A missing portrait and the true cost of Rolf and Jimmy

Just a quick update regarding the question I asked yesterday about what would happen to Rolf Harris' portrait of the Queen.
Well, it looks as though someone at the BBC (who no doubt read my blog) has asked the same question:

The BBC article

The BBC doesn't have it.
The Palace doesn't have it.
Apparently, it was last seen in Liverpool in 2012, but then of course an awful lot of things were 'last seen in Liverpool' by their owners…

There is a wider question here though.
There will, in the aftermath of the Harris conviction, be the inevitable clamour for compensation (and the equally inevitable emergence of a mix of genuine victims and those grubby and morally vacant freaks looking to make a quick buck) - and to pay for that compensation, most , if not all, of the Harris estate will need to be sold.
All of which is fine and is something I agree with. People have to pay for their crimes.
What I don't agree with, however, is the worrying precedent set recently with regards to potential compensation for the victims of Jimmy Savile. A High Court ruling has said that victims can make claims of up to £60,000 from either Savile's estate, the BBC or the NHS. Health Secretary Jeremy (rhymes with) Hunt has said that all claims made against the NHS will be paid out of the public purse (and as the BBC is funded by the public through the licence fee, then we'll be paying for any claims against that organisation as well). Savile's estate of £3.3m has already been all but swallowed up by legal leeches, so it's almost certain that claims that would have been made against his estate will be altered so that either the Beeb or the Health Service is seen as culpable. All of which means that Savile, and probably Harris, and maybe countless other paedos who have yet to be unearthed, could add to their list of victims the names of patients denied life-saving medicines or made to wait an extra couple of months for treatment because the NHS has had to fork out millions in compensation for what they've done.

ps I was also going to add a glib remark about the rest of us being victims as well because the BBC will have even less money with which to make half-decent TV programmes; but as they've only been able to produce reality TV shite for the last few years (e.g. The Voice), and would probably have spent that money on pay-offs for top executives, I'm not sure that's anything to get worked up about.

Rolf's a perv. Where's my humble pie?

On the 20th April, 2013, I wrote a post entitled: 'Rolf a perv? I just don't buy it.'
Well, following yesterday's guilty verdict on twelve counts of indecent assault, it looks like I'll have to buy it after all. Hence a large helping of humble pie for supper tonight.

I will not deny that I am shocked by this verdict. I really did believe (or, perhaps, more accurately, really wanted to believe) that the claims against the Aussie kangaroo-tier-down were spurious and, perhaps because this world makes cynics of us all, probably motivated by the prospect of compensation and media-money for the victim's 'story' - but that no longer seem to be the case. Old Rolf's been found guilty and, possibly, may spend the rest of his life behind bars.

So where does this leave us?
Well, from a personal perspective, it leaves me wondering whether Rolf and Stuart Hall and Jimmy Savile (whose names must only now be whispered in sombre tones accompanied by a disapproving shake of the head) should all now face a new charge:
1. Wilful destruction of memories of happier, more innocent days.
On this count I suggest all of these 'gentlemen' are guilty because I, like millions of others who grew up with Jim'll Fix It, Rolf's Cartoon Time and It's a Knockout, will no longer be able to look back on the television of their childhood without those fond memories being tainted by the realisation that behind the smiles and the laughter of the programmes' stars and presenters, there was a dark unpleasantness and a growing catalogue of victims.

It also leaves me wondering if there are actually any TV personalities from the seventies and eighties who weren't going around kiddy-fiddling or grooming young girls to be sexual playthings - how many others still have such skeletons in their proverbial cupboards? I know they weren't all pervs, but the growing list of guilty verdicts does make you wonder - how many more?

ps - Remember that portrait that Rolf did of the Queen recently?

Here's one for the caption contest...