The title of the report says it all. An exercise in entirely one-sided justice is the very antithesis of justice. The Met Police have no basis even in principle of concluding that Savile was a serial sexual abuser, but have instead simply assumed his guilt despite all of the well-researched reasons for being highly suspicious of retrospective accusations where sex is involved – see my previous blog posts on this.
It is not tenable in the light of all of these major factors casting very serious doubt on historical sexual allegations against a celebrity through a media and police trawl to accept that multiple accusations in any way provide mutual corroboration. On the contrary, they undermine each other in that they provide a key basis for elaboration or invention. The Met Police claim that the accusations are fully believable because of their similarity! Of course they are similar: what else would be expected given the trawling?! The stupidity here is elementary.
The report deliberately misrepresents in using the terms 'allegation' and 'report' to conflate the date (year) in which an offence was claimed to have occurred with the date (year) when the claim was formally made to police. There is no mention in the report of even a single allegation made at a time contemporary with its supposed occurrence, so all of the claims are retrospective -- and retrospective by several decades.
As a parallel, look at the similar sexual abuse hysteria in Portugal where both the leading TV icon and the leader of the main political-Left party in the country were convicted, only later for their convictions to be quashed when finally it was accepted that there was no proper evidence against them. Cross-corroboration here too had been the basis of building the whole house of cards, and likewise after police and media trawling.
What we will see now is the dismal spectacle of accusers on the make taking out civil actions through the waiving of the normal there-year limit on retrospective claims.
In my previous blog posting I have outlined the likely scenario of Savile's behaviour, and that this was hardly unusual for a high-status male. Likewise it would be usual for girls who were willing at the time to come to regret their acquiescence, and for all sorts of – often trivial – reasons.
Inasmuch as allegations have any basis beyond invention they are likely to be distortions or gross misrepresentations of events; and many are likely to be 'false memory' constructions.
There is an outside chance -- of course, and this is not to be denied -- that Savile really was a serial sexual abuser, but, even if this were the case, if evidence were to be considered dispassionately then this can never be proven even according to a civil let alone criminal standard of proof. Obviously, evidence will not be considered at all dispassionately. It will not be 'considered' in any meaningful sense of the word, but merely paraded pejoratively.
An alarming aspect of the Met Police report is that it is a collaboration with a demonstrably male-hating political campaigning organisation – the NSPCC – with the two authors being one from each organisation. The Met Police author, Detective Superintendent David Gray, should resign; as should the senior policeman responsible, Commander Peter Spindler. Ditto Keir Starmer, the ever hapless idiot Director of Public Prosecutions.
The Savile hysteria will go down as a very dark chapter in British history, where there was a collective refusal to think in any way logically or fairly, and instead to express unhindered the pure prejudice of how we have all evolved to consider men generically when it comes to sex. It is as crude as that.