In this age of Internet trial, the dead are truly Damned. The slurping sound you can hear on the cyber waves is the sound of a thousand career conspiracy theorists licking their lips at the thought of the new culpa scandal they can brew.
Leon Brittan is dead. Long live the Leon Brittan scandal. He is about to join Jimmy Savile as the pantomime paedophile icon of our age.
Out in Twitterland, the message is that “Survivors feel angry and fear the truth may never come out” – really? Surely now they are free to broadcast their version of the “truth” that they have been too shy to tell us before?
And that is the version of the ‘truth’, the ‘untested in court truth’, the ‘undefended truth’, that they demand ‘#we believe’, that will go down in history as it is written by our fearless main stream media. The articles written by hacks in the thrall of the career conspiracists will be quoted and requoted, you will be urged to ‘retweet’ them, and eventually your children will read them and believe them to be ‘the truth’.
Those truths have no more force or veracity than me claiming David Cameron is really a Koala Bear called ‘Fair dinkum’.
Leon Brittan’s ‘alleged victim’ was interviewed by Police in America recently; he was given every opportunity to repeat the internet rumours and instigate an investigation – he declined to do so. His friends were interviewed, to see whether they could come up with corroborating evidence that would substantiate the rumours and instigate an investigation without his involvement – perchance he was still too scared to ‘see the truth come out’ – they were unable to do so.
That won’t silence the army of sycophants in Salford bedsits who believe they ‘know the truth’ – what does the alleged victim know anyway, what do his friends know? What are they compared to the army of politically inspired activists who have gained meaning to their life by fighting for ‘the truth to come out’ – their truth.
What I have to say next IS important, and I hope you will retweet it to those who can carry on this fight for truth and justice. Ms Raccoon can do it no longer, my life is ebbing away and just getting through the day is taking all my strength now – I don’t propose to waste any on the Internet.
Last week I had a lengthy chat with Claudia Glover. Claudia is one of the solicitors at Osborne Clarke who has been evaluating the claims against the Savile estate. We have spoken before; I put her in touch with those Duncroft girls that I have been in contact with who were actually present when Savile’s alleged offences were said to have occurred; she was helpful and friendly.
Those Duncroft girls are the only people in the world able to legitimately comment on the veracity of some of the claims that have been made in respect of Duncroft. If someone is claiming that ‘Savile dragged them into the sewing room next door to the dinning room’ they are in a position to say where the various rooms were and on which floor. Because of their importance to judging the claims, I made the decision that I would have no further contact with them – I didn’t want to risk them inadvertently telling me anything that I shouldn’t know. I hope, when they read this post, they will understand why I have kept my distance from them.
However, that hasn’t stopped me being aware of information leaking out of the surveillance process. Not, I reiterate, from the Duncroft girls – but there are other sources involved in the process. I had telephoned Claudia in respect of one particular claim, that I understood was, shall we say, in ‘some difficulties’ in respect of being accepted. What some of you might, in your non-legal way, refer to as ‘laughed out of court’.
What she had to tell me, stunned me. I couldn’t possibly comment. In fact, she told me, she understood that a letter was en route to me from Slater and Gordon, telling me just that. It hasn’t reached me yet.
It seems, that whilst the claimants against the Savile estate are free to waive their right to anonymity and fill the airwaves with lurid stories, the actual claims are covered by a blanket confidentiality clause in Justice Sales judgment that means they can never be identified.
‘But some of those claimants are now being investigated for fraud’, I said. ‘And they belong to people who have waived their right to anonymity by appearing on the TV sofas’. ‘Doesn’t matter’, she said. ‘You cannot identify the claims or their outcome. You will be in contempt of court if you do so’.
This is a ridiculous state of affairs.
A Producer called Ollie Lambert from Minnow Films is making a documentary for the BBC “interviewing victims of Jimmy Savile” – or claimants against the Savile estate, as those of us who are sticklers for the facts would describe them.
It means that those claimants can go on ‘waiving their right to anonymity’ for the rest of their lives, dinning out on stories of ‘how they were abused by Savile’ – and creep back under the legal security blanket when challenged. You will never, EVER, know the truth. You will never be able to judge which of them were speaking the truth, which of them were fraudulently ‘taking a chance’ by climbing on the ‘compo’ bandwagon, which of them were just sad misguided souls attributing some genuine abuse by a lesser known name to Savile in the hope that someone would give them solace.
They could all belong in any one of those three categories, and you will never know which – because I am not allowed to tell you, nor is anybody else.
The case ‘for the defence’ is sealed.
You will be told in due course that the ‘Savile estate has paid out 3 million in compensation’ – and that will be presented as ‘evidence’ that the claims were valid.
I doubt you will be told that it will be going to the solicitors, Slater and Gordon, for their fees now dwarf the estate that should have been going to charity, including those to help victims of abuse…and the solicitors fees take precedence. Any claims against the estate surplus to the funds available are underwritten by the BBC and the NHS.
If there are any genuine claims, it is you who will be paying them, not Savile. You, the single Mothers that the BBC takes to court for not paying your licence fee, and you, the payees into the National Insurance fund that pays for the A & E in hospitals that is so underfunded it is in crisis.
You will never know whether your money was wisely spent or not – because you are not allowed to know.
I hope one of the many barristers who reads this blog takes forward the fight from here; I can do it no longer.
This isn’t about ‘child abuse’ – it is about the nature of Justice with a capital J.