Jimmy Savile

[kenkay]

I've no doubt about the truth of the allegations but some of the statements beggared belief. One lady when asked how many times he abused her between the age of 15 and 16 replied a couple of dozen. Well why the f*ck did she keep going back.

[Bluwise]

To go on Top of the Pops.

[Linda]

I watched the 'Exposure' documentary on Jimmy Saville last night and I am left with no doubt that the allegations against him are true! It makes me feel sick to my stomach that I grew thinking he was a good, if not weird guy, who was dedicated to good causes, when it was all a sham for his own gratification! He used his charitable work to groom very young girls and to make him untouchable .. sickening!! The evidence his alleged victims has revealed and continues to reveal a number of accomplices for want of a better word, all of whom were famous names and used their celebrity status to procur and molest underage girls in some cases as young as 12!!! Of course I feel for his family but I wish to God that he could have been outted when he was alive .....

[mercury]

Kenyak there are thousands and thousands of abuse victims who go back time after time for whatever reason and I find the comment from Bluewise very offensive... Can we please stop the feeble attempts at humour. I know about child abuse and trust me there is nothing remotely funny or amusing about it!!

[Bluwise]

Kenyak there are thousands and thousands of abuse victims who go back time after time for whatever reason and I find the comment from Bluewise very offensive... Can we please stop the feeble attempts at humour. I know about child abuse and trust me there is nothing remotely funny or amusing about it!!

I didn't mean to offend and was certainly not trying to be funny - just stating what came across as the reasons these women returned. 
Are you suggesting that the pull of appearing on TV and meeting celebrities was not relevant?  Are you also suggesting that at 14/15 years of age, these young women didn't know any better?
I find what he appears to have been doing absolutely disgusting, I am now of the opinion it did take place so am not doubting the women however there is a degree of responsibility on them too.  "Why keep going back" is a reasonable question to ask in these circumstances.

[mercury]

I would suggest that there are still a lot of vunerable young girls aged 14 or 15 who certainly dont know what they are doing. They may seem grown up and act grown up but they are still underage and children. The  aged 16 years law is for their own protection. I thought that I was grown up at 14 and 15 but when I look back I certainly wasnt.!!!  Of course they wanted to be on Top of the tops who wouldnt have wanted to be but it still doesnt give anyone the right to take advantage of them.. . There have been countless numbers of choirboys and children abused by priests over decades. Some of these kids were abused by the same men for years they didnt stop going back for whatever reason. They the same as these girls were vunerable kids at the time.  My point was that I find the amusing remarks distasteful. I have personal experience of abuse in my familyand trust me it isnt amusing in any way!!!

[Jacqui Harvey]

A really interesting and shocking article in the Telegraph which has a statement from Liz Kershaw showing  the way the BBC treated it's women employees in the eighties, which was totally disgusting. 
Also a piece about John Peel which surprised me. Seems like abuse to woman and chlidren was accepted and covered up as a matter of course by the BBC.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9591317/Jimmy-Saviles-toxic-legacy.html

[patrice]

Hmm very interesting reading Jackie

[Bluwise]

I would suggest that there are still a lot of vunerable young girls aged 14 or 15 who certainly dont know what they are doing. They may seem grown up and act grown up but they are still underage and children. The  aged 16 years law is for their own protection. I thought that I was grown up at 14 and 15 but when I look back I certainly wasnt.!!!  Of course they wanted to be on Top of the tops who wouldnt have wanted to be but it still doesnt give anyone the right to take advantage of them.. . There have been countless numbers of choirboys and children abused by priests over decades. Some of these kids were abused by the same men for years they didnt stop going back for whatever reason. They the same as these girls were vunerable kids at the time.  My point was that I find the amusing remarks distasteful. I have personal experience of abuse in my familyand trust me it isnt amusing in any way!!!

Again, I want to point out there was no attempt at humour in my post - I take this very seriously.
Whilst agreeing with some of your comments regarding taking advantage of youngsters, it is also appears that you see this in black and white and have no intention of apportioning any responsibility to the “victims” here.
This is where we will have to agree to differ. 
I offer my respect to those who work relentlessly to stop child abuse and applaud their dedication.  I am all too aware of the lifelong damage it can cause.  I also see that these valuable resources can be used less effectively by following up on cases where someone has looked back on their own behaviour and suddenly decided they were “victims” rather than someone who, at that time, was willing to trade their self-respect for short term gain. 

Clearly, no two cases are the same however, I formed the opinion that some of the people taking part in the documentary were not blameless.
I was immature and impulsive at 15 – but I knew right from wrong as I suspect some of these women did too.  It seems to me there were choices available to them.  Protecting children has to prioritise those who are not given any choice.

[jacqtay]

One word... PERV!!