“Savile the Beast – the inside story of the greatest scandal in TV history”.
Seven words jumped out near the start of the second chapter of this book. ‘But the truth had to emerge eventually’ – fifteen chapters later the truth had still not put in an appearance.
I’m glad I did not buy this when it first appeared for sale in April this year. Then it was £7.99 – I saved £7.10 with my kindle version. Had I waited another 24 hours I could have saved another 13 pence, perhaps if you wait a few weeks longer the publisher will pay you to read it.
The authors starts as he means to go on, using other people’s words instead of his own. A title, no doubt inspired by graffiti scrawled outside two of Jimmy Savile’s homes, followed by 17 chapters of stories lifted straight from British newspapers and magazines from January 2012 onwards. Other Amazon reviewers complain that he repeats the same stories, surprising given the hundreds more he could have found had he made that little bit more effort.
Here is the author’s interpretation of a tale included in Jimmy’s 1974 autobiography – “As it Happens”. The story involves a girl , a night club and a lady police officer.
‘If she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’ he wrote of his meeting with a woman police officer. Sure enough, that evening the young girl came in. Savile claimed that he took her into his office and told her : ‘Run now if you want, but you can’t run all your life’ The girl stayed at the dance and then overnighted at Savile’s before he took her to the police station the next morning.’
‘He went on : ‘The lady policewoman was dissuaded from bringing charges against me by her colleagues, for it was well known that were I to go I would probably take half the station with me’
Here is what Jimmy Savile OBE wrote from Page 51 of his own book – “As it happens” Jimmy Savile 1974
‘A high ranking lady police officer came in one night and showed me a picture of an attractive girl who had run away from a remand home. ‘Ah’ says I all serious, ‘if she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’. The law lady, new to the area was nonplussed. Back at the station she asked ‘Is he serious?’
It is God’s truth that the absconder came in that night. Taking her into the office I said ‘run now if you want to but you can’t run for the rest of your life’ She listened to the alternative and agreed that I hand her over if she could stay at the dance, come home with me and that I would promise to see her when they let her out. At 11.30 the next morning she was willingly presented to the astounded lady of the law. The officer was dissuaded from bringing charges against me by her colleagues for it was well known that were I to go I would probably take half the station with me.
A ‘high ranking lady police officer ‘ in the late 1960’s? I’m not sure about that one Jimmy and there’s that implication of power and influence that Savile could not really have had, that is, if another story that is, regurgitated in the same chapter is anything to go by.
The author introduces Dennis Lemon who ‘acted as Savile’s bodyguard’ and the ‘He’s up to court tomorrow – interfering with young girls, he’s worried’. No ‘taking half the station’ with him that time is there ?
The author ends his first chapter disclosing how much Jimmy was paid for each episode of Jim’ll Fix it in 1980 (£600) and how much he got in 1990 (£2350) so he obviously saw the press reports about the numerous Freedom Of Information requests made to to the BBC in the wake of the Newsnight fiasco.
In Chapter 2 – ‘the story breaks’ in the Sunday Mirror in January 2012, closely followed by the Oldie, The Guardian and the Telegraph and despite the fact that ‘nothing had seen the light of day in the mainstream media’ before Jim’s death, within three months every paper in the land printed the story of the brave Newsnight journalists and the film that never was.
The subtitle of this book is ‘the inside story of the greatest scandal in TV history’. A more fitting start as it happens, would have been ‘the inside job that was done on one of the greatest television stars in the history of television’, but that would have been a tad long given the fact that he couldn’t even be bothered to write ‘television’, ‘TV’ has to do.
The book is actually a compendium rather than a narrative; I hope I got that right. I’m no author but I do know a well researched piece when I see one, and this is certainly not. His first error occurs right at the beginning when he describes Top of the Pops being first aired in 1974….
1974 is certainly an important year in the Savile story as it happens, am I repeating myself enough already?
‘Bosses of flagship BBC2 show Newsnight launched the investigation into Sir Jimmy in the days after his death ….. but they were eventually ordered to scrap the report’ He goes on quoting the Sunday Mirror : ‘the TV journalists discovered that complaints regarding the star were made to police in 2007 …. But the CPS decided to take no action due to insufficient evidence’.
The Sunday Mirror has a ‘BBC source’ spilling the beans in January 2012 who explains the film maker’s honourable intent for starting an investigation that ‘by interviewing the 3 women Newsnight hoped to establish the truth of the claims ….. only for BBC executives to halt the investigation’.
When I read the above, I naturally assumed the ‘source’ to be Meirion Jones, the producer of the ill fated film but McShanes epic continues with ‘the insider said’ ….. people are up in arms ….. someone somewhere should have realised that a report trying to uncover a dark side of one of the BBC’s favourite sons was a silly thing to do. It cost millions …… down the drain’.
The author does get round to mentioning Meirion Jones but not before he introduces us to the hero of the story: Mark Williams–Thomas the eventual presenter of Exposure. The next newspaper stories covered occur in August 2012, seven months after the Mirror ‘broke’ the story. The author announces that ‘his (Jimmy’s) victims were tracked down by MWT’; he quotes Thomas’ online blog thing the night before ‘Exposure’ hit our screens, explaining how ‘a year earlier, after presenting a programme about child protection, he was approached by someone who asked if he had ever heard about JS being involved in child abuse. He had heard rumours, but JS was still alive at the time and MWT was ‘sceptical’ as no journalist or publication had ever substantiated such stories. Savile died before the former detective could speak to the source and when he did, although that source had credibility it was a ‘lone voice’. ‘He had never been on my radar’ said Williams-Thomas.
MWT is clearly referring to the Newsnight film broadcast on 6th July 2011. July 2011, three months before Jimmy’s death on 29th October 2011. He does not mention this, unless there are footnotes not included in the Kindle version, so I include my own points by way of further information to the serious reader.
‘I knew that the key would be to collect credible evidence’. Recounting the ‘I ran it like a police operation’ boast from Thomas, ‘he and L Gardiner (producer of Exposure) were the only ones who knew the identities of the women who chose not to speak on record about Savile’. He was taking a ‘big risk’ he said but concluded that ‘I have no doubt that on the evidence I have gathered, if Savile was still alive I would be banging ON HIS DOOR TO GET HIM NICKED’.
Williams–Thomas is stretching my patience now. I should read the primary source again to see if he actually said that, because if he did then he is deliberately misrepresenting the facts. He did not track down the ‘victims’ most of them were already available to him eleven months before Exposure aired. It also beggars belief that only he and Lesley Gardiner his ITV producer, were aware of the identities of the anonymous ‘victims’. Lesley G is the wife of Alex G, Thomas’ producer in the delightfully titled 2009 show ‘To catch a paedophile’ .
The reader is not told the identity of one of Thomas’ early ‘credible’ witnesses used later in the film but he is described as a ‘BBC producer’ who ‘said he was surprised when Savile invited him to a Chinese restaurant called the Lotus House‘. The more interested readers of Anna and Moor’s blogs will recognise this as Wilfred De’ath, his story gets a few paragraphs and is followed by another alleged ex BBC employee, one Sue Thompson, her rather important piece gets just one paragraph.
Just a few chapters later, the author describes what he calls ‘The BBC in Crisis’. The ‘credible’ witness is arrested but the author does not appear to have linked this despite the press reporting his being a ‘producer of Savile’s on the BBC show teen Scene’ the very show that De’ath was allegedly meeting Jimmy about when the alleged Chinese Restaurant incident took place.
The reader is then introduced to the following :
Fiona, Charlotte, Angie, Karin (choir girl story Stoke Mandeville), Val and Anna who ‘did not take part in the documentary but wrote of her experiences online’ and implicated ‘two other stars’ in an incident alleged to have taken place after a recording of Clunk Click. ‘Anna’ is presumably Karin Ward then, strange that two ‘Karin’s’ feature in the the same story, but we have to remember that the author is merely presenting press reports, unless these were the names used in the film – answers below please, I really cannot GO THERE again.
A few paragraphs later a four page piece on Colleen Nolan and her experiences on TOTP. I will make no further comment on this, apart from the fact that the Duncroft gals have, up to now shared less than 6 pages in total.
Just hours after Exposure aired Scotland Yard announced it’s verdict on Jimmy Savile. The ‘recent information would be ‘assessed’ and the Metropolitan Police would be ‘putting victims at the heart of our enquiries’ – David Gray. The backlash against all things Savile and the BBC began, and within days his headstone was removed.
By 9th October Commander Peter Spindler ‘was quoted as saying’ : ‘we have formally recorded 8 criminal allegations […] his offending behaviour does appear to be on a national scale’. He goes on to describe ’20 potential victims’ but ‘we believe we will come up with between 20 and 25 victims’. He made it clear that the ‘police would only launch investigations into living individuals about whom allegations are made if they get some evidence’. It would be an ‘assessment rather than an investigation’. Because Savile was dead, officers were looking at other alleged abusers whose names had now cropped up’.
The Panorama special ‘What the BBC knew’ is covered next and is interesting because it provides the ONE direct reference to the man who formed such a huge part of the authors ‘inside story’. ‘Meirion Jones who also worked on the story said ‘I was sure the story would come out one way or another and if it did the BBC would be accused of a cover up’. He goes on ‘I wrote an email to Peter saying ‘the story is strong enough’.
By 19th October the police announced that the JS inquiries have become a ‘formal criminal investigation’ – in just two weeks ‘200 potential victims’ have been uncovered.
In the 5th chapter, ‘The Victims speak out’, begins the ‘most disturbing of all’ the stories to date, that of Jimmy’s great niece. His depiction of the family’s response speaks volumes: several members of the Savile Clan said ….. ‘such remarks brought shame on the entire family’.
Under Chapter 6 entitled ‘More Allegations’ we are treated once again to Karin Ward’s memories of regular visits to BBC TELEVISION CENTRE – ‘sometimes going every week to sit in the audience’. She goes on ‘The production staff must have known. They were in and out of his dressing room with snacks. We were drinking alcohol and some of them must have seen Jimmy with his hand up someone’s top’.
Prior to this we have the Deborah Cogger story and following Karin comes ‘Jill’ who spoke to the Sun about her experiences in Jimmy’s caravan when he suddenly turned up at her mother’s B and B. Next we have the anonymous future model, who had to have an abortion after Jimmy raped her when she was just 16. She was so traumatised by these events that she applied to work with Savile on Top of the Pops several years later.
By Chapter Seven – ‘Duncroft’ it is mid October and 5 ex Duncroft girls are named:
- Toni Townsend
- Carole Wells 52 years old
- Bebe Roberts 62
- Frances Jennings 53
- Kathleen Webb 55
Chapter 8 is called ‘Broadmoor’.
Chapter 9 is ‘More Hospital visits’ but begins with a story about one Katrina Rose, then a minor incident involving an occupational therapist, then the reader somehow arrives in Glen Coe. ‘Savile owned a cottage in Glen Coe and it was feared that as many as 20 victims may have been taken there’. The founder of the mountain Rescue team, Hamish MacInnes who knew Jimmy well, had heard no such allegations indeed he imparts a very interesting piece of information when he says :
‘HE DID NOT SEEM TO LIKE TO STAY HERE ON HIS OWN, SOMEONE LOCAL WAS ALWAYS WITH HIM’
I will skip the next few chapters and fast forward to Chapter 14 – ‘Charity work and famous connections’ for it opens with another interesting snippet that the reader may not have picked up on yet and that is that ‘A GREAT MANY PEOPLE DID NOT LIKE JIMMY SAVILE’. Using remarks that could have been lifted straight from Daily Mail readers comments – ‘he gives me the creeps’ or ‘I can’t stand that man’ but ‘he does a lot for charity’. To be fair the author does outline some of Jimmy’s efforts in this sphere but soon reverts to form describing an alleged abuse of a 11 year old in Stoke Mandeville’s chapel during mass and other horror stories including the account of an ex-nurse who claims to have witnessed Jimmy abusing a patient in a hospital bed in Leeds General Infirmary.
Reading the same awful stories again for the purpose of investigation could certainly dampen the soul of the most fervent Savile supporter, but, just as sure as behind every silver cloud there is a much bigger blacker one you can always rely on someone somewhere in the entertainment industry to provide a little light relief. For me that someone turned out to be Jim Davidson. I laughed out loud at his remarks before and after his arrest in January 2013. “Just pick someone you don’t like and say it’s them” he says of the ‘witch hunt’ that is/was the Yewtree police investigation. Of Jimmy: ‘as odd as he was, Savile can’t defend himself’ and of his own arrest, ‘I can’t remember last week, let alone 25 years ago’. Thank you Mr Davidson, you made my day with that.
Chapter 16 is called ‘The Duchess and her family’. This is what the author says about Jimmy and his mum. ‘Behind the seemingly innocent childlike devotion to her he so frequently expressed, was there some other secret that was never spoken ?’
McShane finishes his compendium of other people’s stories with the release of the findings of the Yewtree ‘investigation’ wherein an ‘assessment’ of the claims made against Jimmy Savile have rendered him responsible for 214 ‘crimes’. The last word is left to Mark Williams –Thomas whose words I will not repeat here save the author’s:
‘And he (Williams) added, chillingly :’There could be at least double the number of potential victims. It’s a mere drop in the ocean’.
All in all, I am glad that I purchased and read through ‘Savile the Beast’ for one thing it brought to my attention was the fact that Wilfred De’ath’s story actually involved the Mascot Hotel in Central London, a rather down market establishment off Baker Street, rather than the eminently more upmarket Ascot Hotel in Mayfair. Myself and several other commentators had discussed this story at length on Moor Larkin’s blog. The De’ath story seems even less likely now. Where I could imagine customers having access to a telephone in a posh hotel, and the Ascot, Mayfair is a very posh hotel, I cannot quite see this facility in the Mascot. This finding led to another by Moor Larkin, thorough as ever, to note that De’ath was a regular contributor to the Oldie Magazine whose boss Richard Ingrams edited Private Eye. Strange that Mr Ingrams claims never to have heard anything about Jimmy Savile back in the day?
Anyone who puts pen to paper has a motivation. It is sad that someone would want to merely compile a number of press reports about a tragedy without any thought that the stories might not be true. John McShane’s ‘home page’ on Amazon lists his other works which include books about ‘Baby P’, Levi Bellfield, Cheryl and Ashley (Love wars) and Heath Ledger, the latter of which attracts the following response in the review section :
The only saving grace was that it is not very long and quick to read but then again that was probably rushing my way through it. I felt the author knew nothing about Heath Ledger other than what he has trawled off the internet and dare I say it threw it together just to cash in on the actor’s death.
I couldn’t have said it better myself save adding the following conclusion. The initial television investigation into claims made against Jimmy Savile is described here as an attempt to see if those claims had any substance. Whoever made this statement to the press is a liar. In his earliest e mails to his boss, Meirion Jones uses the words ‘Jimmy Savile Paedophile’. It’s all there in Appendix 12 of the Pollard Report that is mentioned by everyone but read by nobody. This book will appeal to those who are only too willing and happy to believe that Jimmy Savile was indeed a ‘beast’ rather than ‘one of the greatest characters of this city’ – Leeds General Infirmary on news of the death of Sir Jimmy Savile.
Addendum
I was in Leeds a few weeks ago as part of my Savile’s Travels investigations. I spoke to several people including two mothers outside the lakeside Café to which Jimmy was a regular visitor. They were interested to hear that an alternative view of the story is being investigated and that evidence exists that the stories presented in the television show were untrue. They told me that the main reaction of Leeds folk was one of hurt and betrayal especially given the fantastic send off Jimmy was given. They did not dismiss my idea’s out of hand, quite the reverse. The Press and others have perpetuated a huge lie about the Late Jimmy Savile. The general public appear to have swallowed this lie but I believe that their hearts and minds can be recaptured and the record can be set straight. I don’t know where I read it but somewhere someone remarked that Jimmy Savile NEVER said a bad word about anyone.
McShane’s publisher is no stranger to allegations of falsehood.
After an acrimonious dissolution of the original partnership in March 2002, John Blake went solo. In August 2008 a book which was about to be published by JBP, On Her Majesty’s Service under the name of Ronald Evans, a former bodyguard of Sir Salman Rushdie, had a Declaration of Falsity made against it by a Judge in the High Court for the inclusion of 11 “serious falsehoods” defaming Mr Rushdie, after extracts were serialised in The Mail On Sunday. The book was never published.
Jimmy Savile wrote two books during his life, three, if you count ‘Love is an uphill thing’ which is basically the paperback version of the hardback ‘As it Happens’ published in 1974 and written in just three weeks in ‘longhand’ and on ‘knocked off – (note) books’. ‘As it Happens’ is the one most quoted in the main stream media because of the stories involving girls. The second (or third) book Jimmy wrote has been mentioned but largely ignored in the press. It is called ‘God’ll Fix it’ and was commissioned and published in 1978 for Mowbrays Popular Christian Paperbacks. Jimmy was working on a programme called ‘Speakeasy’ in 1978 a religious talk show. Anyone who wants to know the real Jimmy Savile would do well to read this book. I will quote just a few lines of his chapter ‘Why do I think people suffer’ because I think that it gives an important insight into Jimmy’s thoughts on his efforts for those he saw as less well off than himself and the real motive behind his hospital and charitable efforts.
‘For instance, I might have got up at six in the morning to drive to see a kid in hospital. What I have done for the kid is nothing. The kid’s example helped me no end, because if nothing else, it made me realise that I was fortunate, blessed, or whatever, and that my body was even now able to enjoy the good things of God and put itself out for the very child that was suffering’.
Join me in Leeds on 29th October in Roundhay park for a walk around the lake. It’s not that far and it’s a lovely place. Let’s show the media what we think of their stories and let’s show Jimmy and his family that we can put ourselves out just a little bit for him and them.
August 22, 2013 at 09:24
-
Progress…
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/davidson-clear-over-yewtree-allegations-170753193.html#ocDoV15
And while I’m aware that Yahoo comments aren’t the best means of gauging
genuine public sentiment, it’s nice to see that so many people are starting to
tire of all this business and actually calling for an end to Yewtree.
Undoing the mud-dragging for all concerned will be a considerably harder
task… but it’s a start!
- August 22, 2013 at 08:04
-
Clive James Anderson, 59, walked free from Carlisle Crown Court after a
jury found him not guilty of 10 counts of child sex abuse, including three
rapes. The former hotel worker, of Station Road, Wigton, who formerly lived in
Needham Drive, Workington, said he had never had a relationship with either a
woman or a child. His accuser – a woman now in her 40s – claimed he subjected
her to years of sexual abuse during the 1970s, starting when she was
six.
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/cumbrian-man-cleared-of-historic-abuse-and-rape-charges-1.1063185?referrerPath=news
The
court heard from a psychiatrist who is a recognised expert in false memory
syndrome, Dr Janet Boakes. Asked if people who have false memories believe
them, she said: “Yes. “They are not liars: They are reporting what they
believe to have happened to them, but in many cases it can be shown
objectively that it could not have happened.” She said such memories emanated
from a misunderstanding of how memory works
I was imagining the comments in the modern vox-pops where people would say,
“He never had sex? A likely story.”
-
August 21, 2013 at 22:55
-
Mina – the comments were not directed at you. It was merely that it invited
comment on the Britain that exists today. The Britain that is still so
decent,generous and tolerant among ordinary folk. To see crimes ‘finalised and
recorded etc in accordance with policy’ is of course grotesque when the
accused is deceased. One should not speak ill of the dead without due cause.
And none has so far been established to my satisfaction. But the deceased are
silent. They do not exist here. Only the memory and what can be learnt. The
policy you object to is true of people who have allegations made against them
where the police and or prosecution do not pursue the case. They are branded
as offenders without having the chance to clear their names. They will have
social services ‘contracts of expectations’ at the very least, enhanced
criminal record checks that lose them their careers and any related positions.
And still no chance of clearing their names because nothing other than an
allegation has been made. There is no court or tribunal available to them.
That is now. In this world. In the land of the living. Where we should still
have some sway.
-
August 22, 2013 at 06:11
-
@Margaret Jervis
I don’t disagree.
- August 21, 2013 at 22:02
-
@Margaret Jervis
I fear I might have been misunderstood. Believe me, I am not ignorant of
the false allegations industry, have read much of Richard Webster’s work, am
aware of FACT, and even look in on the daftmoo forum occasionally. However,
the WYP ‘finalisation and recording of crimes committed by Jimmy Savile’
brings us into new and more evil territory. These ‘crimes’ have not even been
established, let alone investigated and tried.
None of us now can die, and
be content that we don’t have a criminal record. No matter how clear our
consciences, our innocent status can’t be guaranteed to survive us. Something
to bear in mind if saving for a nice funeral and a decent headstone.
- August 21, 2013 at 17:33
-
How’s about this for a line from Crime & Justice Hell?
“The majority of these crime reports have been finalised and recorded as
having being committed by Savile, in line with national policy.”
http://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/jimmysavile
-
August 21, 2013 at 18:03
-
@Moor – the ‘facts’ speak for themselves …….
Cigarette Lighter Presentation
A radio interview this morning (Fri 10-5-13) suggested West Yorkshire
Police presented a cigarette lighter to Savile, engraved with a message from
the Force.
This was an engraved cigarette lighter auctioned last July which said ‘To
Jimmy Savile, from his friends at the Fraud Squad’. Therefore it cannot be
attributed to any particular force and there is no evidence to suggest it
came from West Yorkshire.
Blimey, the Leeds boys will be so relieved …… really, it’s like one of
those awful murder mystery things on daytime tv ……
here’s something else that I didn’t notice in May …… so easy to mistake
Leeds General for St James’ ……..
Two victims were offences at St James Hospital, Leeds, aged five to 12.
One victim is unsure whether it was St James or LGI due to the passage of
time.
http://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/jimmysavile
-
August 21, 2013 at 19:05
-
@Moor Larkin
‘Crime & Justice Hell’ is absolutely descriptive. How
on earth is this Britain?
- August 21, 2013 at 20:55
-
Because it is. Where have you been all these years of gross injustices?
– thousands in jail for non- existent offences over twenty five years. I
don’t mean they’re all still there. Just convicted. But sentences for
historic allegations get longer and longer. Mostly mild-mannered people
who look on the bright side of life. Of course they have problems on
release too – but they are resilient. Some not so. Con-men perhaps? Tends
to be something that exhibits itself beyond the alleged offending. Some
plead guilty> Yes. Most sex offenders do. Some not but generally they
have a history of lies.
And then the accused and acquitted and the accused and not prosecuted.
Of course there are occasional failures here – Huntley for instance who
had a string of credible contemporaneous allegations dismissed. But the
blot of a single allegation – however incredible, may place an indelible
blot on your career and family landscape for life. Didn’t know about this
– how can I know? You can’t – neither the courts nor parliament will be of
much assistance and it’s not a matter that the media want to be associated
with , mostly. Inside Time – the prisoner’s newspaper has some articles
and correspondence on these issues – see online edition. Inside Time
editorial is mostly about making a good go of it inside and out – Lord
Longford legacy. Falsely Accused Carers and Teachers – FACT is a very
useful resource. There are online help forums too – Helga Speck runs one
with wild and sometimes not so wonderful contributions – Pafaa or its
successors. It’s the citizen’s band radio of the genre by friends and
family. For an overview http://www.richardwebster.org/ or chrissaltrese.co.uk.
this latter I should add, I am a consultant for. But my experience in
journalism of these matters goes back as far as the mid 80s – went into
the law in the late 90s. But still a magpie….
- August 21, 2013 at 21:26
-
CORRECTION ALERT! my ref to the late Richard Webster site should be
http://www.richardwebster.net/ no idea what the .org is
– they may be offended or not! I’ll take a look. Sorry guys and gals and
whoever else might be looking or suspicious…
- August 21, 2013 at 13:48
-
The walk in the park will commence at 1pm meeting at the Lakeside Cafe in
Roundhay Park Leeds. Jimmy Savile died on the 29th October 2011 and almost
immediately the media’s vilification of him began. So that is the day we will
begin the fightback in earnest and our little walk will not be the only event
organised. More later, in the meantime, don’t let the press reports get you
down – I won’t, I believe that they may be getting a tad concerned that they
have not quite pulled off their little enterprise !!! Onwards “guys and gals”
- August 21, 2013 at 17:15
-
Rabbitaway,
Good for yous
-
August 21, 2013 at 17:27
-
Hi Lucozade
- August 19, 2013 at 12:28
-
The book is produced by that great publishing house John Blake. Whose
proof-reading maintains its usual high standard. Savile is quoted as saying,
‘For fun, girls take some berating.’ As any troll could tell you . . .
- August 19, 2013 at 11:22
-
You really have to read the whole of App 12 at least to get a flavour of
what is going on and more importantly WHO TELLS WHO WHAT. Rippon gave Jones
the red light to make a film for Newsnight NOT an investigation a FILM. Jones,
a highly experienced award winning journalist left the investigation of the
claims made in a web memoir, to a trainee journalist based in Glasgow. When
the shit hit the fan in October 2012 Rippon wrote a blog that is then slated
for containing ALLEGED inaccuracies about the 2009 police investigation. These
alleged inaccuracies, led to the conspiracy theory that the BBC were covering
something up. This pdf thing is a nuisance because you cannot cut/paste but
App 12 is not that big in itself
PS feel free to correct any of the above – I do not have time at the moment
to check everything …… I guess that’s where the BBC went wrong too !!
- August 19, 2013 at 10:52
-
I must correct something that I said earlier, revisiting App 12 I see that
it was David Jordan – (Director Editorial Policy and Standards) who tore into
Jones about a ‘confidential email’ dated 4th October 2012 somehow finding it’s
way into Private Eye Magazine. The email from Jones to Jordan includes a copy
of the 2011 script for Newsnight (App 12 page 12/329)
Jones had his film scripted BEFORE the CPS confirmed the real reason the
2008/9 investigation was dropped. His later emails show that he intended to
slide this in when it was confirmed. I assume that HE thought that the CPS
would confirm that they did not proceed because of Jimmy’s age – what an idiot
!
-
August 19, 2013 at 10:21
-
Seems there are some peoplein the legal arena wlling to think, rather than
accuse- she is a brave person indeed:
The trouble is that people without eny experience, first or second hand,
start creating a ‘belief system ‘ which grows like a cancer throughout an
already predjudiced public, overshadowing truths that lie behind all these
allegtions against people whose behaviours were perhaps not quite what they
seem by todays standards.
It is the false positives when investigating a posible cancerous growth
that actually create hysteria afterwards. We know from the reaction to
Princess Diana’s death that mass hysteria previalis in this country.
- August 19, 2013 at 11:22
-
“It is the false positives when investigating a posible cancerous growth
that actually create hysteria afterwards. We know from the reaction to
Princess Diana’s death that mass hysteria previalis in this country.”
And the zombie walks amongst us once more…
-
August 19, 2013 at 01:37
-
The Pollard report is also much too big for me to completely download, but
I did note that “R1″ from Duncroft had a father who was a producer (some of
that email was redacted) – I believe Hannah Livingston made the observation.
Well, yes, R1 did and we all know who that is now. For some reason, this
association went right over the heads of our doughty defenders, where I would
have screeched to a halt seeing that associated with the Beeb. Let alone all
these people were believing that the Surrey police had somehow provided a
letter that noted that Savile was ‘too old’ to prosecute. No such letter
existed, just a letter that told the recipient that they had spoken with
Savile and there didn’t appear to be any grounds to proceed further, which is
a whole lot different. When this letter was found to be a forgery by the Daily
Mail, that didn’t seem to matter, let alone the ridiculous lies of Bebe
Roberts.
The initial email from Meirion regarding the “bizarre sort of approved
school in a stately home” was so biased in its tone as to be highly suspect
regarding his motives, then along comes MWT just about crawling on his knees
to be involved, and on and sickeningly on.
- August 21, 2013 at 11:34
-
Sally Stevens,
Re: “Let alone all these people were believing that the Surrey police had
somehow provided a letter that noted that Savile was ‘too old’ to prosecute.
No such letter existed, just a letter that told the recipient that they had
spoken with Savile and there didn’t appear to be any grounds to proceed
further, which is a whole lot different. When this letter was found to be a
forgery by the Daily Mail, that didn’t seem to matter, let alone the
ridiculous lies of Bebe Roberts”
There’s been to much nonsense from this lot for them to carry on being
blindly believed the way they have been, they haven’t earnt that privilege
by showing that they are honest people and being honest about this.
Even Meirion Jones makes himself sound ridiculous – none of what they say
should be taken at face value without being checked out properly….
- August 18, 2013 at 16:27
-
Dear me – M.P’s demanding Pollard does another report – and look who the
‘reporter’ of this piece is, the author of the Oldie magazine article !
Don’t bother commenting – they don’t print …… !
- August 18, 2013 at 21:19
-
@ Don’t bother commenting – they don’t print …… ! @
I think you might
be right……….
Posted at 18:44 when there were 14 comments………..
Nobody who actually
read Pollard’s original Report would still believe the stories about Savile.
The Duncroft stories were pure hokum and it’s obvious that Val & Angie
in Exposure were two more from Duncroft but this was masked by the itv. The
original Newsnight investigation was utterly deficient in both rhyme and
reason. The mass hysteria then unleashed has meant that nobody wanted to
read his report. I did, and it’s obvious that the entire Media narrative
could do with an Investigation. There won’t be one, and this comment will
not get published by The Mail either…..
Answer @ 18:45
Thank you for adding a comment to
MailOnline.
Comments on this article are being checked in advance. We aim
to publish as many as possible. MailOnline receives thousands of comments
every day, so please be patient.
If your comments do not appear, this may
be due to the volume we receive or due to the content of your comment.
It’s now 21:16……….. and there are still only 14 comments so it’s not the
volume that’s the problem………….
- August 18, 2013 at
21:44
-
Dear oh dear… guess Comment Isn’t Free at the opposite end of the MSM
political spectrum either…
I would’ve thought they’d have relished an opportunity to unleash their
own hordes of Righteously Indignant People to launch assaults on one of
the “small number of sad people” who contradicts That Which Everybody Must
Know, even if it’s only to give large numbers of thumbs down rather than
responding with verbal pitchforks.
Maybe they don’t think enough members of the public care anymore?
Apathy is better than stoking the fires of fallacy, I suppose… but passion
for the truth is far better than both. Is there any appropriate forum
frequented by The Man In The Street that won’t block contradictions to its
own world view?
- August 18, 2013 at 22:07
-
Try Twitter Ergathones. Soul of the world. @mscjervis for
starters.
- August 18, 2013 at
22:55
-
Thanks, might well!
I must admit the sparring between Jeremy Williams and MWT seems
highly entertaining, even if it has fallen silent for the time
being.
I wonder if public sentiment on this matter will ever turn… the
charging and imminent court date of Dave Lee Travis has been well
publicised, and a defeat for Yewtree after hauling in One Of Those
Nasty BBC Types might at least make a few people stop and think that
maybe not all is as they have been led to believe.
We shall see on Friday…
- August 19, 2013 at
06:02
-
“Is there any appropriate forum frequented by The Man In The Street
that won’t block contradictions to its own world view?”
Yup, right here!
- August 19, 2013 at
08:33
-
Certainly more room for discussion than in “real life” – reactions
from people I’ve ranted to in person about this have ranged from
boredom at my ongoing cries of innocence after all these months, to a
first-round KO courtesy of Godwin’s Law…
Let’s hope sanity prevails before this drags on much longer, though
I’m wondering if even everybody involved in this sad tale coming
forward and saying “We made it all up” will restore Sir Jim’s good
name now.
- August 18, 2013 at 14:57
-
That should be mentions an appendix that is NOT inc in this doc – well, I
can’t see it anyways !
- August 18, 2013 at 14:55
-
@Margaret – I have no idea, he mentions his ‘terms of reference’ in an
appendix that does not appear to exist …… I’ll have a look later
- August 18, 2013 at 14:24
-
@Margaret – the penny has just dropped for me too ! Apologies, I misread
and misinterpreted your point. The Inquiry did indeed start from a ‘false
presumption’ i.e that the decision to drop the investigation was the wrong.
Makes me mad to read those darn responses to his questions about dressing
rooms at TVC, when the shows allegedly attended were not even made there. The
BBC let themselves and the rest of the country down by not checking the
simplest of details.
-
August 18, 2013 at 11:25
-
Just trawling though an (unrelated) ‘eminent’ report.
Maybe the more pedantic raccoonistas could assist with the following
conundrum.
What exactly is a ‘conspiracy of silence’?
Is it an oxymoron, the paradox of the liar, or what?
-
August 18, 2013 at 17:45
-
@ Margaret Jervis
Terms of reference – details in this link
BBC – Media Centre – Dame
Janet Smith DBE and Nick Pollard to lead BBC independent reviews
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/bbc-independent-reviews.html
- August 18, 2013 at 18:52
-
@minafield Thank you Mina. Though woolly, the terms of reference should
have enabled Pollard to identify the ‘failings’ namely that the
allegations were poorly researched, had vested interests and should not
have been allowed to progress as far as they did. There was another story-
cui bono from such a farrago but sadly many journos are not prone to
investigating these things these days, elementary as they are. Who knows
what was happening in the Newsnight emporium at the time – seems like
there might have been a toxic mix in the lower ranks. I think Peter Rippon
may be should be have been applauded for pulling it – albeit belatedly.
But of course the ‘cover-up’ rumours – leaked by whom I wonder and who
benefits again by this, but the ‘leaks’ did wonders for MWTs nine month
buildup to Exposure. Merion and the woman seem a bit emotional to me –
maybe they had issues within the BBC of which we know nothing – bring back
Harry Hardnose I say.
However Pollard’s brief was essentially a preface to the Smith enquiry
– which doesn’t appear to have terms of reference only bullet points. And,
strangely, this was set up at the same time. No pressure then. Pollard –
pull your socks up! Smith *** **** BBC – still lots of good stuff to
listen to. Thanks guys and gals.
-
August 18, 2013 at 19:03
-
@Margaret, if you haven’t already, have a gander at Appendix 12 of
the Pollard report …… Peter Rippon knew WHO leaked the info to the press
!!
- August 18, 2013 at 19:30
-
@rabbitaway Well done rabbit! I’ll leave you and the guys and gals
to do the appropriate exhumations. Do let me know the results by
telex.
@mscjervis. Pigeon post is very effective these days. I
think I need some music – Beethoven’s Pastoral comes to mind. But any
old tweet will do. Cheers!
- August 18, 2013 at 22:44
-
@Margaret Jervis
I read most of the interview transcripts from the report, and it
appeared clear as day that it was Meirion Jones who was responsible
for the ‘BBC are covering it up’ stories. He was spectacularly
flustered when questioned as to why he was sending emails to his home
computer, and gave lame reasons for his failure to speak to someone
above Peter Rippon’s head. Also, it looked probable that he pretty
much just gave MW-T the whole thing to run with in the end.
What
was surprising ( well, it was to me, but the report never seemed to go
into it) was that, once the newspaper stories and the Oldie article
were due to be published, and were published, nobody at the BBC
considered any damage limitation or counter attack. If they had
immediately made it known that the stuff they had was spurious and
insubstantive – well, none of this would ever have happened. It would
have been nipped in the bud right there.
-
August 18, 2013 at 23:17
-
Hi, Mr Mini Leveret Lookalike
Some quick help would be welcome. The App 12 pdf file is not
searchable and, although I skimmed through most of this when it first
appeared, I missed that and don’t have time to plough through it all
right now Where are we looking for that particular bit of info?
-
August 18, 2013 at 10:38
-
*Jimmy Savile was/is the tip of an ice sheet. This is a world wide problem.
David Icke has been going on about it for years. It’s called satanic ritual
abuse. Look up the Franklin cover up. This goes all the way to the top of
power. Jimmy Savile was never, ever, going to be charged whitest [sic] he was
alive and kicking.- Me , London* 18.8.13 Daily Mail.
No that’s not me, that’s *me* whoever s/he may be, flaming on the Daily
Mail website in response to
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2395273/Nick-Pollard-BBC-bosses-credible-official-Jimmy-Savile-inquiry.html#ixzz2cJMAumgb
where
MPs call for a new inquiry into the ‘Pollard cover-up’.
Apparently Pollard said he couldn’t get to the bottom of the Newsnight
issue, because people’s memories were so poor. Really?
Just a year after
the event when others ‘remember’ so clearly what ‘happened’ forty or fifty
years ago without having told anyone at all?
It seems these august institutions are unable to do what they are paid for
– proper research to source. If they had, they might have consulted
annaraccoon.com. They still might. Memo to Nick: Please remember to hold the
telescope the right way up.
-
August 18, 2013 at 12:56
-
@Margaret – the reason Nick Pollard could not get to the bottom of the
Newsnight thing was because there was quite simply, no ‘bottom’ to get to.
Someone made a mistake by sanctioning an transmission slot for a highly
controverial film the contents of which were enormous. Such an important
matter should not have been undertaken by :
1. A Producer who was
personally linked to the subject in hand (Meirion Jones)
2. A Trainee
Journalist who was given the responsibility of finding and interviewing the
so called witnesses.
Peter Rippon made a mistake, not in pulling the story but allowing Jones
to work on it in the first place. McShanes book indicates a falsehood, that
the film makers were looking to interview the Duncroft women to ascertain if
their stories were credible. Their stories were NOT credible and neither
were they (Fiona), nevertheless, Jones went on with his project until the
penny finally dropped with Rippon, with the Surrey police/CPS finally
disclosing the REAL reason that the 2008 police investigation ended. This
was just a few days before transmission, Jones was furious, the rest is
history.
- August 18, 2013 at 13:14
-
@rabbitaway Yes I’d gathered that, but did not have the detail. The
question is ‘bottom of what’? If Pollard, Waterhouse and all sorts of
inquiries and tribunals start with a false presumption, then the findings
will fall short of explanation. That is why terms of reference are so
important. And asking the right questions. And doing elementary
research….! There are people who think that Rippon became the whipping boy
though.
-
August 18, 2013 at 14:12
-
@Margaret – don’t have time at the moment to read the whole report
and he does mention ‘his terms of reference’ but this jumped out at me
The decision to drop the original investigation was flawed and the
way it was taken was wrong but I believe it was done in good faith. It
was not done to protect the Savile tribute programmes or for any
improper reason.
In my view, the most worrying aspect of the Jimmy
Savile story for the BBC was not the decision to drop the story itself.
It was the complete inability to deal with the events that followed. In
the first few months after the Savile investigation was halted the News
Division’s management and its publicity teams seemed to have kept a lid
on the rumblings of press interest about the story but it slowly became
clear they did not have the full facts and that the problem was not
going to go away. An element of personal distrust played a significant
part in this
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/pollard_review/pollard_review.pdf
- August 18, 2013 at 14:24
-
@rabbitaway
Thanks for the link rabbit, it looks like it might be worth
scrutinising. But the report doesn’t include the terms of reference
and other important things that are in the appendices. How weird to
produce a report without setting out the terms of reference? Is there
a separate Appendices doc online?
- August 17, 2013 at 19:04
-
Beautifully written as always. XxX
-
August 17, 2013 at 20:16
-
Thank you ‘S’
- August 17, 2013 at 18:35
-
I wonder if any of the MSM will ever start to query the total lack of
evidence and distortions of the various ‘victim’ stories, which a little
investigation would show cannot be true. Surely just one newspaper or TV
channel would have some interest, it might mean backtracking on their previous
stories but I think they would get some kudos for presenting a more balanced
report.
- August 17, 2013 at 17:45
-
MWT tweets that the porn viewing was done under strict legal control on BBC
computers! That doesn’t sound right to naïve me. I imagined that there would
be a police office(s) where specially trained police officers work,
specifically to trawl for sex offenders on the net so, why not go there in the
interests of research? I know very little about technology, but wouldn’t it be
foolish to use the BBC computer systems to make such an application? How easy
would it be for others to access?
-
August 17, 2013 at 17:53
-
I would appreciate if someone would ask this pompous wind-bag what he
means by “strict legal control” on BBC computers. Was there a police officer
in the room? Does he have a letter from the BBC legal department, giving him
permission to use their corporate computer system to conduct private
research, and under what statute is that permitted? Here in the States, what
MWT was doing was entrapment at best, and though we have had a show where a
responsible investigative reporter did use decoys – real young girls, not
men posing as young girls – to arrange meetings with pedos, the police were
there, and arrested the perps when they attempted to flee the premises. What
MWT was doing is very different, and I don’t know that it was legal at all,
let alone he involved Facebook in his public claims.
- August 17, 2013 at 19:21
-
Have a gander at the profile of Mark’s ‘biggest fan’ – I’ll leave ‘yew’
to draw your own conclusions…
https://twitter.com/mwalkerdine
-
August 17, 2013 at 17:35
-
I wish everyone the best on the walk around the lake – and hope the media
pays attention as well. They’re oh-so-busy hearing from one side of this story
only, time they listened to the other side for a change.
- August 17, 2013 at 16:22
-
@Chris – that exchange tween him and Jezzajwilliams made me laugh – I
wonder who he is referring to here
Mark Williams-Thomas @mwilliamsthomas 1h
@jezzajwilliams a small number of sad people who themselves believe Savile
never offended.
Yep, Mr T that would be us but let’s get one or two things straight shall
we ?
1. Our number may indeed be ‘small’ but we a certainly not ‘sad’ but
then we do not spend our lives hounding innocent old men
2. Unlike you
‘we,’ do not profess to know what anyone else did or did not do. You are no
longer a police man. you DID not run a ‘police operation’, you made a
television show, get over yourself !
-
August 17, 2013 at 18:38
-
“… a small number of sad people who themselves believe Savile never
offended.”
My position would be more that all of the allegations of Savile’s sexual
offending that are in the public domain are of dubious value. Out of the
hundreds of allegations that have been collected, I would like to know the
details of the affidavits of those who are considered MOST credible and
least impeachable on grounds of poor character, criminal history, etc. That
would give everybody a much better idea of what Savile was really up to, if
there was something.
I don’t even know if you can take stuff from Savile’s autobiographies as
true confession. Remember the case of Arnold Schwarzenegger who once claimed
in a interview that he and fellow body builders gang-banged a woman who
presented herself naked in a Gold’s Gym, but later withdrew the claim
altogether when challenged over the details of the account, locations, etc.,
and said that it was just an untrue boast designed to deflect any sentiment
that body builders had homoerotic tendencies.
- August 20, 2013 at 23:29
-
I myself am in the “skeptical” camp. We don’t know what happened. I
think it likely that Savile, like many slebs of the time, had sex with
fans, some under age. It is entirely possible that he may have committed
rape, especially in those days when definitions and boundaries were
different. I think it entirely plausible that just about any celeb you
care to mention might have committed what would now be called “sexual
assault” if that covers touching legs, bottoms, etc.
Part of the problem here is something what I’ve wrote at length in
various places on the internet largely to a rather negative response,
regarding “local culture”. That is, moral rules vary from place to place.
My sister and I both started careers in theatre at the end of the 1970s,
at our local rep. She was on a government “MSC” programme, then an ASM,
and I started doing followspot at the tender age of 14. And the world in
there was different to the world outside and, for a teenage lad, a
revelation. Openly gay people, for a start. But also, very touchy-feely in
that theatrical manner. What would sound like “groping” or “sexual
assault” in the austere environment of a (particularly modern times)
courtroom was just part of the normal interaction. People were touching
each other all the time. For my sister, said mutual touchy feely with a
much older man (she was 19, he was 56, a Shakespearian trained actor who
was a lovely guy) developed into a proper love affair which she still
looks back on with much affection. It was a liberal, bawdy environment
utterly, delightfully, different to the dreary outside world where I was
still going to school.
And, for instance, in particular, by the time I was 16 or so there was
a theatre manager who very much fancied me, and everyone knew, and it was
a bit of a running joke. He sometimes used to give me a lift home and,
even though not gay myself, was content to let him kiss me goodnight. I
mean, not tongues and all that, just a little thing that presumably made
him feel better and was no cost to me, if you see what I mean.
Suppose I dragged all that up now? Suppose I had some
psychological problems and a therapist got me to inflate those
insignficant incidents into something terrible, trauma, abuse, I never
recovered where’s my compensation? How would he defend himself? Only he
and I know what did (and didn’t) happen in that car between the theatre
and me arriving home. Which was nothing really, but in the current
climate, boy could I make it into something!
So to me, and to my sister as well, we’ve discussed this hysteria a
lot, it sounds just like a lot of conflating of this kind of thing,
described in shocked tones to a public who don’t really understand all
that because they weren’t there, in an age when Victorianism had
gone into remission and the age of consent laws were seen as irrelevant as
the sodomy laws. Everyone then thought the world was going to get
more liberal, and nobody foresaw the furious reaction that blazed
out of the USA via SRA, the Therapy Movement, etc.
So me, I don’t think Savile et al didn’t do anything. I just am highly
suspicious that they did anything abnormal for the time and place.
- August 21, 2013 at 01:22
-
This is exactly what I think, Ian. There was great kudos to being the
friend of a celebrity, and the girls at Duncroft were very thrilled to
have Jimmy Savile visit them. James Robertson Justice and John Gregson
would hardly have been of any interest for them – before their time,
really – and so Jimmy, who was a pretty big deal in the from the early
70s on, a pop icon to boot, who was a gatekeeper to who knows how many
rock stars, would have been extremely welcome. Also, as someone noted
elsewhere, Jimmy had plenty of women throwing themselves at him, and he
was not about to risk everything if the girl was absolutely known to be
underage. That I just have a problem with.
One of the staff at Duncroft has also said that the girls went on
about ‘dirty old men’ all the time, so either this was case of crying
wolf, or there was never a wolf to cry about until Mark and Meirion came
to town. Someone did complain to the Surrey police in 2007 (don’t know
when Karin self-published her first version via Fanstory), but after
Jimmy was interviewed, under caution mind you, so not some casual ‘stop
by when you have a moment, sir,’ Jimmy did not bring a lawyer to the
interview, just a friend, because that’s how confident he was that there
was nothing there but smoke and mirrors and the police backed that up.
Whoever it was declined to press charges, probably because they knew
darn well that Jimmy had the goods on them, and that was the end of it.
This was an attempt to extort money, plain and simple.
Once you start to tug away at the foundations of this perfect storm,
i.e. Karin Ward’s book, Meirion Jones’ feud with his aunt Margaret, Mark
Williams-Thomas ambition, the smoke begins to clear a bit. If you remove
the Duncroft accusations from the picture entirely, you got absolutely
nothing at all.
I live in America, and I don’t think you can blame the moral climate
here for this goody-goody, finger-pointing, witch-hunting crap that is
Operation Yewtree. In a way, I’m sorry I don’t still live in the UK,
because I would LOVE to talk to some of these police investigators.
- August 21, 2013 at 08:30
-
@ We don’t know what happened. I think it likely that Savile, like
many slebs of the time, had sex with fans, some under age. It is
entirely possible that he may have committed rape, especially in those
days when definitions and boundaries were different. @
The more I listen to *him*, the less I believe that he did any of
those things. He wasn’t really a celeb “of the time”, he was 40 in 1966
– a very different generation. He was actually quite prudish in some
ways. He once headed a minor campaign against “streaking” for instance.
I’m absolutely convinced he would never “take anyone by force”. He had a
deep belief that whilst his sex-life might be judged immoral by the
standards of the day (he refused to marry anyone) his central tenet of
his own moral compass was that he must never cause “distress” to a
woman. Check his own words out from 1978 here:
In 1978 Jimmy Savile wrote a small book about his own personal
philosophies. It was published as part of a small publishing effort
called, Mowbrays Popular Christian Paperbacks. I wouldn’t want any
confusion to creep in, in terms of context, so here is the whole
chapter: “How Do I Cope With Sex”
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/sex-and-single-man.html
- August 21, 2013 at 09:32
-
That’s amazing Moor and redolent in style of Pope John Paul’s early
writings about sex – though he was somewhat surprisingly- and
disarmingly- explicit! What’s interesting is the sense of inner
dialogue and reflection and of catholicism as it used to be taught –
the church of ‘high ideals and low expectations’ – human fallibility,
forgiveness and accountability to conscience.
-
August 21, 2013 at 13:18
-
-
August 21, 2013 at 07:24
-
Jonathan Mason,
Re: “My position would be more that all of the allegations of Savile’s
sexual offending that are in the public domain are of dubious value”
Exactly.
It’s for him to ‘prove’ or at least adequately show evidence that Jimmy
Savile ‘offended’, not for us to just automatically believe that he did
because he said so even though there are huge gaping holes in these
‘accounts’.
He’s the one that is being silly here – it seems crazy that so many
people have been taken in by his obviously dubious claims…
- August 17, 2013 at 15:39
-
Interesting over on Twatter – Lord Tosspot has come back on there to round
on Jeremy Williams for suggesting he’s a paedophile, but has not posted
anything else. Which is interesting behaviour for His Lordship….
- August 17, 2013 at 17:22
-
Lord tosspot has been quiet since his programme was scrapped. Knowing TV
as I do, I’d be surprised if the ‘postponed’ programme ever sees the light
of day.
- August 17, 2013 at 14:26
-
Here’s details of a good premier inn with rooms available for the 28th and
29th October at just £39 – very nice a few mins from the Headrow – main street
in Leeds City Centre and the foods great
http://www.premierinn.com/en/hotel/LEEHEP/leeds-city-centre-leeds-arena
- August 17, 2013 at 13:25
-
One of the best photos of JS I have seen so far. Thanks rabbitaway…… your
critique of ‘ SAVILE THE BEAST’ will save me sullying my Kindle with the
contents.
- August 17, 2013 at 13:24
-
@Edward – save your fantasies for whatever e book you are contemplating. I
do not believe a word you say – proof please !
- August 17, 2013 at 13:15
-
His mother knew her lad was a wrong un, in her latter years she was a very
sad, disconsolate and desperately lonely old lady, she received very few
visitors and Savile vetted those that did manage to visit, he kept her
ensconced in her luxury flat, out of harms way, closeted, cosetted in
Scarborough.
From his early days, “the Duchess” knowing he’d never be changed and she
urged him to atone for his ways, the flagellant tawse exchanged for marathon
charity efforts and which provided penance but Savile realised early on – it
was fantastic PR – as fate sometimes [unfortunately] does, it favours the
crass and the malignant, literally he’d fallen on his feet. Perfect for him
but with terrible consequences for his numerous victims, he could have been
stopped very early on but the opportunity was missed, other chances to
prosecute were also spurned and ignored, closed down and after the early
mistakes – it was too late, Savile had an in to police ‘chatter’ and had
updated his heinous modus operandi.
- August 17, 2013 at 13:33
-
WHAT the hell are you talking about Edward???????? You know nothing,
lonely oold lady!!!?????!!!!!! OMG, she was anything but – unless you can
talk with any real knowledge, don’t talk at all……………. you have spoilt
something really lovely here – though I guess it was bound to happen sooner
or later.
The Duchesss lived a life, literally up until the day she died, that few
could dream of. A massive loving family and many, many luxurious holidays –
what poppy cock we have to continually read from people who know
NOTHING.
Grrrrrrrrrrrr…….. nay double Grrrrrrrrrrrrr
- August 17, 2013 at
13:40
-
Not worth grinding your teeth over – he’s one of the uninformed
Zombies.
- August 17, 2013 at 13:43
-
Calm smiley face xxxx
- August 17, 2013 at 17:17
-
How do you know? You can’t possibly know any of what you have stated.
You’re just guessing. Where is you’re proof? How can you substantiate what
you have said. Bring us the proof. And also why are you trying to emulate
Byron? What’s a ‘flagellant tawse? Standard English please! ‘heinous modus
operandi? You’ve been watching too much Perry Mason, you have haven’t you?
Ha you’re soooo funny dear.
- August 17, 2013 at 18:34
-
Uhm sorry Charlotte but “flagellant” and “tawse” are both ‘Standard
English’ (whatever that might be), at least for Radio4 listeners and those
of us who frequent certain *cough* exclusive *cough* clubs….
- August 17, 2013 at 12:27
-
I’ll be there Rabbitaway on the 29th – just like I was 2 years ago. We need
a time and place and I will make sure I bring a few with me.
I have to, though I don’t need to, defend the rubbish in this book about
his relationship with his Mum. He loved her, as did the six other siblings as
did her 30 or so grandchildren, she loved him as he was her youngest, he
nearly died as a baby and was saved with her prayers by her at St Anne’s
Cathedral to Margaret Sinclair (who will hopefully be sainted). She was also
very proud of him, of course!
Thank you Rabbitaway, its tough and scary at the moment, and you guys are
keeping us going. See you on the 29th!
Ellen xxx
- August 17, 2013 at 12:49
-
It’s the day before my life begins – so they say…
- August 17, 2013 at 12:51
-
We can celebrate, I’ll bring a cake Chris.
E xxx
-
August 17, 2013 at 13:02
-
We can ‘have a run then go for a bun’ – Ha – skipping the run that is
….. a nice cuppa in the caff overlooking the lake – we’ll make the
arrangements shortly see y’all there
-
August 17, 2013 at 13:05
-
PS Ellen I lit a candle for Jimmy and you and all his friends and fam’
that includes all of us on here and Moor’s, at St Anne’s – will send photo
via Anna – later
- August 17, 2013 at 13:36
-
Thank you, I lit one in Rome as for us all too a few weeks ago! Looking
forward to seeing the photo. A bun and a run…….ha! So funny.
Hope Edward dosn’t turn up!
E xxx
- August 17, 2013 at
13:42
-
“Hope Edward doesn’t turn up!”
On the contrary, I hope he does – the prospect would surely spur me
on to make sure I got there too. I’d love to look one of these anonymous
self satisfied hypocrites in the eye and demand their proof.
-
August 17, 2013 at 13:50
-
I’ll hold your coat!
E xxxx
- August 21, 2013 at 07:15
-
Ellen,
Keep your chin up, it’ll be alright in the end hopefully…
- August 21, 2013 at 20:51
-
- August 17, 2013 at 11:10
-
a fascinating piece by rabbitaway and Lo & Behold as I progressed
through the paragraphs I was not disappointed : for sure enough I knew the
publisher must be ‘John Blake Publishing’ or as Private Eye refers to him “the
distinguished London publisher”.
Blake was the originator of the “rock’n’roll’ gossip column with Ad Lib on
the Sun and many a cheque was sent my way as I invented tale after tale of
“celebrities”..all harmless..I got from 2 to 3 a week. They were the days
!
He went on to edit the organ of repute The Sunday People and was hired by
the great Robert Maxwell to set up a similar style New York tabloid but that
was interrupted by Maxwell’s date with the ocean.
Blakey sells these books by the kilo to supermarkets ( boxes of mixed
titles) and if rabbitaway actually purchased a Kindle copy I think there would
have been major celebrations in the JPB heavily fortified East London office,
with that one sale having set a precedent. Those offices are heavily fortified
mainly to keep out disgruntled JBP authors who have great difficulty
establishing what their royalties may be once they discover their tome was
certainly published by Blakey but by which of his myriad companies is the real
mystery.
McShane does well as he is able to belt out these- as rabbitaway
has correctly concluded,- press clipping titles for a 2000 pound advance (as
previously mentioned-royalties are usually non-existent) and can do one in
under 4 weeks. It’s safe to say a John Blake Publication will never be up for
a Booker Prize.
-
August 17, 2013 at 11:46
-
Thank you for that information ‘Oscar’, very helpful
- August 17, 2013 at 10:34
-
Good to see you highlight the personal link between Lesley Gardiner –
variously producer and director of Exposure for ITV – and her husband Alex
Gardiner, the senior ITV executive who paid for the programmes.
-
August 17, 2013 at 10:46
-
@Geoff – a ‘set up’ of the highest order. No one with any sense at the
BBC would touch the story so the ‘source’ peddled his wares to his chums at
the other side. Reading the Pollard report made me realise how insignificant
Mark W Thomas was in the Newsnight attempt, he could not even get Surrey
Police to talk to him about the 2008 investigation. Just imagine the
conversations between him, Meirion Jones and Mr and Mrs Gardiner about how
this sordid story could be presented to best effect, with an ex police man
to front.
- August 17, 2013 at 11:07
-
Surrey Police on MWT (Jeremy Williams’ has been on their
case)
Jeremy Williams @jezzajwilliams 15 Aug
@SurreyPolice Why is
Mark Williams-Thomas allowed to view child porn when he left the police
force over 10 years ago, isn’t it illiegal?
Surrey Police
@SurreyPolice 15 Aug
@jezzajwilliams Not an easy question to answer on
twitter! If you’re concerned with the legalities of his work ask Met
Police re Op Yewtree.
- August 17, 2013 at 11:15
-
MWT’s latest TV ‘expose’ seems to have hit a legal problem which
somewhat dents his oft claims that he approaches his explosive TV shows
like a “police investigation”. But then given how so many hapless folk
have ended up in jail on such police investigations only to be
eventually freed by the courts, perhaps for MWT real evidence and facts
are just an inconvenience.
- August 17,
2013 at 10:29
-
Excellent piece!
- August 17, 2013 at 10:03
-
I am sure there is a really excellent book destined for publication that
would make a lot ‘moor’ sense.
We can at least document the fall of
civilisation in between banging our heads against walls…
-
August 17, 2013 at 10:02
-
Does the book have value as a summary of the ‘official case’ against Jimmy
Savile? Given the number of people who supposedly must have known Savile was
abusing children – nurses, BBC employees, charity workers etc. – the
‘official’ story amounts to a wild conspiracy theory. That is an alarming
thought.
- August 17, 2013 at 10:17
- August 17, 2013 at 10:00
-
You are of course preaching to the long-converted in my case, but nice
piece. I recall one of the things that most shocked me last October when I
first became aware of the book by Karin that was openly available on the
internet, even whilst the police and legal whatnots were chuntering about
investigations and “sub-judice”.
That thing was nothing to do with Savile. I read Karin’s “reviews” on
Amazon etc. and gathered the book contained graphic scenes of child abuse.
Then I read a short “review”, which basically said, “That was so good Karin,
“I can’t wait to read the next one.”.
This is Entertainment for the 21st Century and nothing to do with Truth or
Justice or any of that old-fashioned 20th Century *serious* schtick. It is the
Zombie Society writ large. They do say the only way to stop a zombie is a
bullet in the brain, but what if there is no brain?
- August 20, 2013 at 23:00
-
This was one of the red flags for me. When the story broke, I did a
search for Karin Ward, as you do, having an internet and all that, and
immediately found the fact that she was an “abuse story author” via Amazon,
while the press were reporting her as “bravely come forward, waived
anonymity…” and the two things clearly didn’t fit together.
What amazes me in this age of the internet is how few other
people, including journalists it seems, don’t bother to do such rudimentary
investigation which is now so easy and takes only seconds. I can’t really
fathom it.
- August 20, 2013 at 23:08
-
The other thing being that Ward’s books describe a lifetime of abuse in
a Dworkinesque manner. According to her, she was cruelly abused by her
mother, her father raped her and handed her around his friends as a child
for rape, and so on. Which if it were true, the idea that it would be of
any consequence that Freddie Starr made a joke about her tits in a
dressing room seem ludicrous.
Talking of which, has the supposed girl who was supposedly being raped
by Gary Glitter at the same time in the Savile dressing room ever been
identified/discovered/whatever?
-
August 21, 2013 at 07:11
-
Ian B,
Re: “Talking of which, has the supposed girl who was supposedly being
raped by Gary Glitter at the same time in the Savile dressing room ever
been identified/discovered/whatever?”
The big elephant in the room, lol
I’ve lost patience with that woman’s stories entirely now and can’t
believe a word of them…
{ 92 comments }