Jump to content

Jimmy Savile


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 147
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I always thought he was kinda weird. Oh dear me...     Child abuser??

I think it would be naive to suppose that people on the groovy pop scene of the '60s and '70s were resisting the temptations of any and all female groupies under 16.   Savile is just very creepy, so

Yes indeed, the lovable comic who crawled to fame on the coat-tails of The Beatles.

 

I am reminded of Julian Clary's dictum that "Everyone in show business is gay, except Judith Chalmers." It looks like he should have said "Everyone in show business is molesting minors, except Judith Chalmers."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

You see, I don't know yet what to call the thread, so I'll park it here for now: another stunning scandal about to break in the UK, a "secret love affair" of such implications that the Prime Minister is having "emergency talks."

 

Speculation centers around figures in the Murdoch phone scandal. Hopefully we'll know by morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's Cameron himself. Word on the street is that a "super injunction" has been obtained, in which case the press are not even allowed to report that there's an injunction.

 

Someone might blurt it on Twitter, but if there is a super injunction in place, the court will be furious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On what basis can an injunction be granted? I assume they don't hand them out because some information embarrassing to the government is about to be released. Is there criminal or civil litigation in the works?

Link to post
Share on other sites

oof Lex - UK privacy laws are sort of crazy. There may or may not be litigation - we can't know because the terms of a super-injunction prohibit even the discussion of the injunction.

 

Sort of like Fight Club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt if it's about privacy laws as such. It's possible to get an injunction against publication of a story you claim to be defamatory, so presumably one or both of the parties are denying it. In other words, there does have to be some sort of case going on (my understanding, anyway). The super injunction is intended to prevent the media even revealing that parties have taken out an injunction.

 

One way around this is for an MP to spill the beans on the floor of the House of Commons, where they have absolute protection through Parliamentary privilege. That's what happened in the Ryan Giggs case, although Twitter was alive with rumors too. I haven't yet seen solid, consistent rumors in this case.

 

The system is very unpopular in the UK, as legal aid isn't available in the conduct of libel or slander cases, meaning that bringing such suits--and seeking injunctions--is a game for the rich and famous.

Link to post
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...