Furious GMB fans demand Richard Madeley apologise after ‘affirming Savile slur’

33 comments
  1. Perhaps Richard Madeley and GMB need to be reminded that defamation is only allowed inside the House of Commons?

  2. Has Richard Madeley always been a dickhead or is this a recent development? I don’t remember him being this bad but I’ve not seen him on TV since I was a kid and he was doing morning TV with Judy.

  3. GMB fans were fine with Piers Morgan for years but seem to have finally found a line which they do not want to be crossed. As bad as Madeley’s comments are, GMB and ITV’s morning schedule has been the sort of environment where such attitudes have been tolerated for a long time. I wouldn’t be surprised if Madeley made the comment in the hope it would be received well be the audience that supported Piers Morgan for so long.

  4. He is a cock. Earlier on he was supporting the argument that Bozo is responsible. I don’t think he can hold a thought in his head for more than 5 minutes.

    BTW didn’t Johnson write something along the lines of investigating historical abuse cases like this was just ‘spaffing money up the wall’. Changed his tune now hasn’t he?

    To me this whole thing is similar to the sort of dog whistling Trump used to do to the far right. He knew exactly what he was doing.

  5. Honestly the fact that even the GMB crowd are starting to get mad about this right wing shit slinging is a good sign.

  6. I really can’t stand the man- he’s an overblown, self important prat!

    A few weeks back he was trying to lambast the insulate Britain spokesperson on the show- he was really quite ugly and didn’t add anything to the debate.
    As others have said- he’s trying to be a pound shop Piers Morgan!!!!!
    Give him a few months and he may well be in No.10 Rimming Bozo.

  7. Oh look an overly made-up washed up daytime TV host made a controversial right wing statement to generate headlines, what a shocker.

  8. Does anyone get the feeling that certain elements of the political class are seeing an opportunity to use this to harass Starmer and other Labour politicians/supporters.

  9. Madeley is an insufferable cunt like Morgan was, they had a chance when he fucked off to get someone decent in and they went with this twat.

  10. I might be being thick here (very likely) what is the Savile slur that people are talking about? What is the word that was used?

  11. Something something Corbyn supporters ‘First time?’ gallows meme something something.

  12. I didn’t know who this guy was (I’m an expat brit, what can I say)… so I looked on wikipedia.It won’t last, but I had to sadly agree with

    **’Keir Starmer slander**

    On the 8th of February 2022 on the GMB show Richard propagated the lie told in the house of commons by Boris Johnson that Starmer had refused to prosecute Jimmy Saville while a member of the judiciary. *Absolutely nothing will be done about Madeley or Johnson as England has long ago descended into a nationalistically arrogant dystopian tory police state. (italics added)*

    Well. the author is not wrong (which is why I’m in no rush to get back!)

  13. My first reaction to seeing him on GMB was ‘Oh fucking no, wtf did Susanna Reid do to deserve this’! Wasn’t Piers Morgan and Andi Peters enough?

  14. Next week Madeley reminds his viewer that the broadcasters did nothing about savile long before Starmer was DPP.
    Any link between Starmer and savile is vanishingly small. It was a vile and unwarranted slur by Johnson which I think will bring about his downfall.

  15. “You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to know that the failure to prosecute Jimmy Savile, which was a terrible mistake, did happen on Keir Starmer’s watch when he was running the DPP, for something that he did actually apologise.”

    This is crazy, Starmer was head of the DPP, the DPP is responsible for every prosecution and he did apologise for the failure of the CPS to prosecute, making judgements on the reasons for failure is one thing, but the above statement by itself isn’t false

  16. Meh, a decision was made not to bring charges to Saville whilst Starmer was head of the DPP… hardly a slur

  17. Why can’t we accept that both leaders can simultaneously be pieces of shit? It’s pretty clear Starmer looked the other way over the savile thing (or worse) but that doesn’t mean boris or the tories are good, far from it. It’s also clear that the notion of ‘the opposition’ just doesn’t really exist anymore. It’s a Punch and Judy show boys and girls.

  18. Fuck these celebrities who mostly knew what the fuck was going on and did nothing about it and said nothing to anyone and now they want to be the moral adjudicators.

  19. There is a point about ultimate accountability, but leadership cannot be held responsible for all decisions, particularly right or wrong individual decisions. Otherwise by this logic, the PM of the time is also culpable as they sit above the head of the DPP.

    Leadership must take responsibility for culture, but can’t be held accountable for every mistake in an organisation.

  20. Kier Starmer literally accepted the findings of a report that the failure to prosecute Jimmy Saville was under his watch.

    It’s not a conspiracy or far right ravings. It’s true. The question is whether or not Boris incited the crowd. There’s no clear evidence he did, he said something that’s true and people decided to act on it.

    Was it irrelevant to the discussion in the commons at the time? Yes. But what was said was accurate. It’s a strawman to say Boris directly accused Kier of refusing to prosecute Jimmy Saville.

    It was under his watch so he was directly responsible for the actions of his department and staff.

  21. You all believe that the head of the prosecution service didn’t know anything about a high profile celebrity who was accused of multiple sexual abuse of children ?
    Maybe he missed the email ?

  22. While I completely disagree with claiming it was Starmer’s fault, he is very literally right here – the failure to prosecute Savile happened when Starmer was head of Prosecutions.

    You could say that saying that gives strengths to those supporting the idea but he’s stating pretty factual information, right? The problem here is that he didn’t go on to clarify for viewers what he was further insinuating.

Leave a Reply