Interview or Interrogation. Is TV overstepping its remit.

[ahinton]

Is Savile Row:

a) A terrace of houses in Spain?

b) A 12-tone series in an unknown piece by Roberto Gerhard?

c) An argument as to why the BBC did not to hold an enquiry into possible paedophile activity under its aegis in the 1970s?

or

d) A street in London's West End well known for its tailors' shops?

Answers should be sent to eighthobstruction, Full Member

Well, it certainly isn't b), because Gerhard was a Catalan. Perhaps I should ask a friend...

[amateur51]

What the hell's going on?!

Lord Black of Crossharbour by the sound of it

[ahinton]

I don't want to obstruct free speech or shut anyone down, but if you use the Jimmy Savile affair as a source of humour, try to bear in mind the individual distress and damage he has caused to so many YOUNG people who had no chance of fighting back or being believed. Because of the pain, the invasion, the isolation, the lack of acknowledgement or redress, most will have been affected for their whole lives...

Totally agreed, Jayne, but even so I do not think that those who have occasionally resorted to this feel any better about the affair or consider it to be any less grave than does anyone else.

[Dave2002]

There seems to be a lot of evidence, but surely technically JS is (was?) innocent until proved guilty, and the victims, presumed real, should surely still be alleged victims. I find it odd how there was a fairly rapid switch from doubt to certainty in this case. I'm not saying JS was/is innocent, but it's a curious situation legally - or is it more common than we realise for dead people to be assumed responsible for crimes, and how do these things normally resolve?

[french frank]

the victims, presumed real, should surely still be alleged victims ... I'm not saying JS was/is innocent, but it's a curious situation legally - or is it more common than we realise for dead people to be assumed responsible for crimes, and how do these things normally resolve?

Caliban will correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the dead can't be libelled so reports with careful terms like 'allegedly' &c, designed to avoid being sued, aren't necessary.

But I agree - there now appears to be 'no doubt'.

[Dave2002]

Caliban will correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the dead can't be libelled so reports with careful terms like 'allegedly' &c, designed to avoid being sued, aren't necessary.

But I agree - there now appears to be 'no doubt'.

OK, but there's now an opportunity to ascribe lots of offences to one dead individual. Surely there must be proper procedures for resolving cases, or situations which might arise. There could be some rather unsavoury actions by some arising out of this.

[Nick Armstrong]

Caliban will correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the dead can't be libelled so reports with careful terms like 'allegedly' &c, designed to avoid being sued, aren't necessary.

But I agree - there now appears to be 'no doubt'.

No need for correction, french frank!

But I think it's still worth adding the 'allegedly' - first, because it's accurate (nothing is yet proved, however likely it seems that it will be)... and second, because certain living people may yet be drawn into the story (to add to one or two who already have been) as having allegedly cooperated or colluded... or participated.

No harm with being cautious as well as accurate.

[french frank]

OK, but there's now an opportunity to ascribe lots of offences to one dead individual. Surely there must be proper procedures for resolving cases, or situations which might arise. There could be some rather unsavoury actions by some arising out of this.

It may be that this only arises where well-known people are involved. And with a snowballing effect when more and more evidence becomes public. Most people who were afraid to speak out during the life of offenders won't bother when they (the offenders!) are dead.

It's not just a question of libel/slander (I was thinking about this while getting my supper ): 'allegedly' can be used (in some circumstances injudiciously) when it's a matter of contempt of court or the jeopardising of a prosecution. When the 'accused' is dead, that is no longer a consideration.

But you're right - claims have to be investigated, especially now the question of claims for damages against institutions has been introduced.

[french frank]

No need for correction, french frank!

You got in just before me! I've now added the bit about jeopardising a prosecution: you can't say someone 'is guilty' before they've been tried.

[I am merely NCTJ educated in these matters, whereas you ... ]

[Nick Armstrong]

You got in just before me! I've now added the bit about jeopardising a prosecution: you can't say someone 'is guilty' before they've been tried.

[I am merely NCTJ educated in these matters, whereas you ... ]

True - and no one's going to try Mr Savile unless Beelzebub has him on a particularly hot spit... But they remain allegations here on middle Earth - and it may not be all about JS...

[Dave2002]

There could be some rather unsavoury actions by some arising out of this.

I don't want to spell out more at this stage but with seemingly so many people involved one way or another the opportinities for improper actions must surely have increased considerably. Actions could be present as well as relating to previous behaviour. There needs to be some way of at least trying to tidy this mess up without causing more harm.