IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
Honey wrote: We know that a lot of the ridiculous claims about Savile are untrue, and anyway, the man was never charged, let alone convicted, so should be presumed innocent.
It was a vile thing to say.
How come a mere inquiry and Janet Smith was able to basically convict him on her say so and allow everyone to call him an offender just because he was now dead? If he popped back into life tonight nobody would be able to say that until due process had been completed. No arrest, no charges, no convictions means technically innocent in my eyes. Surely the deceased as well as the living should have some basic human rights too? I've always felt something wasn't all quite right with this. I have no idea about the extent of his guilt or not, but justice has to work both ways, for the defendant/accused as well as the victims/accusers.
We know that a lot of the ridiculous claims about Savile are untrue, and anyway, the man was never charged, let alone convicted, so should be presumed innocent.
It was a vile thing to say.
Jo
It looks as if she's still around, judging from this Facebook page, which last had a post in June.