Jump to content

Should Jimmy Savile's knighthood be removed?


tara_dad

Should Jimmy Savile's knighthood be removed?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Jimmy Savile's knighthood be removed?

  2. 2. should we have a public inquiry into all not just savile



Recommended Posts

It's the point of your post's that's questionable not the event. :roll:

 

 

wolfie don’t be Paranoid when I say people say it’s not aimed at you or any one on here not everything avowals a round you mate :roll::roll:

 

I think you have been very respectful with the topic and with me not like on others topic I thank you for that and your views have been taken on board

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an art lover, if I am looking at a piece of artwork, be it painting or sculpture, my mind is focused on what I am looking at and not on it's creator. The same with music, I listen to the music and do not think about the composer. I appreciate any piece of art that pleases my senses with no regards or thoughts for it's creator. Therefor, I would have to sit on the fence at any suggestion that something should be removed because of something that it's creator had done in their life, whatever it might have been. If we went all the way back in time and considered the lives of every artist of any media we would be bound to find some 'skeleton in the cupboard' of most of them. They were all human with human failings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite right to, but it's not tara that's saying it. It's simply a cut and paste job of editorial comments that if anyone was interested in they would have already have read.

 

if you look in the cut and paste you see my comments to the point i was looking at why put up the fullstory but hay ill put the full link up no problem :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cleo if i can call you cleo ....i have to Agree with you there on sum but money made off someone like this should they be allowed to keep it! I my self don’t know. if we did not or ban we would have to look at all peoples background just like Oscar Wilde to say for one, before any one says he was not a pedo you are right but talking about not having a clean as clean background

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I wouldn't say being gay was dirty. He happened to be a gay man who fell in love with another gay man Arthur Douglas, known as Bosie, and they formed a loving relationship together even though at that time being homosexual was illegal but that is another story. The bad tempered Marquess of Queensberry, John Sholto Douglas, an eccentric and arrogant man and father of Arthur Douglas, was quite friendly with Wilde when Arthur first introduced them to each other but over time Queensberry began to be suspicious about the relationship between his son and Wild and demanded that his son ended the relationship with Wild and have nothing more to do with him but he refused to do so. To say the least, things became acrimonious between father and son and father and Wilde culminating in Wilde sueing Queensberry for libel. Big mistake. Queensberry had the cards stacked up against Wilde with a number of Wildes' previous amores ready to give evidence of their affairs with him. As a result Wilde was arrested and brought to trial on a charge of being homosexual. He was sentenced to two years in Reading Jail. Interesting that Bosie was never put on trial for his part in the relationship. However, disowned by his father, Arthur maintained his relationship with Wilde and they lived together after Wilde's release from prison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's over a year since he died and I remember at the time it being reported that he's left ALL his money to charities (apart from a few £1000 to family/friends).

 

How come the money hasn't already been given to the charities which it mustn't have been or there would be no estate to now freeze for inevitable claims.

 

Personally I don't think a lot of his victims should get £'s compensation either and I'd like to think that they wouldn't ask for it knowing that they are taking money that hospital charities etc etc should be getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If is alleged victims wanted compensation, they should have taken him to court when he was alive, they should not be allowed to claim from his estate.

 

Let it not be forgotten that some girls were brave enough to report the thing called savile. The police may have believed them enough to take it to the Crown Prosecution Service. Some burk there decided not to prosecute for lack of evidence, not just once but several times. So if those girls were not believed by the CPS but obviously believed by the investigating police can you wonder that others at the time feared they would not be believed? Their word against a popular celebrity, rich enough to hire the services of top barristers. Lets not forget also that some thirty/forty years ago sex was not as openly discussed as it is today, so those kids would maybe have been too embarrassed as well as afraid to talk to someone about the abuses. But since his death some victims have felt more able to report the sordid abuse they suffered at the hands of the thing called savile. And learning that there were others who suffered the same abuse others have found the courage to come forward too. I seriously doubt that compensation was the foremost incentive for them coming forward. As for them being after compensation I doubt any award would be made from the estate of the dead thing called savile but rather from the criminal compensation dept. But monies may be drawn from the money it left after it's death to cover exppenses occured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's over a year since he died and I remember at the time it being reported that he's left ALL his money to charities (apart from a few £1000 to family/friends).

 

How come the money hasn't already been given to the charities which it mustn't have been or there would be no estate to now freeze for inevitable claims.

 

Personally I don't think a lot of his victims should get £'s compensation either and I'd like to think that they wouldn't ask for it knowing that they are taking money that hospital charities etc etc should be getting.

 

Possibly because it is taking so long to collate all the assets he left. For instance he had several properties throughout the country (not just two or three) and some in other countries, which need to be sold off. Plus he instructed that his personal property be sold off too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...