:00:13. > :00:17.This programme contains scenes some viewers may find upsetting.
:00:17. > :00:21.Four weeks ago, an ITV documentary broadcast allegations that one of
:00:21. > :00:27.this country's best-known TV stars, a man of the people, a friend of
:00:27. > :00:31.royalty, a devout Catholic who comforted the sick - was a child
:00:31. > :00:41.abuser. And he'd been allowed to get away with it unchecked for 50
:00:41. > :00:42.
:00:42. > :00:45.years. How did one man con the Since being exposed, more than 200
:00:45. > :00:49.people have claimed they were Savile's victims. Now, finally,
:00:49. > :00:53.their stories are being heard. is a bloody tragedy that this has
:00:53. > :00:58.happened when he's died - all this should have come out way before his
:00:58. > :01:03.death. But these girls are left with that legacy, and who's going
:01:03. > :01:07.to pay for that? The NHS, the Home Office and local authorities may
:01:07. > :01:11.all face legal action for failing to protect Savile's many young
:01:11. > :01:15.victims. It's growing by the minute.
:01:15. > :01:19.Initially, it was a few, and now they're coming in all the time, and
:01:19. > :01:23.they're from the variety of different organisations. But no
:01:23. > :01:30.organisation is under more fire than the one that made Jimmy Savile
:01:30. > :01:34.a star, the BBC. Jimmy Savile's victims have faced years of pain.
:01:34. > :01:40.We owe it to them and to our audiences to understand how this
:01:41. > :01:45.could have happened and to make sure that everything we do ensures
:01:45. > :01:52.that nothing like this could ever happen again. This is the worst
:01:52. > :01:55.crisis that I can remember in my nearly 50 years at the BBC. Tonight,
:01:55. > :02:01.Panorama asks just how much BBC staff really knew about Savile's
:02:01. > :02:06.abuse. After they had gone, he indicated to me in a nudge, nudge,
:02:06. > :02:11.wink, wink sort of way that he'd just had sex with them. I didn't
:02:11. > :02:20.believe him. And reveals the inside story of why a BBC investigation
:02:20. > :02:22.that could have exposed Savile almost a year ago was spiked
:02:22. > :02:28.instead. We weren't asked to find more evidence or anything like that.
:02:28. > :02:33.We weren't asked to get more people on camera. We were asked to stop
:02:33. > :02:36.working on the story. It raises questions for the very top of the
:02:36. > :02:40.corporation. You know, ever since the decision was taken to shelve
:02:41. > :02:43.our story, I've not been happy with public statements made by the BBC.
:02:43. > :02:53.I think they're very misleading about the nature of the
:02:53. > :03:04.
:03:04. > :03:11.That's me. That's the only surviving photograph of me that I
:03:11. > :03:14.know of. On November the 14th last year, Karin Ward did an interview
:03:14. > :03:19.with the BBC's Newsnight programme. In doing so, she became the first
:03:19. > :03:25.person to talk on camera about being abused by Jimmy Savile.
:03:25. > :03:32.wanted me to do things for him. He wanted me to fondle him. He asked
:03:32. > :03:35.me for oral sex, and I didn't want to, and he promised me that if I
:03:35. > :03:39.gave him oral sex that he would arrange for me and my friends to go
:03:39. > :03:45.to Television Centre and be on his television show. This interview has
:03:45. > :03:48.never been broadcast by the BBC before. I was 14. Of course I
:03:48. > :03:54.wanted to go to Television Centre. I didn't want to give him oral sex
:03:54. > :03:58.because I thought it was disgusting, but I did it. Off camera, the
:03:58. > :04:03.investigation team had managed to speak to four more women who said
:04:03. > :04:07.that as girls they too had been sexually abused by Jimmy Savile.
:04:07. > :04:14.Karin was ill with cancer when she filmed her interview with Liz
:04:14. > :04:19.MacKean. It was a very big step for her, but she'd obviously steeled
:04:19. > :04:23.herself to do it, and the thing that motivated her was that she was
:04:23. > :04:26.so angry at everything that was being devoted to holding Jimmy
:04:26. > :04:32.Savile up as this wonderful figure, and she'd known what had happened
:04:32. > :04:36.to her. She'd known what had happened to a lot of other girls.
:04:37. > :04:41.Karin's interview contained serious allegations not just about Savile
:04:41. > :04:49.but of abuse on BBC premises by other celebrities - again, this was
:04:49. > :04:55.backed up off camera by others. Gary Glitter was one example. He
:04:55. > :05:00.was particularly horrible, and only interested in getting as much sex
:05:00. > :05:05.as he could possibly get from any girl. I can remember seeing him
:05:05. > :05:12.having sex with one of the girls from Duncroft in Jimmy Savile's
:05:12. > :05:16.dressing room. -- which was packed with lots of people. Was Jimmy
:05:16. > :05:21.Savile there? Yeah. He'd have known what was going on? Oh, yes. He
:05:21. > :05:28.laughed about it. He thought it was funny. But the BBC chose not to
:05:28. > :05:32.reveal what Karin had to say. The investigation was dropped for what
:05:32. > :05:37.the corporation says were editorial reasons. Instead, just a few weeks
:05:37. > :05:40.later, the BBC broadcast this: Let's pay tribute to the
:05:40. > :05:44.extraordinary, unique and never, ever to be forgotten host, the one
:05:44. > :05:51.and only Sir Jimmy Savile. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, all
:05:51. > :05:54.you guys and gals. Welcome, indeed, to Jim'll Fix It. Now, then -
:05:54. > :05:59.Now then... This special Jim'll Fix It tribute put out on Boxing Day
:05:59. > :06:04.attracted five million viewers. This, in all truthfulness, is just
:06:04. > :06:11.a fraction of the mail that we get. There was also a Radio Two eulogy
:06:11. > :06:15.followed shortly after by two more BBC TV tributes.
:06:15. > :06:20.He was a pop pioneer! How about that, then? Some of Savile's former
:06:21. > :06:24.colleagues knew there was another side that wasn't being shown.
:06:24. > :06:29.was pretty vomit inducing that the BBC was running tributes to Jimmy
:06:29. > :06:35.Savile when he had died, and I could only marvel that the
:06:35. > :06:38.programme-making decisions were obviously in the hands of a younger
:06:38. > :06:46.generation who didn't really understand the severity of what had
:06:46. > :06:50.happened. To me it just meant that yet again I hadn't been believed,
:06:50. > :06:54.but I've spent my whole life not being believed.
:06:54. > :06:57.Today, Karin Ward, now recovering from surgery to remove her cancer,
:06:57. > :07:01.still feels angry about the decision to drop the Newsnight
:07:01. > :07:08.investigation. It was hurtful, and it was
:07:08. > :07:12.difficult because I had been pushed so hard to do it - when I didn't
:07:12. > :07:17.want to - and you have to remember, I wasn't very well at all. I had
:07:17. > :07:22.cancer. In the end, I said OK, and for all that stress, that's what
:07:22. > :07:26.made me angry, the fact that I'd gone through all that stress when I
:07:26. > :07:33.really needed to concentrate on getting well, and then they never
:07:33. > :07:36.used it because somebody higher up didn't believe me. Newsnight's
:07:36. > :07:40.decision to drop the investigation was called into question by a few
:07:40. > :07:45.newspapers soon after, but the whole issue really exploded into
:07:45. > :07:52.controversy just weeks ago when ITV chose to run the story the BBC had
:07:52. > :07:55.shelved. The documentary built on key
:07:55. > :08:00.evidence originally gathered by Newsnight. Savile's abuse victims
:08:00. > :08:02.were finally given a voice - on ITV. The reporter was Mark William
:08:03. > :08:10.Thomas, a former police officer who had previously been involved in the
:08:10. > :08:15.dropped Newsnight investigation. He'd had a big background in child
:08:15. > :08:20.protection, and we were using him really as an expert witness to just
:08:20. > :08:27.evaluate the testimonies that we had, and certainly he had seen
:08:27. > :08:30.everything we had, and he thought it was very strong. When Exposure
:08:30. > :08:38.was broadcast, the impact was immediate. It engulfed local
:08:38. > :08:42.authorities, the NHS, the Home Office, but especially the BBC.
:08:42. > :08:47.what has deepened the revulsion is that this happened at the BBC, an
:08:47. > :08:51.institution so loved and trusted it's known as auntie. This has cast
:08:51. > :08:56.a stain on the BBC. As new victims came forward, the corporation was
:08:56. > :09:03.accused of turning a blind eye and covering up Savile's abuse, both
:09:03. > :09:08.now and in the past. These are serious issues - really serious,
:09:08. > :09:11.for which the Director General... Nine days after ITV's film, the
:09:11. > :09:16.BBC's Director General announced two inquiries - one into Savile's
:09:16. > :09:19.behaviour at the BBC over four decades, the other, whether there
:09:19. > :09:23.were any management failings in the canning of Newsnight's Savile
:09:23. > :09:27.investigation. Despite our efforts to make clear
:09:27. > :09:32.our belief that the decision to drop the Newsnight investigation
:09:32. > :09:38.was taken properly, for sound editorial reasons, people have
:09:38. > :09:42.continued to speculate. This is damaging to the BBC and is a cloud
:09:42. > :09:46.of suspicion which cannot be allowed to continue. I think there
:09:46. > :09:50.are serious questions about the handling of this matter recently,
:09:50. > :09:54.and particularly the fact that Newsnight appeared to be uncovering
:09:54. > :09:59.evidence to suggest that this was happening, and yet that - it was
:09:59. > :10:02.decided not to pursue that report. I only knew that there was a
:10:03. > :10:05.Newsnight investigation. I didn't have any details about it.
:10:05. > :10:08.dropping of the Newsnight investigation has also raised
:10:08. > :10:11.doubts over the leadership of the new BBC Director General, George
:10:11. > :10:17.Entwistle. REPORTER: You're happy with this
:10:17. > :10:22.role in this, are you? I'm - I - I'm - I'm - I'm entirely convinced
:10:22. > :10:28.that I've done all the right things, yeah, yeah. The allegation here -
:10:28. > :10:31.or the charge here is that that a bad editorial decision was made.
:10:31. > :10:33.The charge is that a film that was ready to go - I don't believe
:10:33. > :10:40.that's the case - was pulled, killed, completely eradicated
:10:40. > :10:43.because of pressure from the top on account of the Savile tributes. Now,
:10:43. > :10:53.that's the allegation, and that, as far as I can establish, is simply
:10:53. > :10:59.The unmasking of one of Britain's most prolific sexual offenders
:10:59. > :11:04.begins here in Surrey. In the 1970s, Duncroft was a Home Office-approved
:11:04. > :11:10.school for girls. It was a very strange place, and it was filled
:11:10. > :11:16.with celebrities coming along, film stars, all sorts of people - minor
:11:16. > :11:21.royalty - very, very strange. Newsnight producer Meirion mer
:11:21. > :11:24.visited regularly as a child. His aunt was the head. Another regular
:11:24. > :11:28.visitor, often driving his Rolls Royce convertible, was Jimmy Savile.
:11:28. > :11:33.On one occasion, I saw him taking out some of the girls, and my
:11:33. > :11:36.parents would question with my aunt whether this was really appropriate.
:11:36. > :11:41.Did you think it was unusual? Everything about that place seemed
:11:41. > :11:44.very odd to me. It was sort of later on I suppose when I started
:11:44. > :11:48.to wonder whether there was something else going on. All the
:11:48. > :11:53.girls at Duncroft were deemed to be emotionally disusual turned. For
:11:53. > :11:57.some, at first, Savile seemed almost like a saviour. Jimmy Savile
:11:57. > :12:00.would turn up and suddenly brighten - or give the impression that he
:12:00. > :12:03.was going to change something for you. He was going to give you hope.
:12:03. > :12:08.You know, you were worth something because this famous guy would come
:12:08. > :12:13.and see you. But it became clear what Savile's intentions actually
:12:13. > :12:17.were - sexual abuse. After awhile, the girls would wonder why he
:12:17. > :12:20.bothered coming, and then, of course, everybody knew why he would
:12:20. > :12:25.come - because he would be letching after - after all these pretty
:12:25. > :12:31.young girls who were so vulnerable. Karin Ward was one of those. Savile
:12:31. > :12:36.would take her and others out in his car and abuse them. It has
:12:36. > :12:40.haunted Karin ever since. I'm so full of self-disgust. I can't
:12:40. > :12:47.believe that I did such things. I can't believe that I allowed such
:12:47. > :12:57.things to happen, that I didn't immediately rush and scream it from
:12:57. > :12:58.
:12:58. > :13:02.the rooftops, make this stop, just make it stop, but I didn't. None of
:13:02. > :13:12.us did. I just carried on, lulled into a false sense of that's how
:13:12. > :13:17.
:13:17. > :13:22.these things have to be. That's what we're for. It was only when
:13:22. > :13:26.Savile died at the age of 84, that his past would finally start to
:13:26. > :13:32.catch up with him. Newsnight producer Meirion Jones went
:13:32. > :13:38.straight to his editor with the idea. Jimmy Savile died on the 29th
:13:38. > :13:42.of October, a Saturday. I pitched it on the Monday morning. The
:13:42. > :13:46.victims, as far as we could tell, would be very vulnerable people who
:13:46. > :13:52.would not stand up in a libel court, so it was only when he died that it
:13:52. > :13:55.really became feasible. Meirion had already seen that Karin Ward had
:13:55. > :14:02.published on the internet an account of sexual abuse at Duncroft
:14:02. > :14:06.by a man called "JS." He contacted Karin, and she agreed to be
:14:06. > :14:10.interviewed. The team tracked down other women who said they had been
:14:10. > :14:14.abused by Savile when they were at Duncroft. We'd found Karin Ward
:14:14. > :14:18.very credible, but that interview on its own was not going to make
:14:18. > :14:21.this story, and it was the collection of testimonies from the
:14:21. > :14:26.other women as well, those who didn't want to go on the record,
:14:26. > :14:32.but were very happy for us to use quotes and gave us detailed quotes
:14:32. > :14:36.of their experience - they were all telling the same story. Newsnight's
:14:36. > :14:42.investigation gathered pace, but how could Savile's abuse had
:14:42. > :14:48.remained hidden while he was still alive? This horror - that is what
:14:48. > :14:54.it was - took place while all of society was watching, but because
:14:54. > :15:04.it was off the scale of everybody's belief system, they didn't really
:15:04. > :15:05.
:15:06. > :15:12.Jimmy Savile's larger-than-life story started in Leeds in 1926. He
:15:12. > :15:22.was a miner during the war, a pro- wrestler, a semi-pro cyclist. He
:15:22. > :15:24.
:15:24. > :15:28.drove the Savile brand to stardom In the dance halls of the 1950s and
:15:28. > :15:31.'60s, Savile's predatory behaviour appeared to be well known.
:15:31. > :15:35.person said the big joke with Jimmy Savile was that he was either going
:15:35. > :15:41.to be famous, or he was going to be locked up for having sex with 14-
:15:41. > :15:46.year-old girls. After Savile died, biographer Dan Davies tracked down
:15:47. > :15:51.those who knew about the early abuse. He had a reputation as
:15:51. > :15:54.somebody who preferred girls at the younger end of the spectrum, and
:15:54. > :16:00.other people I have spoken to have confirmed that the younger, the
:16:00. > :16:10.better was his motto when it came to women. So there were obviously a
:16:10. > :16:12.
:16:12. > :16:21.trail of people who knew about this $:/STARTFEED. Stkpwhrfrpblts
:16:21. > :16:28.Welcome to January 1, 1964. Savile's link with the weeb -- BBC
:16:28. > :16:33.began in 1964. His Radio 1 career started four years later. I arrived
:16:33. > :16:38.at Radio 1 September 30th 1973. By the time I arrived he had
:16:38. > :16:43.transcended us all without a doubt. There were stars like Tony
:16:43. > :16:49.Blackburn. There were infloun shall people like John Peel --
:16:49. > :16:54.influential people like John Peel in. Terms of stardom it was Jimmy.
:16:55. > :17:00.By the early 1970s, the BBC was filmed Jimmy Savile as he criss-
:17:00. > :17:05.crossed the country on a series of charity runs and walks. He always
:17:05. > :17:15.had at his disposal a camper van or just a Range Rover with a mattress
:17:15. > :17:16.
:17:16. > :17:20.in the back. The BBC's Nationwide programme caught wup his on the
:17:20. > :17:24.shores of Loch Ness, as Savile searched for the monster. Have you
:17:24. > :17:29.seen anything of any interest out there? Yes, she was about 17 and
:17:29. > :17:34.she had long legs and long blonde hair, but she wasn't a monster.
:17:34. > :17:40.Savile was pursued by fans everywhere he went. You lurker,
:17:40. > :17:45.come here! Nationwide reporter Martin Young joined him on another
:17:45. > :17:49.run from Carlisle to Newcastle. think, in a sense, it was the
:17:49. > :17:59.beginnings of celebrity culture. Jimmy could have who he wanted.
:17:59. > :18:04.Jimmy appeared to just pluck one from the masses. Good morning,
:18:04. > :18:08.Jimmy. Martin found Savile in his camper van lying on the bed with a
:18:08. > :18:11.teenage girl. They were both fully clothed, but for the reporter, it
:18:11. > :18:17.confirmed the rumours he'd heard were true. I thought he was a
:18:17. > :18:22.pervert. Even then? Yeah. Did you think about reporting it or
:18:22. > :18:26.anything like that? No, it never even crossed my mind. I'll take my
:18:26. > :18:30.share of the blame for. That Another Nationwide reporter
:18:30. > :18:36.dispatched to cover a charity walk was Bob Langley. On two occasions
:18:36. > :18:42.she spotted young girls coming out of Savile's caravan. They would be,
:18:42. > :18:47.I would say, 12 or 13. They could have been 14. They certainly were
:18:47. > :18:51.not 15. After they had gone, he indicated to me, in a nudge, nudge,
:18:51. > :18:57.wink, wink sort of way that he had just had sex with them. I didn't
:18:57. > :19:02.believe him. I said something like, thinking it was a joke, "I think
:19:02. > :19:06.they're a bit on the young side for you, Jimmy." To which he replied -
:19:06. > :19:11.and I can't remember the exact words - but something along the
:19:11. > :19:13.lines of, when you think that way you're finished. Since the ITV
:19:13. > :19:17.revelations, Bob has wondered whether he should have reported
:19:17. > :19:23.what he saw. Supposing I had gone to the police or the BBC, what
:19:23. > :19:27.would have happened? Nothing would have happened. He would have said,
:19:27. > :19:29."Can't you take a joke in" That would have been it. If journalists
:19:29. > :19:37.didn't think to report Savile to their bosses what about BBC staff
:19:38. > :19:46.who worked on another of his shows? This is today's edition of Savile's
:19:46. > :19:52.Travels. They went round the country in the caravan and
:19:52. > :19:57.obviously other things lierk a BBC car and stop and say to people
:19:57. > :20:01."What's your favourite record? We'll play it for you." What sort
:20:01. > :20:04.of music would you like? Paul Gambaccini worked in the office
:20:04. > :20:09.next door to Savile's Travels production base in Radio 1's London
:20:09. > :20:14.HQ. The programme's production assistants told him some disturbing
:20:14. > :20:19.stories. They would come back from these Savile's Travels outings and
:20:19. > :20:28.they would report that unplesantness had occurred. What
:20:28. > :20:32.sort of unpleasantness? We were told that he would go off with an
:20:32. > :20:36.institutionalised young woman. senior Savile's Travels member of
:20:36. > :20:43.staff even gossiped openly about their star's illegal behaviour.
:20:43. > :20:47.sure he regrets it now. He had a big mouth. He would talk to the
:20:47. > :20:52.record company promotion people about things that went on in the
:20:52. > :20:58.caravan. So you see, there was no real attempt to cover up the fact
:20:58. > :21:06.that things did go on. Again, though, he never thought to report
:21:06. > :21:13.Savile. So, what, I a junior DJ am supposed to say "my senior is a
:21:13. > :21:18.perv." They're going to laugh at me. It never occurred to me. But word
:21:18. > :21:24.about what was happening on Savile travels was reaching BBC Radio
:21:24. > :21:28.management. In 1973, the then Radio 1 controller, Douglas Muggeridge,
:21:28. > :21:33.ordered his press officer, Rodney Collins, to find out if the stories
:21:33. > :21:38.were true. Douglas Muggeridge said to me, look, I've heard rumours
:21:38. > :21:43.about Jimmy Savile and perhaps some problems with under-age girls. Do
:21:43. > :21:48.you know anything about this? And I said, "I've heard nothing Douglas,
:21:48. > :21:52.nothing at all." Rodney Collins asked around his Fleet Street
:21:52. > :21:59.contacts to see if they had heard anything he could feed back to his
:21:59. > :22:02.boss. They all came back with exactly the same answer - I mean,
:22:02. > :22:07.exactly, which was that they'd heard rumours about Jimmy Savile
:22:07. > :22:12.but they knew of nothing. They knew of no inquiries going on by their
:22:12. > :22:16.newspapers and they'd certainly not heard of any police interest.
:22:17. > :22:21.Around the same time, Derek Chinnery, then a Radio 1 department
:22:21. > :22:27.head, was asked by Douglas Muggeridge to confront Savile with
:22:27. > :22:31.the allegations. An informal meeting was set up with executive
:22:31. > :22:37.producer Doreen Davies acting as a witness. Savile flatly denied
:22:37. > :22:40.having sex with under-age girls. reflection, it was very naive of
:22:40. > :22:47.Muggeridge and me to do that, because the man was obviously going
:22:47. > :22:52.to deny it. Even though we had no reason, no real concrete evidence
:22:52. > :22:56.to prove that anything was up. If the man's denied it, you don't then
:22:56. > :23:02.go and hound him at the time. I know it sounds terrible that we
:23:02. > :23:07.didn't, but there was no reason to do so at the time. Wonderful,
:23:07. > :23:12.wonderful, so marvellous to get away from it all. It was an
:23:12. > :23:16.opportunity lost, a chance for the BBC to stop Savile's abuse almost
:23:16. > :23:20.40 years ago. I suppose this probably wasn't the BBC's finest
:23:20. > :23:26.hour. We only have to look at the press, television and radio over
:23:26. > :23:33.the last three, four weeks to see that. Derek, God bless him, being
:23:33. > :23:38.on the fourth floor rather than on the third floor, and that's the
:23:38. > :23:45.only difference it requires, he wouldn't have heard the plaintive
:23:45. > :23:49.cries of the disappointed programme assistants on the third floor. It's
:23:49. > :23:55.probably that simple, you know. It's just one floor in an office
:23:55. > :23:59.building makes all the difference in the worldment -- world. Any
:23:59. > :24:09.doubts about Savile's record during his radio days were soon forgotten
:24:09. > :24:10.
:24:10. > :24:15.as his television career took off. The BBC bought in to Savile's
:24:15. > :24:19.sexually suggestive style in a big way. Now then, if I was a
:24:19. > :24:23.chimpanzee and I was being naughty, what would you do to me? Say I was
:24:23. > :24:30.going like this, you see, what would you do if a chimpanzee was
:24:30. > :24:36.doing that? His new television producer had no idea that anything
:24:36. > :24:45.but playfulness might lie behind it. Now then, watch this... Get this Dr
:24:45. > :24:50.Camera. Clunk Click every trip. He'd never been told about the
:24:50. > :24:58.earlier radio inquiry. I should have been told, I think. The people
:24:58. > :25:04.who were, felt that to be the case in BBC Radio should have perhaps
:25:04. > :25:08.passed it on to the television, but life was like that. You're in a
:25:08. > :25:12.hurry, making a programme. You get on with it. Jimmy Savile was our
:25:12. > :25:17.brand name. He was the front man. He was very little involved in the
:25:17. > :25:24.making of the programme. Why was it that you didn't discuss these
:25:24. > :25:29.rumours with anybody else in Television Centre at the time?
:25:29. > :25:34.don't know why it wasn't, you know the questions you're asking me
:25:34. > :25:39.don't apply to what was going on in radio at the time. They certainly
:25:39. > :25:44.applied to what was going on in television, apparently. But only
:25:44. > :25:51.that's only come to light in recent time, rather than 30 or 40 years
:25:51. > :25:56.ago. Among the guests on Clunk Click were young people from
:25:56. > :26:01.hospitals and other institutions, including girls from Duncroft.
:26:01. > :26:05.Karin Ward, aged just 14, was one of them. After the show, she was
:26:05. > :26:10.invited with other young people to join more famous guests in the
:26:10. > :26:15.dressing rooms. She told Newsnight about this 11 months ago, in the
:26:15. > :26:21.interview that was dropped. What sort of things happened in
:26:21. > :26:27.Jimmy Savile's dressing room? that's when the other guests on the
:26:27. > :26:34.show would come in, generally after the show had finished, they would
:26:34. > :26:41.come in and they clearly saw girls and, well, kids, male and female,
:26:41. > :26:47.as being there to be used. I had a famous person who would try. He
:26:47. > :26:56.smelled awful. He smelled of sweat and alcohol and it made me heave
:26:56. > :27:02.just to be near him. I didn't want him to do anything to me. Gary
:27:02. > :27:07.Glitter, also appeared on Clunk Click. He too would join Jimmy
:27:07. > :27:11.Savile and young guests after the show. They couldn't fail to be
:27:11. > :27:17.impressed. Bean bags, did you like Gary's new record? Put your hands
:27:17. > :27:21.up. All of us totally totally overawed by the fact we were
:27:21. > :27:26.meeting all these famous people and obviously, that particular famous
:27:26. > :27:34.person wanted to have sex with one of the girls and I suppose we would
:27:34. > :27:37.have seen it as some kind of honour, conquest. I don't know. I can
:27:37. > :27:44.remember being quite scared actually, because I didn't like
:27:44. > :27:50.Gary Glitter. He gave me the creeps. Gary Glitter is now a convicted
:27:50. > :27:58.child sex offender, but he denies the new allegations. In the studio,
:27:58. > :28:05.some of the young guests came from the secure hospital Broadmoor.
:28:05. > :28:11.I get two? You get two in there. I shall be giving girls away. I'm
:28:11. > :28:16.going to get some down here. From Broadmoor. Savile's charity
:28:16. > :28:20.fundraiser - he's said to have raised more than �40 million - gave
:28:20. > :28:25.him special access to many institutions and to vulnerable
:28:25. > :28:29.children. See you next week for another Clunk Click. His choice of
:28:29. > :28:33.victim is very interesting, isn't it? Who's going to take the word of
:28:33. > :28:38.a girl who's been in trouble with the law, who's found herself in an
:28:39. > :28:42.approved school over somebody who has just, a few years earlier, has
:28:42. > :28:48.been made an OBE because of his relentless charity work who is one
:28:48. > :28:52.of the biggest TV stars in the country and is moving his way into
:28:52. > :28:57.the centre of the establishment by this point. Savile's charity work
:28:57. > :29:02.took him inside the spinal injuries unit of Stoke Mandeville Hospital.
:29:02. > :29:06.Leeds general Hospital, where he worked as a porter and more
:29:06. > :29:11.remarkably into high security Broadmoor. There are now
:29:11. > :29:16.allegations and inquiries in them all. One former Broadmoor patient,
:29:16. > :29:21.Alison Pink, spent more than 20 years in mental hospitals after
:29:21. > :29:25.committing arson. She's since undergone a sex change. He used to
:29:25. > :29:28.just sudden lay peer. He'd be smoking a cigar, having a cup of
:29:28. > :29:33.tea in the tea room. Sitting in the corner talking to other female
:29:33. > :29:37.patients. Of course, one he got his keys, he was always doing that. I
:29:37. > :29:43.did actually sit there and think, he's a DJ, what's going on? But he
:29:43. > :29:47.did try and raise prot file of Broadmoor, give it a -- raise the
:29:48. > :29:52.profile of Broadmoor, give it a kinder looking face. They did Songs
:29:52. > :29:56.of Praise there. They did a programme called Inside Broadmoor.
:29:56. > :30:00.Alison was then in her late teens, a patient locked in a secure
:30:00. > :30:04.hospital but vulnerable to Jimmy Savile. I was on the sofa watching
:30:04. > :30:12.Top of the Pops. It had started. He was sitting on the floor to this
:30:12. > :30:18.side of me, which would be my right. He turned slightly and then, as I
:30:18. > :30:22.said, he literally put his hand between my legs, quickly, not
:30:22. > :30:25.really looking at me. I remember moving backwards slightly. But I
:30:25. > :30:29.couldn't do anything about it. There were two witnesses, two
:30:29. > :30:39.patients. We knew that if we stood up and said, look what he's doing,
:30:39. > :30:46.we'd be punished. They wouldn't Those organisations that trusted
:30:47. > :30:51.It was growing by the minute. Initially it was a few. Now they're
:30:51. > :30:55.growing all the time. The stories I am hearing from some of the victims
:30:55. > :30:59.are that they did report the abuse and that no action was taken.
:30:59. > :31:02.BBC could be the target of many legal claims. It was through the
:31:02. > :31:06.corporation that Savile came into contact with thousands of young
:31:06. > :31:09.people. Welcome to another edition of Top
:31:09. > :31:14.of the Pops. Lots of lads and ladies about with us this evening
:31:14. > :31:18.and lots of nice records we've got. There are now allegations that Top
:31:18. > :31:22.of the Pops was a centre for abuse, and that as well as Jimmy Savile,
:31:22. > :31:26.others were involved. A group of three have been described - men in
:31:26. > :31:33.their 30s - who would collect girls from the Top of the Pops audience
:31:33. > :31:36.and take them to other parties off the premises of the BBC, and
:31:36. > :31:39.inappropriate things had been described as happening then - some
:31:39. > :31:46.quite serious. And is it your understanding that these people
:31:46. > :31:50.worked for the BBC? Yes, yes, so, you know, I - we have had one
:31:50. > :31:54.particular call that has names of people who can be traced on there,
:31:54. > :31:57.and that will be passed on to the police. Not all of the victims were
:31:57. > :32:04.young girls. Lawyers are now hearing allegations that boys were
:32:04. > :32:09.targeted too. There's some quite serious allegations that there was
:32:09. > :32:12.a paedophile ring operating, so these are quite serious allegations.
:32:12. > :32:22.A paedophile ring operating where, at the BBC? Yes. Involving other
:32:22. > :32:23.
:32:23. > :32:27.members of staff? Yes. In 1972, Jimmy Savile added honour to
:32:27. > :32:32.stardom when he was awarded the OBE. Two years later he was sufficiently
:32:32. > :32:37.confident to hint at his darker side in his autobiography. In one
:32:37. > :32:41.story from the early '60s, Savile told how the police had asked him
:32:41. > :32:45.to look out for a run-away girl. He told them if he found her, he would
:32:45. > :32:51.keep her overnight as a reward, and that's exactly what happened. In
:32:51. > :32:56.his book, he sea, "At 11.30am the next morning, she was willingly
:32:56. > :33:00.presented to an astounded lady of the law. The officeress was
:33:00. > :33:07.dissuaded from bringing charges against me, for it was well known
:33:07. > :33:10.that were I to go, I would probably take half the station with me."
:33:10. > :33:14.Were you surprised that he was still employed by the BBC and
:33:14. > :33:18.writing this sort of stuff? Well, I am surprised, but you know, it was
:33:18. > :33:22.a different culture at that time. A year later after his autobiography,
:33:22. > :33:26.he started presenting Jim'll Fix It, which very quickly became, you know,
:33:26. > :33:31.an iconic children's programme. Some of the stuff that he was
:33:31. > :33:35.writing in his autobiography does seem, you know, wrong. Despite all
:33:35. > :33:40.the rumours - all those young girls hanging around his dressing room
:33:40. > :33:46.and now his own published revelations, Savile was now not
:33:46. > :33:50.just still employed by the BBC, he was marked out for stardom in his
:33:50. > :33:57.biggest show so far. So the BBC decided why not put it all on film
:33:57. > :34:00.which is why we call it Jim'll Fix It. That took off in the most
:34:00. > :34:04.amazing way, and we got figures that were sometimes up to 20
:34:04. > :34:07.million viewers, and on several occasions Jim'll Fix It was number
:34:07. > :34:11.one beating Coronation Street and This is Your Life. We have many
:34:11. > :34:16.things we would like you to fix for us, but we think the best of our
:34:16. > :34:19.ideas is a milk float race. It was family entertainment, and it mostly
:34:19. > :34:22.featured children. The idea was that Jimmy Savile would make their
:34:22. > :34:26.dreams come true. This daft suggestion was dreamt up by a Cub
:34:26. > :34:30.Scout group from East London. was just quite fun, a really,
:34:30. > :34:33.really good day. We were so excited. And we're going to be short on
:34:33. > :34:36.badges, and there's only one badge, so we've only got one badge with a
:34:36. > :34:40.big, long ribbon. It goes around everybody like this you see. That
:34:40. > :34:45.goes around here like this and around there like this... We was
:34:45. > :34:48.then told that we was going to get a big badge for the whole cub group.
:34:48. > :34:52.I was a bit disappointed, but then straight away, he asked me if I
:34:52. > :35:00.would like my own individual badge just for myself, and then,
:35:00. > :35:05.obviously, I said, yeah. One of the Cub Scouts, a nine-year-old called
:35:05. > :35:10.Kevin, was singled out by Savile. was led into one of the rooms, and
:35:11. > :35:15.it was like a small dressing room, very dingy. We went in, and he
:35:15. > :35:23.closed the door, then he asked me again, you know, did I want my
:35:23. > :35:28.badge? And I said, "Yeah." Um, then that's when he put his hand on my
:35:28. > :35:33.knee and started touching me,ed a then at the same time, he grabbed
:35:33. > :35:38.my hand and forced my hand on top of his trousers and made me sort of
:35:38. > :35:44.rub him. Did you think about telling somebody then? No, no,
:35:44. > :35:48.certainly not then. Why not? I was absolutely petrified. Jimmy
:35:48. > :35:52.Savile's producer for more than 20 years has since retired and lives
:35:52. > :35:58.in France. He says he knew his former colleague as well as anyone,
:35:58. > :36:03.which was not very well at all, but he had no reason to suspect him of
:36:03. > :36:07.wrongdoing. You do hear rumours about people, but nothing to make
:36:07. > :36:11.me suspicious, and I was never given cause to feel I ought to be
:36:11. > :36:15.doing anything because no-one had ever complained to me, and I myself
:36:15. > :36:20.hadn't seen anything. You are sat on my magic chair. Do you know, if
:36:20. > :36:27.you sit on my magic chair, I could make you disappear. Jimmy Savile
:36:27. > :36:33.had succeeded in hoodwinking a lot of people, including Margaret
:36:33. > :36:36.Thatcher, the Prince and Princess of Wales, the Vatican, the Honours
:36:36. > :36:46.Committee, the NHS and hospitals up and down the country and several
:36:46. > :36:49.
:36:49. > :36:53.police forces. And some members of BBC staff, including me.
:36:53. > :36:57.Outside the BBC, though, rumours were being picked up by Fleet
:36:58. > :37:01.Street, but still, the story didn't come out. I think the rest of the
:37:01. > :37:05.media has something to answer for here. If we're to believe what
:37:05. > :37:08.we're now told, a lot of the newspapers, a lot of the tabloid
:37:08. > :37:14.press had their own inquiries, their own investigations going on
:37:14. > :37:19.into the allegations against Jimmy Savile. As long ago as 1994, the
:37:19. > :37:22.Sunday Mirror had tracked down two women who had been at the Duncroft
:37:22. > :37:26.Approved School, and they told reporters about the sexual abuse
:37:26. > :37:30.they'd suffered. They were in awe of Savile's power, as they saw it,
:37:30. > :37:39.the fear that they wouldn't be believed, so when it came to the
:37:39. > :37:44.crunch, they were too terrified to signed afters and -- affidavits and
:37:44. > :37:49.face going to court, which would have been inevitable because, you
:37:49. > :37:53.know, one thing would be certain - that Jimmy Savile would hire the
:37:54. > :38:00.best QCs, and sue you to high heaven. The tabloids made me. If
:38:00. > :38:08.they want to break me, that's up to them. I'll go down -- won't go down
:38:08. > :38:13.without a fight. The tab Lloyds wrote their own tributes to Jimmy
:38:13. > :38:17.Savile. I am not trying to excuse them covering this whole story up,
:38:17. > :38:20.but I think the BBC fell down on the job here. Right to the end
:38:20. > :38:26.Savile was fending off questions about his private life - not always
:38:26. > :38:36.with a joke. What do you do in the caravan? Anyone I can lay my hands
:38:36. > :38:37.
:38:37. > :38:43.APPLAUSE It's easy for me as a single man to
:38:43. > :38:50.say, "I don't like children because that puts a lot of salacious
:38:50. > :38:57.tabloid people off the hunt. you basically saying that so
:38:57. > :39:01.tabloids don't, you know, pursue this whole "is he, isn't he a
:39:01. > :39:07.paedophile line?" Basically? Yes, yes. How do they know whether I am
:39:07. > :39:12.or not? How does anyone know I am? Nobody knows. I know I'm not, so I
:39:12. > :39:16.can tell you from experience that the easy way of doing it is when
:39:16. > :39:21.they say, "Oh, you're holding those children on Jim'll Fix It" is to
:39:21. > :39:26.say "Yeah, I hate them." There was one final chance to unmask saf
:39:26. > :39:30.while he was still alive. Surrey Police had investigated him in 2007,
:39:30. > :39:35.but it didn't get very far. In the name of the Father and of the Son
:39:35. > :39:40.and of the Holy Spirit... In the end, the truth about Jimmy Savile
:39:40. > :39:43.never came out during his lifetime, but just a month after his death,
:39:43. > :39:52.the Newsnight team felt they were getting close to proving it, and
:39:52. > :39:57.then they found out about the Surrey Police investigation. When
:39:57. > :40:00.finally we got initial off-the- record confirmation that Surrey
:40:00. > :40:05.Police had investigated Jimmy Savile, we just thought, we're over
:40:05. > :40:08.the line. We can now tell the story, and certainly our editor was very
:40:08. > :40:16.positive. You know, he said basically, all systems go. Let's
:40:16. > :40:20.get ready to get this story on air. In an e-mail on November the 25th,
:40:20. > :40:23.Peter Rippon wrote, "Excellent. We can pull together a TX plan," in
:40:23. > :40:33.other words, prepare for broadcast. So there was into doubt in your
:40:33. > :40:36.
:40:36. > :40:39.mind there was a definite By this time, the team were already
:40:39. > :40:46.aware their programme could result in a potentially embarrassing clash
:40:46. > :40:52.in the BBC schedules in the run-up to Christmas. We heard, I think, on
:40:52. > :40:56.the PM programme that the BBC was going to broadcast tributes to
:40:56. > :41:01.Jimmy Savile over Christmas, and there was a deep intake of breath
:41:01. > :41:06.from all of us. We assumed that if our programme went ahead, they'd
:41:06. > :41:10.have to pull the tributes. think you'd made that connection at
:41:10. > :41:16.that point? Immediately, yes. the two couldn't coexist? No, no
:41:16. > :41:19.way. So while one part of the BBC was preparing to eulogise Savile,
:41:19. > :41:26.the celebrity, another was preparing to expose him as a sexual
:41:26. > :41:30.predator. It was a tricky position for the Newsnight editor Peter
:41:30. > :41:34.Rippon. A lot of people think the BBC is this great monolith where
:41:35. > :41:39.the Director General sits at the top, and everything he - or at some
:41:39. > :41:43.point in the near future - or she goes - it isn't like that one of
:41:43. > :41:47.the most important things in the BBC is the editorial independence
:41:47. > :41:53.of its editors. Given the important issues involved, it was flap
:41:53. > :41:57.flagged up to Peter Rippon's bosses, deputy Director of News Steven
:41:57. > :42:02.Mitchell and Director of News Helen Boaden. For the Newsnight team,
:42:02. > :42:09.everything was going to plan. They worked on their script, and on the
:42:09. > :42:13.29th of November sent a copy to the editor. It included transcribed
:42:13. > :42:17.clips from Karin Ward's interview naming Savile and Gary Glitter as
:42:17. > :42:25.being involved in the sexual abuse of underaged girls - in one case,
:42:25. > :42:31.on BBC premises. Their draft script also quoted three other unnamed
:42:31. > :42:40.Duncroft pupils who said they were abused by Savile. And a report of
:42:40. > :42:44.sexual assault at Stoke Mandeville Hospital. It all led journalists
:42:45. > :42:48.from the BBC's in-house publicity team to tell Peter Rippon they
:42:48. > :42:52.anticipated a huge amount of interest and that all domestic
:42:52. > :42:56.outlets would want to run this story. The very next day, though,
:42:56. > :43:01.the 30th of November, the Newsnight editor suddenly applied the brakes.
:43:01. > :43:09.All. I can say is that it was an abrupt change of tone from, you
:43:09. > :43:14.know, one day, excellent. Let's prepare to get this thing on air to,
:43:14. > :43:18."Hold on." His reason? Some of the women spoken to by the Newsnight
:43:18. > :43:23.team had claimed they'd been told by the Crown Prosecution Service it
:43:23. > :43:28.had not pressed charges because Savile was too old and frail. For
:43:28. > :43:31.Peter Rippon, getting confirmation of this became critical. Having
:43:31. > :43:34.pondered this overnight, I think the key is whether we can establish
:43:34. > :43:38.the CPS did drop the case for the reasons the women say. That makes
:43:39. > :43:46.it a much better story. Our sources so far are just the women and a
:43:46. > :43:50.second-hand briefing. We understand that he had concerns about the
:43:50. > :43:55.reliability of witnesses - including Karin Ward. We were in an
:43:55. > :44:00.approved school. This is a school for bad girls. Who's going to
:44:00. > :44:05.believe bad girls when they say, "Oh, this happened to me" or "He
:44:05. > :44:10.did that to me" - no-one would believe you for the very nature
:44:10. > :44:15.that you were troubled. Duncroft was a school for intelligent, but
:44:15. > :44:22.emotionally disturbed girls, which says it all, and it also says very
:44:22. > :44:26.loudly that Savile went after very, very vulnerable people. But for
:44:26. > :44:31.editors of programmes like Newsnight, the reliability of
:44:31. > :44:35.witnesses may not be their only concern. How institutions, like the
:44:35. > :44:38.police or the Crown Prosecution Service, handle cases is also
:44:38. > :44:43.important. One can criticise this all one likes but a BBC editor with
:44:43. > :44:47.a BBC mindset says, hang on a minute. If we've got a story here
:44:48. > :44:51.about An institution that's failed that in our terms a serious news
:44:51. > :45:01.and current affairs programme - that's a better story than the
:45:01. > :45:04.
:45:04. > :45:09.But no-one seems to have considered that the long-term abuse by a BBC
:45:09. > :45:15.personality sometimes on BBC premises was arguably the biggest
:45:15. > :45:18.institutional failure of them all. Newsnight's editor was instead
:45:18. > :45:24.focusing primarily on the Crown Prosecution Service. His team felt
:45:25. > :45:29.this was an unnecessary obstacle. was very surprised at this. I
:45:29. > :45:32.argued, as did Liz MacKean, with our editor. We had meetings
:45:32. > :45:37.together. We had individual meetings with him, and the argument
:45:37. > :45:47.went on for some time. The next day, Peter Rippon became even more
:45:47. > :45:53.
:45:53. > :45:56.adamant about the importance of the Having effectively told them to
:45:57. > :46:02.stop gathering new evidence against Savile, he then cancelled the
:46:02. > :46:06.editing of the piece. "I'll pull editing etc for now." Did there
:46:06. > :46:12.seem to be any room for changing his mind? No, it felt like there
:46:12. > :46:16.was a decision to kill the story. Six days later, the BBC press
:46:16. > :46:20.office asked Peter Rippon how publicity for the story should be
:46:20. > :46:24.handled. Peter Rippon was blunt. "We are putting the cart way before
:46:24. > :46:29.the horse here. We've been looking at the story, but it is far from
:46:29. > :46:37.clear it will ever be strong enough even for us to run it." He copied
:46:37. > :46:41.in his boss Stephen Mitchell, the deputy director of news. So in 13
:46:41. > :46:46.days, Peter Rippon had gone from "excellent, prepare to broadcast"
:46:46. > :46:49.to "this story isn't strong enough". We now know he hadn't watched the
:46:49. > :46:55.interview with Karin Ward, the first person to go on camera
:46:55. > :47:01.testifying to Savile's abuse. time did he say, I want to see
:47:01. > :47:05.everything and I'll come to a view on it. We did prepare and give him
:47:05. > :47:08.one of the drafts of the scripts so that he could see, which we'd made
:47:08. > :47:12.as full as we could, with quotes that we already had, with
:47:12. > :47:17.transcripts of interviews that we already had. Also with stuff that
:47:17. > :47:24.we knew we were going to get. We gave that to him so that, to try to
:47:24. > :47:27.impress upon him that we thought we had the story. The producer e.
:47:27. > :47:32.Mailed his editor warning him of the potential of the disaster if he
:47:32. > :47:37.dropped the film. I was sure the story would come out, one way or
:47:37. > :47:41.another and that if it did, the BBC would be accused of a cover up. I
:47:41. > :47:45.wrote an e-mail to Peter saying, "The story is strong enough. And
:47:45. > :47:51.the danger of not running it is substantial damage to BBC
:47:52. > :47:56.reputation." Two days later, the CPS told the team it had decided in
:47:56. > :48:03.2009 not to prosecute Savile because of lack of evidence, not
:48:03. > :48:06.because he was old and frail. Peter Rippon killed the story. I was very
:48:06. > :48:10.unhappy the story didn't run because I felt we had spoken to
:48:10. > :48:16.people who collectively deserved to be heard and they weren't heard. I
:48:16. > :48:22.thought that that was a failure. Were you concerned that that
:48:22. > :48:28.compounded the hurt? Yes. I felt we had a responsibility towards them.
:48:28. > :48:32.We'd got them to talk to us, but above all, we did believe them and
:48:32. > :48:37.so, then for their stories not to be heard, yes, I felt very bad
:48:37. > :48:40.about that. I felt very much that I'd let them down. Was it the right
:48:40. > :48:44.editorial call? A lot of people will have a different view about
:48:44. > :48:47.that. What do you think? With hindsight I might have made a
:48:47. > :48:52.different call, but I do fully understand why Peter made the call
:48:53. > :48:57.that he did. As predicted, news emerged that the Savile story had
:48:57. > :49:03.been spiked. In January, cover up was suggested. In February, that it
:49:03. > :49:06.had been pulled to protect the corporation's image. The BBC
:49:06. > :49:09.publicically denied it. Peter Rippon said it was absolutely
:49:09. > :49:17.untrue that the Newsnight investigation was dropped for
:49:17. > :49:22.anything other than editorial The Jimmy Savile story finally
:49:22. > :49:26.exploded back into life three weeks ago on ITV's Exposure. It's been
:49:26. > :49:30.the scoop of the year. Detectives will be investigating events at
:49:30. > :49:38.locations across the country. Investigations say five women have
:49:38. > :49:44.come forward with allegations. says she has no memory of that...
:49:44. > :49:48.It's pursuing 120 separate lines of inquiry... And the chore us of
:49:48. > :49:53.voices demanding to know why the BBC had not run of story last year
:49:53. > :49:56.grew ever louder. To begin with the BBC held firm. Savile's abuse was a
:49:56. > :50:03.matter for the police and there could be no inquiry at the
:50:03. > :50:06.corporation in case it got in the way. But that would soon change. Do
:50:06. > :50:10.you think we'll see resignations over this?
:50:10. > :50:15.It's been a baptism of fire for the new Director-General George
:50:15. > :50:21.Entwhistle. He's apologised to Savile's victims. I have one thing
:50:21. > :50:26.to repeat, that is, a profound and heart-felt apology on behalf of the
:50:26. > :50:33.BBC to every victim. And he announced a number of inquiries.
:50:33. > :50:38.These will be forensic, but also soul-searching examinations. Our
:50:38. > :50:42.audiences trust in us is paramount. We will do everything in our power
:50:42. > :50:47.to maintain that trust. But there remain a number of key questions
:50:47. > :50:53.about the BBC's handling of the Savile crisis. The first, why
:50:53. > :50:56.didn't they run their story based on the evidence they had? In a blog,
:50:56. > :51:03.the Newsnight editor explained his reasons for cancelling the
:51:03. > :51:08.investigation. "Newsnight is not normally interested in celebrity
:51:08. > :51:14.expose yay. I felt if we could prove the police or CPS had let the
:51:14. > :51:19.women down in some way, we should go ahead." But the producer remains
:51:19. > :51:22.adamant that was not his initial brief. I thought the story was
:51:22. > :51:27.about Jimmy Savile, paedophile and I thought that was a strong enough
:51:27. > :51:31.story to run. Is it possible that you misunderstood what your editor
:51:31. > :51:37.wanted or that maybe you just didn't keep him up to date with the
:51:37. > :51:41.developments in your investigation? It's possible, but I think once
:51:41. > :51:46.you've got the story that Jimmy Savile is a paedophile, you've got
:51:46. > :51:48.a victim on camera. You've got corroboration from other witnesses
:51:48. > :51:52.and victims, when you've got confirmation for the first time
:51:52. > :51:59.that Savile was investigated by the police as a paedophile, I think
:51:59. > :52:02.you've got a great story. I think any journalist would run that.
:52:03. > :52:06.Director-General, George Entwhistle, sent an e-mail to all staff giving
:52:06. > :52:14.the official BBC line that Newsnight were investigating how
:52:14. > :52:16.Surrey Police had handled their Savile investigation. "As is well
:52:17. > :52:21.known the BBC News night programme investigated Surrey police's
:52:21. > :52:27.inquiry into Jimmy Savile towards the end of 2011, but decided not to
:52:27. > :52:32.go ahead with the broadcast. "But Panorama has seen internal e-mails
:52:32. > :52:36.which appear to question the BBC's official version of events. One was
:52:36. > :52:43.sent bit Newsnight producer, telling the Director-General that
:52:43. > :52:47.he was wrong. "George, one note, the investigation was into whether
:52:47. > :52:57.Jimmy Savile was a paedophile. I know because it was my
:52:57. > :52:57.
:52:57. > :53:00.investigation." Yet the very next day, an interview with the
:53:00. > :53:06.corporation's head of editorial policy and standards was broadcast
:53:06. > :53:10.in which it was said again. They're investigating the Surrey police's
:53:10. > :53:13.investigation into Jimmy Savile. They discovered the police had done
:53:13. > :53:15.a decent investigation, had made recommendations to the Crown
:53:15. > :53:18.Prosecution Service and subsequently it was dropped because
:53:18. > :53:21.they felt there was a lack of evidence. I felt they were
:53:22. > :53:25.misleading at the very least. They were suggesting that the story
:53:25. > :53:28.wasn't about the thing that had been commissioned, which was
:53:28. > :53:32.allegations about Jimmy Savile's behaviour to teenage girls. It
:53:32. > :53:37.seemed to give a misleading impression and overall, I just felt,
:53:37. > :53:42.well, once again, it's like their stories are being minimised. And,
:53:42. > :53:46.the team had more direct evidence of abuse at Duncroft than they had
:53:46. > :53:51.been told the police and the CPS had originally considered. The CPS
:53:51. > :53:56.only looked at one allegation of indecent assault investigated by
:53:56. > :54:00.Surrey police. But four years on, Newsnight had spoken to five former
:54:00. > :54:02.pupils who said they'd been sexually abused at Duncroft. So
:54:02. > :54:09.what happened to Newsnight's evidence once the story was
:54:09. > :54:15.dropped? That's problem number two. Should the evidence have been
:54:15. > :54:20.handed to the police? In his blog, Peter Rippon said: "We are
:54:20. > :54:26.confident that all the women we spoke to had contacted the police
:54:26. > :54:29.independently already." But this wasn't correct. The key witness,
:54:29. > :54:34.Karin Ward, categorically told us she had not gone to the police.
:54:34. > :54:38.Peter was reminded many times that was the case, verbly and in writing.
:54:38. > :54:43.You had made him aware this afternoon? Yes, and we did so again,
:54:43. > :54:46.myself and Liz MacKean, after he wrote the blog. So you pointsed out
:54:46. > :54:52.this inaccuracy? Of course. And it wasn't changed? Not as far as I
:54:52. > :54:59.know. Peter Rippon's team e-mailed him telling him he'd got it wrong.
:54:59. > :55:03.He says that's what he'd been told. In his blog, he adds, "We Also had
:55:03. > :55:08.no new evidence against any other person that would have helped the
:55:08. > :55:12.police." But they did. Remember, Karin Ward said she saw Gary
:55:12. > :55:16.Glitter having sex with an under- age girl in Jimmy Savile's dressing
:55:16. > :55:20.room at Television Centre. Shouldn't that have been passed to
:55:20. > :55:26.the police? The team didn't think so. For once, they were all in
:55:26. > :55:31.agreement. I don't think we withheld anything that would have
:55:31. > :55:36.been much use evident shallly to the police. Jimmy Savile was dead
:55:36. > :55:42.and could not be prosecuted. In our interview, Karin Ward said she
:55:42. > :55:48.didn't know who Gary Glitter was having sex with in a BBC dressing
:55:48. > :55:53.room. So, it was very limited use, but, yes, maybe the decision should
:55:53. > :55:58.have been taken to pass it on. source close to the Surrey Police
:55:58. > :56:01.investigation has told Panorama that they weren't aware of the Gary
:56:01. > :56:06.Glitter allegation in 2007. It's new information. The fact that it's
:56:06. > :56:12.an allegation about a living person makes it all the more serious.
:56:12. > :56:16.Since being interviewed for ITV, Karin Ward has spoken to police.
:56:16. > :56:20.The police are now investigating people still living connected to
:56:20. > :56:25.Savile's crimes, including, we understand, Gary Glitter. A few
:56:25. > :56:30.days afterwards, I was contacted by officers from the Met and they came
:56:30. > :56:37.to my house. They did nine half hours of interviews and statements
:56:37. > :56:41.with me. At no point, did they say "I don't believe you" or "that's
:56:41. > :56:45.not right." Now there's a third problem for the BBC which has dog
:56:45. > :56:49.today since this controversy erupted. Did the Newsnight editor
:56:49. > :56:55.take the decision to stop the investigation on his own, as the
:56:55. > :56:58.BBC's maintained? Or was he subject to pressure from above? There's
:56:58. > :57:01.been widespread speculation outside the BBC that the Newsnight
:57:01. > :57:06.investigation was Sheffield because of the big tribute programmes
:57:06. > :57:11.already commissioned to celebrate Jimmy Savile's life. I've spoken to
:57:11. > :57:16.a number of people at all levels in the BBC and a lot of people will
:57:16. > :57:20.have to be lying for it to be true that pressure was put on Peter
:57:20. > :57:24.Rippon to pull that film. I don't believe they are. Panorama has
:57:24. > :57:30.found no evidence that Peter Rippon was told to drop the story. But
:57:30. > :57:35.it's difficult to explain why he went off it so quickly. During
:57:35. > :57:42.their rows about it, Liz MacKean says she was left with the clear
:57:42. > :57:48.impression that Peter Rippon was feeling the heats. -- heat. On the
:57:48. > :57:54.morning of 30th November, I fire off this e-mail, "PR says, if the
:57:54. > :57:59.bosses aren't happy, I can't go to the wall on this one." And the
:57:59. > :58:02.final big question - what did the new Director-General know then? In
:58:02. > :58:08.the top job for just four weeks, when the Newsnight investigation
:58:08. > :58:14.was dropped, he was head of BBC Vision, in charge of TV output.
:58:14. > :58:22.That means he was ultimately responsible for those tribute films.
:58:22. > :58:26.For the first time in 17 years, it's time for a letter. How much
:58:26. > :58:35.did George Entwhistle know about the Newsnight investigation which
:58:35. > :58:39.threatened his Christmas schedule? We understand that at an awards
:58:39. > :58:42.ceremony here on December 2 last year, the director of news, Helen
:58:42. > :58:48.Boaden told George Entwhistle that if the Newsnight investigation went
:58:48. > :58:52.ahead, he might have to change his Christmas schedule. We're told the
:58:52. > :58:55.whole conversation lasted less than ten seconds. She didn't give me
:58:55. > :58:59.more information to say it was something Newsnight were looking at.
:58:59. > :59:03.And I said, thank you for letting me know. In a ten-second meeting
:59:03. > :59:07.the director of news doesn't offer any detail an the director of
:59:07. > :59:10.vision doesn't ask any questions. The thing that was uppermost in my
:59:10. > :59:14.mind was an absolute determination to ensure that nobody should
:59:14. > :59:21.construe anything I had to say or think about this as a matter of any
:59:21. > :59:26.pressure. So, Helen said to me, "We're looking into Jimmy Savile."
:59:26. > :59:30.I said, "Thanks for letting me know. I hope you'll keep me updated."
:59:30. > :59:37.think this might be a problem that he has that, for all the right
:59:37. > :59:42.reasons, he did the wrong thing. In trying to appear to do this at
:59:42. > :59:46.arm's length, to not interfere, to not have influence over what was
:59:46. > :59:50.going on in news, he probably stepped a little too far back. I
:59:50. > :59:54.think... So you think it was a mistake not to ask? I think he did
:59:54. > :59:59.it for good reasons. Tomorrow the Director-General will face
:59:59. > :00:04.questions from MPs on the culture, media and sport Select Committee.
:00:04. > :00:07.He is there to account for the BBC. Actually, he did hold one of the
:00:07. > :00:11.key positions at the time some of these decisions were taken. Yes,
:00:11. > :00:15.obviously, we will be asking him about what his knowledge was at
:00:15. > :00:18.that time, whether or not he did play any part in the decision
:00:18. > :00:21.that's were taken and why he didn't ask as many questions as some
:00:21. > :00:26.people think he should have done. This is exactly why the BBC can't
:00:26. > :00:30.possibly win on this. If it's shown that George did ask all these
:00:30. > :00:37.questions, aha, interference, pressure. If it's shown that he
:00:37. > :00:41.didn't, then it's top BBC man asleep at the wheel. We put the
:00:41. > :00:48.points we've raised to all the BBC senior management involved and
:00:48. > :00:53.asked for interviews. They declined. In a statement, the BBC said today,
:00:53. > :00:58.it was "putting first and foremost the victims of Jimmy Savile's
:00:58. > :01:01.abuse." That's why it's announced a judge-led review. They added a
:01:01. > :01:06.second independent review, which will seek to establish what exactly
:01:06. > :01:10.happened at Newsnight is... "The right forum to resolve detailed
:01:10. > :01:14.issues." Relating to the programme. The BBC admitted there were
:01:14. > :01:18.inaccuracys in Peter Rippon's blog on October 2 and have nowt
:01:18. > :01:24.corrected them, stating they accepted there were... "Allegations
:01:24. > :01:28.of abusive conduct on BBC premises." In some cases the women
:01:28. > :01:31.Newsnight contacted... "Had not spoken to the police. The police
:01:31. > :01:35.were not aware of all the allegations." The BBC accepted
:01:35. > :01:41.there were allegations that... "Some of the Duncroft staff knew or
:01:41. > :01:43.may have known about the abuse." It added, "We should also make it
:01:43. > :01:47.clear we now accept that the Newsnight investigation did not
:01:47. > :01:52.start out as an investigation into the Surrey police's handling of the
:01:52. > :01:55.case against Mr Savile. "Newsnight editor, Peter Rippon, is stepping
:01:55. > :02:01.aside while the investigation into what happened at Newsnight is
:02:01. > :02:07.carried out. Do you think all of this could have been avoided?
:02:07. > :02:13.easily by broadcasting a very good story about Sir Jimmy Savile and
:02:13. > :02:18.how he was a paedophile. That would have avoided all of this. Jimmy
:02:18. > :02:23.Savile, the star, was the BBC's creation. For half a century it,
:02:23. > :02:29.more than any other organisation, failed to face up to an unpalatable
:02:29. > :02:34.truth. Give us a kiss, then. fooled them or pulled the wool over
:02:34. > :02:38.their eyes. He managed to get them all to look the other way, even
:02:38. > :02:43.though almost every one of them would have heard rumours. He was
:02:43. > :02:47.hiding in plain sight. Metropolitan Police say they are
:02:47. > :02:52.investigating allegations from more than 200 potential victims of the
:02:52. > :02:57.late presenter and others. The Met have confirmed some of the alleged
:02:57. > :03:04.abusers are still alive. Panorama will give the police any new
:03:04. > :03:08.evidence we've uncovered. And the woman who revealed that story to
:03:08. > :03:13.the Newsnight team, yet went unheard, is, at last, being
:03:13. > :03:17.listened to. I think being believed might end up being a good feeling.
:03:17. > :03:21.At the moment it's not so good because I don't really know how to
:03:22. > :03:27.cope with it. But one day I will and then it will be good. This is
:03:27. > :03:33.the worst crisis that I can remember in my nearly 50 years at
:03:33. > :03:37.the BBC. I don't think the BBC has handled it terribly well. All we
:03:37. > :03:42.have, as an organisation, is the trust of people, the people that
:03:42. > :03:48.watch us and listen to us. If we don't have that, if we start to
:03:48. > :03:53.lose that, that's very dangerous for the BBC. There's no doubt trust
:03:53. > :03:57.in the corporation has been badly shaken by the decision to halt the