I see Jack  Straws bit is missing? Notice D is it?

What words were exchanged between Savile and the Holy Father?

A celebrity-obsessed society will always create such people, and it will always refuse to believe that someone 'off the telly' can behave in such a manner.

The BBC covered up this scandal for decades, and it needs to be brought to book. It has so much power it can even make the authorities turn a blind eye to blatant criminal acts.  Sweeping it under the carpet avoids scandal and keeps a National Treasure high in the ratings, with riches beyond his wildest dreams to finance his sexual exploits and without fear of prosecution.

.

Proof of that claim of a cover up ?

.

'Protect the Corporation at all costs' is a huge part of the BBC's culture. It was built on a Civil Service structure, just like MI5.  Any proof will come to light during a full investigation, but  it may not be in the public interest to disclose its findings.

'...a rogue operator in an establishment that gave him the glory, the freedom and the immunity to do as he wished.'

In all walks of life, at all levels, we see this. In professional institutions, with supposed robust policies against bullying and harrassment,  closing ranks to protect the public image is the norm in any grievance dispute involving a rogue manager; church communities have preserving an aura of respectability as a priority ;  amateur drama groups led by a professional, choirs, swimming clubs etc.

Will the shocking extent of the current scandal help some of us become braver about putting our heads above the parapets to fight misogeny, harrassment and abuse  in our culture? I hope so -an abused individual is in no position to do this alone.

Yes, vin19.  Savile was a big mate of the RC clergy, and presumably went to confession from time to time, but I haven't seen much condemnation or even concern coming from that quarter - but perhaps I've missed it.

Wasn't he a Celibate Catholic ?

ask then answer: why does the Vatican have an Age of Consent (currently TWELVE)??

SIR Fred Goodwin, SIR Norman Bettison, SIR Jimmy Savile -   plus several others dodgy ones : isn't it time that the Honours Committee was a little less liberal with doling out knighthoods?

And while it is popular now to point the finger only at the BBC for failing to spot the awfulness of Savile, despite his predilections apparently being common knowledge to many of those he worked among in various institutions, why did no warning bell ring with the Honours Committee before they recommended that the Queen confer a knighthood?  Surely even a sniff of impropriety should have been enough to keep him off the list.

This sad affair serves to show us that we need to actively pursue all accused pedophiles such as Sylvain Kustyan (charged with two counts of 1st Degree Sodomy of a ten-year-old little boy) and get them off the streets. This French native, a middle school English teacher, took school groups on several trips to England and Ireland. Kustyan, currently on the lam, is the author of a leading children's textbook series published by a leading publishing company that has been made aware of the charges against him.

The article bristles with all sorts of presuppositions chief among them that ALL the main players at the BBC had no vested interest in the cover-up. All were clueless. That the police "failed" etc, etc. The Police are paid NOT to fail.

Moreover, if Savile's evil was common knowledge to many, how come we only get to hear about it AFTER the old sod has died? Could it be that once in the dock he might have spilled the beans, named names etc? Why did nobody shop him?

Does the case not make it clear to us that this level of corruption seeks SECRECY above all and that the recent onslaught against malpractices by the press is but the will of such power elites to get that SECRECY. And to make sure they get to keep it in perpetuity by having it  protected by law under the sobriquet of "privacy".

Should we now not be looking closely at all those who are pressing for just that and who are most determined to get it?

May we also ask how long it will be this time around before this whole supposed "investigation" is dumbed down into oblivion as if it never happened... just like the Australian version of  "international paedophile ring" of some four years ago that threatened to expose English politicians? What ever became of that?

Given the extent of this disease of paedophilia among power elites and the number of carriers at large in prominent positions isn't it odd indeed how few of them actually end up in the dock? Can we not reasonably conclude that these miscreants protect themselves because they operate at the highest politcal levels either directly or indirectly?

Dear Mary Riddell,

Thank you for your article.

It seems to me that every one in high office is sworn to secrecy and are bound up in invisible "chains"  !!!

BBC Chiefs, etc. etc. may perfectly well know the terrible crimes that have been taking place but are humanly weak to do anything about this universal problem.

The decades of the teaching of the fase theory of evolution has weakened the Nation's Moral Backbone, and the evil fruits are now MANIFEST  !!!

THE GOOD NEWS IS, we can, all of Us Brits, reconsider the moral teachings of  The Holy Bible, AND BEGIN TO SEE AT LAST, THE UNIVERSAL BENEFITS OF A GODLY SOCIETY.

GOD SAVE OUR GLORIOUS, GRACIOUS, "DAY-STAR", FAITHFUL, SAVIOUR; HER MAJESTY GOD-QUEEN ELIZABETH II.

Sincerely,
Veteran09. 

Oh God ,not another religious nutter . Savile was a devout Catholic,says it all really.

So you 'believe' that there was once a Godly society that was Moral and Just. Not sure what planet this took place but it certainly was not on Terra aka Earth .

So it seems that Jimmy Savile played the part of the Emperor in new clothes, and the BBC the crooked tailors who sold him these. “Isn’t he smart isn’t he fine, look at his suit it’s just divine” they appeared to sing, whilst we looked on, wondering whether only we could see that in fact he was just a creepy old bloke. Savile believed his own publicity, and that was sufficient fuel to carry him for a lifetime.  Auntie gave him that, and asked us all to believe in it too, and of course Auntie couldn't be wrong.  Yet her love of this weirdo certainly left you doubting your own judgement, especially when (as was often the case)  Savile reminded you of how clever he was, what with his Mensa membership and all.  The BBC wasn’t alone in this deception.  It was almost as if in the 1970's the whole of British society had a thing with old men and young girls. ITV ran a highly successful sitcom called “On the Buses”. Its two central characters played by Reg Varney and Bob Grant were on the far side of middle age, yet they were depicted as a pair of racy men about town, constantly on the look out for a young "bit of stuff".  Likewise Sid James in the “Carry on” films – one would have expected his walnut wrinkled face and lecherous laugh to generate at least a mild hint of revulsion in the women he pursued.  I would watch these films in total bemusement. He was old enough to be her father (at least), and I was supposed to believe that this was okay. I was in my early teens at the time and seeing predatory old perves chase pretty young girls was so commonplace that I grew up simply accepting it as the way of the world.  My understanding was that most "working class" men (and Savile was certainly portrayed as that) were leches and the older they got, the worse it got.  This notion was sold to us by the entire media industry (not just the BBC) and it was down to us girls to decide whether to go along with it or not.  Dress like a tart and you were asking for it.  Go off to a weirdo’s dressing room and you got what you asked for. This was how it was and no wonder no-one dared speak out.  When I went on my first date with a boy in 1977, he bought me a gift – a soft toy his neighbour had made.  When I got home my mother said “so what did you have to do to earn that?”.  I was horrified, but it I guess it was her way of telling me “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”.  She was wrong by the way - I'd done nothing, yet at the age of sixteen the assumption I had was made palpably clear to me.I loved a pop group called the Bay City rollers.  Twenty years later one of its members Derek Longmuir was caught looking at child porn on the internet. Likewise Gary Glitter, whose records I also bought, turned out to be a convicted paedophile.  Well of course they/he did, after all  the internet is there, the girls begging for it, sex on tap like cherries on a plate.  I'm sure this would have been the view if anyone had known of their vices at the height of their fame.  You see sexual perversion did not make a difference in the 1970’s!  It was like the elephant in the room.  We grew up knowing about it, but we didn’t mention it.  We simply needed to have our wits about us to avoid becoming victims.  Organisations did not owe us a duty of care, parents did not drive us to school or look out for us every minute of the day, and adults simply saw us as prey – either their own or someone else’s.  Thus my mother’s unkindly comments.  “Give me a blow job and I’ll take you round telly centre” Savile apparently said to one of his victims.  The girl in question did not reply with “what’s a blow job?”.  She did not faint at the suggestion, or throw up with disgust. She actually went ahead, overwhelmed by his fame and her own desire to experience the magic of the BBC.  And whilst it doesn’t make it right, you can see that kids back then had a tacit knowledge that made them co-conspirators in their own fate.   Childhood was not sacred and often not pure.  As soon as you hit puberty you were in any case deemed to be adult. No use bleating about age – if you can get pregnant you are grown up and you need to live by grown up rules.  That was how it was told and sold to me anyway.  And what of Savile's vulnerable victims?  Where were their carers, their nurses, their parents at the time?  Placing their trust in him, that's where.  So Savile the creep turned out to be a creep.  Of course he did, we saw it all along..... didn't we?

Carla, this is the most insightful post I have read on this subject. I am (almost) the same generation as you, and your depiction of how it was for teenage girls in the 70´s is spot on.  

There is absolutely no defence for the behaviour of Savile, and the unnamed others, but, to paraphrase your comments, that´s the way it was in those days. It shouldn´t have been, but it was.   

'Culture of neglect' absolute rubbish, Mary. The answer to one of the world's great mysteries - why Savile was not only employed but also promoted constantly by the BBC is that other people there were involved. I was a teenager in the late sixties; my friends and I thought Savile was weird then, with his odd noises and catchphrases, and he just got odder and more weird as time went on.When I heard in the 1970s that he lived in a caravan this only served to confirm the'ugh' reaction; and made one wonder why he was still employed by the BBC. Now we may find out.

 Savile - the man Thatcher invited to Chequers every year for 10 years. The man who had free reign of hospitals and prisons. The man who nearly every investigative journalist in Fleet Street new to be dodgy.

And the BBC - always with stuffy top brass - but with dedicated staff who continue to to try and expose these sorts of things in spite of the lack of support from the chiefs. Panorama exposed the main culprits - bosses and politicians afraid of risking their reputations.

I must say that I am coming to the view that Sir Jimmy was not really the the affable and big-hearted chap we all imagined him to be and that he might have had a disturbing and dark side of his character.

Disgusting. I think even the Queen Mum's at it too. They're everywhere, everywhere i tell you. Appalling. Marxist left wing scum.

I heard that the BBC (scum) bought some Marxist ouija boards so that Saville could keep abusing kids there from beyond the grave. Can you believe it?

Scum.

.

You forgot to add the carefully worded nearly racist remark to make it truly realistic.

.

First the expenses scandal, then Hillsborough, now this.

The UK state is rotten to the core.

England4ever. 

Full marks.

I was interested in Mary Riddell’s reference to the BBC’s sins of omission. I have been writing to complain of the BBC’s almost total non coverage in popular television of the biggest problems facing the world which are global, long term but very urgent. They patently have very bad communications both internally and externally.. Why can I get replies from very senior scientists, but not eve an acknowledgement from any level of the BBC?
 

The problem is the BBC is too big. Its also too attached to an unquestioning cult of progressive and left-wing thinking.

There is only one solution - break up the BBC.

Look Riddell

Let us have an end to this smokescreen diversion b/s

Another 9 have been charged in Rochdale 

http://menmedia.co.uk/rochd...

There have thus far been 3 rings tried and convicted

1)

February 2010: Rochdale

Ajmal Afridi, 19: two rapes, sexual assault. Six years. Imtiaz Syed, 20: rape,sexual assault. Six years. Tayub Hussain, 19: rape. Three years. MustafaArshad, 17: aiding and abetting sexual assault, taking indecent photographs.Eight months. Mohammed Usman Raja, 20: perverting the course of justice.Six months. Bolton Crown Court.Girl, 16, agreed to go to house where she was given whisky and possibly sleeping medication before being raped several times by three members of gang, two of whom “used a whisky bottle to further degrade her”. Fourth man took pictures of the abuse. Victim later found wandering streets, dazed.

Times

2)

August 2010: Rochdale
Asad Yousaf Hassan, 28: two counts of sexual activity with a child. Two years.
Mohammed Basharat, 28: sexual activity with a child. Two years.
Mohammed Atif, 29: sexual activity with a child. Two years. Aftab Khan, 31:
controlling a child prostitute, sexual activity with a child. Seven years. Abid
Khaliq, 30: perverting the course of justice. Eight months. Mohammed Anwar
Safi, 31: paying for the sexual services of a child. 31 months. Ahmed Noorzai,
29: paying for the sexual services of a child. Four years. Mohammed Khan, 26:
facilitating child prostitution. Four years. Najibullah Safi, 32: sexual activity
with a child. Two years. Manchester Crown Court.
Independent school pupil, 14, from Rochdale, went missing from home for several
days on two occasions. She was spotted in the town centre, groomed and fed a diet
of alcohol and drugs before being forced to have sex with numerous Asian men in
flats and to work on the streets as a prostitute.
She was finally found after she approached a couple in the street in Manchester
and asked them for help.

Times

3) Ahmed was one of nine Pakistani men jailed at Liverpool Crown Court for a total of 77 years last month for the horrific sex attacks.
The takeaway worker and former taxi driver was given a 19-year sentence for conspiracy, two rapes, aiding and abetting rape, sexual assault and sex trafficking.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/... 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

That's 4 rings in Rochdale alone

 Praise be to Saint Anthony Blair creator of our degenerate multi cultural rainbow society.
The Sikh community complained and they were ignored.
The White working class communities complained and they were ignored.
Oh dear the 4 th estate has a problem.
The so called liberal elites are corrupt and corrupting.

I seem to remember a certain Home Secretary Roy Jenkins by name announced that this was the"Promiscous aociety"nothing to do with neglect.

Would that be the Roy Jenkins who thought the new society that he and others of his ilk brought about, was an 'enlightened society'?

An interesting observation, to say the least. It could do with some fleshing out (sorry for the unfortunate pun). 

As Edmund Burke said, "all that is necessary
for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

One of the greatest quotes of all time, and incredibly apt in this context.

Thank you Mary.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

According to Esther Rantzen, you are the guilty ones.

La Rancid is in a state of extreme twitchiness.   I watched her ensconced on a studio couch the other day.   If she'd twitched and turned herself much more, she's have corkscrewed herself into the upholstery.

...meanwhile in Blackburn, Rochdale, Luton , etc etc

Last night on several news items , a blonde woman of about 60 was heard being interviewed saying that it should never have happened etc etc. It would appear that she was a patient at Stoke Mandeville and the caption said 'former victim'.

Of what and of whom? A road accident? She cannot be a former victim of Jimmy Savile because no case has yet been proven against him. The media are in serious danger of someone like Leveson saying 'enough is enough'. I feel they are just making it all up and when idiot DJs on Radio announce to the world as a fact that Savile was a necrophiliac, I hope someone from the mental health services is monitoring that man. 

This is not about 'Socialism' yet 80 pc of the posters on here keep blathering on about the filthy Lefty BBC. They are talking about people who are employed in a broadcasting corporation and probably had never heard of any of this before you and me, yet The Mob would lynch them if they could.

I remember reading about a mob on a council estate who the press said had attacked the home of a paediatrician. I didn't believe it at the time, I thought it was invented. Now, having followed the comments throughout the media about Savile , I realise that scratch the surface and the hate-fueled mob is still evident. And still it is all based on the allegations of 2 women with mental health issues yet the DG is genuflecting to the crooked toads of Parliament apologising for things that probable have never happened.

PS...notice that a senior liar from the police has resigned ahead of an enquiry into Hillsborough.

Surely, after the millions of words written on this subject, you can´t still be confused between a paedophile and a paediatrician ? 

 Certainly she can be a victim, remember that the crime is committed as soon as it is committed, not after a conviction.

The often misquoted principle of law is that a person is "considered innocent until proven guilty.". So we presume innocence and have to prove guilt as part of our legal system. But any sensible person knows that it is committing the crime that makes you guilty, not the judgement of the court.

240 victims have come forward so far and a lot of people around Saville have also confirmed his behaviour. Up to you how you view that but it changed my mind about him.

.

You are mixing up your definitions of the word "guilty".

.

 No, guilt is one thing, conviction (found guilty) another. A person is guilty as soon as they commit the crime.

Its like the old one of, does a falling tree make a noise if there is no one to hear it? Yes it does.

Whats the difference between a greyhound and Jimmy Savile?

At least the Greyhound would wait for the hare to appear......."

.

Good to see you have empathy for the victims.

.

I do.

But your comment identifies the problems at institutions like the BBC.

.

Liar.

Oh, and Witchfinder-general.

.

The BBC News channel has just displayed images of three of the women
who've claimed to have been tinkered with by Sir Jimmy Savile in his
dressing room. They showed a current picture of each woman and a picture taken of each of them in the '70s:

the caption read - Now then, now then, now then.....

I find reports that Jimmy Savile engaged in necrophilia dead boring.

Complacency is a disease unique to the great and good. We have been seeing a lot of it lately. So long as nothing endgangers their sinecures they are not particularly bothered about what is really going on underneath. Subordinates reporting fearful events are told they are exaggerating and ignored.

What is becoming quite apparent is that abuse whether it be sexual, psychological or just plain ordinary violence is tolerated within UK society by all the authorities. We may have police, social workers, courts, laws, political correctness and all the artifice  of a decent society but when push comes to shove the vulnerable individual is left on their own. Immature and troubled teenagers in particular are very prone to being abandoned by everyone as it is said, they bring it on themselves. Of course they do, they are innocents looking for affection. So unless they are street-wise they become victims to the corrupting. Nobody is looking.

Now a mirror is being erected on the grave of the recent dead and the reflections are not a pretty sight.

Like all good politicians Patten is getting his retaliation in first.
One hopes that his support for the independence for the BBC will not mean that the wall of compensation claims due to arrive at his door (with the usual  unscrupulous support of the totally corrupted battalions of the compensation lawyers) will all be accepted regardless of merit.In most public bodies the usual procedure is for the top executives  dealing with "compensaaaation"claims to fish around the Inns of Court for an opinion which supports the claimants so that none of the cases ever reach court. The justification for such negative action is usually based on the pretence that this will be cheaper in the long run.The fact that it is tax payers money that is being given away and that the real motive is that, by abject surrender at no personal cost to themselves, the senior executives involved will thereby save themselves from an embarrassing day in court is rarely mentioned.There will, of course, be a significant number of genuine claims and they should be settled a.s.a.p. As always on these occasions there will be many false claims from people jumping on the rapidly accelerating bandwagon and such cases need to be brought to court.

 if there are awards of compensation, as undoubtedly there will be, then I hope that they are made against the individuals who took part in or allowed this scandal to happen.
I for one believe this approach may make some of the great and good sit up and pay attention rather than allowing the bill to be settled by the licence and/or tax payer.

Chris Patten, the Chairman of the BBC Trust, has now waded into the Savile scandal by issuing a thinly-veiled warning to the Culture Secretary not to be "seen to be intervening" in the BBC's editorial independence.

This is puzzling because, as a Tory, he should be aware that the Coalition government looks at the Trust with a jaundiced eye and wishes to replace it with an outside regulatory body.

It is puzzling also on a second count. The DG, Mr Entwistle, has drawn flak for saying the reason he didn't inquire further when he was informed last year that the Newsnight investigation of Savile might entail changes "to the Christmas program" was because he didn't want to give the impression of undue interest. Again, editorial independence.

It is finally puzzling that, as hard as the BBC pretends it is an autonomous media organisation, it in fact became a public sector body when the licensing "fee" was re-classified as a "tax" a few years back. (As you know, not paying a tax is a criminal offence). Thus, the Culture ministry has every right.