Jimmy Saville

For some reason, recent reading has led me to the story of Jimmy Saville.

It now seems to be generally accepted that he was a sex monster, but some doubt has been sowed in my mind by reading off the beaten path.

It is interesting that the modern mind seems to be taken in by the thought that sheer volume of allegations compensates for lack of evidence. A bit like if you add enough zeros you'll eventually get a number.

The idea is "all those people independently saying the same thing can't be making it up". Which is probably the opposite of the truth. If all those people had already read or seen reports of what 'that horrible man' had done, any making up most likely would be similar.

Except that it seems they aren't all saying the same thing: he seems to be variously accused of abusing young boys, young girls, teenagers, women, people in wheelchairs, pensioners, and even dead bodies. In public, in private, in hospitals, in cars, in dressing rooms. (I won't enumerate the different kinds of sex acts, you can go and Google those for yourselves)

So there is clearly a pattern there (irony).

This of course still leaves a nagging doubt: how come so many people would spontaneously come forward with these accusations? They can't just be in it for the kicks.

Well they could be, but the thing is, apparently they didn't come forward spontaneously, the police went looking for them. And this is not new:

Detective Superintendent John Robbins, of the Merseyside police, has described this new kind of investigation as ‘the reverse of normal police methods’. Instead of starting from a crime and setting out to find the criminal, the trawling procedure starts with the suspect (or an allegation) and then attempts to find the crime. Police officers trace and interview former residents of care homes and, during these interviews, more evidence against the original suspect, or against other care workers, almost unfailingly emerges. 

Note also that these people are probably aware (if the police don't directly inform them), that there is money to be made from this.

Generally I can spot 'conspiracy theorists' websites from a mile away. Black backgrounds, wildly changing fonts, miles of text mostly repeating itself, deviations from the main subject into half-associated weird affirmations about an unspecified 'them'. This blog definitely doesn't fit the pattern. If you've got the time, read this four-part series, then sit back and try to work out what you really believe.

Susan's story - Part 1
Susan's story - Part 2
Susan's story - Part 3
Susan's story - Part 4

In life (as much as I can judge by TV appearances) he clearly had an eccentric persona. But I suspect that the 'I always knew he was a baddun' is retrospective re-interpretation. So, it may well be that he was up to no good, but accepting unsubstantiated accusations just because "doubting sex-abuse victims just adds to their trauma" is not good justice.

And then they came for Cliff Richards!