Gentleman Jim Davidson, wife beating and the Celebrity Police Force
JIM Davidson is on the front pages. The Sun leads with: “JIM: I’M NO JIMMY.” That’s Jimmy Savile, formerly Sir Jimmy Savile, now a man covered in lots of lots of dirt.
It was Davidson who wrote of Savile on his blog:
Who’s next to be the victim of a media feeding frenzy? I have the answer to that. But, like Jimmy Savile, it’s only rumours. But when these rumours come out… WOW!”
As odd as he was, Savile can’t defend himself. The bloke’s dead for God’s sake. Let’s move on.”
So. What is a “JIMMY”? The Sun knows:
COMIC Jim Davidson last night broke his silence to angrily deny claims he sexually molested two women.
It’s all horrible, isn’t it. The two women make a claim. The police investigate. They arrest Davidson. But he’s not charged with any crime. We should have faith in the investigation. But instead we are invited to play armchair detective:
…he angrily told a friend: “It’s not in my make-up to do what I’ve been accused of. If a girl wasn’t interested I’d say, ‘F*** it, all right then’ and move on. I know at the end of this I will be completely exonerated. I have done nothing wrong.”
What friend? Why not name names? This is a criminal matter. The accused celebrity is front-page news. That’s rough. Others accused of similar crimes don’t get the same treatment.
Esther Rantzen (how are the kids?) opined:
…the latest arrest of comedian Jim Davidson is deeply confusing. Yewtree is about child abuse, isn’t it? After all, it was set up as a direct result of the Savile revelations. The NSPCC is supporting the Yewtree investigations because it is a charity dedicated to protecting children against abuse. When Yewtree swoops, and celebrity after celebrity has been targeted by them, we assume that they have uncovered yet more sexual abuse of children.
But it turns out that Jim Davidson has not been accused of abusing any children. He is defending himself against historic accusations brought by two women who were in their twenties at the time. He is of course innocent unless he is proved guilty, and he vigorously denies the accusations. But the danger is that he is now tainted, and will be for ever. And the taint is the false implication that he was somehow involved with the Savile crimes against children.
He’s no Savile, says the Sun. He’s no nonce. Said Davidson before he was pinched:
“The Savile witch hunt is going a bit silly now. We all are starting to speculate…”
If speculation is so unfair, why get a “source” to speak to the media? If truth and clarity is all, what use a unnamed source? The Sun adds:
Five times-married Jim was held as he prepared to enter TV’s Celebrity Big Brother House and had to pull out of the show. He was accused of sexual offences against two women which his solicitor Henri Brandman said related to incidents 25 years ago when the women were in their 20s.
Says Jim to his source:
“I can’t remember last week — let alone 25 years ago. But I know this much, I have never, ever taken advantage, or anything else like that, of a woman. There was one occasion during a pantomime when a really beautiful dancer got completely rat-a**** during a cast night out. She was very, very drunk and I didn’t want her to go home in a cab on her own late at night in that state. I gave up my bed in my hotel suite and stayed the night on the floor of the living room. I never laid a finger on her even though she was completely comatose and wouldn’t have had a clue what was going on. That’s what kind of bloke I am — I’m a gentleman.”
Is there a more telling test of a gent than not raping a sleeping dancer?
Can this be the same Gentleman Jim Davidson whose ex-wife Alison Holloway alleged in The People in 2001:
“His behaviour is so unhinged I was terrified of him most of the time. He could change from Prince Charming to being a monster in an instant…
“One of his favourite ways of man-handling me was to get me in a vice-like grip by grabbing both my shoulders and yelling in my face.”Another one was to yank me by my arm or grab my hair…
“We started arguing and then he dragged me out by my hair, ripping my shirt and either punching me or elbowing me in the face. My shirt was covered in blood and he drove off and left me crying on my doorstep. I felt so humiliated but there were so many incidents like it. On another occasion I ended up with a black eye because he threw some car keys at me at point-blank range when we were arguing about who should drive the car…”
The News of the World alleged:
The TV boss who married Jim Davidson’s ex-wife Alison Holloway has sensationally admitted taking out a contract on the top comic’s life. Burt Kearns met hitmen after being enraged by Davidson’s account of his 18-month marriage to the sexy newsgirl. The American executive claimed the 45-year-old Generation Game host had tried to make excuses for beating up Alison by claiming she was equally to blame. Kearns stormed: “I hired some guys to break his ****ing knees.” He added: “I was going to kill him.”
Davidson married Alison—his third wife—in 1987, three weeks after meeting her. Bust-ups followed and she soon had two black eyes. Alison, 38, split from the comic after 18 months and married Kearns in 1995. Davidson wrote about the marriage in his autobiography, The Full Monty. He bragged: “We’re like a couple of boxers. On the first occasion, I poked her in the eye by accident. I actually went for the mouth. Thank heaven I missed, I’d have fallen in. I just took a playful punch. Unfortunately I caught her completely wrong. The second time I gave her a shiner. I threw a bunch of keys which whacked her in the eye. Just for a giggle she kept blackening it up to make it look worse.”
Kearns wrote in TabloidBaby:
“Davidson didn’t tell the story of kicking Alison down the stairs the day they returned from their honeymoon or her shame when she appeared on air with pancake makeup covering the bruises. He was blaming the victim. After weeks mulling over how to punish him I decided an old-fashioned Irish kneecapping by bullet or sledgehammer seemed most appropriate.”
The NoW added:
Bristol-born Alison lives with Kearns in Los Angeles with their three-year-old son. She in turn has blasted Davidson, saying: “Claiming I hit him is like OJ Simpson accusing his wife of abuse.”
If we’re playing Tabloid Speculation, whether or not we like the celebrity matters. As Victoria Coren notes:
But, assuming Jim Davidson’s innocence, he still seems ghastly
None of it is of relevance to the ongoing criminal case.
Rantzen is right about two things: Jim Davidson is guilty of being famous. Coren adds:
Who are they, the Celebrity Crime Unit?
And why did they arrest him at Heathrow airport? He’s not a jewel thief on the run across international borders. OK: he was about to do a series on Channel 5, which may be an even more effective way of disappearing completely. But he would have been evicted very soon. Couldn’t the police have gone quietly to his house?
She is right against to state that Davidson is innocent. He’s not been charged with any crime. What began as the story of a predatory peadophile molesting girls at the BBC and on NHS wards has become a way to show how much better we – media, politicians and police – are than what went before.