really? not only is he accused by multiple victims
People working in BBC has admitted to looking the other way
it wasnt talked about

charity? his way of finding kids? him thinking he paid his due? who knows`

but dont make up excuses for him, this thread is very provoking to me
victims rarelt felt they could step forward back then they wouldnt bee believed
they didnt know there was others, because back then no one talked about it

having a poor or hard upbringing is NEVER an excuse to treat others poorly

I can't believe that you're actually being serious here.... as Arti says, that vile man used his 'charitable work' as a means to gain access to his victims, many of whom were extremely vulnerable.

And, as for his victims not reporting the crimes. This was the 70's and 80's, totally different times to nowadays. Without corroboration victims of sexual abuse were seldom believed when their attacker wa not famous, can you imagine the furore if someone made an allegation about someone as well known and influential as Saville was in his heyday?

Enough people at the BBC and other adults who worked with him knew what was going on but they chose to ignore it and they are the ones who should have it on their conscience, there is no defending this sick pervert. I'm disappointed that a so called woman thinks like you.

Almost certain that he was a real bad guy.
What's so sad is that the whole history of TOP OF THE POPS has been tarnished and to be frowned upon.
So many loved the show, and so many Superstars performed on TOP OF THE POPS

I am not a "so called woman'.
Imagine if a colleague or neighbor accused you of being untoward them or a minor and it wasn't true.
Would you sit back and say or do nothing?. I doubt that very much.
We have a little thing in the UK it's called innocent until proven otherwise.
Harvey Weinstein was alive to answer to allegations against him.
Jimmy Savile was dead for almost 18 months before someone said something then others came out.

I don't know why I'm biting as you have to be on some sort of sick wind up here.

But because this is a subject closet my heart, I suggest you check your facts.... it was public knowledge/ rumour long before he died. Have you heard of Louis Theroux? Check his catalogue of work.

I think it's fair enough to ask the question because it is sometimes puzzling why people don't speak out. Also being convicted doesn't always guarantee being guilty - e.g. many people were concerned about the extremely flimsy 'evidence' that led to Rolf Harris being convicted, and one of the four accusations that led to this was later thrown out because all the evidence pointed to him never having visited the venue where the alleged offence took place. Another accuser had a relationship with him until she was about 30, and only 'spoke out' after he refused to loan (or perhaps give) her a large sum of money. She claimed his actions when she was under 16 took place while his daughter was sleeping in the same room - which his daughter considered nonsense. None of a set of later accusations led to him being found guilty, and it seemed the post-Savile climate was a major factor when he was convicted.

However, the crimes of Savile were a very different matter. Yes, he did an extraordinary amount for charity but it's dubious whether any of it reflected a wish to do good - I believe there were even cases when he assaulted young people he was left alone with during hospital visits. Even when he was running marathons, etc, it was probably all part of an attempt to build a reputation as a virtuous person. Another example of the way he manipulated people was by developing a good reputation with the police - who then seemed to take his side when he referred to certain people being liable to make an accusation.

While I'm not condoning BBC's 'tolerance' of Savile, I think this also reflected a liberal, very different era (around the 1970s) in which - compared to now - there was very little sense that young fans who strove to seek out their idols might need to be protected from them. People seemed to give far less thought to how damaging the consequences could be.