Jimmy Savile Discussion: "Dr" Fox cleared of all charges

I'm staggered, him of all people.

If Gary Glitter goes to jail, does that mean the gang needs a new leader?

He'll be trying to start a new gang to protect him from being arse-raped in the shower!

More Savile news:

Savile 'abused 63 people at Stoke Mandeville Hospital'.

The Stoke Mandeville report said the victims, abused from 1968-92, were aged eight to 40.

It also found:

• Savile had "virtually unrestricted access" to clinical areas and patients during the 1970s and 80s
• Several sex abuse claims were made against him from 1972-85, to different staff members, but only one was a "formal complaint"
• That complaint by a father "should have led to Savile's suspension from the hospital and a formal police report being made"
• There was probably no "hospital-wide intelligence" on Savile
• Information known to junior staff and middle managers was "probably filtered out" before reaching senior managers
• Over the past 40 years Stoke Mandeville has employed three doctors who have "subsequently been convicted of sex crimes against patients"

Also Sir Cliff Richard police inquiry 'significantly expanded'.

Obviously there are limits to how far and wide the Yewtree witch-hunt should go, but I'd love to know who the senior staff were that bollocked the junior staff for reporting the issue.

Gary Glitter eh? I have a 7" vinyl somewhere. Can't remember what it is called, but the song goes "I love you love, do you love me too love?". Clearly they didn't, but that didn't seem to stop the Glitter express.

Wonder if that is worth more now. :shifty:

I've sold my Cliff Richard collection. You know, just to be on the safe side.

KKLEIN wrote:I've sold my Cliff Richard collection. You know, just to be on the safe side.

I think the Cliff Richard case is going to be a very interesting one to see play out. If he's innocent, he's almost honour-bound to sue the pants off both South Yorkshire Police and the BBC (and if he's innocent I hope he does precisely that).

But I don't know about Sir Cliff. Usually, I'd be willing to take a vague guess at which way I think it will go (I was right about Paul Gambaccini, after all) - this one is an altogether much more tricky one.

The prosecution case is going to have to be extremely strong - I think it might possibly prove to be one of the most difficult cases of alleged historical child abuse yet.

Re the litigation, absolutely. The BBC waded in, in particularly ham-fisted fashion, as it did with McAlpine, and should be taken to task if Cliff Richard is not found guilty of this stuff.

The BBC really has its knickers in a twist now over paedogeddon, doesn't it? Ignoring the failures while Savile (and others) was still around, since it pulled that Newsnight show in 2012, it has just leered from one mess to another. McAlpine and Richard have both been (effectively) accused prematurely.

There's no doubt it feels like it wants to atone for sins, but isn't doing a very good job. The collective navel-gazing and cycle of self-recrimination is farcical.

Poser wrote:There's no doubt it 'feels' like it wants to 'atone' for sins (agenda), but isn't doing a very good job (clearly). The 'collective', 'left-wing' navel-gazing and cycle of 'so-called' self-recrimination is farcical.

I fixed that up for you.

Poser wrote:Re the litigation, absolutely. The BBC waded in, in particularly ham-fisted fashion, as it did with McAlpine, and should be taken to task if Cliff Richard is not found guilty of this stuff.

The BBC really has its knickers in a twist now over paedogeddon, doesn't it? Ignoring the failures while Savile (and others) was still around, since it pulled that Newsnight show in 2012, it has just leered from one mess to another. McAlpine and Richard have both been (effectively) accused prematurely.

There's no doubt it feels like it wants to atone for sins, but isn't doing a very good job. The collective navel-gazing and cycle of self-recrimination is farcical.

Agreed. Somehow I feel sorry for the poor mug whose job it is to go back through Auntie's archives airbrushing out various 70s-era sex offenders who worked undisturbed at the BBC for so many decades.

Speaking of 70s-era sex offenders, I see Mr Glitter is now back in jail. BBC suggesting (on The World At One (R4) today) that this time 'he might die behind bars'. He's almost 71, staring down the wrong end of a 16-year stretch. If he does only half of that he'll be almost 80 on release. Well, if you rape an 8 year-old girl (amongst others) I'm pretty sure there should be consequences.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31711252

'Ol Rolfy has been stripped of his CBE

Gandalf wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31711252

'Ol Rolfy has been stripped of his CBE

Poor Rolf should have died before he got caught. Sir Jimmy didn't make the mistake of losing his honour.

Genuine question: does it feel like it's hanging over the country a little bit, the fact that we've not been able to mete out justice to Savile?

On the one hand, there is the Yewtree legacy, which arguably might not have happened had we collectively had our pound of flesh from Savile. There are things like Rotherham, which are frankly strawberry floating disgusting (something like 1,400 victims, I think I read.)

On the other hand, y'know, we were all on a high in August 2012 with the Olympics, then the Savile stuff broke and you can't move for paedogeddon since then. It's all so tawdry. If we could just have subjected him to knowing we were onto him, having his titles taken and dying in disgrace, then it would have helped us all out no end.

Just went back and read the first page of the thread.
How things have changed.

I'm honestly amazed that he managed to get away with abusing 63 people at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, surely the pattern of complaints would've been big enough for it to be taken seriously at the time. Unless they were all idiots, probably, most likely.

Good to have you back Robbie. I agree, It's incredible that this went uninvestigated.

I wonder how many reports were made against him. Sounds like someone really dropped the ball on this one (to put it lightly)

In the 70s, with his profile and charity work, I can see how people would have thought these allegations to be false and why victims wouldn't come forward. It wasn't perhaps as taboo in the 70s to be a dirty old man. I can certainly see why it didn't come to light sooner.

You'd like to think we are beyond that now...

Strange how all these paedos appear to be asexual to the outside world until a scandal hits, Michael Jackson, Jimmy Savile, Cliff Richard, J. M. Barrie....

Cliff has always had a creepy side to him imo maybe because he is too nice everytime he is in the press on TV etc the nice ones are sometimes the ones you have to be wary off. Will be interesting to see what happens with him if gets found out or proven innocent time will tell. Shakin Stevens came across a bit dodgy peado'ish in his xmas video.

Jimmy Savile Discussion: "Dr" Fox cleared of all charges

Who is online

Affiliates