Give it up dude. There have been loads of witnesses independently verified and he practically boasted about molesting underage girls in his autobiography. He is as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo...
We’ve been through this before.
And I stand by my opinion that all the evidence I have seen points to a dirty old man who had consentual sex with young teenage girls. And young women in their late teens and 20’s. And whose ‘violent abuse’ seems to have been nothing more than some unwanted groping.
No evidence of rape. No evidence of abuse. No evidence either of the more ludicrous claims about him.
And much of the evidence as we discussed in an earlier thread has simply been a load of crap. Some of it already refuted, and wont be part of the investigation (the ‘taxi driver—12 year old’ story for example OR the Duncroft accusations which have been ripped apart by the former headmistress). ITV even has the cheek to follow up their first dreadful joke of an ‘expose’ this month. (btw, google the ITV expert......expert my arsesticles, and has a few dubious morals and court appearances himself)
Loads of witnesses?. Mate, have you actually taken the time to read the stories, the accusations?. I have, and much of the supposed evidence of rape or abuse or paedophilia is simply not there. Once you get by the screaming headline, actually there is little or no evidence except for suggestion and accusation. Second and third hand many times as well.
Look at the Coleen Nolan accusation for example. We can all see with our own eyes thanks to BBC film that the silly woman was about as attacked and molested by Savile in 1978 as you and I were. Look at the ‘secret audio clip of Savile abusing a young girl’, which turned out to be an old clip from ‘Savile’s Travels’ on Radio 1.
And as I said, other major stories like the supposed abuse of the Duncroft girls has been shown never to have happened. In fact, the Duncroft girls have been shown to be a pretty slaggy bunch of girls who would F8ck anything for a cigarette and a bottle of booze. Yet they are being portrayed as poor little virginal victims.
And lets be blunt here, much of it is simply unbelievable nonsense 40 years late from people who cannot prove their accusations. Frankly, the TV and radio in the UK are full of rather odd middle aged women making all sorts of unprovable and frankly ludicrous accusations.
You call me nieve, I think its you who is. You and I have read all the stories, all the accusations. Even you must admit that a lot of it is simply nonsense. Bandwagonning by sad middle aged people who can see a few quid their way if they can sound convincing enough. And thats what this is all about: money.
Justice?. Give over, guvnor. Its all about getting a bit of dosh from Jimmy’s estate. Oh, and the BBC while we are at it. Do you think for a second if Savile had been a pauper when he died, this whole saga would have started?.
I suppose you believe the Rossiter story as well. Or the stories about every DJ/pop presenter circa 1960-1980. This is hysteria and peado panic at full blast, and Britain at the moment is a stupid, hysterical little island. Where actual evidence takes second place to accusation.
ALL that abuse, all that rape by Savile, and not one victim ever went to the police (oh wait a minute they did, and nothing was ever found)?.
Savile was probably a ‘dirty old man’ with a fondness for jailbait and young women. He was not however a rapist, paedophile, child abuser or necrophiliac. He didnt abuse little girls in his dressing room, he didnt wander hospitals at night, he didnt violate bodies in the morgue.
When all the evidence is at hand, and the investigation reaches its conclusions, I dare say we will find Savile was far less of the evil pervert that the hysteria has him as currently.
So sneer away, mate, sneer away. But it is ME who is the one who is looking at this with calm eyes, whilst all around me scream paedo! and reach for their pitchforks......