Jimmy Savile - What the BBC Knew Panorama

This programme contains scenes some viewers may find upsetting.

Four weeks ago, an ITV documentary broadcast allegations that one of

this country's best-known TV stars, a man of the people, a friend of

royalty, a devout Catholic who comforted the sick - was a child

abuser. And he'd been allowed to get away with it unchecked for 50

years. How did one man con the Since being exposed, more than 200

people have claimed they were Savile's victims. Now, finally,

their stories are being heard. is a bloody tragedy that this has

happened when he's died - all this should have come out way before his

death. But these girls are left with that legacy, and who's going

to pay for that? The NHS, the Home Office and local authorities may

all face legal action for failing to protect Savile's many young

victims. It's growing by the minute.

Initially, it was a few, and now they're coming in all the time, and

they're from the variety of different organisations. But no

organisation is under more fire than the one that made Jimmy Savile

a star, the BBC. Jimmy Savile's victims have faced years of pain.

We owe it to them and to our audiences to understand how this

could have happened and to make sure that everything we do ensures

that nothing like this could ever happen again. This is the worst

crisis that I can remember in my nearly 50 years at the BBC. Tonight,

Panorama asks just how much BBC staff really knew about Savile's

abuse. After they had gone, he indicated to me in a nudge, nudge,

wink, wink sort of way that he'd just had sex with them. I didn't

believe him. And reveals the inside story of why a BBC investigation

that could have exposed Savile almost a year ago was spiked

instead. We weren't asked to find more evidence or anything like that.

We weren't asked to get more people on camera. We were asked to stop

working on the story. It raises questions for the very top of the

corporation. You know, ever since the decision was taken to shelve

our story, I've not been happy with public statements made by the BBC.

I think they're very misleading about the nature of the

That's me. That's the only surviving photograph of me that I

know of. On November the 14th last year, Karin Ward did an interview

with the BBC's Newsnight programme. In doing so, she became the first

person to talk on camera about being abused by Jimmy Savile.

wanted me to do things for him. He wanted me to fondle him. He asked

me for oral sex, and I didn't want to, and he promised me that if I

gave him oral sex that he would arrange for me and my friends to go

to Television Centre and be on his television show. This interview has

never been broadcast by the BBC before. I was 14. Of course I

wanted to go to Television Centre. I didn't want to give him oral sex

because I thought it was disgusting, but I did it. Off camera, the

investigation team had managed to speak to four more women who said

that as girls they too had been sexually abused by Jimmy Savile.

Karin was ill with cancer when she filmed her interview with Liz

MacKean. It was a very big step for her, but she'd obviously steeled

herself to do it, and the thing that motivated her was that she was

so angry at everything that was being devoted to holding Jimmy

Savile up as this wonderful figure, and she'd known what had happened

to her. She'd known what had happened to a lot of other girls.

Karin's interview contained serious allegations not just about Savile

but of abuse on BBC premises by other celebrities - again, this was

backed up off camera by others. Gary Glitter was one example. He

was particularly horrible, and only interested in getting as much sex

as he could possibly get from any girl. I can remember seeing him

having sex with one of the girls from Duncroft in Jimmy Savile's

dressing room. -- which was packed with lots of people. Was Jimmy

Savile there? Yeah. He'd have known what was going on? Oh, yes. He

laughed about it. He thought it was funny. But the BBC chose not to

reveal what Karin had to say. The investigation was dropped for what

the corporation says were editorial reasons. Instead, just a few weeks

later, the BBC broadcast this: Let's pay tribute to the

extraordinary, unique and never, ever to be forgotten host, the one

and only Sir Jimmy Savile. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, all

you guys and gals. Welcome, indeed, to Jim'll Fix It. Now, then -

Now then... This special Jim'll Fix It tribute put out on Boxing Day

attracted five million viewers. This, in all truthfulness, is just

a fraction of the mail that we get. There was also a Radio Two eulogy

followed shortly after by two more BBC TV tributes.

He was a pop pioneer! How about that, then? Some of Savile's former

colleagues knew there was another side that wasn't being shown.

was pretty vomit inducing that the BBC was running tributes to Jimmy

Savile when he had died, and I could only marvel that the

programme-making decisions were obviously in the hands of a younger

generation who didn't really understand the severity of what had

happened. To me it just meant that yet again I hadn't been believed,

but I've spent my whole life not being believed.

Today, Karin Ward, now recovering from surgery to remove her cancer,

still feels angry about the decision to drop the Newsnight

investigation. It was hurtful, and it was

difficult because I had been pushed so hard to do it - when I didn't

want to - and you have to remember, I wasn't very well at all. I had

cancer. In the end, I said OK, and for all that stress, that's what

made me angry, the fact that I'd gone through all that stress when I

really needed to concentrate on getting well, and then they never

used it because somebody higher up didn't believe me. Newsnight's

decision to drop the investigation was called into question by a few

newspapers soon after, but the whole issue really exploded into

controversy just weeks ago when ITV chose to run the story the BBC had

shelved. The documentary built on key

evidence originally gathered by Newsnight. Savile's abuse victims

were finally given a voice - on ITV. The reporter was Mark William

Thomas, a former police officer who had previously been involved in the

dropped Newsnight investigation. He'd had a big background in child

protection, and we were using him really as an expert witness to just

evaluate the testimonies that we had, and certainly he had seen

everything we had, and he thought it was very strong. When Exposure

was broadcast, the impact was immediate. It engulfed local

authorities, the NHS, the Home Office, but especially the BBC.

what has deepened the revulsion is that this happened at the BBC, an

institution so loved and trusted it's known as auntie. This has cast

a stain on the BBC. As new victims came forward, the corporation was

accused of turning a blind eye and covering up Savile's abuse, both

now and in the past. These are serious issues - really serious,

for which the Director General... Nine days after ITV's film, the

BBC's Director General announced two inquiries - one into Savile's

behaviour at the BBC over four decades, the other, whether there

were any management failings in the canning of Newsnight's Savile

investigation. Despite our efforts to make clear

our belief that the decision to drop the Newsnight investigation

was taken properly, for sound editorial reasons, people have

continued to speculate. This is damaging to the BBC and is a cloud

of suspicion which cannot be allowed to continue. I think there

are serious questions about the handling of this matter recently,

and particularly the fact that Newsnight appeared to be uncovering

evidence to suggest that this was happening, and yet that - it was

decided not to pursue that report. I only knew that there was a

Newsnight investigation. I didn't have any details about it.

dropping of the Newsnight investigation has also raised

doubts over the leadership of the new BBC Director General, George

Entwistle. REPORTER: You're happy with this

role in this, are you? I'm - I - I'm - I'm - I'm entirely convinced

that I've done all the right things, yeah, yeah. The allegation here -

or the charge here is that that a bad editorial decision was made.

The charge is that a film that was ready to go - I don't believe

that's the case - was pulled, killed, completely eradicated

because of pressure from the top on account of the Savile tributes. Now,

that's the allegation, and that, as far as I can establish, is simply

The unmasking of one of Britain's most prolific sexual offenders

begins here in Surrey. In the 1970s, Duncroft was a Home Office-approved

school for girls. It was a very strange place, and it was filled

with celebrities coming along, film stars, all sorts of people - minor

royalty - very, very strange. Newsnight producer Meirion mer

visited regularly as a child. His aunt was the head. Another regular

visitor, often driving his Rolls Royce convertible, was Jimmy Savile.

On one occasion, I saw him taking out some of the girls, and my

parents would question with my aunt whether this was really appropriate.

Did you think it was unusual? Everything about that place seemed

very odd to me. It was sort of later on I suppose when I started

to wonder whether there was something else going on. All the

girls at Duncroft were deemed to be emotionally disusual turned. For

some, at first, Savile seemed almost like a saviour. Jimmy Savile

would turn up and suddenly brighten - or give the impression that he

was going to change something for you. He was going to give you hope.

You know, you were worth something because this famous guy would come

and see you. But it became clear what Savile's intentions actually

were - sexual abuse. After awhile, the girls would wonder why he

bothered coming, and then, of course, everybody knew why he would

come - because he would be letching after - after all these pretty

young girls who were so vulnerable. Karin Ward was one of those. Savile

would take her and others out in his car and abuse them. It has

haunted Karin ever since. I'm so full of self-disgust. I can't

believe that I did such things. I can't believe that I allowed such

things to happen, that I didn't immediately rush and scream it from

the rooftops, make this stop, just make it stop, but I didn't. None of

us did. I just carried on, lulled into a false sense of that's how

these things have to be. That's what we're for. It was only when

Savile died at the age of 84, that his past would finally start to

catch up with him. Newsnight producer Meirion Jones went

straight to his editor with the idea. Jimmy Savile died on the 29th

of October, a Saturday. I pitched it on the Monday morning. The

victims, as far as we could tell, would be very vulnerable people who

would not stand up in a libel court, so it was only when he died that it

really became feasible. Meirion had already seen that Karin Ward had

published on the internet an account of sexual abuse at Duncroft

by a man called "JS." He contacted Karin, and she agreed to be

interviewed. The team tracked down other women who said they had been

abused by Savile when they were at Duncroft. We'd found Karin Ward

very credible, but that interview on its own was not going to make

this story, and it was the collection of testimonies from the

other women as well, those who didn't want to go on the record,

but were very happy for us to use quotes and gave us detailed quotes

of their experience - they were all telling the same story. Newsnight's

investigation gathered pace, but how could Savile's abuse had

remained hidden while he was still alive? This horror - that is what

it was - took place while all of society was watching, but because

it was off the scale of everybody's belief system, they didn't really

Jimmy Savile's larger-than-life story started in Leeds in 1926. He

was a miner during the war, a pro- wrestler, a semi-pro cyclist. He

drove the Savile brand to stardom In the dance halls of the 1950s and

'60s, Savile's predatory behaviour appeared to be well known.

person said the big joke with Jimmy Savile was that he was either going

to be famous, or he was going to be locked up for having sex with 14-

year-old girls. After Savile died, biographer Dan Davies tracked down

those who knew about the early abuse. He had a reputation as

somebody who preferred girls at the younger end of the spectrum, and

other people I have spoken to have confirmed that the younger, the

better was his motto when it came to women. So there were obviously a

trail of people who knew about this $:/STARTFEED. Stkpwhrfrpblts

Welcome to January 1, 1964. Savile's link with the weeb -- BBC

began in 1964. His Radio 1 career started four years later. I arrived

at Radio 1 September 30th 1973. By the time I arrived he had

transcended us all without a doubt. There were stars like Tony

Blackburn. There were infloun shall people like John Peel --

influential people like John Peel in. Terms of stardom it was Jimmy.

By the early 1970s, the BBC was filmed Jimmy Savile as he criss-

crossed the country on a series of charity runs and walks. He always

had at his disposal a camper van or just a Range Rover with a mattress

in the back. The BBC's Nationwide programme caught wup his on the

shores of Loch Ness, as Savile searched for the monster. Have you

seen anything of any interest out there? Yes, she was about 17 and

she had long legs and long blonde hair, but she wasn't a monster.

Savile was pursued by fans everywhere he went. You lurker,

come here! Nationwide reporter Martin Young joined him on another

run from Carlisle to Newcastle. think, in a sense, it was the

beginnings of celebrity culture. Jimmy could have who he wanted.

Jimmy appeared to just pluck one from the masses. Good morning,

Jimmy. Martin found Savile in his camper van lying on the bed with a

teenage girl. They were both fully clothed, but for the reporter, it

confirmed the rumours he'd heard were true. I thought he was a

pervert. Even then? Yeah. Did you think about reporting it or

anything like that? No, it never even crossed my mind. I'll take my

share of the blame for. That Another Nationwide reporter

dispatched to cover a charity walk was Bob Langley. On two occasions

she spotted young girls coming out of Savile's caravan. They would be,

I would say, 12 or 13. They could have been 14. They certainly were

not 15. After they had gone, he indicated to me, in a nudge, nudge,

wink, wink sort of way that he had just had sex with them. I didn't

believe him. I said something like, thinking it was a joke, "I think

they're a bit on the young side for you, Jimmy." To which he replied -

and I can't remember the exact words - but something along the

lines of, when you think that way you're finished. Since the ITV

revelations, Bob has wondered whether he should have reported

what he saw. Supposing I had gone to the police or the BBC, what

would have happened? Nothing would have happened. He would have said,

"Can't you take a joke in" That would have been it. If journalists

didn't think to report Savile to their bosses what about BBC staff

who worked on another of his shows? This is today's edition of Savile's

Travels. They went round the country in the caravan and

obviously other things lierk a BBC car and stop and say to people

"What's your favourite record? We'll play it for you." What sort

of music would you like? Paul Gambaccini worked in the office

next door to Savile's Travels production base in Radio 1's London

HQ. The programme's production assistants told him some disturbing

stories. They would come back from these Savile's Travels outings and

they would report that unplesantness had occurred. What

sort of unpleasantness? We were told that he would go off with an

institutionalised young woman. senior Savile's Travels member of

staff even gossiped openly about their star's illegal behaviour.

sure he regrets it now. He had a big mouth. He would talk to the

record company promotion people about things that went on in the

caravan. So you see, there was no real attempt to cover up the fact

that things did go on. Again, though, he never thought to report

Savile. So, what, I a junior DJ am supposed to say "my senior is a

perv." They're going to laugh at me. It never occurred to me. But word

about what was happening on Savile travels was reaching BBC Radio

management. In 1973, the then Radio 1 controller, Douglas Muggeridge,

ordered his press officer, Rodney Collins, to find out if the stories

were true. Douglas Muggeridge said to me, look, I've heard rumours

about Jimmy Savile and perhaps some problems with under-age girls. Do

you know anything about this? And I said, "I've heard nothing Douglas,

nothing at all." Rodney Collins asked around his Fleet Street

contacts to see if they had heard anything he could feed back to his

boss. They all came back with exactly the same answer - I mean,

exactly, which was that they'd heard rumours about Jimmy Savile

but they knew of nothing. They knew of no inquiries going on by their

newspapers and they'd certainly not heard of any police interest.

Around the same time, Derek Chinnery, then a Radio 1 department

head, was asked by Douglas Muggeridge to confront Savile with

the allegations. An informal meeting was set up with executive

producer Doreen Davies acting as a witness. Savile flatly denied

having sex with under-age girls. reflection, it was very naive of

Muggeridge and me to do that, because the man was obviously going

to deny it. Even though we had no reason, no real concrete evidence

to prove that anything was up. If the man's denied it, you don't then

go and hound him at the time. I know it sounds terrible that we

didn't, but there was no reason to do so at the time. Wonderful,

wonderful, so marvellous to get away from it all. It was an

opportunity lost, a chance for the BBC to stop Savile's abuse almost

40 years ago. I suppose this probably wasn't the BBC's finest

hour. We only have to look at the press, television and radio over

the last three, four weeks to see that. Derek, God bless him, being

on the fourth floor rather than on the third floor, and that's the

only difference it requires, he wouldn't have heard the plaintive

cries of the disappointed programme assistants on the third floor. It's

probably that simple, you know. It's just one floor in an office

building makes all the difference in the worldment -- world. Any

doubts about Savile's record during his radio days were soon forgotten

as his television career took off. The BBC bought in to Savile's

sexually suggestive style in a big way. Now then, if I was a

chimpanzee and I was being naughty, what would you do to me? Say I was

going like this, you see, what would you do if a chimpanzee was

doing that? His new television producer had no idea that anything

but playfulness might lie behind it. Now then, watch this... Get this Dr

Camera. Clunk Click every trip. He'd never been told about the

earlier radio inquiry. I should have been told, I think. The people

who were, felt that to be the case in BBC Radio should have perhaps

passed it on to the television, but life was like that. You're in a

hurry, making a programme. You get on with it. Jimmy Savile was our

brand name. He was the front man. He was very little involved in the

making of the programme. Why was it that you didn't discuss these

rumours with anybody else in Television Centre at the time?

don't know why it wasn't, you know the questions you're asking me

don't apply to what was going on in radio at the time. They certainly

applied to what was going on in television, apparently. But only

that's only come to light in recent time, rather than 30 or 40 years

ago. Among the guests on Clunk Click were young people from

hospitals and other institutions, including girls from Duncroft.

Karin Ward, aged just 14, was one of them. After the show, she was

invited with other young people to join more famous guests in the

dressing rooms. She told Newsnight about this 11 months ago, in the

interview that was dropped. What sort of things happened in

Jimmy Savile's dressing room? that's when the other guests on the

show would come in, generally after the show had finished, they would

come in and they clearly saw girls and, well, kids, male and female,

as being there to be used. I had a famous person who would try. He

smelled awful. He smelled of sweat and alcohol and it made me heave

just to be near him. I didn't want him to do anything to me. Gary

Glitter, also appeared on Clunk Click. He too would join Jimmy

Savile and young guests after the show. They couldn't fail to be

impressed. Bean bags, did you like Gary's new record? Put your hands

up. All of us totally totally overawed by the fact we were

meeting all these famous people and obviously, that particular famous

person wanted to have sex with one of the girls and I suppose we would

have seen it as some kind of honour, conquest. I don't know. I can

remember being quite scared actually, because I didn't like

Gary Glitter. He gave me the creeps. Gary Glitter is now a convicted

child sex offender, but he denies the new allegations. In the studio,

some of the young guests came from the secure hospital Broadmoor.

I get two? You get two in there. I shall be giving girls away. I'm

going to get some down here. From Broadmoor. Savile's charity

fundraiser - he's said to have raised more than �40 million - gave

him special access to many institutions and to vulnerable

children. See you next week for another Clunk Click. His choice of

victim is very interesting, isn't it? Who's going to take the word of

a girl who's been in trouble with the law, who's found herself in an

approved school over somebody who has just, a few years earlier, has

been made an OBE because of his relentless charity work who is one

of the biggest TV stars in the country and is moving his way into

the centre of the establishment by this point. Savile's charity work

took him inside the spinal injuries unit of Stoke Mandeville Hospital.

Leeds general Hospital, where he worked as a porter and more

remarkably into high security Broadmoor. There are now

allegations and inquiries in them all. One former Broadmoor patient,

Alison Pink, spent more than 20 years in mental hospitals after

committing arson. She's since undergone a sex change. He used to

just sudden lay peer. He'd be smoking a cigar, having a cup of

tea in the tea room. Sitting in the corner talking to other female

patients. Of course, one he got his keys, he was always doing that. I

did actually sit there and think, he's a DJ, what's going on? But he

did try and raise prot file of Broadmoor, give it a -- raise the

profile of Broadmoor, give it a kinder looking face. They did Songs

of Praise there. They did a programme called Inside Broadmoor.

Alison was then in her late teens, a patient locked in a secure

hospital but vulnerable to Jimmy Savile. I was on the sofa watching

Top of the Pops. It had started. He was sitting on the floor to this

side of me, which would be my right. He turned slightly and then, as I

said, he literally put his hand between my legs, quickly, not

really looking at me. I remember moving backwards slightly. But I

couldn't do anything about it. There were two witnesses, two

patients. We knew that if we stood up and said, look what he's doing,

we'd be punished. They wouldn't Those organisations that trusted

It was growing by the minute. Initially it was a few. Now they're

growing all the time. The stories I am hearing from some of the victims

are that they did report the abuse and that no action was taken.

BBC could be the target of many legal claims. It was through the

corporation that Savile came into contact with thousands of young

people. Welcome to another edition of Top

of the Pops. Lots of lads and ladies about with us this evening

and lots of nice records we've got. There are now allegations that Top

of the Pops was a centre for abuse, and that as well as Jimmy Savile,

others were involved. A group of three have been described - men in

their 30s - who would collect girls from the Top of the Pops audience

and take them to other parties off the premises of the BBC, and

inappropriate things had been described as happening then - some

quite serious. And is it your understanding that these people

worked for the BBC? Yes, yes, so, you know, I - we have had one

particular call that has names of people who can be traced on there,

and that will be passed on to the police. Not all of the victims were

young girls. Lawyers are now hearing allegations that boys were

targeted too. There's some quite serious allegations that there was

a paedophile ring operating, so these are quite serious allegations.

A paedophile ring operating where, at the BBC? Yes. Involving other

members of staff? Yes. In 1972, Jimmy Savile added honour to

stardom when he was awarded the OBE. Two years later he was sufficiently

confident to hint at his darker side in his autobiography. In one

story from the early '60s, Savile told how the police had asked him

to look out for a run-away girl. He told them if he found her, he would

keep her overnight as a reward, and that's exactly what happened. In

his book, he sea, "At 11.30am the next morning, she was willingly

presented to an astounded lady of the law. The officeress was

dissuaded from bringing charges against me, for it was well known

that were I to go, I would probably take half the station with me."

Were you surprised that he was still employed by the BBC and

writing this sort of stuff? Well, I am surprised, but you know, it was

a different culture at that time. A year later after his autobiography,

he started presenting Jim'll Fix It, which very quickly became, you know,

an iconic children's programme. Some of the stuff that he was

writing in his autobiography does seem, you know, wrong. Despite all

the rumours - all those young girls hanging around his dressing room

and now his own published revelations, Savile was now not

just still employed by the BBC, he was marked out for stardom in his

biggest show so far. So the BBC decided why not put it all on film

which is why we call it Jim'll Fix It. That took off in the most

amazing way, and we got figures that were sometimes up to 20

million viewers, and on several occasions Jim'll Fix It was number

one beating Coronation Street and This is Your Life. We have many

things we would like you to fix for us, but we think the best of our

ideas is a milk float race. It was family entertainment, and it mostly

featured children. The idea was that Jimmy Savile would make their

dreams come true. This daft suggestion was dreamt up by a Cub

Scout group from East London. was just quite fun, a really,

really good day. We were so excited. And we're going to be short on

badges, and there's only one badge, so we've only got one badge with a

big, long ribbon. It goes around everybody like this you see. That

goes around here like this and around there like this... We was

then told that we was going to get a big badge for the whole cub group.

I was a bit disappointed, but then straight away, he asked me if I

would like my own individual badge just for myself, and then,

obviously, I said, yeah. One of the Cub Scouts, a nine-year-old called

Kevin, was singled out by Savile. was led into one of the rooms, and

it was like a small dressing room, very dingy. We went in, and he

closed the door, then he asked me again, you know, did I want my

badge? And I said, "Yeah." Um, then that's when he put his hand on my

knee and started touching me,ed a then at the same time, he grabbed

my hand and forced my hand on top of his trousers and made me sort of

rub him. Did you think about telling somebody then? No, no,

certainly not then. Why not? I was absolutely petrified. Jimmy

Savile's producer for more than 20 years has since retired and lives

in France. He says he knew his former colleague as well as anyone,

which was not very well at all, but he had no reason to suspect him of

wrongdoing. You do hear rumours about people, but nothing to make

me suspicious, and I was never given cause to feel I ought to be

doing anything because no-one had ever complained to me, and I myself

hadn't seen anything. You are sat on my magic chair. Do you know, if

you sit on my magic chair, I could make you disappear. Jimmy Savile

had succeeded in hoodwinking a lot of people, including Margaret

Thatcher, the Prince and Princess of Wales, the Vatican, the Honours

Committee, the NHS and hospitals up and down the country and several

police forces. And some members of BBC staff, including me.

Outside the BBC, though, rumours were being picked up by Fleet

Street, but still, the story didn't come out. I think the rest of the

media has something to answer for here. If we're to believe what

we're now told, a lot of the newspapers, a lot of the tabloid

press had their own inquiries, their own investigations going on

into the allegations against Jimmy Savile. As long ago as 1994, the

Sunday Mirror had tracked down two women who had been at the Duncroft

Approved School, and they told reporters about the sexual abuse

they'd suffered. They were in awe of Savile's power, as they saw it,

the fear that they wouldn't be believed, so when it came to the

crunch, they were too terrified to signed afters and -- affidavits and

face going to court, which would have been inevitable because, you

know, one thing would be certain - that Jimmy Savile would hire the

best QCs, and sue you to high heaven. The tabloids made me. If

they want to break me, that's up to them. I'll go down -- won't go down

without a fight. The tab Lloyds wrote their own tributes to Jimmy

Savile. I am not trying to excuse them covering this whole story up,

but I think the BBC fell down on the job here. Right to the end

Savile was fending off questions about his private life - not always

with a joke. What do you do in the caravan? Anyone I can lay my hands

APPLAUSE It's easy for me as a single man to

say, "I don't like children because that puts a lot of salacious

tabloid people off the hunt. you basically saying that so

tabloids don't, you know, pursue this whole "is he, isn't he a

paedophile line?" Basically? Yes, yes. How do they know whether I am

or not? How does anyone know I am? Nobody knows. I know I'm not, so I

can tell you from experience that the easy way of doing it is when

they say, "Oh, you're holding those children on Jim'll Fix It" is to

say "Yeah, I hate them." There was one final chance to unmask saf

while he was still alive. Surrey Police had investigated him in 2007,

but it didn't get very far. In the name of the Father and of the Son

and of the Holy Spirit... In the end, the truth about Jimmy Savile

never came out during his lifetime, but just a month after his death,

the Newsnight team felt they were getting close to proving it, and

then they found out about the Surrey Police investigation. When

finally we got initial off-the- record confirmation that Surrey

Police had investigated Jimmy Savile, we just thought, we're over

the line. We can now tell the story, and certainly our editor was very

positive. You know, he said basically, all systems go. Let's

get ready to get this story on air. In an e-mail on November the 25th,

Peter Rippon wrote, "Excellent. We can pull together a TX plan," in

other words, prepare for broadcast. So there was into doubt in your

mind there was a definite By this time, the team were already

aware their programme could result in a potentially embarrassing clash

in the BBC schedules in the run-up to Christmas. We heard, I think, on

the PM programme that the BBC was going to broadcast tributes to

Jimmy Savile over Christmas, and there was a deep intake of breath

from all of us. We assumed that if our programme went ahead, they'd

have to pull the tributes. think you'd made that connection at

that point? Immediately, yes. the two couldn't coexist? No, no

way. So while one part of the BBC was preparing to eulogise Savile,

the celebrity, another was preparing to expose him as a sexual

predator. It was a tricky position for the Newsnight editor Peter

Rippon. A lot of people think the BBC is this great monolith where

the Director General sits at the top, and everything he - or at some

point in the near future - or she goes - it isn't like that one of

the most important things in the BBC is the editorial independence

of its editors. Given the important issues involved, it was flap

flagged up to Peter Rippon's bosses, deputy Director of News Steven

Mitchell and Director of News Helen Boaden. For the Newsnight team,

everything was going to plan. They worked on their script, and on the

29th of November sent a copy to the editor. It included transcribed

clips from Karin Ward's interview naming Savile and Gary Glitter as

being involved in the sexual abuse of underaged girls - in one case,

on BBC premises. Their draft script also quoted three other unnamed

Duncroft pupils who said they were abused by Savile. And a report of

sexual assault at Stoke Mandeville Hospital. It all led journalists

from the BBC's in-house publicity team to tell Peter Rippon they

anticipated a huge amount of interest and that all domestic

outlets would want to run this story. The very next day, though,

the 30th of November, the Newsnight editor suddenly applied the brakes.

All. I can say is that it was an abrupt change of tone from, you

know, one day, excellent. Let's prepare to get this thing on air to,

"Hold on." His reason? Some of the women spoken to by the Newsnight

team had claimed they'd been told by the Crown Prosecution Service it

had not pressed charges because Savile was too old and frail. For

Peter Rippon, getting confirmation of this became critical. Having

pondered this overnight, I think the key is whether we can establish

the CPS did drop the case for the reasons the women say. That makes

it a much better story. Our sources so far are just the women and a

second-hand briefing. We understand that he had concerns about the

reliability of witnesses - including Karin Ward. We were in an

approved school. This is a school for bad girls. Who's going to

believe bad girls when they say, "Oh, this happened to me" or "He

did that to me" - no-one would believe you for the very nature

that you were troubled. Duncroft was a school for intelligent, but

emotionally disturbed girls, which says it all, and it also says very

loudly that Savile went after very, very vulnerable people. But for

editors of programmes like Newsnight, the reliability of

witnesses may not be their only concern. How institutions, like the

police or the Crown Prosecution Service, handle cases is also

important. One can criticise this all one likes but a BBC editor with

a BBC mindset says, hang on a minute. If we've got a story here

about An institution that's failed that in our terms a serious news

and current affairs programme - that's a better story than the

But no-one seems to have considered that the long-term abuse by a BBC

personality sometimes on BBC premises was arguably the biggest

institutional failure of them all. Newsnight's editor was instead

focusing primarily on the Crown Prosecution Service. His team felt

this was an unnecessary obstacle. was very surprised at this. I

argued, as did Liz MacKean, with our editor. We had meetings

together. We had individual meetings with him, and the argument

went on for some time. The next day, Peter Rippon became even more

adamant about the importance of the Having effectively told them to

stop gathering new evidence against Savile, he then cancelled the

editing of the piece. "I'll pull editing etc for now." Did there

seem to be any room for changing his mind? No, it felt like there

was a decision to kill the story. Six days later, the BBC press

office asked Peter Rippon how publicity for the story should be

handled. Peter Rippon was blunt. "We are putting the cart way before

the horse here. We've been looking at the story, but it is far from

clear it will ever be strong enough even for us to run it." He copied

in his boss Stephen Mitchell, the deputy director of news. So in 13

days, Peter Rippon had gone from "excellent, prepare to broadcast"

to "this story isn't strong enough". We now know he hadn't watched the

interview with Karin Ward, the first person to go on camera

testifying to Savile's abuse. time did he say, I want to see

everything and I'll come to a view on it. We did prepare and give him

one of the drafts of the scripts so that he could see, which we'd made

as full as we could, with quotes that we already had, with

transcripts of interviews that we already had. Also with stuff that

we knew we were going to get. We gave that to him so that, to try to

impress upon him that we thought we had the story. The producer e.

Mailed his editor warning him of the potential of the disaster if he

dropped the film. I was sure the story would come out, one way or

another and that if it did, the BBC would be accused of a cover up. I

wrote an e-mail to Peter saying, "The story is strong enough. And

the danger of not running it is substantial damage to BBC

reputation." Two days later, the CPS told the team it had decided in

2009 not to prosecute Savile because of lack of evidence, not

because he was old and frail. Peter Rippon killed the story. I was very

unhappy the story didn't run because I felt we had spoken to

people who collectively deserved to be heard and they weren't heard. I

thought that that was a failure. Were you concerned that that

compounded the hurt? Yes. I felt we had a responsibility towards them.

We'd got them to talk to us, but above all, we did believe them and

so, then for their stories not to be heard, yes, I felt very bad

about that. I felt very much that I'd let them down. Was it the right

editorial call? A lot of people will have a different view about

that. What do you think? With hindsight I might have made a

different call, but I do fully understand why Peter made the call

that he did. As predicted, news emerged that the Savile story had

been spiked. In January, cover up was suggested. In February, that it

had been pulled to protect the corporation's image. The BBC

publicically denied it. Peter Rippon said it was absolutely

untrue that the Newsnight investigation was dropped for

anything other than editorial The Jimmy Savile story finally

exploded back into life three weeks ago on ITV's Exposure. It's been

the scoop of the year. Detectives will be investigating events at

locations across the country. Investigations say five women have

come forward with allegations. says she has no memory of that...

It's pursuing 120 separate lines of inquiry... And the chore us of

voices demanding to know why the BBC had not run of story last year

grew ever louder. To begin with the BBC held firm. Savile's abuse was a

matter for the police and there could be no inquiry at the

corporation in case it got in the way. But that would soon change. Do

you think we'll see resignations over this?

It's been a baptism of fire for the new Director-General George

Entwhistle. He's apologised to Savile's victims. I have one thing

to repeat, that is, a profound and heart-felt apology on behalf of the

BBC to every victim. And he announced a number of inquiries.

These will be forensic, but also soul-searching examinations. Our

audiences trust in us is paramount. We will do everything in our power

to maintain that trust. But there remain a number of key questions

about the BBC's handling of the Savile crisis. The first, why

didn't they run their story based on the evidence they had? In a blog,

the Newsnight editor explained his reasons for cancelling the

investigation. "Newsnight is not normally interested in celebrity

expose yay. I felt if we could prove the police or CPS had let the

women down in some way, we should go ahead." But the producer remains

adamant that was not his initial brief. I thought the story was

about Jimmy Savile, paedophile and I thought that was a strong enough

story to run. Is it possible that you misunderstood what your editor

wanted or that maybe you just didn't keep him up to date with the

developments in your investigation? It's possible, but I think once

you've got the story that Jimmy Savile is a paedophile, you've got

a victim on camera. You've got corroboration from other witnesses

and victims, when you've got confirmation for the first time

that Savile was investigated by the police as a paedophile, I think

you've got a great story. I think any journalist would run that.

Director-General, George Entwhistle, sent an e-mail to all staff giving

the official BBC line that Newsnight were investigating how

Surrey Police had handled their Savile investigation. "As is well

known the BBC News night programme investigated Surrey police's

inquiry into Jimmy Savile towards the end of 2011, but decided not to

go ahead with the broadcast. "But Panorama has seen internal e-mails

which appear to question the BBC's official version of events. One was

sent bit Newsnight producer, telling the Director-General that

he was wrong. "George, one note, the investigation was into whether

Jimmy Savile was a paedophile. I know because it was my

investigation." Yet the very next day, an interview with the

corporation's head of editorial policy and standards was broadcast

in which it was said again. They're investigating the Surrey police's

investigation into Jimmy Savile. They discovered the police had done

a decent investigation, had made recommendations to the Crown

Prosecution Service and subsequently it was dropped because

they felt there was a lack of evidence. I felt they were

misleading at the very least. They were suggesting that the story

wasn't about the thing that had been commissioned, which was

allegations about Jimmy Savile's behaviour to teenage girls. It

seemed to give a misleading impression and overall, I just felt,

well, once again, it's like their stories are being minimised. And,

the team had more direct evidence of abuse at Duncroft than they had

been told the police and the CPS had originally considered. The CPS

only looked at one allegation of indecent assault investigated by

Surrey police. But four years on, Newsnight had spoken to five former

pupils who said they'd been sexually abused at Duncroft. So

what happened to Newsnight's evidence once the story was

dropped? That's problem number two. Should the evidence have been

handed to the police? In his blog, Peter Rippon said: "We are

confident that all the women we spoke to had contacted the police

independently already." But this wasn't correct. The key witness,

Karin Ward, categorically told us she had not gone to the police.

Peter was reminded many times that was the case, verbly and in writing.

You had made him aware this afternoon? Yes, and we did so again,

myself and Liz MacKean, after he wrote the blog. So you pointsed out

this inaccuracy? Of course. And it wasn't changed? Not as far as I

know. Peter Rippon's team e-mailed him telling him he'd got it wrong.

He says that's what he'd been told. In his blog, he adds, "We Also had

no new evidence against any other person that would have helped the

police." But they did. Remember, Karin Ward said she saw Gary

Glitter having sex with an under- age girl in Jimmy Savile's dressing

room at Television Centre. Shouldn't that have been passed to

the police? The team didn't think so. For once, they were all in

agreement. I don't think we withheld anything that would have

been much use evident shallly to the police. Jimmy Savile was dead

and could not be prosecuted. In our interview, Karin Ward said she

didn't know who Gary Glitter was having sex with in a BBC dressing

room. So, it was very limited use, but, yes, maybe the decision should

have been taken to pass it on. source close to the Surrey Police

investigation has told Panorama that they weren't aware of the Gary

Glitter allegation in 2007. It's new information. The fact that it's

an allegation about a living person makes it all the more serious.

Since being interviewed for ITV, Karin Ward has spoken to police.

The police are now investigating people still living connected to

Savile's crimes, including, we understand, Gary Glitter. A few

days afterwards, I was contacted by officers from the Met and they came

to my house. They did nine half hours of interviews and statements

with me. At no point, did they say "I don't believe you" or "that's

not right." Now there's a third problem for the BBC which has dog

today since this controversy erupted. Did the Newsnight editor

take the decision to stop the investigation on his own, as the

BBC's maintained? Or was he subject to pressure from above? There's

been widespread speculation outside the BBC that the Newsnight

investigation was Sheffield because of the big tribute programmes

already commissioned to celebrate Jimmy Savile's life. I've spoken to

a number of people at all levels in the BBC and a lot of people will

have to be lying for it to be true that pressure was put on Peter

Rippon to pull that film. I don't believe they are. Panorama has

found no evidence that Peter Rippon was told to drop the story. But

it's difficult to explain why he went off it so quickly. During

their rows about it, Liz MacKean says she was left with the clear

impression that Peter Rippon was feeling the heats. -- heat. On the

morning of 30th November, I fire off this e-mail, "PR says, if the

bosses aren't happy, I can't go to the wall on this one." And the

final big question - what did the new Director-General know then? In

the top job for just four weeks, when the Newsnight investigation

was dropped, he was head of BBC Vision, in charge of TV output.

That means he was ultimately responsible for those tribute films.

For the first time in 17 years, it's time for a letter. How much

did George Entwhistle know about the Newsnight investigation which

threatened his Christmas schedule? We understand that at an awards

ceremony here on December 2 last year, the director of news, Helen

Boaden told George Entwhistle that if the Newsnight investigation went

ahead, he might have to change his Christmas schedule. We're told the

whole conversation lasted less than ten seconds. She didn't give me

more information to say it was something Newsnight were looking at.

And I said, thank you for letting me know. In a ten-second meeting

the director of news doesn't offer any detail an the director of

vision doesn't ask any questions. The thing that was uppermost in my

mind was an absolute determination to ensure that nobody should

construe anything I had to say or think about this as a matter of any

pressure. So, Helen said to me, "We're looking into Jimmy Savile."

I said, "Thanks for letting me know. I hope you'll keep me updated."

think this might be a problem that he has that, for all the right

reasons, he did the wrong thing. In trying to appear to do this at

arm's length, to not interfere, to not have influence over what was

going on in news, he probably stepped a little too far back. I

think... So you think it was a mistake not to ask? I think he did

it for good reasons. Tomorrow the Director-General will face

questions from MPs on the culture, media and sport Select Committee.

He is there to account for the BBC. Actually, he did hold one of the

key positions at the time some of these decisions were taken. Yes,

obviously, we will be asking him about what his knowledge was at

that time, whether or not he did play any part in the decision

that's were taken and why he didn't ask as many questions as some

people think he should have done. This is exactly why the BBC can't

possibly win on this. If it's shown that George did ask all these

questions, aha, interference, pressure. If it's shown that he

didn't, then it's top BBC man asleep at the wheel. We put the

points we've raised to all the BBC senior management involved and

asked for interviews. They declined. In a statement, the BBC said today,

it was "putting first and foremost the victims of Jimmy Savile's

abuse." That's why it's announced a judge-led review. They added a

second independent review, which will seek to establish what exactly

happened at Newsnight is... "The right forum to resolve detailed

issues." Relating to the programme. The BBC admitted there were

inaccuracys in Peter Rippon's blog on October 2 and have nowt

corrected them, stating they accepted there were... "Allegations

of abusive conduct on BBC premises." In some cases the women

Newsnight contacted... "Had not spoken to the police. The police

were not aware of all the allegations." The BBC accepted

there were allegations that... "Some of the Duncroft staff knew or

may have known about the abuse." It added, "We should also make it

clear we now accept that the Newsnight investigation did not

start out as an investigation into the Surrey police's handling of the

case against Mr Savile. "Newsnight editor, Peter Rippon, is stepping

aside while the investigation into what happened at Newsnight is

carried out. Do you think all of this could have been avoided?

easily by broadcasting a very good story about Sir Jimmy Savile and

how he was a paedophile. That would have avoided all of this. Jimmy

Savile, the star, was the BBC's creation. For half a century it,

more than any other organisation, failed to face up to an unpalatable

truth. Give us a kiss, then. fooled them or pulled the wool over

their eyes. He managed to get them all to look the other way, even

though almost every one of them would have heard rumours. He was

hiding in plain sight. Metropolitan Police say they are

investigating allegations from more than 200 potential victims of the

late presenter and others. The Met have confirmed some of the alleged

abusers are still alive. Panorama will give the police any new

evidence we've uncovered. And the woman who revealed that story to

the Newsnight team, yet went unheard, is, at last, being

listened to. I think being believed might end up being a good feeling.

At the moment it's not so good because I don't really know how to

cope with it. But one day I will and then it will be good. This is

the worst crisis that I can remember in my nearly 50 years at

the BBC. I don't think the BBC has handled it terribly well. All we

have, as an organisation, is the trust of people, the people that

watch us and listen to us. If we don't have that, if we start to

lose that, that's very dangerous for the BBC. There's no doubt trust

in the corporation has been badly shaken by the decision to halt the