Super Star – Freddie Starr.
Freddie said he wasn’t going to be messed around like this any longer – and now that the police have arrested him, but still not charged him, for the fourth time in 18 months without giving any indications of their intentions whether to charge him or not – he has decided to take the fight to them.
Today they put an allegation to him that they had previously decided not to question him about. It is not a new allegation.
When he answered his bail in January, his solicitor wrote to the Police and Crown Prosecution Service to express concern for the amount of time that the investigation was taking and to put them on notice that the decision to keep Freddie on bail for this amount of time without charge was potentially unlawful.
Both the Police and the CPS responded by saying that a decision whether to charge or release would be forthcoming by 12 February 2014, at the latest.
Today is February 12th 2014. They have neither charged nor released him.
Freddie is now filing an application in the High Court for Judicial Review in relation to the conduct of the police and CPS.
This should get very interesting.
Scousers do it standing up – they definitely don’t take it lying down. Freddie Starr has Liverpool grit stamped all the way through him.
- Ellen Coulson
February 12, 2014 at 4:59 pm -
Good on you Freddie. Now what’s happening with Karin Ward?
- rabbitaway
February 12, 2014 at 4:59 pm -
Is it a ‘new’ allegation if they have not put it to him before ? How do you know that the Police decided not to put it to him before ?
- rabbitaway
February 12, 2014 at 5:00 pm -
Oh yes, of course, good on ya Fred !
- Moor Larkin
February 12, 2014 at 5:23 pm -
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/its-not-as-if-im-hitler-or-osama-bin.html
The title of the blogpost eventually became: “I’m just a bloke from Liverpool”
- sally stevens
February 12, 2014 at 5:32 pm -
Go get ’em, Freddie! Bloody hell, what are the plods thinking here??
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 12, 2014 at 5:41 pm -
It’s pure cat and mouse, isn’t it? Or maybe that should be Schroedinger’s cat: until they open up the box and show us what they’ve got, Freddie is neither off the hook nor on it.
Good for him. We need some habeas corpus on their ass, otherwise known as Put up or Shut up.
- Richard Williams
February 12, 2014 at 5:44 pm -
How much longer is Plod going to keep this one going? It’s a witch hunt and should be stopped.
- steve
February 12, 2014 at 6:07 pm -
People are starting to realise what utter drivel this police witch hunt is.
- Chris
February 12, 2014 at 6:18 pm -
Good on Freddie – they’re probably hoping they will kill him, but he and his imaginary Clunk-Click cohert are so integral to the whole Savile Circus that they are in a worst position than most caught up in this witch hunt. “Gary Glitter” won’t be making any noise due to his position as Public Enemy #1 being set in stone – though it is noticeable he hasn’t been ‘rearrested’ nor has he been subject to any further allegations.
- Moor Larkin
February 12, 2014 at 8:32 pm -
It’s almost like “Gary” has been abducted by aliens innit.
I have no doubt that the ACPO/NSPCC sponsored programme, “Exposure – the other side of Jimmy Savile” had full cognizance that the “Glitter” and “Starr” accusations were balderdash because they made sure that neither was subject to a Jacque Hughes accusation in that show, although the show did ensure Jimmy Savile was condemned for the heinous crime of having been taped saying “Gary had only looked at some pictures”
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/exposition-conclusion.htmlTheir absence from that show, which had been painstakingly cobbled together over a year, and then pre-released through the entire UK mass media in a co-ordinated news strike, timed to to take place just after several more hundreds of thousands of pounds had been accumulated by the auction of Savile’s last goods & chattels (to ensure the Savile Trust coffers were full to the brim)….. makes their stunt-arresting shortly after the whole farrago hit the streets, ever more illustrative of the legal finagling that has gone on, right from the beginning – and deliberately so.
That all the Duncroft assaults were said to have occurred in buildings that were not even in use by Jimmy Savile in the years alleged, just makes a mockery of any semblance of “investigation”. If it were not for the collective Mass Media Omerta, which includes the BBC even, then this whole nasty episode could have been popped like a septic boil long ago. Instead, it now looks as though whole legs and arms are gonna have to come off as poison has flooded the body politic.
- Moor Larkin
February 12, 2014 at 8:36 pm -
I meant “Exposure” assaults…. not “Duncroft” assaults in that last paragraph, but it’s probably all much of a muchness. Same people, different imaginary times and places.
- Moor Larkin
- Moor Larkin
- WorldViews
February 12, 2014 at 6:25 pm -
” Freddie Starr Ate Their Scamsters! “
- Leg-iron
February 13, 2014 at 3:05 am -
There should be a ‘like ‘ button for those comments I wish I’d thought of first.
- Anne3362
May 6, 2014 at 11:44 am -
I agree – there should be a ‘like’ button for all these great comments.
- Anne3362
- Leg-iron
- ivan
February 12, 2014 at 6:47 pm -
Oh dear, that will set the cat among the pigeons and no mistake. It might derail the whole band wagon then what will the MSM do especially the Mail?
- The Blocked Dwarf
February 12, 2014 at 6:53 pm -
“Freddie Starr has Liverpool grit stamped all the way through him”
Liverpool Grit being a breed of small pet rodent?
Seriously though the creaking and squeaking of tables turning is providing the perfect backdrop to the skies darkening with poultry wings….
- Frankie
February 12, 2014 at 7:39 pm -
Its all happening.
Jury out in ‘Hairy Cornflake’ case.
‘Cock’ Roache acquitted… for now.
Rolf awaiting trial…
Jim Davidson – NFA… for now.
Did Freddie really eat that hamster? Perhaps the authorities would be on safer ground prosecuting him for animal cruelty.
- Mudplugger
February 12, 2014 at 8:47 pm -
Don’t tempt them on the last one – with the RSPCA’s record of dodgy prosecutions, they’ll happily blow a million quid of dear-old-ladies’ soft-hearted donations on pursuing the hamster-lunch myth though the courts.
- JuliaM
February 13, 2014 at 5:47 am -
On the subject of the RSPCA, interesting that they should have been mentioned in the killer pit bull case as having done nothing about reports the beast was out of control…
- JuliaM
- SamBest
February 13, 2014 at 3:10 am -
No. And he’s too small to eat a whole hamster.
It was a tale perpetuated by his ace PR at the time, a man named Max who now faces his own ordeal.
- Carol42
February 13, 2014 at 3:14 am -
Very much doubt if Max will face trial, I am sure he knows where all the bodies are buried! I suspect they only picked him to get access to his computers but I would be surprised if he was not one jump ahead of them.
- Carol42
- Mudplugger
- Carol42
February 12, 2014 at 8:14 pm -
Good luck to him it’s high time this witch hunt was brought to an end, even the most gullible re Savile, are starting to question the whole sorry saga.
- GildasTheMonk
February 12, 2014 at 9:16 pm -
Exactly so, well said
- GildasTheMonk
- sally stevens
February 12, 2014 at 10:43 pm -
The last time someone cocked a snoot at habeas corpus, his Majesty’s head was removed. I guess other heads may roll now. Can only hope so.
- SamBest
February 13, 2014 at 3:11 am -
I do wish there was a ‘like’ button for comments !
- SamBest
- Carol42
February 12, 2014 at 11:24 pm -
How long has the DLT jury been out now?
- Mudplugger
February 13, 2014 at 8:21 am -
Do you mean they’re all gay ?
- Mudplugger
- sally stevens
February 13, 2014 at 12:18 am -
Thursday will be day three.
- SamBest
February 13, 2014 at 3:12 am -
that sounds ominous.
- Carol42
February 13, 2014 at 3:17 am -
Yes it does, I really hope they don’t find him guilty.
- sally stevens
February 13, 2014 at 3:25 am -
Their verdict has to carry extreme weight, and I’m sure they’re aware of it.
- Ian B
February 13, 2014 at 7:00 am -
I must admit, I am expecting a conviction more than an acquittal for DLT. The allegations are trivial (we’re down to groping from “paedo ring”) but plausible. Roache’s allegators clearly had major holes in their testimony- the non-existent roller, the “I think it might have happened”, the fan letter- whereas it seems with DLT it’s all down to whether you believe a bloke groped a few women, which everyone knows has gone on. So, I’m not optimistic about this one. I hope I’m wrong.
- Duncan Disorderly
February 13, 2014 at 8:09 am -
A guilty verdict will PROVE the BBC was a haven of nonces and sex maniacs. DLT will no doubt be linked to all manner of crazed sex parties he attended with Savile.
- Ian B
- sally stevens
- Carol42
- Ellen Coulson
February 13, 2014 at 11:02 am -
N0 Sally. You been chatting to MWT? Thursday, today, is fourth day
- Ellen Coulson
February 13, 2014 at 2:55 pm -
Congratulations to DLT – not guilty on 12 charges
- Ellen Coulson
- SamBest
- GildasTheMonk
February 13, 2014 at 9:59 am -
I think we need to leave the DLT chat alone – best course for now, peeps. But thanks for the update.
- Radical Rodent
February 13, 2014 at 11:19 am -
Another guilty-’til-proven-innocent “c’leb” without any demonstrable left-wing inclinations. Odd that.
- The Blocked Dwarf
February 13, 2014 at 12:30 pm -
Re DLT, it really doesn’t look good if the Judge will now accept a majority verdict
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/13/dave-lee-travis-jury-fourth-day-deliberations - Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 12:53 pm -
Well there are some differences between this one and the Roache case. AFAIK, the prosecution witnesses gave testimony about a pattern of behaviour which the jury will have to decide amounts to indecent assault/harrassment or just pratting about in an annoying manner. The allegations in the Roache case were much more serious and at the same time much more easily attacked: basically, there were so many holes in the testimony that the jury probably decided it was all a crock. We haven’t seen the argument that this just didn’t happen in the DLT case – we’re looking at what legal interpretation the facts will sustain.
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2014 at 2:03 pm -
I probably should have been paying moor attention but didn’t Ken Barlow’s trial involve under-age allegations?
Surely there is no real relationship between his case and the DLT one – other than the prurience of the police and media lumping him into their vindictive via Yewtree.con
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 2:10 pm -
Exactly. We’re not really comparing like with like here. I can see how a jury in the DLT case might be split on what the allegations against him, assuming they accept that they are true, might amount to legally. They will have been directed by the judge that if they find such-and-such as a matter of fact, then it will/won’t constitute X, Y, or Z, and this is what the sticking-point for them may be.
With Roache, we were looking at accusations of what the Americans would call statootory rape, and there was a really big question, given the inconsistency of the testimony, whether the alleged acts took place at all. Finding as to fact.
- Eyes Wide Shut
- Moor Larkin
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2014 at 1:54 pm -
If he has a civil case in the pipeline, does it get deferred until any potentially related allegations of criminal behaviour are concluded?
If it is, the possibility exists that it’s in the prosecuting authorities’ interests to keep the criminal issues running. If a civil case were to end up trashing the initial allegations and those who made them, and consequently called into doubt the root cause of both their whole enterprise and a large part of the resultant celebrity pin pricking that resulted, then potentially a lot of their other criminal cases might fall, as juries might conclude, reasonably or unreasonably, that the making of all these serious allegations, after allowing 20/30/40 years to elapse without doing anything about them, is all just a load of old cack.
Their trying to keep a falling star aloft might just be a means of helping keep them from a long, dark, night
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 2:19 pm -
Interesting : a reverse OJ Simpson – he was found Not Guilty in the criminal trial but liable in the civil action.
Burden of proof is different. “Beyond all reasonable doubt” in criminal law; “balance of probabilities” in civil action i.e. it is more likely than not that the defendant is or is not responsible. It would be very odd if a defendant found guilty in a criminal case was found not liable in a civil action based on the same facts.
- Eyes Wide Shut
- Duncan Disorderly
February 13, 2014 at 2:22 pm -
DLT Not guilty.
- Carol42
February 13, 2014 at 2:23 pm -
Not guilty on 12 charges, 2 others could not reach verdict crown wants 7 days to consider retrial but generally great news!
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2014 at 2:25 pm -
Noticed that of the “unable to reach verdict”, one was a pantomime and one was a journalist. No coincidence methinks.
- Carol42
February 13, 2014 at 2:34 pm -
I wonder who the well known female journalist is who, if it was true, couldn’t handle a grope, most female journalists are well able to take care of themselves. If someone tries to bring a civil case do they lost their anonymity ?
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 3:01 pm -
Yep, they do.
In the States, I doubt the “well’known” journo would have got past the first round of jury-challenging.
“You work in the media yourself?” “NEXT”
‘Cos in the States, a jury member can speak openly about the grounds on which they reached their decision. They’re sworn to secrecy in the UK. The smell of a book-deal would hang all round a journo on an American Jury, and the lawyers would say “We don’t want any John Grisham wannabes prejudicing the outcome of the trial for the sake of a more saleable product”.
- Eyes Wide Shut
- Lucozade
February 13, 2014 at 2:57 pm -
Moor Larkin,
Re: “Noticed that of the “unable to reach verdict”, one was a pantomime and one was a journalist. No coincidence methinks”
The journalist one is suspicious under the circumstances and they should be careful – one day it might get to the point that something really terrible really does happen to a journalist, which they can’t prove, and nobody believes them….
- Carol42
- Ian B
February 13, 2014 at 2:38 pm -
Bit of a curate’s egg then.
- Moor Larkin
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 2:37 pm -
Another victory for commonsense.
Pratting about in a deeply annoying fashion is not a crime. If it were,I”d have been banged up long ago, albeit my version of pratting about is somewhat more refeened than DLT’s.
A journo was the holdout eh? Surprise, surprise.
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2014 at 2:44 pm -
As opposed to a victory for Common Purpose perhaps………..
- Moor Larkin
- Lucozade
February 13, 2014 at 2:47 pm -
You’d think after 18 months worth of trawling if they haven’t found anything (other than obviously dubious accusations from a known bs merchant, KW) then in all likelihood there is probably nothing of note to find – and even if someone somewhere did have something of note happen to them at the hands of Freddie Starr (hypothetically), after 18 months since his first arrest and the publicity around it, would they not have made their complaint by now off their own back if they wanted to (their are at liberty to do this at anytime they want?. The fact no one has says, either those that may have been ‘groped’ by him at some point don’t want to complain about it (it’s their choice isn’t it? – again hypothetically) or there is simply no one around who has been ‘groped’ by him, or he hasn’t ‘groped’ anyone. The fact that with Freddie Starr ‘new’ accusations only ever seem to crop up every time it starts to look as if the ‘investigation’ into him is going to have to be dropped is utterly ridiculous and transparent. I really don’t see how they can justify this treatment of a man in his 70’s with health problems – if anything happens to him it should be him or his family that should be due ‘compensation’….
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2014 at 2:54 pm -
Perhaps Freddie should consider asking for help from Liberty or Amnesty International. Back in the 1970’s those organisations were vaguely interested in liberating folks from tyrannical regimes, or perhaps I just dreamed the whole decade.
- Lucozade
February 13, 2014 at 3:02 pm -
Moor Larkin,
Re: “Perhaps Freddie should consider asking for help from Liberty or Amnesty International. Back in the 1970′s those organisations were vaguely interested in liberating folks from tyrannical regimes, or perhaps I just dreamed the whole decade”
We seem (as a society) to be trying to move backwards not forwards….
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 3:09 pm -
LOl, we were told these people we were worrying about weren’t worthy of our notice. Bad things only happen to bad people. As for “Liberty” that turned into another cosy job creation scheme for the otherwise unemployable middle classes.
“Amnesty” won’t get involved in its own backyard. I suppose we could ask Russian Amnesty to take a look at what’s going on over here.
- Eyes Wide Shut
- LambertGenie
February 17, 2014 at 9:39 pm -
Hah! Liberty, ex National Council For Civil Liberties, in association with the Paedophile Information Exchange, were all for removing the age of consent when Harriet Harperson, no less, was in charge. Best if Mr Starr stays well away from that lot.
- Lucozade
- Moor Larkin
- GildasTheMonk
February 13, 2014 at 3:10 pm -
So, not guilty on 12 charges and no conviction on the other two. It seems the CPS can ask for a retrial on those two, but as far as I am concerned that means I am free to comment. There must be extreme concern over the merits of these prosecutions. First because of their historic nature. That goes both to the veracity of recollection and the public’s view of the seriousness with which the alleged action was taken at the time. Second because they have no corroboration in terms of forensics. Third because the public is not so stupid as to ignore the fact that different mores applied in different times, and also recognise that “fame” is a heady attraction for some. Fourth because there is general cynicism about the fame game and the generally febrile atmosphere surrounding this awful phrase “Historic Sex Offence” – a phrase which if construed accurately would mean a sexual offence of dramatic historical significance – the rape of Boudicca’s daughter’s for example. Fifth because the public perceives the dramatic costs of this exercise when there are other matters which deserve public money. These prosecutions are highly suspect and of dubious value.
All in all, Operation Yewtree is in tatters.- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 3:31 pm -
The UK is the only country in Europe which has no statue of limitations on serious sexual offences: none at all. In 95% of cases where the alleged victim was a child at the time the offence is supposed to have occurred, a jury will convict. And this despite the fact there will be very, very little evidence, eg DNA etc. That’s precisely why most other countries impose a limitation period: the risks are too high that an innocent person will be convicted.
It’s interesting that you very rarely hear about historic crimes of violence. Why’s that?
This whole thing is so obviously open to abuse that no matter how badly we may feel for people who have been abused and never came forward for decades, we have to find other ways of dealing with the situation than the blunt instrument of the criminal law as it stands.
- GildasTheMonk
February 14, 2014 at 9:48 am -
I completely agree
- GildasTheMonk
- Eyes Wide Shut
- JimmyGiro
February 13, 2014 at 3:18 pm -
English law had evolved over centuries to become the pinnacle of Justice, regarded by many as the standard of fairness, when compared to all other legal systems. If this is true, then the present actions by the CPS has devolved that standing. Indeed, if what was good has been corrupted, then that action must be evil: the corruption of the good.
When bad people do bad things, we punish them via the law, for it is sufficient to stop their bad actions; for bad people only corrupt their own integrity. But when the law does bad things, because it has become corrupted, then the integrity of the ‘law’ is destroyed. Further, a corrupted law has the universal power to commit the full violence of the State against the guilty and the innocent; and no system has the incentive to contradict its own power, therefore the law will propagate its own perverted self defence in perpetuity.
Even bad people can be redeemed, as long as they have some integrity regarding ‘right and wrong’. But those who practice malfeasance, or slander, can never be trusted to know a hawk from a heron, or arse from quim; for truth is their bane.
I believe that the death penalty should be enacted for proven cases of malfeasance or slander, for these actions are more than just bad, they corrupt the good, as traitors betray their loved ones, and therefore these actions of pure evil must be cleansed with the same violence that the perpetrators bring to our world.
- Dai Brainbocs
February 13, 2014 at 3:32 pm -
Alarming statement by clearly livid police spokesman after the Travis verdict that they will support all people who are victims of sexual assault. I think he means “alleged” victims at the point the police deal with it. Shameless.
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2014 at 3:34 pm -
Brainless more like
- Dai Brainbocs
February 13, 2014 at 3:41 pm -
Not at all brainless from his standpoint, that view of the justice system clearly holds the whip-hand at the moment and maybe in perpetuity, or he wouldn’t feel free to say it so brazenly.
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2014 at 3:43 pm -
Inspector Dawkins Theory of the selfish gene huh?…….
- Moor Larkin
- Dai Brainbocs
- Duncan Disorderly
February 13, 2014 at 3:49 pm -
Would he say the same about someone who had their face punched in thirty years ago?
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 3:54 pm -
LOL, scroll up to see my earlier post, Duncan Disorderly. There’s no percentage in “historic crimes of violence”. Sex offences are where it’s at.
Especially when you realise how very, very easy it is to secure a conviction. Unless the tide is starting to turn …. ?
- Eyes Wide Shut
- JohnR
February 15, 2014 at 5:47 pm -
That is average police-speak after a failed trial: ¨we are not looking for any other people in connection with the case, we accept the verdict of the jury¨ (whose names are marked and will not appear in a jurors list again)
There is also the problem that, even if there is only a minor possibility of successfully prosecuting a famous person, even a not guilty verdict can easily, and in many cases does, destroy a persons life. So, job done by the back-door.
Still, the CPS is a vast improvement over the old system where the police beat the crap out of a suspect (sorry, the suspect fell down the steps) to get a ¨confession¨.
- Moor Larkin
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 3:38 pm -
Well, as a certain lady once remarked “He would, wouldn’t he?”
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 13, 2014 at 4:02 pm -
Just read:
The two charges over which Travis could face further action relate to the allegation that he indecently assaulted a theatre worker while appearing in a pantomime with the Chuckle Brothers, and the claim that he grabbed a journalist’s breasts as she was interviewing him at his home.Well that’s panto, folks. As for the journo – what a story she passed up! I tell you, Lynn Barber would have thought Christmas had come. There’s her whole interview right there
- Matt
February 13, 2014 at 7:49 pm -
Do you know—-this is really strange—all these cases against old rich famous wealthy white men have completely taken my mind off those muslim grooming gangs.
- mike lewis
February 14, 2014 at 11:32 pm -
I think it is scandalous the way these people have been treated. There should be a time limit to these “allegations ” There are a lot more people higher up the chain who should be investigated into abuse claims, but then of course they have the power to “Lose ” the evidence. Freddie Starr will not be charged. We all made mistakes when we were younger but A celebrity is fair game for some people. I know certain bands who were taken for a ride by many fans, and half the bands were high on substances and could not remember what happened. You can make up any story you like after all these years and probably find some one to believe it. These accusations should be addressed within a time limit. No one should have their careers, reputations, ability to provide for their families taken away from them by hearsay. The health of the “accused ” must be taken into consideration as well. They talk about these “celebrities ” using their “fame ” to prey on young “innocent” Women ! What the hell were they doing there in the first Place ?
- sally stevens
February 15, 2014 at 1:25 am -
Very good, mike. Yes, what the hell WERE they doing there in the first place? Rhetorical question! It takes two to tango. And now they snivel and want people to feel SORRY for them? I worked in the music industry for many years, saw more than enough of it, and the damned cheek of these little scrubbers – now superannuated groupies – is astounding.
- Tom
February 17, 2014 at 3:26 pm -
By the brilliant late Richard Webster. Worth reading, and worth exploring the rest of his site too.
http://www.richardwebster.net/howthepolicetrawltheinnocent.html
{ 76 comments… read them below or add one }