Cliff Hanging.

by Anna Raccoon on August 15, 2014

The Internet mob have claimed another scalp. A woman who chose to run a brothel told a man involved in money laundering that one of her customers used to sign into the brothel as ‘Cliff Richard’.  Naturally coming from such a reputable source, and being conveyed to the ears of the internet generation by another impeccable source, this has been taken, for some years, as being irrefutable proof of inside knowledge into the sex life of someone they have never met, nor are likely to.

Presumably if that long ago customer had chosen to use the more usual moniker of ‘Mickey Mouse’, Operation Yewtree would have been tipping off the press to hang around outside the Disney studios in slavering expectation of the imminent springing of the Scotland Yard mousetrap.

South Yorkshire Police have denied that they informed the media of their planned raid, in conjunction with Operation Yewtree, on the apartment that Cliff Richard bought 23 years after the alleged offence is supposed to have occurred 176 miles north.  They declined to inform Cliff Richard of their desire to search this property – instead ‘someone’ informed the world’s media. Helicopters circled the property and bedraggled BBC announcers waited outside as a convoy of five cars carrying eight policeman arrived to forensically search the property.  Since South Yorkshire Police have formally denied having informed the media, we can only assume that it was someone from the celebrity obsessed Operation Yewtree or one of their media ‘friends’ that are apparently privy to the inner workings of this police operation.

No matter; this morning Cliff Richard has awoken to a social media awash with headlines like ‘Arise Sir Pervert’ and the inevitable ‘Hello, Hello, Hello Kitty’ – and that is before the world has any idea as to whether Cliff Richard is involved as a suspect, a witness, or merely the owner of a property that has been named by one of the army of ‘survivors’ who believe that they have been sexually abused by a celebrity, or someone who once knew a celebrity, or someone who once donated to the Conservative Party, or any other tenuous claim to fame.

What a nasty, curtain twitching, prurient, celebrity obsessed nation we have become. We used to point the finger in disgust at North Korea or East Germany for their ‘show trials’ – at least they had a ‘show trial’ – we are indulging in a ‘show denunciation’; ritual humiliation; the ‘perp’ walk beloved of New York.

If, and it is a big ‘if’, there is someone out there who genuinely believes that he was sexually abused by Cliff Richard, and hasn’t felt able to speak about it for 29 years until now, then that is something that can be dealt with by the police and judiciary – it has nothing to do with the rest of us.

What has happened to Cliff Richard today has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘child protection’. I repeat; we don’t know whether Cliff’s involvement is as a suspect, a witness, or merely the owner of a property – though the social media crowd will be hoping that Cliff will be the next one to have to publicly defend the size of his penis, or his sexual inclinations to the slavering world.

There is only one reason why someone from either Operation Yewtree or someone connected to them tipped off the media yesterday – and that is the obsession with fame. They wanted to be the person who pointed the finger and ritually humiliated a famous person. It did nothing to aid the investigation; but everything to aid their present – or future – media career.  

There should be an investigation. Another investigation – to unmask the police officer who tipped off the media. Questions should be asked in the House of Commons.

There are some very unpleasant undercurrents swirling round the current moral furore. The Government have announced an inquiry into ‘historic sex abuse’. Within hours the social media crowd were screeching that the government couldn’t possibly investigate – they were ‘too involved’.

What they propose is that the social media mob investigate! Mark Williams-Thomas whose various claims to fame involve pounding the streets on behalf of Surrey Police then for a chewing gum removal firm, licked the end of his pencil and wrote ‘Wot I wud do if I wuz conducting the investigation’ to loud acclaim from his acolytes – apparently this extends to ‘looking somewhere else’ if wherever he looked first didn’t produce the required proof. ‘Tis truly amazing what they teach police constables these days.

The once respected criminal barrister John Cooper, who was an unsuccessful Labour Parliamentary candidate, and President of the League Against Cruel Sports which successfully lobbied for the Hunting Act, and still advises them on prosecutions against fox-hunting, has apparently agreed to ‘chair the People’s Tribunal’ – the Tribunal is said to have been set up as a result of ‘conversations between John Cooper and a Joanne Welch. Joanne Welch is a lady who comes on-line at 7.30am, and is still tweeting at approximately one minute intervals (I kid you not!) 9 hours later. 13,965 Tweets to date. She spends her time retweeting anything which shows a sceptical attitude towards Government transparency.

‘The People’s Tribunal’ is said to be a huge improvement on the ‘secretive and less than transparent’ Government Inquiry which will – allegedly – be hobbled by its terms of reference.

They are encouraging ‘survivors of sexual abuse’ to come forward and ‘tell their stories’. Who to?

Well, so far, they have declined to say who will be funding them, they have declined to say who is on the committee, they have declined to show even other ‘survivors’ who is behind the organisation, unless they were at the secret squirrel inaugural meeting on August 4th – apparently there were people there who ‘didn’t want to be identified’. ‘Evidence’ is to be collected by Skype, so that if the Government inquiry ‘lacks bite or is too narrow’ the ‘People’s Tribunal’ can ‘act’. How is not explained.

In the meantime, those with tales of sexual abuse by powerful politicians are invited via Twitter to tell their stories to an organisation comprised of ‘we know not who’ – besides a failed would be Labour Politician – financed by ‘we know not who’, which discusses and has aims of ‘we know not what’. Transparency eat your heart out.

It would be laughable if sexual abuse wasn’t such a serious subject – primarily ruining the lives of those subjected to it, but also ruining the lives of those prematurely or falsely accused of it.

Yesterday, the Daily Mail was running a story by a woman claiming that two – conveniently dead – men had raped her at age 4. One was a prominent politician. Naturally. There is no redress for him, no opportunity to rebut the claims.

There may be no opportunity for Cliff Richard to address the claims currently circulating about him – it wouldn’t be the first time that Operation Yewtree had pointed the finger at someone they later declined to charge. Jim Davidson and Freddie Starr could sympathise with him.

This has to stop. Child Abuse is not fodder for the prurient masses. Nor should it be an opportunity for out of power politicians to foment discontent.

Let’s have an inquiry to find out who tipped off the media.

{ 197 comments… read them below or add one }

Alexander Baron August 15, 2014 at 9:56 am

Joan Welch appears to have fled Facebook. Perhaps she’s been kidnapped by Satanists to ensure she doesn’t reveal details of their nefarious plot.


Joe Public August 15, 2014 at 10:06 am

Thank you Anna. Wise words, again.


Lizzie Cornish August 17, 2014 at 4:51 pm

Yes, I agree, excellent article, Anna.


Ancient+Tattered Airman August 15, 2014 at 10:15 am

Well said, Anna. Can journalism sink to lower depths?


JuliaM August 15, 2014 at 10:24 am

“There should be an investigation. Another investigation – to unmask the police officer who tipped off the media. “

Or the CPS official…


Frankie August 15, 2014 at 11:14 pm

Well said Julia…

I hope this Cliff Richard saga is all scurrilous clap trap… but I remember thinking that about Rolf Harris. The media have had a fascination with the sex life of Cliff for years so perhaps, egged on by the witchunt surrounding the celebrities of the sixties it was only a matter of time.

Unfortunately, this investigation bears quite a few of the hallmarks of the early days of the Harris investigation – and look what happened to Rolf!


Junkkmale August 16, 2014 at 7:30 pm

“bears quite a few of the hallmarks of the early days of the Harris investigation – and look what happened”

A possible wrong based on an eventual right does not make two rights, especially when it comes to the trampled concept of innocence until guilt proven.

If, that’s IF… anything is discovered now that may lead to charges later, having half the BBC Mandelathon crew tipped off and camped out to preserve the moment it all kicked off must surely taint what will be tricky to prove anyway.

Which means the injured parties will be poorly served by justice anyway.

Leaving… who again… that benefits by this circus of the absurd?


Lizzie Cornish August 17, 2014 at 4:50 pm

I do not believe, for a moment, that Rolf Harris is guilty, Frankie. I’m deeply concerned about him, about his entire trial, which, for me, was a mockery of British Justice.


Dioclese August 15, 2014 at 10:28 am

Excellently put – and an eye catching headline. Couldn’t have put it better myself, so I won’t bother.

I would have commented over at the Max Farquar blog about the crowing of certain people over there to behave in just the kind of speculation and unfounded ‘evidence’ that you are talking about regrading Cliff Richard. They are full of themselves right now! “I told you so”. Trial by blog, indeed. Unfortunately, I am not allowed to comment on that site ( “The only site on the internet that supports free speech” in their words) any more because I’m censored out. They don’t like what I say.

They’re not the only site that does this – see today’s post over at mine. Seems that the many people who write this sort of stuff don’t like comments from people who don’t agree with them. They call it ‘moderation’ but I call it ‘censorship’ and that can’t be a good thing for anyone.

And you’re right about the copper who tipped off the media. He should be sacked IMHO or at least demoted…


Plodder August 16, 2014 at 1:32 pm

Not necessarily a copper. The CPS, various solicitors, barristers and employees of all of them are also possible suspects. Please be fair and do not accuse the innocent.


SpectrumIsGreen August 15, 2014 at 10:32 am

The only justification that I can see for raiding Cliff’s house was to try and find some questionable photos, like Rolf, to pin extra charges on him and bolster their case. A shameful fishing exercise but par for the course these days it seems.


Anna Raccoon August 15, 2014 at 10:42 am

You forgot – ‘public fishing exercise’!


Anna Raccoon August 15, 2014 at 10:44 am

Perhaps that should read ‘pubic fishing exercise’.


Chris August 15, 2014 at 11:01 am

‘Pubic Fisting Exercise’ more like…

Interesting precedent to set – one age-old allegation of impropriety now means a judge will sign off a warrant to search a knowingly unoccupied property without anyone so much as speaking to the law-abiding citizen in question. Can we all expect to have coppers raking through our homes whilst we are on holiday, taking and planting whatever they want?


Plodder August 16, 2014 at 1:37 pm

”Planting whatever they want” ? Another random unfair accusation/comment.


eric hardcastle August 15, 2014 at 11:00 am

I believe there is a far more sinister reason. If we believe Jonathon King’s website- and I do- they now have a complete knowledge of the layout. This is a trawling expedition and the police are capable of subtly influencing other claimants with details of Richard’s home.

And they do it : when I first came to Australia I did some work for a solicitor the late John Marsden. Marsden was a high profile powerful lawyer, president of the Law Society and a member of the Police Board, gay and a target.

He was accused by a tabloid TV show of abusing under-aged rent boys. We all knew John was into “rough trade”- the more tattoos the better, preferably truck drivers.
Marsden sued for libel and the TV network bitterly fought the case for 10 years. It all hinged on details of Marsden’s house, the decor , layout and so on. Eventually it emerged that local police, who had it in for Marsden had supplied details of his house to the TV Station & the claimant.
Fortunately for Marsden we found his decorators who had re-designed his house 10 years after the claimed abuse and who still had the photos of the old decor.
The Judge awarded Marsden the biggest ever libel payout in history- $6M plus costs probably twice that. John was going to sue every goddamned liar including a number of police officers who had colluded with the media. Sadly he died of cancer while on holiday a year after the case.


Ian B August 15, 2014 at 11:57 am

Well if that is the case, it’ll be interesting to see if further Bravely Come Forwards allege abuse at that address.


Johnny Monroe August 15, 2014 at 10:39 am

‘The People’s Tribunal’? I expect that will be held in the Court of Public Opinion, then.


GD August 15, 2014 at 2:36 pm

The very idea sounds like a remake of “Witchfinder General”…quite horrifying…mob hysteria is capable of anything, online as well as off.


eric hardcastle August 15, 2014 at 10:46 am

Again Anna Raccoon puts it succinctly , honestly and with more truth than any of our ‘media’. I really am sickened to watch afar what is happening in Britain.
It sickens me to my stomach to see how the law has become putty in the hands of the obsessed hysterics and gutter types like MWT.

# I have received a further email from Mark Colvin of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, a final dismissal of my complaint to him over his interview with “the man who knew fuck all about Jimmy Savile” Dan Davies.
Colvin dismisses my claim that his 6pm round-up of important news stories of the day :
1. he covers important local & world events and his choice of interviewing the author of a cheap news clipping novel was in appropriate and-
2. If he was to interview him he at least he should have had the integrity to ask Davies why he gave Savile a glowing review after his death calling him a man “with a heart of gold”. I had sent Colvin a copy of Davies’ Daily Mail haliography and he had received it.

But it’s a symptom of a far greater sickness. The media has become Stalinist in it’s weekly re-writes of history ( I should think Davies’ abominable Savile book is a prime example given his glowing tributes to the man 3 years earlier).
God only knows where this madness will end.


Chris August 15, 2014 at 10:46 am

I used to think that life was sweet….

Here’s another curious coincidence – the Filth waited to swoop on Cliff’s unoccupied property whilst he is at Number One in the charts of 1979 – the point the BBC4 Top Of The Pops repeats are at. Meaning the BBC may yet find themselves having to pull another edition or two.
And if you think that is the grasping of straws by an obsessive devotee of said once-celebrated show, it’s the fourth such coincidence – and three of which appear to have had the timing contrived for that purpose:

1) The “Gary Glitter” Twitter account of January 2012 – set up to stir trouble, strangely JUST PRIOR to his appearances on the TOTP 1977 repeats that the BBC did indeed show unedited, keeping their promise made to Jonathan King in 2011 that “we will not seek to rewrite history, nor edit anybody out in the future”. Of course, it now looks as though the GG Twitter hoax was the work of the team behind the Savile Conspiracy, the foreplay to the full-on shafting the following Autumn.
2) The Savile ‘Exposure’ happened at the precise moment the BBC4 TOTP run passed the last of the ‘wiped’ shows. No more missed shows we thought – not from that week. I’m prepared to accept that was *just* coincidence, but oh what a coincidence
3) Dave Lee Travis was arrested on the Thursday Morning his TOTP of 20-10-77 was due to be repeated for the first time ever on BBC4. As the late Mike Smith bravely pointed that day on Twitter, the area where DLT lived had been swarming with press for over an hour before the police arrived mob-handed to arrest one 67 year-old law abiding citizen. BBC4 had to quickly replaced that repeat with the Kid Jensen edition of the week after, and The Hairy Cornflake has remained ‘in the can’ ever since.

One coincidence I can accept. It’s up to you whether you believe they all are, though I accept it’s a mere ‘aside’ in this current episode of corrupt collusion.


Fat Steve August 15, 2014 at 11:06 am

Bang on the point Anna and delivered with peerless wit — Cliff Hanger and Hello Hello Hello Kitty being ones for my book of The Collected Wit of Procyon Suprna . Arrrgggghhh I feel inadequate.!!!!


Peter Raite August 15, 2014 at 11:09 am

The Mail is bleating that the BBC got the story first, which is inevitable sour-graping. I would expect that like any tabloid they would have jumped at the leak themselves, and found words to justify actuing on it.


Jim Bates August 15, 2014 at 11:10 am

The Police are supposed to provide reasons why they feel a warrant is necessary in order to get a Judge’s signature. They should also stipulate why they feel it is necessary to arrive unannounced.
Such reasons can of course be invented to order and as far as I am aware, they are rarely, if ever, checked.
In the current madness this means that anyone with an axe to grind and a glib tongue can sling whatever mud they like knowing that some will stick and the ‘no smoke without fire’ morons will revel in the ensuing media frenzy.
I believe a simple solution would be that the same rules of anonymity that protect the alleged ‘victims’ should be extended to the accused.
It is likely to be much more difficult though, to identify the source of the leak. If they ever do, I’d suggest bringing back tarring and feathering as a start.


Curmudgeon August 15, 2014 at 12:19 pm

The lack of any real judicial oversight on warrants now being exercised is another example of our gradual slide in to a police state.


Frankie August 15, 2014 at 11:25 pm

‘…Such reasons can of course be invented to order and as far as I am aware, they are rarely, if ever, checked.’

And your source for such a scurrilous suggestion is…?

On every warrant application I have ever seen (hundreds, possibly more) there is always supporting evidence. No self-respecting magistrate would sign a warrant without such and, of course, no police officer would attempt to get a warrant (each warrant application must countersigned by at least an Inspector, in normal circumstances, a Superintendent in specific instances) without material which would justify its issue. That is the reality.


Jim Bates August 16, 2014 at 2:35 am

Hi Frankie.
“Such reasons can of course be invented to order …” stems from my own experience. That they are rarely, if ever checked is the observation of acquaintances in the Police when I asked for their opinion. The warrant in question was eventually declared invalid by the High Court.


Jim Bates August 16, 2014 at 6:11 pm

You might also find a recent entry on the Magistrates Blog :
“… An important point that has been neglected in the past is the need to give and record full reasons behind the application for the warrant and the magistrate or judge’s decision… “


Ian B August 15, 2014 at 11:10 am

I just mentioned over at the Libertarian Alliance blog, it appears that the police have misunderstood Matthew 4:19.


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 11:37 am

Both trawling and trolling, it would appear….


Frankie August 15, 2014 at 11:26 pm



thedude August 15, 2014 at 11:14 am

When are these bastards going to get what’s coming to them?
I hope Cliff sues the living shit out of them and this proves the start of a few ruined careers and corruption prosecutions. I can dream.
If I were an ageing celebrity in the UK right now, I would be getting the hell out of Dodge. The country has become a cesspit for corrupt, misandric loonies throughout the media, police and political spheres.


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 11:34 am

If they’re getting El Ducks in the row, next we will be seeing adverts asking for people who fell on, or off, a cliff. Congratulations, and celebrations, we want all the world to know that compo’s here for you…..


sally stevens August 15, 2014 at 7:49 pm

Dux, you mean, don’t you?


Chris August 15, 2014 at 11:38 am

Here’s some sheep being herded off a Cliff. Topical or wot?


Strange World August 15, 2014 at 12:00 pm

I’m afraid it’s a sad reflection on the world that we live in that the notion of innocent until proven guilty appears to be something that goes over the heads of a lot of people. It isn’t that this is new as there have always been people who seem to prefer the no smoke without fire, guilt by association, implication, the way they look, the lives they lead or the “facts” just speak for themselves type. When you put such beliefs together with a distrust of authority, elites, anyone who seems to have power, it’s a powder keg that goes off whenever the media feeds us with a new story.

Since Operation Yewtree there has been a strange coming together of the conspiracy and mainstream media world, in that the conspiracist’s have been lining up to tell everyone “told you so”, while at the same time maintaining the purity of their beliefs by holding that this is the tip of the iceberg and that the real villains are still at large. The system may well have given us Clifford, Harris and of course, Savile as sacrificial lambs, but those at the top are still getting away with everything. In other words, it’s all a cover for what’s really going on still and the celebrity witch-hunts are merely a way of keeping the masses in check by giving us some salacious offering to keep them content. Cliff Richard is just next on the agenda.

In reality, this offers us a dangerous world. The conspiracists share a certainty of belief that all extremists have, although they will often claim freedom and liberty as their watchword. Extremists have one thing in common, especially when they have power, that is they can do what they like and they do. Don’t like what you stand for – guilty. Don’t like the way you look or life you live – guilty. Have sympathy, empathy, or even question – guilty. They get away with it in totalitarian states because they can, that is until they are overthrown when they will find themselves on trial and guilty at the hands of someone who sees things differently.

Democracy is supposed to be different, but we do live in an age of instant communication thanks to the internet. The downside is that it has given a voice to every nutter, dot joiner, crank, story teller, fraud, liar, no smoke without fire, told you so, etc type you can think of. I suppose it’s an unfortunate price to pay to have a degree of freedom to stand up and say that despite all the rumours and gossip, Cliff Richard hasn’t been charged or found guilty of anything. It can be dangerous to do so, simply pointing out that little something that is so important in a democracy- innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately even if totally innocent for Richard the stain on his character may never go away now that its out there and some people will just love that, because it’s what they live for.


Fat Steve August 15, 2014 at 1:13 pm

@Strange World —-together with a distrust of authority, elites, anyone who seems to have power, it’s a powder keg that goes off —-you pick up on one of the central points that is at the heart of the decline in western culture —and that is that those in power have lost the moral high ground in playing up to the low mean of public opinion in order to achieve and retain power —at the heart of such an approach is a certain disrespect for the ‘common man’ —a belief that all he understands and is entitled to is a three minute sound bite of opinion in which he can only share perhaps add to but never truly participate in forming because of a belief that he wouldn’t understand the facts and so should never have access to them—-and so of course he comes to believe that —Wots trending ? lets feed it without worrying too much about fact —– with inevitable results that what is trending is little more than what the low mean want or are being told to think. In due course of course it comes out if its important enough –WMD in Iraq being the prime example and with it the distrust of which you speak. The reaction? Well I see it as something of a vacuum that needs to be filled and that may account for the ‘British Values’ of which Anna wrote yesterday gaining traction.


Fat Steve August 15, 2014 at 2:09 pm

And perhaps on reflection the British values at play in the Cliff Richards investigation


GD August 15, 2014 at 11:40 pm

@Strange World God knows I have been round all the relevant block rather more often than anyone should, but among the things that are troubling me is this:

Given all the “inside track” I have been privy to throughout my life, before all this, if anyone had asked me to guess where I thought you would find the most pedophiles I would have answered, without hesitation:

“Career Politics”

Now I do not know anything specific (With premature development syndrome, at 6 foot age 12 I looked well past the attention of a pedophile by the time I was 10, so nobody ever hit on me), but I wouldn’t be licking that notion off a stone either, so it troubles me that, so far, the only people really witchhunted have been Showbiz…and every single case seems questionable in the extreme. Paedophiles exist, children are sexually abused and it scars them for life, so, given that all these “exposes” are tangential at best…where are the real monsters who have got away with real abuse scot free?


corevalue August 17, 2014 at 11:30 pm

By and large, the “victims” indentified by Yewtree and others were not children. They were teenagers who should have known their way around an unwelcome come-on. In fact for all the bloviating, Jimmy Savile for example seems to have had a remarkably low hit rate. It’s all to do with hands under blankets, French kisses and having the hem of your skirt lifted with a Hockey stick. Same with Rolf, Dave Lee Travis and even waxy Maxy.


GD August 18, 2014 at 1:48 am

…you are preaching to the choir…I managed to get myself out of Duncroft a few months before the alleged “events” took place and was aquainted with some of those involved (though I do not remember Karin Ward in specific) and I have to say it always has a distinct feel of Dracula’s Daughters accusing Jonathan Harkness of sexual abuse to me.


robert August 18, 2014 at 2:54 am

as i understand it ,cyril smith was whipping children of 10 and 11 years old ,not worldly wise teenagers.


corevalue August 19, 2014 at 11:37 am

Cyril Smith has nothing to do with Yewtree. We’re talking of the Yewtree and others cases where we have evidence that the “official” narrative simply isn’t true. I used to work for the BBC, I know personally people involved with Savile’s programmes, which leads me to conclude that the stories are lies, however generated. The same for our landlady, and several other commentators here.

Whereas about Cyril smith, I know nothing, and I am not prepared to either dismiss or support stories about him.


Ed P August 15, 2014 at 12:11 pm

Perhaps the source was not a leaky policeman, but more phone hacking?

Apart from a few high-profile scapegoats, that nasty activity was never really stopped (or properly investigated).


Mhehed Zherting August 15, 2014 at 12:25 pm

We’re almost at the stage where older celebrities should issue pre-emptive denials, and accuse the groupies-of-the-day of offering themselves for voluntary exploitation. (If that’s not a contradiction in terms?)


Cornish Lark August 15, 2014 at 12:26 pm

Absolutely brilliant post, Anna. Sums it up perfectly. And when someone who has been ‘molested’ by Max Clifford can lodge a claim for £1.5 million in compensation for ‘ongoing psychiatric’ support one would hope that the scales would fall from the eyes of the general public!


Gil August 16, 2014 at 12:59 am

A quick look at therapists listed on the BACP website shows that they tend to charge around £50 a session. So £1.5 m would cover 30,000 sessions, or one a week for 577 years, or one a day for 82 years.


StiilAnEngineer August 15, 2014 at 12:44 pm

The downside to all this is that in a not to distance future children who come forward
with very legitimate claims of child abuse will be be dismissed by the now outraged
masses as just another attention seeker.

These self elected white knights soon move onto another cause.


Sigillum August 15, 2014 at 1:02 pm

Well said, and a great headline. Purely off the top of my head, so someone alleges – alleges – they were sexually assaulted at a public event 25 years ago and Plod does a dramatic “swoop”. Expecting to find what? A diary entry from back then with “Today I sexually assaulted JS – what a wizard wees!” written in crayon for the day in question? A framed photo of the alleged incident with Cliff waving to the camera? So, perhaps some evidence of other wrongdoing? But if so, how would that be relevant to the allegation? That’s just trawling for “something” and as far as I am concerned not good grounds for a search warrant. Turning up in a convoy of cars with the media looking on is ridiculous, and sinister.
This is publicity driven, and quite wrong. It is all very worrying.


GildasTheMonk August 15, 2014 at 1:05 pm

I think you’ll find it’s “Wheeze”


Joe Public August 15, 2014 at 4:23 pm

Depends whether they’re into urolagnia or not.


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 3:03 pm

I suppose it is just about possible they were looking for photographs of the 1985 Billy Graham event showing Richard in the company of the person making the allegations to prove that they met. Remember Rolf Harris and the doubts over whether he ever went to Portsmouth and did an autograph signing there.


ivan August 15, 2014 at 1:24 pm

One point that has not been addressed – what did plod leave behind? Without legal representation there they could have a field day with prepared evidence carefully used to give the ‘right’ result in a trial.

Any @evidence’ found should be dismissed on the grounds that it was planted.


ivan August 15, 2014 at 1:25 pm

That should be ‘evidence’


Frankie August 15, 2014 at 11:30 pm

Such searches are routinely videoed these days – to stop stupid people suggesting that the police planted evidence.


Cascadian August 16, 2014 at 12:17 am

Really? So four of the eight rozzers were videographers?


Mr Ecks August 16, 2014 at 2:35 am

And of course we can trust the pork not to have the camera pointing in the wrong direction while one of them plants something can’t we? Cos we’re not stupid people are we?.


Frankie August 16, 2014 at 8:20 pm

Body worn cameras… they are all the rage at the moment.

It prevents scurrilous suggestions of improprietry… Not all police officers are lying conniving b……….s. At least in my experience.


Jim Bates August 16, 2014 at 2:37 am

Not in my experience!


Bandini August 15, 2014 at 1:30 pm

The BBC’s very own Danny Shaw offers his analysis here:

“In his statement, Sir Cliff Richard complained that the press appeared to have been given advance notice that his home in Berkshire was to be searched – where as he hadn’t been. He was referring to the reporters and camera crew from the BBC who were outside when police arrived…
… The media presence at Sir Cliff Richard’s home, therefore, was highly unusual – it appears to be a deliberate attempt by police to ensure maximum coverage. That’s not illegal – but there are strict guidelines – and the force may have to justify its approach in the months to come.”

The standard line being presented in all the press is that “the investigation is not connected to Operation Yewtree” although they “have been notified”.
This is patently untrue if, that is, we are to accept the word of MWT (!) as he states the following:

“Op.Yewtree passed the non current sexual abuse allegation to S.Yorkshire police-dating back to 1980s involving a boy U16yrs #CliffRichard”

Er, so rather than Yewtree BEING informed we have Yewtree INFORMING. 180-degrees of back-to-frontedness.

And not only are we left wondering what on earth the BBC were doing waiting, cameras in hand, for the “raid” (plus, according to the Mail, they also had a pre-recorded interview with one of the investigators ready to roll) we might ask why the details of the alleged crime have been released to us, bearing in mind that no one has even been charged:

“Speaking at a police station in South Yorkshire, detective superintendent Matt Fenwick stressed the investigation is in its “really early stages”.”

But the complainant was 10-years old & the alleged incident took place at a ‘Crusade’. Hmmm. The first result thrown up yesterday by Google for ‘Billy Graham Sheffield 1985’ is a blank-page today. But the cache is available:

Colour my cynical.


Peter Raite August 15, 2014 at 1:56 pm

To give the BBC their due, the “pre-recorded interview” is a total red herring the Mail is characteristically trying to beat them with. Their first broadcast report was at 13:00, some there and a half hours after the raid commenced – more than enough time to secure the interview.


Peter Raite August 15, 2014 at 1:59 pm

Three and a half hours…


Bandini August 15, 2014 at 2:54 pm

Two and a half hours… But point taken! Maybe the BBC used the helicopter they had hovering over Berkshire to whip them up to Sheffield and back?

(In my defence I’ll say that I am not in the UK and therefore am denied the dubious delights of BBC rolling-news coverage & so must at times rely on other media-outlets for filling in the gaps. For using the Mail, I offer no defence.)


johnS August 15, 2014 at 2:22 pm

That is a curious post asking for detailed information about that specific event. Just the sort of information which would be useful for someone wanting to claim that they were there when they weren’t.

Further down the thread there is a comment from a possible witness which no doubt the police won’t be busting a gut to find:
“I was a police officer at that time and was put in charge of looking after Cliff’s car.
He had tea and biscuits sent to the police room for the duty officers with a note thanking us for looking after him.
Nice bloke. :)”


Jonathan August 15, 2014 at 1:49 pm

Many years ago, before any of you were born, being GAY was criminal and police specialised in something called “entrapment”. Handsome young cops flashed at queens in public toilets and then arrested them when they went all gaga. These days the media, who love a good story (preferably involving a celebrity), are used by the law enforcement element (which knows it’s far easier to invent and solve a crime than to actually work) to set up false allegations by giving enough details in press reports for loonies to flesh up their own fantasies. Then they sit back, cherry pick the most sensible sounding victims, watch it go to court and see innocent men and women get 7 years for crimes that never took place – and there is no evidence they ever did. Alice is alive and well and living in Wonderland.


The Blocked Dwarf August 15, 2014 at 7:50 pm

“being GAY was criminal ” Was it? Being before my time I don’t know for sure but I’d guess that is was never a criminal offence to be a homosexual. Sodomy was a crime, as was propositioning, cottaging and all other activity pertaining to homosexuality but simply having a sexual preference for the same gender, a crime? 6 months in the Scrubs for having a sculpture of David or speaking Polari? Sandy and Julian would have been broadcasting from their bijou Cell or from the Bona Prison Laundry.


sally stevens August 15, 2014 at 8:04 pm
The Blocked Dwarf August 16, 2014 at 1:06 pm

Thanks, so pretty much what I said. The law changed to “decriminalised homosexual ACTS” (my shouty). Although it would appear that the writers of the wiki-article also confuse ‘homosexual acts’ with ‘homosexuality’.


Jim August 15, 2014 at 11:04 pm

Julian and Sandy were comedy genius:


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 2:17 pm

You wouldn’t know someone had a sexual preference for the same gender unless they acted on it, so at that time homosexuals were presumed to be having sex with others, not being celibates, at least judging by the graffitti on the walls in the men’s toilets at Skipton bus station in the early 60’s, which was one of the few places where gay literature and art was freely disseminated.


Anne3362 August 15, 2014 at 2:07 pm

Brilliant post Anna as always, you should be in charge of our media or the ‘esteemed’ CPS!


GD August 15, 2014 at 2:26 pm

First, I am not mad into “Yewtree Knocking” because I have met and dealt with them and they really are not “like that”, in fact, from my dealing they are fairer and more open minded than most involved. But they have to work within the constraints of what they are given. My overall impression is of a sincere desire to limit damage to innocents as much as possible. Always bearing in mind that they are not paid to be Judge and Jury, and cannot possibly make blind judgement calls about things that are alleged to have happened before they were born. All they can do it collate, investigate (if at all possible) and put what they have through to the DPP.

I find it extremely unlikely that anyone from Yewtree would have tipped off the press. I know that if I were Sir Cliff’s press officer I would have done…better to drag these things into the eye of the sun than wait to be hounded, it offers a strategic advantage in the court of public opinion, allowing the accused to offer a plea before any formal accusation is made. It is far more likely that one of the locals tipped off the Sir Cliff and it went from there than that someone in Yewtree held down their tea (and you can make of that what you will) long enough to tip off MWT or similar.

We all know what is going to happen…an elderly man will now be put through pointless and unnecessary hell for a year or so, guilty or innocent. I suspect he is innocent, I also suspect that if he believed he were guilty he would admit it within a few weeks (not immediately, he is a devout Christian, not a saint!).

So pointless, so unnecessary, and horrible to watch, until it is over, one way or another, Sir Cliff is tainted for life, one way or another, and the next witchhunt begins.

But something is bothering me.

WHO IN BLAZES signed off on the petrol for 8 Police Officers in 5 cars???


Anna Raccoon August 15, 2014 at 2:30 pm

“WHO IN BLAZES signed off on the petrol for 8 Police Officers in 5 cars???”

Glad you noticed that – I did include it in the original post, but it didn’t really fit in, so took it out – were five of them not speaking to each other, were five of them so important that they didn’t have to share a vehicle with the foot soldiers?


EyesWideShut August 15, 2014 at 3:01 pm

Bet you the next step is they fly out to the Algarve to question CR.

“We’re all going on a summer holiday…”

(I’ll get me coat).


sally stevens August 15, 2014 at 5:27 pm

Probably the same sort as signed off on a luxury hotel in South Wales for a few detectives who then barged into the home of an elderly former headmistress of a certain school in Staines, where all this started. When I confronted a DC on the Surrey Police about this reckless waste of public money and outrageous conduct, all I got was “that didn’t happen!” At which point, I exploded in her ear, so to speak. Yes, madam, it bloody well did, and you know it. She had no further defense, and we moved on in our conversation.


GD August 15, 2014 at 8:35 pm

@Anna When I was a gel it was 8 Polis to the one panda car and no squabbling over who sat on the sergeant’s lap in the front seat either! You get to do a celebrity porn search once in a blue moon, but a mileage allowance happens every day.


Frankie August 15, 2014 at 11:34 pm

Got it in one, methinks…


Alexander Baron August 15, 2014 at 3:01 pm

On a related subject, I uploaded these recently:

I have no evidence this scumbag was doing anything illegal with kids in the UK, but I was shown some photographs by his protectors which were said to have been taken in South Africa.

And with no evidence whatsoever – you need to find somewhere else to host your links Alexander!
Don’t do it again! I have removed the link.


Duncan Disorderly August 15, 2014 at 4:17 pm

I think a lot of people desperately >want< to believe people in power are paedophiles. As someone once said:
"Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one's first feeling, 'Thank God, even they aren't quite so bad as that,' or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies are as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally we shall insist on seeing everything — God and our friends and ourselves included — as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred."


Robert Edwards August 15, 2014 at 4:36 pm

‘Recovered memory’ has been a well-known psychobabble phenomenon for some time. But mix it in with self-righteous mob mentality and self-appointed ‘Noncefinders General’ and the resultant outcome is truly toxic. The plods are building a bonfire for their own destruction; there are very big questions to ask about their role in trawling for soft targets…

But once again, Hear, hear…


Geoff August 15, 2014 at 5:00 pm

Anna, this is a most important post, thank you. I hope at least some Op Ed editors are paying attention.


JimmyGiro August 15, 2014 at 5:14 pm

Three quotes from Edmund Burke:

“In doing good, we are generally cold, and languid, and sluggish; and of all things afraid of being too much in the right. But the works of malice and injustice are quite in another style. They are finished with a bold, masterly hand; touched as they are with the spirit of those vehement passions that call forth all our energies, whenever we oppress and persecute.” [1780]

“Those who have been once intoxicated with power, and have derived any kind of emolument from it, even though but for one year, never can willingly abandon it. They may be distressed in the midst of all their power; but they will never look to any thing but power for their relief.” [1791]

“People crushed by law, have no hopes but from power. If laws are their enemies, they will be enemies to laws; and those who have much to hope and nothing to lose, will always be dangerous.” [1777]


JimmyGiro August 15, 2014 at 5:21 pm

Oh Anna, this one could’ve been made for this blog:

“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”


Chris August 15, 2014 at 5:44 pm

Well, Well, Welly-Well, Well
The Hillsborough Police are now admitting they did in fact “work with a media outlet before searching Cliff Richard’s apartment”


Anna Raccoon August 15, 2014 at 5:48 pm

In spite of their denial this morning to the Press Gazette? Still, not the first time they’ve amended statements is it?


sally stevens August 15, 2014 at 6:21 pm

“Work with a media outlet”??? Wtf does that mean, and furthermore WHY??? Heads should roll on this one.


Carol42 August 15, 2014 at 6:25 pm

Will this madness ever end? If I was Cliff I would stay away given what’s happened to the others with no actual proof of any crime. Just wonder who will be next.


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 6:29 pm

Probably Lloyd George. He knew everybody’s father


EyesWideShut August 15, 2014 at 6:58 pm

That song would have made more sense if it had been Lloyd-George knew my mother … 🙂


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 8:18 pm

Not if that’s what the songwriter meant but couldn’t say… 🙂


EyesWideShut August 15, 2014 at 8:36 pm

Lloyd_George WAS my father, my father was Lloyd-George … 🙂


ForensPsych August 15, 2014 at 7:16 pm

Well said. Needed saying. We seem to have descended into a Monty Python sketch featuring the “Witchsmeller Pursuivant”.


Andy Mitchell August 15, 2014 at 7:35 pm

I notice this story, despite being number one all yesterday on the BBC, is now tucked away low down the order in local news – Berkshire.


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 8:16 pm

Awwwww! Be a bit more fair to them. It’s still up on the /news/England/south_yorkshire page too.

Incidentally, that other illiberal bastion of liberalism, the Guardian, still doesn’t seem to have caught up. They are still reporting police denying any leak. Also reporting them as saying that they, the Police, weren’t making any appeals for people to come forward with information about any alleged incident.

Then, Hallelujah, they got lucky when those who weren’t expected to did just that. Isn’t it extraordinary that miracles do still happen in the 21st century?


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 8:31 pm

I suppose, of course, technically, they may not have ‘leaked’ anything. They just worked with the Beeb. But, really, saying that ‘they didn’t speak to any media outlets prior to the warrant being executed’ is probably as great, if not even greater, a transgression,


johnd2008 August 15, 2014 at 8:10 pm

I had official dealings with Cliff & the Shadows in the early sixties when I was a Special Constable. They were definitely not interested in young boys judging by the company of tarts they were with.


Ed P August 15, 2014 at 8:10 pm

The clues were there, if only we’d spotted the lyrics nearly fifty years ago:

We’re all going on a bummer holiday
No more w**king for a week or two
Fun and laughter on a bummer holiday
Lots of botties for me & you


EyesWideShut August 15, 2014 at 8:15 pm
GD August 15, 2014 at 9:15 pm

As it is Thames Valley, I am finding it strangely comforting to meditate upon the possible reaction of Inspector Morse had he walked into any aspect of this fiasco.


EyesWideShut August 15, 2014 at 9:31 pm

Lol. Morse would have said “An orange juice for you, Lewis. You’re driving.” 😉


GD August 15, 2014 at 10:03 pm

…to which Lewis would reply:

“Where do *you* think they got the budget sir?”


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 2:33 pm

Excellent article in The Independent! Saves me from writing a post pointing out that it would be impossible for this to have happened here in Florida where judicial processes like issuing a search warrant are public records and the grounds for issuing a warrant are quite narrowly defined. Without spelling it out, the article is a stunning slap at the corruption, cronyism, and lack of due process in the UK justice system which does not even follow its own laws, rules, and guidelines.

Incidentally, Sir Cliff must have been advised that publicly denying the charge in advance of a trial amounts to a doubling of a future sentence under the Stuart Hall ruling by the Court of Appeal, but he did it anyway. Good on him.


Opus August 15, 2014 at 8:28 pm

Random Observations:

One really has to draw the following conclusion: either all celebrities are sexual perverts unfit to appear on old TotP clips or the sexual behaviour of celebrities is entirely normal, whatever subtleties the law devise to suggest otherwise.

Reading about this in the press is indulging in the said activities but at one remove – you know you wish you did it too.

Magistrates issue Warrants like Confetti being showered at weddings.

The P.M. should his Home Secretary to end this circus – although of course her department is surely the driving force.

Why aren’t American celebs (who must surely be just as prone to sexual activity) being arrested and show-trialled?

Cliff needs a beard.


Ian B August 15, 2014 at 8:41 pm

One wonders whether Cliff is going to be the bridge into shifting the paedowar onto the numerous rock stars whose tour bus escapades were legendary. The Light Entertainment well starting to run dry, and all.


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 2:39 pm

Why aren’t American celebs (who must surely be just as prone to sexual activity) being arrested and show-trialled?.

This did happen to Michael Jackson, and more recently the name of film director Michael Singer has been subject to allegations, then of course there was Roman Polanski who fled the country, but in general statutes of limitations make it impossible to bring such charges many years later. The US would not allow them to be extradited to Britain to face charges, otherwise Elvis might be turning uneasily in his grave.

Kris Jenner might want to avoid visiting the UK just in case she is charged with pimping her daughters.


Nick Langford August 15, 2014 at 8:35 pm

“There is only one reason why someone from either Operation Yewtree or someone connected to them tipped off the media yesterday – and that is the obsession with fame.” I agree with everything else, but I disagree with this. I can think of at least two other reasons. The first, as has been proved today, is that going public with this has made numerous other people contact the police with more allegations; the police know that in these cases they will never get a conviction on the first allegation, but if they can amass enough ‘similar fact’ evidence they can. The accused doesn’t need to be tried on these allegations, and no evidence needs to be brought, they just need to be mentioned to the jury. And that is the second reason: any potential jury is now tipped off and over the coming months will be fed more salacious gossip, ‘leaked’ from the enquiry. A fair trial – if it comes to that – is now impossible.


Anon August 16, 2014 at 6:01 pm

Are you the author of ‘Ring Cycle’ on the blog headed ‘Exiniuria’? I thought this was a really good analysis of the similar fact evidence position. Thank you very much. That is the kind off article The Spectator should be printing.


Ian B August 15, 2014 at 8:39 pm

Well, that didn’t take long-

“Police investigating a child sex assault allegation made against Sir Cliff Richard have said “a number of people” have come forward with information as a result of publicity surrounding a search of his home.”


The force suggested the decision [to tell the BBC to send a chopper] was vindicated by saying it was “grateful” for the media’s role in publicising the raid and generating the fresh calls to its investigation team.


Mr Ecks August 15, 2014 at 10:13 pm

If 1% of 1% of Britain’s females are crazy enough to make a false accusation–1 woman in 10000–that is approx. 3500 potential female accusers alone nationwide. Add to that the statistic that 2 out of every 100 people are psychopaths and prob quite happy to ruin someone’s life to put a few thousand compo in their pocket. These facts alone ensure that trawling is an utterly false and deceitful process that must be stopped.


GD August 15, 2014 at 10:25 pm

The poor, poor man…I don’t suppose South Yorkshire Police have tried any cutting edge, hi-tech stuff in their efforts to contact him? Like, for example, dialling his number and waiting to see if anyone picks up?

I admit, I would be the first in the queue for the barf bag if there was the slightest threat of him showing up on my small screen, and heaven knows the man is richer than Creosus (here in Ireland begrudgery is compulsory, if we don’t do it we are fined) but nothing, compensates for this.

I hope his faith gets him through…he deserves that much. If I recall my Christianity correctly, dignity in adversity gets you special favour from the Lord you love so dearly. I hope he believes that with all his heart.


Gil August 16, 2014 at 12:17 am

“A BBC producer is understood to have heard that the raid was going to happen, and phoned South Yorkshire Police, who confirmed the information was correct.”

This suggests that he didn’t hear it from SYP, or he wouldn’t have phoned them for confirmation.


GD August 16, 2014 at 12:29 am

Well caught…that is interesting…


Ho Hum August 16, 2014 at 12:30 am

Maybe he found an old chestnut tree that had some plausible deniability growing on its branches


Gil August 16, 2014 at 1:12 am
Ian B August 16, 2014 at 12:24 pm

And what sort of “non police” contacts know about upcoming police raids? Who are the police “partnering with” who might know? Hmm?


Gil August 16, 2014 at 10:55 pm
Chris August 15, 2014 at 9:11 pm

Cliff Richard isn’t what you would call ‘Big In America’ – unlike, for instance, Bill Wyman & The Rolling Stones, Jimmy Page & Led Zeppelin and several other well known ‘shaggers’ (all on Google, all much celebrated even now) and other well-documented former sexual & domestic abusers.

I think the kids would now add ‘#justsaying’ to the above statement….


sally stevens August 15, 2014 at 9:29 pm

I remember when the Beatles first toured here, and George Harrison remarking that Summer Holiday was playing in very small movie houses. He is not even small here. Aficionados of British rock music certainly know who he is, but he never had any traction with American teens of the day, and the Beatles did for any chance he might have had. I liked the Cliff and the Shadows era myself.


GD August 15, 2014 at 10:17 pm

Just a little reminder, as it occurs to me, like Saville, because of his frequent contact with the royals, Cliff Richard would have been personally vetted 7 ways to Christmas under the auspices of the home office. You wouldn’t b*gger a comatose badger once, while under the influence without being found out by that lot, it is that simple.

An entertainer is relatively unimportant in that context, so one breath of irregularity = no access to her Majesty, without explanation (What would you do? Sing “We don’t talk any more” on a soap box at Hyde Park Corner until you got an answer?), much less sensationalist press releases, personal vetting was only about security clearance and information derived from it seldom, if ever, went any further.

Draw your own conclusions, the knighthood is a little hint…


Ho Hum August 15, 2014 at 10:46 pm

It always makes me think twice, when some of those out there, who at first glance might not be considered as being likely to be amongst the More Witless Twats, don’t seem to evidence the sort of grasp of such things that you might reasonably expect from their apparent personal experience. Or, at least, if they do, for some reason, they seem to be very reluctant to point that out to others. What a strange place the world is.


Mrs Grimble August 18, 2014 at 9:01 pm

“Just a little reminder, as it occurs to me, like Saville, because of his frequent contact with the royals, Cliff Richard would have been personally vetted 7 ways to Christmas under the auspices of the home office. You wouldn’t b*gger a comatose badger once, while under the influence without being found out by that lot, it is that simple.”
That’s far too logical for the tin-foil hat brigade. I’ve seen plenty of claims online that the police and MI5 always knew these celebrities were kiddy-fiddlers and that politicians and Royals hung out with them because they were fellow kiddy-fiddlers! However, the hatters haven’t, as far as I know, explained how Margaret Thatcher fits into their theory that the entire establishment of the time was united in doing the nasty to innocent children.


JaundicedView August 15, 2014 at 10:26 pm
MTG August 15, 2014 at 10:50 pm

This government could solve the housing crisis. A hundred thousand bent plod could ‘fit up’ all pensioners and see them sent down.


Gil August 15, 2014 at 11:43 pm

The whole thing’s insane. People spewing sick stories and others lapping it up. To see this in action, you just need to tune into the latest YouTube interview between the man convicted of money laundering in an “outrageous and elaborate fraud” (BBC) that separated pensioners from their savings and his eager listener. One old man telling another old man what he wants to hear. And the justice system is taking this seriously?!


Ho Hum August 16, 2014 at 12:15 am

The Beeb have got the story back on their front page. Leading in the angle ‘ Sir Cliff police given ‘information’ after search.’

No mention of the concerns raised elsewhere about their own involvement and presence. No references back to the earlier articles which pointed out the dodginess of their involvement, as set out in their own analysis. That’s unusual, to say the least. No reference to the misleading police press information statements. No direct reference to it being themselves that apparently approached the police in the first place and started off the whole jamboree

It would make you sick. They have a Head of Newsgathering. Do they have a Head of Newsmanipulation too? If they do, he’s headed for greatness


DP August 16, 2014 at 6:59 pm

Dear Ho Hum

Head of Newsmongering perhaps?



Anna Raccoon August 16, 2014 at 7:03 pm

Newsmongering – love it!


sally stevens August 16, 2014 at 2:52 am

For this to be going on, someone is making money somewhere, otherwise what would be the point? The appeal against the Justice Sales ruling in the Savile litigation has seriously slowed recovery for ‘victims’ and, more importantly, their lawyers. So, while that grinds along, we must have fresh wheat to chaff. Cliff will do nicely, thank you. Let’s be having some ‘information,’ ‘victims,’ etc. Well, if we do it privately, the nutters won’t come out of the woodwork, better use the ‘press.’ Are we seeing a pattern yet, fellow Britishers?


Anna Raccoon August 16, 2014 at 8:33 am

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britishers never, never, never shall be slaves.

Doesn’t quite scan…does it? Can’t see it catching on at the Last Night of the Proms.


Jonathan August 16, 2014 at 10:40 am

“Tip off came from non-police source”… goodness me, what a surprise! And we thought it would be from the SYP Desk Sergeant leaving his office phone number! Let’s check if the tip off came from Glen Mulcaire. I do start wondering, as our species heads off the CLIFF like lemmings, whether all sanity has left our society.


surreywebmaster August 16, 2014 at 11:06 am

‘The man initially contacted Mark Williams-Thomas, the journalist behind the Savile exposé, who put him in touch with the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Yewtree early last summer.’

No comment …


Ho Hum August 16, 2014 at 12:42 pm

Ok. So the bottom line is ‘Which BBC producer was told by whom about the raid, and if it wasn’t the SYP, how might the informant have known about it in the first place?’

That will make for a lot of parlour games today


sally stevens August 16, 2014 at 6:16 pm

Meiron Jones probably got a tip from yew know who.


Chris August 17, 2014 at 4:59 pm

Interesting how Jones used just one hashtag on his first ‘Cliff’ tweet. That hashtag being ‘#Savile’


Gil August 17, 2014 at 12:48 am

Apparently not the first to have taken that route.

0:29 “…without her, Clifford might not be in prison. She was the first victim to come forward, approaching me just after the Jimmy Savile scandal…”

0:24 “…and in fact it was later on, at the beginning of 2013, when a [Harris] victim came forward to me, I passed that on to the police. So amongst the whole Operation Yewtree I’ve passed on information to the police…”


The Blocked Dwarf August 16, 2014 at 12:55 pm

Walking past the newsstands this morning it seems further VICTIMS of Cliff have come forward. So pretty much as expected. KAAAA CHING!

“you’ve gotta pillory a pocket-fondler or two..”


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 2:12 pm

Although in my adulthood I have not been an admirer of the music or persona of Sir Clifford, he was actually immensely influential in my life. Let me explain.

As a kid I was somewhat aware of his early hit songs like Bachelor Boy and Living Doll, and The Young Ones as the lyrics were easy to learn and the tunes easy to sing. At the age when I was just starting to become aware of the adult world outside of childhood the words of Bachelor Boy were darkly mysterious and spoke of the threats and danger of emotional engagements with women, a subject of which I as yet knew nothing.

However the real biggie was when I was invited by a friend and his family to go into town and see the movie Summer Holiday. In the age of black and white TV, this film was in colour and was only the second film I had ever seen in the cinema, the first being a Hayley Mills film some years earlier. I had also seen some black and white films at school.

The film is about a group of young bus mechanics who convert a double decker London bus into a mobile home and have summer adventures in Europe. I was immensely impressed by this film, as one is by anything at the age of 12, and only five years later after working in London for a year and saving up the maximum travel allowance of 50 pounds, I set out on my own–well, initially with an acquaintance, but after a few days alone, to hitch hike to Greece for the summer, not being able to afford to buy and convert a double-decker London bus-or drive one for that matter–and spent three months on the continent, mostly in Greece before the money ran out.

Had I been older, I probably would have realized that Summer Holiday was just an escapist fantasy musical designed as a vehicle for Sir Clifford or Cliff, as he was then known.

Later Cliff became very uncool and sang the awful song Congratulations in the Eurovision Song Contest and became a Christian and faded into obscurity as far as I was concerned, becoming so uncool that even my younger sisters liked him.

I would be terribly sad if it turned out that Cliff is also a paedo and that there was an additional hidden meaning to songs like The Young Ones and Bachelor Boy that I totally missed.

In one sense I hope that he succeeds in totally destroying the absurdity of Yewtree, because I cannot believe these allegations are true–at a Billy Graham rally for God’s sake!–but if it turns out that he was in fact a pervert all along, then to prison he must go with a song in his heart.


Ian B August 16, 2014 at 3:08 pm

Cliff is a singer, not a songwriter. Bachelor Boy was written by Bruce Welch; I’ve watched him say in an interview that his clumsy lyrics make him cringe to this day “then I’ll get married have A wife and A child and they’ll be my turtle dove”‘s clunky scan in particular. The Young Ones was written by Sid Tepper and Roy C Bennett, who were major pop songwriters of the era. And so on. All these songs are just simple fayre about being young and carefree, romantic love and teenage crushes, and so on. There are no hidden meanings.

I always liked “In The Country”, myself. The silver stream is the poor man’s wine, oh yes. Great bombastic musical arrangement, that one.

As to Cliff himself, I think part of what is driving this is a simple, prurient determination to out him as a poofter. I have no idea whether he is or not, but there have been decades of speculation, and the Twatterati are obviously drooling at the thought of his sex life (whatever it is, if he has one) being dragged out in court for all to speculate over and sagely declare “I told you so”. Hence the raid; if it’s bad enough for kindly old Rolf to be sitting up all night looking at nubile porn, imagine what would be left of our memories of childhood innocence to know that saintly Cliff’s hard drives bulged with depravity.


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 3:25 pm

Yes, I know Cliff didn’t write the songs that made the whole world sing–that was Barry Manilow–but his name is irrevocably linked with the phrases Bachelor Boy and The Young Ones. However, I do sometimes wonder whether when people are trying to thing of names to make up sex allegations about , they don’t think “Well, who was that geezer wot sung about Two Little Boys? Or The Young Ones, or Young Girl, Yeah, they will do nicely.”

Like you I have no idea if Cliff is gay. Being a very good looking young person who is willing to provide pleasure to influential music business figures has always been one route to the top.

In the seventies the rumour was that he was celibate because he had a colostomy, but I am sure this was just silly BS.


Ian B August 16, 2014 at 3:59 pm

Ironically, “I Write The Songs” was not written by Manilow, but by Bruce Johnston, so the whole thing was a collossal musical fraud.


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 7:33 pm

Amusingly true–although Manilow (ne Pincus) is a songwriter and composer who has produced numerous original songs, advertising jingles, and compositions, many of his hit songs were written by others. For example Copacabana, though Manilow did write the music.

Anyway, I think you can say that Bachelor Boy was a good fit for Cliff as he was single at the time and remains so, because the public likes to associate singers with the lyrics of their songs. A married John Lennon, for example, would have seemed odd performing the same song during his time with Yoko Ono, (although one might have secretly sympathized at the cry from the heart.)


sally stevens August 16, 2014 at 5:15 pm

He’s not Sir Clifford – he’s Sir Cliff. His real name is Harry Webb, born in India to British parents. He adopted the name Cliff Richard himself and presumably had it changed legally at some point. I’d say that out of all the persons the plods have picked on, this one is going to be very unpopular with the British public in general, not the nut-jobs. I’m already seeing signs of it – very hopeful. As for gay, my former sister-in-law was roommates with both Cliff and Jet Harris in the early 60s. I remember asking her if I could meet Cliff and she said that he wasn’t interested in girls. If he’s gay that’s entirely his own business. Mark Wanking Thomas may have met his end with this scam, and that would make all this entirely worth it.


Jonathan Mason August 16, 2014 at 7:40 pm

Yes, like George Orwell (Eric Blair), Cliff was born in India and changed his name for professional use, though Orwell never made the change legal. Sir Harry Webb would not have had the same eclat. My sister and I called him Sir Clifford Richard, as we pretended he must have some connection with the Clifford family, earls of Cumberland, who held nearby Skipton castle from 1310 to 1676.


The Blocked Dwarf August 16, 2014 at 8:28 pm

” Mark Wanking Thomas may have met his end with this scam, and that would make all this entirely worth it.”

Ohhhh yes! Sir Cliff The Paragon Of A Paladin whose Xian beliefs have not only kept him unnaturally young looking (Gildas,wasn’t there a 1st Century Martyr what didn’t age?) but also the hem of his toga (todger?) free from the sinful pollution of premarital sex , now slays the Grand Inquisitor Marcus Thoma de Torquemada.

Pass me the mead and the popped maize.


GD August 16, 2014 at 9:22 pm

I think martyrs refrain from rotting rather than aging, something to do with the logistics.

I do hope that dreadful little media whore man doesn’t harbour any illusions about being held in anything resembling esteem by his erstwhile colleagues…I should hate to see him disappointed…especially since he has shown SUCH PROGRESS of late in ceasing to hustle for faux dirt long enough for someone to actually approach him?

I often wonder how many of Anthony Luckwill’s young victims would have been spared if he had been famous enough to refrain from boring MWT at first mention, really I do….


Ho Hum August 17, 2014 at 4:13 am

Is this story likely to be true? Does it sound right, or does anyone understand it?
@ Aug 16, 2014 22:30

To quote:

‘The allegation against Sir Cliff first emerged in October 2012 when the alleged victim contacted Mark Williams-Thomas, an investigative journalist and former detective who worked on an ITV documentary exposing Jimmy Savile.

Today, Mr Williams-Thomas confirmed that he had also passed new information to the police about Sir Cliff in addition to the claims he heard from the alleged victim.

Despite reports that he will fly home within days, the Sunday Mirror understands it could be much longer – possibly weeks – before he is interviewed by police.’

Surely to goodness the police can’t have taken that long to investigate something that was reliable and credible on such a serious allegation? That would be utterly ridiculous, wouldn’t it? So why only now? Have they capitulated to media pressure from the Beeb, driven on by their bloke who seems to be in in the know, so that they now have to be seen to be doing something, regardless of whether or not the initial story has any credibility or not, because they were told it would go public anyway?

And I could understand that, with this having aired, anyone having serious concerns with anything that may have happened to them, at any other time or place, would have gone directly to the police, so why is any other new information being given to them in such a roundabout route – or is this just old news, passed on now, after this has popped into the public view?

It’s all very strange

And they can’t continue to leave this hanging for the sort of length of time quoted, can they?


GD August 17, 2014 at 9:51 pm

There is another interpretation.

I never underestimate anyone, it took me half an email, long before “Exposure” when nothing was a big deal, to figure out MWT was probably full of sh*t. I only had to google his site and see the egomania and narcissism dripping off it. Altruistic people, who actually care are not capable of that kind of display. So, is it not equally possible that the Police do not see the need to waste the front burner on anything that comes from him for the same reasons? Dragging it all out as long as possible in the hope he will find something more profitable to distract him and GO AWAY? Obviously that backfires on his latest victim when he doesn’t, but I know I would see it as worth a try, and we do not actually know (thank heavens) how many victims he has backed off from in search of richer pickings.

I know there are rules about “undue delay” but I have a horrible feeling they can leave it hanging…but not, I think, without full disclosure to the accused.


Jonathan Mason August 17, 2014 at 10:06 pm

Obviously a lot going on behind the scenes. Probably the South Yorkshire police gave the initial allegation little credibility, or the allegator refused to talk to them, or would only do so through an intermediary like Williams-Thomas. Why would the allegator contact Williams-Thomas in the first place and not the police? Perhaps since there was no action, the legal team acting on behalf of the allegator forced the issue with the police, alleging that there was some evidence, perhaps photographs in old albums at the Richard residence, or a private porn collection owned by the singer, or at least a photo showing the singer with the allegator. It seems to be undisputed that Richard was at the Billy Graham rally in Sheffield in 1985, so that can’t be what they are looking for evidence of.

Those acting on behalf of the allegator then tipped off someone at the BBC about the upcoming search.

Of course it COULD just be a fishing expedition, but I imagine the application for the search warrant would have to be a lot more precise than saying “This guy is alleged to be a paedophile, so we want to search his house and computers for child porn before he gets a chance to hide the evidence.”

On the face of it, sexually assaulting a child at a Billy Graham rally sounds ridiculous, but without hearing the precise details of the allegation, we really cannot tell if it is just a fantasist, or whether there is a case to answer. And if it is true that Cliff was aware of these allegation some time ago, you would think that any incriminating evidence in the house in the UK, if there ever was any, would be long since gone. I mean you can easily install a replacement hard drive in a computer to remove all traces of child porn activity, delete e-mails, etc. so I would have thought a search warrant of e-mail providers or phone companies would be more significant, though perhaps they wanted to find out what e-mail accounts he had. Of course the alleged offense happened before the Internet existed.

Who knows what they were really after?


Dai Brainbocs August 17, 2014 at 12:33 pm

S. Yorks Police now complaining about the BBC being slow to clear them of leaking the story, but admitting they confirmed the date when asked. What’s the moral difference between leaking something and confirming something already leaked?


Ho Hum August 17, 2014 at 11:14 pm

Quite a lot, really, if you hadn’t leaked it in the first place


Ho Hum August 17, 2014 at 11:10 pm

Looking round Twitter and the like this evening, I can give Harriet Harman the inscription to carve above the entrance to her ‘Court of Public Opinion. It’s …

‘Veni, vidi, damno’

Isn’t it great to see ‘people power’ in action? I guess that the ladies of Salem, and some of those who met Matthew Hopkins, would find something resonated in that sort of justice system


GD August 18, 2014 at 2:00 am

Harriet Harmon seems to make the top 5 on my personal sh*t list week after week these days.


arnold frampton August 18, 2014 at 1:55 pm

“There is only one reason why someone from either Operation Yewtree or someone connected to them tipped off the media yesterday – and that is the obsession with fame. They wanted to be the person who pointed the finger and ritually humiliated a famous person. It did nothing to aid the investigation; but everything to aid their present – or future – media career. ”

I think you missed the point here Anna, Police in tow to the child-scare-industry rely on sensational publicity as a gimmick to trawl for other ‘victims’ in loony-land. The Savile case clearly showed how it works. Gone is the necessity for all the hard work in tracing residents of children’s homes, all that is necessary is a tip-off to the ever willing media. The stronger the sensationalism the more likely it is that other impressionable ‘victims’ will telephone the NSPCC help-lines after dreaming they were abused by some celebrity when they asked for his autograph 30 years ago. In the numbers-game of guilt-by-association lynch-law, a high number of calls validates/justifies the completely unacceptable witch-hunting methods that the police from Yew Tree are using. It’s a despicable form of advertising, but I suppose fame is a nice bit of icing on the top for them. Where are the criminologists we have been training? Why are they not pointing out that these methods have nothing to do with forensic policing and more to do with Salem?


Anna Raccoon August 18, 2014 at 3:10 pm

“Where are the criminologists we have been training? Why are they not pointing out that these methods have nothing to do with forensic policing and more to do with Salem?”

Unfortunately, Williams-Thomas is one of the criminologists we are currently training – registered at Birmingham doing the world’s longest PhD…..which has the fortuitous side effect of making him a bona fide researcher allowed to view child porn…..

Handy that isn’t it?

Hiding in plain sight and all that….


Marvin August 19, 2014 at 4:35 pm

“Naturally coming from such a reputable source, and being conveyed to the ears of the internet generation by another impeccable source, this has been taken, for some years, as being irrefutable proof of inside knowledge into the sex life of someone they have never met”

Fair point and a useful counterbalance.

Wasn’t Mary Moss another (linked) source for Cliff Richard’s presence at Elm Guest House?

If the Mary Moss and Chris Fay are fantasists, can you explain to me why Simon Danczuk MP is so close to naming Leon Brittan? I’d expect that he could separate a witness from a fantasist.


Anna Raccoon August 19, 2014 at 4:45 pm

So close? That was seven weeks ago when he had a book to promote…
The good people of Rochdale have an MP representing them at Westminster, given privileged protection against defamation, and it only takes one Tory toff ‘stepping out of the shadows’ (oooh, scary…)to warn him off and silence him?
I hope they remember that at the next election.
Just as well that bloggers like my good self don’t scare so easily – or there would be no counterbalance to any of this guff….


Marvin August 19, 2014 at 5:17 pm

OMG! The man has the press dancing on eggshells around Leon Brittan’s name but has actually made it all up in order to promote a book!

That is scandalous.


Anna Raccoon August 19, 2014 at 5:30 pm

You think he has made it all up? that is truly scandalous – and could be libellous!


Marvin August 19, 2014 at 5:52 pm

No, I must have misunderstood you.

You believe that Mary Moss and Chris Fay have cleverly invented the list of names to include some people who are now known to have frequented Elm Guest House and added ones who had never been there, such as Cliff Richard.

Do you think they have hoodwinked Simon Danczuk or is he part of the deception? What is their motive?

If I’m still misunderstanding, perhaps you could clarify who is telling the truth, who is lying, who is gullible and who is complicit?

It all made sense until I found your blog!


Anna Raccoon August 19, 2014 at 6:06 pm

I have never said that I think Mary and Chris ‘invented names’ – where did you get that idea from?
I think they quite possibly wrote down what Carole Kasir said – whether Carole was telling the truth or whether she made it up is another matter – as is whether whoever signed any particular name in the register was telling the truth or made it up…..
Elm House was a gay brothel, quite apart from any other consideration – lots of people would have had good reason not to sign their real name in the register – no one more so than someone with an extremely famous name.
Just imagine for a moment that Simon Danszuk was a paedophile and was invited to a gay brothel where under age children were available – do you honestly believe for one moment that he would sign the register Simon Danszuk? Truly? Can you believe that Joe Smith might sign himself Simon Danszuk rather than his true name? I can.
People are taking it as gospel that because Carole said a particular name appeared in the register that it is proof positive that a particular person was there – it is not. Either that or Micky Mouse really did do casual work for the Daily Express for years and years – his name appears hundreds of times in the register of cash payments for casual work……


Marvin August 19, 2014 at 6:17 pm

Is it not fair to say that Carole would have recognised Cliff Richard and other famous people with her eyes? She wouldn’t have needed to read the guest book (which it is alleged Cliff would have signed as “Kitty”).


Anna Raccoon August 19, 2014 at 6:25 pm

Possibly. Possibly someone who looked exactly like him. Possibly even him – but doing nothing illegal. Possibly she was just making it up.
Possibly a lot of things – and that is a long way from the absolute certainty that is being traded on the internet.
I get the curious feeling that people want it to be true….so much so that if there isn’t mass imprisonment of every name that has ever come into their head, they will say there has been a cover up……


Ho Hum August 19, 2014 at 6:38 pm

If Google ever link directly to social media content, in trying to meet the ECJ’s privacy requirements they’ll probably find it simpler to exclude everything, other than whatever people positively state that they wish to be included within the context of a ‘Right to be remembered’


Marvin August 19, 2014 at 6:52 pm

Chris Fay was very careful to state in his video with Bill Maloney that he knows of no evidence that Cliff abused children. I assumed he just wanted somewhere secret to go with his partner. I also assumed that the kiddy abuse only took place on occasion (“The Monday Club”?) and he wouldn’t have seen anything so serious as to warrant outing himself to go report it. Unfortunately most are stopping at the connection between the man and the place.

I wonder if this time the police want to make arrests rather than cover up. I knew nothing about all this until I spent a minute looking for the rumours – which turned into several hours as I became gobsmacked by it all – and it fits into place.

Perhaps this episode will elevate public knowledge of Elm Guest House far enough that Parliament can stop its attempts to cover up. I get the impression Parliament wants to shield child abusers until they are dead. I’m concerned that Keith Vaz was part of Richmond Council at the time of Elm Guest House and is now the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee – it just seems inappropriate and ripe for allegations of a cover up. He just seems to spend his time chasing those who are chasing the abusers, rather than doing anything about the problem.

Many thanks for taking the time to clarify.


Ho Hum August 19, 2014 at 7:10 pm

So why, after all this time, have none of Cliff’s ‘ex-partners’ ever come forward publicly? The media would have trumpeted their stories from the top of Everest

And you’d think that they might want to protect themselves, from guilt by association, wouldn’t you? Or maybe make a quick buck? Or, maybe, are they the ones whose bodies were used as fertiliser on his vineyards, or are they all just terrified because he is another one being protected, as I saw someone allege JS was, by Mossad?

Marvin August 19, 2014 at 7:18 pm

Gosh that’s a good point. Maybe he did rape those boys after all. Or maybe going direct to Cliff pays better and is less hassle. Or maybe they have a conscience or aren’t out themselves.

And no, they use Madeline McCann’s body as fertiliser. Cliff and Mrs McCann set up a missing persons charity to throw people off the scent. I read that on the Internet.

Ho Hum August 19, 2014 at 7:43 pm

I hadn’t read that there before. But I have now.

Paul August 19, 2014 at 9:45 pm

Great articles as always.

It’s exactly what a lot of people want. This type of (alleged) crime is the utterly perfect ‘excuse’ for just that. For most of the public, it trumps murder in its abhorrence. They WANT it to be true. They want blood.

This includes all the so-called ‘truthers’ and conspiracy theorists, who otherwise (on other subjects) may be correct in what they say (communism, cultural Marxism, banking & finance, etc – many rational people would agree with various aspects of the ‘conspiracy community’ on these and other subjects). How curious then, that many so-called ‘truthers’ have been so taken in by this entire fiasco and taken the diametrically opposed path to the actual truth?

But the fact is that very many of the internet theorists and conspiracists are, at heart, merely part of ‘the mob’. To some degree they play a part (along with the MSM) of whipping up the frenzy among the herd, together becoming the mob as a whole. Most of the underclass want to riot again (they would at least rather welcome it). Many of the more supposedly ‘switched on’ type of ‘truther’ want various flavours of civil war and revolution. And somewhere along the line, their oft-mentioned devices of ‘lamp-posts and piano wire’ are destined to come into the picture.

Now it’s one thing to string up perceived enemies for financial and constitutional wrongs (much of this bluster is ill-thought-out bravado – though no less dangerous for it ….. or the words of psychopaths) but how much easier is it (in the mind) to propose its use for the additional crime of child abuse? This is how a lot of people are thinking. They are still essentially brutes, who wish to respond to very real wrongs that have been perpetrated, with lynch-mob violence. A belief in a witchcraft type of fever sweeping the land is just the extra juice they need to justify their already well-developed blood-lust.

That’s what I think. I’ve asked a few ‘truthers’ (and admittedly more dedicated conspiracy loons, of the Icke type devotee) whether they have ever considered that they are hoodwinked on this one and have gone totally in the wrong direction entirely. That the real conspiracy is the one as discussed on this very blog – that it’s mainly all lies.

No – they don’t want that. They’re too emotionally invested, both initially and definitely by now. They WANT it to be true. It’s too juicy and salubrious to ever let go, and that’s the thing that captivated them initially. You could say that deep down they are also perverts of a sort, though not direct perpetrators. They are fantasists and lechers. Voyeurs. They WANT sexual crimes to have occurred – just not perpetrated by themselves. “To Hell with the wicked – but not I”. And self-righteous indignation and the need to feel (or rather display) compassion for ‘victims’ is also paramount in this age*.

To the people I know I have asked – ‘would you rather that the names you accuse were in fact Not Guilty (and so by implication the ‘victims’ were not abused, but safe and unharmed) or would you rather that they were indeed Guilty (and so people have been abused for real)? The overwhelming (and passionate) answer is – GUILTY! These people care little about the victim – what they care most about is the prospect of a sentence being passed. Besides, in the modern world, one can assuage any tinges of regret by the comforting thought of financial compo (from a 3rd party source – the public purse) for the victims themselves. But we want Guilty and then we want blood – that’s the sentiment.

*It’s all a form of brain-washed soft-leftism too of course, a cultural Marxist desire in so many: The need for a victim – the ‘other’. The need to preach a moral superiority. The desire to snoop and accuse. The desire for state heavyweight action. A hive-like mentality. Groupthink. Constant tension and a desire for ‘revolution’. General barbarism and depravity.



sally stevens August 20, 2014 at 2:37 am

Paul, this is brilliant summation. Well said, sir.

Gil August 22, 2014 at 11:13 pm

I agree with Sally. You sum it up perfectly.

“You could say that deep down they are also perverts of a sort, though not direct perpetrators. They are fantasists and lechers. Voyeurs. They WANT sexual crimes to have occurred …”
This seems to be illustrated very well in the latest BM interview with CF. A storyteller spinning a gruesome tale and a listener who can’t get enough.

Paul August 28, 2014 at 10:09 am

Thanks Sally, Gil and anyone else.

You may notice that in this immediate wake of the report concerning Rotheram, there isn’t too much noise from the ‘truthers’ and the usual witch-hunters. If there is, it will be as apologetic as they dare in the way that denigration of the ethnic community concerned will be backed up by saying they have been led along by a culture actively promoted by …. the royals, the Tories, celebrities, the elite. So in a way the perpetrators might be victims too (at least of a sort), whilst we (meaning our girls but phrased in a ‘we’, proletariat kind of way) will be victims of the victims. The real guilty parties will be the royals, the Tories etc. They’re Marxists not too far below the surface, most of the ‘truth’ movement that is.

tdf August 20, 2014 at 6:45 am

I assume that this post will be deleted as – in blatant contradiction of the stated policy – contrary opinions are not allowed here.

But I must ask, are you guys happy with being associated with a barrister that tweets jokes against child abuse victims? How does that jive with you guys? I’m just curious here. I seek merely information.


Anna Raccoon August 20, 2014 at 9:44 am

Well, you assume wrongly tdf – possibly it is a habit with you. It is one you must make the effort to break with on this site.

However, referring to other posters as ‘idiot’ does not go down well.

We’re not really happy about being associated with people whose level of debate only extends to ‘idiot’ – but a) you are welcome to your own opinions and b) the fact that you post here or tweet about this site doesn’t count as an ‘association’ in our eyes, since there is nothing we can do about either.

I have no idea why you are under the impression that ‘contrary opinions’ are not allowed here.

Only libellous comments are moderated – and you wouldn’t expect me to risk my house on behalf of anonymous commentators who wanted to spout libel would you?


Bandini August 20, 2014 at 3:26 pm

Ms. Raccoon, I’ll restrain myself from responding to several points raised in the comments above from Marvin as to do so would just attract more of the type of response seen below from TDF. Although I’ve grown somewhat accustomed so such unwarranted invective, I wouldn’t wish to bring it to your site, and I apologise for having done so.

I am champing at the bit, though… grrrr! So maybe I’ll permit myself a single point:

The Elm “guest list” – although it carries the name of Mary Moss – was actually supposedly the work of Fay & “his friend”, the “journalist”, “John Oaks”/”John Oakes”.
The “journalist” has apparently vanished. None of the believers seem to want to broach the subject. This is strange, as without any corroboration we only have Fay’s word to go on (and not even Moss trusts Fay). My interest was originally piqued by another friend of Fay’s (and Maloney’s): Clive Godden.

Clive Godden was the original accuser of David Hamilton Grant, a sixties porn baron. The accusations started 2-years before the inquest into Kasir’s death (at which Godden, Fay & Moss were in all attendance) but only after DHG had stolen his wife. At this point he started to call himself a “private detective/Investigator”, and the Press unquestioningly labelled him as such.
(As recently as 2013 the Independent, for example, repeated this ‘fact’, presumably as it had been previously published as ‘fact’ in 1990. And I suppose it is true, in a way. But only in as much as anyone of us who ever double-checks information in a private capacity might self-aggrandizingly call oursleves “private Investigators”.)

The name of DHG appears in the ‘Moss Documents’. According to some he was at the hub of an international God-knows-what, and forms a key-part of the whole massive Elm-conspiracy. I’ve found no evidence to support this view.

Godden has recently sprung into life again with his crusade. I posted about it here:

The level of intellectual rigour backing-up these claims should be clear for all to see. It really doesn’t inspire confidence.
Some of it would be comical but as it has directly led to, for example, the likes of the video that Chris linked to (“Dear Cliff Richard” beneath the “… Slips Over The Cliff…” article) I can’t quite see the funny side of it. I find it all profoundly depressing.


Gil August 20, 2014 at 4:38 pm

“Five men have been jailed for their roles in a scam… conned their victims … “outrageous and elaborate” fraud … Christopher Fay… pleaded guilty to one count of entering into an arrangement – money laundering – and was jailed for a year… “boiler-room” scam involved the men using pressurised selling techniques…”.

“None of the believers seem to want to broach the subject.”
They just need to consider that conviction, and look at his latest interview with BM to see what’s going on. A blagger spinning a tale and a mark eagerly buying it.


Marvin August 20, 2014 at 4:55 pm

What’s his motive?

Can you detail which parts of Chris Fay’s interviews with Bill Maloney you say are true and which you say are fiction? At least I can then understand what are the agreed facts.

The Leon Brittan thing is confirmed to some extent by the customs offer interview, isn’t it?


Gil August 21, 2014 at 2:49 pm

Is it? Check out the first comment. As to motive, it could be that he just likes doing what he does.


Marvin August 21, 2014 at 6:04 pm

It’s on the transcript of the customs officer interview, on Exaro somewhere.

Exaro makes interesting reading as you can discern the timeline of what’s going on.

Back in February 2014 they reported that CPS had dropped the case against 2 visitors to Elm. Reading between the lines it’s obvious that’s because the Chris Fay fraud conviction would get him destroyed by a defence barrister.

In the last weeks they have reinstated the charges because there was actually a second witness.


Bandini August 22, 2014 at 4:15 pm

Marvin, I’ll try and answer a couple of points, but it is time consuming to do so with any level of accuracy. It is also difficult not knowing what level of knowledge you may have about the main-players in this saga, of whom there are surprisingly few. Firstly, I have to ask if you post elsewhere, and if so under which name? (I have only ever been ‘Bandini’.)

You asked further up the page for a breakdown of what is truth/fiction in the Fay/Maloney material. With respect, no one has time to wade once again through their ever-expanding output, which now has grown to include Satanists, senior members of the Royal Family & might make whoever is responsible for maintaining the security of Britain’s shipping-lanes wonder if a massive dredging operation won’t be needed to prevent a future disaster: the ‘Elite’ have apparently been tossing children overboard from their yachts on an industrial-scale for decades.

Regarding the CPS decision mentioned above, I’m afraid that reading between the lines on this occasion was a mistake: “None of the charges against Stingemore or McSweeney relates to the guest house.”

The person who may have faced being “destroyed by a defence barrister” wasn’t Fay, but a witness who the CPS wrongly thought was the ONLY person alleging abuse took place at Elm (and was considered unreliable for this reason). Now they realise that there are TWO, plus a “masseur” who worked at Elm & is also alleging he was abused.

We are limited by what we can say here about witnesses in upcoming trials. I shall just say that some witnesses have seen their sad tales treated as tabloid-fodder, been manipulated & disgracefully treated by the very people who were supposedly helping them. I wish I could say more, but…

The ‘Leon Brittan thing’? I don’t really have the time to go through this all again, so I’ll post a couple of links which might help you get your head around this story. Don’t be put off by the destination – the David Icke forum – as it was simply the best place to go at the time to seek answers. (Example: my first post on that forum, which related to what I have written above about DHG/Clive Godden and their part in the Elm-saga, mentioned a particular poster by name. That poster was later shown to have played a direct-role in the gestation of the Tricker-tale which led to the transcript of the Customs Officer you refer to, a matter which has arrived as far as Parliament & had over a hundred-MPs putting their names to a demand for its investigation).

Again, I have to point out the small number of “cast-members”, not solely in this particular thread but in all of them. The tales also follow a similar “route to market”, which should soon become apparent. I’m afraid you’ll have to click on yet more links within my posts if you are determined to get (closer) to the bottom of things, and read the replies, evasive though they sometimes are. (As an example: “My view is that we’re being set up with false allegations…” That from the avatar who dug-up the seizure-listing.)

A quick recap of the Customs Officer story (for those not willing to brave the madness ‘over there’): an avatar working with Needleblog was asked to look for Tricker’s travel agency & was handed a Fay-document – at that time Fay was a part of the ‘Needleteam’ – and simply Googled the name & address and, lo & behold, up popped a 1982 edition of the London Gazette with the customs seizure notice, including a description of the items such as a video cassette “entitled LB”. This was passed to another avatar, back to the source, and somewhere along the line someone became convinced that LB meant L.B. and journalists were despatched to confirm the story. Truly incredible. Maybe worth noting also that the conversion of LB into L.B. is a bit murky… and that I don’t believe it was the fruit of “traditional journalism” in that Exaro, Independent & Express were simultaneously aware of it, and therefore unlikley to have been responsible for it, assuming they are not all incredibly generous with their scoops! The Independent, for example, went to interview the Customs official the day before the Express.

There are those who would prefer to analyse the terrible-quality recording (by a disgrace to the journalism profession) – looking for signs of positive or negative-sounding inflections – when I would have thought the key might lay in understanding what even led someone to “join the dots” between a 1982 Gazette-listing & an ex-Cabinet Minister. I can’t think of any logical reason for despatching a journalist to question the official in this manner.

The Tim Tate-contribution mentioned above by Gil: this also caught my attention, and I wrote about it here:

The Tim Tate version – which flatly contradicts the Exaro/audio-recording version – once again can be seen to have its roots in the Needleblog.

Finally, you asked what Fay’s motives might be.
I can offer a few possibilities, but don’t pretend to know for sure the answer:

1) Fame. He’s not shy about coming forward & seems more than happy to appear in the press (kidnappings in Rolls-Royces & snuff-films, for example, in 1990).
2) Money. Presumably the Express pay for these lurid tales. As we can see in the BBC report above, he has in the past been willing to engage in criminal activity relating to fraud.
3) Revenge. Here’s what Mary Moss herself said about him when he first started appearing in the Fay/Maloney double-act:

“We were told to get rid of you Chris.. you seem to enjoy this story.. so why now are you saying Carol in the know.. you sound like disgruntled social worker from Greenwich who was going make them all pay even we had to pay I don’t trust you a single bit and remember some strange shit about you and how you used us all in this process.. stop saying ‘we’.. you were not NAYPIC never.”

(Revenge against some of those mentioned in the ‘documents’ – this time on the part of Carole Kasir – has also been alleged.)

4) Justice. Albeit in a twisted, mangled form, at least to my way of seeing things. Something ‘bad’ happened at Elm, but I doubt it bore much resemblence to the image being portrayed by many. They’d probably be disappointed by the scale of it, such is their depressing worldview & apparent need for evil to be found in every nook & cranny (as has been eloquently noted above by Paul & others. And the victims are but a means to an end, despite the protestations of the ‘campaigners’.)

I’d really better leave it here. As you can see, accuracy is a time-thief. One last thing, though: don’t forget that Fay never visited Elm. He only started ‘compiling’ the documents with Kasir 6 to 8-years after it had closed. There is a tale to be told in how they hooked up, perhaps? And, as mentioned, the “journalist” also present at these meetings, who could bolster his claims, has disappeared. In fact, he’d already disappeared by 1990 and the time of the inquest. But Clive Godden the “private Investigator” was there, so let’s just brush over the matter & carry on regardless… like true believers.

Good luck.


arnold frampton August 26, 2014 at 6:20 pm

Fantastic overview Bandini but you missed out some earlier links which I will list below.

It is interesting to see you refer to Tim Tate and his latest Needleblog offering. In case observers’ memories don’t go back far enough I remind them that Tate was the producer and researcher for Roger Cook’s discredited 1989 ‘expose’ of Satanic Ritual Child Abuse, which, many seasoned researchers conclude was the origin of the entire rumour mill of the Holly-Grieg/People-in-High-Places/Savile/Celebrity Paedo/Elm Guest House cycle. It was Tate who ‘broke’ the story about a world-wide conspiracy of Satanists abusing and killing children into the British Press in 1988 and he worked with key fundamentalist believers in the panic to promote the hysteria on national TV. Tate and these other ‘satan hunters’ have enmeshed themselves in feminist politics and made a career out of doing so. You can see more about the background to Tate’s support for Satanic Ritual Abuse here:

and to see how accurate his claims were you might like to know that his first book on the subject “Children for the Devil” was ordered to be pulped by the court when Tate defamed a detective involved in the Broxtowe child abuse case (the first claimed case of SRA in the U.K.) here:

The great problem with Needleblog is that, in my personal experience, when anyone has facts which disprove the manic contents of their blog and try to air them they consistently censor, ban and delete it to keep their readers in the dark and manipulable. This is a tremendously important point. If ‘unaligned’ observers are fooled into thinking that all the assertions on Needleblog are correct because they go unchallenged (or are only challenged softly with opinion rather than refutation) then they will be tricked into believing dangerous falsehoods. Full marks to Anna Racoon for inviting and publishing comments from believers and non-believers so that a proper public debate can be had.


Moor Larkin August 26, 2014 at 6:27 pm

@ This is a tremendously important point. If ‘unaligned’ observers are fooled into thinking that all the assertions on Needleblog are correct because they go unchallenged @

Sound like the comments section of the Mail or the Grauniad.

Anna Raccoon August 20, 2014 at 4:53 pm

Worry not Bandini, anybody who arrives here in the early hours and say ‘obviously this comment won’t get printed’ is seen for what they are instantly – the commentators here are an intelligent lot, used to debating facts.


Ho Hum August 20, 2014 at 10:06 am

I don’t follow her Twitter feed, but I’ve just had a skim through the last tweets and can’t see anything that sounds akin to what you mention

As for contrarian views not being accepted, I’m quite happy to duff up either her or any of the other regulars here when they start spouting real nonsense on NHS issues, and no one has ever tried to stop me 🙂


tdf August 20, 2014 at 6:51 am

Incidentally, for the benefit of Bandini.

Nice try. Better luck next time. Idiot.


Bandini August 20, 2014 at 3:40 pm

TangoDeltaFoxtrot, I don’t even understand the point you are trying to make here. But please don’t try to drag this site into it.

I previously spent hours of my time answering you in detail, always in a civil manner. I was repaid with creepy messages & baseless insults.
I’ve pushed the rock as far up your hill as I could reasonably be expected to. Good luck & good bye.


JGA August 24, 2014 at 10:44 am

Many a good poster was driven away from DI forum due to that particularly unsavoury and highly dubious bunch and they are best not engaged with Bandini. I do enjoy reading Anna’s blog and what a shame, though no surprise, that these characters are now appearing here to spew their nonsence and bile.


sally stevens August 21, 2014 at 2:16 am

Bandini, even bothering to respond, let alone with reason and/or civility is a waste of your time. You can’t argue with a sick mind.


Ho Hum August 28, 2014 at 8:39 pm

I meant to add a rider to state the the response was fine, except for the bits where you acted like a pompous ass 🙂


katesjc6189 September 4, 2014 at 9:52 am

My Defence of John Cooper QC and the CSA Survivors Peoples Tribunal Process Progress so far
by katesjc6189

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

I agree with your analysis on everything bar John Cooper, and how the CSA Peoples Tribunal, with Joanne Welch, John Cooper and myself has been conducted.

We now have an formidable Steering Committee which unfortunately I wasn’t elected onto despite making the most popular speech and co-chairing the meeting because the other Candidates were too strong.

Those attending must be applauded for electing such a strong Committee which will be a match to face any of the tough questions and terrifying Opposition they will ace. At least my words which ran through the meeting like a lace fabric affected the make up of the Committee!!!!!

History Lessons for absolute Rookies and Beginners like myself on the unbelievable suffering of Child Abuse Survivors which beggars belief

I believe CSA Survivors have never had justice or if they did on rare occasions one of which was then they took matters into their own hands resulting in extremely rare occasions of justice. I/we discovered astonishing new facts in the meeting! the proposed PT wasn’t the only weapon; but it sure was gonna come about given the social media buzz since the baby-steps inaugural Meeting with Joanne Welch and John Cooper QC.

(who is a wonder to behold btw do see him in action!)

Facts about CSA PT Steering Commitee so far

I have been part of the CSA PT from the start working with John and Joanne in an extremely informal setting and that is GOOD. JCQC was in his Garden, Joanne and I were tweeting our little hearts out and we were combined in a mad visionary tweet up resulting in Joannes actions in managing to commission JC Pro Bono and me publicizing on blog the aforementioned Meeting.

John then explained the whole Legal Theory of Peoples Tribunal and gave advice of a generic sort.
The CSA proposed PT is part one part of a process whereby at last Survivors may attain justice. Other bodies can and should be formed, we work alongside them and are complementary to them. JUSTICE is the end result desired in all Inquiries. CSA PT is part of it but from where I am standing an indispensable part of it whatever its faults because it is commissioned BY THE PEOPLE.

John Cooper QC and the Peoples Tribunal Legal Process

I am so glad John Cooper QC is hopefully part of this CSA PT.

I know of Child Abuse Specialist Lawyers indeed I was blessed to meet one at the Meeting and even more blessed to have four follow me on Twitter. So thats it, get them to do it!!! Let them give the legal advice and be the Legal Architect behind the process!

WRONG! With John Cooper QC the CSA PT Steering Commitee has a QC of unimaginable Potential. No matter how wonderrful these CA Specialists are and I am quite conversant with Whose done Child Abuse Cases- I could name names. They are NOT John Cooper. With him leading the Legal Team we have someone who has 1)drafted Legislation 2) has strong media contacts 3) is a nice guy important in this process 4) a deeply humane guy 5) a versatile and flexibly minded Barrister who can turn his mind to anything he wants too. If Life and Legal Life is gaining new skills multiplying the ‘talents Matthew 25 stylee then JC epitomises this.

In addition he is a wonder to behold. It was a complete revelation watching him in action in those small brief hours. He is Legal Education in Action. He was wonderful. A new phrase entered my vocabulary ‘Lawyerly Listening ‘ and he excells in it. I do not regret for one minute the exhaustion I experienced because I had to leave home at 4am in the morning and walk to the Station, mistimed but at least I didn’t miss him/the Meeting.

He is a real man, an uncle a daddy kids love him. People who go through shit are safe with him. At least when he is LISTENING to you you have the beginnings of JUSTICE. Falsehoods about him, libel and defamatory statements regarding John are just that evil despicable Libel. Yeah I would wish him to represent me. All of us were in awe and the meeting broke out in loud applause after JC gave us his advice. With no partiality bias a complete surrender to our will. He helped us take the baby steps towards SC formation.

To him i/we are grateful.( Repeating the process ala #cliffrichardabuseraid would be helpful!!

My list is incomplete but here is a man completely and utterly devoted to the Law who is versatile, multi-talented good looking (yes I know crush NOW!!! )

JC’s Multi-faceted Experience esp with regard to the Law and how it operates or rather doesn’t ie needing to JR the failing CPS

CPS JR, Trial by Jury Appeal Gibralter, Miscarriage of Justice Cases, Sports Law, Judicial Reviews per se, getting justice by the Law of Law*** If you look at it JC is potentially very useful to us indeed!!

John’s LACs and Hunting Act Enforcement Activities

Whatever is wrong with the Hunting Act it can be corrected. John’s heart is in the right place.

I would be delighted to see this redrafted or whatever and come to a party celebrating it I believe in Redemption a virtue in short supply amongst the much esteemed learned legal community

Star Junior Lead Counsel me the Junior trusted to take over from the expert!!.
I was proud to work with a top Barrister I shall refer to as #starjunior to take part in a #twocktrial using real daa defending John. I am NOT his lawyer but cross examining his foe under the guidance of Star Junior was an experience NOT to missed and thankfully I made the most of it. John’s heart is in the right place. I have everything against me in life but me [learning how] to cross examine au nature was one of the biggest experiences of my life. thank you John! xxxx

We all have things wrong with us doesn’t negate us as Lawyers and Non Lawyers!
Whatever is wrong with John I stand as one of his Defenders that he is basically a good man that goes wrong. Just because people go wrong doesn’t mean they are bad people. Lawyers that I am aware of are not exempt from the trials and tribulations of life. Whatever is wrong John is a good man who wants to see justice for his clients, the Campaign win against this evil and power hungry government and justice advanced in all kinds of ways and fields. All Lawyers can go doally they need friends who will stand by them and hold them up when they fall down.
If he will accept it I shamelessly uphold him and support him and I love it.
I believe I am a true judge of character.
Anna raccoon you are good person. if you were doally I would support you as him and any lawyer who secretly goes off rails.
John is good he is man of integrity and goodness, he is not just a pretty [handsome hunky] face he genuinely seeks to be a a friend to people and work his hardest at great cost for his clients. Surely all Lawyers can learn from him.
I don’t want to harm his reputation in any way. I only want to bless him and all that he does. He has his faults but don’t we all.
John I hope my frail words here might remotely bless you and help you to keep going as a Lawyer under an increasingly difficult legal scene.
Apart from above a fantastic article that says important points from a fabulous but yet unknown to me Lawyer.
Viva Anna Raccoon and John Cooper QC!


Arnold Frampton August 27, 2014 at 11:04 pm

Oh yes, very much like the Guardian. When Ace reporter Nick Davies (involved in many high-level Guardian ‘scoops’ including Julian Assange’s Wikileaks of U.S. secrets) accused a person I know of murdering a man by pushing him off a cliff, Davies didn’t even bother to telephone him to check whether he had the facts right. It was, proveably, a complete fabrication. When my friend wrote to Rusbridger to explain this and demand a printed correction he was denied it! Hanged, drawn and quartered in public without notification or appeal. The editor, ( last seen warning the British Public about censorship of the press ), wouldn’t even print a letter in the Letters Page! The truth was simply buried. How many more lies has the Guardian printed… and then covered up to protect the lack of professionalism of it’s staff? Or the agenda of its left-wing readership? I have heard many stories about the inaccuracies in Guardian reporting but never at such a blatently unjust level. You have to admit that publicly accusing a man of murder when there is no evidence to prove it and then refusing to apologise when evidence is given to DISPROVE it, has to be at the top of the list of journalistic sins. So much for Leveson!


Ho Hum August 27, 2014 at 11:39 pm

There are other remedies available to your friend in such circumstances. Did he avail himself of any of those? If not, why not?

Please forgive my directness, but some of us get more cynical in our old age, and I, unfortunately perhaps, suffer from having been stuffed full of it from birth


Arnold Frampton August 28, 2014 at 1:07 pm

I sincerely hope you are not inferring that the story is exaggerated because everything I have stated is absolute truth. Obviously it would not be possible to name names and say these things if it were not true because those Guardian people would sue me otherwise. The mere fact that I can say these things and accuse Davies is proof that they are true and my friend does this frequently to provoke any move by the Guardian to justify their despicable actions, knowing full well that they can’t because they lied about him.

As far as litigation is concerned you seem to be one of those inexperienced people who believe that justice is universally available to everyone regardless of status and wealth and that an ordinary person can take a multi-million pound legally proactive organisation like The Guardian to court and not be pushed into bankruptcy by the cost of it in a game of litigious poker which makes a mockery of the law.

My friend prefers to be free to tell the truth publicly at every opportunity to ensure that others learn not to trust what is printed in the Guardian. If you want to choose to ignore his experience and remain in tow to their dishonour then you are free to do so.


Moor Larkin August 28, 2014 at 1:28 pm

Have you got a blog you could direct us to? That would help, rather than these random comments in here.


Ho Hum August 28, 2014 at 8:36 pm

Thank you for your elaboration, as well as helping me to come to terms with my own inexperience.

I think I’ll use the wisdom gained to now go and read up on some of the absolute truth which is also purveyed by those commenting BTL on that website which is crystal clear about the world’s government being made up of shape changing lizards. After all, if I believe in the unmitigated availability of justice for all, what’s now left to be questioned?


arnold frampton August 29, 2014 at 9:54 am

I can go one better, you can download a .pdf LEWES SATANIC DEATH CURSE – ANATOMY OF A MODERN MYTH which gives a detailed time line and previously unseen research showing how the Guardian falsified and sensationalised the entire story here:
It is interesting to note that whilst the Guardian imperiously criticised ‘the tabloids’ for sensationalising Satanic Ritual Child Abuse (the myth which empowered and influenced the children’s homes hysteria, the Asian Gangs hysteria, the Westminster Satanic Clique myth and lately the celebrity paedophile hysteria which roped in Cliff) it did exactly the same with its The Devil in Lewes article! These awful and untrue allegations exist because the British Media (tabloids AND broadsheets) consistently give them the oxygen of publicity, therefore if it can be proved indubitably that the Guardian has promoted untruths as facts people will be less likely to respond gullibly to this kind of moral blackmail and believe every shock-horror story the media posits.


No One Special December 2, 2014 at 11:54 pm

Hi Arnold – for what it’s worth, a friend of mine who knew the late Mr Gargani and also met the person you know who was implicated mentioned to me recently that the Nick Davies article was one of the better and more balanced articles about the terribly sad events of that spring almost 20 years ago in his view and mentioned the Fortean Times sensationalisation and recent online conspiratorial drivel as being much worse versions of a confusing attempt to turn events including much irrational youthful dysfunction all round into a narrative. I haven’t read Chris Bray’s ebook so can’t comment, if I find a free version floating around online I will do, and would ask NG’s friend what he makes of it too.


Arnold Frampton January 5, 2015 at 11:53 am

Well thanks for the input ‘No-One-Special’ but I can’t agree with you about Davie’s article being ‘balanced’ in any way. Many years ago in my mis-spent youth I used to do voluntary behind-the-scenes work for the SAFF ( ) and that’s why I know a lot about this situation. It’s taken time for them to get back to me over it and they simply sent me this text of a formal complaint to the Press Complaints Commission which completely and utterly shows up Davies’ article as a piece of tabloid trash of the worst kind. I am not sure whether the S.A.’s long complaint will be postable in this forum in one go but if not I will try to upload it in sections so people can see the truth, that the Guardian manipulates facts to suit itself and buries the truth when they get it badly wrong. Incidentally the utterly ineffective and much criticised Press Complaints Commission did not carry thru on this complaint (another whitewash). It is no wonder that the government’s Leveson report demanded a completely independent press complaints procedure!

Friday 2nd May 1997:


The name of my business, The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, was, without prior enquiry or corroboration, included twice in the text of the above article in connection with a ‘fabricated mystery’ surrounding the death of Nick Gargani. The contexts of both mentions was unfair, inaccurate, distorted and gave a misleading impression to the reader that we were some how involved, specifically or generally in the process which lead to Gargani’s death. After writing to the Guardian they refused to correct, apologise or print a letter from me.

The gist of the DEVIL IN LEWES is thus: There is a well-formed cell of Satanists in Lewes, that Nick Gargani became inadvertently involved with these Satanists, that they terrorised him, that this lead to him losing, spending or otherwise compromising his life’s savings and ended up causing his mysterious death. Gargani fell, jumped or was pushed to his death from a 300 foot high cliff in Lewes. The Coroner recorded an open verdict. The inferences in the article were ambiguous and posited two possible criminal causes for Gargani’s death.
(1) He was terrorised into taking his own life.
(2) He was murdered by being pushed off the cliff.

We were not contacted either by Guardian staff nor the writer of the piece,Nick Davies, prior to publication. Nobody got in touch with us to check the information, or our response, before including us in this terrible story. I believe this breaks all professional protocols and is certainly against natural justice. Moreover had we been contacted we would have been able to provide FACTUAL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE to show that Gargani was not a dabbler (as depicted in the article); that he was planning to start his own occult supply shop in Lewes and that his purchases with us were inconsequential.

However, when we wrote to the Guardian, included Gargani’s letter to us and details of his purchases, the newspaper refused to retract, apologise, correct or give us space in their letters column to air the new facts.

Here are the two specific sections used in the article relating to the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, along with the thread of inference which Nick Davies has written, underlined as our emphasis, and followed by our evidence.

Nick Davies wrote:

“At the beginning of February Gargani had sold half the shares in Rentokil that he had taken up when he worked there. He had received just over 2,500.00 But there was no sign of that money in any of his accounts. In April he had started selling his possessions – his TV, his video, his sofa. In the week before his death he had withdrawn 170.00 in cash from his account and arranged to borrow a further 2,000.00….Neither Michael nor any of Gargani’s friends could explain why he would have wanted all this money, they could think of nothing on which he could have spent it. There was another odd clue in his paperwork. His bank statements showed two payments on March 27 and April 2 to something called the Sorcerer’s Apprentice This sounded at first, like a trendy restaurant but it turned out to be a mail-order business based in Leeds that sold the paraphernalia of Satanism and books about the occult. AT LEAST TWICE Gargani had ordered material from them. How did all this fit together. ”

The inference was that Gargani had withdrawn unusually large sums and was spending abnormally on Satanic/Occult impedimenta, largely from the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, and that this was evidence of him being terrorised by Satanists. It could have also been taken to indicate some form of extortion. Nick Davies referred to Gargani’s bank account as documentary evidence in order to substantiate this hypothesis.

Please note the qualifying pejorative statement by Nick Davies

‘AT LEAST TWICE Gargani had ordered material from them.’

This is clear evidence of him wishing to convey his belief that the two purchases were simply the tip of the iceberg and that it was likely that most of the rest of the cash had gone that way too.


Fact 2: Gargani started buying from us on March 12 1997, bought three times only, the third and last being on 21 March 1997. All the items he purchased were books. All our books carry gold stickers with our name and address on and could be identified in his occult library, yet such research appears to be beyond Mr Nick Davies’ abilities.

Fact 3: Most of Nick Davies’ information on Gargani’s occult involvement came from Gargani’s girlfriend and Mr Johnney Dennis, who was described at the Inquest, where he gave evidence, as Gargani’s ‘best friend’. However Nick Davies seems to have failed to elicit from Dennis the fact that he had himself been a customer of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice as long ago as July 1989. The ramifications are immense.

(a) Johnney Dennis was living proof of someone with a decade’s experience in active occultism in the Lewes area (therefore would be experienced and fully familiar with the occult scene there) who had the same interests as Gargani and who had NOT been harmed by any supposed Satanic coven in Lewes.

(b) Johnney Dennis had been a customer of the S.A. without being preyed upon or making mysterious satanic purchases – hence we can only assume that Nick Davies’ statements which specifically emphasised the darker aspects of the occult was entirely prejudiced and put there for its negative effect, viz:

‘.. something called the Sorcerer’s Apprentice This sounded at first, like a trendy restaurant but it turned out to be a mail-order business based in Leeds that sold the paraphernalia of Satanism and books about the occult.’

In reality; (i) The Sorcerer’s Apprentice is extremely and internationally well known in the New Age, having been established for over two decades. We have over sixty thousand regular clients who buy on ALL aspects of the supernatural. (ii) Johnney Dennis had purchased non-satanic items from us and knew exactly what we were, hence – to whom did the Sorcerer’s Apprentice ‘sound like a trendy restaurant’ and who was it that gave Nick Davies the information that we promoted Satanism above other beliefs when we do not? This statement is unfair and appears specifically designed to mislead the reader into a negative conclusion about our lawful business.

(c) Moreover; Johnney Dennis would be the best person to fill in the gaps on Gargani’s other purchases from occult suppliers in the Sussex area and elsewhere, but it appears that this line of enquiry was ignored. The fact that Nick Davies did not mention any other occult bookshop but focussed solely upon the Sorcerer’s Apprentice is itself a distortion. We believe it was another method used to single us out.

Nick Davies clearly admits to having questioned Gargani’s friends (‘Neither Michael nor any of Gargani’s friends could explain why he would have wanted all this money, they could think of nothing on which he could have spent it’).

The inescapable conclusion is that Nick Davies chose to involve solely the Sorcerer’s Apprentice in his article even though the evidence was clear that Gargani had spent little with us BECAUSE THERE WAS NO OTHER PROVABLE OCCULT LINK OTHER THAN THESE TWO TRANSACTIONS ON HIS BANK STATEMENT.

Gargani must have had a greater connection with other suppliers, if that is where the money went, and if it didn’t go on occult things, then a cornerstone of the article is destroyed. Ultimately therefore if Nick Davies HAD contacted us beforehand and we had been able to prove that Gargani had only spent 36.00 then the story would have virtually collapsed. We believe therefore that Nick Davies chose not to check with us beforehand in order to perpetuate his biased view of the circumstances. All these things taken together lead me to believe that Nick Davies was prejudiced against us, believed that the rest of Gargani’s money had been spent with us and so inferred this in his article thereby making it inaccurate, misleading, and distorting.

In fact Gargani was not the naive Nick Davies make him out. I have a letter from him under the trade name LUGH in which he states his intention of starting up in the occult supply business, a copy of which I attach.

“Dear Sir/Madam, I would be very grateful if you would send me a catalogue of your merchandise. I am shortly going to set up as a retail outlet, and would be interested to know if you deal as a wholesaler and if so whether you would consider a contract of some sort as a supplier. If not, perhaps you would recommend another suitable supplier. ”

This letter arrived here several months BEFORE Gargani began buying from us on a retail basis. There are two things to note:

a) Gargani was looking for OTHER occult suppliers as well as the S.A. His purchases may have been for his own consumption or they may have been for re-sale. Either way the inference that we were the only occult suppliers he purchased from is highly contentious.

(b) His use of the name Lugh (see Gargani’s letterheading). Lugh is the Celtic Pagan God of Light & Fire – the one who brings knowledge through light. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Satanism, but its use does reveal a deep understanding and research into Pagan history. Gargani was obviously not the dabbler which Nick Davies describes and I cannot believe that Gargani would make enquiries about starting up an occult business without any of his friends knowing about it. Remember what Nick Davies wrote

‘.Neither Michael nor any of Gargani’s friends could explain why he would have wanted all this money, they could think of nothing on which he could have spent it.’.

For the record it has been a long-standing rule of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice (over at least two decades) NOT to supply other retail outlets. This is mentioned clearly in our terms of business and we have NO trade accounts therefore we replied in the negative to Gargani and it was after this that he began to buy from us as a retail client.

However, if Nick Gargani was intent on beginning an occult business of his own then he would have easily consumed several thousand pounds in stock etc in setting-up costs. His enthusiasm might have lead him to converting his possessions into liquid cash to assist with that project. For all we know a financial failure of this kind might have been a factor which pushed him to commit suicide, if that was what it was. THE TRAGEDY MIGHT HAVE HAD QUITE INNOCUOUS AND UNMYSTERIOUS CAUSES but Nick Davies doesn’t hypothesise on these at all, preferring to go with a totally unsubstantiated hearsay story about some kind of Satanic Death Curse – and then include us in the middle of it as corroboration!

Gargani’s purchases from us had nothing to do with any form of satanism. He did in fact buy the following:

(i) ENCOUNTERS WITH THE PAST: A book on regression hypnosis.
(ii) CELTIC MAGIC: A book on the origins of Celtic Paganism in Britain. (which ties in well with his use of the name Lugh)
(iii) THE SIXTH AND SEVENTH BOOK OF MOSES A well-known 16c text full of Hebrew periapts and prayers which purports to be two lost books from the Old Testament Bible.
(iv) DREAM RECALL TECHNIQUES: A pamphlet on recalling and analysing prophetic dreams.
(v) UNCOVERING YOUR PAST LIVES: A book on beliefs surrounding reincarnation.

I have enclosed copies of his original receipts to prove the above.

So nothing whatsoever on Satanism here. Gargani appears utterly disinterested in Satanism from his purchases with us. However Nick Nick Davies did not know what Gargani had bought, but prejudicially presumed that what Gargani purchased from us was connected with Satanism because it fitted the way he wanted to write the story. (inaccurate, misleading, distorting)

The impression given in the article was that we, and only we, were directly involved in supplying Gargani. Nick Davies further implicates the S.A. in this vein by constructing a double-negative trap which restricts the reader to those conclusions Nick Davies wants them to reach instead of other possibilities. He writes:

…the final clue had been uncovered a few weeks after Gargani’s death by a farmer just north of Lewes. Going into an old barn, the farmer had found an odd collection of burned candles, a photograph and a letter Realising that they might be important the farmer had taken them to the police. The photo was the mugshot of a young man with shoulder length brown hair. The letter was written in blood. Its author was renouncing god and giving his soul to Satan. The letter was signed in the name of Nicholas Gargani. It was his face in the photo. …Possibly this letter was a forgery. Possibly this photograph had been stolen from Gargani’s flat. … Possibly he [Gargani] had been using the Sorcerer’s Apprentice to buy things that might protect him from Satanism. But it was now equally possible that Gargani had become involved with some Satanic group….”

Nick Davies clearly infers that if the S.A. had not actually been involved in helping with Gargani’s headlong rush towards Satanism, we might have instead been providing him with things to protect himself from it. See the double-negative? The fact that we did neither and he could have checked this for sure simply by writing to us, seems to elude Nick Davies. His exact words are that we ‘probably’ sold Gargani ‘things that might have protected him from Satanism’. The facts are that Gargani bought nothing of the kind, and as he also never confided in us that he had a problem, we were totally unaware of his situation and simply fulfilled his orders which were straightforward and quite normal. The implication in the article is that we knew that he was in trouble and preyed upon him. WE DID NOT AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST ANYTHING OF THE KIND BECAUSE THE ASSERTION IS COMPLETELY UNTRUE. Because Nick Davies did not do his research properly and did not contact us for input before going to print this thread of the story, which should not have appeared at all, is utterly fallacious, but intrinsically crucial to convincing the reader that something mysterious was happening. Whereas the facts we can supply would clearly disqualify us for inclusion in the story and would have also undermined the image presented of Gargani as someone who became caught up in Satanism. This image is a foundation stone of the gist of the article which seeks to suggest that he was an ordinary bloke who was terrorised to death by local satanists.

Therefore the inclusion of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, linked to Gargani’s personal occult quest, was significantly misleading and distorted enough to have needed a full correction once the facts were known, yet the Guardian have refused to correct or apologise. The Guardian and Nick Davies were confident enough to use the reference to the S.A. even though they had not checked, nor could they prove, any of the inferences they were making. It was entirely supposition. This is clearly illustrated in the first letter from their In House Lawyer (dated 18 April) where, astonishingly, she asks US for

‘details of the titles and authors of the books purchased by Nick Gargani’!

A clear admission that they do not know, yet made the irresponsible inferences all the same. In short prejudice.

Therefore they are in breach of PCC Code 1. para iii)- The Guardian have declined to publish an apology for our unnecessary inclusion in the article.

They are also in breach of PCC Code 2.; An apology IS appropriate in this instance, yet we have been given no opportunity to reply and correct these dangerous inferences. However the editor did see fit to publish two letters from readers in Lewes. Neither of these addressed the inaccuracies, distortions and misleading aspects of the article, but concerned minor, even trivial angles related to Lewes. The editor appears ready to print these peripheral opinions, but has refused to correct serious errors which have strongly mislead his readers, hence unequal dealing and unjust suppression of facts.

Additionally a breach of PCC code 15. ii) I am not a Satanist. I am on record as not being a Satanist. Nick Davies does not know what I am because he has never asked, yet the article clearly infers that this company supports satanism or has some connection with Satanism. The requirement in the PCC code to ensure correct representation of a person’s religious views and only include them when relevant has been breached. In the Guardian’s response they exhibit this prejudice clearly and accuse us of selling books on Satanism as though this is some kind of crime. This appears to be a major plank of their defence, i.e. Because we sell books on Satanism we must be satanists! However:

(a) Gargani didn’t buy any of the books we stock on Satanism so in his case in relation to the complaint the fact that we stock them is irrelevant. (However for the record we keep six books on satanism out of a range of three thousand titles. The allegation that we favour/promote Satanism is obviously unfounded.)

(b) The Guardian doesn’t know what we stock nor what Nick Gargani bought so shouldn’t have made up their mind anyway, and…

(c) the fact that someone sells books on Satanism doesn’t make them satanists. In the same way that Hutchinsons publishers produced the first edition of Mein Kampf but aren’t Nazis. The fact that people other than Satanists may want to read material on satanists appears to escape the Guardian; which is strange as they are one of the most strident campaigners against censorship when it suits them.

A further breach of PCC Code 16 i, may have occurred in that details of Gargani’s Bank account were appropriated and used to make a tenuous connection with us to substantiate a libelous inference which was checkable and incorrect. – see comments on Code 1, second paragraph above.


The DEVIL IN LEWES has a paucity of fact, but even those facts which are offered are sometimes wholly inaccurate and misleading. Using hearsay evidence from Christian evangelists Nick Davies builds the assertion that Satanists always choose to work their evil magic at the full moon. In order to work up evidence that Gargani’s death was connected with some satanic group and therefore occurred at the full moon, Nick Davies places great import on the date by stating:

“Walker said that the full moon was often the focus of Satanic events The disappearance or maiming of cats often occurred around these times. The incident with the dead hedgehog had happened on the night of the May full moon. AND GARGANI HAD DIED ON APRIL 17TH . THAT NIGHT THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A FULL MOON. perhaps he had know that night he would be asked to do something he could not face, or perhaps he had already refused and the long fall from the cliff was his punishment.”

IN FACT THE NIGHT OF April 17th 1996 WAS A NEW MOON, NOT A FULL MOON. A whole plank of Nick Davies’ advocacy collapses after an application of a single fact. The truth is that Gargani died on a day which had nothing whatsoever to do with any aspect of occultism. Details like that can be easily corroborated by simply looking at a calendar. Such a lack of professional research is lamentable but acceptable if the incidence of inaccuracy does not materially affect the run of the article. However in DEVIL IN LEWES inaccuracies like this are used to support further inaccuracy on many occasions.

Similarly, Nick Davies attempts to demonise a 16 year old whom he calls ‘Donald’, almost elevating him to ‘Damien’ status.. In his eyes Donald is a key influence on Gargani and has a powerful hypnotic persona. Donald turns an ‘outhouse’ into some kind of occult temple and after three minor brushes with the law, police discover it. Nick Davies writes:

“The inside walls had been painted black. On the floor was the shape of a pentacle. on a table were the chalices and vestments and candles that head been stolen from the churches, all neatly laid out as if on an altar. In the centre, was a long shining sword. At the back standing on top of the altar, was the crucifix headstone that had been stolen in the spring. It was upside down. Inside the house in Donald’s room the found a small library of books about black magic. The police tried to charge Donald with stealing from churches, BUT HE SAID ALL OF THIS STUFF HAD BEEN GIVEN TO HIM BY GARGANI WHO HAD TOLD HIM HE HAD BOUGHT IT IN A SECOND HAND SHOP. The next day however the police were able to charge him with a completely different offence , inflicting actual bodily harm on his mother”

Later Nick Davies contradicts himself by adding

“Donald said he had BOUGHT the content of his shrine from Gargani”

Is this just more sloppy Nick Davies reporting, or is Nick Davies quoting two sources? The First from the police, who said Donald had claimed to have been GIVEN it all by Gargani and then the 2nd quote directly from Donald when he said that he had BOUGHT the paraphernalia and books from Gargani? Either way it does appear that Gargani was the source and , because of Gargani’s letter to us, announcing that he was starting up in business selling occult gear, Donald’s claim that he BOUGHT it from Gargani seems more than plausible. However note the accusation by Nick Davies that much of the content of the temple was stolen from local churches. (‘On a table were the chalices and vestments and candles that had been stolen from the churches….’). Donald maintains that it wasn’t and that he bought it all from Gargani. Note well that Donald’s brushes with the law occurred well before Gargani’s death and he made this link to the police WHILST GARGANI WAS STILL ALIVE hence expected it to be checked out with him. Court records show that Donald was found guilty of stealing a broken gravestone cross from a churchyard but not prosecuted for any of the other stuff. Nick Davies does not report this.

The facts surrounding Donald’s case came out in Lewes Youth court and are a much less sensational than Nick Davies has penned it. ‘Donald’ was stopped by the police in a churchyard and was found to be carrying a four inch knife. A month later he ordered two 14 year old lads to kneel down and recite the lord’s prayer. The parents of the two boys complained to the police and Donald admitted it. A short time later , in a domestic incident, he struck his mother who is an ardent Catholic and who disagreed with his occult involvements. He hit her with a belt after she had given permission to the police to search his temple without asking him. In the youth court he was found guilty of possessing an offensive weapon, threatening behaviour and assault and stealing part of a gravestone cross from a church. Donald was given a two year probationary sentence with psychiatric treatment at Brighton General Hospital. Not exactly the Damien figure Nick Davies projects. In reality Donald appears to be the typical out-of- control mixed up teenager. His barrister said that the incidents had ‘taken place over a three month period when the youth had ‘gone off the rails’ and that ‘there was no evidence that the shrine had been used for sinister purposes’.

It was Donald’s contention that Gargani had given him his occult equipment which he [Gargani] had bought in a 2nd hand shop. If this is true then Gargani would have been influencing Donald and not the other way round as Nick Davies has it. Nick Davies dismisses this, whereas the letter we have from Gargani in which he asks to be supplied with occult books and equipment at trade rates as he is ‘shortly going to set up a retail outlet’ is proof of the reverse. It is in fact one of the few key pieces of documentary evidence in this case. It is therefore probable that Gargani may have begun experimenting with buying and selling 2nd hand occult equipment some time before he requested trade rates from us and this would link very well with Donald’s’ claim. It is certainly more feasible than Nick Davies’ alternative hypotheses, but does not appear to have been followed through. It would also explain where some of the big bucks from Gargani’s bank account went, but this would totally dismantle the body of Nick Davies’ Satanic Death Curse theory and so the possibility is overlooked.


I think I have been able to present sufficient documentary evidence to show that

(a) We had nothing to do with Nick Gargani’s death and therefore should not have been picked upon in this article, yet were victimised by the Guardian based on the flimsiest of pretexts whilst being denied the opportunity to reply to these most serious accusations. Such a process is as dishonourable as it is dishonest.

(b) The so-called Satanic connections to Nick Gargani’s death are nothing of the kind. They form a collection of exaggerated theories supported solely by hearsay and peripheral circumstancial evidence. The few bits of information which are posited as factual corroboration of his Satanic Death Curse theory ( the Connections with the S.A. and Gargani’s bank acount) are used selectively and partially by Nick Davies to knit his mythical story together when in reality they are proof of the reverse!

(c) The article is a collection of grossly inaccurate, unprofessional, and dangerous hypotheses which, if Nick Gargani’s death really was subject to foul play, projects a false trail and is more likely to cover up the perpetrators of crime rather than expose them. In the public interest, Guardian readers should have access to the true facts.



Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: