I don't relish the thought of it being true.
I do however relish the thought that something is finally being done about these sick *** who think it is ok to abuse kids with impunity.
If he didn't then it needs to be investigated and he needs to be very publicly exonerated. You can't prevent victims or even fraudsters making allegations, but you can thoroughly investigate them once they do. In a society where victims are trauma is acknowledge, nothing more could be asked.
Should there be anonymity for people accused of crimes? I'm not sure there should. I'm fairly certain recent historic abuse cases have prevailed because victims who think they are the only ones realise they aren't and come forward.
Amazing how some people like to stick up or demean a person they never knew and certainly know nothing about their secret sex lives.
I say stay on the fence and keep quiet until the evidence either proves them not guilty in which case you can stop leading the pitchfork and burning torch mob and start painting your "I'M SORRY" Banners or they find him guilty in which case you start painting the "GUILTY AS SIN" banners and relead your angry mob and this time quite rightly so!
//Should there be anonymity for people accused of crimes? //
The flipside to that question involves putting yourself in the dock and asking yourself whether you want every potential juror in the nation 'primed' by all the press coverage of what you're accused of.
What would you say to that?
//I'm not sure there should. I'm fairly certain recent historic abuse cases have prevailed because victims who think they are the only ones realise they aren't and come forward.//
Ah but that's using ends to justify means, isn't it? These people should have been coming forward -even when- they thought it was only them.
Inaction is why Sovile was on the loose doing more of the same for decades!
Trial by media is a problem, but so is secrecy. It allows these monsters to behave as they wish. Savile's antics were reported frequently and ignored by the police for years until the media got hold of it and they were forced to act.
I wish I had a tape loop/audio sample of some newsreader saying that. Give it a backbeat and make a hit record out of it.
Can someone clarify a detail: Did Savile visit this guest house and might he have set eyes on this guest list? He had 'the dirt' on a lot of influential people and the police inaction was in response to him threatening to bring them all down, if charges were made against him?
(sorry if this is old ground for many, I don't buy the papers).
Something about that guest list doesn't seem right. People who were in the public eye couldn't disguise who they were but others, like senior civil servants, might know the value of discretion.
And Anthony Blunt, who heads the list, was more interested in men than pimply boys.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.