He was banned from the studio when Children in Need was being filmed. Someone knew.

I think a lot of that is wisdom after the fact myself.

You are suggesting that Savile was protected. Isn't that similar to what the Labour MP alleged about some old Tories and it turned out to be based upon claims by a fruitcake?

Don't get me wrong, I think the Epstein and Weinstein situations are more than enough proof that sexual exploitation by the powerful is commonplace. However, should we automatically assume that they are all in on it? Personally I don't think it works like that.

I think certain intelligence agencies are involved in blackmail and dirty laundry knowledge about people....I think that does go on...The Epstein situation kind of proves it....Hollywood is a sick place run by sick people. However, do we really think that applies to the Savile situation back in the 70s and 80s? Maybe you're right but I prefer to think not while having an open mind to evidence.

Did loads of people know Savile was a peado?....As a layman I prefer to think the people on the ground suspected more than knew....suspecting someone is dodgey is one thing....for example, how many under 16s did rock stars shag?
Logic tells us we know it went on but we haven't officially heard much about it have we?...There's a difference between hearing stuff and knowing stuff...actually knowing names and addresses.

However, the Police received a complaint and don't seem to have taken it seriously. That very much looks like a terrible decision.

Edited by Stirlingsays (26 Apr 2024 2.24pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

But the fact those suspicions were held mitigates against the no knowledge of what he was up to claim.

there is surely a difference between a) a pop star doing a consenting groupie....her the same age as half the pram-pushers of Croydon, and b) Jimmy Savile violently raping innocent children.

the BBC should have been disbanded and replaced with something accountable & manageable.

Kayla's at Anfield & Old Trafford

No, it doesn't. Suspicions don't indicate knowledge. Suspicions can indicate a variety of things. Have you never been suspected of being up to something whilst knowing you are totally innocent?

They can do, but as they cannot be relied on cannot be trusted.

What went wrong was the lack of any mechanism whereby the volume of suspicions could be assessed and investigated by ensuring they were reported, safely and without fear.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Yes there is, I'd agree with both your points.

I want to know how we can have a situation where anyone is raping children and can get away with it.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)