www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/freddie-st...wtree-arrest-3146660

To be honest its bringing its self down. I also feel it will have a complete negative feedback for all and also stop REAL victims of nasty barsts coming forward, yes there are some real perverted people out there not someone who touched another up in the 1970's when it was par for the course in those days.

MWTWATCHER2 wrote:
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/freddie-st...wtree-arrest-3146660

To be honest its bringing its self down. I also feel it will have a complete negative feedback for all and also stop REAL victims of nasty barsts coming forward, yes there are some real perverted people out there not someone who touched another up in the 1970's when it was par for the course in those days.

Good for him. Although I don't know how he can know that Jimmy Savile was the "only one who is guilty". Does he know this for a fact? He certainly seems to have had a ton of obviously false accusations thrown at him, including from the woman that's accused him, and it was pretty much a few of her old school mates that started this whole thing against Jimmy Savile in the first place, when most others interviewed from the same school and time period as the original complainant denied all knowledge...

Anon wrote:
MWTWATCHER2 wrote:
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/freddie-st...wtree-arrest-3146660

To be honest its bringing its self down. I also feel it will have a complete negative feedback for all and also stop REAL victims of nasty barsts coming forward, yes there are some real perverted people out there not someone who touched another up in the 1970's when it was par for the course in those days.

Good for him. Although I don't know how he can know that Jimmy Savile was the "only one who is guilty". Does he know this for a fact? He certainly seems to have had a ton of obviously false accusations thrown at him, including from the woman that's accused him, and it was pretty much a few of her old school mates that started this whole thing against Jimmy Savile in the first place, when most others interviewed from the same school and time period as the original complainant denied all knowledge...


Its as if people are frightened to suggest that Jimmy Savile might well be innocent too.

Spot on Honey - and Anon. We all say "I never believe anything in the media" where, in truth, we all believe almost everything if it's in the media. Indeed, many of us find it impossible to admit doubts about a media verdict. And when somebody is dead, it's nice and easy to construct the only thing that matters - a good story.

The problem is a principle can only really call itself a principle if it withstands "emotive issues" - and, as Paul Gambaccini has found out, going with accepting 'a wealth of hearsay' in regards to one person who may be dead and unable to defend himself, who we personally may not have liked or understood when they were alive, means 'a wealth of hearsay' then can be pointed at their heads like a loaded gun and they have no real defence and have to accept the consequences.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Its as if people are frightened to suggest that Jimmy Savile might well be innocent too.

I see no reason to assume Jimmy Savile's guilty anymore than the rest of them. Not only was he investigated in 2008/2009 and they never found enough evidence to charge him, but it was the same bunch of people that first accused him (the other one was talked into it by the Sun newspaper who'd been desperately trying to implicate him in the Huate de la garrenne scandal - for some bizzare reason) that the woman that has accused Freddie has come from.

Yes he's had a lot more accusations thrown at him, but then he hasn't been here to refute them and accusers know they won't have to face him in court.

If Freddie was dead and as much hype was made over him as there was over Jimmy Savile in 2012 then the same thing would quite probably happen to him...

I don't know why he's brave enough to openly question operation yewtree but not the Jimmy Savile spectacle...

JK2006 wrote:
Spot on Honey - and Anon. We all say "I never believe anything in the media" where, in truth, we all believe almost everything if it's in the media. Indeed, many of us find it impossible to admit doubts about a media verdict. And when somebody is dead, it's nice and easy to construct the only thing that matters - a good story.

A lot of people get practically all their information about things like this and lots of other things from the media, newspapers, the news, programmes like newsnight etc, yet they often seem to just get things so wrong. It's a shame they can't be more balanced with their reporting...