The Law BBC covers up activities of serial paedo star

[medusala]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-dozens-more-abuse-allegations-are-made.html
Scotland Yard has taken charge of investigating the sexual abuse allegations against Sir Jimmy Savile as the number of alleged victims reached more than 40 – including one man.

The claims put further pressure on the BBC to reveal whether it knew about the accusations at the time – and for calls for Lord Justice Leveson to investigate the corporation's conduct.

So far more than a dozen women have claimed that Savile forced himself on them when they were teenagers, sometimes on BBC premises

 

[John]

Crikey!

 

[Dry Rot]

Groping spinal op folk isn't cricket.

 

[medusala]

Crikey!

I cant get over how many there were. Gary Glitter gets a mention in the whole affair as well.

 

[John]

I cant get over how many there were. Gary Glitter gets a mention in the whole affair as well.

Rock and Roll (part 2)

 

[John]

I remember Jimmy Saville On Top Of The Pops.

'It's Number One It's Top Of The Pops" he used to say and Paul Gadd and his Glitters used to rip into Do You wanna be in My gang or some such number.

 

[medusala]

I remember Jimmy Saville On Top Of The Pops.

'It's Number One It's Top Of The Pops" he used to say and Paul Gadd and his Glitters used to rip into Do You wanna be in My gang or some such number.

Saville was in the gang alright

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/350039/

GARY Glitter raped a 13-year-old girl in Jimmy Saville's dressing room it was alleged last night.
A woman has told how she watched Sir Jimmy and Gary Glitter abuse underage girls in the DJ's BBC quarters

Karin Ward was a former pupil of Duncroft boarding school where Savile is accused of preying on under-age girls.

She waived her anonymity to tell an ITV documentary screened last night how the Jim’ll Fix It star was in cahoots with pop paedophile Glitter.

 

[John]

I love you love etc and Do you wanna touch? All dirty *ers Meds, you know it, I know and so does the rest of the world but in the end you are here to attack the BBC for past crimes. In the end Gadd and cigar chomper are in a way superfluous to the thread. And yes I missed you while you were away, I hung your picture on my wall.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Truly horrific.

Would meds have posted the thread though if Jimmy Saville had not been an employee of the BBC? Wasn't meds the first to try and minimise blame to "a few bad apples" in the NOTW thread?

If the allegations are true and if fellow employees really did help cover up the alleged crimes, then that is inexcusable.

Having said that aren't the BBC conducting their own internal investigation and also part of a joint operation which involves the Met, NSPCC and ITV? There does not seem to be any evidence of some kind of systemic cover up as of yet.

I do wonder though, did you have even a seconds worth of doubt before posting such a provocative and as of yet unproven thread title. I hope you aren't dishonestly exploiting this awful situation to push a political wheelbarrow. That would be truly callous and more than a little s**t.

 

[Slax]

The sad thing is it shows that media organisations around the world will protect their stars regardless of what they do, the whole Robert Hughes case is also an exmaple of execs turning a blind eye to it to ensure top rating shows aren't affected.

 

[rayven]

The sad thing is it shows that media organisations around the world will protect their stars regardless of what they do, the whole Robert Hughes case is also an exmaple of execs turning a blind eye to it to ensure top rating shows aren't affected.

I love this quote, take out Robert Hughes and replace "media"with "church". You can also replace media with police or for something more relevant to these days "liberal party" , who had no problem with Slipper until he was no longer one of them.

 

[evo]

I cant get over how many there were. Gary Glitter gets a mention in the whole affair as well.

My first mrs was a distant relative of Gary Glitter. Word around her family was he got up to all sorts of shenaghins.

 

[Monniehawk]

If the BBC can do it, I am now deeply nervous about ABC4Kids...

 

[medusala]

I do wonder though, did you have even a seconds worth of doubt before posting such a provocative and as of yet unproven thread title. I hope you aren't dishonestly exploiting this awful situation to push a political wheelbarrow. That would be truly callous and more than a little s**t.

Nice apologism. Savile had already previously been investigated by the police. The police have come out in the last 24 hours and confirmed that Savile was a predator and that they accepted the versions of a number of victims.

If you want political wheelbarrows and rampant misology take it to the phone hacking thread.

This is about something far, far more serious.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...e-alleged-victims-approach-ITV-presenter.html

Savile is now suspected of abusing up to 25 young girls in allegations dating as far back as 1959 and police have called him a “predatory sex offender”.
In the first official estimate of the scale of his crimes, Scotland Yard said its team was pursuing 120 separate lines of inquiry against him.

There does not seem to be any evidence of some kind of systemic cover up as of yet

Just the words of numerous ex BBC employees who said they knew what was going on. Just the allegations that a number of the assaults took place on BBC property. Not to mention allegations that misconduct extend to BBC radio as well with other stars.

It amazes me that some people seem to think the BBC should get a free pass whilst the churches should be torn apart over exactly the same crime.

 

[blackcat]

penn state coach sandusky does the national broadcaster on a public pedo purse

 

[John]

This is about something far, far more serious.

What a stupid comment.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

It amazes me that some people seem to think the BBC should get a free pass whilst the churches should be torn apart over exactly the same crime.

There is no apologism, I am just a little disturbed that someone can be sick or callous enough to use such a horrific circumstance simply as a political battering ram to take a whack at an organisation he does not like.

Do you even appreciate the gravity of what these people have experienced? What depths won't you stoop to.

The BBC should not get a free pass and by "known" you mean were suspicious? There has been one other person accused of indecent behaviour, but I will wait till the investigation provides something solid before throwing stones.

Where was your outrage when the Jersey cover up was unravelling, systemic abuse ignored and hidden by the state. Is it possible employees covered up his behaviour, yes. If so it is completely inexcusable.

Unlike the Sandusky case, those allegations have not been made by the authorities or publicly in any serious fashion, so first we need to see what will be uncovered. It seems to be that ITV and the BBC are working in concert with the authorities, so hopefully they will get to the bottom of what has happened and justice will be served if there is any to be had for the victims.

 

[cancat]

If the BBC can do it, I am now deeply nervous about ABC4Kids...

Wrong channel, try Network X

 

[DivideandMultiply]

If the BBC can do it, I am now deeply nervous about ABC4Kids...

I would suggest there is an element of this kind of behaviour in all places where power and influence are concentrated, or those with authority over and direct access to the vulnerable.

Schools, religious organisations, charities, the police service, the media, politicians and social workers.

Organised predators, who use a culture of silence and self preservation to shield themselves from accountability.

Very possible there has been a cover up at the BBC, though at the moment it seems to be the work of a particularly depraved individual. It is the transparency though of what meds is doing that shocks me.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Wrong channel, try Network X

I see what you did there, wondered if anyone would post this.

 

[cancat]

I see what you did there, wondered if anyone would post this.

I did nothing and I know nothing, Google knows though

 

[medusala]

What a stupid comment.

How can anyone possibly arguing covering up paedo activity (on your own premise) is somehow LESS serious than hacking a phone?

Yet of course that is what some are doing. The Guardian for example has even tried to have a crack at the tabloids (despite one of them - no guesses at to who - having a go but backing down due to libel)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2012/oct/09/jimmy-savile-tabloids-bbc-allegations

Unlike the Sandusky case, those allegations have not been made by the authorities or publicly in any serious fashion, so first we need to see what will be uncovered

WTF? See statements by the police in the last couple of days. See also the news emerging that the BBC management pulled a program in the past on the topic. They knew. Numerous former employees say they knew.

Of course only two people had been convicted over phone hacking and yet we had the Leveson enquiry. Staggering hypocrisy.

If this was a private body then people would be demanding a fit and proper enquiry. Instead all we get is a rerun of the nothing to see of a John Cairncross variety.

 

[John]

How can anyone possibly arguing covering up paedo activity (on your own premise) is somehow LESS serious than hacking a phone?

Who arguing that it is less or more serious? ******* no one matey but your entire posting history is a deflection away from the crimes of Murdoch. Get over it! Your idol is a phone hacking liar. I look forward to a whining WTF!

 

[DivideandMultiply]

WTF? See statements by the police in the last couple of days. See also the news emerging that the BBC management pulled a program in the past on the topic. They knew. Numerous former employees say they knew.

Of course only two people had been convicted over phone hacking and yet we had the Leveson enquiry. Staggering hypocrisy.

If this was a private body then people would be demanding a fit and proper enquiry. Instead all we get is a rerun of the nothing to see of a John Cairncross variety.

Have they made accusations of an organised and systemic cover up by the BBC? Do you have links to this?

The program that the BBC pulled was one which featured him, not some expose if IIRC? Do you disagree with them pulling programming that featured Savile or Star?

At the moment the BBC are not only aiding but participating in a joint investigation. Until there is evidence they are trying to cover up what has happened, we can only wait. If there is any whiff of wrongdoing or lack of cooperation, bring on an independent inquiry.

As for the Levenson inquiry, it is now clear why you have posted the thread.

 

[blackcat]

Wrong channel, try Network X

cant get a google hit on the roman numerals... dont know a thing about this