Jump to content

Talk:Jimmy Savile

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeJimmy Savile was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 31, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 29, 2019, October 29, 2023, and October 29, 2024.

Semi-protected edit request on 8 August 2024

[edit]

Why on earth is his presenting roles listed before the fact he’s a convicted sex offender. 82.47.169.139 (talk) 14:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He isn't a convicted sex offender, the most interesting thing about Savile is that he was never arrested or prosecuted during his lifetime.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2024

[edit]

Change Sir Jimmy Saville (OBE) to Jimmy Saville. He had his honours stripped of him.

Change order of introduction and name him as a sexual predator first. Andyhall1986ad (talk) 10:41, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the article currently says this (emphasis added):
"Following the allegations of sexual abuse, British Prime Minister David Cameron suggested in October 2012 that it would be possible for Savile's honours to be rescinded by the Honours Forfeiture Committee. A Cabinet Office spokesman said that there was no procedure to posthumously revoke an OBE or knighthood, as these honours automatically expire when a person dies, but that the committee might consider introducing a process to do so in the light of Savile's case.[1] On 30 September 2021, the Forfeiture Committee published a statement in The London Gazette stating that "the Director for Public Prosecutions has stated that criminal prosecutions should have occurred during his lifetime, based on the evidence" and confirmed that "had James Wilson Vincent Savile been convicted of the crimes of which he is accused, forfeiture proceedings would have commenced."[2]".
Martinevans123 (talk) 11:17, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Could Jimmy Savile lose knighthood over abuse claims?". BBC News. 9 October 2012. Archived from the original on 11 November 2020. Retrieved 8 October 2012.
  2. ^ "Honours and Awards JAMES WILSON VINCENT SAVILE". Retrieved 13 October 2022.

Too bad little has been said about the seriousness of the evidence

[edit]

Without a specific explanation, this whole story looks very suspicious. So it pulls to put a hyperlink to the incident of Salem witches. 84.245.221.32 (talk) 10:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to explain that one to me? Knitsey (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Failure of the C.P.S. to prosecute Savile

[edit]

Question: why is there no mention of the Crown Prosecution Service's failure to prosecute Savile? In light of the evidence available when Savile was still alive, how was it deemed that there was insufficient evidence? Regardless of any embarrassment to anyone involved in the decision not to prosecute Savile, I feel that it is worthy of mention here. ChrisgenX (talk) 09:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section says "The scandal had resulted in inquiries or reviews at the BBC, within the NHS, the Crown Prosecution Service, and the Department of Health." which is supported by this source? The Crown Prosecution Service is also mentioned twice in the main body? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the era before Operation Yewtree it was just too easy for people like Savile and Cyril Smith to lie and bluff their way out of allegations of this sort. Fortunately things have moved on since then.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]