Jimmy Saville

[alumni]

Have you ever been wrongly accused of something that could have a serious impact on your life/welfare/wellbeing?
Have you ever been arrested?

Do you know why the Legal structure is what it is?

Don't be so stupidly patronising.
There is never going to be a trial, we can never go through the full legal process, and there is no physical evidence after all of this time.
It can only now be a question of whether people believe the numerous alleged victims or not.
Why would they all lie?????

Come on, answer the questions.

 

[sooey]

Have you ever been wrongly accused of something that could have a serious impact on your life/welfare/wellbeing?
Have you ever been arrested?

Do you know why the Legal structure is what it is?

Don't be so stupidly patronising.
There is never going to be a trial, we can never go through the full legal process, and there is no physical evidence after all of this time.
It can only now be a question of whether people believe the numerous alleged victims or not.
Why would they all lie?????

Come on, answer the questions.

Your above questions are patronising to say the least, and don't deserve an answer other than to say yes of course I know how devastating it must be for anyone to be falsely accused of paedophilia or any serious crime.
That does not alter the FACT that we have a number of different groups of women, who are making the same allegations about the same person.
How many women have to come forward before you will consider that they may be telling the truth??100, 1000, more?

 

[Big Tone]

Why would they all lie?????

Because humans often do; all the time and for many and varied reasons. You can’t possibly be that naïve.

Not saying they are but for a few starters: 15 minutes of fame, there’s money in it as compensation, poor recollection or exaggeration of events, pure malevolence...

There’s a difference between evidence and proof; one may hold you to account the other will see you doing time.

I’m simply playing devils advocate and giving him the benefit of the doubt. If or when it’s proven I will call him all the names under the sun. The difference is you are calling him all the names beforehand. Is that really fair or just? You obviously think so.

Again, I’m not saying you are wrong about him but the truth is I don’t know and neither do you! As such you are opening yourself to eating humble pie if the case comes to nothing, but then you appear to have made your mind up despite and irrespective of any outcome like you were a witness or something. From how you come across you would probably say he got off with it as opposed to he was innocent.

If someone falsely accused you of a heinous crime which you knew you hadn’t done just imagine how you would feel if it spread like wildfire. The reason huge sums are paid out in liable cases is precisely because of the damage it does to a person’s reputation and the knock-on effects in income, respect, opportunities etc. etc. (Yes he’s dead but he still has charities which would doubtless be affected).

If you are completely innocent and some malevolent or misguided child, for example, wrongly accused you of something, many people will inevitably always and forever think no smoke without fire an’ all that. It’s never something which can truly ever be undone IMO, which is why it is so important to get to the facts.

The thing is, I know how it feels when you know someone to be a tosser but you can’t nail the barsteward. It’s why I could never have become a policeman TBH, going home at night gnashing my teeth over an event where I can’t just exact my own type of punishment there-and-then. But we have laws and a framework within which we have to abide as best we can. No, it’s not perfect but it’s the best we have until something better comes along.

Well, that’s what I think anyway...

 

[alumni]

Your above questions are patronising to say the least, and don't deserve an answer other than to say yes of course I know how devastating it must be for anyone to be falsely accused of paedophilia or any serious crime.
That does not alter the FACT that we have a number of different groups of women, who are making the same allegations about the same person.
How many women have to come forward before you will consider that they may be telling the truth??100, 1000, more?

So there we have it.
The man who seeks justice won't answer questions on the subject and relies soley on the press - but only when it suits him.

Hypocrite!!

 

[sooey]

I'd ask you the same question big tone

How many women have to come forward before you will consider that they may be telling the truth??100, 1000, more?

 

[sooey]

Your above questions are patronising to say the least, and don't deserve an answer other than to say yes of course I know how devastating it must be for anyone to be falsely accused of paedophilia or any serious crime.
That does not alter the FACT that we have a number of different groups of women, who are making the same allegations about the same person.
How many women have to come forward before you will consider that they may be telling the truth??100, 1000, more?

So there we have it.
The man who seeks justice won't answer questions on the subject and relies soley on the press - but only when it suits him.

Hypocrite!!

You have descended into the realms of nonsense.

 

[alumni]

One has to ask why MWT, the arbiter of truth, having started his 'investigation' did not pass the information over to the authorities.
Not on about the dead here, but the inferred institutional cover ups.

Any of the banged to rights believers care to comment?
What were and are his motives?

Do you not find it odd that he is payrolled by the competition?

 

[sooey]

One has to ask why MWT, the arbiter of truth, having started his 'investigation' did not pass the information over to the authorities.Not on about the dead here, but the inferred institutional cover ups.

What difference does that make to the veracity or otherwise of the victims statements?

Any of the banged to rights believers care to comment?
What were and are his motives?

His motives are irrelevant. The statements of the women aren't.

Do you not find it odd that he is payrolled by the competition?

Who is paying him is irrelevant, the statements of the women aren't

 

[alumni]

One has to ask why MWT, the arbiter of truth, having started his 'investigation' did not pass the information over to the authorities.Not on about the dead here, but the inferred institutional cover ups.

What difference does that make to the veracity or otherwise of the victims statements?

Any of the banged to rights believers care to comment?
What were and are his motives?

His motives are irrelevant. The statements of the women aren't.

Do you not find it odd that he is payrolled by the competition?

Who is paying him is irrelevant, the statements of the women aren't

Oh dear.

So detail is not relevant to you eh?

Selectivity.

You remind me of the picture depicting the two women doing their knitting sat in the front row of the executions during the French Revolution.

 

[Big Tone]

I'd ask you the same question big tone

How many women have to come forward before you will consider that they may be telling the truth??100, 1000, more?

I would have thought veracity is worth more than quantity sooey; I word you yourself have just used

 

[sooey]

I agree, as I've said I thought those women were telling the truth.
Some of them even said that they wanted to stay anonymous to avoid upsetting their families, which is entirely understandable. So they, at least, weren't doing it for money or 15 minutes of fame.
Of course I am assuming that they weren't all paid to tell their stories, but even if they were that would not mean that they were lying.

 

[Big Tone]

I agree, as I've said I thought those women were telling the truth.
Some of them even said that they wanted to stay anonymous to avoid upsetting their families, which is entirely understandable. So they, at least, weren't doing it for money or 15 minutes of fame.

Let me see if I've got this right...

So of all these women over all this time and all the parents of all these children, (as they were at the time), not one of them either could or would take Saville to task and make it stick?

They just ended up retracting it or they, their parents and all bystanders, for some reason just kept Schtum.

Sorry, but if only on the balance of probabilities that doesn’t quite add up to my mind. There’s more to this than meets the eye.

As I said, if anyone molested or raped my daughter I’d make it my life’s mission to ‘out’ him in this life; not the next...

 

[sooey]

As I said, if anyone molested my daughter I’d make it my life’s mission to ‘out’ him in this life; not the next...

So would I, but would your daughter tell you?
You need to look at it from the victims viewpoint, it's nowhere near so easy for them to come forward as you suppose.

 

[alumni]

Of course I am assuming that they weren't all paid to tell their stories, but even if they were that would not mean that they were lying.

You seem happy enough to use 'Gary Glitter' in your argument against Savile.
Yet.
A case against him was thrown out of court because - the witness was paid by the press. What makes this worse is, she was lined up for a bigger payout if he was found guilty.

Would you like to be the bloke in the dock with a witness like that?

 

[alumni]

As I said, if anyone molested my daughter I’d make it my life’s mission to ‘out’ him in this life; not the next...

So would I, but would your daughter tell you?
You need to look at it from the victims viewpoint, it's nowhere near so easy for them to come forward as you suppose.

Mine did!
And her friends Mother made sure we got all the details.