Jimmy Savile

[spaximus]

Pommygranite said:

It's not about rubbishing legacy it's about not fawning over someone just because they died. This isn't a 'oh he's a bit strange' this is a 'if you'd experienced his behavior for real you'd actually find him disgusting'

Good that your view is based on actually having met him rather than a presumption. Oh hang on...

Actually I di meet him once in Harry Ramsdens in Guisley. He was a very nice guy to all those there, however I did not base my opinion on one brief meeting hence no mention of it.

You have your opinion and you are entitled to it but his charity work including working as a hospital porter is on the record for all to see.

[thehawk]

It's very odd that people base their entire opinions on whether someone was a decent bloke or not on the occasional meeting of them in public.

I'm sure Fred West or Adolf Hitler were probably decent blokes if you bumped into them in a public place and had a brief conversation with them.

[Bonefish Blues]

thehawk said:

It's very odd that people base their entire opinions on whether someone was a decent bloke or not on the occasional meeting of them in public.

I'm sure Fred West or Adolf Hitler were probably decent blokes if you bumped into them in a public place and had a brief conversation with them.

"Plato syndrome", perhaps?

[MX7]

Bonefish Blues said:

thehawk said:

It's very odd that people base their entire opinions on whether someone was a decent bloke or not on the occasional meeting of them in public.

I'm sure Fred West or Adolf Hitler were probably decent blokes if you bumped into them in a public place and had a brief conversation with them.

"Plato syndrome", perhaps?

A dislike of people who hang about outside a dry cleaners in an attempt to meet you?

[Bonefish Blues]

MX7 said:

A dislike of people who hang about outside a dry cleaners in an attempt to meet you?

That's the one, yes!

[Babu 01]

MX7 said:

Babu 01 said:

MX7 said:

Babu 01 said:

Saville took an injunction with the High Court to prevent the spread of the photo of him at the Haut de la Garenne childrens home in Jersey.

Are you sure that's not internet myth? David Icke forums seem to be the most common source.

It would also surprise me if there was an injunction that the public "knew" so much about.

http://www.thelawyer.com/jimmy-savile-turns-to-fox-hayes-for-action-against-the-sun/131780.article

There's no mention of an injunction there.

The whole point of these secret injunctions is that they're, well, secret.

What is known is that (1) the Sun published the photo, (2)Saville's QC took action against the Sun and (3)the photo vanished from the web & no other media picked the story up.

The link above refers to (2) after which point no evidence will be in the public domain.

Like I said, questions to be answered.

[ALawson]

If half the stuff on the davidicke thread about JS is true then there will be a few upset people.

I wonder what Coleen Nolan thinks about him?

[bosscerbera]

Babu 01 said:

The whole point of these secret injunctions is that they're, well, secret.

What is known is that (1) the Sun published the photo, (2)Saville's QC took action against the Sun and (3)the photo vanished from the web & no other media picked the story up.

The link above refers to (2) after which point no evidence will be in the public domain.

Like I said, questions to be answered.

Perhaps it's as simple as The Sun being wrong?

Showing a photo of Ronnie Biggs leaving your local HSBC doesn't mean he robbed it. More to the point, showing a picture of YOU leaving HSBC doesn't mean you robbed it or 'bowling balled' the receptionist. If The Sun published such photos alongside a tale of robbed banks and goosed bank clerks, I'd expect you or Ronnie Biggs to tell The Sun to wind their necks in. No?

[Melvin Udall]

bosscerbera said:

Perhaps it's as simple as The Sun being wrong?

Showing a photo of Ronnie Biggs leaving your local HSBC doesn't mean he robbed it. More to the point, showing a picture of YOU leaving HSBC doesn't mean you robbed it or 'bowling balled' the receptionist. If The Sun published such photos alongside a tale of robbed banks and goosed bank clerks, I'd expect you or Ronnie Biggs to tell The Sun to wind their necks in. No?

Well, not keen on getting involved in this, BUT, he did deny ever being there, hence the importance of the photo, I think?

[Dr Jekyll]

bosscerbera said:

Perhaps it's as simple as The Sun being wrong?

Showing a photo of Ronnie Biggs leaving your local HSBC doesn't mean he robbed it. More to the point, showing a picture of YOU leaving HSBC doesn't mean you robbed it or 'bowling balled' the receptionist. If The Sun published such photos alongside a tale of robbed banks and goosed bank clerks, I'd expect you or Ronnie Biggs to tell The Sun to wind their necks in. No?

But if the local HSBC had been robbed, and I denied having ever visited the branch until the photo of me leaving it was produced, I would expect people to ask questions.

[MX7]

Babu 01 said:

The whole point of these secret injunctions is that they're, well, secret.

Yet you claim to know an incredible amount about it all. Do you have some sort of privileged information that can now be reveled?

Babu 01 said:

What is known is that (1) the Sun published the photo, (2)Saville's QC took action against the Sun and (3)the photo vanished from the web & no other media picked the story up.

The link above refers to (2) after which point no evidence will be in the public domain.

Newspapers get things wrong all the time. The Sun withdrew the implication because it had no evidence that Savile was involved, and all it takes is someone on the internet to claim that there's an injunction and all of a sudden it creates an air of suspicion that no one can talk about.

Babu 01 said:

Like I said, questions to be answered.

No, that's exactly what you didn't say. You said "Saville took an injunction", not apparently, or rumoured to have done, but that he did.

[Roger Dodger]

Pommygranite said:

doogz said:

Pommygranite said:

doogz said:

Pommygranite said:

Zaxxon said:

Pommygranite said:

Yeah off day if you consider turning a hug into a bowling ball arse vag grab.

Perhaps you have an irresistable arse?

thanks.

Nah female not me.

So some woman you know says he felt her arse 30 years ago, and that makes him a horrible nasty man?

Bit OTT imo, given all his other achievements. Not saying that if it actually happened, it's ok, but you're writing off all the good he's done, and saying he should have been locked up, based on this one event that someone said happened?

If a female relative of yours was digitally raped by a guy would you think 'yeah not nice but think of all his charity work'?

Leave it out. If you want to start another thread about it, feel free, but there's no need to start spreading stuff like this about here, is there? You've no proof, you're just saying nasty things about a dead guy, for no reason as far as i can tell.

Responding to the eulogising and I'm quite able to do so so I'll decline your offer and say my piece if I wish, but let's not a death get in the way of the truth shall we, it appears im not the only one with these views of him so feel free to ask them all to stop as well.

TBH, if you left it be after she was 'digitally raped' (does anyone else find this phrase pretty funny?) then you're a crap relative.

But it's ok, you've done your bit for her by bhing about a dead man on the internet.

The ultimate keyboard warrior. Wait until the man's dead, then kick off.

[Roger Dodger]

pacman1 said:

I think he'd have made a good PH'er, long before PH, or even the net for that matter.

He's also wearing 2 watches - the watch thread would have loved him!

[ExChrispy Porker]

Why is it wrong to discuss someone, just because they are dead? Can't see the logic there.

[Life Saab Itch]

Saville would have got a knighthood without his charity work.

He has been a close friend to Prince Charles for years and advised him during the divorce from Diana.

Such friendships carry a lot of weight.

[pacman1]

Roger Dodger said:

He's also wearing 2 watches - the watch thread would have loved him!

Exactly. I wondered if anyone would spot the two watches.

[Wacky Racer]

More here:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-1551137...

[Pommygranite]

Roger Dodger said:

Pommygranite said:

doogz said:

Pommygranite said:

doogz said:

Pommygranite said:

Zaxxon said:

Pommygranite said:

Yeah off day if you consider turning a hug into a bowling ball arse vag grab.

Perhaps you have an irresistable arse?

thanks.

Nah female not me.

So some woman you know says he felt her arse 30 years ago, and that makes him a horrible nasty man?

Bit OTT imo, given all his other achievements. Not saying that if it actually happened, it's ok, but you're writing off all the good he's done, and saying he should have been locked up, based on this one event that someone said happened?

If a female relative of yours was digitally raped by a guy would you think 'yeah not nice but think of all his charity work'?

Leave it out. If you want to start another thread about it, feel free, but there's no need to start spreading stuff like this about here, is there? You've no proof, you're just saying nasty things about a dead guy, for no reason as far as i can tell.

Responding to the eulogising and I'm quite able to do so so I'll decline your offer and say my piece if I wish, but let's not a death get in the way of the truth shall we, it appears im not the only one with these views of him so feel free to ask them all to stop as well.

TBH, if you left it be after she was 'digitally raped' (does anyone else find this phrase pretty funny?) then you're a crap relative.

But it's ok, you've done your bit for her by bhing about a dead man on the internet.

The ultimate keyboard warrior. Wait until the man's dead, then kick off.

I had said my piece and was done but felt it wasn't inappropriate to respond to this.

Firstly there's a lot better threads I could go on and lie about nonsense and create sensationalist threads.

Secondly starting a thread on the experiences of a family member hadnt really crossed my mind tbh. I saw a few positive, and imho wrong, comments on here and am within my rights to say my piece.

Fnally,keyboard warrior no,I havent offered anyone out for a fight or saying anything I would say face to face or even to the dirty old bloke himself when he was alive.

I understand the public view is very positive of him and your defenses of him are based on this but my families experiences are very different and do not feel it wrong if air my views just because he died.

I'm done.

Edited by Pommygranite on Sunday 30th October 23:12

[BliarOut]

Slag off a dead man with no absolutely proof.... Nice bloke you are So why not say it when he was alive and could sue your ass? God I hate spineless people who speak ill of the dead...

Oh and just for the record, pinching a woman's ass was still a compliment thirty years ago

[Seti]

BliarOut said:

oh and just for the record, pinching a woman's ass was still a compliment thirty years ago

I don't want to get involved in the right and wrongs of the argument or whether or not it happened but I think the suggestion was slightly more than a pinch. As far as I know the insertion of a digit is now considered on the same level as (or even possibly to be) rape.