Talk:Abe Saffron/Archives/2015

Chronology

The article implies that Saffron moved to Newcastle in 1953 and returned then to Sydney from Newcastle in 1948. Whilst a man of some talent, this seems beyond him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.110.145.13 (talk) 18:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Australian Business category??

Is it really appropriate to place Saffron in the Australian Business category? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.73.204.141 (talk • contribs).

He once owned an entire strip of nightclubs / strip bars in Kings Cross, New South Wales. Why not? That's business to me. -- Longhair 11:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough.

Is incomplete

Needs info added about his life before serious crime as a draper. Possiby needs more info about his attempts to sanitise his public image. More direct quotes from obituaries could help a lot here too. — Donama 05:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

In defence of Abe

I moved this block of text written by 203.14.108.9 from the article to the talk page, which is the designated place to discuss article status and changes (doing so in the article itself would be infeasible anyway). I'm in no way affiliated with this article or Mr. Saffron and not able to comment, but I'll try to call some attention to this issue. --Kizor 06:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

---

RE: Abe Saffron. Your article above made mention of certain points that I would like to comment on. I feel justified in saying this, having known Abe since 1958.

• Abe Saffron never owned, or ran, brothels
• He did own hotels, taverns, nightclubs and apartment blocks and even strip clubs. He was an entrepreneur extraordinaire and brought many overseas artists, including Frank Sinatra, to Australia
• He was mentioned in various Royal Commissions but no charges were ever made against him
• When Abe sued any of the newspapers over such articles, announcements of his court victories were relegated far from the front pages
• Yes, Abe did go to prison on a tax charge, but he was an honourable businessman proven over 65 years.

To compare Abe to gangster is ludicrous, showing that the Wikipedia apparently did not know Abe Saffron but instead, like many others, chose to copy the rabble-rousing of newspapers. I am proud to say Abe was my friend, and I his.

Victor Bogan Sydney, NSW

Thanks for your feedback, Victor. I went through the article but I couldn't find the allegation that Mr Safron owned brothels. The article seems to be in agreement with your second, third, fourth and fifth comments, excluding, of course, your statement that Mr Safron was an "honourable businessman" as that is a matter of opinion and we could not state that unless quoting a reliable source,

You mention that you feel this article has repeated allegations made by the newspapers. Wikipedia has a strict policy of verifiability using reliable sources and so the authors of this article most likely used newspaper articles and/or books. If there is false information in the article, please point it out here on the talk page and I will do my best to respond. Sarah 05:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Defamation in Australia

I removed the following text from this article:

In his last years Saffron launched numerous law suits against publications that suggested or stated that he was involed in criminal activity. Like many other public figures with questionable reputations -- such as former Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen -- Saffron was able take advantage of Australia's draconian libel and defamation laws to defend his supposed good name. In contrast to the situation in the USA, truth is not a defence in such cases under Australian laws.

Defamation law in Australia varies from state to state. In Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory, truth alone is a defence and it is generally considered to be the best defence. In NSW, truth is a partial defence (the material must also relate to a matter of "public interest"). In Queensland and Tasmania truth is a partial defence (the material must also relate to a matter of "public benefit"). And in the ACT, truth is also a partial defence (the public benefit test applies in addition to a negligence test if no criminal activity is alleged). The blanket statement: "In contrast to the situation in the USA, truth is not a defence in such cases under Australian laws" is false. Sarah 05:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Recent additions

I've updated the "recent news" section to include the material contained in the recent reports about Alan Saffron's book.

re: the above comments, without wanting to be disrespectful to Mr Bogan, I must point to the fact that the Maxwell Royal Commission found that Saffron deliberately concealed his ownership of several pubs by illegally registering them in the names of family members. I can't say for sure which brothels, strip clubs etc Saffron owned directly or through dummy owners/companies, but I would argue that he was a proven master at concealing his involvement in such activities and especially in concealing the true income he derived from them, a fact that was proven in court and which eventually led to his incarceration.

I gather that Abe was well-liked, and as his son points out in his new book, he built an empire on activities which were once illegal but which are now legal; he also curried favour with the Jewish community by giving donations to institutions like Moriah College. However, he was in no way a white knight, or even a "rough diamond": he used prostitutes, conducted flagrant extra-marital affairs with a number of women over several decades, sired at least one illegitimate child -- to whom he left substantial legacies -- and shamed his wife and family with his conduct. He is also -- fact -- a twice-convicted criminal and a proven tax cheat.

As noted in the article, his niece alleged last year that Saffron was involved in the Luna Park Ghost Train fire, and his son's new book claims -- as many have long believed -- that Saffron was a key player in the Juanita Nielsen murder, link Saffron and Frank Theeman through Saffron's alleged loan sharking operation.

I have no illusions about Alan Saffron's motives -- he is clearly interested in distancing himself from his father and he obviously has an axe to grind in terms of his relatively meagre legacy in his father's will -- but few were in a better position to observe his father's business and private dealings and whatever his motives his allegations deserve to be taken seriously.

Alan now claims that his father was indeed involved in all of the activities that have long been alleged (including prostitution), that he bribed Askin and Allan, acted as bagman for most organised crime in the city and loaned money to Frank Theeman, Peter Abeles, Kerry Packer and Paul Strasser.

Also I think it's important to note for the record that according to a 2006 report in the Daily Telegraph, Mr Bogan was a personal friend and a long-standing business partner of Mr Saffron, and is one of the executors of his estate, so his personal biases in this matter cannot be disregarded.

re: defamation, I agree that the earlier statement was inaccurate -- there are no national defamation laws of course and that was too broad a statement -- although I think many, particularly in NSW, would agree that the laws in this state are heavily weighted in favour of the plaintiff. I would argue that Saffron and many others have exploited these laws as a way of protecting their public image. What I was inexpertly trying to express was that, unlike the USA, Australia has no explicit constitutional right to free speech, and that truth, as Sarah points out, is only a partial defence, and not available in all states.

Dunks (talk) 07:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)