Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
The Sir Jimmel "Owzabout then" Paedo ring cover up
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kmosselOffline
Give in
Joined: 14 Dec 2006
Total posts: 101
Location: San Francisco
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 20-01-2014 03:24    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jan/18/jimmy-savile-abused-1000-victims-bbc

Quote:
Revealed: how Jimmy Savile abused up to 1,000 victims on BBC premises

Executives turned a blind eye to attacks, according to former judge's 'shocking' finding

The BBC will be plunged into a major crisis with the publication of a damning review, expected next month, that will reveal its staff turned a blind eye to the rape and sexual assault of up to 1,000 girls and boys by Jimmy Savile in the corporation's changing rooms and studios.

Dame Janet Smith, a former court of appeal judge, who previously led the inquiry into the murders by Dr Harold Shipman, will say in her report that the true number of victims of Savile's sexual proclivities may never be known but that his behaviour had been recognised by BBC executives who took no action.

Smith's investigations, which followed the Pollard inquiry into why the BBC shelved a Newsnight programme about Savile, will send shockwaves through the corporation.

A source close to the inquiry told the Observer: "The numbers are shocking. Many hundreds and potentially up to 1,000 people were victims of Savile when he was representing the corporation. The report will overshadow Pollard. It will go right to the heart of how Savile was able to get away with the most heinous of crimes under the very noses of BBC staff for more than 40 years."

The sheer scale of victims' testimonies being examined has delayed the publication of Smith's report by a month.


More at The Grauniad's site.
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1755
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 58
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 20-01-2014 11:54    Post subject: Reply with quote

They really do need to get on and publish. Constant rumours and allegations floating around are doing no-one any good. Obviously there is a balance to be struck that allows thorough investigation, but we have had a number now of official statements which basically accept his guilt - we need to see the evidence and also the chains of responsibility before everyone else dies.

Cover up can be caused just as much by excessive delay or overly-prolonged investigation and 'procedural delays' as by actual, well, cover up. I'm thinking of other cases here as well - there are several on-going enquires that are taking so long that their findings will be virtually meaningless by the time they are published.

If we aren't careful the public will start to believe there is no celeb or public body that anyone can trust. I'm halfway there myself.
Back to top
View user's profile 
escargot1Offline
Joined: 24 Aug 2001
Total posts: 18719
Location: Farkham Hall
Age: 4
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 20-01-2014 13:33    Post subject: Reply with quote

Reminds me of the Macpherson Inquiry, whose findings were that the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist and was guilty of failing large sections of the public.

There was no racist conspiracy as such: the police were just carrying on as they had done for years, with suspicion and misunderstanding of non-white communities.

As a result of the report the police had to knuckle down and change their philosophies and practices.

I feel that this report into Savile's crimes at the BBC will present us with, not exactly a conspiracy, but an acceptance that certain people could sexually abuse others without interference. The nasty habits of big stars and big earners were ignored and boats weren't rocked. People who did try to cause trouble over it probably found themselves frozen out.

Looking forward to reading the report as long it's not a whitewash. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile 
gncxxOffline
King-Size Canary
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Total posts: 14878
Location: Eh?
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 20-01-2014 18:01    Post subject: Reply with quote

Funny how the police, the politicians, the doctors, the Royals and all the rest of the British establishment are never being mentioned re: Savile, and all the blame is going on the BBC, who just employed him to present programmes for them and not advise on any serious matters.
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1755
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 58
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 21-01-2014 07:33    Post subject: Reply with quote

gncxx wrote:
Funny how the police, the politicians, the doctors, the Royals and all the rest of the British establishment are never being mentioned re: Savile, and all the blame is going on the BBC, who just employed him to present programmes for them and not advise on any serious matters.


Yes, part of the reason I want to see where the investigation is going - it wasn't the BBC who gave him access to Broadmoor for example.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Quake42Offline
Warrior Princess
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Total posts: 5799
Location: Over Silbury Hill, through the Solar field
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 12:13    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not a surprise:

Quote:
Coronation Street actor Bill Roache cleared of rape and sexual assault

Lawyers for Roache argued that trial had been 'infected' by torrent of abuse allegations against Jimmy Savile and others


The Coronation Street actor Bill Roache has been cleared of all charges of raping and sexually assaulting five women in the 1960s and 70s.

The 81-year-old was cleared after a three-and-a-half week trial at Preston crown court, where he was accused of exploiting his fame to rape a 15-year-old girl and indecently assault four other teenagers at the soap's studios in Manchester and in his Rolls-Royce.

Roache, who has played Ken Barlow since Coronation Street began in 1960, maintained his innocence throughout. He insisted he had never met his accusers, let alone molested them.

In front of a packed courtroom, Roache's legal team argued that the police investigation and subsequent trial had been "infected" by the torrent of abuse allegations made against Jimmy Savile and other celebrities after the entertainer's death in 2011. The "spectre" of Savile loomed large, claimed Roache's barrister, Louise Blackwell QC, as she accused the complainants of jumping on a bandwagon.

The actor stood in the dock as the unanimous verdicts were delivered, his face giving little away. The bald headed bodyguard who has ushered him in and out of court for the past three and a half weeks clapped as he was released from the dock.



More:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/06/bill-roache-cleared-rape-sexual-assault

It seems odd that a case of this nature - where there is no evidence that the accused even met the complainants - could proceed to a criminal trial. The CPS have some serious questions to answer.
Back to top
View user's profile 
YithianOffline
Keeping the British end up
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Total posts: 11948
Location: Vermilion Sands
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 13:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

They clearly believe that it is better that an innocent man run the risk of imprisonment (for there is always that risk) than a guilty man escape punishment. Personally, I'd err on the other side, especially given a long history of miscarriages of justice.

The danger is that by bringing ridiculous cases to trial, the police and lawyers will view other accusers with increasing quantities of doubt.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Quake42Offline
Warrior Princess
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Total posts: 5799
Location: Over Silbury Hill, through the Solar field
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 13:24    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
They clearly believe that it is better that an innocent man run the risk of imprisonment (for there is always that risk) than a guilty man escape punishment. Personally, I'd err on the other side, especially given a long history of miscarriages of justice.


I think it's a bit more than that though. A complaint about an alleged crime that occurred yesterday or last week, where the complainant could produce no evidence of said crime or even that she had ever met the accused, would never proceed to the prosecution stage. This sits oddly with the prosecution of ageing minor celebrities over alleged events from 40 years ago which cannot be evidenced in any way. It looks rather as though the CPS is pursuing prosecutions to satisfy the media rather than as a neutral body assessing the evidence, and that is very worrying.
Back to top
View user's profile 
HenryFortOffline
I am Seeking Rest for my Weary Heart
Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Total posts: 1131
Location: UK Again
Age: 44
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 14:46    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quake42 wrote:
It seems odd that a case of this nature - where there is no evidence that the accused even met the complainants - could proceed to a criminal trial. The CPS have some serious questions to answer.

it doesnt say that there is no evidence, but that barlow had insisted he had never met them, and in closing his barrister claimed there was not a shred
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1755
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 58
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 14:56    Post subject: Reply with quote

HenryFort wrote:
Quake42 wrote:
It seems odd that a case of this nature - where there is no evidence that the accused even met the complainants - could proceed to a criminal trial. The CPS have some serious questions to answer.

it doesnt say that there is no evidence, but that barlow had insisted he had never met them, and in closing his barrister claimed there was not a shred


Well the jury clearly found any prosecution evidence unconvincing. I for one would not be prepared to convict anyone on unsupported verbal evidence. You surely wouldn't convict someone of theft from 40 years ago just because 5 people say he/she did it,

Memory is just not good enough to trust people on such things without some sort of corroboration. Even without speculating on the prosecution witnesses motives, it is entirely possible to convince yourself over that timespan that something happened when it didn't.

This is why the US has a statute of limitations - or at least one of the reasons.
Back to top
View user's profile 
YithianOffline
Keeping the British end up
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Total posts: 11948
Location: Vermilion Sands
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 14:56    Post subject: Reply with quote

This charge made it to the court before the prosecution bottled it:

Quote:
A fifth indecent assault charge was dropped due to insufficient evidence after the woman, who accused him of abusing her in his car, told the court she had "no actual memory" of the episode.


Did nobody from the CPS ask her if she remembered the abuse happening???
Why did it take a lawyer to ask the question and burst the bubble?
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1755
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 58
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 15:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

theyithian wrote:
They clearly believe that it is better that an innocent man run the risk of imprisonment (for there is always that risk) than a guilty man escape punishment. Personally, I'd err on the other side, especially given a long history of miscarriages of justice.

The danger is that by bringing ridiculous cases to trial, the police and lawyers will view other accusers with increasing quantities of doubt.


Or indeed that they will bring the whole system into disrepute. I wonder how many Corrie watchers will believe the next allegation against one of its stars?
Back to top
View user's profile 
HenryFortOffline
I am Seeking Rest for my Weary Heart
Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Total posts: 1131
Location: UK Again
Age: 44
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 15:05    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cochise wrote:
I for one would not be prepared to convict anyone on unsupported verbal evidence ...

surely thast would depend on the strength of the testimony ? a lot of the time, that is what juries (and judges) are left with
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1755
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 58
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 15:15    Post subject: Reply with quote

HenryFort wrote:
Cochise wrote:
I for one would not be prepared to convict anyone on unsupported verbal evidence ...

surely thast would depend on the strength of the testimony ? a lot of the time, that is what juries (and judges) are left with


Not for me. I have come across too many situations where people fervently believe in an identification or a series of events when subsequent evidence has proved they could not have seen or experienced what they claim. Sometimes several people.

You'd be amazed at the number of times people have , for example, come forward and say they seen a murdered individual well after they must have been dead, sometimes even had conversations with them.

Memory simply is not as good as people imagine it to be. It can fabricate as well as omit, and any sort of cross-contaminiation - even discussing it with the prosecution - only makes it worse. The longer the time lapse the worse the problem.

And that is ruling out all the possible motives for embroidering testimony or indeed making it up out of whole cloth - not all the motives being mercenary by any means.
Back to top
View user's profile 
HenryFortOffline
I am Seeking Rest for my Weary Heart
Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Total posts: 1131
Location: UK Again
Age: 44
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-02-2014 16:04    Post subject: Reply with quote

and the forensic process has to take all that into account
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42  Next
Page 38 of 42

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group