Sir Jimmy Saville's Range Rover (auction Feb 2012)

[DonkeyApple]

FlaresChestwig said:

DonkeyApple said:

Valid point. I think this one would be worth more converted back to a car, for example.

Nice...dont forget the most dangerous part of the car is the nut behind the wheel.

Or the one lying on the lilo in the boot.

Edited by DonkeyApple on Friday 12th October 08:20

[Flatinfourth]

Some years ago i went into a local Auto-electrical specialist to find a thirties Mercedes, apparently one of Hitler's. Made me go a bit cold at the time, but I would i think expect to find that same vehicle in a collection or a museum,it brings history to life, however unpleasant.

However,This Range Rover is a whole different kettle of fish i'm afraid, if it was mine I think i would have it destroyed...

[Taff107]

DonkeyApple said:

[quote=Flares&Chestwig]

DonkeyApple said:

Valid point. I think this one would be worth more converted back to a car, for example.

Nice...dont forget the most dangerous part of the car is the nut behind the wheel.

Or the one lying on the lilo in the boot.

Ahh....there goes the coffee

[47p2]

Buyer Of Jimmy Savile's Rolls-Royce 'Gutted'


Click

[DonkeyApple]

47p2 said:

Buyer Of Jimmy Savile's Rolls-Royce 'Gutted'


Click

He's an idiot. Bad things happen to people who do not engage brain before opening their wallet.

[nicanary]

Flatinfourth said:

Some years ago i went into a local Auto-electrical specialist to find a thirties Mercedes, apparently one of Hitler's. Made me go a bit cold at the time, but I would i think expect to find that same vehicle in a collection or a museum,it brings history to life, however unpleasant.

However,This Range Rover is a whole different kettle of fish i'm afraid, if it was mine I think i would have it destroyed...

That's what they did with Fred West's house. Best thing for it, stops it getting in the hands of a nutcase ghoul-monger.

[na]

Unemployed said:

na said:

Unemployed said:

I'm not paying £12,995 for a car that cost the vendor £1,500 to buy and which is tainted by a serial paedophile so I may never be able to sell it again. Gross profiteering for which this vendor is known for with Range Rovers.

that takes away your high moral stance

No high moral stance here, friend. Would you take the risk on the former car suspected paedophile when you know that the price has been vastly inflated? Not for me. You may be different.

yes you're right, you're worried about a potential finiacial loss to yourself youy've proved you don't have high morals despite the stance of your first two points

and yes I think I may be different to you

[Unemployed]

Ooh an internet disagreement! Imagine that!

[na]

so you're here for the full arguement then, you'll make no money from it so are you sure you want to waste your time on it ?

[WCZ]

Zingari said:

Interesting how we stereotype people. But just once there is occasionally someone who defies the sceptics.

True enough Jim was weird in some areas, eccentric even, but paedo I doubt as it would have been disclosed by now.

Hows about that then................

:O

[Unemployed]

na said:

so you're here for the full arguement then, you'll make no money from it so are you sure you want to waste your time on it ?

Well, you have me sized up brilliantly. Quite wonderful deductions from just one of my posts and without asking any questions too! I'll leave you to it.

[Unemployed]

WCZ said:

Zingari said:

Interesting how we stereotype people. But just once there is occasionally someone who defies the sceptics.

True enough Jim was weird in some areas, eccentric even, but paedo I doubt as it would have been disclosed by now.

Hows about that then................

:O

True. Of course, he'll never actually be convicted of anything and it's most likely to remain hearsay. Going back to the Range Rover, it's enough to scare people away and wonder if any car that has Savile provenance is worth what some people are currently asking for them (it). That's my point of earlier really, not what someone is trying to create my point into.

[evosport]

If I was owner of the rr I would give to the police so they can further their investigations. I do not it was not used in anyway to bring harm to any of his victims.

[GC8]

There really is some foolish prattle posted in this thread.

[DonkeyApple]

evosport said:

If I was owner of the rr I would give to the police so they can further their investigations. I do not it was not used in anyway to bring harm to any of his victims.

To be honest, they would ask for it if it were relevant but I don't think it is.

If the car is in good fettle then it is a classic British car with a rare and interesting conversion.

The only problem is the ownership association. The current vendor is attempting to sell it without mention as it certainly won't add value.

If it doesn't sell then I wouldn't be surprised if he stored it for a couple of years for it to reappear a different colour with different plates or whatever change needed to try and wipe the history.

[47p2]

I remember this Range Rover being up for sale a number of years ago and there was no mattress in the back, just a standard seat. I would guess there would originally be some sort of sleeping accommodation but I doubt very much if it is now original. Makes me wonder if it has been modified since I last saw it

[4rephill]

47p2 said:

I remember this Range Rover being up for sale a number of years ago and there was no mattress in the back, just a standard seat. I would guess there would originally be some sort of sleeping accommodation but I doubt very much if it is now original. Makes me wonder if it has been modified since I last saw it

It might well have been restored by a previous owner cashing-in on the Jimmy Saville link (which has now backfired for the current owner).



As for the Rolls Royce owner: http://news.sky.com/story/996611/buyer-of-jimmy-sa...

The Owner must be some sort of idiot if he thinks he's entitled to some sort of legal compensation because he bought Saville's Rolls Royce!

At the time of sale (at a charity auction), he was not misled about the car, the car was not stolen/damaged or under a finance agreement that he wasn't aware of, and it was as described, so under what law does he feel he has the right to compensation? - A failure to predict a future scandal, rendering the investment value of the vehicle based purely on the celebrity status of the vehicles previous owner now being null and void?

Pretty certain that's not going to hold water in a court of Law!

As for:

evosport said:

If I was owner of the rr I would give to the police so they can further their investigations. I do not it was not used in anyway to bring harm to any of his victims.

Hows the car going to help with the police investigations?

Have any of the alleged victims stated that they were sexually assaulted/raped in one Jimmy Saville's cars?
Have any of the alleged victims stated anywhere that they were ever in one of Jimmy Saville's cars?

If the answer to both these questions is no, then the cars of no relevance to the investigation at all!


As I've previously posted, if you haven't owned your car from brand new, how do you know for a fact that your own vehicle has never been involved in paedophile activity? (or any other type of sexual assault come to that!).

Better get your car down the Police station just in case - It might help them with an inquiry!

[na]

4rephill said:

Have any of the alleged victims stated that they were sexually assaulted/raped in one Jimmy Saville's cars?
Have any of the alleged victims stated anywhere that they were ever in one of Jimmy Saville's cars?

IIRC in the Exposure TV program then it's yes to both questions

[mywifeshusband]

I guess he replaced the RR with a VW.

http://www.volkswagen-vans.co.uk/press-releases/ji...

[Cheib]

mywifeshusband said:

I guess he replaced the RR with a VW.

http://www.volkswagen-vans.co.uk/press-releases/ji...

Nothing like a campervan to keep prying eyes away.