The scandal of Jimmy Savile's long career of child abuse has cast a long shadow which continues to grow to gigantic proportions. When it first began, and before the full extent of Savile's criminal activity began to be known (it's still not fully known), I was prepared to give the man the benefit of the doubt. After all, I reasoned, he was no longer able to defend himself, why had his accusers waited until now?
Well, I have my answer, and own up to having been a tad naive. I don't want to repeat what everyone knows already - I try never to do that. However, the fact that Savile was investigated on a number of occasions without being charged, coupled with the fact that his perverted activities were well known to, or strongly suspected by, a large number of people for decades, just beggars belief. How did he get away with it? This question has not been fully answered, but I'll make a suggestion later.
One aspect that keeps being plugged is the role of the BBC in Savile's crimes. As we all now know, the Beeb is the focus of much criticism and soul-searching over the axing of the Newsnight investigation and the fact that Savile carried out a number of attacks on minors on BBC premises. Savile is said to have abused both boys and girls in his BBC dressing-room, all of which reminds me of one of the old roue's favourite phrases, which I paraphrase here:
"How's about that then? Guys AND gals!".
But should the Beeb take all the blame? What, one wonders, were Private Eye and the tabloid press doing while Savile was engaging in his sexual "adventures"? To be fair to Private Eye editor, Ian Hislop, when Jimmy S appeared on "Have I Got News For You", both he and Paul Merton baited Savile over his caravan conquests, yet the Eye ran no stories about them. As for the tabloids, they eulogised Savile at the time of his death and burial; their present vilification of the disgraced knight makes for an amazing turnaround. No tabloid newspaper appears to have tapped Saville's phone.
So what went wrong? Well, digressing slightly here, for what it's worth, I think our primary concern should be for the victims of this scandal. They have suffered in silence for so long, and I think that all the money held by Savile's charities should be diverted to their care, and that of other child abuse victims. We need to learn from this case that abuse victims should be listened to with care and sympathy. Having said this, the rules of justice and evidence need to be followed strictly. I have known teachers wrongly accused of abuse by children, and I don't want to see it happen again.
However, Savile was not a teacher. He was a celebrity with an outstanding reputation as a charity worker, practising Christian, confidante of senior politicians and prelates and friend to the stars. Put simply, he had many powerful friends and allies. Now, I suggest that this is not the only reason why Savile evaded justice. Even the most reputable of people can be quickly disgraced. I believe that Jimmy S used his "connections" in various ways. They undoubtedly helped to build up his cover, but he would have been privy to all kinds of confidential information about all sorts of important and not - so - important people. Knowledge (or gossip) of this kind is always useful to operators like Sir Jim, and could be part of the reason why he remained untouched. Blackmail has its uses.
Also, as has been said elsewhere, his status (not to mention his wrestler's physique) would have intimidated his young victims into keeping quiet. He is also thought to have led his victims to believe that unnamed things could happen to them if they spoke out. This could have been no idle threat; Savile began his career by running Yorkshire dance halls, and might well have retained underworld contacts from that time. He certainly bragged about it - even that he had friends in the IRA.
But the net of blame should be cast wider than this. The fact is that we, the public, generally fell for Savile's image - although there are now many who say they weren't fooled for a minute (Oh, yeah). Had Savile been brought to trial during his lifetime, he would have been no easy mark. He would have appointed the most elite criminal defence team that money could buy, and there would have been long queues of people wanting to appear as character witnesses in his favour. I hate to give the old pervert any praise, but he was crafty enough to cultivate friendships not only with the great and the good, but also with thousands of ordinary people for whom he did "Fixits" and cared for in his charity work. Opinion would have been divided - even had he been convicted. And Sir Jim does not seem to have been alone in his sex crimes. Other celebrities appear to have been involved - which means more people with something to hide.
Should anyone walk through Woodlands Cemetery, Scarborough, late at night, when it is deserted, they may well hear the raucous sound of "Er! er! er!"ringing out in the darkness. It will be the sound of Sir James Savile laughing in his grave, and he is laughing for two reasons: one, that he escaped justice despite committing hundreds of despicable crimes against young children. The other reason will be that he is laughing at all the gullible people he fooled in his lifetime.
In other words, dear readers, he's laughing at you and me.
