Jimmy Savile and the two-faced watch
It has become impossible to miss the stuff that’s coming to the surface about the late Sir Jimmy Savile. If it’s true, am I shocked? Yes, very. Am I surprised? No, not very.
I had occasion to meet Sir Jimmy in the late 70s, when he was on a visit to the state mental hospital in Carstairs, Scotland, that being one of my civil service responsibilities at the time. I accompanied him on a tour of the place; it was, as you’d expect, full of very disturbed people, and I was struck by the way that he was able to communicate with all but one of two of them. He spent a couple of minutes with as many as he could and left each one calmer and happier than they had been. I’ve never forgotten that; the man had a genuine and unusual gift.
However I still remember also, the Jimmy who sat later and chatted with the small group of invited journalists who had been with us. As I listened to him, I tried to get a grip of the depth of the man, to see what made him different. But I couldn’t; he seemed entirely two-dimensional, as if his true self was hidden behind a very thick wall. But he let one thing slip. On that day he was wearing a wrist watch, or rather two wristwatches on a single strap, one front, one back. Someone asked him why. His reply: ‘Well, as it ‘appens, it’s like this. If you’re with a young lady in certain circumstances, it means you never need to move your arm to see what time it is.’
Seems that more than Jimmy’s time-piece may have been two faced.
Added October 6.
But then again, a few days down the road, and I’m disturbed for another reason. People are coming out of the woodwork with tales of abuse. They may well be genuine; let’s say they are. However they are not proven. Yet this morning I heard a BBC executive declare JS guilty, when he said that there is no doubt these things happened.
Sorry, mate, but while all this seems to have been an open secret, if his hand-wringing contemporaries are to be believed as they rush to distance themselves from potential scandal, not a single charge was laid while all these allegations were allegedly taking place. JS was never put on trial. Indeed a police investigation into a complaint was dismissed out of hand.
Now that Jimmy is dead, of course, there is no burden of proof, and in the current climate, anyone who comes forward to declare that he had horns under that hair and a hole in the ‘Jim’ll Fit It’ chair to accommodate his tail will be given a ready hearing and presented as a credible witness.
What we’re seeing now is a media lynch mob. If that doesn’t disturb you, it should.
Quintin Jardine's blog 
Like you I was not surprised, but at first I was shocked that this should be revealed so soon after his death. Whatever happened to never speaking ill of the dead? And there is no-one to defend the allegations. If true, then those who claim to have been abused do need to be heard, but what really sickens me is the apparent cover-up. People like Paul Gambucini admitting he was aware of what was going on, but felt ‘blackmailed’ by Sir Jimmy who, it is claimed, said the charities would lose out if he was brought to court; and others who knew what was happening and kept quiet (including the Police) are no better than Savile himself.
I’m with Joy 100% here. I’m not surprised – the man always struck me as being very, very creepy, but I don’t understand why everybody has waited until the man is gone and can’t defend himself. I realise that people said he was the ‘guv’ and you did what he said, but his time was long over by the time he died, so that doesn’t hold water anymore, and it’s not as if his alleged victims could be hurt by him, or embarrassed by him. I want to say something very cynical here (along the lines of ‘jumping’ and ‘bandwagon’) but it detracts from the true victims, if what the allegations are saying is true.