Wednesday, 10 October 2012

Jimmy Savile is innocent

I never have liked trial by media or the lynch mob mentality.
They smack of insecurity, self guilt,of bullies and cowards.



 I've never liked Jimmy Savile either. Too much corny ooohing and aaahing for my money.

But it needs to be said that we cannot judge this man even if there is a growing wave of accusations from those who allege abuse by him. He is not here to present a defence.

He is dead and will by now have faced the most important judgement that any of us will receive.

It was wrong of the senior police officer who, when interviewed, described him as a "sexual predator".

If Savile was still alive such language would have rendered a potential trial null and void; we have only heard the voices of those in the defendants' box, we cannot hear the plaintiff's account.

Time for all those tabloid newspapers to stop their cant and hypocrisy and to look at removing the 'page 3' models instead.

24 comments:

  1. Whatever happened to "innocent until proved guilty?". Has English law changed? Could we not wait until guilt or innocence has been established?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The evil that men do lives after them;
    The good is oft interred with their bones.

    Most of these women who have belatedly come forward were 'groupies' who now think that if the BBC can be retrospectively found guilty of a 'cover-up' they will be able to claim unlimited 'compensay-shun' from a publicly-funded corporation. Women who go out of their way to have casual sex with popstars, DJs, footballers and other so-called celebrities are themselves 'sexual predators'.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree...more and more these days I am feeling like an outcast on my owm planet...it seems that everyone is guilty before we even start...it seems that the nany state says we are not allowed to say anything or do anything without it being questioned or frowned upon.....It must be said that child abuse is abhorrat and should be dealt with however when will it end will furture generations be exhuming people accusing them of kissing people?

    ReplyDelete
  4. the modern equivalent of the lynch mob.

    as for "everyone knew it was happening"; what they mean is that malicious gossip was widespread and spread by those who didn't happen to like his personality.

    Although the ridiculous gravestone's removal is to be applauded.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr Collins, I think this defense of Sir Jimmy Savile is rather unwise. The truth always comes out in the end. I watched the ITV documentary and I think the evidence of Savile's behavior was pretty damning. Savile's family has taken the unusual step of disposing of his gravestone. What does that say? Perhaps they too feel there's truth in the allegations. Just because he was Catholic it doesn't he was faultless.

    I blame the media, in particular the BBC, for making this man the god-like figure he was. This is not a case of trial by media. This is more a case of the truth finally coming out, because for too long the media created a myth of a man which was divorced from reality. He was no saint, and he even admitted it.

    From personal experience of knowing someone who was abused, I know it takes a lot of courage and time for the victim to say he/she was abused. There is always the fear that the other person may not believe them. Plus there's the fear what other people will think of them. It is not their fault that they were abused. The fault is with the perverted adult who took advantage of them. The children are scarred for life.

    Your post shows a callous disregard for victims of sexual abuse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, come on, JI. Savile was always the creation of a meretricious media and pop-music culture which flourished in the 1960s and shows no signs of abating. The fact that he used his money and fame to support good causes is laudable, and who are we to examine his conscience? This whole business stinks of the hypocritical, money-grabbing, sentimental victim culture which makes living in the 21st century so unpleasant.

      Delete
    2. That's really a great point about the 60s culture and the individuals it spawned being responsible for this. Is it any surprise that a product of the 60s media culture would unscrupulously prey on children? Here's his own account of hosting a charity event where he was provided six young girls for his entertainment into the evening.

      http://pvewood.blogspot.com/2012/10/sir-jimmy-savile-serial-child-abuser.html

      I know that the Vatican was ridiculed for this sometime last year when they accurately saddled the cultural revolution for these problems, but after considering the growing list of sexual predators who are also famous media figures, I think it's becoming embarrassingly difficult to hide the fact that the Vatican was right.

      Now, it would be nice to confront such pop-star priests and religious figures directly, which I hope is increasingly the case.

      Ordinarily, I'd be attempting to mount some defense of Sir Jimmy, but considering the evidence, his personal closeness to the Church notwithstanding, I don't think I can do that.

      Despite the fact that he preyed on young girls, his situation isn't that much different from that of Oscar Wilde.

      Delete
  6. That's a bit harsh, JI.

    It seems as though Jimmy Savile was indeed guilty, pace Richard's headline, of grave offences against chastity (his own and his victims'). I say that not based on posthumous allegations, but based on what Savile himself wrote, as has been reported this week, in his autobiography. It's shocking that those who read this book, and there must have been dozens of them, didn't raise this issue at the time - decades ago. It's too late now he's dead.

    The headline aside, Richard is quite right, in my view. Still, the headline was enough to tempt me here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. True. It is very disedifying to hear the police speak opinions which are not within their power or duty as police.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It seems to me that the scale of the allegations by respectable people lends credence to the accusation that he was a predator and an abuser.
    I am not suggesting that the numbers are the deciding factor but Newman's "Proof from the convergence of Probabilities" seems to be applicable.

    ReplyDelete
  9. What utter rubbish Mr Collins and some of you others. As a fellow Catholic I have to say your comments do us as a religion no favours at all t a time when Catholicism is reeling from scandals galore. Your headline is even unwiser. To say he is innocent is indeed taking a standpoint rather than being neutral.
    Some other stupid comment here too about groupies. Some of these girls with the allegations were under 13 and brought up with very little knowledge of sexlike many of us over 40!
    I've covered many court cases as a journalist where there have been sex accusations. They are hard to prove historically, but this is completely different animal. There is a torrent of accusations from many. Additionally, there are many ex-colleagues of Savile saying there were strong rumours about his behaviour and most damning of all women who had nothing to gain like nurses at Stoke Mandeville and a former BBC assistant who tell of inappropriate behavior.
    This man would not have stood a chance in a court of law. He is a disgrace to Catholicism and to humanity in general who used charity as the shield o protect him. He was nothing more than a deviant protected during life.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "He was nothing more than a deviant protected during life."

    The accused cannot defend himself because he is no longer with us.
    It's so easy to speak ill of the dead.

    ReplyDelete

  11. Anonymous @ 08.20 - please have the courage to put your name alongside your comment.The law of this country is still based on a presumption of innocence until proved guilty. As Catholics we are obliged not to condemn or judge unjustly. We do not have hard evidence only hearsay at present.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Inappropriate behaviour". Well, we've all been guilty of that at some time in our lives. I also expected someone would come up with 'scandals' in the Church. Yes, there are plenty - LCWR, openly disobedient Austrian clergy, liturgical abuse - but I don't see the connexion with Jimmy Savile.

    ReplyDelete

  13. Well said JN - agree completely. Richard

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is something very odd going on here. Why, for instance, are individuals who waited until the man was dead to denounce him being described as "brave"? Wronged they may have been but that is another matter.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The main witness Karin Ward has 7 kids by 5 different men, she was convicted if deception, she also brought charges of abuse against a man..guess what..he was dead!
    Who else was actually abused by him.....................?

    ReplyDelete
  16. The nature of the beast with girls attacked in institutions is they are likely to go on and live dysfunctional lives. There will be some of the allegations againstSavile which are lies aimed at money. However, taking away the Karin Wards there are girls who didn't go to his dressing room who tell of less serious crimes such as him kissing them uninvited. There are also plenty without pund signs in their eyes who were concerned about his conduct. That is why he was investigated several times in his life.
    Sex crimes are very tough to prove, but the sheer numbers involved here and viewpoints of those who dealt with Savile make it almost impossible to believe he was whiter than white.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This site disgusts me beyond belief. How anyone can be defending Savile and side stepping the whole issue of sexual abuse has left me dumb founded as to what your religion prioritises.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We abandon the golden principle "innocent until proven guilty" at our peril. As for Mr Savile, it's clear action ought to have been taken by many in respect of him.

    ReplyDelete

  19. Agreed on both counts Lynda. God bless.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't know if he did what was said but I do know that over 300 people come foward after his death. So why did no one come out before and if they did at least one you would think would've gone to the papers. I don't know I just think it's all very suspicious. Only now people think oh yeah he was a bit off. I'm not saying he didn't abuse people but he should get a fair trail like us living people. And the women should only get compensation if it can be proved because if it can't be proved who is to say what happened? Alot of women get compensation if they lose trails over rape when there is no evidence and that's like saying Well I Know he did it but there is no proof so here is £5000. I feel from the bottom of my heart for girls who are abused and raped but there ARE women who give those poor women a bad name. I'm not sure of his guilt and would like to stay unsure until he has been fairly trail and "convicted"

    ReplyDelete
  21. Principles like "innocent until proved guilty" and "equality before the law" are ideas of the "enlightenment". I didn't expect to hear this from a faithful catholic traditionalist.

    Savile is guilty, that is now beyond all doubt. But even if he wasn't guilty of what he is now accused of, he is not a faithful catholic man worthy of any respect. He lived a hugely immoral life and committed fornication countless of times, which he boasted about. He never married but had a concubine sex partner ("girlfriend") that he was open about. He gave all of modernism a face: sexual immorality, abuse and the adoration of the juvenile above the modest.

    ReplyDelete