Necro-nonce© policing and Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe.
Every single working day of the past year; every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday – and come to that – most Saturdays for good measure, a senior and specially trained police officer of the gender requested by the ‘victim’, will enter a carefully selected suite of rooms, decorated in ‘calming’ hues, with comfortable seating, ambient temperature, and ensure that refreshments are available.
He, or she, will ‘adopt a posture of active listening‘; being careful not to interrupt the tale of cadaverous cavorting they are about to hear. Yes, every single working day our wonderful Police who are mandated to protect the public and ensure the safety of children, will have to go through the charade of applying the full rigours of section 93(4) of the Police Act 1997, (whilst bearing in mind every last nuance of the Ministry of Justice’s 2015 Code of Practice enhanced entitlements for adult victims)…..knowing that a disciplinary hearing awaits them if they forget so much as one requested toffee doughnut….
There will be two of them, naturally, one to listen attentively, one to write down every last enthralling word from the ‘victim’s lips’.
It must be a soul destroying job – no chance to ‘protect the public’, nor rescue a child from international sexual slavery. No chance to do anything apart from fill in a mountain of paperwork describing the ‘partnership organisations’ they have put the putative victim in touch with, the ‘special measures’ they have ordered on behalf of their ‘victim’, the letters dictated or handwritten informing the ‘victim’ of their rights, of the progress of their ‘incident’.
Knowing from the first few minutes, that there can be no progress, no job satisfaction in this ‘incident’ – for now, they are just a glorified group therapy session with free coffee.
Why? Because every single day of the week, and most Saturdays, last year, someone walked into a police station and reported a ‘serious sexual offence’ carried out by a perpetrator safely a’mouldering in his grave.
A corpse; a cadaver; a carcass; a stiff. All 298 of them.
Actually, it is worse than that, for we only have the figures for those of some ‘celebrity value’. The media only report those of clickbait value – the Ted Heath’s, the John Inman’s – we think they are bad enough, but those senior policeman have had to sit through another 296 of them, keeping the same neutral expression on their face, whilst noting the alleged perpetrator – an Elvis impersonator in Durham? – died all of 20 years ago.
No matter, the ‘victim’ has entitlements and they must be observed.
No wonder that virtually every force has scurried away to hire a fleet of flat-footed ex-policemen, cushioned by their pensions, on £21,747 per annum as ‘Civilian Investigators‘. It is they who will apply for the search warrant under Paragraph 16 of Schedule 4, part 2 of the Police Reform Act 2002 – to enter the corpse’s old home and seize the computer from his widow.
Who knows, there might be a picture of necro-nonce’s nephew falling off a surf board with an unknown 8 year old struggling out of his bathing suit in the back ground – all in a file marked ‘Dick’. In vain will the widow cry ‘But Dick was his nephew’s name’ – that will be for the CPS to decide! They will take the Teddy Bear from his daughter’s bed – perhaps it was used to lure other youngsters? – whilst pointing out that they will need to interview the daughter when she gets home from her job as a trustee of Age Concern….’Did Daddy ever say it will be our little secret’? – even though she stopped calling him Daddy 50 years ago….
There is no time limit to investigating the newly popular historic sexual offences; there is no requirement that the alleged perpetrator still be alive; in fact there is no requirement that the victim still be alive – for the full range of deferential requirements under the 2015 Code of Practice applies to anyone reporting a crime, even on behalf of someone else.
Perhaps you don’t think those 298 celebrity shroud wavers are enough to worry about – but consider this. They represented 10% of the 2,328 ‘celebrity sexual offenders‘. Overall, there were 99,609 sexual offences recorded in Britain over the same period.
Given the frequency with which we are told that no ‘victim’ would lie about a sexual offence in order to gain compensation from a celebrity offender or his estate, we should find a similar percentage of reports being painstakingly recorded by senior police officers amongst the ‘99,609’ should we not?
Perhaps its not the cost of the ambulance chasers we should be worrying about – but the cost to the public purse of Hogan-Howe’s Hearse Harriers.
The mind boggles! 9,000 cadavers being read their rights?
Hogan-Howe has had his tootsies held to a fierce flame this week, and as a result is planning to apologise to Lord Bramall, as he did to Lady Brittan. Do the partners of the other corpses not deserve an apology? The other families who have had to endure rabid vitriol from commentators immune from libel law? The grieving widows, mothers, sons, and daughters who have also had their lives turned upside down with narry a chance of contesting the truth of allegations by virtue of their loved one’s departure from this sainted isle of justice?
It is not the investigations of serious offences that is offensive – it is the manner in which it has been done that deserves apology.
The careless manner in which police stations have leaked information; the glee with which an underclass of professional sex trolls have dissected that information and been allowed to publicise their theories of ever more exotic crimes; and the curmudgeonly way in which some have finally been exonerated – ‘insufficient evidence’.
Given the case which emerged yesterday of Mark Pearson who had the misfortune to be sharing the same London railway station, along with several thousand others, with an anonymous allegator for a brief half second – and yet still the CPS thought that sufficient evidence to air her claim that he had ‘sexually penetrated her for two or three seconds’, you have to wonder what ‘insufficient evidence’ actually means?
Not every family affected will be able to muster the sort of support that Lord Bramall and Lady Brittan had access to – yet they have been just as abused by Hogan-Howe’s Hearse Harriers.
Wot abaht the others?
Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe was last seen on Thursday, praying with the Met’s personal chaplain, the Rev Jonathan Osborne, who has been heard to voice his ‘concerned’ opinion of the current state of the Met’s reputation.
Do you think he was praying for Inspiration? Deliverance? Or Forgiveness?
- jim
February 7, 2016 at 4:11 pm -
Lost for words. This is my country in 2016.
- Major Bonkers
February 7, 2016 at 7:42 pm -
You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet, Jim lad – get ye tae: https://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/
Some particularly lurid join-the-dots allegations coming out in an ongoing trial about political interference, police cover-ups, and missing evidence in child abuse cases.
- Major Bonkers
- Dave
February 7, 2016 at 4:20 pm -
Excellent post Anna. I notice that the MSM have picked up on this. One can only hope that there will be enough of an outcry that will bring about the end of this unbelievable waste of time and money.
- David
February 7, 2016 at 4:39 pm -
Dead, or alive, crimes should be investigated. Hitler’s crimes were posthumously investigated, but he was never tried, or convicted, does that mean he is innocent? No one, so far, who was connected to Elm Guest House, or Dolphin Square has been put on trial. When any ‘live persons’ connected with these places, are arrested, ‘no names are given’, for ‘legal reasons’, and they disappear into the ether. One such case occurred last year, when a, ‘civil servant’, who could not be named for legal reasons, and two other men, ‘who could also not be named for legal reasons’, were arrested, in connection to ‘Elm guest House’. They were accused of picking up a young boy in a Museum, and abusing him over three years. ‘All three men have been arrested and bailed until October 2014, while police inquiries continue’. Nothing has been hear of this case since, no wonder many victims of abuse/murder, have to wait. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3174757/Civil-servant-arrested-claims-VIP-paedophile-ring-visited-notorious-London-brothel.html
Maybe the only chance of these three being exposed is after they have died?
- Hubert Rawlinson
February 7, 2016 at 4:55 pm -
Godwin’s Law violation after only three comments!
- The Blocked Dwarf
February 7, 2016 at 5:05 pm -
Hitler’s crimes were posthumously investigated, but he was never tried, or convicted, does that mean he is innocent?
Yes actually it does, as are JS, Fred West and anyone else who had the bare face cheek to escape JUSTICE via the loophole of being dead.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Bandini
February 7, 2016 at 7:22 pm -
David, you really need to be a little more cynical when reading the press. Please go back and carefully re-read the article which you believe mentions three men “arrested in connection to Elm Guest House” – you will find that it does no such thing. The journalist would clearly like you to BELIEVE that that is what he is saying, and by weaving several tales together he has hoodwinked you into so doing.
The ludicrous nature of this rubbish today reached a new low – a story so stupendously ridiculous that it ought to have been received like an ‘ice-bucket challenge’ even by the ghouls who have built their whole lives around believing irrationally in things for which they have no real evidence, but NO! They are celebrating as if it ‘proves’ something or other. Here it is…
Thanks to the pen of James Fielding we learn that “Marianne Faithfull believes the Rolling Stones drugs bust was a cover for VIP child abuse.”
I have to say that this seems – ahem! – unlikely, but let’s give him a chance & see where he leads us. He leads us to 1967 and the arrest of Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, about which Faithfull (allegedly) pontificates:“She insists the crackdown on the Stones’ hedonistic lifestyle was a ploy to mask the abuse of young boys in care, particularly at the now notorious Elm Guest House in Barnes, south west London.”
This is quite astonishing, as Elm Guest House was not established until around 1979, over a decade after the raid mentioned! Presumably a time-travelling posse of ‘spooks’ arrived from the future (sort of like in the film ‘Terminator’, I suppose) ready to do the dirty deeds of the evil establishment elite intent on evading justice…
Let’s not forget that this nugget of nonsense come from one of the principle bullshitters in the farce, for it was Fielding who worked with Bill Baloney & Chris Fay, exploiting a sad individual for a gruesome headline – the one that Exaro said involved a witness having words put in his mouth, although they seemed to hurriedly forget this when they needed to rely on ANOTHER of Fielding’s masterpieces: the inexplicably low-quality recording of a former Customs official either saying or not saying something or other, depending on how desperate one is to hear what one wants to hear.
(Tabloid Tim Tate turned-up with another version of THAT tale, flatly contradicting the first & leading to a heated argument wherein Exaro as good as accused him of being a – that word again! – ‘spook’. Yoiks!)
David “Boy Brothel” Hencke (of Exaro infamy) put his name to a laughable article regarding Fielding’s excrement: “Audio file set to blow lid off paedophile scandal at Westminster”. That was in July 2014. Perhaps you’d have more luck chivvying him along than I!
- A Potted Plant
February 7, 2016 at 7:52 pm -
Step by step, David…
“Civil servant arrested over claims he was part of VIP paedophile ring and visited notorious London brothel” – headline. False. IF this man really existed, and he really was arrested, he could not have been arrested for “belonging to a VIP pedophile ring” nor for “visiting notorious London brothel”. There are no statutes titled “belonging to a VIP pedophile ring” or “visiting notorious London brothel” in the UK criminal code.
“The man was questioned on suspicion of assaulting a boy in the late 1970s”. THIS, he could be arrested and questioned on suspicion of: “assaulting a boy”.
“Claimed he was part of ring that had links to top civil servants and figures” – WHO claimed this? Surely not the civil servant himself? The alleged victim? Some CSA conspiracy theorist on twitter? Chris Fay? If we don’t know who made this claim, we can’t evaluate the validity of this statement and shouldn’t assume it is true.
“He allegedly visited notorious Elm Guest House, a VIP brothel in London” – WHO alleges this? Super secret press informant Chris Fay, the notorious con-artist and fantasist?
“A former civil servant at the centre of allegations that a paedophile ring once operated in the heart of Westminster has been arrested” – WHO says this man was “at the centre of allegations…”? The police? Where is the quote from a police force briefing or spokesperson?
“The alleged victim also claimed the man introduced him to two others, who also abused him. All three men have been arrested and bailed until October while police inquiries continue” – where is the proof that three men were arrested and bailed in relation to this supposed victim’s allegations? Who says that three men were arrested – the professed victim? The police? Chris Fay? Where, again, is the quote from a police briefing release or spokesperson? This alleged victim is unnamed…how can we even be certain that this complainant really exists? The article gives no source references for any of the statements in it. How can we know that EVERY statement in it wasn’t provided by some tipster-informant? Some delusional, lying fantasist? - Eric Hardcastle
February 8, 2016 at 2:19 am -
Adolf may have avoided a trial (or lived in Argentina in retirement?) but his henchmen certainly faced justice. It is apt though to bring that up as the same crimes Hitler’s associates were tried for have been committed by our politicians who now escape justice.
As for Elm Guest House, aging sleb Marianne Faithful has given an interview to Time Out where she claims the drug bust that ensnared her, Mick Jagger etc and some Mars Bars was done to cover up child abuse at Elm Guest House.
Sadly for Marianne time has dimmed her memory. The drug bust was in 1967 and Elm Guest House did not come into existence until 1979 but hey, who cares?
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 12:29 pm -
Reading the Time Out article shows that Faithfull actually made no mention of ‘Elm Guest House’ – it’s pure invention (again) by the appalling Fielding at the Express! And regardless, would we really want to place much ‘faith’ in her words after hearing her extraordinary claim that the manufacturer of Mars Bars offered her “a lot of money” in 1967 to advertise the damned things?!? I’m off to imagine what form this publicity might have taken…
http://www.timeout.com/london/music/marianne-faithfull-interview
- David
February 8, 2016 at 1:11 pm -
Detective Hogan-Howe mentioned above is one of the best Police Commissioners that London has ever had. I agree with Anna that the way some of the people, ‘helping police with their inquiries’, has be managed, could have been done better. However, not everyone who goes to the police with stories of abuse are believed. They have to be ‘credible’, and have to know things that the general public do not. Harvey proctor was visited by the police, and his house searched. I doubt in a country where the press are like rabid dogs, and gossip runs riot, that this fact could have been kept a secret for long.
The police said that the search was because, although Harvey was ‘not a suspect’, he had been implicated in a group of high profile people, by a man known as Nick. Yes it is possible to be accused of crimes, investigated for those crimes, but not be a ‘suspect’. The police said they ‘may’ wish to interview Harvey. However, two appointments to interview him were cancelled, by the police, and there was no real indication that they wanted to interview him. at all. However Harvey’s solicitor insisted on, not one, but two interviews. So he insisted on being told what the investigation was about. On being told, Harvey held a press conference, and told the press everything he had been told. He was still, only, assisting police with their inquiries, in a complex case, that he did not understand himself.
So Harvey told the press about Nick’s account of what happened to him, however that was only a small part of what operation Midland was, and is about. Well over half of Operation Midland is not in the public domain, and’ the press’, ‘Harvey & co’, and ‘Nick’, no nothing about it.
It is by far the most complex, and mysterious case London police have had to deal with since ‘Jack the Ripper’ in 1888.
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 1:33 pm -
Don’t be silly, David.
Proctor is/was a suspect. He is/was a suspect because the only ‘witness’ in Midland accused him of the most serious crimes, leading to an investigation. That investigation inevitably considered Proctor a suspect because… oh, I have no energy left. Just because, okay?The nutter-army have already convicted him, Bramall & all the others, so don’t be so disingenuous – you know as well as I do what the #IbelieveNick hashtag means, just like all the others: people who have nothing better to do than arrive at stupid conclusions, ruining peoples’ lives just for ‘something to do’. They have no interest in the truth, and none in justice. Crusty crotched creeps. It’s their hobby. It seems to be yours, too.
You have failed to regale the Raccoon Arms’ regulars with your posited ‘Proctor identical triplets’ idea… Just as well, I think. You seem to have skirted around your wrongness over the Elm Guest House “arrests”, too. Are you flagging? Give yourself an energy boost – treat yourself to a Mars Bar.
- David
February 8, 2016 at 2:10 pm -
Harvey Proctor : On the day of my interview I was not arrested, nor placed on Police bail, I was told I could leave the Police Station at any time and that it was a voluntary interview. I and my Solicitors had previously been told ‘I was not a suspect’.
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 3:23 pm -
I’d love to have been a fly on the wall when the warrant to search the ‘non-suspect’s’ home was being applied for, David!
Do the police routinely hand out sensitive information (such as the names of those also alleged to have committed torture & murder) to random people helping with their enquiries? Or do you think that perhaps you are mistaken in your belief that Proctor was not a suspect? [Rhetorical]
Exaro, September 2015: “The statement sheds no light on allegations by a witness known only [ahem!] as ‘Nick’ against Proctor of child abuse and murder…”
- Misa
February 8, 2016 at 8:42 pm -
Bandini, I would love to have been a fly on the wall, too. I still can’t work it out. But Proctor clearly said he (or his solicitor) had been told, when he went for interview, that he was not a suspect. Which raises the question of how police managed to search his home. Was he initially a suspect, and a search of his property established that he was no longer a suspect? If he’d been named as being involved in committing offences, might the other, related offences the police wished to investigate have been so serious as to make Mr Proctor insignificant? As a politician keen on law and order, did he simply open his door and invite the police to search the property? Did someone authorise a warrant to search the property because it was thought to contain evidence relating to a crime, even though Mr Proctor was not a suspect and didn’t live at the property at the time the crime did (or didn’t) take place? What can it all possibly mean?
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 9:44 pm -
Misa, as with A Potted Plant’s analysis of David’s Mail article, we should maybe pay close attention to exactly what is being said because he (Proctor) wasn’t speaking off the cuff, and we can expect him to have put the best possible gloss on his situation. He said:
“I and my Solicitors had previously been told I was not a suspect.”
He does not specify WHO told him that, and it could be taken that after the period that was ‘previous’ ended he MAY have been told differently. He doesn’t say, and we could tie ourselves in knots trying to second-guess… I can’t really see the point!By any normal definition of the word a man who has his home searched for 15-hours WITHOUT his consent (22nd September: “These people are like burglars: they raid your home without consent and without any regard for the consequences”) who is then informed by the police on two occasions of the matters they would be discussing with him under caution, and that these matters would include the allegations that he murdered & tortured children in concert with others IS a suspect. Maybe a copper just told him off the record: “Don’t worry, mate, we know it’s all a load of rubbish but we’ve got the forms to fill in – overtime forms!”
“Two days before my interview with the Police, my Solicitors – Sakhi Solicitors of Leicester – were sent a “disclosure” document. It set out the matters the Police wished to discuss with me. It was the first time I had known of what I had been accused.”
- Misa
February 8, 2016 at 10:20 pm -
Thanks, Bandini. What a tangle.
- Misa
- David
February 9, 2016 at 7:33 am -
Had he been a ‘suspect’, he would have been ‘held for questioning’, for several days.
- Bandini
- Misa
- Bandini
- David
- Bandini
- Eric Hardcastle
February 8, 2016 at 3:10 pm -
How extraordinary. Thanks for pointing that out. Even so she was making a ridiculous statement and the Time Out interviewer was pretty slack as he said scene of abuse in 70s/80s when the bust was 67. It was a claim that needed expanding. But fancy being taken in by the tabloid echo chamber ? I plead guilty.
- A Potted Plant
February 8, 2016 at 4:06 pm -
What about the Telegraph article from December 2014? That had the earliest mention of Faithfull claiming the 1967 bust was intended to cover up VIP abuse, that I could find. Mentions Elm Guest House, but maybe more as an example than a direct correlation…I can’t remember now.
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 4:22 pm -
Oooh, you are correct, APP!
Before I read that I read this one from August 2014: “Marianne Faithfull, the singer, claims she knows who “killed” Jim Morrison [with heroin]… …Faithfull, who has a new album out in September…”So a bit strange to see the article you mention from December 2014: “Marianne Faithfull: ‘Heroin saved my life’… …to promote a new book about her life…”
The smack giveth, the smack taketh away…
“Faithfull believes that the vilification of Sister Morphine – the song was eventually pulled by her record company – ties into the fact that hippies were used as scapegoats in the Seventies to cover up a series of child abuse scandals. “Now we know, with Elm [Guest] House and male brothels and bussing 10-year-old boys up from the Midlands, we know what was actually going on, so us poor hippies with our LSD and our joints were a godsend to the Establishment…”
Is she still on LSD, I wonder? Her brain is truly addled by the sounds of things!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-news/11268024/Marianne-Faithfull-Heroin-saved-my-life.html
- Bandini
- David
- Bandini
- Anne
February 8, 2016 at 12:31 pm -
Its breathtaking and very sad the way some believe everything the media has to say. The way that these crimes are investigated is shocking and appalling – to say the least. Problem is – it could happen to any of us – it’s not just about the rich and famous..
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 11:57 pm -
[David, one more thing: the Daily Mail article is dated 26 July 2015 and what it actually says is: “All three men have been arrested and bailed until October while police inquiries continue.” I’m not sure where your ‘2014’ has come from!]
- David
February 9, 2016 at 7:21 am -
Correct, but they mean October 2015 ? It is now Feb 2016. I think I know who they are, but it is an example of the police, and the Courts being very discreet, even though they were arrested, because they are famous. So the charge that Commissioner Hogan-Howe’s officers expose everyone to the press is wrong? As I said this is the most complexed, and bizarre case that London Police have had to deal with since the ‘Jack the Ripper’ case in 1888.
- David
- Hubert Rawlinson
- Hadleigh Fan
February 7, 2016 at 4:59 pm -
In a case like this, the accuser should be publicly named and shamed, be made to sign the sex offender’s register, and be forced to pay compensation
- Anne
February 8, 2016 at 12:33 pm -
Agreed.
- Anne
- Pils
February 7, 2016 at 5:00 pm -
shicklgruber, stalin, temujin and the Rotherham followers of the religion of peace all need to be investigated.
Gah! Keep up the good work Anna.
I know I shouldn’t feed the troll.
- IlovetheBBC
February 7, 2016 at 5:03 pm -
So because you have heard nothing since, you presume it’s either proof of guilt or proof of a cover up?
How about the entirely plausible idea that it may not have actually happened? Or that the police could corroborate nothing, and have had to reuctantly conclude their investigation without a prosecution? I really do worry about people who think like you David. You are a threat to a free society. And bringing in the crimes of the Nazis is beneath contempt. - Lottie Garonne
February 7, 2016 at 6:33 pm -
“So anyway, then the Government politicises the police, and tells them to investigate Left wing Orwellian orchestrated Mob fantasies for the distractive purposes of Aussie Gargoid corporate-fascist media owners”.
Imagine trying to sell that to a publisher around, say, 1992. 24 years later, it is reality….the self-fulfilling prophecy of a paranoid schizophrenic has come to pass.
I have heard it said, and seen it written would you believe, that Anna Raccoon can only be obliterated with the use of silver bullets, baptism water and a razor-sharp stake through the heart. Sometimes, bad science is good news.I don’t think this lady has any master when it comes to the forensic application of universal common sense. When it comes to bollocks, she is a human Xray machine.
- MartinWW
February 7, 2016 at 8:25 pm -
Somewhat intrigued, I followed the link under “adopt a posture of active listening” https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/investigative-interviewing/
which took me directly to the following section in the College of Policing :
—————————————
Investigative Policing:
Investigation is a core duty of policing. Interviewing victims, witnesses and suspects is central to the success of an investigation and the highest standards need to be upheld. Forces need to develop and maintain the valuable resource of a skilled interviewer. Interviews that are conducted professionally and quality assured realise several benefits. In particular, they can:
• direct an investigation and gather material, which in turn can lead to a prosecution or early release of an innocent person
• support the prosecution case, thereby saving time, money and resources
• increase public confidence in the police service, particularly with witnesses and victims of crimes who come into direct contact with the police.
—————————————-
The second bulleted item leapt up and hit me in the face. Surely, it is NOT for the police to support the prosecution case, but only to gather and present evidence. It is not in their remit to pass judgement, which is something entirely for the CPS. Or am I missing something?- Major Bonkers
February 8, 2016 at 7:41 am -
Well, if you weren’t guilty, you wouldn’t have been arrested in the first place… ?
‘War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Arrest is guilt. Plod is omnipotent.’
- MartinWW
February 8, 2016 at 9:05 am -
Yes, indeed, Major. It would be amusing were it not clear that it seems to be the current practice in the police. That is the thinking behind their refusal to apologise unconditionally to Leon Brittan and Ld Brambell, and Cliff Richard and Jim Davidson and Jimmy Tarbuck and many others by saying there is “insufficient evidence”. The Home Sec. should insist in Hyphen-Howe’s forthcoming apology that he states that there was an is no evidence and that they were wrong to egregiously publicise and pursue these cases.
- Cloudberry
February 8, 2016 at 10:38 am -
“In particular, they can: … • support the prosecution case, thereby saving time, money and resources” …The second bulleted item leapt up and hit me in the face. Surely, it is NOT for the police to support the prosecution case, but only to gather and present evidence.”
Perhaps supporting the prosecution was what the police were doing in these two cases:
“Cross-examining the officer, Mr Vullo said: “There are some very troubling things that have happened in this case. “I don’t suggest you have done anything wrong but I don’t absolve all police officers of wrongdoing.” Mr Vullo told the jury there was “evidence” that an alleged victim, who claims she was assaulted by Mr Travis at a pantomime, had been “tipped off” by police that the Chuckle Brothers could not remember an incident she reported.”
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29140886Jim Davidson:
“We agreed that our disclosure to the police had prompted them to revisit Wag and inform her it could not have been the Palladium. She them “remembered” it was the Slough Pavilion. That’s cheating, isn’t it? We had to make the police aware of our displeasure with this, because an attempt to be as truthful and helpful as possible has come back to hurt us.”
Jim Davidson: “No Further Action – The truth behind the smile”, John Blake Publishing Ltd. 2014, p. 128It would be interesting to know how much tipping off has gone on, e.g. whether accusers have been helped to streamline their stories.
- Mr Ecks
February 8, 2016 at 1:49 pm -
This is why talking to the police is not a good idea at any time. And esp not handing them your alibi to destroy.
Even if there is a real crime and a real victim who is not a shill willing to agree to whatever the coppers tell them.
Say a women has been really attacked at 8.30 and the cops dislike the cut of your jib and want you (wrongly) for it. You have an alibi for 8.30 but not 9. In the world of TV cops they’ll say “He can’t have done it –release him”. In the real world what actually happens is that “release him” equals “suffer the humiliation of having got it wrong –again–, suffer the pressure and abuse of our bosses, the media and the public and start again on the expensive, effortful and increasingly cold trail of the real culprit”. What they will do is try and persuade the victim that the crime took place at or much nearer to 9 than she first thought.
Bad enough that if the victim is a real one and has a mind of their own. They might still be pressured or persuaded by the bluebottles to help bust your alibi but they might stand by their original statement.
But how much worse if the crime is bogus and the victim an attention-seeker/gold-digger /nutter. Who will do/say anything the cops suggest to keep the whole circus going. You are in danger of being toasted.
Tell ’em nowt.
- Mr Ecks
- Cloudberry
- MartinWW
- Major Bonkers
- Hankenstein
February 7, 2016 at 8:48 pm -
Maybe people know of this: the ‘Cadaver Synod’ (A.D. 897), that can be looked up in Wikipedia.? It concerns the posthumous ecclesiastical trial of Pope Formosus. Seemingly, they dug up his corpse, put him it the dock, found him guilty, cut off three of his fingers, and buried him again. Then they dug him up again and threw him in the Tiber … the story goes on. He wasn’t even a kiddy-fiddler. There was politics at work! I thought I’d heard everything. Very nicely written article.
How long will it be before there’s a petition to dig up Saville’s remains, and put them in a bowl on TV where the public can text in what they want done to them? We’d better watch out though: “Rumors circulated that Formosus’ body, after washing up on the banks of the Tiber, had begun to perform miracles.”
- Eric Hardcastle
February 8, 2016 at 2:29 am -
Becoming increasingly environmentally “responsible” as I grow older I fancy the Tibetan idea of funerals : chop up the body and place it on a mountain top for the buzzards to consume. It would satisfy all my needs, save costs and I love the idea of feeding birds. Now I see a new benefit.
- Eric Hardcastle
- Carol42
February 8, 2016 at 2:50 am -
It looks like this whole fiasco is starting to fall apart and not before time. Without Anna’s wonderful blog I would have never known just how bad things had got. Some stories are just so fantastic that no sane person could believe them, says a lot about the CPS! Stay well Anna we couldn’t do without you.
- Ian B
February 8, 2016 at 9:09 am -
It’ll take quite a while to fall apart I think; too many people have publicly bought into it too deeply. Can you imagine the press admitting they might have been too hasty over Savile? Can you imagine how many convictions will need to be re-examined?
- Anne
February 8, 2016 at 12:38 pm -
I think so too unfortunately, I am often told by the frightened and the self loathers that the ‘proof’ is there..
- Mr Ecks
February 8, 2016 at 1:53 pm -
It took 25 years for the UK Satanic child abuse in Rochdale/Orkneys nonsense to be finally officially declared nonsense-both the fiddling and the Satanism.
That is a more realistic time scale I fear.
- Mr Ecks
- Anne
- Ian B
- Mike
February 8, 2016 at 9:08 am -
What I find curious is that anyone even being investigated for historical paedophile crimes is not accorded anonymity (Cliff Richard) but according to the papers this morning, MPs arrested for fiddling their expenses is.
- Ian B
February 8, 2016 at 9:09 am -
The Waterloo “assault” immediately brought to my mind the complete absence of evidence and implausibility regarding Rolf and the seven year old.
- Mudplugger
February 8, 2016 at 10:22 am -
I look forward to the ‘well-known actress’ being prosecuted for perjury, wasting police time etc. (they can’t claim lack of evidence, as we’ve all seen it), with an associated penalty of substantial damages payable to the innocent bloke.
I fear it may be a long wait…..- Cloudberry
February 8, 2016 at 10:30 am -
“The Waterloo “assault” immediately brought to my mind the complete absence of evidence and implausibility regarding Rolf and the seven year old”
It’s just as well there were CCTV cameras, otherwise the man might have found himself in jail and paying compensation, like Rolf. It’s astounding that either of these accusations ever reached court.
- Cloudberry
- Mudplugger
- Dioclese
February 8, 2016 at 9:47 am -
Frankly, by the time they’re dead then they’ve gotten away with it – so what’s the point?
- A Potted Plant
February 8, 2016 at 12:46 pm -
Dioclese – leaving aside the issue of lawsuits against dead person’s estates, obviously dead persons cannot be punished in any way and that fact renders standard criminal investigations against them somewhat pointless.
Cold case investigations can be exceptions to this, however. Where there is an unresolved disappearance, death or rape investigation, and police have reason to suspect that a deceased person could be proven to be responsible, it is not pointless to pursue forensic investigations which could exclude them as suspects or document their involvement. It is important to pursue cold cases to their conclusion if possible.
But in cases where an adult person knows the identity of a person, whom they allege to have criminally victimized them in the past, and the alleged perpetrator is deceased, some form of public hearing or inquiry through which they can tell their story makes more sense than instigating criminal investigations. Using police officers to investigate an adult person’s allegation, that they were sexually abused as a child by a person who is now deceased, is just bizarre and unique to the UK as far as I know.
- A Potted Plant
- JS
February 8, 2016 at 10:26 am -
You will often see the guilt-by-accusation brigade asking why on earth anyone would lie about being a victim of abuse.
Ignoring for a second the deluded, the vengeful, the attention-seekers, the gold-diggers etc, etc…
You only have to look at the people who have, especially in the case of notorious crimes, voluntarily gone to the police to confess to a crime they couldn’t possibly have committed. This isn’t disputed by anyone and police are well aware of the phenomenon. Compared to falsely confessing to something which could get you locked up for decades or even executed, falsely claiming to be an abuse victim looks like a positively sensible career move. - English Pensioner
February 8, 2016 at 10:40 am -
And at the same time, any MPs who are arrested are claiming that it will breach their human rights if their names are revealed!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3436474/Anger-MPs-demand-secrecy-arrested-Review-says-naming-members-breach-right-privacy-human-rights-laws.html - Lisboeta
February 8, 2016 at 1:04 pm -
The Mark Pearson case was a total travesty. Firstly, his legal team discovered that the CPS-supplied CCTV had been doctored to slow it down — thus allowing maybe a whole second (!!) instead of half-a-second for the alleged ‘penetration’ to take place. Secondly, throughout the CCTV footage, both of Mr Pearson’s hands are visibly occupied: one is clutching his bag, t’other holding his newspaper. Thirdly, the claimant failed to pick out Mr Pearson in a video-image identity parade (not to mention a lack of witnesses or forensic evidence). Fourthly, the CPS did not produce the supposedly-damning CCTV during the trial! It was the defence who did so and, upon seeing the CCTV footage for the first time in court, the claimant said ‘That can’t be me in the CCTV’.
Yet, after the trial, the CPS maintained: “There was sufficient evidence for this case to proceed to court and progress to trial”. That says a lot about the CPS’s standards of ‘evidence’, doesn’t it? Meantime, Mark Pearson had lived with the horror of a wholly false accusation. And, even though now cleared, he will have to live with the snide, no-smoke-without-fire, comments.
If you ever find yourself in the wrong place at the wrong time, just pray that your legal team is as perspicacious as his was — and that you can afford such legal expertise.
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 1:49 pm -
This is quite shocking if true. I say “if true” as I’m a little confused by this:
“The few seconds when my client walked past the alleged victim had been slowed down so it looked like he had more time to commit the alleged actions than he in reality did have. Instead of one frame per second it was running at two frames per second.”
I would have thought this would lead to a ‘Benny Hill effect’ but may be just down to a poor explanation (or my inability to think clearly). Otherwise, somebody needs holding to account.
- Mr Ecks
February 8, 2016 at 1:57 pm -
Bruce Lee would not have been fast enough to commit this alleged crime never mind the poor sod accused.
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 2:02 pm -
Just to be clear I was only puzzled over the description of the CPS’ supposed manipulation of the speed of the CCTV-recording; even without this information the whole case would truly stink.
- Cloudberry
February 8, 2016 at 2:38 pm -
Pedantry alert, Bandini. The article says “Instead of one frame per second it was running at one frame every two seconds.” It’s quite shocking they could get away with this. I wonder how much the defendant had to spend on the CCTV forensic expert!
- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 2:45 pm -
Spying journo alert, Cloudberry! I cut ‘n’ pasted the above – they’ve changed it.
- Bandini
- Cloudberry
- Ian B
February 8, 2016 at 2:38 pm -
You’ve forgotten that paedos have super nonce-powers, Ecks. Jimmy Savile could bend space and time and fly in through windows, for instance.
- Bandini
- Lisboeta
February 8, 2016 at 2:51 pm -
That baffled me too, but I thought it might be my tech-illiteracy … or the legal-beagle’s (seems to be a direct quote?). Luckily, the CCTV forensic expert knew better!
- Mr Ecks
- Bandini
- Fat Steve
February 8, 2016 at 2:11 pm -
A slightly brusque critique of what I like to think is a well intentioned if possibly flawed model for dealing with these sorts of complaints. We have probably arrived where we have arrived because lack of care by Police in the past. Actually I am not so sure that the Police were deeply and institutionally racist/sexist/homophobic more arrogant/ill mannered/clumsy and that gave the MSM and Politically Activist Groups opportunity to push them around and the tail has come to wag the dog . Its now swung the other way ….the self righteousmess/clumsyness/ ill manners are exhibited to the likes of Lord Bramall. I suggest good policing has a fair amount to do with the exercise of discretion rather than following rigid rules. It shouldn’t be different than any form of Trusteeship, where a group of individuals hold control over the interests of others in this case the Accused/the Accuser/Other members of Society who are potential Accused and Accusors. At the moment it seems the Trusteeship is of the accusation alone …..much as some Solicitors see their only duties to the Client rather forgetting that they have duties as Officers of the Court.
One other personal opinion is that as this little saga has played out starting with Savile and reaching where we presently stand is that there does appear to be rather more in the notion of some older men of influence and wealth having something of a taste for younger flesh than I thought existed. Criminally so ? I really don’t know ….but it is a taste that appears a little unsavoury to me. Having said that the response doesn’t seem measured and may well be seen in retrospect as ineffective and counter productive. Legislating effectively on such matters must be a minefield unless some discretion is accepted. and more importantly delegated to individuals who can exercise that discretion wisely. Its never going to be perfect but probably better than that which exists now. The Judiciary seem (whether I am right on this point I do not know) to have come down heavily on one side.
But my opinions above are no more than personal and carry little weight but more objectively I do think the ‘insufficient evidence to prosecute’ is possibly the sort of mealy mouthed language that can only bring the whole system into further disrepute. If there is insufficient evidence then there is ‘No Legal case to answer’ and that I think should be the correct language to bring an investigation to a close in default of a prosecution.
That surely reflects the balance of what I suggest is the Trusteeship that Society has given to the Police and CPS rather than the only duty being to the Accuser- Bandini
February 8, 2016 at 3:04 pm -
How about this for mealy mouthed:
“There is some ambiguity surrounding the issue of consent, which would prove difficult before a properly directed jury. Proving that consent was not given [in 1967] or could have reasonably been implied would be the first difficult step and proving that LB understood this to be the case would have proved more difficult still. When all these factors are taken into account, the reviewer concludes that following a thorough investigation with no useful lines of enquiry left unexplored, the case is more likely to lead to acquittal than conviction. Therefore the Full Code Test is not quite [!!!] met.”
- Daisy Ray
February 8, 2016 at 7:07 pm -
The report claimed the alleged victim’s tale was ‘far from fanciful’. Presumably she didn’t give them the lurid version she fed to a tabloid which included Brittan giving her a date-rape drug.
- ST
February 9, 2016 at 10:46 am -
Has there been any explanation as to why they chose that particular rural and small police force to conduct the review? The officer in charge- an up and coming ambitious type- was hardly going to rock the boat was he.
Furthermore, criticism has been laid at Paul Settle’s feet for not being experienced in investigating sexual offences. Erm, why was he appointed as head of the paedophile unit then? Senior management obviously saw no problem with that lack of experience when THEY appointed him, yet use that inexperience as a stick to beat him with later. So why no criticism in the report of senior management who put him into that position? Or was there? Since even the HASC will not be given a copy of the actual report neither they nor we will know.
Likewise, “surprise” is expressed that paul Settle did not consult someone more senior. Surely internal guidelines are in place, generally and with regards to allegations against the more high profile of suspects,, in this respect. Did he not follow them or were there none to follow? Since there is no mention – or that we know- of the former then it looks like the latter applies so, again, why no criticism and recommendations in this respect too?
Regardless, the outcome was the same. Perhaps Leon Brittan should have been interviewed earlier, but it would have changed nothing.
Unless MSM reports that “Jane” had a history of mental illness, suffered from delusions, had wrongly suspected a close relative of being a paedophile and wrongly identified the location of the rape as a garden apartment, she does not pass my own full test code either where credibily is concerned. Lastly, “plausible that she moved in the same circles” leaves a lot to be desired and indicates to me that they found no evidence/corroberation that she actually did.
- Daisy Ray
- Lisboeta
February 8, 2016 at 3:12 pm -
“there does appear to be rather more in the notion of some older men of influence and wealth having something of a taste for younger flesh than I thought existed.”
That, in a totally non-criminal sense, has long existed: wealthy older men frequently display a penchant for young women! (I think it’s called arm-candy?) However, when it comes to the under-age criminal sense, that notion has been bolstered and fostered by recent cases, often based on little or no provable evidence.
- Ian B
February 8, 2016 at 3:27 pm -
there does appear to be rather more in the notion of some older men of influence and wealth having something of a taste for younger flesh than I thought existed.
The peak maximal pulchritude of female flesh is a relatively short period that runs from somewhere in the teens to somewhere in the twenties, variable from individual to individual. The age of the viewer is irrelevant. Older males with wealth, influence, etc are more likely to be attractive to younger women, that’s all. Hence the elderly tycoon/supermodel um, model of relationship.
Many girls are in full bloom by 15 or so. It’s basic human biology.
- Fat Steve
February 8, 2016 at 7:47 pm -
Basic human biology is one thing but some creatures and ‘better’ humans are not mere biological automata. I have found those who see other humans as biological automata (though in my experience they never seem to see themselves as ‘just’that) are amongst the least happy and fulfilled individuals I have known and I speculate the reason for that is their understanding of an objective reality is incomplete and like a gramophone needle stuck in a groove of an old vinyl L.P. endlessly repeat just an incomplete part of the music
I think the point I am attempting to make is that one can treat humans as a means or an end. Treating anyone as a means is pretty unsavoury, Treating any young person but particularly a child as a means is more so perhaps because their understanding of life (THEIR life and what THEY might want) is not fully formed. Biology might be thought of as mitigation if one accepts biology as the totality of human existence but manifestly its a diffucult point to argue since there is some basic human emotion (and reason to) that finds using others repulsive.- Ian B
February 9, 2016 at 12:12 am -
Fat Steve-
Sex and sexual attraction are matters of biology. Sexual attraction is driven by the display of physical signals between the sexes. This is why women spend vast amounts of money on products that promise to make them look younger and/or different to how they really are. To straw man the discussion with the “just automata” argument does not alter this fact.
- Fat Steve
February 9, 2016 at 12:55 pm -
I concede it does not but my point is a little different …..although it sounds a little pretentious the best way of expressing the point I am attempting to make is to adopt Kant’s language and distinction that somethings have a price and others a dignity. To some (and no it is not a personal comment about your opinion about the importance of Biology but rather an extension on from it) everything has a price even the young physically attractive female (or male) …..something to be acquired and used and sometimes perhaps usually discarded . I doubt that is anything other than a subjective view as to the nature of reality and i further suggest an incomplete one taking account only the phenomenal
- Ho Hum
February 9, 2016 at 1:16 pm -
@ Fat Steve February 9, 2016 at 12:55 pm
Might you be missing out on half the equation, though, as throughout this you seem to be only taking account of the the price paid by the acquisitor, and omitting to consider the cost that the seller is prepared to incur?
See the smilies? They convey the intent to be humorous, to add some levity, to not be unduly serious in a burdensome manner, so please please realise, this time, that my not being out to get you doesn’t mean that you still have to express some, or indeed any, paranoia in your response LOL
- Fat Steve
February 9, 2016 at 2:54 pm -
paranoia in your response LOL
I am grateful for your respect for my aspergers.
Just to make sure you have grasped the metaphysical construct adequately to be humourous Things that have dignity are inherently different (hence why they have a dignity) and are above price and cannot be measured by price- Ho Hum
February 9, 2016 at 3:01 pm -
I had no idea that you have Aspergers.
You have my sympathies, although I have reservations about using that term with regard to a congenital condition.
I shall take account of it in future
- Fat Steve
February 9, 2016 at 3:51 pm -
Gosh Ho Hum …..which one of us has the humour by pass on this occasion and missed the joke
SMILEY FACE SMILEY FACE SMILEY FACE ETC- Ho Hum
February 9, 2016 at 4:09 pm -
You still have my sympathies.
That’s it for today, I’m afraid, as those are in danger of getting less as time goes by
- Ho Hum
- Fat Steve
- Ho Hum
- Fat Steve
- Ho Hum
- Fat Steve
- Ian B
- Fat Steve
- Bandini
- Mike Spilligan
February 8, 2016 at 3:14 pm -
Just to remind anyone who’s forgotten – the CPS was created when it had been shown many times over that the police couldn’t be trusted to be impartial – targets and all that. Now it’s clear that the CPS has followed that same corrupt path.
- Ian B
February 8, 2016 at 3:30 pm -
Any such body will have the same problem, because it will always end up with interests of its own. This is why we have jury trials, because the jury- for all their other faults- are not a permanently constituted body with its own self interest, and not part of the State or even the same social class as those who end up in official bodies.
Thus, a Grand Jury system might be an improvement.
- Ian B
- Ho Hum
February 8, 2016 at 4:05 pm -
‘some older men of influence and wealth having something of a taste for younger flesh than I thought existed. Criminally so ? I really don’t know …… Legislating effectively on such matters must be a minefield unless some discretion is accepted. and more importantly delegated to individuals who can exercise that discretion wisely’
I presume you can’t really be being serious, but it did make me laugh to wonder for just how many ‘offences’ you might think, say, Rupert Murdoch might/should be locked up? And, assuming you are one of those rare individuals who really believe in the equal application of equal opportunities, a great many women as well ……
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5i4h_3D3-o
- Ho Hum
February 8, 2016 at 4:06 pm -
Aw, not again….
That was for ‘Fat Steve February 8, 2016 at 2:11 pm’
- Fat Steve
February 8, 2016 at 8:10 pm -
Don’t worry Ho Hum I am astute enough it was me you were looking for to give a thick ear.
Do I personally think Murdoch is a user and unsavoury ?Well you guess …..Murdoch and many others survive and flourish because I am not sure all discriminate adequately for their own good let alone the good of others….locking him up? Naaahhh not really but shunning him? Treating him with disdain? Well if everyone did that might make a start.
Anyone who talks of infotainment and publishes ‘Hitler’s Diaries’ knowing them to be a forgery (which was the case so I understand I hope correctly) might make him need to justify he was motivated to practice his profession as a (virtuous) end in itself rather than a means……always assuming of course virtue has a place in the public space that his media empire seeks to occupy
- Fat Steve
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
February 8, 2016 at 4:33 pm -
Having caught up with this, and trying to be a bit more serious, one does wonder a little if the police, maybe even supported by their political masters, see this as a positive opportunity to push back a bit against the tide of ‘historical crime’ that threatens to engulf them and their diminishing resources
Leaving aside the odd policeman who was as daft as get quoted with the ‘credible and true’ gaffe, a claim that is this barmy is an ideal counter weapon, both for tactical and strategic purposes.
Nobody is really going to care much about the involvement of a dead Prime Ministers or Home Secretary, neither of whom is looked back at with fond remembrance by the masses, or even some slightly weird former Tory politician, but putting a beloved, much revered very very senior old soldier up for the fall is something that really isn’t going to be stomached by the vast majority of people, when they look and see just how daft the claims made are, and will certainly attract much more broad supportive attention than the persecution of some old odd slebs, for whom most think that whatever smoke is puffed up probably proved their assumptions of past fire anyway
Yes, here, there will be public approbation, and a lot of attendant accusatory heat and light to go with it, for putting one of our more honourable senior citizens through the mill, but our politicians, private and public sector leaders will sell out, and sacrifice, anybody when it suits their game
And anyway, do any of us really think that Theresa May et al had no idea that the police were going to raid Bramall and Proctor as they did, when they did, and for exactly what?
- Ho Hum
February 11, 2016 at 9:32 am -
So, the push back is under way, if somewhat on tippy toes. HMIC in the firing line, too
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35546690
Psssssst! Stage left. Cue the Charge of the Cover Up Brigade…..
- Ho Hum
- Crankybleeder
February 8, 2016 at 5:01 pm -
The thought of Hogan-Howe praying bothers me. It’s far too reminiscent of James Anderton. Perhaps Hogan-Howe hears God telling him that paedophiles (real of just alleged) are swimming in human cesspool of their own making.
Salem witch trials, anyone? - Bill Sticker
February 8, 2016 at 6:31 pm -
Now that truly is desperation Anna. All these spurious allegations of Z-list ‘celebrities’ wrongdoing to get some ‘compo’ from what remains of their remains is, as I have said before, no more than celebrity asset stripping.
Whatever happened to ‘Wasting Police time’?
- Major Bonkers
February 8, 2016 at 6:42 pm -
I’ve had a very good idea, which I believe will prevent either me or my eventual estate ever being targeted by false claims of impropriety.
In almost all cases of sexual naughtiness involving a gentleman, it follows that he will have to expose what my Law Dictionary refers to as his ‘male member of generation’ to the other party.
Therefore, if your male member has some distinguishing feature, it would be an easy matter either to prove or disprove that it has been exposed.
My own member, of course, and as you would expect, is of prodigious size and wielded with no little skill; however, I feel that these attributes, of themselves, do not render it sufficiently distinguishable from anyone else’s. After all, it used for exactly the same purposes.
I therefore propose that my member, like that of the Jamaican in the joke, will be tattooed with a secret motto, that only I, and those lucky enough to have sight of my member, will be able to see.
For example (under cross-examination): ‘Now, Miss. Eagle, you allege that, in conjunction with Frau Merkel, you enjoyed a night of passion with my client. Can you describe any distinguishing feature of my client’s intimate area?’
‘Yes, it is tattooed with the secret motto, ‘The Lesbian Straightener’.’
‘Why so it is… excuse me m’lud, whilst I take instructions.’
- Frankie
February 8, 2016 at 9:12 pm -
‘… I therefore propose that my member, like that of the Jamaican in the joke, will be tattooed with a secret motto, that only I, and those lucky enough to have sight of my member, will be able to see.’
And there I was, thinking I was the only one who had come up with this imaginative, slightly painful, yet foolproof way of protecting oneself from the ‘slings and arrows of outrageous fortune’…!
Bugger, should have patented the idea.
In my case, I was going to have the word ‘Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious’ tattooed on my ‘gentleman’s vegetable’. Never one to boast, I eschewed ‘ Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch’ only because I am not Welsh…
- Bandini
February 9, 2016 at 12:19 am -
This might work only if the tattoo was ‘homemade’ & no one ever came to know of its existence…
Otherwise, anyone catching wind of it (or sight!) would instantly have you over a barrel with ‘proof’ of their abuse, if they so wished. You’d be better chopping it off entirely – that’d fool ’em!- Major Bonkers
February 9, 2016 at 12:12 pm -
‘Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch’, eh? That’d certainly be a bit of a mouthful.
Thinking about my plan a bit more, homosexuals, of course, could have bugger all tattooed down there.
- Frankie
February 9, 2016 at 11:42 pm -
Inspired!!
- Frankie
- Major Bonkers
- Bandini
- Frankie
- Fat Steve
February 8, 2016 at 8:45 pm -
And if she replied ‘The tener’ presumably successful insertion might be difficult to prove.
{ 88 comments… read them below or add one }