Friday, 26 February 2016

Jimmy's 'London Team'

I've now scoured all 793 pages of dame Janet Smith's BBC report. One, I wanted to find the one voice that no one in the msm seems to want to know. Two, I wanted to see if/how her evidence might differ from that foisted upon us for the last three years ! 
Straight down to business then with 'The London Team', in plain speak, the girls who hung round Jimmy Savile for years, yet still describe themselves as 'victims'. First up 'Val' and 'Angie'
 'Angie's' evidence changed, the dame finds her credible anyway. She cannot be bothered to pursue the inconsistency 
 Go to page 275

 It seems the gals were 'happy' with Savile back in the day. They even had a 'reunion' with him years later, ALL OF THEM. Oh, and 'Angie' went with him for TEN YEARS 
Next up - this load of bilge, yes, this woman believes this. Take a deep breath !
Her conclusion 
I'm actually laughing as I'm typing this ! 
By p318 we get to the Duncroft gals, kinds outside her remit but, they went to his show at the BBC so ... She starts with C30 whom I shall refer to as Fiona for reasons that will become obvious 
Now, what's really interesting about C30 is the fact that the dame DOESN'T BELIEVE HER !
 Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ! The old gal must have read my blogs ! I did send her an email. Moving along, it seems the D gals were actually fighting over JS, what a revelation we have here
She obviously didn't read the blogs exposing Karin Ward's lie about her age. Even the press had to reveal that one when the Starr case came up 
Best of all, is the evidence provided by a staff member ! Well, hurrah for Ms Figgins ! First Ward's version of a trip to Clunk Click 
Not a dressing room then ? 
 Then Ms Figgins's account

The dame finds Figgins an 'impressive witness' but, as she didn't hear anything bad about Savile, she's out !

Finally, for now that is, is that wee 'voice', a woman who was closer to Jimmy than anyone at Duncroft, and has only fond memories ! Indeed, she is the reason Jimmy came to the home in the first place ! Susan gets a mention, blink as you skim and you will miss it ! I had to look very intensely to find her ! I dedicate this blog to a fine lady whom I've been privileged to meet myself. Thank you 
The dame's report cost about £10,000,000 we are told. I could have done it for a lot less ! 



  1. "the gravity of what had gone on really came home to her"

    Presumably that was after she had started Therapy for being old and no longer sexually desired by men.

    These people make me sick.

  2. Either that, Mr. Larkin, or when she realized just how much cash was in store for her . She claims that she was raped by him, but even *if* that is true (it is rare, but some rape-victims do actually bounce back immediately, and forgive and strike up a relationship with their assailant -- viz. Beverly Aadland),

    It is clear that Dame Janet does not approve of Sir Jimmy's predilection for young women at or near the age of consent. She also, it seems to me, underestimates just how much saner people were about these matters in the '70s. I, admittedly, wasn't there, but I read and watch quite a lot from that decade. It might interest her to know that although "casual" sexual relationships between teens might not have been generally accepted, back in the '70s and early-'80s, when most of this is alleged to have happened, almost every historical romance-novel centered around a teenager, and a man in his thirties, and sometimes even early forties, who soon married and lived happily ever after, while she was still a teen (usually at least 17, granted, but 16 was not unheard of, and the youngest heroine from this era of whom I am aware was 14 -- "The Taming", by Aileen Malcolm, Dell Books, 1979). As did around 1/3 of Mills & Boon novels – which, I think that we can all agree, are about as mainstream as books *get*. In some cases, he had been in love with her for years prior to the start of their relationship (on the night prior to her thirteenth birthday, in "Forbidden Fire", Mills & Boon, 1979, by Charlotte Lamb). I'd like to email Dame Janet and point this out (and I'm enough of a nerd that I can provide a list, and how old each character was, and the date of publication -- without even having to look it up, in most cases!) -- do you know how I can get in touch with her?

    There are also a lot of films which treat this subject very matter-of-factly -- "Baby Love" (1968), "Come Home and Meet My Wife!" (1974 -- a 51-year-old godfather, who has not seen his now 17-year-old goddaughter since she was born, meets her, falls in love with her and marries her after a very rapid courtship -- less than a month, I believe), "Moi, Fleur Bleue", that interminable German "Schoolgirl Report" series (which features student/teacher relationships, as well as other May/December type stories, if I recall correctly), etc. Yes, people were not without reservations, but it was *far* more acceptable then -- and *not* just for celebrities. Society had yet to lose its collective marbles about this back in what I'm beginning to nickname "the sane '70s".

    You are correct in thinking that modern-day therapists, alas, have an unfortunate tendency to encourage their patients to blame all of their current problems on a past incident that, according to the discourse the therapist follows, is always traumatic -- and only, of course, by acknowledging the abuse that she doesn't realize was inflicted on her, can the woman stop "blaming" herself (i.e., thinking that she enjoyed the sex, and wasn't bothered by it) and embrace her victimhood!

  3. Amendment: I ought to have said, "thinking that she enjoyed the sex, and wasn't bothered by it at the time -- and still wasn't, until she came to therapy".

  4. Ah, and one more amendment (proofread, you silly goose!) "even *if* that is true ... she clearly bounced back immediately, and continued to have consensual sex with him for some time".

    I also should have written, of the hero in "Forbidden Fire", that he fell in love with her "the night prior to her FOURTEENTH birthday".

    I'll stop now. I'm neurotic, I fear.

    1. You are fine "Miss S" Caitlin, thank you for your comments which I'll consider more later !

    2. Thank you Rabbitaway! I might add that in some of these books, the hero is the heroine's guardian (guardian/ward was an entire subgenre in those days!). Not to mention that in quite a few others, his rival is (wait for it) his son. Yes, that's right, he has a son her age or slightly older (I fully intend to point both points out when I email Dame Janet).

    3. Oh, I must add that I hope that I did not give the impression that the rape (*if* it happened, which I doubt) was acceptable because she immediately forgave him -- I most certainly do *not*! But, obviously (or it really ought to be obvious), it was her prerogative to continue to see him, have sexual relations with him, to neither complain nor press charges, and to still think of him fondly and invite him to parties a decade or more later. Telling her that she *needs* to be traumatized (or, as the "child advocates" -- or, in this case, seeing as how a sixteen-year-old is not a child, "child" advocates might put it, is "in denial" -- they listen to victims all right, or "victims" as the case may be: -- and I quite agree that someone who is raped *is* a victim -- provided, of course, that the victim, or "victim" tells them what they want to hear) is doing her no favors. I do hate it when people

    4. Caitlin, on your general point above, I see DJS says on page 194/5 of her report:

      "3.10...But I am not persuaded that there was a general approbation of the idea of sex (albeit apparently ‘consensual’) between a girl of 14 or 15 and a man of say, 30 let alone 40 or 50.

      "3.11 There are those who would seek to persuade me to the contrary by pointing to an example of a middle-aged celebrity who had been in a sexual relationship with an underage girl. The point being made was there was little real sense of public outrage when the relationship was reported in the press. I think it may be that the public were content to think that such conduct was acceptable for celebrities; they lived in a different world."

      I wonder whether the kind of novels and films you mention support the idea that "such conduct was acceptable for celebrities" without necessarily implying that it was approved of amongst the general population? I wonder, also, whether there had been much greater acceptance of a wide difference in age between partners at an earlier stage which, even as fiction was portraying such relationships, was becoming less acceptable to the general population? I live in a developing country where it is relatively common for young women to marry significantly older men (though not before the age of 20) - it might be considered a 'pragmatic' choice.

    5. As I plod through this report, I now find:

      "3.103 However, I do think that, beginning in the 1960s and continuing over the next two decades, there was a relaxation in our attitude towards such behaviour insofar as it affected other peoples’ teenage girls, if not one’s own. (‘I would not let my daughter do that but...’.) I think the perception was that young girls were determined to run after pop stars and disc jockeys and, if their parents let them do that, there was nothing that ‘we’ could do to stop it. If that ‘running after’ resulted in sexual contact, so be it, even if the girl was still under 16."

      I think you make a very interesting point, Caitlin. And I was certainly not aware of many of the titles you've mentioned! But I suspect that DJS would point out that she has at least considered the point you're making, even if she doesn't necessarily see things quite as you or I might.

    6. There is a lot that I could say in response to your comments, Misa, but I must reiterate that I am trying to be good. *wink*

      Once again, I did not read the entire report, but I believe that I read all of the very cursory investigation that she made into the mores of that time. I gather that this consisted simply of either asking those whom she interviewed about Sir Jimmy what their perspective had been then, or recording what they volunteered. She does not appear to have had a gander at the popular culture of that time (does she even mention that the NCCL was campaigning to have the age of consent lowered to 14 for years?). So I would say that, yes, she is unaware of the points that I raise. If she is aware of them, I have to wonder why she makes no mention of it.

      Furthermore, those books and films are about ordinary folks, and aimed at them. At any rate, that is, the heroine is almost always an ordinary young woman -- whereas the hero is usually rich and successful -- but not generally famous. I don't really follow how mainstream films and literature about regular (as in not famous) people support the idea that such behavior was the province of celebrities...

    7. Caitlin, I think there's a fascinating debate to be had about this, but I'm fear I'm not really equipped to hold up a side! Perhaps I should be grateful for your restraint, but I just wonder whether there's a difference between the fictional romance and the celebrity relationship, as far as the reader/viewer is concerned. I suppose we don't so often read about celebrities marrying 'ordinary' girls (or boys) - its more often the high-profile couple we read about. Does that make the world of celebrity more remote than the world of Mills & Boon?

      Btw did you note that DJS herself was reported to have given up her place at Oxford to marry young? Maybe she was swept off her feet by some Prince Charming;)

    8. I wasn't going to rip into you -- I just meant that I have enough thoughts on this to fill a book! I have amassed a lot of information on this subject -- I have been a great believer in youth rights from a very young age, and this is one of the key "trump cards" used to deny young people their civil rights and enforce age apartheid. ("Ah, but if we allow that it might lead to... intergenerational sex: the *ultimate* evil!) The dominant discourse on this subject which has prevailed for the last 35 years or so (denying as it does any agency whatsoever to young people) irritated me beyond belief at age twelve, and irritates me still today. I could explain a lot more, but once again, I doubt that you have time to read the amount of theorizing that I have in me about this.

      I'm still afraid that I don't follow... You think that the acceptance of intergenerational relationships in romance-novels is comparable to the acceptance of celebrities having underage groupies, and marrying much younger women? Why?

      Well, whatever your reasoning, allow me to elaborate mine. A large part of romantic fiction is wish-fulfillment fantasy. The heroine is presumably an ordinary young woman, because young women like to fantasize about being swept off of their feet by a rich, successful and handsome older man (and older women like to fantasize about being an attractive young woman who is swept off of her feet by a rich, successful and handsome older man). People objected to a lot of things in romance-novels of this era, make no mistake -- but I have yet to read even *one* contemporary objection to the age-differences! Mills & Boon went to a lot of trouble to find out the preferences of their readers -- with surveys, focus-groups, etc. A lot of what happens in these books is wish-fulfillment (a lot of it is just to add to the excitement -- or the stuff of fantasy only, that one would never wish to make a reality): but I think that the hero *always* being rich, successful and older (usually in his 30s, and sometimes early-40s), and the heroine being a beautiful, shapely teen about 1/3 of the time (and sometimes even his ward!) is probably a scenario that a lot of women would have liked to realize in real life. As social attitudes changed, so did the age-differences in these stories, as well as the ages of the heroines (so I gather -- I don't read the modern ones, and never have).

      How young was she when she married? And when would this have been? (Let's not forget that in 1966, 50 years ago, the average first-time American bride was 20.3, and the average first-time bridegroom was 22.8*. So, if she was married around then, she wouldn't have been all that "young" really...)

      *According to the United States Census Bureau (which is about as accurate as statistics get -- seeing as how they average out the ages of *everyone* who was married for the first time that year -- this being made possible due to the fact that everyone who marries must have a license which records, among other things, their age (provided by their birth-certificates).

  5. Dame Janet Smith appears to me to be a split personality, maybe a little capricous. I cannot think of the right word as yet. Because she has two difference rules. Later on in the report when she investigates the question did the BBC know about Jimmy Savile? She challenges the newspaper stories and does a very thorough job indeed including discovering one witness had served serveral terms in prison for fraud. So she establishes quite clearly the media stories about the BBC mnagement that they knew nothing was nabsolutely correct? People like yourself Rabbitaway who can still use your little grey cells know the management knew nothing because there was nothing to know.
    But for some reason most of her 72 witnesses are reliable even when she finds they are not reliable. Just throws in one or two she challenges. Like the real easy ones like De'ath to make it look like she is doing her job seriously.
    So it is very sad indeed but better to read and laugh.
    But the aggendda is clear. Clear the BBC of knowing anything and hang Jimmy Savile out to dry plus Tony Blackburn.
    Dame Janet Smith is a former appeal judge I gather and is very clever but personally I detest people who are so political and dishonest. To me it is corruption for the person personally and for those they have dealings with. So one can see why the justice system is so corrupt.
    I agree with the commentator here she did not agree with Jimmy Savile's casual sex life style. I presonally have no problem with anyone not agreeing with and not liking the chosen lifestyle. But that is still no reason to judge and convict just because he is normal. Although Jimmy Savile did obfuscate the truth he did also say things plainly. The real evidence that is clear the age of 20 Jimmy gives does seem to be evidence that fits the known facts. The known facts the four girlfriends in the authorised biography there is information that can be checked and has not been challenged. Did he ever slept with a under aged younger person. No idea. There was court case about some ex dragon programme personality. Sorry I do not follow TV but the gist was he arranged a sexual encounter and ended up having sex with I think possibly two underage girls and for some reason the jury did not convict him and accepted his argument that the web site he used was not expected to attract underage girls. But because of Jimmy Savile's cautious character in actions I am sure he did attempt to make sure he was not taking advantage of anyone. I have come to really like him and his comments. In spite of his off hand humour Jimmy Savile seems to be the last sane person almost in the United Kingdom.

    1. Good points as always John ! I daresay Tony Blackburn did not expect to be a casualty of this madness, when he attacked Savile in 2012. As for the dame, she's just going through the Savil motions, but good to see a bit more details on some of the yarns. We now know that, when Ward etc went to CC, the guests were in a 'hospitality' area, NOT a dressing room. I shall come back to this very important revelation later !

    2. Well, as for whether or not he ever slept with an underage or younger person, I really have no idea. It seems doubtful that most of his groupies bothered to bring their birth-certificates along, and many of them probably lied about their age. I have not read the entire report, but I did zero in on the two women who contacted Louis Theroux in order to correct Sir Jimmy's assertion that he had never had a girlfriend -- they claimed to have both fitted that description decades earlier. One of them mentioned (I gather that this was either in passing, or perhaps more likely after Mr. Theroux had asked her how old she had been, when he saw how old she looked when he met her, and was wondering how young she might have been then, when she informed him of the year in which their romance had begun) that she had been 15 at the beginning of their relationship -- and had remained friends with him for decades, I might add. Considering that they were anxious that Sir Jimmy never learn of what they had said, and said that they had no regrets, I think it unlikely that they were simply after attention (seeing as how they probably did not wish for Mr. Theroux to publish their names or anything, or tell the world that one of them had been under the age of consent). Thus, I am inclined to believe that this was true, and that Sir Jimmy had a 15-year-old girlfriend in his early 40s (Mr. Theroux said that he actually met up with the woman in question in 2001, and she informed him that their love affair had begun 30 years previously).

    3. On the contrary, I think it's clear now that Tony has been devastated by it all from the off, and has been like a rabbit caught in the headlights, which is why I have nothing but sympathy for him despite his "horrendous man" lapses. His whole revived career is based upon him being a premier "heritage DJ", his show on Radio 2 is a direct descendant of The Old Record Club /Double/Triple Top Ten Show that Jimmy started on Radio 1 way back in 1973, and in it's present form very much a tribute to Alan Freeman, who is also being dragged into things. His own insecurities caused him to slowly sabotage his Radio 1 career (from Noel Edmonds replacing him on the Breakfast Show in June 1973 to his eventual departure in September 1984), but he managed to fulfill his dream of being back n National BBC Radio in 2010. Then *all this* - which, despite his top drawer PR & agency work (which we're seeing the best of now), has hung like a black cloud over him more than most of the others due to his timeline on Top Of The Pops.
      He clearly has an ego, but I think he's also overly sensitive, simple and well-meaning, and has no doubt been anxious for some time as he knows just how groundless it is, and how they've done their best to destroy Dave Lee Travis.

  6. Interesting comments regarding the social attitudes of the time. I find it very confusing that TV will show a film that glorifies those attitudes.....'The Boat that rocked' and still continues to show it. Yet in the next breath their commentators condemn as appalling those very attitudes.

    1. The dame should have watched all those interviews Bill Wyman did with his much younger (met her when she was 13) bride ! As I recall everyone was sooooo pleased for them !

    2. Actually, Mr. Damian, I think that this, even if it *is* hypocritical, is a good thing. At least alternative narratives or discourses are not *completely* kept from the public eye (even if they are for the most part) -- which might encourage *some* folks to think for themselves a little bit more.

      I have not seen (nor heard of, until you mentioned) this film, but I do know how old some of the groupies who became the long-term girlfriends of some rock stars were (and even their wives in some instances -- Tiny Tim and Miss Vicky come to mind -- although I don't think that she was ever his groupie -- I think that they had a normal sort of courtship -- they were married when he was 32 and she was 17, on "The Tonight Show", as part of a huge event, and no one seems to have had any objections, I might add!) -- 13 or 14, several of them.

  7. I have to say, Rabbit, the Chapter 4 profile of Jim is a pretty respectable piece of work. And the spirited defence offered by the family member, A5, was seriously uplifting.

    1. Misa, I think parts of the report are highly illuminating and V useful in terms of my research. The opportunity given to Jimmy's family was nice I guess and well done to A5 for bothering to speak to this dame in the first place !