Jimmy Saville

Lord Soley

I never met Jimmy Savile and since the news of his gross abuse emerged I have often wondered what I would have made of him if we had met. Why? Because he always made me feel slightly suspicious and I would not have trusted him. It may have been my experiences as a probation officer or just a streetwise attitude I acquired growing up with a fair bit of delinquency going on around me.
You have to wonder whether he wasn’t the victim of abuse when he was a child – his behaviour was so gross and extreme that it must be a possibility. If he was, then it demonstrates yet again the enormous damage that abuse does to children and the price that other victims pay.

8 comments for “Jimmy Saville

  1. 27/06/2014 at 3:21 pm

    Lord Soley,

    It seems likely he had some horrific experience the his childhood. But in the cases of people like this (and yes rare as it is this is the instance of a type) it seems to me to ell us a lot about society as a whole and also about this individual in some way intrinsic to themselves whether genetic or not. “The Ring of Gyges’ is an ancient seminal tale which shows that if there were no social cost to themselves most people would do some thing for sex, something for power and something for wealth in their own right. If they had talent for such actions they might even become big players in the world.

    But either the stories about Saville are not mostly true or else there was something about him that had to live at the edges of human sexuality. I believe that an element of moral choice, character and free will is always important and present. But some predisposition gave shape to things. One compares this with the alleged sexual frustration for decades at a time of the young Hitler or for less time of the recent Rodgers serial killer living in Hollywood and Beverly Hills privilege and one can discern how very far from the same people’s inner psycho-sexual workings can be.

    I have put out a few points in a big field of inquiry that would lead to a very long discussion to no point perhaps under some circumstances but to sum up here: I doubt many abused children are really capable of sustaining the lifestyle alleged here even if they became rich and famous. Certainly it is a sort of absolute promiscuity in terms of fleeting contacts with strangers initiated for the contact itself. That is looking at his life regardless of age or legality or convention. I think a good number of people who can be immoral enough have a deep-rooted repugnance for promiscuity even if they live in it from time to time. One wonders if men like Saville can be said to evince any such repugnance at all.

  2. LordBlagger
    27/06/2014 at 7:49 pm

    So how do you go from paedophilia because he was abused as a child to necrophilia?

    Lets be quite clear. He got away with it because those in power let him get away with it.

    Shades of cover ups abound in the establishment.

    However, if you want the police to deal with organised crime on Westminster’s door step, they won’t

    They are too busy opening the doors for MPs and peers.

    • John D
      01/07/2014 at 8:48 am

      The Savile case as put the spotlight on celebrities who are not establishment figures. The Media and Police are focussed on British celebrities and avoid the organised paedophile rings of the British Establishment. Philip Scholfield found this to his cost when he give Cameron a list of people. There is no way that Rupert Murdoch and other Media Moguls will do investigate journalism, they have the facts already and it gives them leverage with the establishment. I have come to the conclusion that if the British establishment activities went public it would bring down the pillars of the Establishment and Murdoch and company would not want that to happen. Revolution or a army coup is not on their agenda. A reading of history indicates we have been here before, the 18th century is the best example of moral decline.

      • maude elwes
        01/07/2014 at 12:11 pm

        Which could have a great deal to do with Rebekah Brooks receiving 17 million dollars for her discomfort in the dock. From Murdoch we were told? That’s a fat pay off. Plus there was some other kind of extra we were told.

        It certainly was a remarkable outcome to a highly researched case. Especially when you consider the role of the other players who face some kind of jail sentence. Talk about of a case where the left hand didn’t know what the right was doing. There is no doubt about it money does talk and very loudly.

        And here is Michael telling us not to be naive.


        And who may be in a position to speak out?


  3. MilesJSD
    28/06/2014 at 12:38 am

    This Savile stuff is silly ‘overkill’ spin-doctoring,
    like hundreds-per-week of other media-sensational-splashes,
    and is a disgustingly wasteful and contemptuous public-stinkscreen.

    By ignoring its greater causative Issues and Contexts it becomes a totally irresponsible distraction,
    both of the Abused and the Non-abused Public in the General Lifeplace
    distracted from our Adult Earth-Citizenship Curriculum;

    and similarly it ‘red-herrings’ Human Development Professional workforces from their ordering of Human Development Training Syllabuses & Work-Prioritisations.

    We are behind the 21st century civisational and lifesupportive-environmental Needs and Longterm-Sustainworthily-Affordable Hows,
    such as Right Education & Lifespan Development,Monitoring, Up-Dating, and Correction
    of the abilities of the Body, the Emotions, the Mind-Functions, the Environment-Supportiveness,
    and of the Spirit and Individually-Personal-Sanctuary needs & Life-responsibilities.

    We are possibly even more behind in Right All-Round Basic Training for the Workplace
    and in its sorely needed External-Lifeplace-Emulable Lifeplace- Leaderships,
    this latter quite distinctly from the Workplace’s internal-to-internal Command-expertises.
    Serious Question then:
    To the Lords of the Blog’s public e-site shouldn’t there now be added,
    and kept up-dated,
    Overarching Greater-Issues Contextual MindMaps ?
    and also
    any underpinning or under-lurking little ‘spanners-in-the-works’, ‘flies-in-the-ointment’ or ‘cockroaches-in-the-soup’ ?

  4. maude elwes
    29/06/2014 at 8:14 am

    Now this is an odd one, LS. The implication being? He wasn’t responsible for his action if Mum or Dad smacked his bum for being a naughty boy?

    Come on. There is two very important matters in all of this. The first being why now he’s dead? Soon there will be a million people who Saville fiddled with in some way. Many believe there is a pot of gold they can get their fingers in and no one alive to contest their claim.

    However, what is far more important is, those who surrounded these horrendous acts of abuse. Those who are still alive. Why did they let this happen? What is it in our culture that would make so many enablers for a madmen of this kind? And why are they not being brought to account? And the funds they have used for compensation, should that arise. How terrifying it would be to find yourself captured by an evil maniac who had the all clear from the supposed protectors of the law and overseers of their welfare. This is what must be addressed. How and why. And the reason for that question is, so much of this abuse we see in the health service and so many other areas of responsibility toward our fellow man, continues at a pace and those with some power to end it, turn a blind eye. And the state encourages them to do just that. A fish always rots from the head.

    So, the only use Saville can be to us now is in order to expose the corruption that allowed him to get away with this bull because of his connections and his weird fame, resulting from those connections. The whole episode reflects on our bizarre Dickensian culture. He was able to cunningly take on some kind of untouchable position so many people were afraid to challenge and it exists today as much, if not more, than then. Just look around you. Subservience to the celebrated. The Kings new clothes syndrome. Obvious seriously unstable prominent people floated and used by politicians to catch the public eye. Just as this Saville man was used in his day.

    Take, top politicians, only recently with the parade of well known people who have obvious mental disorders, heralded as some kind of do gooder. When the private lives of these people are distorted and manic in almost every sphere. That is what you should be looking into. What is at the back of this sycophancy, because in the end, it was this that allowed Saville to pray on his victims.

  5. MilesJSD
    07/07/2014 at 10:11 am

    Some really important and democratic-governance issues-threads can be quite briefly summarised,

    which becomes also a daily, even minute-to-minute, public or people urgency,

    since millions of citizens or ‘potentially-affecteds’ could be scrutinising, or even just browsing 24/7, through the information & reasoning such e-sites as this Lords-of-the-Blog provide.

    Under this “Human and Human-Developmental Abuse” overarching Context,
    it needs to be made clear up-front
    what kinds and extents of abuse are on-the-table,
    both classificationally and for the particular case at hand.

    As a current ‘public-sensational’ instance,
    what might be the comparative and contrasting facts and factors in a ‘case’ of (say) Savile (versus) Harris ?
    On the media face of it Savile appears to have been more ‘evil’ than Harris (?)

    Another causative should also be addressed concerning foundation and preparatory education:

    for instance some TV “Adult” and “Babes” channels can have ‘hidden’ but potentially helpful and educative healthy-movement examples,
    but there has not been nor nor now is sufficient preparatory education, for instance in how to separate the human-developmental from the human-demeaning and the useful from the wasteful;

    and how to instantly switch off the “selling of a solution to which one has no pre-existing problem”.

  6. MilesJSD
    07/07/2014 at 10:32 am

    Wordings are often causative, and need to be rigorously scrutinised as a very serious factor:

    “Mental-health-problem/issue” many of us know to be some kind of ‘professional speak’ for “Mental illness”;
    but what about other professionally-indelible-ised terminologies “Friendly Fire”,
    “Ethnic Cleansing”,

    and “Paedophile” = “Child-Lover” ? when so obviously the abuser is a “Paedo-phobe” = “Child-Hater” ?

Comments are closed.