No smoke without fire?

9 Oct 2012

Quote by alldaysex
as for talking about poss money involed,dont forget it starts at the top,they was a lot of money being made by every one,charitys included

I'm not sure what you are trying to suggest about charities here? Any money that is "made" by a charity has to be used in fulfilment of that charity's charitable purposes. There are no shareholders or other people making any profit or private benefit within charities. All of the profits of a charity are spent on the charitable purposes for which that charity was established. This is a regulated industry, which means that it is necessary to be established for exclusively charitable purposes for the public benefit in order to become a registered charity.
It really does not help the charitable sector when people accuse them of trying to "make money" as if that is a bad thing. Of course charities need to make money, otherwise, how are they supposed to do anything at all? The important point is that all of the money they make is spent on their charitable purposes, rather than lining people's pockets.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by flower411
as for talking about poss money involed,dont forget it starts at the top,they was a lot of money being made by every one,charitys included

I'm not sure what you are trying to suggest about charities here? Any money that is "made" by a charity has to be used in fulfilment of that charity's charitable purposes. There are no shareholders or other people making any profit or private benefit within charities. All of the profits of a charity are spent on the charitable purposes for which that charity was established. This is a regulated industry, which means that it is necessary to be established for exclusively charitable purposes for the public benefit in order to become a registered charity.
It really does not help the charitable sector when people accuse them of trying to "make money" as if that is a bad thing. Of course charities need to make money, otherwise, how are they supposed to do anything at all? The important point is that all of the money they make is spent on their charitable purposes, rather than lining people's pockets.
I recently had an interview with a "marketing company" that specialises in raising money by talking people into signing direct debits. Most of their customers appeared to be charities and a good percentage of the money went to the marketing company and not to the charity.
That's called professional fundraising, and is also regulated. All such companies should inform the donor what percentage goes to the charity.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by alldaysex
no one knows how you would react to been abused ,till it happens to you,

That is very true and I agree with that sentiment but.... Some of these women from what has been spoken about in the papers were abused in the way of having their bottoms pinched, or in Collen Nolan's case the way he had his are around her waist FGS. Some of the accusations being leveled now are not abuse in the sense of the word. Are people really saying they were too scared to come forward because he sat me on his knee, or he pinched my bum? Come on hardly something worth keeping a secret about for over 30 years.
Sorry too many people I think have let time warp their senses, and I am not sure about the money side of things that has been mentioned, but certainly people too traumatised at the time, and too traumatised up until last month, and now only to happy to sing from the roof tops. Some people are so gullible in what they read in the Kangaroo court at Wapping.

9 Oct 2012

:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:
The champions for moral justice, I have heard it all now. innocent

9 Oct 2012

I take it you have missed the reporting of the historical complaints?

Quote by starlightcouple

no one knows how you would react to been abused ,till it happens to you,

That is very true and I agree with that sentiment but.... Some of these women from what has been spoken about in the papers were abused in the way of having their bottoms pinched, or in Collen Nolan's case the way he had his are around her waist FGS. Some of the accusations being leveled now are not abuse in the sense of the word. Are people really saying they were too scared to come forward because he sat me on his knee, or he pinched my bum? Come on hardly something worth keeping a secret about for over 30 years.
Sorry too many people I think have let time warp their senses, and I am not sure about the money side of things that has been mentioned, but certainly people too traumatised at the time, and too traumatised up until last month, and now only to happy to sing from the roof tops. Some people are so gullible in what they read in the Kangaroo court at Wapping.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by Ben_Minx
I take it you have missed the reporting of the historical complaints?

No I have not missed that at all Ben.
The historical complaints count for how many Ben? And how many people are now complaining Ben? So the figures are the same Ben? I think you will find from what I have read, that they are not.
Also reporting from where? The media? The police have now said they will investigate the " complaints " or the " allegations ", but I am at a loss how they will be able to prove anything at all. Do you think no smoke without fire, then Ben? Is it right for the media to launch this witch hunt?
Respect and dignity works when people are dead as well as alive, until of course it can be proved otherwise of course. :notes:

9 Oct 2012

I don't know how many complaints were made over the years. It is one of the things I want to know. I also want to know what happened as a result of those complaints.
I have already expressed my distaste for the media bandwagon.
I was simply challenging this ridiculous assertion that we have a conspiracy of compensation claimants.

9 Oct 2012

ref charitys having to make money,of course they do,but they have to be very carefully,moral wise where it comes from,and not turn a blind eye,
as for the sad coment that it was only a grope of a bototm ect,this is acctualy a sex offence,
and how would some one react if a stanger groped their wife/g/friend?prob a punch in the face,
dont react as if it was ok,it wasnt and isnt,
and did anyone see the story of the cruise ship captain,who,after a complaint from a cple about advances to they daugter,confine savill to his cabin for the rest of the trip,and had him put off at gibralter?,some smoke there i think!
this post could go on for ever,we will never know,unless as i said,some one tells all,
this prob will never happen

10 Oct 2012

Quote by alldaysex
ref charitys having to make money,of course they do,but they have to be very carefully,moral wise where it comes from,and not turn a blind eye,
as for the sad coment that it was only a grope of a bototm ect,this is acctualy a sex offence,
and how would some one react if a stanger groped their wife/g/friend?prob a punch in the face,
dont react as if it was ok,it wasnt and isnt,
and did anyone see the story of the cruise ship captain,who,after a complaint from a cple about advances to they daugter,confine savill to his cabin for the rest of the trip,and had him put off at gibralter?,some smoke there i think!
this post could go on for ever,we will never know,unless as i said,some one tells all,
this prob will never happen

Not necessarily, we are after all on a swingers site. wink

10 Oct 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
ref charitys having to make money,of course they do,but they have to be very carefully,moral wise where it comes from,and not turn a blind eye,
as for the sad coment that it was only a grope of a bototm ect,this is acctualy a sex offence,
and how would some one react if a stanger groped their wife/g/friend?prob a punch in the face,
dont react as if it was ok,it wasnt and isnt,
and did anyone see the story of the cruise ship captain,who,after a complaint from a cple about advances to they daugter,confine savill to his cabin for the rest of the trip,and had him put off at gibralter?,some smoke there i think!
this post could go on for ever,we will never know,unless as i said,some one tells all,
this prob will never happen

Not necessarily, we are after all on a swingers site. wink

the above statement from starlightcouple sums up whats wrong with the atitude on here about the subject,remember,while members from here have a diff idea of whats acceptable,the majority dont,
let me add to my post above,what if it was YOUR DAUGTER OR SON!dont think you would be so complacement
stop defending the issue,and accept it is WRONG!no matter what you think.

10 Oct 2012

It is more how would you react if someone felt the bum of your 13 year old daughter !!
It does seem the weight of evidence is stacking up...125 lines of enquiry and 25 victims so far now come forward. Even the police in their briefing called him a preditory sex offender. It seems its more what was the extent of the abuse that went on. the investigation is also it seems looking at otther people that were well known at the time. If you hear the rumours, it may well be that the BBC and the Police themselves will not come out of this very well......in as much as there may well have been complaints but because of who it was it was just swept quietly under the carpet. I was watching one report on BBC and the reporter said, "this may well yet, lift the lid on a host of various uncomfortable and unpalitable behaviour, that was just turned a blind eye to in the 1970's !!!! "

10 Oct 2012

Quote by alldaysex
the above statement from starlightcouple sums up whats wrong with the atitude on here about the subject,remember,while members from here have a diff idea of whats acceptable,the majority dont,

I was trying to make light about a difficult subject....failed miserably.

Quote by alldaysex
let me add to my post above,what if it was YOUR DAUGTER OR SON!dont think you would be so complacement
stop defending the issue,and accept it is WRONG!no matter what you think.

I am not defending any issue. As far as I can see these are all allegations, made by people 40 years ago in some cases. I am sorry I do not take this particular case seriously as there is not a shred of evidence, except in the medias eyes, and of course to possibly sell a few more newspapers.
The police are as always in a no win situation, damned if they do and damned if they don't scenario. If evidence is put on the table I shall think along different lines, but have YOU any proof that these allegations have strong foundations? Any evidence at all?
IF and it is a big if these are proved to be correct then of course it is wrong in every way, but I am tired of this media witch hunt especially from the likes of the Sun newspaper, and Esther what's her name who openly admitted hearing about the rumours, yet still being the most powerful woman at the BBC for years, still chose to do nothing.....until now. Then shame on her, yet she is screaming for his Knighthood to be removed on the Suns web site now after how many years.
I am sorry if my comment was a bit flippant, but my whole attitude to trial by media is not something I am keen to put down on here. Hence to say I do not believe any of this nonsense, and I would ask you or anyone else that if you have evidence of a crime that has been committed, then contact your local police, as otherwise if puts you in the same bracket as the scaremongers at Wapping.

10 Oct 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
I am not defending any issue. As far as I can see these are all allegations, made by people 40 years ago in some cases. I am sorry I do not take this particular case seriously as there is not a shred of evidence, except in the medias eyes, and of course to possibly sell a few more newspapers.

The evidence you seek consists of the statements currently being gathered by Scotland Yard.
I still agree with you about the media circus.

10 Oct 2012

I don't have a 13 year old daughter but if I had, and she was her father's daughter, I'm sure she would have given him an appropriate nudge in the nuts with a well aimed knee as a reminder about limits!
As for so called innocent, vulnerable children alledgedly being molested whilst chaperoned by adults who 'turned a blind eye' so as not to upset the applecart....
Well, words fail me.
The complainants should be directing their attentions towards these individuals who owed them a duty of care at the time of the alleged offences, not a deceased legend of our lifeltime who cannot defend himself and who should be allowed to rest in peace.
I wonder how long it will be before Miliband jumps on the bandwagon.

10 Oct 2012

Tell me GnV, from the so called allegations that so far have come forward, do you believe there is a word of truth in any of it?
One of the most damning things if true is what I have already spoke about with regards to Esther Rantzen. Her show That's Life was probably the most watched show on the BBC at that time, and she was certainly the most powerful woman at the BBC at the time of these allegations. That's Life! ran on BBC1 for 21 years (1973 to 1994).
Her Husband Desmond Wilcox who From 1972 to 1980 he was head of general features at the you check the dates of both these people, they were right there at the times of these allegations. Two massive high powered figures, and I know that her Husband is now deceased and as such has nothing to do with this case now, but the point is that she andher Husband were mega profiles at the BBC. Now all of a sudden she has stated that she heard the " rumours " regarding Savile but chose to do nothing at the time, or since. But since one person came forward she also now feels this overwhelming necessity to shout from the roof tops, in fact so loud I can hear her 100 miles away, yet said nothing at the time. Also this woman who said nothing for years but had her suspicions, is the founder of Child Line...hmmmm.
She is now joining the Suns witch hunt in regards to this petition to rob him of his Knighthood for which he earned through his years of charity work. Even the charities by some people are being accused of taking " dirty money ". WTF? This has gone way over the top now with even Mr Star being dragged into it. Is it any wonder he wanted an injunction taken out after he has watched the media hunt towards Savile. Who would want their name brought up at all in this case?
I have read some of the Daily Mails readers comments and for a newspaper to allow such slanderous accusations by it's readers in it's newspaper is nothing short of disgusting. But today's news is tomorrows chip paper as I have heard on here.
I cannot see how the police can do anything with a dead accused, and alleged incidents from nearly half a century ago. Still the media have made their own minds up and it's readership have followed like lambs to the slaughter.
My question to Esther would be, why as a powerful woman at the BBC with all your suspicions, choose to ignore these silent whispers? You surely could not be like so many others,who was scared of the man. You cannot possibly say like so many others are, that nobody would have believed you. What the most powerful woman at the BBC, who had a Husband also high up in the corporation? You still said nothing? Why Esther?
This is what the media witch hunt has created. Check out the comments at the bottom, vile and disgusting, and without a shred of evidence as well. Seems that justice in this country is now being taken care of by the British tabloids.

10 Oct 2012

Quote by star
Tell me GnV, from the so called allegations that so far have come forward, do you believe there is a word of truth in any of it?

My view is immaterial and contributes nothing to the issue of whether he did what he is now accused of posthumously.
Nor will it serve any useful purpose to provide such a view.
Since the supposed doer of these wrongs is unable to defend himself against such outrageous allegations as would be his right if still alive, no further investigative time should be given to it but our concern should still be for the living.
If there are people out there still alive this day who were complicit to improper treatment of children, they should be sought out and dealt with appropriately within the law.
It is for the prosecutors to prove such acts took place when the 'star' witness, if you excuse the pun, is no longer available to give evidence.
That will not be an easy task.
Notwithstanding, if people genuinely believe that some wrongs of the past as they perceive them still haunt them, they should be given appropriate counselling and guidance but persuing a dead man's reputation (and his Knighthood, for all the good in life he did) serves no useful purpose in my view and smacks of malevolence, not closure.

10 Oct 2012

Quote by Flower411
Just looks like a bunch words to me and they can`t do any harm ....can they ?

10 Oct 2012

To me it seams totally pointless, no one to prosecute dunno

10 Oct 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
To me it seams totally pointless, no one to prosecute

Oh, but there may be Blue.
Not Sir Jimmy of course, but - and a big but - if the allegations hold true, those who were complicit and had a duty of care to safeguard the well being of vulnerable children and failed in that duty should be brought to book.

10 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
Tell me GnV, from the so called allegations that so far have come forward, do you believe there is a word of truth in any of it?

My view is immaterial and contributes nothing to the issue of whether he did what he is now accused of posthumously.
Nor will it serve any useful purpose to provide such a view.
Since the supposed doer of these wrongs is unable to defend himself against such outrageous allegations as would be his right if still alive, no further investigative time should be given to it but our concern should still be for the living.
If there are people out there still alive this day who were complicit to improper treatment of children, they should be sought out and dealt with appropriately within the law.
It is for the prosecutors to prove such acts took place when the 'star' witness, if you excuse the pun, is no longer available to give evidence.
That will not be an easy task.
Notwithstanding, if people genuinely believe that some wrongs of the past as they perceive them still haunt them, they should be given appropriate counselling and guidance but persuing a dead man's reputation (and his Knighthood, for all the good in life he did) serves no useful purpose in my view and smacks of malevolence, not closure.
Thank you for your reasoned reply GnV :thumbup:

11 Oct 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
To me it seams totally pointless, no one to prosecute

tell that to the victims !! It is not revenge they want...its closure and to be believed. the weight of evidence has brought the Police out to clearly state he was a preditory sex offender. His own family who intially defended him, now accept that there is something in it. It is coming to light now, that alot of complaints were made about Jimmy Saville, but were brushed uder the carpet by the BBC, the charities and the Police. Anyone that has been the victim of a sex offender, especially if when a child, find the being believed the hardest part. It helps them find closure and move on. Surely you can not begrude the victims that !!! Also it acts as a warning to anyone else that even in your grave you can't hide from the truth.
We should 100% expose anyone accussed of such crimes, be they alive or dead.

11 Oct 2012

Quote by dean
We should 100% expose anyone accussed of such crimes, be they alive or dead.

So you'll be digging him up then as suggested in this morning's papers....
bolt

11 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
We should 100% expose anyone accussed of such crimes, be they alive or dead.

So you'll be digging him up then as suggested in this morning's papers....
bolt

Not even worth wiping my dogs arse with any one of those so called papers GnV.
They have now exhausted their witch hunts against Andrew Mitchell, and as all tabloid shit spreads do, move on to another intended victim of their hate campaigns.
What disgusts me is that we have a 5 year old girl missing presumed dead by a monster, and that story is now on page 9 of the Sun this morning. Their front page spread is about how his grave stone is now in a skip, and then continues over about another three page. Nice to see where their reporting priorities lie eh?

11 Oct 2012

Well, yes star.
What astonishes me most is the speed at which the police have already publically condemned the man as a 'predatory sex offender'.
Whatever happened to British justice and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?
On what can the officer who made that very public statement to the worlds media on camera base his wholly improper (and probably illegal) outburst?
He should be removed from office immediately. It is for the police to investigate crime impartially, not to act as judge and jury and declare a verdict before it's even got on the front pages of The Sun.
Just who the hell does this officer think he is?? Is Britain now a police state?
If Sir Jimmy was still alive and able to answer any charges of wrongdoing, his lawyer would have a field day in court wiping the floor with this loose canon and even if the charges were true, the trial would surely collapse on the basis that it would be deemed unfair.
Just as well there isn't a General Election due any time soon because I wouldn't put it past that snivelling wretch Cameron to ask the Queen to withdraw the award in order to garner public favour.
I think you might now have the picture star :lol2:

11 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
Well, yes star.
What alarms me most is the speed at which the police have already publically condemned the man as a 'predatory sex offender'.
Whatever happened to British justice and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?

The problems the Police find themselves in now, is the utter fear of getting things wrong and having to stand in front of the media issuing grovelling apologies regarding their lack of anything. So in this instance they are certainly airing on the large side of caution. British justice is just a myth. We see people taking advantage of that justice every day in the courts with weak judges and weak sentencing. Obviously the British media have learned nothing from the Leveson inquiry regarding the presses behavior and their practices.

Quote by GnV
On what can the officer who made that very public statement to the worlds media on camera base his wholly improper (and probably illegal) outburst?
He should be removed from office immediately. It is for the police to investigate crime impartially, not to act as judge and jury and declare a verdict before it's even got off the front pages of The Sun.

Is this the same officer by any chance who was called a Pleb? If it is not the same officer, then we have another Pleb in the force. :twisted:

Quote by GnV
Just who the hell does this officer think he is?? Is Britain now a police state?

The police now run scared GnV for an absolute fear of yet more bad press, bad press seems to follow them around like a bad smell, so in this case they have decided to find him guilty as there is not a chance that anyone will find any evidence to prove he is not guilty. A very clever ploy indeed from the supposed impartial people who are there to uphold the law, not to make it.

Quote by GnV
If Sir Jimmy was still alive and able to answer any charges of wrongdoing, his lawyer would have a field day in court wiping the floor with this loose canon and even if the charges were true, the trial would surely collapse on the basis that it would be deemed unfair.

That is the whole point GnV as to why the media are taking these decisions to print rubbish. They would be having a completely different view if he was still alive as they would be sued without the evidence to back up their false claims.

Quote by GnV
Just as well there isn't a General Election due any time soon because I wouldn't put it past that snivelling wretch Cameron to ask the Queen to withdraw the award in order to garner public favour.

I think Cameron has already insinuated this.

Anything to gain an extra few votes eh?

Quote by GnV
I think you might now have the picture star :lol2:

I got the picture all right GnV. Guilty until a dead man can prove his innocence. A brilliant way to convict someone, I am sure you would agree.

11 Oct 2012

and some people wonder why I prefer to live in France rolleyes

11 Oct 2012

Just had a thought.....(I know it's a rare occurance)
What if Rantzen's hubby was complicit to what is alleged to have gone on ?
Would she be so vociferous in her pursuit if that was the case ?
Would she move to have his memory discredited ?

11 Oct 2012

Quote by Steve
Just had a thought.....(I know it's a rare occurance)
What if Rantzen's hubby was complicit to what is alleged to have gone on ?
Would she be so vociferous in her pursuit if that was the case ?
Would she move to have his memory discredited ?

I imagine she would eh?

11 Oct 2012

Quote by Ben_Minx
Just had a thought.....(I know it's a rare occurance)
What if Rantzen's hubby was complicit to what is alleged to have gone on ?
Would she be so vociferous in her pursuit if that was the case ?
Would she move to have his memory discredited ?

I imagine she would eh?
And what of the dear lady herself?
By some accounts, she turned a 'blind' eye too....

11 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
Just had a thought.....(I know it's a rare occurance)
What if Rantzen's hubby was complicit to what is alleged to have gone on ?
Would she be so vociferous in her pursuit if that was the case ?
Would she move to have his memory discredited ?

I imagine she would eh?
And what of the dear lady herself?
By some accounts, she turned a 'blind' eye too....
Well it seemed she did GnV.

As I have already said in this thread, she and her Husband at the time were massive personalities within the BBC, and Rantzen was the highest paid female presenter at the time, and the biggest female " star " also. Yet she chose to ignore the " gossip " as she now puts it. You know I hate to say this but am going to anyway, as I always disliked this woman I kinda hope that she or her family also get dragged into this in some way or another. For her ignoring this and then starting up child line, is as big a hypocrisy as I have ever seen.
I wonder if that is where the original idea about child line came from...her own guilt?