THE BBC is to investigate how disgraced former It's a Knockout presenter Stuart Hall was able to groom and abuse his victims over decades at the corporation.
Pressure has been growing on the corporation to launch an inquiry specifically into Hall's activities, similar to that being run into Jimmy Savile, with some observers claiming the current overall inquiry headed by Dame Janet Smith into sex-abuse allegations is not enough.
Lord Patten, the chairman of the BBC Trust, said there would not be a second separate inquiry into Hall's behaviour after the presenter was convicted of sexually assaulting a total of 13 girls during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s when he was also a regional TV newsreader.
But he said the review into the Savile scandal by Dame Janet would also investigate how Hall managed to gain access to his victims.
Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show yesterday, Lord Patten said the BBC is bracing itself for waves of compensation claims from Hall's victims.
He said: "I think to set up a new inquiry, when there is already one which is extremely well-resourced operating, would probably delay arriving at the truth.
"If we need to do more, we will. At the end of the day, what we have to do is to provide answers which will satisfy people that we have been prepared to deal with our own dirty washing."
Asked by presenter Jeremy Vine whether the BBC would be liable to pay compensation to the victims, Lord Patten added: "I imagine so, but that will be a matter for the lawyers and conceivably the courts.
"I think it would be incredible to be able to do that [estimate the cost of compensation] now because first of all what needs to happen is that we need to be able to get a grip on what happened and of course, in the meantime, co-operate with the police."
He said the Hall case was different from that of Savile, the disgraced former presenter of the BBC's Top of the Pops and Jim'll Fix It who abused hundreds of women, because of Savile's death in 2011.
Lord Patten said: "The main person who is alleged to have committed these crimes – who has committed these crimes, he has owned up to some of them – is actually alive."
Lord Patten also shrugged off criticism from former BBC director general Greg Dyke.
He Yesterday today described the chairman of the BBC Trust as a "lame duck".
Lord Patten added: "If Greg Dyke was doing an interview on flower arranging he would find a way to turn it in to an attack on me. It's worth remembering that he presided over the BBC at the last big crisis and as a result we have the present system of governance of the BBC, which has completely changed because of the Greg Dyke business."
But Conservative MP Rob Wilson said: "My gut instinct is the BBC are not using the Smith Review to get to the truth and are instead using it to do the minimum necessary to carry on as before."
Hall, 83, who now faces a jail term, was described as an "opportunistic predator" after he appeared at Preston Crown Court on Thursday.
Recorder of Preston Judge Anthony Russell QC granted Hall bail on condition that he lives at his home address and that he has no unsupervised contact with children.
His lawyer apologised to his victims in court after he changed his pleas from not guilty.
Yesterday, fresh allegations were made that a BBC manager helped to find women for Hall and then filmed some of the sexual activity that took place in his dressing room.
It is being reported that police believe other BBC staff may have helped Hall trick girls seeking fame into visiting him.
One ex-staff member reportedly said it was an "open secret" about Hall's liaisons.
A spokesman for the National Association for People Abused in Childhood said: "It's disgusting the BBC gave Hall unfettered opportunities to carry out his abuse.
"The BBC owes it to his victims to open a new inquiry that can scrutinise his behaviour and the colleagues who may have helped him."
Six of Hall's victims have reportedly contacted solicitor Alan Collins, who is already pursuing the BBC in connection with the Savile scandal.
The BBC owes it to his victims to open a new inquiry into his behaviour and that of colleagues who may have helped him
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article