Carlc:
Jimmy Savile is just a dirty boy along with Glitter, King and co. I don’t care if he stood on his head in a pool of turds for charity he is still the same dirty b---------d that was caught with his hand up a 12 year olds skirt. Is that right? is she old enough to understand what is going on? No right answer. No one in their right mind can now support this guy with all the evidence unfolding. I would belive the words from Paul Gamborchine (spelling) before his charity organisers (they have a lot to loose) or his friends. We should all be thinking about his victims and how they have come to terms with what went on I bet not one of them is saying we should let him rip. I used to be a fan of Jimmy, ex pit man, wrestler, marathon runner but now he had added screwing kids to his CV I am no fan now. I bet there will be loads of JIM’L FIX IT badges in the bin this week.
Gary Glitter and Jonathan King both wished it had been Jim instead of PC World when they said we can fix it for you!
Dave the Renegade:
They won’t need to put a watch Jimmy Saville as he won’t be running away.
Some say that they’ve already got the JCB standing by.
If they leave him where he is, he will get a burial at sea when the cliffs collapse
I thought that was a fate only reserved for terrorists like Bin Laden not cradle snatchers.But I wouldn’t be surprised if the age police are saying it’s all the same thing now.It’s lucky for Jeremy Forrest that he got to France before the SAS came through his front door in that case.
savill glitter king all sick twisted ■■■■■■■■ end of. you can wright wat you like big long fancy words at the end of the day its wrong morraly. kids are to be loved and cherished anyone who supports savile and co must be daft in the fecing head regards rowland
Carlc:
Jimmy Savile is just a dirty boy along with Glitter, King and co. I don’t care if he stood on his head in a pool of turds for charity he is still the same dirty b---------d that was caught with his hand up a 12 year olds skirt. Is that right? is she old enough to understand what is going on? No right answer. No one in their right mind can now support this guy with all the evidence unfolding. I would belive the words from Paul Gamborchine (spelling) before his charity organisers (they have a lot to loose) or his friends. We should all be thinking about his victims and how they have come to terms with what went on I bet not one of them is saying we should let him rip. I used to be a fan of Jimmy, ex pit man, wrestler, marathon runner but now he had added screwing kids to his CV I am no fan now. I bet there will be loads of JIM’L FIX IT badges in the bin this week.
Why didn’t all these people come out and say that Saville was doing these things years ago.If he did do these things he should have been exposed then.
The bloke is dead,nothing can touch him now.I am not sticking up for him in any way,but its a bit futile to start investigating him now !
rward:
savill glitter king all sick twisted ■■■■■■■■ end of. you can wright wat you like big long fancy words at the end of the day its wrong morraly. kids are to be loved and cherished anyone who supports savile and co must be daft in the fecing head regards rowland
Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade ‘if’ they’re guilty.But before branding anyone guilty of that type of charge you’re first going to need to set the definitions and limits and then convict them on the basis of the evidence and that depends on proving someone guilty beyond reasonable doubt as having been involved in a ■■■■■■ activety with a girl under the age of consent.Which doesn’t mean just kissing a girl and that definition applies regardless of the bloke’s age relative to the girl/s in question.IE That type of charge applies equally,if the definitions are met,regardless of wether the bloke is/was her own age or middle aged as should the penalties.
Somehow though I don’t think that the lot who are calling for the type of witch hunt which has sarted all this off see it that way and it’s all about the modern day bs concerning age gaps,not the specific age of the girls in question at the time and exactly what might,or might not have,happened between them and Savile.In which case why wasn’t the case raised while he was alive to defend himself in court.Assuming,that is,the raving age police believe in the idea of innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt in court according to the evidence.Which by definition means hearing the defence case.However it seems unlikely that anyone would get a fair trial in this country in regards to that under present ageist societal ideas and trial by media.Luckily for him he won’t have to face that bs situation because he’s out of it.
Perhaps he did it, or perhaps he didnt. But he cant defend himself, these girls should have been more outspoken while he was alive.
But as for Esther Rantzen the founder of childline turning a deaf ear…
Saw on the news the other night interveiws with a few bbc staff who recon they knew.
Can understand why victims may have felt vunrable and afraid to speak out but for his peers to hush it up if its true is awful sod his charity work that’s despicable.
I’d never inform the police if I knew of someone fiddling tachos etc but for ■■■■ and child abuse them rules don’t apply. If the charges can be proved I think anyone who hushed up wrong doing should face charges.
kr79:
Saw on the news the other night interveiws with a few bbc staff who recon they knew.
Can understand why victims may have felt vunrable and afraid to speak out but for his peers to hush it up if its true is awful sod his charity work that’s despicable.
I’d never inform the police if I knew of someone fiddling tachos etc but for ■■■■ and child abuse them rules don’t apply. If the charges can be proved I think anyone who hushed up wrong doing should face charges.
kr79:
Saw on the news the other night interveiws with a few bbc staff who recon they knew.
Can understand why victims may have felt vunrable and afraid to speak out but for his peers to hush it up if its true is awful sod his charity work that’s despicable.
I’d never inform the police if I knew of someone fiddling tachos etc but for ■■■■ and child abuse them rules don’t apply. If the charges can be proved I think anyone who hushed up wrong doing should face charges.
There’s a lot of logic in that,assuming that he actually did exactly what he’s accused of,but it seems obvious to me that whole thing is being driven by a load of pc modern day ideas just based on age gaps not on how old the girls in question might or might not have been at the time in question.
Therefore I’m betting that the whole hypocritical thing has more to do with Savile’s age at the time considering that there doesn’t seem to be the same type of witch hunt being applied to every bloke who might or might not have been doing something similar at that time or since regardless of age.
Which seems to have been confirmed by the comments of at least one of his accusers which went along the lines of 'she was being kissed by a much older bloke than her which she (now) thinks ( after it’s obviously been put into her head ) is ‘disgusting’ unlike what she obviously thought at the time.
The fact is the situation shows the type of values which those girls had in that they obviously weren’t exactly looking for a decent relationship and marriage anyway ( which is what the whole thing should be about).However the hypocricy of those girls now is no surprise to me having been a bloke of their own age at the time and having been left on the shelf by at least one girl of my own age when she was in her mid teens.Who preferred the so called ‘disgusting’ idea of being kissed by a bloke of around Saville’s age at the time.Although the fact that at least,so far,she’s still married to him at least shows the difference between what the case should be about which is the zb morals of all concerned including Savile ‘and’ those women.So as I’ve said a plague on all their houses and there’s no way that I’d trust the so called ‘evidence’ of those type of women.Who seem to me to have only come forward now because they know their bs can’t be tested in court under oath subject to the laws of perjury in a trial agianst a dead man and calling those girls ‘victims’ ,instead of what they obviously seem to have been all about,is naive in the extreme.
However having said all that it’s my bet that the age police’s hypocritical ideas in this case and the Megan Satmmers’ case are all about the bs American idea of reserving under 18 women for under 18 blokes.Based on an agenda,related to modern day bs revulsion,against decent age gap relationships and taking advantage of what seems like a case of the morals of the girls in ancient Rome to push their bs ideas through.Although the fact that their behaviour and Savile’s seems to put the homewrecking activeties of Megan Stammers into a good light shows the levels of hypocricy and how low society has actually sunk.
That young lady didn’t know what she was missing with you Geoffrey. Who knows a bit more blue stratos on and some bigger flares and a bottle of chinzano she could have been yours.
Mind you I suppouse the older chap turned her head with an Austin maxi and a meal and a carriage of sherry at the berni inn. Still that’s life.
kr79:
That young lady didn’t know what she was missing with you Geoffrey. Who knows a bit more blue stratos on and some bigger flares and a bottle of chinzano she could have been yours.
Mind you I suppouse the older chap turned her head with an Austin maxi and a meal and a carriage of sherry at the berni inn. Still that’s life.
If only it could have been that easy but if she’d have given me the chance it wouldn’t have been long to wait until she’d have been hacking around in the 2.5 PI and if that wasn’t good enough then I’d have just struggled to get the V12 Jag a ‘bit’ sooner .But one thing is for sure she was (much) better marriage material than any of those in that programme.
The ironic thing is in this case,just as you say,is all the so called ‘witnesses’,who confirmed those girls’ stories,have actually now incriminated themselves as much as if not more than Savile because unlike him they’re still around to face trial so it’s catch 22 they’re either guilty of perjury or aiding and abbetting and being involved in a crime by at least not reporting what they saw and knowing the age of the girls involved and actually arranging those ‘meetings’ where this is all alleged to have taken place.
bald bloke:
Girls pre-pubescent feminine itching ?
Apply some Saville-on.
I think the rate of under 16 pregnancy in this country and America shows that most of the girls in the age range in question were anything but pre pubescent which is why many countries,including this one at one time,have lower ages of consent.It’s just that here and in America they seem to have gone collectively nuts concerning the age gap issue in the case of an over 18,let alone middle aged,bloke,being with an under 18 girl ,compared to the type of cases involving same/close age fathers and under age mothers. In which case the jails would be overflowing and the Thames would be full of moored up prison hulks again if every single bloke,regardless of age which is how the law (should) apply,who’d ever groped,let alone knocked up,a 14-15 year old bird,is sent down for the crime but they won’t be able to deport any of them to the colonies though these days.
.But one thing is for sure she was (much) better marriage material than any of those in that programme. 
