Mohamed El Fayed

Yes this would be very helpful

He was first accused in the 80s, but it didn't lead to charges. Vanity Fair did an expose on his sex offending in the mid-90s, as did ITV. In 2009 and 2015 he was investigated by the Met for two cases (one of which involved a 15 year old), but the CPS decided not to prosecute. Last year Harrod's started settling claims from women who were assaulted by him.

I'm guessing that, much like in the case of Saville, this time the publicity is sticking, and people are more willing to listen, because he's dead, so people are less fearful of his influence.

But yes, it's incredibly depressing that there's literally decades of assaults and accusations, and it just kept on getting swept under the carpet. Then people wonder why so many women don't report rape...

Until we have specialist fast track courts to deal with sexual assaults & rapes, many women will prefer to ‘move on and put it behind them,’ rather than having a court case hanging over them for over 5 years. I despair at how crap the system is for women.

This is not to excuse these men's behaviour, but try to put it into context for those who would victim blame women who didn't "stand up" to men who bullied and abused them.
It was par for the course and nearly impossible to protect yourself or get justice.
When I contacted a rape crisis centre around 97 (not about MAF to be clear) I was strongly advised to consider carefully whether it was worth putting myself through it, basically told "I wouldn't if I was you." Around the same time a friend was treated very well by the police, her SA went to court and her assailant (her taxi driver) went to prison (though iirc he pleaded guilty at the very last minute).
I believe all these women deserve justice but I do wonder about the enthusiasm for these high profile cases where the rapist is already dead, relative to the attention paid to finding and punishing the men currently getting away with it.

Not shocking at all.

This does not come as a surprise, rich older man who wanted to ingratiate himself in British high society as a smokescreen that he was a sexual abuser. Same playbook as Saville. Do stuff for charity, give away lots of gifts and this will enable you to getaway with endless abuse.

Having his head of security as an ex head of met police was a clever move. Keeps the police quiet by paying them off.

Kaye Adams on Twitter has pointed out Fulham were not protecting their female players, they were protecting him by not refusing his money and exposing him as a rapist and threat to women. They knew about his behaviour and all they did was not allow him access to 'their' women and didn't care what he did elsewhere.

I know the team manager was trying to protect the players so I don't blame them but I do blame the leadership of Fulham

My first boss when I was 16 made all the women line up at Christmas, against a wall, he then put his tongue down our throats one by one, plus push himself against us. The male office manager would supervise to ensure we were all there. This was 1973.
He was a fat old creepy guy too. A large well known company at the time.

From my experience of working in London in the Seventies and Eighties, I would imagine that what happened at Harrods whilst Al Fayed was in charge was happening in microcosm and to a greater or lesser extent, in many other businesses up and down the UK. It was par for the course if you were a young, vaguely attractive, female and you quickly learned who to avoid being on your own with and also not to complain about sexual harrassment if you wanted to keep your job. That, unfortunately, is how it was for a lot of working women at the time. Obviously, the majority of men did not behave as disgracefully as Al Fayed, but it seems to me that it was an accepted part of the culture at the time. This is not to excuse these men's behaviour, but try to put it into context for those who would victim blame women who didn't "stand up" to men who bullied and abused them.

@Misorchid I worked in the home furnishings dept when Princess Diana died. 2 days before her funeral the store was closed for Raiane Spencer to have a privare shop. If I were being charitable I'd guess she'd need to buy an outfit without the world gawking. I don't think she really needed the cushions from the consession I worked in. I believe she was made a non exec director. Off topic I know.

This behaviour was well known and I knew 2 young women who were targeted. I'm now a lawyer. The practice of using NDAs during settlements is now bad practice thankfully. It took a while for the profession to recognise that the buck doesn't stop at the duty of care to the client.

Thevelvelletes I would hope that any enablers who are alive are brought to justice. That disgusting man did not commit those crimes alone.

An item on Radio 4 this morning was saying Fulham FC had measures in place to protect their female players from him.

Fayed was a "serial sexual abuser" whose abuse was "constant and repetitive" over 25 years, barrister Dean Armstrong KC said.

"I have many years of practice... I have never seen a case as horrific as this," he told the news conference.

This case combines some of the most horrific elements of the cases involving Jimmy Savile, Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein.

Savile because in this case, as in that, the institution, we say, knew about the behaviour", Mr Armstrong continued.

Epstein because in that case, as in this, there was a procurement system in place to source the women and girls. As you know, there are some very young victims.

And Weinstein, because it was a person at the very top of the organisation who was abusing his power.

We will say plainly, Mohammed Al Fayed was a monster."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98137yl092o

Don't forget that abusers also court royal connections or anything that maintains an air of a sacred caste. So they are untouchable and can access more victims

Has there been news about this before? I feel as though I already knew this, or maybe it's just because it's so depressingly familiar. I agree that NDA's should be banned.

Yes according to interviews on world at one some reporters have tried before

The bbc journalists who've made this documentary were praised as they have done something that I'm not quite clear about, to do with ndas / stifling of the information

The world at one interview had someone who'd previously work on it, around 1996-7

Diana's and Dodie's death was an additional factor in something that happened (that I'm not even going to attempt to explain as I need to listen again.)

Diana really was keeping poor company wasn’t she? As well as being party to martial advice from Jimmy Saville, she was going on holiday with this utterly sleazy man and being set up with his son. William and Harry were taken on holiday on his yacht. What company the Royal family keeps.

Disgusting creature forcing himself on young women who wouldn't have looked once at him.
The fucker might be dead but the enablers perhaps aren't could they be liable in a court of law I genuinely don't know but hope the women who were subjected to his crimes get justice.

I know what you mean, and I think it just points to depressing familiarity. I do not say this lightly, but I actually have started to feel my mental health being affected by this endless litany of male sexual abusers. It just seems endless, and so, so depressing.

I was so naive in my first job. Boss was handsy with all the girls. I complained, immediate dismissal. I never complained again even when two further bosses tried it on despite the fact that I was married.

Many of us heard the rumours when I worked there 35 years ago, fortunately he had no interest in me. Sad for the victims.

I think it is because a business like Harrods is a legal entity in it's own right. It's not actually the owners as such, it's the business.

In a way it's the logical corollary of the fact that the business is separated from the owner - so if the business goes bankrupt, for example, the owner is not on the hook for that personally. It's a business debt, they wont have to sell their house of something to pay it off.

The way that separation is made legally is by making the business a kind of person in its own right - which means it is responsible for anything it does "wrong". Otherwise no one would be responsible.

Cesarina

Not sure why your reply was so sarcastic? Yes, I was beautiful. So, presumably were the young women in question, which is likely why the evil
old bastard selected them.
I was naive, too but sure as hell wouldn’t have put myself in the same situation twice.

@MrsSkylerWhite carrot, stick and few choices.

If you can leave you do. If you can’t you find ways to manage it.