We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

Sir James.


Phil Ocifer
Resolved

Likes # 0

I see Sir James Savile OBE is getting a posthumous revival.

Will these allegations get anywhere, or will they just become a platform for people to air their gravest suspicions?

Why did nobody come forward whilst he was alive?

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

carver

"Surely you meant to say "journalists will make the most of what they can fabricate,secure in the knowledge that you cannot libel a dead person."

No, I didn't mean to say that. Journalists will be very aware of the need to stick to using the words of other people in this case. They'll interview anyone who has something to say, and will report the interview. The story is potentially so horrific they don't need to fabricate a thing.

Like this post
Phil Ocifer

Likes # 0

No, i don't believe the paparazzi will fabricate ANYTHING at all. They're all too honest for that. They do have standards you know. (Stifles apoplectic fit in bath towel).

FE I was thinking more of those under 16 which I understood was the legal age of consent. What do you know that's different?

Like this post
morddwyd

Likes # 0

I did not say that the allegations were not serious, nor that, if true, , no offence had been committed.

What I did say is that sex with an under-age girl (or boy) does not automatically make somebody a pervert or a paedophile.

Like many of my contemporaries I had my first sexual experience when I was under sixteen. The young lady concerned would have been most upset if she thought she was regarded as a pervert!.

The examples quoted from the Kyle show would appear to support this view.

Like this post
wee eddie

Likes # 0

I have no idea whether Jimmy Savile was a paedophile.

However, I do have many years of experience of working on the fringes of the Music Business and even as a Gopher, experienced the attentions of Groupies, of all ages.

Many of these girls will tell lies, whoppers, anything, that will get themselves into the presence of whoever their target is. Once there, they will do virtually anything to get the experiences they deem necessary to gain the approval of their Peer Group.

I was once horrified to find that the girl, in my bed, when I had cleared up after a Gig, was only 14yo. On another occasion, a girl was helping me operate the Discotheque at a very smart Deb Dance and I was taking full advantage of the situation. She had told me that she had removed all her undergarments from below her dress, an opportunity not to be missed. Her father came storming up and would have peppered me had he had his shotgun - she was not yet 16yo.

Now, I don't know whether J.S. sought out younger girls, or that he just took his share of those that presented themselves. But he was a Big Star and I would guess, from my knowledge and experience, that the supply of Groupies was almost unending. That some of them proved under 18 is inevitable.

Like this post
woodchip

Likes # 0

Just a Question from me, I have no idea if as as not done what they say, but can anything be gained now by going the way its going as nothing is going to change those that are determined to do there thing. Whether they have money in there pockets or not. We live in a Perverted World only heightened by pornographic Adverts and films, as if SEX is the be all and end all to Life. Any bad spelling down to me not being a good speller, so don't expect many changes at 76 years old

Like this post
Aitchbee

Likes # 0

Tune in to BBC Radio4 ..."The Eddie Mair Show" now, they [the producer of the TV prog & others] will be discussing the Jimmy Savile sex-crime allegations.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

Phil Ocifer

You can stifle your apoplectic fit as much as you like, but think about this...

What possible purpose would it serve for a journalist to fabricate a story about a dead celebrity having sex with under age girls when there seem to be plenty of women coming forward with real-life experiences to report? Paparazzi are freelance photographers by the way - nothing to do with this story.

The legal age for a girl to be able to consent to sex is 16, but I didn't say otherwise. Jimmy Saville is alleged to have had sex with girls as young as 12 and 13, and I simply made the point that a 13 year old cannot legally consent, even if she consents, if you see my point. The penalty for having sex with a girl between the ages of 13 and fifteen is two years imprisonment. If the girl is under 13 the maximum sentence is life.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

morddwyd

You seem to be obsessed with this paedophile/pervert thing. Has anyone here referred to Jimmy Saville in those terms?

It's not really necessary - if he was guilty of the offences that have been alleged he was guilty of raping at least one under-age girl, and that's about as bad as it gets, isn't it?

What's the difference between a pervert and a child rapist anyway?

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

wee eddie

Not knowing that a girl is not old enough to legally consent to sex is no defence.

Having sex with a 16 year old is (now) perfectly legal if she consents, provided you are not in what is called 'A position of trust'. This basically means a teacher, or a carer or doctor. Those people commit an offence if they have sex with a person who is under the age of 18, even with the full consent of that person.

Like this post
wee eddie

Likes # 0

FE - I have no plans to dance on the head of a pin.

I was just trying to point out that, the presence of under-age girls, boys as well, among those trying to greet their friends with, I've got a cast of X's Member, or whatever it is that floats their boat, is legion.

Nor do I believe that you are entirely blameless, if, just because someone says that they are a particular age, you believe them.

If J.S. sought out the young, then his memory should be treated in exactly the same way as that of Michael Jackson.

If, in the course of his dealings with Groupies, he was persuaded that such n' such an individual was of sufficient age and the person led him to believe that this was true, then there may be a difficult problem.

If that be the case then almost anyone in the Entertainment Industry is at risk of such a prosecution.

I think that you can lock up almost all the latest Boy Bands. There is a general failure to understand the ethos of Groupies, and the lengths a Groupie will go to to achieve his/her goal of status with in the peer group.

Many of the Groupies are so proud of their achievement that they openly boast about it and may only later come to regret their actions. Could this be the case.

Maybe, a bit like Pubs, all Groupies should be required to produce Proof of Age, when arriving at an After Show party or when blagging their way into a Star's Dressing Room

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

Google Fit vs Apple Health Kit: What's the difference?

IDG UK Sites

How to join Apple's OS X Beta Seed Program: Get OS X Yosemite on your Mac before public release

IDG UK Sites

Introducing generation tech

IDG UK Sites

This animated film reveals the importance of designing for everyone