The Reckoning - Savile

Yes, it seems unlikely to me too. I don’t want the BBC to close down, but I would like to see systems in place so that numerous people making complaints are listened to and their accusations are co-ordinated across departments.

I would also like to see the police having a duty to co-ordinate complaints across institutions - some sort of central database accessible by any force, so that if someone comes in and says Mr X has molested them in a particular manner it can be cross-referenced with other complaints across the country, whether they happened in a hospital in Leeds or a London TV studio. If something like that had been in place (not possible in the days before without linked computers, I realise) both Savile and Brand (and Harris, Hall and Clifford) would have found it much more difficult to get away with it. It would also encourage women to speak up, and be a deterrent.

Is that not an unlikely crossover. The BBC were up to their neck in it with Brand too.

I wonder if the keyboard warriors who are all over the internet demanding that the BBC should be closed down for ignoring stories about Savile are the same ones heaping insults on the women who are accusing Russell Brand.

No Iam but something doesn’t ring true.

Anniebach

Wonder how the letters were available so long after they were written

I thought his Secretary had kept them. I’m surprised that they haven’t been surreptitiously removed by the security services.

Anniebach, are you suggesting some kind of conspiracy, forged letters aimed at undermining King Charles

Wonder how the letters were available so long after they were written

Louella12

Anniebach

I certainly do not believe Charles asked Savile to advise Andrew and Sarah how to behave in public.

I don't either

Where is the actual evidence? Have we seen the letters from Charles to Savile?

I've very little time for MSM. We are fed all sorts of nonsense that people believe.

If I recall correctly...the Netflix documentary actually featured the letters between Charles and Savile, some details here;

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10689515/Prince-Charles-heaped-praise-Jimmy-Savile-asked-help-fix-Royal-Familys-image.html

While I generally agree that MSM can feed a lot of nonsense, I'd suggest there's truth here.

Well it was a dramatisation.

Yet what these people endured wasn’t enough dramatic effect was added

The drama hardly mentions the RF but it does feature some of the actual people who were victims of Savile's sexual assaults. They speak quite openly of how the assault affected them and explain why he got away with it. Savile was so lauded by the great and the good during his lifetime that it is easy to understand why a little boy couldn't disclose that this "hero" was actually a sexual abuser.

Anniebach

I certainly do not believe Charles asked Savile to advise Andrew and Sarah how to behave in public.

I don't either

Where is the actual evidence? Have we seen the letters from Charles to Savile?

I've very little time for MSM. We are fed all sorts of nonsense that people believe.

It was all so horrific without adding scenes for dramatic effect

The blonde girl from our dance school, (who committed suicide), not only had her name changed in the drama, but I gather she was made to be Asian. I'm not sure what purpose that served?

I chose not to watch the drama when I read-‘some names have been changed and some characters and scenes created for dramatic effect’

Who said that? I didn't. I just pointed out that the answers to such obvious matters of fact are in the programme which is the very point of the thread . People can ask what they like, but they may find that others find that being expected to stop discussing the thread topic to answer the most basic of questions, when the answers are in the drama is a bit irritating.

I get the impression that this is another case where you think that people;e should have shut up until they had irrefutable proof of Savile's guilt before coming forward? That may be the wrong impression, but you haven't added your thoughts, just fired off questions, the answers to which are very much in the public domain.

Really Doodledogasking questions is not now acceptable on a thread ?

Chestnut

You cannot convict someone on rumours. There has to be proper evidence and there doesn't seem to be a willingness to gather evidence due to his huge celebrity status.

that's the thing. I agree that people can't (and shouldn't) be convicted on the basis of rumour, but evidence should be gathered regardless of his celebrity status. By its very nature most sexual assault is carried out in private so most of the evidence will be circumstantial, but where there are enough people saying the same thing, it should definitely be taken into account.

As for the people at the top, Annie - have you seen the drama, or the documentary, or read the numerous newspaper articles on the subject? These things are covered in all of those representations and reports, so you could answer your own questions by looking at them.

I certainly do not believe Charles asked Savile to advise Andrew and Sarah how to behave in public.

You cannot convict someone on rumours. There has to be proper evidence and there doesn't seem to be a willingness to gather evidence due to his huge celebrity status.

It is well documented that Savile had Royal connections because he infiltrated himself at all levels through his charity work. So yes probably did know Andrew but that doesn't make them 'friends'. Savile was seen talking and smiling with the Royals (including the Queen) as lots of charity workers do, but what they said about him behind his back we'll never know.

Why have those at the top not been named ?

It took a long time to come out, the same way the abuse of children sent to Australia or the abuse in the Magdalen laundries, and the abuse by priests took a long time to be revealed and it was always those at the top who either ignored it or disbelieved it when it started to be mentioned.
Revelations and actions about them are speeding up a bit, but it’s still happening.

Have all the people at the top said they heard rumours?

nanna8

Probably all knew each other and were ‘friends’. That’s the problem, people turn a blind eye and if they hadn’t things might not have progressed the way they did. Not suggesting these people were part of his disgusting life, just that they knowingly suppressed feelings of things being ‘not quite right’. If you feel those instincts they should be investigated, not suppressed because the person is famous, a do- gooder
or high profile. I think lessons should have been learnt by this but because of the worship of celebrities by so many it won’t be and it will most likely happen again.

I think you're right, nanna8. There is a knee-jerk reaction when someone famous is accused of anything - and yes they deserve protection against malicious allegations - but when numerous people come forward and say the same things have happened, they should be listened to.

The police, the Church, the hospitals, the BBC, the remand school all had people at the top who heard rumours. Why didn't they talk to their opposite numbers in the other places and compare notes? These questions really need to be asked. We need to remember that the culture then was different, but not excuse it to the extent that we prevent it from being different today.