It comes down to the fact that all the people in the so called "know" were more worried about their jobs than saving a child from molestation. In my mind it makes them complicit!
For some yes, it does come down to that. For others it is about the fact that they were abused themselves, and scared, and bullied into keeping quiet about the abuse they suffered. I'm sure that 'in your mind' the issue is very simplistic. But actually, real life is a bit more complicated than that.
Bollocks Janet. You were a BBC Executive and the Police/Press would have listened to you a damn sight more than any of the victims. Chances are, it would have made more victims come forward. You were a powerful woman in the media at the time and had a reputation for being gobby. Shame on you and the rest of them for not speaking out, particularly if you have also been a victim.
+Northern Monkey Geez Louise!!!! DO you know how hard it was Robert Hughes (Actor "Hey Dad"; mid 80s) victims to come forward? It was known "behind the scenes" what he was like, yet he still got away with molesting Sarah Monahan (played his preteen daughter on Hey Dad) among others? It's only been the last couple of years (since 2010) that he's faced justice and been gaoled. A mother of a victim later said "We first went to [New South Wales] police about Hughes in 1988 when my daughter was nine years old" and says she was told by the investigating detective "I've tried to get this guy but every time I do someone covers for him" [13] NSW Police had interviewed Hughes about claims of sexual abuse as early as 1985.[14] Then there's Rolf Harris...
+Megan Williams What's your point exactly? The whole point of my comment was to emphasise how difficult it was for victims to come forward and/or be believed. Ms Porter however knew that the stories about Savile were, and I quote, "More than Rumor" yet did NOTHING and SAID nothing despite being in powerful position within the BBC. Had she done so, it may have prompted victims to come forward and more importantly, prompted the authorities to take the allegations seriously. When challenged by audience members on this, she revealed she too had been the victim of abuse as a child, which makes her silence on the Savile "Rumors" even more despicable.
+Megan Williams Incidentally.......by "The rest of them" I refer to the countless other BBC executives who knew the Savile stories were "More than Rumor" yet chose to stay silent on the matter..........NOT the victims.
Did they have incontrovertible proof? If you go with rumour, and no substantiated proof that will stand up under cross examination, you'd get done for Defamation and slander.
+Megan Williams Ah OK.....on that basis best just say nothing and let the abuse keep happening then yeah? Hundreds of victims of Savile from the 60's through to the 90's. Who has proof until it is proven beyond reasonable doubt in Court?
If she had started to name names on air, Dimbleby would have promptly shut her up, and Mr Carter-Ruck (the libel lawyer who kept Jimmy safe) would have been on the phone in seconds.
One day in Ireland Philip kearns disappeared In the 1980s. And it has been long speculated that he was abused and then murdered or he saw something happen and he was silenced. We will never know. His school bag turned up a week after he went missing. There is no link to establish him to notorious paedophile and pirate radio pioneer in Dublin eamon cook.
Handyjack right! she’s in good position to divulge what she knows but she chose to keep quiet about it...why? did jimmy gave her some of that charity fund?
Janet's answer roughly translates in my heaad as "Yes,we knew about it, but in the environment that we were in, we were more worried about potential damage to our career prospects than we were about molested children"
She would've ended up like dando if she had said anything. What's she meant to do without proof? She would be "guilty" of liable/ slander. Don't blame her blame scummy sovile
99% of all those who worked for the BBC during the Jimmy Savile period knew what he was doing, but chose to turn a blind eye. All were more concerned about their own careers than what Jimmy Savile was doing to our children. As a result of the BBC covering up what Savile had done, I canceled my TV tax license a few months later. I haven't watched the BBC since.
@@peterowen9183 well people should stand up against the backwards law. I for example by law should have a tv license to use my sky go app to watch live tv. Even though you can’t even watch any bbc channels on it at all. It makes absolutely no sense to have a law that forces you to pay the bbc if you chose to watch their competition instead. How is it not an abuse of a monopoly?
@@Drenwickification You do understand that the licence fee doesn't just fund the BBC, don't you? The reason that there is a law is not because you are being forced to 'pay the BBC'. You're being 'forced to pay' for the transmission of live TV in the UK, in the same way that you are 'forced to pay' to have your bins emptied or to drive your car on public roads. It's not a 'BBC licence', it's a television licence. Hence why you still have to pay it even if you don't watch the BBC.
@@peterowen9183 but sky go isn’t broadcast over television signals, it’s broadcast over the internet. I didn’t realise my license fee was funding my internet.
And as we now know, 99% of those in government, the police, local government, charities to whom he contributed, organisers of charity events, officials at Broadmoor, doctors, nurses, NHS officials...everybody knew. So presumably you'll be refusing to pay any tax to anybody? Because they all knew. Demonising the BBC over this is just silly. Because everybody knew. How do we find a way to punish them all?
Rotten had heard rumours like we all had! So what? Never was a secret, indeed if you read his autobiography he seems to suggest he abused a runaway girl in Leeds!
being in a younger generation, i think that sometimes we underestimate the progress and rights that females now have compared to thirty or forty years ago. In a male dominated climate of the time, Janet Street-Porter who was a junior female staff would likely have had very little recognition for her opinions. now of course we see her as a forthright figurehead, but at the time, i think things were very different. not to mention that jimmy savile was an influential and fearful man
Women have been in dominant roles my entire life (50+ years), it's high time we learn to separate real facts from those with agendas stirring it up for their own ends
She said she was an executive at the BBC at the time. Happy to stand corrected but that doesn’t sound too junior to me. And also I think her bringing up what happened to her as a child (which was not nice at all) was a complete deflection tactic to get her out of a very difficult question because as soon as she shows herself to be a victim then you can’t say anything else
She's clearing her throat because she's under pressure. She might have been younger at the time but this went on for years. She was a BBC exec from 87 to 1994 which happens to be when Saville was in Jim'll Fix It. So she had 7 years as a woman in power to say something and she said nothing. Shame on her and shame on all of those who stayed quiet.
@@dmcdmc7166 people like to sit on their high horses. Stop blaming others for the actions of another. Complicity or facilitation cannot be tangibly proven.
If you heard a rumour/gossip that someone in your office was a pedo, what would you honestly do? Call the police? What evidence do you have to back your accusation? None? You would then face a counter-accusation of malicious slander and find yourself fired with a reputation of being a liar and trouble maker.
Saville had influence. He could get people banned, sacked,ostracized in a heartbeat. Ordinary people wouldn't have known it at the time and, quite honestly, have trouble getting their heads around it now. It's difficult to imagine how someone could fight for justice against such overwhelming odds. Don't think God would have got a fair hearing.
About 20 years ago , I was working in London on a road gang , jackhammering and digging and all that shit when cable t.v. was being introduced . We pissed a lot of people off with noise and dust and what not , but most of them were alright about it and knew we'd only be on their street for a few days and then move on to the next one . Anyway , this witch (jsp) came out of her place screaming and threatening us . Most of us ignored her as we were advised to do in such situations . One of the lads tried to explain to her what we were doing and tried to give her the number of the company rep who handled complaints , and was being very nice to her about it . She was furious and was throwing all sorts of insults about the type of people who do roadwork . She predictably said "do you know who I am ? " and Mick , the guy she was abusing snapped and answered " Yeah . You're that goofy cunt off the telly " . Everyone around erupted in laughter and she scurried off back into her den , looking like she was about to burst out crying . I kinda felt a bit bad for her , but not after seeing this .
So you were in a gang of men who said, to a woman, 'you're that goofy cunt off the telly' Everyone around erupted in laughter and she scurried off back into her den , looking like she was about to burst out crying'. Wow. You must be so proud of yourselves. I guess that showed *her* who was in control. Or maybe that's the kind of behaviour that hammers it home to women that they must not complain about abuse from men. Who knows?
@@haggishighways I pass no judgment on what kind of person she is - I don't know her. If you think she's a 'cunt', that's up to you - I assume you've met her in order to form that judgment. What I am saying is that a gang of men calling a woman 'a cunt' in public , and everybody erupting in laughter, is part of the problem, not part of the solution. How is that 'weird logic'?
@@peterowen9183 Agreed very good point. She points out the patriarchy of the BBC and how she couldn't speak up to her superiors as because she didn't have a penis her word would not have been accepted. She then gets bullied and humiliated by a man using a misogynistic term and people applaud it and still the irony of that is lost on this forum. It is indeed part of the problem and supports JSP's comment on how she as a woman was always expected to shut up and be dominated. Had she been a 6 foot 2 man built like a house would Mick have being so quick to ridicule her?
Times are totally different now. I can relate full well about being scolded if I told my mother that someone had abused me. It makes you turn a blind eye; it makes you feel vulnerable and continue being a victim. It's sad that these woman feel safe after the pervert is dead and it's a great shame that he can't be taken to task for it. But I hope younger people will understand how difficult it was for these women to come out as it were.
It’s like a pedophile who used to go to my school, he used to prey on girls and sexually abused them for years. People spoke up and they were told off, and like Savile, the pupil who did it was a bit odd, but always came across as a popular figure who would never be seen in the wrong. It really made me angry, it took 4 years before the school finally did something about it
@Aero01 This is not about justification. It's about seeing the links between how we are treated by those closest to us growing up and our own resulting behaviour. What we are taught as children has enormous impact on how we feel about the world. We are either willing to see this connection or we are not.
@Aero01 We also need to accept that it's necessary to put ourselves in other people's shoes before we judge their actions. Our upbringing, as well as what society dictates to us, have enormous impact on how we react to life. I wonder if there have been situations in your life when you have reacted in a way which wasn't popular with others? When this happens, would you rather be understood or judged by them?
@Aero01 Ultimately you don't know Janet personally and you are therefore not in a position to assess her personality. It's easy to condemn people from a distance.
Back in the 70s and 80s no one took JSP seriously she was often the butt of many comedians jokes and often mimicked by women comedians,she had little influence back then other than to be made fun of i remember seeing her on an interview once where she was sitting next to Bernard Manning and he was being his usual chauvinist self and speaking out against feminists saying that a womans place is in the home well the audience clapped him and she looked dismayed,she couldnt even draw an audiences support about womens rights She alone would not have the power or been took seriously if she acted alone on blowing the whistle on Saville,he had a lot of power and had higher connections than her It would have took her and a few others to all get together and go public,but then could they have got the evidence to prove it as rumours are not enough and not worth risking cases of slander made against you
Exactly! I worked in TV in the 90s and beyond - if you reported every rumour you heard about a celeb to your boss you'd be a laughing stock! Why would she or any of us have reported unsubstantiated rumours - everyone heard them about Savile, it was an open secret he was dodgy. A memo went round banning him from appearing on the BBC's annual telethon 'Children In Need'. so of course everyone knew he was a pervert! Janet says he bought the tabloid's silence with the charity money he raised which is partly true. But he also had dirt on some very powerful paedos in high places, that kept him out of the police cells.
@@dadkinson I dont believe she mixed in the same circles as Saville to have had any proof . But there were others who did work closely with him who would have had more insight into what was going on. JSP heard rumours you cant do anything with rumours you need proof otherwise you risk being sued for slander ,definition of character etc and he had the millions of pounds to get the best lawyers. She may have spoken out and no one may have backed her up so why take that risk. His victims were only going to talk once he was dead which is what happened
She states,"I don't want to talk about people who are around now",when asked about prosecuting Saville. This is the scandal, those in the know won't speak up and enable the abuse.
@@mcdoodles5460 and I also find her own story of abuse sketchy, she jumped straight into that, to try to shield her from criticism, without batting an eyelid, just seemed off to me
Yeah her excuse is pathetic. She couldn’t say anything because she was a woman? So is she saying if she was a man she would have spoken out? Okay Janet….
@@dannyH84 I see. So we shouldn’t try and see how he was able to rape so many children and try and stop it from ever happening again? Do you just want children to be raked again by a presenter at the bbc?
The fact is though it was rife & tolerated. I'm 58 & I remember girls from 16 to women in their 40's being groped in the work place on a regular basis in the 70's. As sick as it sounds it was just accepted. It also happened in the armed forces. Anyone not from that generation might find it hard to believe, but it was part of life. Just as teachers strapping, slapping & caning kids at school was rife & again nobody batted an eyelid. Life in many ways was far more cruel then, thats just how it was
Funny how she's so forthright that 'lots of people knew what Savile was doing and it was happening on a regular basis' but when asked what she herself knew, JSP had only heard rumours. But she's not alone in this. Esther Rantzen gave virtually (if not exactly) the same answers in an interview around the same time. Senior BBC DJ's from Savile's era have given the same answers too. Not one of these wealthy people will admit to having actual, direct knowledge of what Savile was up to.
Sounds to me a like a case of career protection. Dont want to lose my job over someone elses buisness. A case of it's not right but I am not involved or affected.
@911WokeMe you are a reprobate and fool, there was and is no support for JS from me in my comment any more than there is truth in your pathological, paranoid ideas (ie. your LIES).
And just for context, my mum now 51 has only just been able to tell my dad (married for 31yrs) and me son (29yrs old) about her abuse as a child. We are a close family and would stand by her through anything yet she has only been able to speak about it now, and she is the most honest, open and happy go lucky person you will ever meet yet it's only now she can tell her nearest and dearest
It never was deemed acceptable, I remember having a conversation with an older lady and she said abusing children was normal back then, so she basically admitted that she did that.
Sorry Janet, but, you seem to know a lot more about the things he was doing at the time he was doing them than your admitting to, your as guilty as all the others who kept quiet about it.
Everyon jumping on the bandwagon and going nuts. But put yourself in her shoes when you think your not going to be believed by someone you intend not to speak up.
@@gazzz-yz7xc 600 victims deserved someone to at least try and fight for them. Everyone knew and didn't want to lose there careers. Jonny rotten was one of a few that actually tried to get the word out. Others just shut up as they didn't want to Los there cushy jobs.
I remember a pedophile at my school, myself and many others spoke out and the school did not care and were basically told to stop making rumours. Not long after a girl was raped by him and groomed, it was only then that it started to be taken seriously
I would like to see the police be held accountable in some capacity for brushing off the complaints from the victims, but that's probably not likely to happen. You can understand higher management in the BBC brushing it off, because of the culture, who he was, and the conflict of interest/code of slience (BBC didn't want any negative publicity), but the police you would expect a little more of, to have at least investigated it up to a certain level. This is doable today.
I don't really believe Janet Street-Porter. She says that national newspapers wouldn't print negative stories about Saville because if they did the charity money he'd raised wouldn't go to hospitals. I don't think the media cares or used to care all that much whether money goes to hospitals if they can get a good story. Also, Janet Street-Porter was a top producer and very powerful in the late 80s and 90s. I think she could have said something, and tipped people off. I appreciate that she couldn't have said anything to senior BBC men (who knew anyway) but she could have told outside media. I think the fact is that she just didn't care very much whether there was mass sexual abuse going on, didn't have the courage to stand up, and just accepted that everybody was doing it and that that was the status quo. Having said that I quite liked the way she punched back at the smug smirking girl who asked her why she hadn't said anything.
is it that easy to go to the media though? she had no proof remember-yes she heard it but likewise alot of Hollywood heard about Weinstein but without proof and running to the newspapers you are looking at slander case.
I don't like how she dragged her own history into it. That was irrelevant. When her mother slapped her, she wasn't a BBC executive. Saying the environment was totally male was also irrelevant.
@@neilgerace355 Victims did accuse him at the time he was abusing them. They got nothing. Realistically women at the time did not have a voice. I think Janet learned that in her childhood this is why she told that story about the hairdresser. She just tried to explain herself you know, the sadness in her voice says it all, I think she does actually feel guilty for not saying something. Why is all eyes on her, tho? Males should have comed forward, they were far less vulnurable! And they did not.
@@neilgerace355 They would have believed her. But I don't think they would have done anything about it. Everyone knew about it. If they truly cared the case would have been investigated long ago. We are talking around 500 victims.Yet nobody even tried to arrest him. These were different times. Now, here comes my story. When I was a teenager in Russia (about a decade ago) my friends were severely beaten up by a crazy woman that happened to be a relative of one of them. We tried to do something about it, but every single adult that knew about what has happened was pretty much like "It's all good parents have a right to punish their kids, you should not complain". I tried to explain that this woman was crazy it was not even a "punishment" she was dangerous but no one cared. It was like talking to a wall. I assume that in 1980s Britain if you as a woman accused someone like Savile the response would have pretty much been the same. Something like "It's all good, men have high libido and he is very talented, let him be". And that would have been it.
Stable door and horse are words that come to mind. The responsibility lies squarely with saville,s contempraries in the public domain who knew it was going on.
I had to laugh at loose women the other day talking about sir Jimmy ,they said he fooled everyone including the royals ,you could tell that they did not believe the words out of their own mouths. ,still covering up,
I always knew Janet Street Porter's star would descend one day, but never like this. They are all of them ever so quiet now. Look at JSP body language: Downcast eyes covered by hair, clearing the throat for the lies as she casts about for the right lines. As more revelations come out over Cameron's involvement in the John Major's Cabinet cover-up, the horror story with Leon Britten, Ted Heath and an endless laundry list of names, all elites etc., this QT was a nice "crap in your pants" moment for Ken Clarke looking like a rabbit caught in the headlights. I always detested these people years ago, and that disgust continues to grow. Extreme hatred might be a better word when you span decades.
I absolutely agree, especially in the time period of which all these offenses occurred. A pauper can never deny the King his marbles, Savile was the king who abused all around him including those those in higher powers who tried to protect him naively.
How the hell could a decent person who was aware of the goings on stood by knowing than some innocent in the future would suffer abuse. As for the slap from her mother, a poor excuse when she later came to be an influence in broadcasting!
It's no good sitting there playing the tough no nonsense modern woman JSP, when you were as bad as all the men who kept quiet and allowed Saville to carry on doing what he did. You were protecting your career arse and turning a blind eye. Shameful!
I think Janet makes a very good point , how in those days if you said something like that , you got a slap told to shut up. I think people forget how that sort of "know your place," culture isn't the distant history we think it is. It's only very very recently that we've stopped trating people like that.
David Dimbleby seems to be treating this as to whether or not someone should be investigated for not paying his council tax...and Ken Clarke is shuffling uncomfortably on the fence---clearly knowing far more than he's willing to disclose... and poor Janet, of whom I'm not a particular fan,is somehow receiving a portion of the blame for Savile's vile acts...the very sort of thing on which he thrived!😙
As well as being a popular BBC personality, Saville was very close to the Royal family and the Thatcher government, and I mean VERY close. He was often asked for advice by the royals, invited to many of their events and even drove them around in his Rolls Royce. He was invited to 10 Downing Street on many occasions and Thatcher pushed hard to get him a knighthood. Are you telling me that someone that close to royals and government wouldn’t have been thoroughly vetted by the very top of our secret services and police? Either there was little evidence of his many crimes, or they knew and covered it up. You decide.
People forget that even talking about paedophilia back then was very taboo. My grandmother said when she was young many people knew about pastors abusing young kids in boarding schools but if you dared even mention it you would get slapped and punished. It was 'normal' to look the other way because instead of outrage towards the paedophile, people lashed out against the person bringing it up.
I agree that people are more interested in watching over their own backs than actually blowing the whistle on these sick people. I always thought that Rolf Harris was a wonderful man and he was my most favourite person. Look what he turned out to be and I am sickened by it but nobody spoke out about him because he was so famous and loved by everyone. I have noticed that no matter what a famous person does - murder, rape, child molesting or all three....nothing really happens to them. They are untouchable really because they feel they are better than you or I. They are above the law. Look at the sentence of Harris and Stuart Hall - pathetic and look at that awful creepy Max Clifford, he should have been given a lot more. I bet you they are all being looked after inside, still getting their little perks and the warders, bowing and scraping over them as if they are the bloody King of England. In the eyes of the law they are still celebrities and not criminals at all and we are only having lip service paid to us. Looked after like they are still at home. Stop worshipping these false idols and look at reality. These people are human like all of us who just happened to get the break or whatever was needed to put them where they are today. There are hundreds of Saviles, Harris' and Cliffords out there, hiding in plain sight. They should all be worried now as they could be next. I would really love it if Clifford started to sink some of his clients!
And we all know why! He's as guilty as anybody else and one of his victims confronted him on camera! Clarke did a runner! As did Clegg when he was confronted!
Ken Clarke theres a man I wouldn't trust with a child David Cameron had the proof to put him away instead he gets himself up the ladder in Tory seat , we need a revolution in this country
i love that girls smile at the end....and thats exactly how i would of looked at the old trout....absolutely no excuse what so ever for not blowing the whistle on him....she used emotional blackmail at the end to get out of it and that girls smiled said it all...she aint fooling no one
Personally I found it sanctimonious, the fact that most people in the industry knew about it and didn't come forward reveals a lot about general human nature and that anyone we put in that industry would do the same and remain silent. I bet if that girl was under similar conditions and situated in the same time context she would have dealt with it with the same passivity as those in question.
Huh, yeah... the sanctimonious smile of a smug know-it-all who's never had to deal with such horrendous issues in her own life, yet feels ever-so-clever when she lectures others who have about how they 'should' have behaved. People like that need to check themselves a little more often; they know far less than they think they do. I bet she was proudly sitting there thinking "I would've done the right thing if it was me"... yeah, like hell you would, sweetheart. Walk a mile in that person's shoes before you think you can glibly tell them they're walking all wrong.
@@Maerahn Yes, walk a mile in a BBC executive's shoes. It must be really hard to be wealthy, rich person working in a respected position. Stop protecting ped ophile rings!
Not answering a "no brainer" like "should Savile be investigated after his death", clearly suggests a deliberate cover-up. Maybe even "cover my arse" by this vile woman?
i saw two interviews with saville which showed his disturbing aggression and in one he talked about how if st peter would not let him into heaven he would break his thumb, not in a joking way but absolutely chillingly serious...this just reveals how sick and threatening he would be to cover up his crimes, so there is absolutely no doubt saville would of just casually said things like 'if someone ever said something bad about me i would break their legs or something like that in an aggresive manner when socialising with people of power and influence given he had the audacity to speak like that in front of the cameras. This would have been in the back of their mind when they heard things about him.
2:37- "I don't want to talk about people who are around now........" So she still knows who is doing what behind the scenes! She's either lying, or is afraid of the backlash on her and losing her job. Instead of reporting sex offenders and protecting children. She says it right here FFS!
My nana loathed saville. And my mum couldn't stand him. Even when I was younger something about saville gave me the creeps. When all this came to light it didn't surprise me or mum one bit
I could never understand whh he kept appearing on TV. He was awkward, stilted , uncomfortable to watch and just....weird. I was a schoolboy at the time and I remember jokes going round about Saville and patients. People knew...
@@allosaurusfragilis7782 He had power, control and high ranking people in his corner. Difficult to imagine how much clout he had in this day and age ....but thinking back to those days and with the benefit of hindsight......he was very cunning about what he was doing.
Is it right to investigate Jimmy Savile's past now he's dead? No it's not. They should have done it while he was alive. It is clear that it was well known knowledge and that he was being protected by the establishment. Having said that it's better late than never and all those involved in whatever capacity still need to answer questions and face jail time if need be...
Rumour is not the same as evidence. You do not accuse people based on rumour but on evidence. I suspect people in the BBC actually did know and, if that's the case, then people managing Stoke Mandeville Hospital at the time or members of government knew. This goes right through the heart of establishment in that era. However, if you are not old enough to remember Jimmy Saville, you cannot imagine how big he was. He was on primetime BBC for 20 - 30 years, heading iconic programs with viewing figures regularly hitting 15 -20 million and had the ear of Thatcher. I can imagine how difficult it would be to take down a figure like that.
There was a noticeable slip of the tongue right at the very end when she corrects herself after saying nobody took any notice and then said they wouldn’t have taken any notice. I think she knows that allegations were in fact made to those higher up and brushed under the carpet rather than as she and Esther Rantzen keep claiming that it was all just rumours. Their body language and stuttering and deliberating over answers given tells you all you need to know. They knew what was going on but did and said nothing. In some ways they are as culpable as Saville, Glitter and the rest of the deviants.
@@MarkHewitt Good point made Mark. One should never name names outside of the topic/thread in the discussion. I think it fair to say that one particular Lady (I'll refer to her as a Lady because she is) raised public awareness of child abuse by founding and promoting a successful charity as far back as 1986. Savile; (a great friend of the British Royals...) fooled many people using his insidious tactics.
Everyone dissing her really doesn't understand the culture of secrecy at the time and how much power Saville had. It only came out after his death, despite him being way less beloved and famous than he was....THATS how powerful he was...
What really annoys me about what Janet says is that she tells us that when she became a BBC executive she knew of the rumours and did nothing. She also says that she heard similar rumours about others but that she doesn't want to talk about them. why not? Her feeble excuses about the culture of the time no longer apply, so why not talk about the similar rumours she knows about others? What is she doing about them? waiting until they also die so she can whine pointlessly about them too?
Rumours are just rumours. I don't think anybody can be expected to do a thing on that basis. Any accusations would have been dismissed and it would have been a fool's errand, very self destructive with no results. If you want to blame someone for the situation, blame the offenders.
Does every single person in authority in TV say “I knew there was something going on?” Yes, they do, male and female. That spells “cover up.” “Certainly more than rumours,” says JSP. What about all the executives and celebs??
For evil to succeed all it takes is for good “men” (or women) to do nothing.
Ha rule 303 4me
It comes down to the fact that all the people in the so called "know" were more worried about their jobs than saving a child from molestation. In my mind it makes them complicit!
I think you will find that they were scared because Saville was well protected. Well Protected!
Prince Charles as well.
For some yes, it does come down to that. For others it is about the fact that they were abused themselves, and scared, and bullied into keeping quiet about the abuse they suffered. I'm sure that 'in your mind' the issue is very simplistic. But actually, real life is a bit more complicated than that.
All the royals.
There were children being sexually exploited in porn mags at that time too. I’d imagine that sent the wrong message out to millions of men.
2:36 " I don't want to talk about people who are around now"
I think that says everything about you, Janet.
Good point.
Who are these people?
fucking spot on. what exactly is stopping her from talking about what she may know?
Why don’t u try and do something about people that abuse I bet u know plent
@@briancross6726 defamation law
Bollocks Janet.
You were a BBC Executive and the Police/Press would have listened to you a damn sight more than any of the victims.
Chances are, it would have made more victims come forward.
You were a powerful woman in the media at the time and had a reputation for being gobby.
Shame on you and the rest of them for not speaking out, particularly if you have also been a victim.
+Northern Monkey Geez Louise!!!! DO you know how hard it was Robert Hughes (Actor "Hey Dad"; mid 80s) victims to come forward? It was known "behind the scenes" what he was like, yet he still got away with molesting Sarah Monahan (played his preteen daughter on Hey Dad) among others? It's only been the last couple of years (since 2010) that he's faced justice and been gaoled.
A mother of a victim later said "We first went to [New South Wales]
police about Hughes in 1988 when my daughter was nine years old" and
says she was told by the investigating detective "I've tried to get this
guy but every time I do someone covers for him" [13] NSW Police had interviewed Hughes about claims of sexual abuse as early as 1985.[14]
Then there's Rolf Harris...
+Megan Williams What's your point exactly? The whole point of my comment was to emphasise how difficult it was for victims to come forward and/or be believed. Ms Porter however knew that the stories about Savile were, and I quote, "More than Rumor" yet did NOTHING and SAID nothing despite being in powerful position within the BBC. Had she done so, it may have prompted victims to come forward and more importantly, prompted the authorities to take the allegations seriously. When challenged by audience members on this, she revealed she too had been the victim of abuse as a child, which makes her silence on the Savile "Rumors" even more despicable.
+Megan Williams Incidentally.......by "The rest of them" I refer to the countless other BBC executives who knew the Savile stories were "More than Rumor" yet chose to stay silent on the matter..........NOT the victims.
Did they have incontrovertible proof? If you go with rumour, and no substantiated proof that will stand up under cross examination, you'd get done for Defamation and slander.
+Megan Williams Ah OK.....on that basis best just say nothing and let the abuse keep happening then yeah? Hundreds of victims of Savile from the 60's through to the 90's. Who has proof until it is proven beyond reasonable doubt in Court?
and we are forced by our government to pay for the BBC
throw your t.v. in the gutter! it lies to your face!
I don't pay a penny to BBC and you don't have to either
joel turner l dont pay the bbc for the crap they put on the tv.lm not giving my money to a bunch of pedo's.
You're not forced, I've not paid it for over 15 years.
I would also point out that the Government asks us to pay for the Church of England too. Which is more disgusting.
She says she does not want to talk about people around now, so it goes on and on!
David L I was waiting for that moment where she was going to start nameing, name's...............But once again, she kept her mouth shut.
If she had started to name names on air, Dimbleby would have promptly shut her up, and Mr Carter-Ruck (the libel lawyer who kept Jimmy safe) would have been on the phone in seconds.
Defamation law
Excuse me Janet, you admit to knowing about Savile in 1987 when you became an executive. Why did you not do something about?
Someone should have tried to get evidence, hide a tape recorder/ video camera in the most places he think he wouldn't be caught.
+Handyjack What could she or anyone do in the absence of hard testable evidence?
One day in Ireland Philip kearns disappeared In the 1980s. And it has been long speculated that he was abused and then murdered or he saw something happen and he was silenced. We will never know. His school bag turned up a week after he went missing. There is no link to establish him to notorious paedophile and pirate radio pioneer in Dublin eamon cook.
Handyjack right! she’s in good position to divulge what she knows but she chose to keep quiet about it...why? did jimmy gave her some of that charity fund?
Beacause people would not believed. I take it you have never been abused in any way . Or you would know
"I don't want to talk about people who are alive now".... OUT THEM!!!!!!
Janet's answer roughly translates in my heaad as "Yes,we knew about it, but in the environment that we were in, we were more worried about potential damage to our career prospects than we were about molested children"
Spot on comment, In plain Emglish - we looked the other way cos we didn't want lose our jobs cos our careers meant more to us.
Fuck the BBC, never had a license and never will. They’re scum who all looked after themselves.
That's how I heard it too
She would've ended up like dando if she had said anything. What's she meant to do without proof? She would be "guilty" of liable/ slander. Don't blame her blame scummy sovile
buttonsg1 got a cough have you Jan? Fucking coward. Typical BBC. They're scum.
99% of all those who worked for the BBC during the Jimmy Savile period knew what he was doing, but chose to turn a blind eye. All were more concerned about their own careers than what Jimmy Savile was doing to our children. As a result of the BBC covering up what Savile had done, I canceled my TV tax license a few months later. I haven't watched the BBC since.
Have you watched anything apart from Netflix and Amazon Prime? Because if you have, and you don't have a TV licence, you're breaking the law.
@@peterowen9183 well people should stand up against the backwards law.
I for example by law should have a tv license to use my sky go app to watch live tv. Even though you can’t even watch any bbc channels on it at all. It makes absolutely no sense to have a law that forces you to pay the bbc if you chose to watch their competition instead. How is it not an abuse of a monopoly?
@@Drenwickification You do understand that the licence fee doesn't just fund the BBC, don't you? The reason that there is a law is not because you are being forced to 'pay the BBC'. You're being 'forced to pay' for the transmission of live TV in the UK, in the same way that you are 'forced to pay' to have your bins emptied or to drive your car on public roads. It's not a 'BBC licence', it's a television licence. Hence why you still have to pay it even if you don't watch the BBC.
@@peterowen9183 but sky go isn’t broadcast over television signals, it’s broadcast over the internet. I didn’t realise my license fee was funding my internet.
And as we now know, 99% of those in government, the police, local government, charities to whom he contributed, organisers of charity events, officials at Broadmoor, doctors, nurses, NHS officials...everybody knew. So presumably you'll be refusing to pay any tax to anybody? Because they all knew. Demonising the BBC over this is just silly. Because everybody knew. How do we find a way to punish them all?
She knew cos it was her interviewing Johnny Rotten in the 70s when he pointed out 'Saville's into all sorts of seedy things'.
Wrong. It was Vivien Goldman. 90+ upvotes for made up bollocks lol, UA-cam in a nutshell
Rotten had heard rumours like we all had! So what? Never was a secret, indeed if you read his autobiography he seems to suggest he abused a runaway girl in Leeds!
Listen to the tune wolf in sheeps clothing0
Janet Street Porter was mumbling she knew what went on with under age kids.She choose to keep her trap shut money and job more important.
She must talk about people involved now. Its a crime not too!
being in a younger generation, i think that sometimes we underestimate the progress and rights that females now have compared to thirty or forty years ago. In a male dominated climate of the time, Janet Street-Porter who was a junior female staff would likely have had very little recognition for her opinions. now of course we see her as a forthright figurehead, but at the time, i think things were very different. not to mention that jimmy savile was an influential and fearful man
Women have been in dominant roles my entire life (50+ years), it's high time we learn to separate real facts from those with agendas stirring it up for their own ends
Exactly!
She said she was an executive at the BBC at the time. Happy to stand corrected but that doesn’t sound too junior to me. And also I think her bringing up what happened to her as a child (which was not nice at all) was a complete deflection tactic to get her out of a very difficult question because as soon as she shows herself to be a victim then you can’t say anything else
She's clearing her throat because she's under pressure. She might have been younger at the time but this went on for years. She was a BBC exec from 87 to 1994 which happens to be when Saville was in Jim'll Fix It. So she had 7 years as a woman in power to say something and she said nothing. Shame on her and shame on all of those who stayed quiet.
@@dmcdmc7166 people like to sit on their high horses. Stop blaming others for the actions of another. Complicity or facilitation cannot be tangibly proven.
Career over morals.
If you heard a rumour/gossip that someone in your office was a pedo, what would you honestly do? Call the police? What evidence do you have to back your accusation? None? You would then face a counter-accusation of malicious slander and find yourself fired with a reputation of being a liar and trouble maker.
I totally agree, I think people are being unreasonable
Saville had influence. He could get people banned, sacked,ostracized in a heartbeat. Ordinary people wouldn't have known it at the time and, quite honestly, have trouble getting their heads around it now. It's difficult to imagine how someone could fight for justice against such overwhelming odds. Don't think God would have got a fair hearing.
Savile was blatantly indiscreet. Anyone who says they didn't know about it is lying.
About 20 years ago , I was working in London on a road gang , jackhammering and digging and all that shit when cable t.v. was being introduced . We pissed a lot of people off with noise and dust and what not , but most of them were alright about it and knew we'd only be on their street for a few days and then move on to the next one . Anyway , this witch (jsp) came out of her place screaming and threatening us . Most of us ignored her as we were advised to do in such situations . One of the lads tried to explain to her what we were doing and tried to give her the number of the company rep who handled complaints , and was being very nice to her about it . She was furious and was throwing all sorts of insults about the type of people who do roadwork . She predictably said "do you know who I am ? " and Mick , the guy she was abusing snapped and answered " Yeah . You're that goofy cunt off the telly " . Everyone around erupted in laughter and she scurried off back into her den , looking like she was about to burst out crying . I kinda felt a bit bad for her , but not after seeing this .
"do you know who I am ? "- and while she says "could not do anything."
so "who is she" then?)))
So you were in a gang of men who said, to a woman, 'you're that goofy cunt off the telly' Everyone around erupted in laughter and she scurried off back into her den , looking like she was about to burst out crying'. Wow. You must be so proud of yourselves. I guess that showed *her* who was in control. Or maybe that's the kind of behaviour that hammers it home to women that they must not complain about abuse from men. Who knows?
@@peterowen9183 So she can be a cunt and get away with it because she's a woman? Weird logic.
@@haggishighways I pass no judgment on what kind of person she is - I don't know her. If you think she's a 'cunt', that's up to you - I assume you've met her in order to form that judgment. What I am saying is that a gang of men calling a woman 'a cunt' in public , and everybody erupting in laughter, is part of the problem, not part of the solution. How is that 'weird logic'?
@@peterowen9183 Agreed very good point. She points out the patriarchy of the BBC and how she couldn't speak up to her superiors as because she didn't have a penis her word would not have been accepted. She then gets bullied and humiliated by a man using a misogynistic term and people applaud it and still the irony of that is lost on this forum.
It is indeed part of the problem and supports JSP's comment on how she as a woman was always expected to shut up and be dominated. Had she been a 6 foot 2 man built like a house would Mick have being so quick to ridicule her?
Times are totally different now. I can relate full well about being scolded if I told my mother that someone had abused me. It makes you turn a blind eye; it makes you feel vulnerable and continue being a victim. It's sad that these woman feel safe after the pervert is dead and it's a great shame that he can't be taken to task for it. But I hope younger people will understand how difficult it was for these women to come out as it were.
@Aero01 Yeah - times are different - pedophilia has always been the same. end of.
It’s like a pedophile who used to go to my school, he used to prey on girls and sexually abused them for years. People spoke up and they were told off, and like Savile, the pupil who did it was a bit odd, but always came across as a popular figure who would never be seen in the wrong. It really made me angry, it took 4 years before the school finally did something about it
@Aero01 This is not about justification. It's about seeing the links between how we are treated by those closest to us growing up and our own resulting behaviour. What we are taught as children has enormous impact on how we feel about the world. We are either willing to see this connection or we are not.
@Aero01 We also need to accept that it's necessary to put ourselves in other people's shoes before we judge their actions. Our upbringing, as well as what society dictates to us, have enormous impact on how we react to life. I wonder if there have been situations in your life when you have reacted in a way which wasn't popular with others? When this happens, would you rather be understood or judged by them?
@Aero01 Ultimately you don't know Janet personally and you are therefore not in a position to assess her personality. It's easy to condemn people from a distance.
I notice Street Porter lets herself off the hook much more readily than those she critisises - turn that light on yourself Janet!
Typical weak-but-respects-self-as-strong fool that populates the UK today.
great comment)
You are trying to bully someone talking out and shut people up... we still have this as we can see with Ghislaine Maxwell
I don't know if any of you lived in those times - it was a different world - women were not listened to.
@@anniechorley4940 now they cannot stop!!
Back in the 70s and 80s no one took JSP seriously she was often the butt of many comedians jokes and often mimicked by women comedians,she had little influence back then other than to be made fun of
i remember seeing her on an interview once where she was sitting next to Bernard Manning and he was being his usual chauvinist self and speaking out against feminists saying that a womans place is in the home
well the audience clapped him and she looked dismayed,she couldnt even draw an audiences support about womens rights
She alone would not have the power or been took seriously if she acted alone on blowing the whistle on Saville,he had a lot of power and had higher connections than her
It would have took her and a few others to all get together and go public,but then could they have got the evidence to prove it as rumours are not enough and not worth risking cases of slander made against you
Exactly! I worked in TV in the 90s and beyond - if you reported every rumour you heard about a celeb to your boss you'd be a laughing stock! Why would she or any of us have reported unsubstantiated rumours - everyone heard them about Savile, it was an open secret he was dodgy. A memo went round banning him from appearing on the BBC's annual telethon 'Children In Need'. so of course everyone knew he was a pervert!
Janet says he bought the tabloid's silence with the charity money he raised which is partly true. But he also had dirt on some very powerful paedos in high places, that kept him out of the police cells.
Doesn't matter whether she'd have been listened to or not. She had a duty to say something and she didn't.
@@dadkinson I dont believe she mixed in the same circles as Saville to have had any proof . But there were others who did work closely with him who would have had more insight into what was going on. JSP heard rumours you cant do anything with rumours you need proof otherwise you risk being sued for slander ,definition of character etc and he had the millions of pounds to get the best lawyers. She may have spoken out and no one may have backed her up so why take that risk. His victims were only going to talk once he was dead which is what happened
I guess David Dimbleby knew about Jimmy Saville and what was going on.
guaranteed he did cause they all did at the BBC
porter knew and said nothing to save her job,
It needs to be investigated because it is still going on.
By who, the police who work for them?
An independent group, they set up?
Spot on keep it real im not saying rule 303 im more name and shame
Spot on it got 2 stop ha rule 303 4me
Totaly agree expose the enemy within name n shame rule 303 4 me
'I don't want to talk about people who are around now...' Nice one Janet, keep them protected.
Something made her extremely uncomfortable about talking about this. The words kept sticking in her throat... She knows LOADS more.
She states,"I don't want to talk about people who are around now",when asked about prosecuting Saville. This is the scandal, those in the know won't speak up and enable the abuse.
Because she made her career by keeping silent
@@mcdoodles5460 and I also find her own story of abuse sketchy, she jumped straight into that, to try to shield her from criticism, without batting an eyelid, just seemed off to me
She could have TRIED to report it instead of thinking no one will listen to me. Then, she'd have had a clean conscience over this at least.
A lot of people knew about it including herself and did nothing about it but protect her own career
100%. That's the bottom line. Looking after Number 1.
Yeah her excuse is pathetic. She couldn’t say anything because she was a woman? So is she saying if she was a man she would have spoken out? Okay Janet….
I think she & my self included are just bored of this subject now, he is dead & gone. End of
@@dannyH84 I see. So we shouldn’t try and see how he was able to rape so many children and try and stop it from ever happening again?
Do you just want children to be raked again by a presenter at the bbc?
They did nothing because he was being protected and nothing would've been done about it
She made it to the highest level of the media. She was in a position to challenge things. She said and did nothing, same as the esther thingy
The fact is though it was rife & tolerated. I'm 58 & I remember girls from 16 to women in their 40's being groped in the work place on a regular basis in the 70's. As sick as it sounds it was just accepted. It also happened in the armed forces. Anyone not from that generation might find it hard to believe, but it was part of life. Just as teachers strapping, slapping & caning kids at school was rife & again nobody batted an eyelid. Life in many ways was far more cruel then, thats just how it was
rife?nah
@@titteryenot1136 So you were around then? I think not, or you would know differently.
😭
Funny how she's so forthright that 'lots of people knew what Savile was doing and it was happening on a regular basis' but when asked what she herself knew, JSP had only heard rumours.
But she's not alone in this. Esther Rantzen gave virtually (if not exactly) the same answers in an interview around the same time. Senior BBC DJ's from Savile's era have given the same answers too.
Not one of these wealthy people will admit to having actual, direct knowledge of what Savile was up to.
Sounds to me a like a case of career protection. Dont want to lose my job over someone elses buisness. A case of it's not right but I am not involved or affected.
She could have done something, but the fear tho, must be reason many people don't talk
It’s deeper than that ...
@911WokeMe lol UP YOURS
@911WokeMe you are a reprobate and fool, there was and is no support for JS from me in my comment any more than there is truth in your pathological, paranoid ideas (ie. your LIES).
@911WokeMe you clearly haven't done enough "research" on the video you're hawking, or you're just another fraud looking for views.
She said a lot of people at the BBC knew, she knew too and did nothing as pointed out. She was very defensive there.
And just for context, my mum now 51 has only just been able to tell my dad (married for 31yrs) and me son (29yrs old) about her abuse as a child. We are a close family and would stand by her through anything yet she has only been able to speak about it now, and she is the most honest, open and happy go lucky person you will ever meet yet it's only now she can tell her nearest and dearest
Thank you for sharing, so sorry to hear. I hope she is healing now. ❤️🩹
💖💖💖💖🦊
'A cultural, generational thing.' Janet just publicly admitted that she thought such actions of the time were acceptable.
She is a coward.
It never was deemed acceptable, I remember having a conversation with an older lady and she said abusing children was normal back then, so she basically admitted that she did that.
Tarring herself with the same brush as those she is condemning!!!!!
To factually know that someone was abusing children and not say anything on the victims’ behalf is to be complicit to the continuation of that abuse.
Sorry Janet, but, you seem to know a lot more about the things he was doing at the time he was doing them than your admitting to, your as guilty as all the others who kept quiet about it.
She didn't THINK she would be believed, i.e. She didn't try
Everyon jumping on the bandwagon and going nuts. But put yourself in her shoes when you think your not going to be believed by someone you intend not to speak up.
@@gazzz-yz7xc 600 victims deserved someone to at least try and fight for them. Everyone knew and didn't want to lose there careers. Jonny rotten was one of a few that actually tried to get the word out. Others just shut up as they didn't want to Los there cushy jobs.
I remember a pedophile at my school, myself and many others spoke out and the school did not care and were basically told to stop making rumours. Not long after a girl was raped by him and groomed, it was only then that it started to be taken seriously
I would like to see the police be held accountable in some capacity for brushing off the complaints from the victims, but that's probably not likely to happen. You can understand higher management in the BBC brushing it off, because of the culture, who he was, and the conflict of interest/code of slience (BBC didn't want any negative publicity), but the police you would expect a little more of, to have at least investigated it up to a certain level. This is doable today.
shoot the lot yet we still pay for our licence so we are to blame as well
I don't pay a licence any more. Don't use my TV. But yeah I funded the BBC for several decades.
They have a legal obligation, something like that...
He was best friends with Prime Ministers, that’s why the police did nowt.
I don't really believe Janet Street-Porter. She says that national newspapers wouldn't print negative stories about Saville because if they did the charity money he'd raised wouldn't go to hospitals. I don't think the media cares or used to care all that much whether money goes to hospitals if they can get a good story.
Also, Janet Street-Porter was a top producer and very powerful in the late 80s and 90s. I think she could have said something, and tipped people off. I appreciate that she couldn't have said anything to senior BBC men (who knew anyway) but she could have told outside media. I think the fact is that she just didn't care very much whether there was mass sexual abuse going on, didn't have the courage to stand up, and just accepted that everybody was doing it and that that was the status quo. Having said that I quite liked the way she punched back at the smug smirking girl who asked her why she hadn't said anything.
is it that easy to go to the media though? she had no proof remember-yes she heard it but likewise alot of Hollywood heard about Weinstein but without proof and running to the newspapers you are looking at slander case.
I don't like how she dragged her own history into it. That was irrelevant. When her mother slapped her, she wasn't a BBC executive. Saying the environment was totally male was also irrelevant.
@@neilgerace355 Victims did accuse him at the time he was abusing them. They got nothing. Realistically women at the time did not have a voice. I think Janet learned that in her childhood this is why she told that story about the hairdresser. She just tried to explain herself you know, the sadness in her voice says it all, I think she does actually feel guilty for not saying something. Why is all eyes on her, tho? Males should have comed forward, they were far less vulnurable! And they did not.
@@lizvtaz6 A BBC executive did not have a voice? Police wouldn't have believed her?
@@neilgerace355 They would have believed her. But I don't think they would have done anything about it. Everyone knew about it. If they truly cared the case would have been investigated long ago. We are talking around 500 victims.Yet nobody even tried to arrest him. These were different times. Now, here comes my story. When I was a teenager in Russia (about a decade ago) my friends were severely beaten up by a crazy woman that happened to be a relative of one of them. We tried to do something about it, but every single adult that knew about what has happened was pretty much like "It's all good parents have a right to punish their kids, you should not complain". I tried to explain that this woman was crazy it was not even a "punishment" she was dangerous but no one cared. It was like talking to a wall. I assume that in 1980s Britain if you as a woman accused someone like Savile the response would have pretty much been the same. Something like "It's all good, men have high libido and he is very talented, let him be". And that would have been it.
Stable door and horse are words that come to mind. The responsibility lies squarely with saville,s contempraries in the public domain who knew it was going on.
I wouldn’t trust this grubby woman for one second! She knew and needs to accept blame for being too spineless to go to the police!
Shameful! Still no one says the names of those who knew. They're still covering for them so they get to keep their jobs. Absolutely disgusting!
I had to laugh at loose women the other day talking about sir Jimmy ,they said he fooled everyone including the royals ,you could tell that they did not believe the words out of their own mouths. ,still covering up,
As far as the rumours were concerned at the BBC , it's still only John Lydon who spoke out !
I always knew Janet Street Porter's star would descend one day, but never like this. They are all of them ever so quiet now. Look at JSP body language: Downcast eyes covered by hair, clearing the throat for the lies as she casts about for the right lines. As more revelations come out over Cameron's involvement in the John Major's Cabinet cover-up, the horror story with Leon Britten, Ted Heath and an endless laundry list of names, all elites etc., this QT was a nice "crap in your pants" moment for Ken Clarke looking like a rabbit caught in the headlights. I always detested these people years ago, and that disgust continues to grow. Extreme hatred might be a better word when you span decades.
It doesn't surprise me he managed to get away for so long. He was a psychopath, and they are very good at deception.
The bbc should apologise & take down all its statues !
I absolutely agree, especially in the time period of which all these offenses occurred. A pauper can never deny the King his marbles, Savile was the king who abused all around him including those those in higher powers who tried to protect him naively.
How the hell could a decent person who was aware of the goings on stood by knowing than some innocent in the future would suffer abuse. As for the slap from her mother, a poor excuse when she later came to be an influence in broadcasting!
It's no good sitting there playing the tough no nonsense modern woman JSP, when you were as bad as all the men who kept quiet and allowed Saville to carry on doing what he did. You were protecting your career arse and turning a blind eye. Shameful!
She is not the only one. There are plenty of individuals (male and female) like her.
I think Janet makes a very good point , how in those days if you said something like that , you got a slap told to shut up. I think people forget how that sort of "know your place," culture isn't the distant history we think it is. It's only very very recently that we've stopped trating people like that.
😑The question should be should those who turned a blind eye be held accountable?!?!?🤨
Yes
David Dimbleby seems to be treating this as to whether or not someone should be investigated for not paying his council tax...and Ken Clarke is shuffling uncomfortably on the fence---clearly knowing far more than he's willing to disclose...
and poor Janet, of whom I'm not a particular fan,is somehow receiving a portion of the blame for Savile's vile acts...the very sort of thing on which he thrived!😙
the message she is sending out is wait 50 years and then out them when they are dead.
As well as being a popular BBC personality, Saville was very close to the Royal family and the Thatcher government, and I mean VERY close.
He was often asked for advice by the royals, invited to many of their events and even drove them around in his Rolls Royce.
He was invited to 10 Downing Street on many occasions and Thatcher pushed hard to get him a knighthood.
Are you telling me that someone that close to royals and government wouldn’t have been thoroughly vetted by the very top of our secret services and police?
Either there was little evidence of his many crimes, or they knew and covered it up.
You decide.
What she really meant was …..”do you really think if I’d have said something, that I would have had the career that I have?”
Kenneth Clarke looks very worried
"They wouldn`t have taken any notice." So it wasn`t worth even trying? COMPLICIT!
People forget that even talking about paedophilia back then was very taboo. My grandmother said when she was young many people knew about pastors abusing young kids in boarding schools but if you dared even mention it you would get slapped and punished. It was 'normal' to look the other way because instead of outrage towards the paedophile, people lashed out against the person bringing it up.
Things society doesn't wish to acknowledge... ☹️
They all should face charges, including JSP!
She was withholding evidence in affect horrible woman
@@manutd123ist Unfortunately, a rumour is not evidence.
I agree that people are more interested in watching over their own backs than actually blowing the whistle on these sick people. I always thought that Rolf Harris was a wonderful man and he was my most favourite person. Look what he turned out to be and I am sickened by it but nobody spoke out about him because he was so famous and loved by everyone. I have noticed that no matter what a famous person does - murder, rape, child molesting or all three....nothing really happens to them. They are untouchable really because they feel they are better than you or I. They are above the law. Look at the sentence of Harris and Stuart Hall - pathetic and look at that awful creepy Max Clifford, he should have been given a lot more. I bet you they are all being looked after inside, still getting their little perks and the warders, bowing and scraping over them as if they are the bloody King of England. In the eyes of the law they are still celebrities and not criminals at all and we are only having lip service paid to us. Looked after like they are still at home. Stop worshipping these false idols and look at reality. These people are human like all of us who just happened to get the break or whatever was needed to put them where they are today. There are hundreds of Saviles, Harris' and Cliffords out there, hiding in plain sight. They should all be worried now as they could be next. I would really love it if Clifford started to sink some of his clients!
As long as it's somebody else's daughters, nieces were the victims, then what the hell!!
someone should investigate her
Some woman has now said jimmy said to her on a game show in the 70's, "wheres the nearest hospital, and off he went..." This madness just gets worse.
Janet Street Porter did nothing. John Lydon said it and the BBC banned him. JSP had a vested interest. Hypocrite.
Ken Clarke dont look comfy
And we all know why! He's as guilty as anybody else and one of his victims confronted him on camera! Clarke did a runner! As did Clegg when he was confronted!
Could of reported it to police, social services, parents, media. Instead it went on for fourty years.
the bbc and everyone who caused so much anxiety by ignoring cries for help must be forced to pay compensation to these victims
Why does Ken Clarke look so nervous in the background, I wonder?
Koulla Theoharous
how the fuck do you know that ?
Heinrich Dorfmann Why don't you do your research!
Ben Fellows!
You shouldn’t start with those nasty rumours! Never occurred that it can hurt an entire family with unfounded accusations
Ken Clarke theres a man I wouldn't trust with a child
David Cameron had the proof to put him away instead he gets himself up the ladder in Tory seat , we need a revolution in this country
What a revolting person she is. Wish I hadn't.
BBC stopped the documentary going on about Saville as they were paying tribute to how great they thought he was on the same schedule.
JANET KNEW OF OTHER'S !!!! WELL WELL CAT OUT OF THE BAG ! PERIOD.
i love that girls smile at the end....and thats exactly how i would of looked at the old trout....absolutely no excuse what so ever for not blowing the whistle on him....she used emotional blackmail at the end to get out of it and that girls smiled said it all...she aint fooling no one
Personally I found it sanctimonious, the fact that most people in the industry knew about it and didn't come forward reveals a lot about general human nature and that anyone we put in that industry would do the same and remain silent. I bet if that girl was under similar conditions and situated in the same time context she would have dealt with it with the same passivity as those in question.
Nah she definitely wouldn’t have been believed. A woman would not have been believed at all at those times. If you think so you’re incredibly naive
Huh, yeah... the sanctimonious smile of a smug know-it-all who's never had to deal with such horrendous issues in her own life, yet feels ever-so-clever when she lectures others who have about how they 'should' have behaved. People like that need to check themselves a little more often; they know far less than they think they do. I bet she was proudly sitting there thinking "I would've done the right thing if it was me"... yeah, like hell you would, sweetheart. Walk a mile in that person's shoes before you think you can glibly tell them they're walking all wrong.
@@abbieisakilljoy6977 You making stuff up based on your feelings. Please stop!
@@Maerahn Yes, walk a mile in a BBC executive's shoes. It must be really hard to be wealthy, rich person working in a respected position.
Stop protecting ped ophile rings!
The question was, "should savile be investigated after his death?" For personal reasons, Porter never answered that.
Not answering a "no brainer" like "should Savile be investigated after his death", clearly suggests a deliberate cover-up. Maybe even "cover my arse" by this vile woman?
Fact. She knew and she did nothing.
What a prat Porter is. She was a very powerful figure at the BBC and she chose to say nothing,
They wouldn't listen to a woman anyway!
Isn't it amazing how they all say that there was nothing that they could do about it, when they saw what was going on!
who are the other people speak now
What a sick world we are living in not just Porter but also head of the BBC and police did nothing to stop this and all are guilty!!
sick world?nah,it's a beautiful world
@@titteryenot1136 Beautiful world with sick people living on it!!
i saw two interviews with saville which showed his disturbing aggression and in one he talked about how if st peter would not let him into heaven he would break his thumb, not in a joking way but absolutely chillingly serious...this just reveals how sick and threatening he would be to cover up his crimes, so there is absolutely no doubt saville would of just casually said things like 'if someone ever said something bad about me i would break their legs or something like that in an aggresive manner when socialising with people of power and influence given he had the audacity to speak like that in front of the cameras. This would have been in the back of their mind when they heard things about him.
2:37- "I don't want to talk about people who are around now........" So she still knows who is doing what behind the scenes! She's either lying, or is afraid of the backlash on her and losing her job. Instead of reporting sex offenders and protecting children. She says it right here FFS!
'inappropriate'
'uncomfortable'
'quite young people'
Janet Street Porter - a real pain in the arse at the best of times.
My nana loathed saville. And my mum couldn't stand him. Even when I was younger something about saville gave me the creeps. When all this came to light it didn't surprise me or mum one bit
I could never understand whh he kept appearing on TV. He was awkward, stilted , uncomfortable to watch and just....weird. I was a schoolboy at the time and I remember jokes going round about Saville and patients. People knew...
@@allosaurusfragilis7782 He had power, control and high ranking people in his corner.
Difficult to imagine how much clout he had in this day and age ....but thinking back to those days and with the benefit of hindsight......he was very cunning about what he was doing.
This is the time to talk about people that are around now . Let s not wait until they are dead.
Is it right to investigate Jimmy Savile's past now he's dead? No it's not. They should have done it while he was alive. It is clear that it was well known knowledge and that he was being protected by the establishment. Having said that it's better late than never and all those involved in whatever capacity still need to answer questions and face jail time if need be...
Rumour is not the same as evidence. You do not accuse people based on rumour but on evidence. I suspect people in the BBC actually did know and, if that's the case, then people managing Stoke Mandeville Hospital at the time or members of government knew. This goes right through the heart of establishment in that era. However, if you are not old enough to remember Jimmy Saville, you cannot imagine how big he was. He was on primetime BBC for 20 - 30 years, heading iconic programs with viewing figures regularly hitting 15 -20 million and had the ear of Thatcher. I can imagine how difficult it would be to take down a figure like that.
The likelihood of that person being ‘taken down’ instead are guaranteed (not just career wise either)
Why does she not want to talk about people about now ???? Just as bad why is she protecting
She is as guilty as savile..
She should hav got up stood up not done jak
The BBC were complicit in what was going on with Saville and covered it up.
she knew when she was 28 she's had over 25 years to think about it and tell somebody and who were the others she heard stories about.
There was a noticeable slip of the tongue right at the very end when she corrects herself after saying nobody took any notice and then said they wouldn’t have taken any notice. I think she knows that allegations were in fact made to those higher up and brushed under the carpet rather than as she and Esther Rantzen keep claiming that it was all just rumours. Their body language and stuttering and deliberating over answers given tells you all you need to know. They knew what was going on but did and said nothing. In some ways they are as culpable as Saville, Glitter and the rest of the deviants.
Be careful who you name!
@@MarkHewitt Good point made Mark. One should never name names outside of the topic/thread in the discussion.
I think it fair to say that one particular Lady (I'll refer to her as a Lady because she is) raised public awareness of child abuse by founding and promoting a successful charity as far back as 1986.
Savile; (a great friend of the British Royals...) fooled many people using his insidious tactics.
Everyone dissing her really doesn't understand the culture of secrecy at the time and how much power Saville had. It only came out after his death, despite him being way less beloved and famous than he was....THATS how powerful he was...
It wasn't just celebrities that were at it at the Beeb!
I disagree. If they participated in what you call the culture of secrecy, then they were complicit
Why would Newspapers give a damn whether charity money went to the hospitals or not?
It's not like they are the moral majority is it.
What really annoys me about what Janet says is that she tells us that when she became a BBC executive she knew of the rumours and did nothing. She also says that she heard similar rumours about others but that she doesn't want to talk about them. why not? Her feeble excuses about the culture of the time no longer apply, so why not talk about the similar rumours she knows about others? What is she doing about them? waiting until they also die so she can whine pointlessly about them too?
Rumours are just rumours. I don't think anybody can be expected to do a thing on that basis. Any accusations would have been dismissed and it would have been a fool's errand, very self destructive with no results. If you want to blame someone for the situation, blame the offenders.
I cannot stand anyone working in the media. These cowards knew (and know) much, yet chose money and fame over the truth.
Does every single person in authority in TV say “I knew there was something going on?” Yes, they do, male and female. That spells “cover up.”
“Certainly more than rumours,” says JSP. What about all the executives and celebs??
There was an NHS cover up. They knew exactly what he was up to but the charity money was more important than the children he abused.
Sounds like he was allowed a"free hand" with patients
at Leeds Lnfirmary.Any Meical Professional who knew should be jailed.