From my earliest memories he was someone who gave me the Heebie-jeebies, even watching him on T.V. Recent revelations have not surprised me, but the number of assaults how, how did it supposedly go on for decades with out him being challenged or charged?

Call me cynical, but can that many people ALL keep such a secret for so long? Or is it that once a few genuine ones appeared, BOTH the attention seekers/money grabbers and other genuine ones thought they'd join the bandwagon? Hard to disprove the not genuine ones, after all.

He always seemed a sleeze-bag to me also BUT I agree with Marianne... why did SO MANY people wait so long. They say its because he was famous but if ONE person had accused the Prime Minister of the time it would have been all over the news.

In many cases its sure to have a wiff of a... 'No win - No fee' situation.

The numbers do not surprise me given the extraordinary access he had to star struck and vulnerable youngsters. 
Nor does it surprise me that so many never spoke out given the times as they were, look how far it got the few that did. Even today a complainant has to get past cynicism it seems :)
I think you might be surprised how many patients have told me over the years of previous abuse when giving their medical history.  Never reported, never acted upon just part of their past. 
I don't think it would be hard to prove any non genuine cases, as Esther Rantzen pointed out after watching the Exposure programme, the woman in the film gave very convincing accounts with remarkable consistancy and I dare say she has considerable experience in these things as will any specialist unit dealing with these complaints.

From listening to the news and the documentaries on it now it seems that concerns were raised years ago but weren't believed. Complaints made to Police but it didn't go any further.. All those people at the BBC and colleagues who knew yet didnt say anything as they didn't feel they would be believed.
Nurses and staff at Stoke Manderville said he was never to be left alone in the hospital, why? Because they also knew what was going on..

To make something like this up you have to be seriously sick in the head, I hope no paper is paying for any story and doubt the 'no win no fee' lawyers would take this on, he is now dead and really it's a criminal matter and they often work on civil claims.  I'm hoping this doesn't give compensation anywhere but belief and closure to his victims!

I was attacked by a supposed friend whilst babysitting when I was fifteen and kept it tousled for a few weeks but then the upset it caused me I told a few people including my parents and got told oh don't be silly it was probably nothing you are not hurt so no harm done. The mental hurt is significantly harder to deal with and if people dismiss it as just an unfortunate incident you probably misunderstood what went on then I am not surprised of the numbers tbh

Let's not forget that now we have a lot more interest and help when it comes to that sort of attack; the culture back then was more along the lines of 'If you were dressed like that then you were asking for it, now stop being silly.'. I only hope the people attacked by him have some kind of closure now, after all this time.

Also a lot of the victims were institutionalised and especially vulnerable in that if they complained about anything they'd be labelled a troublemaker and their lives made even more difficult. Nobody would believe them against such a high-profile person, and they knew it. What would be the point of complaining?

Also,

I would not be surprised if he garnered friends in high places in the various institutions he frequented (BBC, police forces, care homes) who shared his interests, another reason why everything has been kept under wraps for so long.

The lid is about to come off at the BBC.

I feel sorry for his victims and fully understand why they didn't report the abuse. Some probably thought they were the special ones and others that no one would believe it.

I only wish this had come to light in time for him to face the consequences.

Looking at old footage its littered with 'inappropriate behaviour' in both his actions and comments.A truly sleazy character who hid behind his fame.

>I only wish this had come to light in time for him to face the consequences.

Oh so do I!

I thought he was a bit scary even when I was a child - a grown man who wasn't married? What's wrong with him? - but I didn't suspect he was quite as evil as he was. He hid in plain sight and got away with it his whole life.

One of the few times I really hope there is a Hell.

To be honest in the 50s inappropriate behaviour at least in theatrical circles was more or less the norm and most girls knew it and took avoiding action, not talking rape but touching and patting was par for the course. Then during the 60s it started to be pointed out that women were not there to be used and men began to have more respect but then like now there will always be those who try it on.

Think I am trying to say that his behaviour was not that unusual in a powerful man although not all, some were respectful but some were not, most girls meeting with such behaviour would have dealt with it and moved on.

Did meet JS at the opening of  a hospice in MK and I found him very unpleasant and very prone to touching but because of who he was one just kept moving but actually eating with him is not a pleasant memory.

But this was not just targeting of teenage girls, his 'interests' included 9 year old boys, his own niece, brain damaged patients, those with learning difficulties, inmates of Broadmoor, as well those in care. Finally, if certain reports are to be believed, he also took an interest in corpses. Remember also that his brother had form as a rapist.

In my view Savile was probably a sociopath as well as a predatory sexual deviant. There is no hint of any guilt or conscience in any of his behaviour. Goodness, he was even a Papal Knight and had the brass neck to flaunt his honours and glory in them. In my view he also gloried in his power to deceive.

It must be awful for his numerous victims to still have to endure the doubters amongst us. How awful too for Karin Ward who bravely gave her story to Newsnight only to be told that the programme would not be aired after all for lack of evidence. That must have been an awful blow for her and I daresay has compounded the damage done by the abuse.

> Nor does it surprise me that so many never spoke out given the times as they were

Nor me - different times. On two occasions, when I was a child, a man exposed himself to me and a friend/sister (not the same man) - we just giggled and ran away. It never occured to us to tell our mother - we knew it was 'rude' but not something really bad. Never had any affect on me, so I can see why some never bothered reporting it (I'm not condoning this sort of behaviour, just how things were when I was a child in the 60s)

But this was not just targeting of teenage girls,

I know freelanceruk I was trying to explain why so many would not or may not have come forward, what he did was wrong but those who were assaulted may well at the time not have known they could complain or if they did would have been ignored. Such behavior is just about acceptable from those of your age but if the man is old enough to know better then it is defiantly a crime but it was not often reported even when the recipient of the unwanted attention was raped or injured. Remember when I was in my 20s rape of a healthy girl was more or less considered impossible without her consent times have changed but you still hear those who say "she asked for it"

To make something like this up you have to be seriously sick in the head,

You watch suejaw, watch the crazies come out, soon it will be very difficult to know the story tellers from the genuine and unfortunately there are a lot of very sick people in our world. Bet you are glad you don't have to deal with this issue, feel sorry for the police and solicitors being contacted it is going to tail spin.

I also always found him creepy, always said so looks as though many of us are very good judges of character.

IMO yes it needed to come out, it also needed to happen whilst he was alive then these people could take up monetary claims with him!

Things like this, it is always one word against another, sheer number of complaints would have got the man put away, but now, it can never really be proven, it is all hearsay IMO and no-one seems to have witnessed the actual assaults of the ones that have come forward, the few stories where people saw him in bed with young girls those particular girls don't appear to have come forward themselves?

I feel very sorry for these girls/boys but what good is trying to sue the BBC AND NHS it only ends up coming out of our pockets and services, we need to remember that. I felt very sorry for these people before the lawyers and compensation talk, no one stopped anyone going to the police if they were assaulted by him as difficult as that may have been, I know many predators are not reported, people are too scared, but to go after the BBC and NHS it really maddens me, sorry but it does, I kind of hope it will all be just thrown out of court........ if it ever gets that far.

These people have recognition and hopefully some closure and therapy if needed and the man is outed for who and what he is and he will be known for what he was, for me that should be it, the lawyers involved need to crawl back under their stones........ the man is dead!

a man exposed himself to me and a friend/sister (not the same man) - we just giggled and ran away.

Oh gosh Daisy, same thing happened to me and my friend whilst playing outside her house, I was approx 6 (so innocent in those days) a road sweeper called us over to look at a kitten in his trousers, (I knew it wasn't a kitten but wasn't sure what it was ) I told my mum and she and my friends mum chased him with a yard brush down the street, we giggled too but didn't understand why, but no she didn't call the police either, dirty old men were taken care of differently I guess in our very young days.

>soon it will be very difficult to know the story tellers from the genuine

I don't think they is too much danger of that, these matters are generally investigated by specialists in the area.  The press may have difficulties discerning, if they even care to, but the experts will not.

> I feel very sorry for these girls/boys but what good is trying to sue the BBC AND NHS it only ends up coming out of our pockets and services

I would disagree.  I think it is still important to look at the role of people who could and should have intervened or who may even have been complicit as we can always learn lessons from the past even when things have apparantly changed. 
If people, or institutions, are found wanting then the survivors do deserve recompense, in my opinion, even if it does come out of the public purse just as any other victims of crime are.

>I think it is still important to look at the role of people who could and should have intervened or who may even have been complicit as we can always learn lessons from the past even when things have apparantly changed. 

What's the saying "Evil flourishes when the good do nothing"?

> a grown man who wasn't married? What's wrong with him?

er, my uncle is unmarried and in the 26 years I've been alive I've never known him to have a girlfriend - dont think he should be judged as a person on his marital status or personal appearance, neither should Jimmy Saville.

Yes, not everyone can be lying so there must be some truth in it but why did NOBODY report it at the time? Very easy to jump on the bandwagon these days & get your money from a paper interview so no doubt lots of people are just 'tagging on'. Now he isnt here to be punished/defend himself it is all a bit of a waste of time.

people, or institutions, are found wanting then the survivors do deserve recompense, in my opinion, even if it does come out of the public purse just as any other victims of crime are.

The trouble is though the people who were there in the 60's & 70's are not there now, suing institutions like the BBC and NHS for the 'fathers apparent sins' IMO is wrong, everything is different, everything is changed, the world works in a different way now.

It's all too little and too late, if Saville was here he would no doubt refute the claims or say the girls threw themselves at him and he did not know or care to know their ages. Would he still get off? No-one can prove he did those things even if he were still here. It is only due to the fact he is dead and not able to say this himself that others are going comp crazy thinking there is a short cut to getting at money, because, have no doubt this is just turning into a multi million pound law suite, it will no longer be about just the victims.  I don't see how anyone can win this one myself only the tax payer will lose out.

I hope the BBC and the NHS get themselves the best of solicitors to fight claims that can not be proven because when NHS waiting lists get longer, when people die because there is no money to care for the living then people will realise that it wasn't worth giving millions to people who 'may' have been abused by a man who got off scot free. The legal aid payments will be going through the roof too and here we are in a recession. I keep saying it........ but the man is dead.

I have no doubt many others out there also did the same things with their celeb privileges , hopefully after 'Saville gate' they will come forward too and make them accountable whilst still alive.

> er, my uncle is unmarried and in the 26 years I've been alive I've never known him to have a girlfriend

I think that JG was referring to her thoughts as a child/young person :) I'm sure there are lots of women (and men) around who have never married/been in a long-term relationship, but that doesn't make them patently bad people :) :) :) Of course, when I was a child there were lots of women who never married due to the shortage of men caused by two World Wars :( :( My gt.aunt never married, but as she always told us 'It doesn't mean that I haven't enjoyed myself' :) :)

> suing institutions like the BBC and NHS for the 'fathers apparent sins' IMO is wrong, everything is different, everything is changed, the world works in a >different way now

I hope that we don't get any of those hollow apologies :( Although I really feel for victims/families etc - having someone like the PM standing up and apologising for something that happened when he was still a child sounds really wrong to me :( Apologies can only be genuine coming from those who were actually responsible. This does not mean that the recognition of errors shouldn't be made - of course they should so that there is never any repetition.

> or say the girls threw themselves at him and he did not know or care to know their ages.

I don't believe that would be taken as a defense when the girls are not of the age of consent.  It is always the adults responsibility to ensure they are capable and of an age to do so.

> I hope the BBC and the NHS get themselves the best of solicitors to fight claims that can not be proven because when NHS waiting lists get longer

I'm sure they will but, as I say, if they are found wanting these women deserve their compensation much as any other victim of neglect or malpactice is at the hands of institutions even when they are publicly owned.  They are not responsible for any deficit in the funds.

>I keep saying it........ but the man is dead.

The police have commented that they are investigating living people. 

> these women deserve their compensation

But should people always get monetary compensation ?? Of course, people who incur expenses due to a crime should be compensated, but I would never wish to be given money as a sop to a wrong :( Money is not always the way to make things better and sometimes it can cause it's own problems :(

>> a grown man who wasn't married? What's wrong with him?
>er, my uncle is unmarried and in the 26 years I've been alive I've never known him to have a girlfriend

To a child, and in the 1960s, it wasn't the norm. :-) As Daisy said, back then everyone had 'maiden aunts' because of the shortage of men created by the two world ward - single men were unusual. I remember when he was presenting TOTP one week he had tartan hair, another week it was half black, half white. Even by the standards of the 'Swinging Sixties' he was considered offbeat. Whatever we may think, people always take appearance into account. :-)

>Yes, not everyone can be lying so there must be some truth in it but why did NOBODY report it at the time?

From what I've heard and read, some people did but it was hushed up. Of course mere rumour won't be taken seriously by the police, then or now. There needs to be evidence.

> Of course mere rumour won't be taken seriously by the police, then or now. There needs to be evidence.

But, it appears, rumour is all that is needed for the press and most of society to brandish this man a peado, this is what he will go down in history for, even without hard evidence.

> Money is not always the way to make things better

No, it's not but it may have it's uses in helping people come to terms with what has happened to them be it counselling or simply having a break to get away and gather your thoughts. It is going to be very stressful and possibly very changing to their relationships to go through the reporting process.  If we think late appologies are hollow what else can we offer then? :)
Compensation for mental harm does not tend to be huge anyway, nothing like the amounts paid out for lasting physical impairment.

Stooge, this is a follow on, not a reply to you:

Surely a key point here is that instances of child abuse rarely involve evidence in forensic terms. Isn't it nearly always a case of the child's word against the adults? Abusers are generally highly accomplished manipulators who know how to keep things secret to ensure the child stays quiet and how to cover their tracks. Most instances of abuse are not ever witnessed by others.

It is the nature of secrecy that is so awful for the victim and such a burden. Don't forget also that most abusers make themselves highly attractive to children, that is how they manage to get so close to them, and they do so by degrees, building trust as they go.And they choose and target children who are emtionally vulnerable- ripe for the picking. Children often don't tell because the abuser may also use a degree of emotional blackmail to keep them quiet, and many adults would rather not hear inconvenient truths. It's almost a kind of Stockholm syndrome.

It is alleged that Savile's sister knew what he was up to and also knew he had molested his own niece, but not upsetting the status quo and Savile as a ready source of gifts and money, proved more important to her.

If we think late appologies are hollow what else can we offer then?

Difficult isn't it, I certainly do not think the BBC or the NHS should pay them though why are they any guiltier than the rest of us. I always thought him creepy, I've seen him on TV and at marathons being touchy feely, many of us here just on this thread have said he was creepy that is all other people knew and assumed too, all word of mouth and mainly just a feeling, (right I dare say, but that is all it is)

Does that make us all responsible for these children being groped or kissed by him, knowing someone isn't coming across quite right, does not mean that we know for sure he is abusing children. No-one was alone in the room with him when it happened. He no doubt would say nothing happened and it is all lies.

His own sister 'allegedly' appears to have known he groped the niece, should those people sue her then as she could have stopped it, surely? Is she not even more to blame for not stopping him? Why pursue his old employers and the NHS who put their trust in him.

There are lots of people we may work with who we like to avoid because we don't like their characters but unless we actually see something it is never anything more than hearsay.

Even though I believe he was an abuser, it really is only hearsay, he is not here to refute it or admit it. Hence why compensation for me is ridiculous to even go for.

People without real proof just can't even apologise to the now adults they didn't do it and they weren't in the rooms, corridors etc when it happened, the whole thing has just got silly for me now.

> Why pursue his old employers and the NHS who put their trust in him.

If that was all it was then I doubt they will be found negligent but if they were aware and covered things then they do have a responsibility.  Late in the day admittedly but it may all help ensure that nothing like this can happen again.
Personally I would like the whole entertainment industry tightened up.  I have long felt the whole fan, groupie thing should not be taken for granted and find it quite nauseating to hear young, would be pop stars admitting they are looking forward to the female attention.  Do they not see that if women were not giving them the time of day before they were able to offer money fame and influence it is not a level relationship?  Now, some if not most of these woman will be equalling exploitative but they are many young and needy fans that are not and are genuinely kidding themselves that they are capable of having a meaniful relationship with these celebrities.
I notice one the X factor contestant in the tabloids lugging several, less than sober looking, young woman back to his hotel the moment he had the extra pulling power to do so!
Perhaps all record companies should give training courses on personal development and social responsibilities as part of their signing up and built it into their contracts that no exploitation must be found to have occured.  Tricky to uphold I am sure but it would help make the whole exploitation thing more socially unacceptable.

I would think it likely that there are individuals in all of the institutions who failed massively in their duty of care- they would have been in loco parentis where minors are concerned and that is serious. I would also think that heads, indeed many heads, will roll once investigations have taken place.

Nonetheless, I agree with you that going after the institutions for money makes little sense. Individuals must carry the can and I do think many of them will be smoked out and will pay with their careers and reputations. As for the institutions, if it is found that there is massive corruption or a failure in systems that somehow supported a network of abuse then that would mean a further overhaul in those organisations, in personnel, in structures and scrutiny. I imagine the reports of victims wanting compensation is partly at the behest of the lawyers and partly knee jerk as a way to assuage understandable feelings of rage and disgust, both the from the victims and from society.

>  Do they not see that if women were not giving them the time of day before they were able to offer money fame and influence it is not a level relationship?

Haha..spoken like a true woman.

Men dont think that way, especially young, sexually active men.
I think young pop star boys are not likely to be looking for a stable relationship,

Oh, I understand that Tooolz :)  but I still think they kid themselves that it was just a question of somehow dropping the veil from these girls eyes that revealed what truly scrumptious individuals they were all along.
I'm not talking about stable relationships merely equal ones.
I also think there are many men that have been brought up and have learned to respect and value woman so it should be possible for any of them really :)

Perhaps all record companies should give training courses on personal development and social responsibilities as part of their signing up and built it into their contracts that no exploitation must be found to have occured.

It would be a wonderful thing if record companies/agents did do that, some do act responsibly no doubt but most want to get them out there, milk them and wring as much profit from them as they can, but it has always been that way, even in the polite 40's and 50's young people would swoon at anyone in entertainment.

The human race unfortunately has an inbuilt need to worship and we always do find something to worship and the young will continually throw themselves at those they see fit the criteria, I don't think anything could stop it, as much as we would like. :-)

As an aside just a ponder, don't you think it strange how there has not been one report of anything other than said kissing and groping, I wonder if he was impot*nt? Being such a confident predator (apparently) I find that strange. No reported accidental pregnancies or abortions either, for someone apparently so flippant and carefree about what he was doing I wonder why he settled for the odd grope? 200 people now say he abused them surely a grope would not have always fully satisfied him, not when he was getting away with it?

Not that I want the victims to have had even worse of course he appears to have been an opportunist maybe it was the kick of doing something 'bad' and not getting caught rather than a s*xual thing for him?

There does seem to have been a lot of just groping so it does make you wonder but at least one of the women on the Exposure programme spoke of actual i****course if I recall correctly.

Don't they also seem to turn a blind eye in the football world too?  I think if they looked into things deeper there would be many individuals whose behaviour is unsavory, but they seem to still get away with it......

His niece gives a very graphic account, indicating clear arousal. The 9 year old boy (adult now) indicates something rather more than groping was going on and allegedly that was witnessed by a BBC employee. BBC insiders say he it was known that he also had an interest in underage boys.

> I wonder if he was impot*nt?

I don't think so.  One 14 year old actually used the word rape.  Not assault or inapproriate touching, but rape.