egafd.com

First like everyone on here, I haven't a clue as to how many of the umpteen people coming forward to complain about sexual assault by Savile are legit or not.

However, one factor in the huge number of complaints that have materialised may be the wonderful world of litigation.

I include a link to the BGAFD's guest publication of the day, The Lawyer.

http://www.thelawyer.com/rjw-on-standby ... 09.article

Apparently there are a number of legal firms such as Russell Jones and Walker (RJW) that specialise in "vicarious liability" cases.

A partner in RJW, Liz Dux told the BBC Radio 4?s World at One that Jim?ll Fix It presenter Savile was working as an agent of the BBC and the hospital Stoke Mandeville, and that if there were suspicions from managers, that duty of care would have been ?heightened?. And that duty of care would leave them open to a vicarious liability charge i.e. Savile was employed to run a kids' programme, he assaulted kids etc.

Dux told the BBC: ?The stories I have been told so far are all very similar sounding so they sound very credible and a lot of them have been backed up by witnesses. I would say these cases have good prospects of succeeding.

She added that it was not necessary to prove managers at the BBC or Stoke Mandeville were aware of the alleged abuse to secure a vicarious liability ruling against each organisation.

Now either this Liz Dux is being misleading in order to generate some income or we appear to be in the strange world where the BBC can be made to fork out compo even when they were not "aware of the alleged abuse" and a potential victim has got a witness (mate, whatever) to back them up and even though Savile ain't alive to defend himself.

As they say in the press, this one will run and run.

You dont need to be aware - this is the crux - as you will know there is duty of care and this is a huge responsibility - JS would have been an employee and as such there would be an obligation for the employer to ensure that the employee worked within the confines of his employ.

- You have molestation of children

- Happening on company property

- Number of people apparently aware of the rumours

This results in implication of the company and liability can be apportioned. Several are going to be drawn through the mire on this one.

If I wire up a plug as an electrician employed by a company and on the way home that evening I am killed. Unfortunately that plug kills someone the next day then its the company that it run through the court, thats the way of the law - if I were still alive the company would come after me, the contract is with the company. Like wise if a person goes to a show and was molested by JS then there is a negligence angle as I would have expected the company to take reasonable steps to ensure my safety and wellbeing.

You dont have to be aware of the issues, you only have to be in the chain of reponsibilities.......

I agree with you David. The dear old public are fed these Saville horror
stories by the Press and now more than 100 folk - none of whom made
major criminal complaints during his lifetime - are suddenly all crying
foul. More will turn up if the BBC or someone offers compensation....
Clearly Mr Saville seems a bad `un and a rum customer, but he has
no chance to defend himself, so its a field day for the Litigation Lawyers. As
you rightly say, the Press and the legal profession will make sure this
story runs and runs.

What is it now? 340 complaints about Saville and not a single one out of all that lot had the guts to pursue the matter while he was still above ground? Sorry but I just don't buy it.

Some of them probably are genuine, but without a doubt just as many of them have to be gold-diggers chancing their arm for a fast buck and their 15 minutes of "fame". No doubt more will follow as well.

And Liz Dux's name and face seem to be popping up all over the place now.

All aboard the gravy train!!!

- Eric

You can see the no win no fee Lawyers lining up now, I reckon there slogan would be 'Did Jim fix it for you?" if so we can recoup ????????????????????????????.
Our representatives are waiting for your call now, and remember it wont cost you a penny..

"not a single one out of all that lot had the guts to pursue the matter while he was still above ground?"

Thats what I find extraordinary, though admittedly there were a few that made complaints which were either ignored or the CPS took the view that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute.

I can understand that young, underage girls, some of them very vulnerable would feel too intimidated to go and complain immediately. They might feel too ashamed etc. as if it was their fault for some reason.

However you would have thought that with the passage of time e.g. 1 year, 5 years, 10 years that feeling of intimidation might change to one of rage. Or alternatively, they may have confided in family, boyfriend, mates etc. And with most people I would have thought if someone close to them admitted being raped by Savile, they would feel like killing the bastard, never mind seeing him in court.

That's what I find so strange. Okay Jimmy Savile was a nationally known figure, on the tele, raising millions for charity etc etc. But he wasn't a Cabinet Minister! And there have been many more powerful than Savile who have been brought down over the decades and ended up inside a jail, as a result of investigations, surveillance, stings etc etc.

It's just gobsmacking that this appears to have gone on for so long without anyone at least making a big effort to fix him.

He hasn't actually been found guilty of anything. Without a trial and him being present can anything be done? A person must be able to defend themselves and show their evidence. Or is that bollocks????????

Well there are two types of justice, I guess in legal terms.

THere is criminal justice and I think that is a complete no-no because of the reasons that you have given i.e. Savile is dead and cannot defend himself.

Then there is civil justice including compensation as a result of someone/something being sued.

Now clearly I am no legal person, but either the partner in the law firm that I mention in my initial post is bullshitting completely or she actually does think that there is a case for successfully suing the Beeb, Stoke Mandeville etc for "vicarious liability"on the back of witness statements.

And my understanding is that the High Court has already given leave to a plaintiff to sue a diocese in the UK in the case of someone who was allegedly raped by a man of the cloth who is no longer alive.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jul/ ... -liability

Time will tell.

The bigger this gets the less the impact. At this rate he must have done nothing but molest children. How he fitted in a career as a DJ and fundraiser is a mystery. Surely someone had the nerve to challenge his reputation before he was knighted?

He had friends in very very high places apparrently. Maybe he knew things that would make our eyes pop out about those in the establishment,and threatened to expose the lot if ever brought down. Im sure there are plenty of underage girls who were molested by him,but there are probably many fake stories too. He certainly evaded justice somehow.