Home Forums |
|
|
Topic History of: BBC 'to hand 120 Jimmy Savile victims £33,000 compensation' Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
honey!oh sugar sugar. |
JK2006 wrote:
It was not an official "offer", Honey, merely a nod nod wink wink say no more hint from "those who knew"... and it came just before my trial.
Having seen a couple of the accusers, I don't know why I am surprised, but I do find it all a bit shocking.
This shows that it was only about money I suppose?
I have tried to imagine that they have some sort of attention craving illness, but it does look as if the motivation is simply cash.
*shudders* |
bh |
JK2006 wrote:
It was not an official "offer", Honey, merely a nod nod wink wink say no more hint from "those who knew"... and it came just before my trial.
It's now known as "doing a Jacko"... |
JK2006 |
It was not an official "offer", Honey, merely a nod nod wink wink say no more hint from "those who knew"... and it came just before my trial. |
andrew |
That's disgusting pay off false victim.
Well £142 per year to pay for TV licence when it goes to pay off Savile victims and Fat Cats, it's ridiculous what tax payers are going through.
www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stori...n-luxuries-1-3061324
This sounds ok to me but internet is essential for my job search I have got my broadband to absolute minimum. I don't smoke or drink and buy unbranded grocery's and clothes, I get mine on ebay got 7 minor defected cricket shirts for £6, the defects are hardly noticeable only a woman could find them. |
honey!oh sugar sugar. |
JK2006 wrote:
I was told I could "buy off" my false accusers at £5000 each. I refused. The BBC considers it a decent compromise to pay compensation to people who may or may not be lying. I think it's a disgrace.
Gosh I didn't know about that. Isn't it blackmail? Was the "offer" before it was all over the papers? |
|
|
|