Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    Form of peer pressure??? I'm sure I wouldn't be happy to find out someone in my family was a paedophile but if they were I wouldn't just cave in to taking down any past memorials. And I doubt that they didn't receive any public call for it to be removed.
    So where was this peer pressure then? Who publicly called for the removal of his gravestone or any other memorial? I'm sure your doubting the existence for a public call for his gravestone to be removed definitely means that public opinion dictated that it be removed...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lanky2610)
    I don't really see the point in this...

    He's already dead! You can't dig him up and put him on trial. Anyway why didn't this mainly come up while he was still alive? There would have been a better chance of prosecution.
    No you can't dig him up and put him on trial. But through the investigation we can find out why this has been kept so quiet for so long, and find those who have been involved in any misdoing if it has happened and make them accountable for covering up any abuse. If there are so many rumours that have been bounced about then others must have known about what was going on. As to why nothing was done while he was alive, perhaps people didn't think any accusation would stick because of his reputation? Perhaps it's all made up. We don't know that, but with the amount of allegations being made it would be wrong not to investigate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    Form of peer pressure??? I'm sure I wouldn't be happy to find out someone in my family was a paedophile but if they were I wouldn't just cave in to taking down any past memorials. And I doubt that they didn't receive any public call for it to be removed.
    Just to clarify.

    Saville wasn't a paedophile.

    He was attracted to/went after teen girls (ie 13 to 16).

    Paedophiles are attracted to children (ie pre-pubescent, ages 11 and below)
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Considering how strongly people can feel about these issues it was probably a good shout by the family to remove the headstone, at least for the time being until people have forgotten about it.

    Better an anonymous unmarked grave that only the family know the location of, than a marked one which is open to abuse and vandalism.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    Because he has not got the opportunity to defend it. This campaign against him is simply left wing opportunism. It is wrong on every level.
    This has absolutely nothing to do with left wing and right wing. Stop trying to turn everything into a political rant, you sound like a fool.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    And so should the 'Sir' in his name be removed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I felt a bit uncomfortable about the news - what replaces the headstone? Additionally, I know of people who have committed crimes who remain with a headstone, elaborate or not. Completely removing it and sending it to landfill seems... a bit off, for me. It's like spitting on Saville's legacy even before his innocence is proven, and he may yet be innocent, for all we know. It's like action before the proof. I'm not someone to act before proof.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxm)
    And so should the 'Sir' in his name be removed.
    There is no Sir in his name. He's dead. Why don't we actually go for living people who we know should have their knighthood removed, such as Goodwin and Archer?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lanky2610)
    You can't dig him up and put him on trial.
    I don't think the headstone was removed for fear of his being exhumed and arraigned.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I actually respect his family for removing the tombstone, they have done the right thing for the sake of the other people buried there and their families.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JGHunter)
    There is no Sir in his name. He's dead. Why don't we actually go for living people who we know should have their knighthood removed, such as Goodwin and Archer?
    I never knew titles were no longer active when someone has died. Fair play.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxm)
    I never knew titles were no longer active when someone has died. Fair play.
    That's quite okay. I only found out recently.

    (Original post by lmosco)
    Im not assuming anything, you just said that you think Saville is a legend for raping all those girls and you wish you could have joined in. If you didn't want to enter a discussion on the subject you shoudnt have written anything, ass.
    LOLWUT.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cambio wechsel)
    I don't think the headstone was removed for fear of his being exhumed and arraigned.
    :rofl3:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    In response to recent allegations coming to light, Jimmy Saviles headstone has now been removed.

    Regardless of what he has done in life, I believe everyone deserves dignity in death. I feel uneasy knowing after I have passed, that my reputation could be brought into disrepute, without the chance to defend it.

    I also think that its wrong for any crimes that he may have committed should not be investigated. Because he has not got the opportunity to defend it. This campaign against him is simply left wing opportunism. It is wrong on every level. Also don't forget the lifetime of good work that he has done, which as well all know is a matter of fact.




    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-8204795.html
    not everyone deserves dignity because they are dead.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rlw31)
    Yeah, but the guy that I quoted said that he doesn't think 'public opinion should get a say in who's gravestones get kept and who's don't.' and it hasn't, no one in the public eye nor people in general had called for his gravestone to be removed. His family saw that he's not well liked by the public anymore and decided to remove his headstone, there was never any public say in what happens to his gravestone.
    "I didn't make him sign the contract, I just said I'd punch him if he didn't."
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clare~Bear)

    How is it left wing opportunism?
    because the guy you quoted is right wing and generally tends to blame everything on the left wing on numerous different threads.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lanky2610)
    I don't really see the point in this...

    He's already dead! You can't dig him up and put him on trial. Anyway why didn't this mainly come up while he was still alive? There would have been a better chance of prosecution.
    Actually, when he was alive he had so much influence that had these grips gone to the police, they would have been ignored.
    (Original post by HotfireLegend)
    I felt a bit uncomfortable about the news - what replaces the headstone? Additionally, I know of people who have committed crimes who remain with a headstone, elaborate or not. Completely removing it and sending it to landfill seems... a bit off, for me. It's like spitting on Saville's legacy even before his innocence is proven, and he may yet be innocent, for all we know. It's like action before the proof. I'm not someone to act before proof.
    I think it's more to avoid vandalism than accuse him of anything.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I do hope these harlotts areproud of themselves, waiting 50 years since the alleged offences took place for the man to die then pissing all over his name... bravo ladies bravo.
    And the fact this is actually being investigated by the police, really? Dont they have better things to be doing like catching criminals who arent dead? but hey what do i know...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sheldor)

    I think it's more to avoid vandalism than accuse him of anything.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It's going to landfill rather than being kept and replaced if he is found innocent, that's my issue with it. It just seems a waste.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I apologise for my last post at 20 - I was still feeling tired and crabby from sleeping with a cold!

    I do agree that these allegations should be investigated to find if there's any truth in them. I doubt that any case would be brought to court, unless someone was actively helping him to cover it up. But these people could have come out earlier to the police while he was still alive - I doubt that Jimmy Savile's influence was as extensive in the police to prevent any prosecutions being brought against him.

    But what would happen if there was insufficient evidence to suggest that Savile was sexually abusive? We would have got hyped up and destroyed everything associated with him for nothing.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 12, 2012
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.