Amerifag question for Britbongs
Was Jimmy Savile guilty of full-penetration, ass-slamming sex with underage kids?
Just the impression I got overseas is that it was a bunch of 70's Benny Hill-esque bum pinching and titty groping. Kinda like Michael Jackson, I always got the feeling Jacko wasn't full-on jack hammering little boys in the ass, just jerking them off after getting them tipsy.
Anyway was Jimmy a full-on rapist?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
It's not rape if she's unconscious lad
Yup. He was a full-on rapist who sexually abused sick and dying children in the hospitals he set up, as well as children and adolescents on his TV shows.
I don't think Jacko was a pedo or rapist, I think he was mentally ill and had the mentality of a child and couldn't understand why sharing a bed with a child (which it was confirmed he did, although nothing sexual happened) was wrong.
Made me think of this:
youtube.com
I think this faggot is right.
Actually, æ has a pretty decent article on this one
With Jimmy it was full on rape.
Old Jacko was a different animal, i think of him more like a 12 year old having a circle jerk. Guy was messed up and immature/childlike.
Rolf Harris was a groper. Jimmy committed every imaginable sex offence.
I can barely understand a word McDougal is saying
The guy was given access to morgues... He wasn't just a pedo.
Here's one with subtitles you fucking yank.
youtube.com
>ywn hang out with Jimmy and do fucked up shit together
Dude had his own fucken keys
Aye thank ye McGuiness
wtf I just got the strongest deja vu, swear I've seen this whole thread before
>Was Jimmy Savile guilty of [randomly-selected perversion]?
Yes.
I remember my sister writing in to "Jim'll Fix It" when she was about 10, she wanted to meet Michael Jackson. lol, shes probably glad she never got a reply
Jimmy sure fixed it for me. Couldn't sit down for a month.
Yes he was a fucking pedo.
Jhonny Rotten exposed him in an interview and the pistols got censored.
Everyone knew it since the 70's and the fucking BBC dares to say "sorry" 40 years later for all the abuse.
Exactly, every fucking one knew about it and they not only dos nothing but participate to
>Was Jimmy Savile guilty of full-penetration, ass-slamming sex with underage kids?
Probably not, but difficult to know for sure. Certainly he was a weird fucker as that Louis Theroux documentary showed, but whether he actually fucked kids I don't know.
One woman I know is a lawyer and she spent time at the girls institution where some of the first accusations were made at the time Jimmy Savile was meant to be running around it like a kid in a sweetshop, her view is that it's completely made up bollocks as security was tight. It was basically a prison for young female offenders.
Cunt that came up with the story was basically just looking for compensation and attention like most cunts.
As for whether he did anything in the privacy of his own home? Who can ever know?
>>Was Jimmy Savile guilty of full-penetration, ass-slamming sex with underage kids?
>Probably not, but difficult to know for sure.
"The report of the investigations undertaken jointly by the police and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), Giving Victims a Voice, was published on 11 January 2013. It reported allegations covering a period of fifty years, including 214 alleged acts by Savile which, though uncorroborated, have been formally recorded as crimes, some involving children as young as eight. The report states "within the recorded crimes there are 126 indecent acts and 34 rape/penetration offences."
Seems pretty certain rape was involved. This isnt a "wheres theres smoke" thing, there was a bloomin inferno
Whatever became of Benny?
He was pretty well-liked in the States, tho he never appeared on any American television shows
>Giving Victims a Voice
Literally libtard bullshitters.
And he also had a thing for fucking corpses
He was an early victim of political correctness.
We should have listened, but now it's too late.
He died. That's it. He's remembered as a comedy folk-hero.
If it was a small group of people who knew each other I might agree. But the sheer weight of the number of accusations, the number of victims, the testimonies, the rumours, the cover-ups.
It's not just 1 or 2 people saying something that has no evidence, it's literally hundreds of them combined with a person who everyone had an eye on but never said anything because he was too powerful.
>But the sheer weight of the number of accusations, the number of victims, the testimonies, the rumours, the cover-ups.
The majority of whom appeared out of the woodwork when he died leaving a massive estate almost exclusively to charities.
They did this because they wanted the compensation and knew that now he was dead he couldn't defend himself.
Most claims that were investigated, even the most convincing from the cunt I referred to were rejected as having either conflicting historical information (such as allegations about on set abuse when no filming was taking place) or were categorically dismissed.
Basically it was a bunch of gold diggers looking to make money from a dead blokes estate.
We have long known that the same weekend as Jimmy Savile died, BBC producer Meirion Jones, began a journalistic campaign to have Sir Jimmy labelled a paedophile. Neither Meirion Jones nor any of the BBC staff he had available to him as a BBC producer, made any attempt to interview Miss Jones. What makes this journalistic decision even more incomprehensible is that Miss Jones is actually his own father’s sister!
The tale of the abandonment of the Newsnight version of the Savile Revelations is comprehensively detailed by the Pollard Report. What becomes evident is that they had one ex-pupil from Duncroft willing to testify on camera, and this she did for them. What is also evident is that no attempt at testing that story was then undertaken by the BBC team. They did not attempt to interview any former member of staff from the school, only other women (claiming to be former Duncroft pupils) who were found via the same internet forums as the speaking witness. The original memoir the BBC had worked from included the names of several of the Duncroft staff. Were they to be given no voice? At least one of those staff would not have been difficult to trace since she was the aunt of the producer in charge of the journalism.
What sort of journalism was this I wondered. What were the rules of journalism? Get someone to tell you a story and then tell it to the public as truth, when you haven’t even checked a single line with another side of the story, the staff who might have known so much, and been able to join so many dots.
It wasn’t just the BBC. For the next twelve months, Mark Williams-Thomas was apparently manipulating the edges of the story and cultivating possible other “witnesses”. At some point his ex-police background gave rise to the involvement of the Association of Chief Police Officers, who subsequently involved the NSPCC. All of this was some way in advance of the broadcast of Exposure – the other side of Jimmy Savile on October 3rd 2012. Williams-Thomas never made any attempt to contact any members of staff from Duncroft, still less the headmistress, who was the sister of the father of the BBC producer who originally paid Mr. Williams-Thomas £500 for PI work, and involved him in this journalistic travesty.
Not one of these individuals or organisations had made any attempt to contact any of the staff from Duncroft.
Some weeks prior to the broadcast, the BBC was given full details of the content of the anticipated itv broadcast. Nobody contacted any of the Duncroft staff, even though the ex-headmistress was the sister of the father of one of the BBC producers who had originated this story in the first place. One of the chief witnesses in the Exposure programme was also known to be the daughter of an ex-BBC producer, as was also mentioned in the Pollard Report.
The Savile Revelations would be filling the pages of British newspapers for some weeks prior to October 3rd, making this programme possibly the most “trailed” in the history of British TV. Only one single newspaper made any attempt to test the Duncroft tales against the testimony of the Duncroft staff and that was The Sun. Moor of that in a moment. No other radio or television news media made any attempt to gain the testimony of any of the staff who had taught and tutored and counselled the Duncroft pupils. The allegations were never tested in any way at all before being published and broadcast.
Full rape.
Corpse rape.
Full on depraved sexual predator.
As I pointed out at the beginning of this piece, it was a month after the broadcast of Exposure that the Daily Mail attempted to speak to the other side. Only The Sun had spoken to anyone before that but that was ten days after Exposure had been broadcast. It passed virtually unseen. The interview was an exclusive to Tom Morgan and appended to an article about the gravestone of Jimmy Savile being smashed up and dumped in an industrial skip.
Here is the pertinent content of his interview with a member of staff – the actual member of staff named by the original story-teller as being present, when Duncroft girls were allegedly abused by Jimmy Savile, Gary Glitter and Freddie Starr. Listen to what she says. Why was her voice so little heard and so entirely ignored?
… she said claims of widespread abuse by Savile were “floods of fancy”. She insisted: “These girls were always on about dirty old men but they never said anything about Jimmy Savile.” She added: “Approved schools were like junior prisons. All the girls were locked in, they were very carefully monitored. “They were never left on their own. There’s no way Jimmy Savile abused them in that building.”
The Sun revealed the first picture of Savile at the girls’ school in Staines, Surrey — cuddling youngsters on a sofa while holding a cigar… said: “He didn’t do any work at the school. He just popped in and visited.” And she added: “I don’t feel guilty because I think I did my job properly and I don’t think anything did happen in the school. Certainly not on my watch.”
Miss Jones corroborated her, but their corroboration was never known, because NOBODY asked them before all the allegations had been made public. This was what Miss Jones said,
(cont)
Anyway go die in a fire.
I used to like the "Jim'll fix it" tv show
‘I was the one who went to the BBC studios to make sure it was a safe environment for the girls to be in. Jimmy Savile never took them there, he would just invite them on the spot and the girls would be so excited and ask me and the staff whether they could go. 'Because we had a minibus we would allow a small selection of the girls to go because they were accompanied by a teacher. ‘It was limited time away from the school. They went at a certain time and they came back at a certain time, there was no hanging around.’
Looking back at her time at Duncroft, Miss Jones remains proud. ‘We saved many girls from themselves, we gave them a start in life that they would have never had without us and for that I am proud, but this Jimmy Savile affair has left a stain on the place which is eternally unfair for the hundreds of girls who came to us and went on to get on with the rest of their lives.
TL/DR - Even the most credible reports have been proven to be complete bullshit.
>Anyway was Jimmy a full-on rapist?
No. Nice man. Helped children.
What the BBC and everyone else manages to ignore is that he was BFFs with Prince Charles. Does that not make you wonder if Chuck didn't fuck some kids along with Jimmy?
It seems obvious that he did.
Don't forget corpses in the morgue
benny hill was lifelong closeted gay man, not a pedo (as far as we know)
Jimmy, by all accounts, was a complete and utter monster. raped kids of all ages and gender and in various states of living and dead and mentally retarded.
he was the sexual predator definition of "any hole is a goal"
he was friends with Piers Morgan too.
>no he didnt
>actually yeah he probably did but he was friends with Charles so Charles probably did too and that makes it ok
lol brits
Rapists have friends too, they're kinda wierd like that