Owzabout That Then? The Jimmy Savile Revelations & Aftermath

[Frideswide]

In the Savile drama, the porter is close enough to hear him refuse to confess and afterwards remonstrates with him about it.

That is... unusual I would say. Confession is one of the most intimate and sacred things for us. We hope others will respect it of course.

Is it pure drama or has someone made the claim?

 

[escargot]

That is... unusual I would say. Confession is one of the most intimate and sacred things for us. We hope others will respect it of course.

Is it pure drama or has someone made the claim?

The series is based on the book we see Dan researching by interviewing Savile. My assumption is that the porter told Dan about Savile's refusal to confess at the last rites.
Savile went home to die alone afterwards.

The porter is shown as being aware of Savile's offending and being hopping mad about it.

I have the book somewhere so can check up.

 

[Stormkhan]

I believe from what I've read that while the Seal of the Confessional is solid, the last rites are slightly different. The dying person is asked if they wish to confess anything if so, the priest puts their ear to the confessors lips so they can't be overheard. If they don't or can't confess, the priest then anoints the dying person with holy oil, and absolves them anyway.
That's how it went in medieval times ... so I can't imagine it's changed much.

 

[escargot]

Only watched the first two programmes but I'd agree that Coogan does good job and it was a brave decision to take on the role and incredibly brave of those victims to appear. It isn't easy viewing.

Many years ago I watched a programme about the (obviously) fictionalised trial of Custer, where it was assumed he had escaped the Little Big Horn and was being court martialed for the disaster. It relied on transcripts of previous court(s) martial where he evaded questions by muttering answers, blaming subordinates etc. It was very effective in demolishing his, at the time to some, heroic reputation. I know circumstances are very different and a similar programme could not happen for Savile; at least for a long while for all sorts of legal and moral reasons; but in the hands of a knowledgeable and sensitive writer it could be interesting.

The Coogan programme portrays how Savile dismissed or talked or threatened his way out of accusations; it would be interesting to theorise what his reactions would be to concrete accusations put to him by experienced barristers in a court where threats and evasions would be challenged.

Another BBC-enabled abuser, Stuart Hall, whose methods and demeanour resembled Savile's, was successfully prosecuted.
His threats and evasions, along with calling his victims liars and worse, got him nowhere in court. How great it would have been to see Savile in that situation.

 

[hunck]

As regards hard evidence against pedophiles/sexual abusers & presumed innocence, as in the case of Weinstein I don’t think there was any in Epstein’s case - no photos, DNA samples & so forth - just weight of accusations.

Mind you, we never heard any more of the videos reported as being found in a safe in his house. That dropped off the radar pretty quickly.

Fortunately or not, he topped himself or was offed by Mossad before it could come to court.

 

[Carse]

The series is based on the book Dan is seen researching. As this conversation was held in private between Dan and Savile, and we're shown Dan recording everything, I take it as a verbatim account.

I read the book when it came out in 2014 and I certainly also got the impression that most of the dialogue in the scenes with Dan was verbatim from his recordings. On a related note, I was a wee bit surprised that Louis Theroux didn't appear in this. His documentary in 2000 was a real eye opener for a lot of people, I think.

The Coogan programme portrays how Savile dismissed or talked or threatened his way out of accusations; it would be interesting to theorise what his reactions would be to concrete accusations put to him by experienced barristers in a court where threats and evasions would be challenged.

I'd imagine it would be very dramatic and theatrical in the same way as the 2019 trial of Edward Cairney and Avril Jones for the murder of Margaret Fleming. In particular, while being cross examined Cairney hectored and argued aggressively with the prosecuting QC, making fantastical claims about what had happened while denying the authority of the court and legal system; his personality appears not dissimilar to Jimmy Savile. BBC Scotland made a documentry about the case which is well worth a watch in itself.

 

[Stormkhan]

Just watched a documentary - one of those who have behavioural, language and psychological experts on, passing judgement with hindsight - on JS interview with Andrew Neil. What they point out, throughout it, was that when Saville was pressed on his private sex life, he openly resorted to threats. One of his friends recorded a comment about him 'always being a one for the young girls', before hastily adding "Er ... over sixteen, of course!" When the 'friend' went on to describe an encounter in a hotel with a "Norma", Saville shut down immediately. Neil asked him if he remembered 'Norma'. JS went on to say he couldn't remember any Norma and that his friend was married now, and JS was 'protecting' his friends reputation - a clear threat!
Throughout the interview JS issued threats about anyone speaking, especially using the words 'grass', 'snitch', and 'a muerta' - phrases usually associated with crime. When asked why JS had refused for his secretary to take part in the programme, JS said "She's my secretary. She should stick to secretary-ing."

 

[escargot]

Just watched a documentary - one of those who have behavioural, language and psychological experts on, passing judgement with hindsight - on JS interview with Andrew Neil. What they point out, throughout it, was that when Saville was pressed on his private sex life, he openly resorted to threats. One of his friends recorded a comment about him 'always being a one for the young girls', before hastily adding "Er ... over sixteen, of course!" When the 'friend' went on to describe an encounter in a hotel with a "Norma", Saville shut down immediately. Neil asked him if he remembered 'Norma'. JS went on to say he couldn't remember any Norma and that his friend was married now, and JS was 'protecting' his friends reputation - a clear threat!
Throughout the interview JS issued threats about anyone speaking, especially using the words 'grass', 'snitch', and 'a muerta' - phrases usually associated with crime. When asked why JS had refused for his secretary to take part in the programme, JS said "She's my secretary. She should stick to secretary-ing."

I've seen all the Savile documentaries available AFAIK. It was obvious even without the experts that Savile was overly defensive of his privacy.

Here's the famous edition of Dr Anthony Clare's BBC R4 series In The Psychiatrist's Chair that featured Jimmy Savile. It's probably been posted before but might be even more interesting now, in case Coogan used it to help with the voice.

This CH4 page discusses the implications of the programme.
How Jimmy Savile revealed all in the psychiatrist’s chair

Incidentally, a transcript of Savile's 2009 police interview obtained by Freedom of Information requests is available online.
We see it dramatised in The Reckoning.

 

[cycleboy2]

I've seen all the Savile documentaries available AFAIK. It was obvious even without the experts that Savile was overly defensive of his privacy.

Here's the famous edition of Dr Anthony Clare's BBC R4 series In The Psychiatrist's Chair that featured Jimmy Savile. It's probably been posted before but might be even more interesting now, in case Coogan used it to help with the voice.

This CH4 page discusses the implications of the programme.
How Jimmy Savile revealed all in the psychiatrist’s chair

Incidentally, a transcript of Savile's 2009 police interview obtained by Freedom of Information requests is available online.
We see it dramatised in The Reckoning.

Yep, I posted a link to Dr Clare's programme before - I heard it when it was first broadcast and it was one of the most disturbing things I've ever heard.

People really do need to listen to this; I can't even imagine revisiting this myself!

 

[escargot]

Yep, I posted a link to Dr Clare's programme before - I heard it when it was first broadcast and it was one of the most disturbing things I've ever heard.

People really do need to listen to this; I can't even imagine revisiting this myself!

Yup, I wondered if I'd posted it before! Must've been you.
I heard it first time when it was originally broadcast, as you did.

Noticed that Savile gave absolutely nothing away. How could he? Anything outside his bizarre public persona was disturbing and criminal.

 

[What Tyler]

It is a thoroughly disturbing, yet I have to say gripping series. The victims themselves are incredibly brave, and I hope some form of closure or even some peace has resulted for them.

It is revealing to see, for want of a better word, how incredibly cunning, and clever JS was in ingratiating himself with the “ great and good” at every opportunity; as for the protection he garnered over the years, has it been mentioned ( apps if it has) that (imho) a large factor was that those in “ high places” generally have an overinflated opinion/ self belief in - even more than the level most of us have- of personal judgement skills- and to admit, even to yourself that you’ve been taken in by a wrong ‘un completely- is just too far to go and denial becomes the default...

Steve Coogan’s portrayal is incredible- it would be very easy to drift towards a parody, of someone who was an actual one in life; but he captures the essence pretty much perfectly- the switch from entertainer to predator and back is utterly chilling...a BAFTA would be deserved reward, but could possibly sit awkwardly for some...?

 

[escargot]

a BAFTA would be deserved reward, but could possibly sit awkwardly for some...?

Coogan could gracefully dedicate it to Savile's victims, including those who have never been acknowledged or apologised to.
That would be the dignified thing to do. He is up to that.

 

[escargot]

This newspaper was on the table when Dan the writer was talking to Savile after Jim'll Fix It was cancelled.
I snapped it from the TV where it was upside down and flipped it over but still can't work out what the headline says.
Any ideas?

 

[Mythopoeika]

This newspaper was on the table when Dan the writer was talking to Savile after Jim'll Fix It was cancelled.
I snapped it from the TV where it was upside down and flipped it over but still can't work out what the headline says.
Any ideas?

Picture?

 

[gordonrutter]

This newspaper was on the table when Dan the writer was talking to Savile after Jim'll Fix It was cancelled.
I snapped it from the TV where it was upside down and flipped it over but still can't work out what the headline says.
Any ideas?

You forgot the attachment!

 

[escargot]

Picture?

You forgot the attachment!

You two - stop that, it's making you go blind.

 

[gordonrutter]

This newspaper was on the table when Dan the writer was talking to Savile after Jim'll Fix It was cancelled.
I snapped it from the TV where it was upside down and flipped it over but still can't work out what the headline says.
Any ideas?

Outrage as bbc co
show announces
of Jimmy Savile

Is what we can see so
Outrage as BBC coverup!
Show announces cancellation
Of Jimmy Savile expose

Perhaps?

 

[Bigphoot2]

I think it's this

In the final show, broadcast on Boxing Day 1994, Chris Morris falsely announced another death, this time of television and radio personality Jimmy Savile. In response to the show, Savile sued the BBC and claimed that the false report had ruined his Christmas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_C...ow, broadcast,report had ruined his Christmas.

 

[gordonrutter]

I think it's this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chris_Morris_Music_Show#:~:text=Premature obituaries,-NEWSREADER: The main&text=In the final show, broadcast,report had ruined his Christmas.

So that would make it

Outrage as BBC Comedy
show Announces Death
Of Jimmy Savile

 

[Tigerhawk]

I read the book when it came out in 2014 and I certainly also got the impression that most of the dialogue in the scenes with Dan was verbatim from his recordings. On a related note, I was a wee bit surprised that Louis Theroux didn't appear in this. His documentary in 2000 was a real eye opener for a lot of people, I think.


I'd imagine it would be very dramatic and theatrical in the same way as the 2019 trial of Edward Cairney and Avril Jones for the murder of Margaret Fleming. In particular, while being cross examined Cairney hectored and argued aggressively with the prosecuting QC, making fantastical claims about what had happened while denying the authority of the court and legal system; his personality appears not dissimilar to Jimmy Savile. BBC Scotland made a documentry about the case which is well worth a watch in itself.

I have this documentary - part of a boxset - but can't bring myself to watch it. Just thinking about makes the blood boil.

 

[Bigphoot2]

This was the mock announcement

NEWSREADER: The main stories so far: Jimmy Savile drops dead at the Stoke Mandeville Boxing Day bash—but the patients are far from mourning. CORRESPONDENT: The majority, if not all of them, are extremely relieved that he’s now dead, although I suspect that some of them will be sorry that he didn't suffer a great deal more.

— The Chris Morris Music Show, 16 December 1994

 

[Stormkhan]

I have this documentary - part of a boxset - but can't bring myself to watch it. Just thinking about makes the blood boil.

I've a small selection of a DVD series on serial killers - Gein, Wornous, Unterweiger etc. Part of a series that I'm sure is now available on YT.
Why can't I imagine a similar DVD production series to be made soon? "The Yewtree Gang"?

Let me point out that because of my being on the autistic spectrum, I can watch 'true crime' documentaries, even of disgusting subjects such as Albert Fish, with a certain amount of distance. I find what they did, what they subjected their victims to, abhorrent and absolutely unacceptable - it was wrong! But I'm equally fascinated by the idea that a living, functioning human being can do such horrific things with no emotional harm! I question how!

 

[Frideswide]

Let me point out that because of my being on the autistic spectrum, I can watch 'true crime' documentaries, even of disgusting subjects such as Albert Fish, with a certain amount of distance. I find what they did, what they subjected their victims to, abhorrent and absolutely unacceptable - it was wrong! But I'm equally fascinated by the idea that a living, functioning human being can do such horrific things with no emotional harm! I question how!

Totally agree, if I may attach my autistic self to your post? Excellent description of how it works.

 

[escargot]

I'm equally fascinated by the idea that a living, functioning human being can do such horrific things with no emotional harm! I question how!

Do you mean by 'harm' remorse/self-loathing etc?

 

[escargot]

This was the mock announcement

Perhaps Morris assumed there'd be a flood of revelations once Savile was thought dead. How wrong he was; it took, what, a year?

I only heard about Morris's skit from the fallout.
A brilliant prank. I can't have been the only one to think 'Shame it's not true!'

 

[gordonrutter]

Perhaps Morris assumed there'd be a flood of revelations once Savile was thought dead. How wrong he was; it took, what, a year?

I only heard about Morris's skit from the fallout.
A brilliant prank. I can't have been the only one to think 'Shame it's not true!'

It was a Morris thing. He announced the deaths of others. When he did jt for Michael Heseltine for example his show was temporarily taken off air.

 

[escargot]

It was a Morris thing. He announced the deaths of others. When he did jt for Michael Heseltine for example his show was temporarily taken off air.

Yup I know all that. My point was that he was right to expect unpleasant revelations; however, when Savile really did die it seems the truth was still suppressed.

 

[Stormkhan]

I think the truth was suppressed was because of public opinion being high for Saville at the time, 'speak no ill ...' etc. as well as a corporate embarrassment. After all, once he was dead, he had no influence over the different organisations and he'd lost his money-making power. It must've been the relief felt by the victim of a blackmail when the blackmailer dies. They just wanted it all to go away.

 

[blessmycottonsocks]

I was down the pub a day or two back and overheard a conversation by a couple of bar-bores loudly discussing the Jimmy Savile programme.
They soon moved onto Cliff Richard and all the clichés were coming out - "no smoke without fire", "I bet he was one", "just wait until he carks it, then we'll hear the truth" etc.
I hope they were very wrong.

 

[James_H]

I was down the pub a day or two back and overheard a conversation by a couple of bar-bores loudly discussing the Jimmy Savile programme.
They soon moved onto Cliff Richard and all the clichés were coming out - "no smoke without fire", "I bet he was one", "just wait until he carks it, then we'll hear the truth" etc.
I hope they were very wrong.

When the allegations about Savile came out I was actually working in a pub and the old bloke regulars were going 'don't speak ill of the dead'.