Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@(f)politics? wrote:
I Dunno Jen, full on molestation meaning ? i think what he supposedly did is very important to all this…
For heavens sake poli, do I really need to give all the gory details? It was NOT just a cheeky old man going a little too far, it was way beyond that. If she had taken it further and if anyone had been prepared to believe her, support her and take action then it would have been sexual assault. Now do you need any more detail than that?
@(f)politics? wrote:
He was known for this kind of behaviour but his high profile and the good work that he did made him practically untouchable.
Known for ? if it was that known they would have plenty of support to do something about it… and
Fellow broadcaster Paul Gambaccini said he had been “waiting 30 years” for such stories to come out.
Speaking on ITV1’s Daybreak programme, he said newspapers had been primed to run similar stories while Sir Jimmy was alive, but the star had intervened to prevent their publication.
“On [one] occasion, and this cuts to the chase of the whole matter, he was called and he said ‘well you could run that story, but if you do there goes the funds that come in to Stoke Mandeville – do you want to be responsible for the drying up of the charity donations.’ And they backed down.”
Would they back down if they really thought they had a story with proof and evidence? i doubt that, hell if they thought the story had any real credence , they’d run it facts or not, and some supposed silly threat abt a hospital losing their donations if they really thought this was fact would not stop them.
Silly threats about a hospital losing their donations? He put Stoke Mandeville spinal unit on the map, he raised over £40 million for charities, a large proportion of which went to Stoke Mandeville. Silly threat? The media then is different to the media of today. I’m sure that the media of today would have no compunction in running the story. But then?
@(f)politics? wrote:
It’s not “one” person that suddenly was molested but to scared to talk up, “allegedly it was many” and all of them were too scared to stand up ?
I’m just not easy with such wishy washy allegations, with no real proof or evidence to back them up.There is safety in numbers, but what if you think you’re the only one? And what kind of proof or evidence would you accept?
It’s you and a man in a room, perfectly innocent and above board but then he sexually assaults you. You are so stunned that you don’t fight back (and yes, for all that we think we would do if it happened to us, when it comes down to it most of us just freeze). There are no physical marks on your body, no witnesses, your word against his. How do you prove it happened? What proof would you accept poli?
@(f)politics? wrote:
Personally, i think its more a case of a man who maybe wasnt perhaps an angel, a bit cheeky pushed his luck a bit perhaps with pretty women, much like many men will do if you met them and “agreed” to a hug, an unknown non celebrity man, who you would maybe kick in the groin maybe slap maybe say geroff matey walk away and that be that, but hey its a well known name so lets make it a huge public thing of it now he can’t answer for himself.
Oh well that’s ok then, he was just a bit cheeky and pushed his luck with teenage girls…no harm done eh?
@(f)politics? wrote:
If there is so many people who suffered from him s is being alleged i can’t believe they didn’t pipe up, when the allegations came up in 2007, were all those people really in a position maybe 30 years on they couldnt speak up then ?
Maybe they would have if they’d known about it, but it wasn’t publicised was it?
No the problem was Jimmy, his behaviour towards women (whether you think of it as abuse or just a pervy man copping a feel when he could) then threatening to withdraw his support for the good causes when confronted. The problem was compounded by people being afraid to tackle it, from the people who heard the rumours but turned a blind eye, the newspapers who didn’t print what they had, the people who were witnesses but didn’t say anything because of who he was, the employers who didn’t support their staff and so on…
It’s easy to say why didn’t they come forward sooner but just try putting yourself in their position if you can. You’re a young teenager. A man that is in the public eye, who does a lot of good work for charity (we’re not talking about just turning up at events and raising a few quid here and there, he raised over £40 million), that everyone thinks is wonderful, who was one of your childhood heroes, molests you. You are not physically hurt and there were no witnesses so there is no evidence, just your word against his. This is 30 years ago when very few rape cases came to court as the attitude to the victim was so very different to the attitudes of today. Paedophilia is a word unknown to most although almost everyone knows at least one “dirty old man that you wouldn’t leave your kids with”.
Yes some will jump on the bandwagon, but some will also be genuine victims…can you begin to see why they might not have come forward sooner?
Do I really need to go into detail on what he did to her?
It was not a hand touching or brushing her ass, it was not just a cheeky grope, it was not a cheeky old man being well cheeky – not that that should have gone uncommented on. It was full-on molestation, not once but twice, and he was well known for it.It did bother her, enough to go to her superiors and ask for advice, and they made it clear that his support and charity work was more important to them, to the point of implying that her job might be at risk.
He was known for this kind of behaviour but his high profile and the good work that he did made him practically untouchable.
What good is it going to do his victims to talk about it now? Probably a hell of a lot more good than it’s done them bottling it up all these years. Anyone who has ever been a victim of abuse of any kind will understand the need to speak out once they feel safe enough to do so, it’s just a shame that in this case they had to wait until he was dead to feel that safety and for anyone to be prepared to listen and not be blinded or threatened by the public image and the risk of losing all those charitable donations.
@(f)politics? wrote:
Special hug? What’s that mean?
“special hug” meant that he had a good grope while he was at it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19788721
Surrey police has confirmed that Sir Jimmy Savile was questioned over allegations of child sex abuse in 2007.
In a statement, they said an individual was interviewed over offences which were “alleged to have occurred at a children’s home” in the 1970s.
The matter was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service, which “advised there was insufficient evidence to take any further action”.
In other words it was his word against hers.
Fellow broadcaster Paul Gambaccini said he had been “waiting 30 years” for such stories to come out.
Speaking on ITV1’s Daybreak programme, he said newspapers had been primed to run similar stories while Sir Jimmy was alive, but the star had intervened to prevent their publication.
“On [one] occasion, and this cuts to the chase of the whole matter, he was called and he said ‘well you could run that story, but if you do there goes the funds that come in to Stoke Mandeville – do you want to be responsible for the drying up of the charity donations.’ And they backed down.”
There was a young nurse, petite, pretty, who was proud to get a job nursing in the spinal injuries unit at Stoke Mandeville Hospital. One day there was a buzz around the unit, Jimmy Saville, one of her childhood heroes, was coming to visit. She asked if she’d be able to meet him and one of the more senior nurses tried to discourage her but she persisted.
When Jimmy arrived, he was just like the man she’d watched on TV, larger than life, outgoing, a smile and a hug for everyone. She didn’t notice at the time but realised later that not everyone was happy to get a hug from Jimmy. She was busying herself with some housekeeping in one of the side rooms when Jimmy came in. She was flattered when he commented that she was a pretty young thing, she was new here wasn’t she? He said how he thought the nurses were wonderful, absolute angels, come here and let me give you a hug to say thank you for the work you do. Only it wasn’t just a hug. Shocked, she told herself that she’d imagined it, that she’d misunderstood, that his hand had slipped, it was an accident…after all, this was Jimmy Saville, that wonderful man from the TV who did so much charity work. Try as she might though, she couldn’t explain it away.
Later in the day she confided in one of the nurses who had been there for a while who said “oh, you’ve had one of Jimmy’s special hugs…well yes you would, he has an eye for the younger nurses, the younger they look the better.” She was shocked – this had happened to others too? Yes, regularly, but everyone turned a blind eye, after all, he did so much for the hospital so we have to be nice to him and it’s not like he comes in every day after all…
That night she went home feeling dirty, used, but thought back to the words of the other nurse and thought oh well, it was a one-off, I’m new there too, best not to make a fuss…and she let it go.
Several weeks later there was a buzz again, Jimmy was coming in to cheer up the patients. She resolved to give him a wide berth but he found her – she had the feeling that he’d actually sought her out but he couldn’t be sure. Once again she got a “special hug”, once again she froze. She said if it had been anyone else she’d have knee’d them in the groin but this was Jimmy Saville, you didn’t do that to Jimmy Saville did you?
This time she took the issue to her manager. She explained what had happened both times and how disturbing she found it and how she didn’t know how to deal with it because of who he was…could she have some advice please? The advice was to “go home and forget all about it, after all Jimmy has done so much for the hospital and helps us raise our profile and funds, we can’t really begrudge him a hug from time to time can we? Anyway, how are you enjoying it here at Stoke Mandeville? Remind me, have you completed your probationary period yet?”
True story. The nurse in question learnt to always be with patients when he came so he couldn’t do anything untoward. One of those patients was a friend of mine who spent 12 months in traction at Stoke Mandeville after breaking his neck then another 6 months whilst learning to cope with his new life.
Jimmy Saville was a man who took advantage of his position. He got away with it while he was alive simply because of who he was, placed on the “national treasure” pedestal and made untouchable. He did many good things with his life but he wasn’t perfect. The shame of it is that those that did get taken advantage of didn’t feel able to do anything about it.
He may not be able to defend himself now he’s dead but the victims couldn’t defend themselves when he was alive. They would have been vilified…but we’re not supposed to speak ill of the dead are we, regardless of what they did when alive, but I guess they’ll be vilified now for speaking out. All they’ve ever wanted was to be heard and for someone to believe them.
OK I know it’s a Twix and not a Flake but it’s not that scary….is it?
Maybe I’m happy to believe it because of the stories I heard about him while he was still alive and how those people didn’t say anything because they didn’t think anyone would believe them. They dreaded the abuse they’d get for accusing “Saint Jimmy” and thought they’d be persecuted by the media.
It’s not uncommon for stories of sex abuse only to come to light after the perpetrator dies as it’s often the first time that the victims have felt safe and able to talk about it.
Psssssst….behind you… :lol:
So it should be brushed under the carpet like it was throughout his life?
It wasn’t just teenage girls, he liked the young nurses too (allegedly) and several of the nurses at Stoke Mandeville dreaded his visits to the hospital.
