

Saville and the IRA have alot in common then.....

[Keesters]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

I never said the so called victims shouldn't be heard. But where have they been? Wait until their so called abuser is dead and then accuse him when he has no way to defend himself. Why didn't they come forward 5 or 10 years ago when I'm pretty sure somebody would have listened. The guy is dead. His crimes, if any, died with him. The accusers had their chance and blew it. Move on. Investigate the living by all means but leave the dead alone.

[simple1]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

I never said the so called victims shouldn't be heard. But where have they been? Wait until their so called abuser is dead and then accuse him when he has no way to defend himself. Why didn't they come forward 5 or 10 years ago when I'm pretty sure somebody would have listened. The guy is dead. His crimes, if any, died with him. The accusers had their chance and blew it. Move on. Investigate the living by all means but leave the dead alone.

In the OP it states "that police and the Crown Prosecution Service had dropped inquiries into abuse allegations against Savile". The factual reasons for this decision has yet to be established, so before criticising the victims wait for the outcome of the current investigations.

[Asiantravel]

I still don't understand what will happen when they find him guilty.

I think its more about nailing the BBC management circles that might have turned a knowing blind eye and removing any of his paedo pals that might still be on the loose any therefore a danger to kids.

Savile’s Pedophile Pals are Hunted, Estimate More than a Hundred

Victims of twisted Jimmy Savile are believed to have told police that more than 100 other paedophiles were involved in his attacks.

Cops investigating the disgraced BBC DJ and TV presenter are understood to have been given names or descriptions of the men.

Last night a source told The Sun: “The scale of what has gone on is unbelievable. It must be more than likely that among those names will be some very well known people indeed.”

http://therebel.org/...-than-a-hundred

Edited October 23, 2012 by Asiantravel

[Exsexyman]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

I never said the so called victims shouldn't be heard. But where have they been? Wait until their so called abuser is dead and then accuse him when he has no way to defend himself. Why didn't they come forward 5 or 10 years ago when I'm pretty sure somebody would have listened. The guy is dead. His crimes, if any, died with him. The accusers had their chance and blew it. Move on. Investigate the living by all means but leave the dead alone.

In the OP it states "that police and the Crown Prosecution Service had dropped inquiries into abuse allegations against Savile". The factual reasons for this decision has yet to be established, so before criticising the victims wait for the outcome of the current investigations.

But some victims did come forward at the time, especially some of the girls at the "naughty girls homes", who he would take for rides in his Rolls Royce, park up and then abuse them. They were put in the punishment area of the homes, " how dare you say such wicked things about Uncle Jimmy, who does so much good here with his fund raising", etc etc. Likewise the patients in psychiatric hospitals who were his victims, would they have been believed? Their word against a "National Treasure" who raised lots of money for these institutions, there was only ever going to be one winner there. Lets not forget he was given his own accommodation in these hospitals and children's homes, despite rumours and first hand reports of his behaviour being common knowledge. That is a scandal that can't be blamed on the BBC. And yes, investigating police officers on several occasions received orders from on high to drop their investigations, much to their disgust, because a prosecution " would not be in the national interest". He wasn't the only one either. Similar investigations against another " national treasure", who coincidentally like Savile also has close ties to the 'Great and Good', a certain 'Peter Pan of Pop', were dropped despite much evidence including photographs, for the same reasons, ie, it would not be in the national interest to prosecute. Like Savile he will be safe until he dies. But who is protecting these abusers, and why? That is the real scandal here.

[Asiantravel]

Victims are to sue the BBC, the NHS and the education authorities

Jimmy Savile's victims are launching compensation claims for millions of pounds, it emerged last night

The BBC did know: Panorama reveals corporation suspected Savile of abuse nearly FORTY years ago

http://www.dailymail...red-emails.html

Edited October 23, 2012 by Asiantravel

[simple1]

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

I never said the so called victims shouldn't be heard. But where have they been? Wait until their so called abuser is dead and then accuse him when he has no way to defend himself. Why didn't they come forward 5 or 10 years ago when I'm pretty sure somebody would have listened. The guy is dead. His crimes, if any, died with him. The accusers had their chance and blew it. Move on. Investigate the living by all means but leave the dead alone.

In the OP it states "that police and the Crown Prosecution Service had dropped inquiries into abuse allegations against Savile". The factual reasons for this decision has yet to be established, so before criticising the victims wait for the outcome of the current investigations.

But some victims did come forward at the time, especially some of the girls at the "naughty girls homes", who he would take for rides in his Rolls Royce, park up and then abuse them. They were put in the punishment area of the homes, " how dare you say such wicked things about Uncle Jimmy, who does so much good here with his fund raising", etc etc. Likewise the patients in psychiatric hospitals who were his victims, would they have been believed? Their word against a "National Treasure" who raised lots of money for these institutions, there was only ever going to be one winner there. Lets not forget he was given his own accommodation in these hospitals and children's homes, despite rumours and first hand reports of his behaviour being common knowledge. That is a scandal that can't be blamed on the BBC. And yes, investigating police officers on several occasions received orders from on high to drop their investigations, much to their disgust, because a prosecution " would not be in the national interest". He wasn't the only one either. Similar investigations against another " national treasure", who coincidentally like Savile also has close ties to the 'Great and Good', a certain 'Peter Pan of Pop', were dropped despite much evidence including photographs, for the same reasons, ie, it would not be in the national interest to prosecute. Like Savile he will be safe until he dies. But who is protecting these abusers, and why? That is the real scandal here.

Did not know of the info above. Given the usually high level of professionalism and dedication by UK police in sex abuse cases you pose a very good question

[ThailandBert]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

The guy is dead. The so called victims kept quiet for 40 years and allowed this man to abuse countless other children but the real reason they all feel the need to tell us all of their tales of abuse now is they intend to sue the BBC, the NHS and the education authority for millions.

As the man concerned is dead there isn't much chance of a stiff defence now is there.

Who can honestly tell me what they did 5 years ago today ? never mind 40 odd years ago.

They all kept quiet for this length of time.

The man is dead so has escaped justice simply because they all kept quiet. They shouldn't be entitled to a penny in my view !

That isn't to say the man wasn't a monster but he has escaped justice !

[Exsexyman]

Only thing I have to say about this is because he is dead he cannot stand and face his accusers and defend himself. That is not cricket and seems well against what I thought was British justice.

If the case is really about those who may still be living then go after them and let sleeping dogs lie.

I simply do not agree with this; the victims deserve to be heard, it's an important part of the healing process in child abuse cases. And yes, anyone involved in deliberate cover-ups should face criminal charges.

The guy is dead. The so called victims kept quiet for 40 years and allowed this man to abuse countless other children but the real reason they all feel the need to tell us all of their tales of abuse now is they intend to sue the BBC, the NHS and the education authority for millions.

As the man concerned is dead there isn't much chance of a stiff defence now is there.

Who can honestly tell me what they did 5 years ago today ? never mind 40 odd years ago.

They all kept quiet for this length of time.

The man is dead so has escaped justice simply because they all kept quiet. They shouldn't be entitled to a penny in my view !

That isn't to say the man wasn't a monster but he has escaped justice !

Many of the 'so called victims" did speak out at the time, but they were not believed by the people who had a duty of care towards them. Some were even punished for doing so.

[marstons]

What exactly are they hoping to achieve with this? The man is dead so not like he can even be punished. Waste of police resource and tax payers money if you ask me.

He raped possibly 200 children, it needs investigating. The BBC gave him access to these children. The children who were raped now adults need closure and to have their stories heard, at last they can speak about it and possibly get some closure. If you were raped as a child would you like the people who covered it up let off the hook and his gang of mates like Glitter to walk around free and untarnished.

It was covered up, people who he gave access to the children so they could rape them are still free. As a british tax payer and a victem i dont begrudge a penny of it, and look forwards to Mr Gadd being behind bars again and some BBC jerks prosecuted or at least fired.

Edited October 24, 2012 by marstons

[siampolee]

Having downloaded and subsequently watched the Panorama programme transmitted some three days ago in the U.K.concerning Savile i was aware he traded on his popularity and also his connections in society at the highest social level, the highest political and religious circles level and also within the Show business world. However this programme expanded my and I am sure many other peoples knowledge even further as to how Savile selected his victims from the more vulnerable and at risk members of society.

People who knew what was happening were not able to speak out as if they did due to their backgrounds as troubled members of society they were not likely to be believed,also people who were working alongside Savile were in the same predicament.

Saviles popularity was his armour, there are clips shown where Savile openly hints about his liking for young prepubescent girls and boys, in a number of the video clips there is no concealing the predatory sexual advances of Savile, however at that time it was only a small sector of society who could actually see what was happening.. .

When there was a threat to Savile from the nationnal press his comments were, '' expose me if you dare but you'll go down with me as will many others.''.

Saviles notoriety goes back a long time and a case that was to come before the courts in the late 1950's or early 1960's concerning his sexual offence concerning a young girl in a nightspot he owned was according to his minder at the time the prosecution and the defendant were bought off for cash as were it seems the police too.

Savile spun a spiders web of deceit and involvement around himself and others of his ilk that was his assurance policy and it sad to say it worked.

Edited October 24, 2012 by siampolee

[Neurath]

Victims are to sue the BBC, the NHS and the education authorities

Jimmy Savile's victims are launching compensation claims for millions of pounds, it emerged last night

The BBC did know: Panorama reveals corporation suspected Savile of abuse nearly FORTY years ago

http://www.dailymail...red-emails.html

Looks like the BBC and the Catholic Church have more than a little in common.

[balo]

He will probably have the "Sir" removed from his name.

I dont think he cares about that anymore.....

[Exsexyman]

Drip Drip Drip Drip!

[Exsexyman]

Sorry, my error, copied wrong.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/was-there-a-paedophile-ring-in-no-10-mp-tom-watson-demands-probe-8224702.html

[7by7]

Jimmy Savile: Ex-pop star Gary Glitter arrested by police

Met Police confirmed officers from Operation Yewtree had "arrested a man in his 60s in connection with the investigation".

"The man, from London, was arrested at approximately 0715 on suspicion of sexual offences. The individual falls under the strand of the investigation we have termed 'Savile and others'."

Jimmy Savile scandal: Lord Patten 'seeks abuse truth'

The chairman of the BBC Trust, Lord Patten, has expressed his determination to deal with the sexual abuse scandal involving Jimmy Savile.

Writing in the Mail On Sunday, he says the corporation's reputation is on the line and it must face up to the truth.

Lord Patten apologised to those victims who(se) alleged abuse by the TV presenter were not aired by Newsnight.

[meatboy]

i have lived through the jimmy savile era,whats coming out now doesnt suprise me one bit,i remember reading long ago that he was known as a powerful man who was more or less untouchable[mr.fixit].as its starting to gather up pace who know's what has happened in the past.i did read that many well known names had warned the bbc.what was going on,one name mentioned was jill dando,to me the most unlikely person ever to be gunned down like she was,maybe they might look at this case again and there could be other cases as well.never mind what country you live in money talks and can be the root of all evil.now lets see who else the round up?glitter-?

[7by7]

That Savile arranged Jill Dando's murder is somewhat far fetched; despite his reported claims of friends within the IRA.

A more credible theory is that she was murdered by a Serbian hitman.

Jill Dando 'murdered by Serbian hitman'

The widow of a Serbian journalist, murdered in almost identical circumstances, has come forward to say she is convinced Miss Dando was shot by a hitman acting on orders from the Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic.................Both victims were high profile journalists who had upset the Serbian regime. Both were returning home when they were approached from behind, forced to the ground and shot in the head at close range................

[meatboy]

That Savile arranged Jill Dando's murder is somewhat far fetched; despite his reported claims of friends within the IRA.

A more credible theory is that she was murdered by a Serbian hitman.

Jill Dando 'murdered by Serbian hitman'

The widow of a Serbian journalist, murdered in almost identical circumstances, has come forward to say she is convinced Miss Dando was shot by a hitman acting on orders from the Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic.................Both victims were high profile journalists who had upset the Serbian regime. Both were returning home when they were approached from behind, forced to the ground and shot in the head at close range................

what this might enhearth nobody knows,normally there are some very powerfull men involved in in sex crimes.it was just that i heard the name of jill dando mentioned,recalling the conviction of barry george for her murder makes you think where did all the evidence come from,but when you look at the facts they give a different story,and dont forget he to worked at the bbc.i love conspiracy theories.