You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Attitudes & Opinions arrow Savile, Top of the Pops and Yewtree
Savile, Top of the Pops and Yewtree PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 14 January 2013
Something has really interested me. If one of our posters (Chris?) is correct and Savile was not there for the last TOTP but pre-recorded his links (as he was too frail), it chimes with something that happened to me.

We discovered before my trial that one of my false accusers, who had given a detailed account of my accosting him before the screening of the first Entertainment USA show and had asked him to get his family to ring the BBC and rave about it if they enjoyed it, would have been 16 and not 14.

The Judge threw out his fake claims but we also found that the police had approached the BBC, discovered the real transmission dates and had not mentioned this - hoping we'd not notice.

Now I wonder - did the police fail to discover Savile's lack of presence at the BBC for the last TOTP, is our poster wrong or - God forbid - did they also find out the truth and pretend not to know, publishing the fake claims?

If so, and if the rest of the Yewtree report is likewise riddled with inaccuracies, can those who compiled it be prosecuted for Perverting the Course of Justice?

It depends, I suppose, on definition of Justice. I'd say promoting a false damage of reputation in order to seem efficient (police) or to get a good story (media) could well be criminal activity. Especially if it diverted funds from noble causes like setting up heart clinics in hospitals to save lives.

Of course, police would be allowed to defend themselves in court by providing evidence that Savile spent "every waking minute" chasing children instead of raising cash for good causes. And victims would be allowed to present PROOF they had been assaulted.

And if those victims (as opposed to the hundreds dying because of the lack of hospital facilities due to cash frozen to give to greedy claimants) could prove without doubt to a jury, they would be entitled to reward. If they couldn't, they and the police assisting their perversion of the course of justice, would serve long prison sentences.

It's called JUSTICE.

< Prev   Next >