He had ‘groomed a nation’ were the well drafted words – deliberately aimed to make headlines – at last week’s release of the report into Jimmy Savile’s alleged reign, as a predatory paedophile.

The findings, prepared jointly by police officers from Operation Yewtree, and the NSPCC, claimed Savile had been sexually abusing vulnerable teenagers and others for a staggering 54 years.

That claim on its own would have been enough to grab the headlines.

What the report failed to supply was any concrete proof; for when you strip away the shock factor and drama, it still appears that the claims made against Savile are, even now, mainly based on the unsubstantiated recollection of individuals, and heresay.

Several complaints were reportedly made against the man during the 54 years but were deemed to be either fanciful, or lacking in either substance or the solid evidence needed to bring the man to face justice.

On the occasions Savile did face questioning, he was not worried by his position, but instead he boasted of friends in high places and a team of lawyers who would not hesitate to sue if such claims became public.

It seems his boasts were not made lightly, for he did indeed appear to have powerful ‘friends’. He was a ‘friend’ of many senior politicians, military personnel, royalty and other establishment figures. Quite how, or why, he established those friendships has not, as yet, been revealed; although there are many theories being published, and easily found, in cyberspace.

What still really surprises me about the Savile story is that the mainstream media have been so reluctant to follow any trail back in time, to gather the facts that would lead to the truth about Savile, or his associates, and his alleged life as a paedophile.

Until that happens, we can only wonder why those so clearly identified online, as being associates of Savile, have not taken legal action against the authors of such defamatory claims.

I feel I should make clear, that I am not attempting to make light of the suffering of any genuine victim at the hands of Savile; but I am wondering:

  • why was someone who made a career as an eccentric DJ and presenter, befriended by such powerful individuals? (he presumably had passed intensive vetting by the security services)
  • why was he allowed such open access to vulnerable people?
  • why has all the recent attention been focused on one man, when it seems highly likely others were involved?

It just seems a little too convenient to place all the blame on someone who is dead and who cannot answer back.

Is it possible Savile wasn’t ‘hiding in plain sight’ as the authors of the report suggest but was, instead, protected and used by others as the ‘shepherd’ who procured the lambs for the slaughter?

 

Picture courtesy of Belfast Telegraph