« Topics
123
Steve in Pudsey7,881 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Yorkshire Look North (Yorkshire)
Interesting that BBC4 aren't showing DLT, yet will apparently show Jonathan King episodes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8835884/BBC-apology-to-Jonathan-King-after-he-is-cut-from-repeat.html

It's disappointing that DLT is tarred with the same brush as Savile, without wanting to condone what he did, there is a world of different between what DLT was convicted of and what Savile is accused of.
Write that down in your copybook now.
3
james-20011,533 posts since 13 Sep 2015
Central (East) East Midlands Today
If Neil Fox had been convicted last week, you can be pretty sure he'd have been up there with Savile in the media's eyes. Heck, the Daily Mail's doing it even though he got off.

Let's be honest, a lot of the Yewtree thing is a witchhunt- it's very telling that of the 14 charges DLT was on trial for, they could only get one to stick (and even that one had to go to a retrial). They're determined to find something, anything, to try and make up for their failings in letting Savile get away for half a century. And while some things have been worthwhile (i.e. Harris, Hall, Glitter), there's been plenty of stuff that probably should never have gone to court in the first place (Fox, Roache, Le Vell)- and even being found not guilty won't take away the tarnishing of their repuatations.
Last edited by james-2001 on 27 December 2015 12:01am - 2 times in total
4
james-20011,533 posts since 13 Sep 2015
Central (East) East Midlands Today
And another thing about the hysteria (though I'd hope not on here), that if you talk about how Yewtree's been a witchhunt, what DLT did isn't that bad in comparison (and doesn't deserve to be yanked off TV for it) and that these people shouldn't be whitewashed out of history gets people accusing you of defending what they did and being an apologist or whatever, which is just as ridiculous and not true. I'm sure you can say Savile & Harris should be broadcast without agreeing with their actions or being a paedophile yourself.

Sadly that's the sort of "you're either with us or against us" attitude this sort of thing seems to whip up. Obviously the Daily Mail brigade aren't going to let a single frame of Savile, Harris or DLT get broadcast, sadly- just look at the hysteria whipped up a few months back when a split-second shot of Savile popped up in TOTP2.
4
RR250 posts since 4 Jan 2003
DLT did seem to get a harsh sentence, but is he not currently still serving it (a two year suspended sentence)? In such a case it would seem reasonable to reconsider whether he can be shown on repeats (of totp) once he finishes the sentence? This would also be consistent with the King story, and would prevent future issues over any number of convicted singers, actors and presenters being shown or not shown.

Personally, I would show all TOTPs, but understand why the BBC acts in the way it does, but do feel they would help themselves in the long run by having a consistent policy on such matters, rather than a "bow to the mob"policy, as it currently appears, however unfairly. I also think that there is little or no point in worrying too much about what they do with 35 year old repeats of entertainment shows.
1
Whataday7,111 posts since 13 Sep 2001
HTV Wales Wales Today
Let's be honest, a lot of the Yewtree thing is a witchhunt- it's very telling that of the 14 charges DLT was on trial for, they could only get one to stick (and even that one had to go to a retrial).


Without being specific to any particular case, historic sexual abuse is very difficult to prove, so it is not surprising that out of numerous allegations, few result in a conviction.
5
rdobbie392 posts since 21 Jan 2003
Let's be honest, a lot of the Yewtree thing is a witchhunt- it's very telling that of the 14 charges DLT was on trial for, they could only get one to stick (and even that one had to go to a retrial).


The one charge he was finally convicted on was a fresh one that wasn't part of his first trial. At some point after the first trial, somebody made the police aware that a woman had, some years earlier, given a public media interview during which she chatted in a light-hearted and humorous manner about DLT having once touched her breasts.

The police then contacted the woman to ask her to give evidence. At no stage had she ever made a complaint to the police about it. Obviously it would be illegal for me to name her on here, but it is not illegal to listen to the interview that she willingly put into the public domain, and to form one's own opinions about it. In my view there is no indication in that interview that she experienced anything more than mild surprise and annoyance as a result of DLT touching her breasts through her clothes (it must also be stressed that she was an adult when it happened). Of course, that's not to say that it wasn't sexual assault, but for DLT to be tarnished with the Savile brush for that one single offence is utterly ludicrous.

It's worth also noting that DLT lost his house in order to pay for his legal defence fees – and I'm talking here about the defence of the numerous charges he was acquitted on in the first trial (under new legal rules you can't reclaim your defence costs even when you're found not guilty - Michael Le Vell and William Roache have both lost a fortune accordingly).

So, without wishing to condone the clearly illegal act of groping a part of someone's body without their consent, I do think the overall price paid by DLT has been disproportionate to his wrongdoing.
1
Interceptor613 posts since 20 Oct 2014
I never thought I'd feel sorry for DLT, but I do. I agree with everything above. I also think it's a pretty poor show that the female personality chose to maintain her right to anonymity even after making comments several times in the public domain about it (in fact, it was at one stage part of a routine I understand!).

So, without wishing to condone the clearly illegal act of groping a part of someone's body without their consent, I do think the overall price paid by DLT has been disproportionate to his wrongdoing.

Agree particularly with this.
ttt245 posts since 15 Aug 2015
DLT's punishment seems particularly egregious when you remember that Leslie Grantham has not been subject to any such blackballing from the media for a far, far more serious crime than Travis committed -- and indeed (and this might not be popular in some quarters but it must be said) more serious than Hall or Harris's crimes.
1