Corpse of Sir Jimmy Savile to Be Exhumed and Put on Trial
The Crown Prosecution Service has announced that the corpse of Sir Jimmy Savile is to be exhumed and brought to court in order that the allegations against him regarding the sexual abuse of minors can be put before a jury.
Although the move is unprecedented, there is no specific requirement under UK law that the defendant must be alive, so long as he or she is physically present in court to be cross-examined.
Founder of ‘Childline’ and TV presenter Esther Rancid declared the news to be a victory for the victims who had suddenly ‘found the courage to come forward’. Meanwhile, children’s charities such as the NSPCC also praised the move, declaring that they hoped other deceased nonces could be dug up and brought to justice. They also demanded that the EU bring forward a directive allowing all member states to prosecute deceased paedophiles who have escaped justice in their lifetimes.
Sophie Haggesicht, the head of the leading German child protection charity, told reporters that she hoped to have the remains of both Beethoven and Goethe exhumed and put on trial. French prosecutors, however, caused a stir when they suggested that legendary feminist Simone de Beauvoir would have her skeleton dug up to face the wrath of the mob. Women’s rights groups immediately branded the move ‘an outrage’, and claimed that de Beauvoir was only acting under the patriarchal sway of her lover Jean Paul Sartre, and that it was ‘structurally impossible’ for a woman to be a paedophile.
(see also : http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/12939/)
After Saville is duly convincted (I’m assuming due to his current condition, he won’t contest the evidence), the United Queendom will bury him in the sea next to Osama bin Laden.
I’m not sure that the move is unprecedented, however. If I remember correctly, during the Witch Trials of the 17th Century, some corpses were exhumed and tried. It fits in well with the spirit of paedohysteria.
Eric
4 Oct 12 at 9:13 am
I guess that brings new meaning to the term “habeas corpus” …which after all literally translated means “You have to bring the body”. Well, might as well drag a corpse into the court room. These days even as a living person you are little more than dead meat if you have to stand trial for child abuse allegations.
or was Jimmy Savile maybe cremated? It says bring the body, not bring the ashes…
inclinedreader
4 Oct 12 at 9:17 am
Pass me the off switch. Do yourselves a favour and switch off the news, especially feminist friendly special princess only channels -cough-BBC-cough-and-ITV-and-CH4-cough in fact just switch it off. There’s still some power of choosing your own news, the Internet for example, watching TV forces you to view rather and join in on the hysterical highly defamatory indefensible witch hunts that the UK has turned into, without caring about your consent. The remote control can even those odds. Let me out I want my money back. That’s to you, BBC! Bloodhungering Babes Communist channel.
When the channels become more balanced, less gossipy & less reputation damaging then the TV will be safe to switch back on again. Doubt that will happen here though unless there’s some kind of paradigm shift. Rest in dignity, Sir Jimmy, you poor sod. I hope the conspiring bitch’s get it right back, many times as worse. They deserve it since they didn’t do anything before your death to allow a fair trial and waited for the kill, a second death, of your good name. Plotting hell!
Dave
4 Oct 12 at 10:29 am
In Australia we say “bring HOME The Ashes”. It’s a special trophy that the England and Australia cricket teams compete for biennially.
If England won them, the Australian team goes to England to try and win the series to “bring home The Ashes”.
The Ashes, btw are the burnt remains of a wicket’s bail that were burnt then placed in a small terracotta urn, after Australia beat England in a match at The Oval (in London) in 1882. They have competed for them (roughly) every 2 years since.
The next series begins in Australia early next year, thus England hope to ‘bring home the Ashes’ at the end of the series.
Yes, OT I realize…
About trying the corpses for child sex offences, just be careful some trolling white-knight paedocrites, Redditors or femihags don’t actually think you’re serious (as one redditor did recently in response to a similarly satirical post) and start asking when and where the trials are going to be held, so they can organize a large gaggle of ghoulish vigilantes to congregate outside the courthouse where their remains will be tried and found guilty…
It would be interesting to hear what they would demand by way of their hateful chanting and placard wielding:
There isn’t much point in hanging them, burning them and castration isn’t even possible, yet they’d be brainless enough to derive some sort of perverted pleasure even from hanging or mutilating a sack of bones!
Alan Vaughn
4 Oct 12 at 10:50 am
“(see also : http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/12939/)”
I did and also read a few of the Related articles. There is a good deal excellent anti-paedohysteria reading in there and some very gutsy writers who provided it all.
Great work!
Alan Vaughn
4 Oct 12 at 11:09 am
you can still take your cue from the old Egyptians; they were the first ancient people who understood that by destroying or tarnishing the memory of a person (i.e. a pharaoh), you can destroy everything a person was or stood for.
Take the case of the heretic pharaoh Akhenaten in particular. Who during his reign abolished the old polytheistic gods and instated the sun god Aten. After Akhenaten’s death, the old priests brought back the previous gods, and nearly all hieroglyph inscriptions in the Egyptian kingdom that mentioned Akhenaten were defaced and obliterated. In ancient Egypt, this was thought to be literally a punishment worse than death, and even affected a dead person’s standing in the afterlife.
inclinedreader
4 Oct 12 at 1:14 pm
I think there was a mad ancient emperor who, having lost a sea battle due to bad water currents, ordered that the ocean be flogged. A soldier dutifully waded into the water and flogged it. The ocean learned its lesson that day eh!
This latest lunacy with the corpse of Savile is just as absurd. I wonder if his refusal to answer questions will see him jailed for contempt of court? Maybe they will sentence him “for the term of his natural life”.
Deano
4 Oct 12 at 2:17 pm
Corpus delicti, literally
Well, the snowball’s gathering size and speed. Hardly surprising, but they’ve got Gary Glitter in it now-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9586024/Gary-Glitter-raped-a-girl-in-Jimmy-Saviles-dressing-room.html
-and the “other unnamed entertainer” who will presumably be named in short order. I’m taking it that the BBC is being placed squarely in the frame so they can be sued.
Intriguing things- the review of the TV programme in the Tele seems to report that the worst allegations were one of a hand up a jumper, and another of fiddle around in a girl’s knickers. Deplorable if they happened, but strange that that’s the worst they had if suddenly now we’ve got gang rape by Savile, Glitter and “unnamed other”.
There was one other interesting allegation in the Telegraph- one girl said she looked forward to his visits- day out, nice food, cigarettes, except for the groping and she once gave him a blow job. If anything, it’s a pretty appalling indictment of 1970s institutional care if sucking Jimmy Savile’s wrinkly old cock is superior to a day in the institution.
Looks like this one’s going to run and run. Since the courts are now obligated to accept historic allegations of rape as genuine, I wouldn’t want to be mister Unnamed-But-Soon-To-Be-Leaked Celebrity. Having said that, it will be a reasonable test of veracity, since it would have to have been on a day when Savile, Glitter and Whoever were all simultaneously in Television Centre at the same time.
Ian B
4 Oct 12 at 3:40 pm
And this is the woman making the accusation (WARNING):
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/03/article-2212445-155412A4000005DC-165_634x357.jpg
theantifeminist
4 Oct 12 at 4:41 pm
yuck.
inclinedreader
4 Oct 12 at 6:01 pm
Deano:
That was the Persian Emporer Xerxes. He was well-known throughout antiquity as having an uncontrollable temper.
If I remember another story about Xerxes, he caught some of his men doing something he disapproved of and they blamed on some officials who had recently died. Xerxes ordered their corpses dug up and thrown to the lions, which inspired the Old Testament story about the prophet Daniel in the lions’ den.
Eric
4 Oct 12 at 7:20 pm
Ick—talk about adding insult to injury! The false accusers couldn’t even come up with someone Saville would have been proud of having!
Eric
4 Oct 12 at 7:22 pm
Dave,
Just to show how bad things are on this side of the Atlantic, a lot of us read the BBC because it’s less biased than than the American news!
Luckily, the Russian media has English-text websites now…
Eric
4 Oct 12 at 7:24 pm
Bloody horrible bias on the BBC, Eric. No channel is safe from it these days but the BBC is a symbol of the anti male media mafia that stalks the UK. The licence & fee need to go, so the insult of having to pay for that Stalin friendly anti male gossip is removed from causing injury to pocket. Then they shut down and have to go pay per view or advert based and who will watch then? Not many I hope and that’s just too bad. Shutdown the BBC and start again.
ITV, stop viewing it so advertisers retract their fees, hurt them in the wallet they might change and genuinely become the independent in the ITV title they are “supposed” to be.
CH4, Jesus don’t get me started but a similar tactic is desired of ad revenue removal.
Achieved initially by simply switching off and finding news that can be male friendly elsewhere, may see a slump in viewing figures and advertisers might get jittery, sending the feminists a message that the viewers are voting their man-hate dissatisfaction with their wallets and the SSisterhood might think again before launching repeat ‘get this man for this week’ campaign’s. The BBC licence being revoked is pure fantasy but a nice one. The politically correct crowd would have a panic attack if their gravy train suddenly ceased. But FFS something has to be done. All that action wouldn’t be to ‘get them’ like they have got Sir Jim & co. It would be punishment. And they deserve it for turning mere allegation into auto-guilty sentences against a man that cannot defend his innocence and have exploited the situation resulting in a complete burnout of trust for the feminazi media.
Dave
4 Oct 12 at 7:53 pm
Have you all seen this : http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/10/04/abortion-ship-denied-entrance-to-moroccan-port/
Feminist abortion tourists can sail into international waters and kill children, openly boasting about it.
theantifeminist
4 Oct 12 at 8:10 pm
Oh right
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9588090/Freddie-Starr-sees-libel-injunction-overturned.html
That didn’t take long then. This whole particular allegation looks a bit strange though. Whether or not Savile was up to no good, this thing with him, Glitter and UnnamedCelebrity in a dressing room at the BBC… well… *raises eyebrow*.
Ian B
4 Oct 12 at 8:47 pm
the skankess running the “Childrens’ Charity” (i.e., her own publically funded slush fund) is named Esther Rancid
the name fits, and she wears it well!
surely she is every bit as Rancid as her predatory kkkulture
folks if theyre exhuming dead guys for prosecution of “sex crimes” then the prognosis for actual living males in the western gynogulags aint good
ray
4 Oct 12 at 9:42 pm
Ray, you are probably aware, but just in case you’re not: this article was a bit of satirical alteration of the original article by theantifeminist, to highlight the absolute stupidity and disturbingly low level that British paedohysteria has now sunk to.
The broadcaster and founder of children’s charity organization ‘Childline’ (and bitter, misandric femihag) who was recently most supportive of this ridiculous witch-hunt over allegations made against a well-known but now deceased radio and TV personality: Jimmy Savile, is actually named: Ms Esther Rantzen…
Alan Vaughn
4 Oct 12 at 10:18 pm
This has happened before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaver_Synod
Jack
4 Oct 12 at 10:22 pm
Haha, I certainly don’t do satire as well as the likes of Paul Elam and JohnTheOther, unfortunately.
I expect it to sink even lower over the next few weeks. I don’t know if non-British readers are aware, but currently in the UK we have a tragically real child protection story running at the same time as the Savile one. A 5 year old girl has been missing for several days, and it doesn’t look good at all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2212734/April-Jones-latest-We-searching-night-vow-police-continue-hunt.html
Of course the Sexual Trade Union will no doubt be orgasming already at the thought of how they can exploit the inevitable mob hysteria to press for new ‘anti-paedo’ legislatiion. New laws that will actually have nothing to do with protecting toddlers from random psychopaths or perverts, but everything to do with deterring ordinary men from even thinking about any nubile female below the age of 25.
theantifeminist
4 Oct 12 at 10:27 pm
An interesting article about some Australian-Italian girls living in Australia who were ordered by the court to return to their father in Italy. The mother hid them, appealed to the court and lost. The court ordered the girls to be flown back yesterday. An MRA agency here (headed by a woman?) agrees. I feel sorry for the girls who obviously had lives here, but the story is interesting nonetheless:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-04/rights-groups-welcome-court-order-to-send-girls-back-to-italy/4296052
Daniel
4 Oct 12 at 10:29 pm
LOL—Where’s the feminist media now, complaining about male ‘sex tourists’ abroad?
Eric
5 Oct 12 at 1:07 am
Antifeminist:
I remember once on the Spearhead, Futrelle got exposed and humiliated for quotemining a comment thread that had remarks from a known troll who’d been banned from something like 12 MRA blogs. Feminists and manginas are notrious for lacking sense of humor…
Eric
5 Oct 12 at 1:12 am
I cannot believe the vile opinions that people express on this website. I seriously beggars belief.
Anonymous
6 Oct 12 at 4:24 pm
*NOTE – this creature got here by Googling ‘anti jimmy savile’.
theantifeminist
6 Oct 12 at 8:30 pm
Which vile opinion do think they were referring to? Burying Saville at sea, or trying him as a witch?
Eric
6 Oct 12 at 11:50 pm
Anonymous, it’s fine to comment anonymously on this blog, but please tell us: are you another bitter and jealous man-hating feminist troll, or perhaps just another (much more common, thus more likely) ‘concerned’ paedodrite?
If you fit the latter category, you don’t need to become a vigilante paedo hater to fool the world into thinking you hate paedos, to cover your own ‘dirty little secret’ (that you want to have consensual sex with 16 and 17 year old women that your feminist heroines have now (re)defined as innocent little ‘children’), because under that definition: ALL (non-gay) MEN are paedophiles anyway…
Alan Vaughn
7 Oct 12 at 12:21 am
Antifeminist:
I’ve noticed while researching several topics lately, that links to this blog from Google are fairly high on the list. Seeing now that it took less than two hours for my video link on the other thread to get swatted down by Youtube, I think it’s safe to assume that the femihags are paying close attention to this site! LOL
Eric
7 Oct 12 at 4:21 am
PS: Just as an experiment, I Googled ‘Strong Arm Squad of the Future.’ The ‘History of Feminism’ site comes up third on the search engine, ahead of feminist film critiques and silent-film history sites!
Eric
7 Oct 12 at 4:25 am
They are indeed now planning to dig Sir Jimmy up and burn him :
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sir-jimmy-savile-family-consider-1372123
Who needs satire?
‘It is feared hundreds of women were assaulted by Savile’.
And everyone of them is entitled to victim compensation even without a trial under UK law. And not one of them came forward in the 50 years while Jimmy was alive (and a massive celebrity).
theantifeminist
11 Oct 12 at 10:10 am
Which to any normal thinking and rational person should only mean one possible explanation: they’re all LYING!
In any other situation it would only mean that they’re all LYING, thus they would all be ignored or even charged with FRAUD.
But of course when an accused perpetrator is dead, he cannot prove that his accusers are liars, not that it makes that much difference anyway:
When it comes to child-sex offences: a single accusation only, without evidence or witness testimony, is all that’s required as PROOF of guilt, thus full conviction, even when the accused is alive!
How LOW does one have to stoop just to get a bit of lousy money??
And how LOW does the feminist totalitarian British government have to go to maintain or elevate their all-important societal paedohystera?
It seems they are now quite happy to pay people to LIE just to increase the British public’s vigilante hatred of non-existent paedophile monsters and now, even DEAD ones are acceptable scapegoats.
This is enough to make George Orwell envious, because even he couldn’t have written a fictional narrative depicting a society so dependent on such high-level, institutionalized HATRED…
Alan Vaughn
11 Oct 12 at 10:51 am
As I am unfortunately male and unfortunately single, my oh-so-worthy paedo hunting work colleagues have made it clear to me that I am under suspicion of being a nonce.
I understand that, in accordance with UK law, I am guilty until proven innocent. It is unclear to me what evidence of innocence is required. Perhaps I am expected to sleep with each of these fugly, twisted femihags? This is improbable as I wouldn’t touch them with a barge-pole, even if they were the last people on the planet.
I am thus resigned to my fate. If I am not dragged from my home and lynched, I fully expect to be burned alive in the car park at work. I’ve offered to bring some fire lighters and a zippo as I’m feeling pretty fed-up anyway.
John of Arc
12 Oct 12 at 12:23 am
I’ve gone through this myself John, and in fact, it largely led to me joining the MRM (from reading AngryHarry – little did I know that 99% of the movement are not willing to even discuss these issues for fear of losing the power to control the medieval economic resource value of their American teenage daughter’s (non-existant)virginity).
I have also been in situations where I have met a woman in a work or social situation who finds herself attracted to me, that when I tell her that I am single and yet continue to show no sexual interest in her, she spreads gossip that I must be a paedophile. In my view, this is nothing short of attempted rape.
theantifeminist
12 Oct 12 at 7:41 am
Your description sounds true to form.
It’s too difficult to rape the man physically so the feminist will seek to dominate and defile him through other means. I’d argue that, in the long term, this is no less damaging than an actual rape.
Some men still need to wake up to this reality.
John of Arc
12 Oct 12 at 1:04 pm
@theantifeminist,
I hope you can help our new friend John of Arc as I’m sure you can do that much better than me, so I won’t reply to his comment yet.
What I really wanted to ask you though, is about SirJimmy Savile.
I have read all the articles you have linked to so far, but have not read anything in any of them that discusses or mentions anything about wherther or not the Queen will revoke his Knighthood?
Have I missed that somewhere, or is he still the late SIR Jimmy as far as the Queen is concerned?
(I know that to most of the British
Inquisitorspublic, he is the late Jimmy Savile – NONCE, but thought maybe the Queen has other ideas. She did after all, thoroughly enjoy a concert during that era where 4 very well known Liverpudlians entertained her by singing about being in love with underage girls)..?Alan Vaughn
13 Oct 12 at 2:51 am
Actually there is a big debate over that and even the Prime Minister has got involved chasing votes. Even though it is impossible to strip somebody of their knighthood posthumously (because the knighthood only exists whilst the person is living), David Cameron is chasing the vagina and mob vote by promising to do just that :
http://news.sky.com/story/995210/jimmy-savile-cameron-hints-over-knighthood
theantifeminist
13 Oct 12 at 5:15 am
Not sure how you think I can help him other than sympathise with him as I did by making clear I’ve been through the same thing.
What advice can I give him? Fuck the hags at his work in order to stop the allegations? As I’ve made clear, that would be the equivalent of letting himself be raped.
Go to the police and make a complaint of attempted rape? Mmmm…no. (even though he would have legal and moral grounds to do so).
Brian Rothary I think mentions that the medieval witchhunts only ended when the accused learnt to accuse their accusers. Unfortunately, it’s almost impossible to accuse a woman of being a paedophile – you won’t be taken seriously. Contrary to the historical fiction presented to us, almost as many men as women were accused and burnt as witches. The present paedo witch hunt, as we know, is about persecuting male sexuality only.
I hope John d’arc continues to comment here however, even if I can’t help him, as he obviously gets what the STU are up to, from unfortunate personal experience…
theantifeminist
13 Oct 12 at 5:33 am
Sir Jimmy Saville is now in the hands of our Father,,,,,,,,,God is our Judge
Anonymous
6 Nov 12 at 10:58 pm