Operation Yewtree - Page 2

nomadking · 30-09-2012, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

If there is evidence which confirms he was a paedophile it shouldn't matter if he is dead or alive. Paedophilia is indefensible.

How many rape or child abuses cases are there, where there is irrefutable evidence? Most cases can only proceed on a "he said, she said" basis.

In this instance there are dates, times, and places that might be able to be verified, and I'm sure that will have been done prior to this broadcast.

Russ · 30-09-2012, 17:17

Just because a number of people have come forward to make these claims does not mean they are true.

I agree with those who say he always seemed a bit......odd but that does not mean he was guilty of anything.

Sirius · 30-09-2012, 17:23

A quote from the BBC story on this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19776872

Quote:

In a statement, the BBC said no evidence of allegations on its premises had been found.

"The BBC has conducted extensive searches of its files to establish whether there is any record of misconduct or allegations of misconduct by Sir Jimmy Savile during his time at the BBC. No such evidence has been found.

"Whilst the BBC condemns any behaviour of the type alleged in the strongest terms, in the absence of evidence of any kind found at the BBC that corroborates the allegations that have been made it is simply not possible for the corporation to take any further action."

Sir Jimmy's niece Amanda McKenna, of Kirkstall, Leeds, told the Yorkshire Evening Post: "The documentary makers should be ashamed of themselves cashing in on a man who is dead and cannot defend himself"

colin25 · 30-09-2012, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Just because a number of people have come forward to make these claims does not mean they are true.

I agree with those who say he always seemed a bit......odd but that does not mean he was guilty of anything.

I always thought he was guilty, of abusing fashion

Sirius · 30-09-2012, 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin25

I always thought he was guilty, of abusing fashion

Indeed i think you would be correct on that point

danielf · 30-09-2012, 17:56

Perhaps it would be good to change the thread title to something that reflects the fact that it's just allegations at this point?

devilincarnate · 30-09-2012, 17:58

Now then Now then

Hom3r · 30-09-2012, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Perhaps it would be good to change the thread title to something that reflects the fact that it's just allegations at this point?

Agree, Innocent until proven guilty.

Sirius · 30-09-2012, 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Perhaps it would be good to change the thread title to something that reflects the fact that it's just allegations at this point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Agree, Innocent until proven guilty.

Indeed

Chad · 30-09-2012, 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Perhaps it would be good to change the thread title to something that reflects the fact that it's just allegations at this point?

I started the thread and would be happy for the mods to change the title to:

"Jimmy Savile branded a paedophile"

I think that would be more reflective of the news reports today.

Russ · 30-09-2012, 19:01

I've changed it to something a bit more appropriate.

Sirius · 30-09-2012, 19:01

Personally i think The Title should have allegation in there as that's what they are at the moment.

TheDaddy · 30-09-2012, 20:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

Just because a number of people have come forward to make these claims does not mean they are true.

I agree with those who say he always seemed a bit......odd but that does not mean he was guilty of anything.

It seems as though these allegations were investigated by the police whilst he was still alive and they decided to take no further action

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...legations.html

30-09-2012, 21:17

The problem the surviving family have now is they have to disprove the allegations beyond doubt or Sir Jimmy's memory will always carry this doubt and proving his innocence will a hell of a lot harder than shouting some allegations and sowing the seeds of doubt

RichardCoulter · 30-09-2012, 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

From what I've read. he was investigated for it.

it's intersting because if it is true then there must have been another celebrity who was aware of it going on.

and of course persons at the BBC.

Apparently, it was an "open secret".

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

And accusing somebody whilst they are still alive, and are unable to disprove allegations is any better? Should we summarily dismiss all "he said, she said" types of allegations on that basis?

The papers are merely reporting what will be in a TV programme, so criticising them for it, is complete prejudiced and blinkered nonsense(no surprise there

).

Some of the the initial allegations were made at the time and ignored or covered up.
He was approached before Jimmy Savile died. The fact that the full investigation didn't start until after his death, seems to be more of a coincidence than anything else.

It is not just these women making accusations.

Indeed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMG

Should have been sorted when he was alive & able to defend himself. He`s dead, let it go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

If there is evidence which confirms he was a paedophile it shouldn't matter if he is dead or alive. Paedophilia is indefensible.

I agree, people should be exposed if they are guilty of sexually abusing children, dead or alive.