RE: Jimmy Saville - 3

#31 by astoness , Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:05 pm

dont make it right at all lynne but i still say it should all have come out when saville was alive so if guilty he could have been bought to book...there is nothing to be gained now and the press cant even say its in the public interest..

#32 by Deleted User , Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:08 pm

There was a general fear of him Lyn............He had previously owned clubs and the general consensus was he knew a lot of people.

#33 by Sheldonboy , Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:03 pm

Quote: denise wrote in post #30
Gary Glitter was talked about and Saville supported him........every body loved Gary including me.

Sorry I thought Garry Glitter was a pillock.

#34 by Deleted User , Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:35 pm

Did you Graham?

#35 by phil ( deleted ) , Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:06 am

Quote: lynne webb wrote in post #29
I remember years ago boys making complaints about Priests abusing them and nothing was ever done, but now even the Pope has apologized for what happened. Those priests will be dead now so does that make it OK.

I think this is different altogether, we are talking about catholics who thought that they would be excommunicated by the church if they accused priests. Then we had the hierarchy of the church conspiring to cover things up by bribing, threatening and cajoling witnesses and accusers. Jimmy Saville was one person not a world wide multi million pound organisation.

#36 by Sheldonboy , Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:16 pm

Quote: denise wrote in post #34
Did you Graham?

Sorry only my opinion, but yes.

#37 by mikejee , Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:23 pm

Phil
I hope you find the following (last paragraph) amusing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/...own?INTCMP=SRCH

#38 by phil ( deleted ) , Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:00 pm

Mike

Perhaps the Church did not wish to be associated with someone who is still thought of as a good man, until proven different and seeing as he is now dead I cannot see how he will ever be proved any different.

#39 by phil ( deleted ) , Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:02 am

What I love about the newspapers in this great country of ours is how you are always guilty until proved innocent. I see they are all calling JS a pervert now and at the moment there are talks taking place to remove his name from the Jimmy Saville Charity Trust. All this on the word of a few youngsters (then) who may or may not have threw themselves at him in the sixties. Are we then going to question the whole of the pop scene from back then because they were all at it from the Rolling Stones & the Beatles down to the group who sang at the local pub.

#40 by astoness , Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:52 pm

Quote: phil wrote in post #39
What I love about the newspapers in this great country of ours is how you are always guilty until proved innocent. I see they are all calling JS a pervert now and at the moment there are talks taking place to remove his name from the Jimmy Saville Charity Trust. All this on the word of a few youngsters (then) who may or may not have threw themselves at him in the sixties. Are we then going to question the whole of the pop scene from back then because they were all at it from the Rolling Stones & the Beatles down to the group who sang at the local pub.

agree with all that phil...now lets be realistic...we all know that back in the day groupies threw themselves at the pop stars..some resisted..some did not and i would like to bet it still goes on today although maybe not so much...i have always said that i dont beleive or disbelieve the allegations made against JS..I didnt know him and who am i to be judge and jury but why try to hang a dead man who will never get a chance to have his say and its certainly not in the publics interest ..too late for that now if its all true...im just wondering who will be next...

lyn

#41 by Sheldonboy , Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:13 pm

Have to agree with you Lyn.

#42 by phil ( deleted ) , Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:31 pm

Do you think the £10 million that his charity is talking about receiving when his estate is wound up has got anything to do with it. If his estate is that much then how much did he give away to charity when he is reputed to have given 90% of everything he earned to charity?

I listened to the chairman of his charity today on the radio discussing the fact that they might be removing his name off the charity. I hope that they have the decency to wait until the investigation is finished. Though I have to say that the spokesman who has known Jimmy for a long time said he had never heard a bad word spoken about JS in all the years he had known him.

#43 by Voltman , Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:41 pm

Who next?
Try John Peel.
Well at least he will be able to defend himself.

#44 by phil ( deleted ) , Sat Oct 13, 2012 7:52 pm

As I have just said on another forum, are we really going to pretend that we didn't know that young girls in the 60's and 70's chased after pop stars and those in contact with them with the ultimate intention of having sex with them. Most of these pop stars, DJ's, roadies and the like were only 16. 17 & 18 year olds themselves at the time. Who could judge what age a girl was back then unless she turned up in her school uniform.

#45 by Deleted User , Sat Oct 13, 2012 8:01 pm

When I was young I went to see Tony Blackburn at Bingley Hall.The place was rammed with young girls all desperate to see him.The Radio 1 DJS were a huge thing then.

This is not a case of a few daft young girls throwing themselves at him Phil.The things that are coming out such as hospital staff being aware of his antics
is beyond my comprehension.

Glad to say I was never keen on him,I admired his charity work but he was too much of an oddball for me.Never suspected anything like this though.

Posts:	15.017
Date registered	02.24.2010

Posts:	43.994
Date registered	12.22.2009

Posts:	43.994
Date registered	12.22.2009

Posts:	3.265
Date registered	12.26.2009

Posts:	15.017
Date registered	02.24.2010


	Mainly For Brummies But All Are Welcome To Join In The Birmingham Fun & Chat