Operation Yewtree

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Because of their illegal nature, child porn sites are usually subscription based to make money.

They are encrypted, so a google search won't produce anything. That would be too easy for the police to find.

http://ceop.police.uk/ will often look for key words to alert them to inappropriate internet usage.

Yes there is one key word that will take you to all the sites and you say when it is used it rings alarm bells.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I and others said that they wouldn't go near the child, we would keep an eye on her to ensure she didn't go near a busy road etc and call the police.

I find that a bit pathetic.
if you don't do anything. and have no intention of doing anything.

then who gives a flying fig what people think?

I have no problem with upsetting the paranoid society we have become.

I can imagine everyone standing on the other side of the road holding their hands up to the approval of each other.

[Chad]

One thing for sure I'll be watching the show on Wednesday. There has been some really interesting points made in this thread. I'll maybe create a poll on Thursday to see what impact the documentary has had on peoples opinions towards the allegations and Jimmy.

Originally Posted by Gary L

I find that a bit pathetic.
if you don't do anything. and have no intention of doing anything.

then who gives a flying fig what people think?

I have no problem with upsetting the paranoid society we have become.

I can imagine everyone standing on the other side of the road holding their hands up to the approval of each other.

Blimey...What have you done with Gary L?

That's the second time I agree with your expressed sentiments.

Maybe if we worried less about what others think we might have a less paranoid society and we could get back to a real caring sharing society. The thought that adults would fail to comfort an obviously upset child because they are terrified of being accused of perversions makes my blood boil.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Maybe if we worried less about what others think we might have a less paranoid society and we could get back to a real caring sharing society. The thought that adults would fail to comfort an obviously upset child because they are terrified of being accused of perversions makes my blood boil.

I was at Edinburgh zoo with my wife a few weeks ago. We went first thing in the morning, the place was dead. As we got up to the Tigers we heard crying. There was a little boy about 4 years old who was wearing shorts and had got his leg stuck in the fence next to the enclosure. His mum was freaking out. God knows how long they had been there but I'm pretty sure we where the only 4 people in the zoo at that time. Obviously the mother needed help but couldn't get it as she didn't want to leave her little boy alone. She rubbed cream on his leg hoping it would slip out but it was stuck fast. I offered to help and climbed over the fence and started to push his leg from the other side. Again nothing. I asked her to throw the cream over and I
would put some on his knee from my side. The boys mum looked at me like I'd just spat in her boys face. She then proceeded to yank his leg until it became unstuck, clearly causing him pain, and ignored me thereafter. I was so offended. Clearly I wasn't looking to rub cream onto her boys leg for sexual gratification. I'd have to be a pretty mental customer to mess with a boy in front of his mum and my own wife!

Originally Posted by Chad

One thing for sure I'll be watching the show on Wednesday. There has been some really interesting points made in this thread. I'll maybe create a poll on Thursday to see what impact the documentary has had on peoples opinions towards the allegations and Jimmy.

I think it's a waste of time.There can be no prosecution and I think that the women concerned should get help with treatment rather than appear on this programme.I think it's more likely to do them harm when they are unlikely to get any real redress from the person concerned.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I find that a bit pathetic.
if you don't do anything. and have no intention of doing anything.

then who gives a flying fig what people think?

I have no problem with upsetting the paranoid society we have become.

I can imagine everyone standing on the other side of the road holding their hands up to the approval of each other.

I can totally understand where your coming from- but, sadly, that's the society we've become. Remember the case where two PCSO's left a child to drown as it would have "breached health and safety regulations" for them to enter the water?

Originally Posted by Chad

One thing for sure I'll be watching the show on Wednesday. There has been some really interesting points made in this thread. I'll maybe create a poll on Thursday to see what impact the documentary has had on peoples opinions towards the allegations and Jimmy.

Good idea to create a poll.

On This Morning a senior lawyer was quoted as saying that he has examined all the evidence based upon legal protocol and that there would definitely be grounds for arrest.

During the discussion, a woman, who was there to balance out the views of the man who did the investigating that lead to the programme being made, said something odd. She said that her father used to work at TV Centre and as a child he used to take her in to meet all the Radio 1 starts of the day. She met DLT, Tony Blackburn and all the others, but, her father would never introduce her to Jimmy Saville. She then began to verbally wonder why on air and, to me, there looked to be a dawn of realisation in her facial expression.

She then said that she was going to talk to her father about it now she's an adult as she was never, ever given an explanation as to why JS was the only one she was not allowed to meet.

If anybody wants to watch it, it's here (the discussion is the first item, where they normally review the days papers):

http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=325977

Originally Posted by Chad

I was at Edinburgh zoo with my wife a few weeks ago. We went first thing in the morning, the place was dead. As we got up to the Tigers we heard crying. There was a little boy about 4 years old who was wearing shorts and had got his leg stuck in the fence next to the enclosure. His mum was freaking out. God knows how long they had been there but I'm pretty sure we where the only 4 people in the zoo at that time. Obviously the mother needed help but couldn't get it as she didn't want to leave her little boy alone. She rubbed cream on his leg hoping it would slip out but it was stuck fast. I offered to help and climbed over the fence and started to push his leg from the other side. Again nothing. I asked her to throw the cream over and I
would put some on his knee from my side. The boys mum looked at me like I'd just spat in her boys face. She then proceeded to yank his leg until it became unstuck, clearly causing him pain, and ignored me thereafter. I was so offended. Clearly I wasn't looking to rub cream onto her boys leg for sexual gratification. I'd have to be a pretty mental customer to mess with a boy in front of his mum and my own wife!

I understand the sentiments of what Maggy has said in post 79, but, just imagine if you had come across that child on your own and his mother was not there. What do you think could have happened if you had been rubbing cream into him to try and get him out from the inside of the enclosure and his mother then appeared?

I also think that society presumes women will be less likely to harm a child, so would be viewed with less suspicion.

This is unwise as, of course, there are female paedophiles too. Maybe this is why people seem to be more outraged when a woman is caught doing these things.

The most hateful comments I have heard about Myra Hindley have come from women, in particular women who have had children.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I can totally understand where your coming from- but, sadly, that's the society we've become. Remember the case where two PCSO's left a child to drown as it would have "breached health and safety regulations" for them to enter the water?

No

On This Morning a senior lawyer was quoted as saying that he has examined all the evidence based upon legal protocol and that there would definitely be grounds for arrest.

Most people questioned by the police are arrested ,even the parents of a child suffocated with carbon monoxide at a camping ground ,the default position is to arrest and then ask questions ,it means nothing .

During the discussion, a woman, who was there to balance out the views of the man who did the investigating that lead to the programme being made, said something odd. She said that her father used to work at TV Centre and as a child he used to take her in to meet all the Radio 1 starts of the day. She met DLT, Tony Blackburn and all the others, but, her father would never introduce her to Jimmy Saville. She then began to verbally wonder why on air and, to me, there looked to be a dawn of realisation in her facial expression.

Anyone and everyone who ever came within 20ft of jimmy saville will now be screaming abuse ,such is the power of our sensationalist media .

[colin25]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I think it's a waste of time.There can be no prosecution and I think that the women concerned should get help with treatment rather than appear on this programme.I think it's more likely to do them harm when they are unlikely to get any real redress from the person concerned.

I think the show is important. I am not a fan of hiding history. From evidence of interviews, it looks like most people in BBC knew about him.

If he was, then it should come out.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by martyh

No

Most people questioned by the police are arrested ,even the parents of a child suffocated with carbon monoxide at a camping ground ,the default position is to arrest and then ask questions ,it means nothing .

Anyone and everyone who ever came within 20ft of jimmy saville will now be screaming abuse ,such is the power of our sensationalist media .

It'll be on the internet.

Fair point.

Yes, it's certainly a possibility that that might happen.

Originally Posted by colin25

I think the show is important. I am not a fan of hiding history. From evidence of interviews, it looks like most people in BBC knew about him.

If he was, then it should come out.

Philip Schofield said that his first contact with Jimmy Saville was at the age of 17. He was working for The Daily Mirror and his boss had told him to ring him and ask him a question not connected to child sex abuse. His sister answered and went to fetch him. The first thing he said before Philip Schofield could say anything was "she said she was over 16" Schofield also said that he was told about him when he started working at the BBC.

For balance, his PA of many years was on the 'phone. She said that she never saw evidence of any wrongdoing and that he did not have a computer.

[joglynne]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I think it's a waste of time.There can be no prosecution and I think that the women concerned should get help with treatment rather than appear on this programme.I think it's more likely to do them harm when they are unlikely to get any real redress from the person concerned.

I do understand your viewpoint Maggy but having a close friend who was both mentally and physically abused as a child I also understand why these women want to do this.

A dear friend has had 'treatment' all her adult life in the form of counseling but nothing has been able to reduce the pain and psychological damage she went through, and still has to deal with, when she was forced to endure what was happening to her because no one would have believed what she and many others were going through at the hands of so called pillars of the community.

I don't know whether these allegations are true but as more people come forward I am starting to believe that, had he been alive, Mr Savile would have a case to answer. Unfortunately this can now never happen so having the abuse acknowledged publicly and having other people come forward and admit that they knew this was going on but did nothing will give these women the possibility of closure.

I just hope that those people who now claim to have known what was happening at the time feel some sort of responsibility for the things that they failed to act upon. Turning a blind eye to abuse is shameful.

I have to say it looks bad. I haven't paid much attention to the story presuming it to be a sensationalist documentary that might have some truth in it but ultimately inconclusive. However now it's just person after person coming out to say they were either abused by him or television personalities saying that it was an open secret/suspicion that surrounded him for years.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I think it's a waste of time.There can be no prosecution and I think that the women concerned should get help with treatment rather than appear on this programme.I think it's more likely to do them harm when they are unlikely to get any real redress from the person concerned.

Assuming the abuses happened (and the evidence presented thus far would seem to indicate they did), maybe they want some sort of apology from the BBC? After all, it would seem he did at least some of them in Television Centre.

It's interesting to note that the BBC's announcements so far seem to be very carefully worded so that they are neither accusing Jimmy, nor denying he did anything. They are saying merely that they have no record of anything untoward happening. As it seems that (for whatever reason) the girls didn't make a complaint, this is probably true.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I can totally understand where your coming from- but, sadly, that's the society we've become. Remember the case where two PCSO's left a child to drown as it would have "breached health and safety regulations" for them to enter the water?

Except that's not what happened. When the PCSO's arrived the child was submerged, out of sight, and no one could tell them where they were last seen. In those circumstances I wouldn't wade into water in the hope I'd stumble across a body.

Anyway back from rumour control it's clear there have been stories circulating about jimmy saville for years, the main story for me isn't what did or didn't happen but rather did the BBC kill a previous enquiry and if so who and why decided to do that.

[Caff]

Originally Posted by joglynne

I do understand your viewpoint Maggy but having a close friend who was both mentally and physically abused as a child I also understand why these women want to do this.

A dear friend has had 'treatment' all her adult life in the form of counseling but nothing has been able to reduce the pain and psychological damage she went through, and still has to deal with, when she was forced to endure what was happening to her because no one would have believed what she and many others were going through at the hands of so called pillars of the community.

I don't know whether these allegations are true but as more people come forward I am starting to believe that, had he been alive, Mr Savile would have a case to answer. Unfortunately this can now never happen so having the abuse acknowledged publicly and having other people come forward and admit that they knew this was going on but did nothing will give these women the possibility of closure.

I just hope that those people who now claim to have known what was happening at the time feel some sort of responsibility for the things that they failed to act upon. Turning a blind eye to abuse is shameful.

Exactly.

Whether dead or alive a perpritrator of a crime, if found guilty, should be punished in a fitting way. In this case peoples memory of him might change.
Similarly, someone accused of crime of which they were innocent, and executed/incarcerated, may be exonerated - whether they living or dead.

Whatever the outcome, those that loved, admired or knew him as a friend will have new worriess. Mud sticks.

I'll wait for the outcome.