‘Saint’ Bernard Hogan-Howe safe – but is he a ‘Pussyfoot’?
I have always been of the opinion that the age of ‘Savilisation’, a term I invented and now proudly watch as it propagates through the media, was a perfect storm of tensions between the media, the police and the charitable third sector. There have been spirited efforts to pin the blame on the Feminist movement, but I think they were just useful idiots on the sidelines. The real battle was between media barons, political ideology and charities whose fortunes waxed and waned in accordance with the electoral cycle.
In the doomed tradition of CEOs who ‘are determined to see the necessary changes put in place’, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe is to hang onto his job for another year – the alternative being that he became the third consecutive Met Commissioner to be chased out of office for having offended one or other of the warring media parties.
Sir Ian Blair’s critics perceived him to be too close to New Labour; the shooting of de Menezes was the weapon of choice – that and the admission that he had taped his conversation with the then Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, ironically on the subject of intercept evidence. Blair’s downfall was the battle between Conservative forces such as Boris Johnson who saw him as emblematic of New Labour, and the oligarchs of the ‘Third Way’ who didn’t want their potential voters locked up. He was never a ‘copper’s copper’ – but an English language graduate who had been fast tracked into the political minefield of policing London.
Sir Paul Stephenson, a northern butcher’s son who had come up through the ranks, succeeded him. He fell foul of the battle between the left wing media and their sworn enemy – the Murdoch press. The Guardian whipped up a firestorm claiming that the News of the World had ‘hacked’ the missing Milly Dowler’s phone – the headlines later read ‘hacked the murdered teenagers phone’, although at the time she was just another missing teenager. That battle resulted in the nuclear bomb that was Leveson, the closure of the News of the World – and the demise of Paul Stephenson on the grounds that he was close friends with Neil Wallis, then editor. Three days after the arrest of Wallis – subsequently cleared of any wrong doing – Paul Stephenson lay mortally wounded by media comment. Eventually it was revealed that the News of the World had never ‘hacked’ Milly’s phone and the police had been promptly informed of their information.
Enter Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, former Chief Constable of Merseyside, now mired in the Hillsborough ordure. Hogan-Howe was a mixture of the previous two incumbents – a ‘copper’s copper’ who had come up through the ranks pace Stephenson, but had been spotted as a high flyer and sponsored whilst he obtained a Masters in Law at Oxford, pace Blair. The compromise candidate?
Four days after Bernard’s birthday in 2011, when he had been in office all of two months, Jimmy Savile died. A belated birthday present. A chance to turn the media attention to other matters. Those ‘matters’ – Savilisation – were to become a gift to both the embattled Murdoch press and their enemies, generating untold column inches in the proxy war fought in the ‘dead tree’ trenches, allowing a clear line of sight at the BBC, guardian of the left wing chalice.
It is easily forgotten in the current ‘paedo’ climate – that Hogan-Howe is not only still under IPCC investigation for his role in the Hillsborough disaster, but also for the part he played in Operation Care, an investigation resulting in the arrest of care home boss Michael Carroll, during which it was alleged that former Prime Minister Tony Blair was suspected of paedophile activity.
The senior investigating officer at the time would have been expected to have reported to his senior officers the fact a serving government minister had come under suspicion.It’s inconceivable to think that senior Merseyside officers would not have known.
Left wing politicians were alarmed at the idea of Hogan-Howe having any control over the subsequent inquiry into Operation Care.
Given the gravity of the crimes being investigated, it is worrying this is not a fully independent investigation. Instead the Met will lead this work with oversight from the IPCC. Surely this should be done by an independent investigator or, at the very least an alternate force.
There was another factor to consider in 2011. The NSPCC.
In that July, all was not well in the headquarters of Childline. The organisation had faced bankruptcy before in 2006, but then been taken over by the NSPCC. The NSPCC had acquired a generous £30 million from the Labour government to preserve the service, but that money had run out by the March of 2011. They chose to slash the organisation by 25%.
It was in July of that year that Meirion Jones found/was sent Karin Ward’s ‘fanstory’ claiming amongst other tales that ‘JS’ had abused her in his estranged Aunt’s school.
The perfect storm of vested interests. This then, was the turbulent political scene that Hogan-Howe inherited.
One of the mysteries of the past few days, is why Hogan-Howe has ordered an inquiry to be headed by Sir Richard Henriques into the handling of historic allegations of sexual abuse against public figures.
It is a brief 10 months since just such an ‘independent’ review was conducted into the manner in which all sexual abuse was investigated by the Met. I have managed to find a copy – it makes for fascinating reading, and I cannot understand how I managed to miss it before. Tomorrow I shall sit down and précis it.
Why another review, in such a short space of time, confined to public figures? There are far more ‘unknowns’ who have been on the sharp end of the historic abuse pitchfork. The key word in Hogan-Howe’s announcement is ‘public‘ figures.
They are the people who have born the brunt of our present determination to figure out good and evil via the medium of #Ibelieveher sexual allegations. They have born the brunt as a direct result of the media’s desire to avert bankruptcy and irrelevance. They are the click-bait that has kept the presses rolling over the past four years.
The politicians need the media, the charities need the media, and both are using the police to produce the raw meat to feed the beast. We, the public, are needed to keep the whole bandwagon rolling – by paying, in tax pounds, in subscriptions.
Operation Midland alone has cost 1.8 million – the equivalent cost at an average starting salary of £22,636, of 80 junior hospital Doctors. This is what Operation Midland looks like in my new currency – ‘Docs‘.
Just for good measure – this is what just the Leeds section of the cravenly politically correct NHS investigation into the historic allegations of abuse by Savile looks like expressed as ‘Docs’.
Both utterly dwarfed by the cost of the BBCs navel gazing. £4.9 million so far.
Or 216 Docs.
- ILoveTheBBC
February 13, 2016 at 11:25 am -
It wasn’t Blair who was alleged to be a paedophile, but one of his minsters.
Unless things have ‘progressed, as they often do!- John Galt
February 13, 2016 at 11:50 am -
Given the circumstances and the subject matter, don’t you think that nom de guerre is a tad offensive?
- IlovetheBBC
February 14, 2016 at 9:11 am -
We try not to take offence here.
And I do love the BBC, despite everything, because at it’s best it’s far superior to anything else on offer.
- IlovetheBBC
- John Galt
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2016 at 11:27 am -
A reminder of how Jimmy fought for his NHS, and won his war.
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/
A Consultant gave the main speech at his memorial service in Leeds, as it happens.- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2016 at 11:28 am -
all this time and I still haven’t got the hang of copy/paste…
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/smoke-of-war.html
- Moor Larkin
- Moor Larkin
February 13, 2016 at 12:14 pm -
The real enemy is ourselves.
“savilisation – what can it actually be all about?
Postby steve lewis » Fri Feb 27, 2015 5:27 pm
I know it’s heavy going … but is this really what yewtree has been all about
from anna raccoon .. who has spent some (tedious but curious time) trawling the local council website for info on these yewtree reports
Here goes.Re: savilisation – what can it actually be all about?
Postby B202NUT » Fri Feb 27, 2015 5:29 pm
CAN you summarize; its Friday, who the fuk wants to attempt all that reading SteveRe: savilisation – what can it actually be all about?
Postby norman lovie » Fri Feb 27, 2015 6:21 pm
look Jimmy Saville fucked glass eyed cadivors – its facthttp://www.saabsforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=2045
- David
February 13, 2016 at 12:16 pm -
As Oscar Wilde said, “Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.” The total cost of the Leveson Inquiry into phone hacking, was £5.4 million.The largest cost was the £32.7m incurred by Scotland Yard for the four investigations. It is estimated that police and Crown Prosecution Service bills for the Old Bailey trial have come to at least £33m. Bearing in mind that no children were abused, or murdered, that is quite an expense.
The Midland enquiry into the abuse, and murder of young boys, has cost less than 32 million, and bearing in mind the grizzly allegations, is money well spent. The government is in favour of replacing Trident at a cost of around £100 billion. This money would be enough to fully fund A&E services for 40 years, employ 150,000 new nurses, build 1.5 million affordable homes, build 30,000 new primary schools, or cover tuition fees for 4 million students. Bearing in mind that if Trident was ever used, we would all die slowly from radiation poisoning, that would be money badly spent.
Commissioner Hogan-Howe has said that the Midland enquiry has been, overall, a success, and I agree with him. Especially as we are going back over 35 years, and trying to sort out the memories of a young boy, ie Nick, as well as other witnesses, who gave evidence before he did.The cost of investigating child abuse, and murder should never be questioned, especially when society spends far more on frippery every year.
- Misa
February 13, 2016 at 12:30 pm -
David,
X ‘should never be questioned.’
Thank you for that a stunning insight. Moor Larkin, above, rather anticipated you, didn’t he?
- Misa
- Hadleigh Fan
February 13, 2016 at 12:29 pm -
Trident may well cost a lot over its lifetime, but the NHS spends more than that every year (£141 billion in the 2015 budget). In comparison, the whole of the defence budget comes in at £45 billion per annum. The whole nuclear part of our defence budget comes in at about 5% of its total.
Given that large parts of the NHS budget count as frippery – treatments of questionable value, some completely bogus, operations to turn perverts’ penises inside out so they can fantasise that they are women, stuffing tits with silicone for small-breasted woment to think they are Katie Price, statins causing type 2 diabetes, health tourism, chief executives on over-inflated salaries, hospitals stuffed with ‘administrators’, bigger fatality rates at weekends and hospitals with all sorts of defects in patient care that wouldn’t have been tolerated by Florence Nightingale (or Mary Seacole!) etc, then the 40 year cost of Trident could probably be saved by cutting the unnecessary crap out of the NHS!
Don’t get me started on our social services budget.
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2016 at 1:02 pm -
Calm down, old chap
Haven’t got time to deal with too much of that, so have to I’ll confine myself to pointing out to you that there’s nothing to be gained by your working up such a lather as to, all on your own, increase your risk of dying this weekend just because of some politically inspired myths and fables, you know.
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2016 at 1:06 pm -
I forgot to point out what fable I meant! Sorry about that….
- Hadleigh Fan
February 13, 2016 at 4:25 pm -
Ho Hum: The article you cited actually admitted that there was an excess of fatalities over the weekend, and degenerated into an argument for more money. Not a good source to refute a ‘fable’ if it turns out that the fable is true!
By the way, I’m not actually worked up about it, just that our £141 billion a year doesn’t always give great results, and the fable is that throwing even more money at it will make it better is the true politically inspired fable.
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2016 at 5:05 pm -
Sorry. You’re right about the article’s content. I had grabbed the first thing I could find and skimmed it rather than checking it properly. That’ll teach me!!
I remember that there was some contention about the study’s political use and potential purpose, as well as its accuracy, at the time. Found that now.
http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h4596/rr-31
Again, apologies for the original hiccough!
- Hadleigh Fan
February 13, 2016 at 7:41 pm -
Ho Hum,
No need for apologies: I read the cited source to see the other side of the argument, as I’m almost always prepared to be convinced of a different view if the evidence is there,.
- Hadleigh Fan
- Ho Hum
- Hadleigh Fan
- Ho Hum
- windsock
February 13, 2016 at 3:29 pm -
By all means, point out genuine failings, but don’t swallow the propaganda whole – it will make you sick. How do you know bigger tits don’t improve a woman’s psychological health or feeling that one should have a vagina instead of a penis does not make one a pervert? If you are a doctor, maybe your “opinion”, stated as fact, might carry more weight.
- Hadleigh Fan
February 13, 2016 at 4:54 pm -
I am sure that breast implants do make some women feel better about their body image, but unless there is a general medical need (such as mastectomy, congenital malformation, injury, etc) I can’t see that the costs of it need to be socialised just on a whim. If the recipient of the benefit pays for it they can do what they want as far as I’m concerned. It is particularly egregious that some folk have them put in, and then taken out at taxpayer expense: medical hokey cokey. “You put the implants in, you take the implants out, in, out …. etc”
Dear Windsock, I am a conventional human being, so I am qualified to opine on what is normal and what is a distortion of normality, and hence what is perverted. Your norms may well be different, and I suppose that however reluctantly I do so, I accept that. However, I cannot see why being a ‘doctor’ (by which you presumably mean a medical doctor) has any bearing on it. The medical profession has its share of myths and fables, and it wasn’t long ago that blood-letting was the norm, doctors went from dissection of corpses to the delivery room without even washing their hands and thus spread fatal disease, amputated limbs with gay abandon for relatively minor injuries, and dispensed drugs like Thalidomide that with the best will in the world could hardly have improved the lives of those who consumed them.
I have some sympathy for someone who is uncomfortable with their genetically assigned body, but I don’t agree that the costs of modifying their body need to be the responsibility of the taxpayer. What people want to do to themselves is their business, not mine.
Perhaps for those who believe that they are the wrong sex, it may help to convert to Hinduism, and you can live with what you got dished out today in the expectation that it will be different next time round!
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2016 at 5:15 pm -
‘so I am qualified to opine on what is normal and what is a distortion of normality, and hence what is perverted’.
I have reservations about the moral issues associated with some issues, but if perversion is defined as ‘the process of improperly changing something that is good’, I still struggle a bit with the notion that, in what is an imperfect world, changing something that isn’t necessarily entirely good, to something else that might be a bit better, is perverted. Nor can I condemn those who would, in good conscience, try to do so.
But I guess that I might not be authoritarian enough for my own good
- Hadleigh Fan
February 13, 2016 at 8:00 pm -
I’d gone away to read up on why (men) feel the need to have the surgery I so disparaged, and discovered to my astonishment that some men get sexual kicks from thinking of themselves in a female body! Turns out it even has a name: Autogynephilia.
I stand on the point that I don’t see why taxpayers like me have to support people’s sexual fantasies, but if anyone cares to pay with their own money to indulge in legal activities like mucking around with their bodies, I frankly don’t see why they shouldn’t. But please don’t imagine that it is what the majority of the world’s population would describe as normal.
I said I was qualified to opine (i.e. give my opinion). I never said that it was a universally held opinion, nor did I say that ‘normal’ was ‘good’ (although I happen to think so). So it was deviation from normal.
It’s a great mistake to think that a pronouncement on any forum is anything other than its author’s opinion, but a lesser mistake to think that the author knows it! In my case, I know it is opinion alone.
- windsock
February 14, 2016 at 11:37 am -
Also this might help you understand why autogynephilia is not the same as transexualism.
http://tsroadmap.com/info/autogynephilia.html
I read about this somewhere else (sorry, can’t find the link, grrrr!) that a study of the subject was based on men who identified as straight, who found pleasure in fantasizing they were a woman for sexual purposes, but had no desire or intention to transition.
- windsock
- Hadleigh Fan
- windsock
February 14, 2016 at 11:27 am -
Dear Hadleigh Fan,
A previous partner’s sister had breast implants (enlargements). She became a changed woman – more confident, and went from being an unemployed mother of two to a police officer. I think that confidence and her newly acquired tax paying abilities were more than worth the NHS operation.
Conversely, I also know of a woman who had a breast reduction and she reported greater happiness that her subsequent partner was more interested in her as a person than the previous one who had mostly just been into her tits.
I also know of a transexual woman who paid for her surgery herself. We have talked many times about her identity issues and she says she always felt she was a woman trapped in an ugly gay man’s body. She now has a male partner and is matriarch to his family…. and very happy. If the NHS were to have paid for years of therapy to try to make her happy – and fail, would that not have been a more extensive waste of money than an operation (which she chose to pay for herself)?
I think the only thing that can be “perverted” is an ideology, not a person. If something varies from “the norm”, it is just that, a variation and can be seen in all sorts of behaviour. Why people get so het up about what an individual chooses to do with their own body always confuses/amuses me. Aren’t there enough other things to bother about?
- Ho Hum
- Hadleigh Fan
- Ho Hum
- The Blocked Dwarf
February 13, 2016 at 12:53 pm -
Mommy, how many Docs AnnaR to the Wales BBC Radio4 ?
How does one express fractions of ‘Docs’, nurses,ward cleaners(for negative amounts anyways) ? Doc-Coin accepted here anyone?
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2016 at 1:05 pm -
You’re quite right, Anna. There’s a whole lot of stitching up going on, and the scalpels are also out to create a lot of new victims. And we won’t have enough docs to meet the impact and cost of it all
- DtP
February 13, 2016 at 1:46 pm -
Love the Junior Doc currency – it beats bitcoin as l’argent de nos jours!
- Eric
February 13, 2016 at 3:12 pm -
Err…
Savilisation and Savile is nothing new. The only thing new about it is that people know about it because it’s public people (albeit fairly obscure old ones mostly).
It’s been happening since the 1990s in residential care and schooling for children, mainly disturbed children for obvious reasons. It was accelerated in the late 1990s by “Similar Fact” law, which meant that Police could just collect any old allegations and stick them together as mutually self supporting, even if they were nonsense – think Roache for example.
Prior to this they had to have strong similarities.
The “Cliff Richard” behaviour, touting for allegations, has its roots in the “trawling” process, whereby Plod rang up all former residents/pupils inviting them to make complaints, usually with compensation in the background. No, always with compensation in the background, usually the Police telling them about it. They would do things like advertise in prisons for former pupils to “come forward”. Any pupil who came forward to say “look, this is all a load of cr*p” was either ignored (or, to my knowledge, threatened, with CPJ ; the ‘victims’ of course can set up as many meetings as they like and CPJ never happens. ever)
For example, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmhaff/836/836.pdf (House of Commons committee on the subject from 2000-2001).
Everything you read there will be familiar, or have exact parallels.
Including the insane mushrooming of claims against the ‘abuser’ – think Savile again – all prompted by the usual compo solicitors (and many of the same names are still at it).
There is no excuse, incidentally, for the government not knowing about it as one of the members of that committee was the then barely known D.Cameron MP.
Probably the only well known victim of this was the football manager David Jones, who was picked up in a massive trawl of virtually the entirety of the Mersey/Manchester corridor. His trial fell apart after the 5 (carefully selected) complainants all retracted/withdrew at the start of the trial.
- Ho Hum
February 13, 2016 at 3:17 pm -
You should tell this story at parties. You’d be a riot.
- Cloudberry
February 13, 2016 at 4:54 pm -
“They would do things like advertise in prisons for former pupils to “come forward”.”
There’s a description of police trawling here (http://prisonerben.blogspot.com/2012/02/justice-3.html), though I think it’s a bit rich of him to blame the police for manipulating him, when he clearly had been all to happy to make a false allegation and seems to have little or no remorse about it.- Eric
February 13, 2016 at 7:08 pm -
I have actually read that. I think he does have a bit of remorse about it. People sometimes do, not often. More common is the other way round, where they talk to a defence lawyer, and say “but it wasn’t like that”, and then find out about the compensation racket.
- Eric
- Cloudberry
- Ho Hum
- Ian B
February 13, 2016 at 4:10 pm -
I think it’s pretty sad to still be excusing the Feminists as “useful idiots on the sidelines”. From them has come the whole child abuse panic, which they started fomenting when they picked up on Satanic Ritual Abuse and have been running with ever since. Savilisation was simply a consequence of that. “Media barons and charities”. Okay, where did they get the idea from? “Political ideology”- what political ideology? Whose political ideology?
It’s the ideology that says that all men are rapists, and that men have families to produce more victims to abuse (© Catharine Mackinnon), the ideology that detests the sexual looseness of the “liberated” 1970s and wants that period condemned utterly, the movement that arose in reaction against the “sexual revolution” of the 1960s and collapse of the First Wave Feminist, Social Purity system- that movement being Second Wave Feminism.
The Media was the method. The charities and legal firms and insiders in the bureaucracy etc were the mechanism. But the ideology is Feminist Theory, Feminist Definitions Of Trauma, Feminist interpretations of sex, gender and class power relations. And in particular Ms. Mackinnon’s theory of Feminist jurisprudence.
- IlovetheBBC
February 14, 2016 at 9:24 am -
Sorry but whatever the excesses of feminism, you cannot blame the SRA nonsense on them. That one emanated from the Christian right. Some (and it IS only some) feminists picked it up and ran with it, but it’s wrong to make the assumption that because a woman thinks she should have the same rights as a man she also believes in SRA. For one thing, women get accused of SRA too. In fact women have featured heavily as the accused in several well -known cases, such as the McMartin preschool panic.
- Mr Ecks
February 14, 2016 at 1:40 pm -
Some of the SRA was down to the Born-Agains.
But plenty of it was down to the climate of anti-male hatred fostered by cultural Marxism. And putrid leftist social work scum.
CM is what Ayn Rand called ” The New Left”. Feminism is that division of CM charged with poisoning relationships between men and women. Because families derived from the relationships of men and women are the foundation of bourgeois society (they have done much harm –but as not as much as Welfare etc).
Far too many use feminism as if the word referred to a vague idea that women should be equal with men. It does not. Marxist feminism is an ideology of brazen hatred towards men and seeks to quite literally destroy them.
- Mr Ecks
- IlovetheBBC
- Alexander Baron
February 13, 2016 at 6:17 pm -
I can’t believe they gone and laid more charges against Rolf Harris. How is he meant to defend himself? This madness has to stop.
- David
February 13, 2016 at 9:43 pm -
‘This madness has to stop’, I presume you mean the sexual abuse of children?
- Alexander Baron
February 14, 2016 at 1:07 am -
That isn’t madness, it’s obscenity.
- Mr Ecks
February 14, 2016 at 1:44 pm -
No the trolling of loons like you David.
Tell me do you practice swallowing lies or does it come naturally to you?
- David
February 14, 2016 at 1:53 pm -
There is a murder inquiry going on, which will produce results. Just because no children in your family were murdered, you have the selfish, ‘I’m Alright Jack’ attitude.
- Elsie
February 14, 2016 at 5:13 pm -
As a member of a family who are all SURVIVING VICTIMS of a false accuser & wrongful HSA conviction. I think I am qualified to take part in this conversation. There was no proper police investigation, the accused was presumed guilty, there was no evidence as the crime was imaginary, there were 2 other witness’s giving evidence that this crime was imaginary, they were at the address at the alleged date of the alleged crime. The accused did not have wealth enough for a decent PI lawyer and used a LA lawyer who was a friend of the charging police officer. The accused had no chance. Beyond Reasonable doubt has been removed from these trials.It is impossible to prove an imaginary crime did not happen as it is impossible to prove it did. The jury guessed.. This is your justice. Tom Watson had his stories printed in the media the week before. These Leon Brittain stories were on tv and radio at the time. The jury guessed wrong!!! A Family has lost its most important member. A wife without her husband of 33 years. 3 children without their dad who has cared for them all their lives. 4 Grandchildren who have lost their wonderful Grand dad. All these lives in trauma. This crime was imaginary. Imagine being locked up, for an imaginary crime. Imagine a jury stating you are GUILTY of a crime that did not happen. This could happen to you at anytime unless these laws are changed.. There are 000s of innocent people sat in a cell NOW convicted of crimes that did not happen. Is this what you want. 000s of innocent people being sacrificed… Children crying at night for their parents and grandparents. What more do you want. If you only knew just how many innocent good living families are right now out there looking for new evidence for an appeal… Looking for new evidence to prove an imaginary crime did not happen…. Evidence that was not required to convict but for some reason in this crazy justice system is required to appeal. All the lawyers and barristers and judges and police know what is happening. Is this what you want? Corroborative Evidence matters!!!!!
- IlovetheBBC
February 14, 2016 at 11:31 pm -
I feel for you Elsie, and your family. I’ve seen the results of this close up: a work colleague’s father, a pillar of his community, was accused of an ‘historic’ offence and his incredulity turned to horror when he realised the police considered him guilty from the off. He couldn’t refute it. There was no actual evidence to refute. He killed himself. And for many, that proved his guilt. It’s torn his family apart and they’ll live with the stain of it forever. Try to stay strong and one day your family may get proper justice. Things have to improve because they can’t get any worse.
- IlovetheBBC
- Elsie
- Cloudberry
February 14, 2016 at 1:55 pm -
“I can’t believe they gone and laid more charges against Rolf Harris. How is he meant to defend himself? This madness has to stop.”
I agree, and I don’t fancy his chances, given what happened the first time around. It would be all too easy for someone to copy one of the stories that emerged during the first trial. It’s difficult to see how he could get a fair trial this time either.- Eric
February 14, 2016 at 3:24 pm -
That’s what happens. The only surprise is it is as low as seven. In Savilisations parent, Residential Care Trawling, it is not unheard of for one not-guilty verdict to produce literally hundreds of claims. Literally hundreds.
It’s hardly surprising ; it’s an open invite to lie for money with zero risk.
- Eric
- David
- Alexander Baron
- David
- The Jannie
February 13, 2016 at 6:30 pm -
“the grizzly allegations”
Are these bear-faced lies?
- Stewart Cowan
February 13, 2016 at 7:59 pm -
O/T – I will write this in two comments to avoid moderation incarceration.
I see that national treasure, Noel Edmonds, has been tweeting about immigration. Personally, I think we’re only ‘too full’ of people who won’t live like human beings and respect our way of life, but here is an article about his tweets from a month ago:
- Stewart Cowan
February 13, 2016 at 8:01 pm -
News just in – his stalker has accused him of having an affair with her:
“It kicked off again a few weeks ago. ‘She’ sends me emails of an intimate nature. Then it got quite serious as she accused me of having an affair and she wanted to go to the media.”
Coincidence, or are they by any chance related?
It could be argued that he should be arrested for ‘Deal Or No Deal,’ but you can’t upset the Establishment like that and expect to get away with it! He’s fortunate he didn’t get seven bullets through his brain at point blank range like the aforementioned Mr de Menezes.
- Don Cox
February 13, 2016 at 8:01 pm -
“a perfect storm of tensions between the media, the police and the charitable third sector. ”
And the lawyers. A major driving force in all this is lawyers pursuing claims for “compensation”.
The current compensation culture is doing plenty of damage on its own.
- Stewart Cowan
February 13, 2016 at 8:04 pm -
Make that three comments. Cue Mr Edmonds:
“I’ve subsequently had a guy who set up a website to kill me,” Edmonds said. “I had the option of bringing the police into this but I went down a slightly different route.
“I met him and he went to pieces completely. He had a very simple decision: either I went to the police, or meet me and I want to understand why you want to kill me.”
- Ed P
February 13, 2016 at 11:30 pm -
Did you just invent “fanstory”? If you didn’t you should have.
- Major Bonkers
February 14, 2016 at 8:36 am -
More on the Met corruption/ Nigerian governor story:
- Misa
February 14, 2016 at 10:15 am -
Anna, Moor’s link has led me back to your original post and this line in particular:
“Unfortunately – in her e-mail to Ms Cooper, the adult female explained her reticence about participating further in terms of not wanting to re-awaken feelings of distress and discomfort personally, *but wishing to validate the accounts of Savile’s other victims*. ”
I seem to recall, from when you went tackled that pile of ‘lesser’ Savile reports, as well as in the Leeds/Stoke Mandeville/Broadmoor reports, which I ploughed through myself, there were a quite a number of people who seemed to be similarly motivated – people apparently genuinely concerned to ‘help’. I guess this is only a small step from the old ‘you could tell by the way he rattled his milk bottles’ response to hearing that a neighbour had been picked up for some heinous crime, but I wonder what’s really going on here. Do you have any sense of why people would feel the need *to validate* someone else’s account, or how the legal system would normally treat this kind of ‘evidence’?
- David
February 14, 2016 at 2:04 pm -
Vera Baird, the police and crime commissioner for Northumbria, said her force would not be adopting the policy of not automatically believing an alleged abuse victim, which has been suggested by Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/12/bernard-hogan-howe-sex-abuse-claims-comments-vera-baird-northumbria-police
- Eric
February 14, 2016 at 3:26 pm -
That’s easily fixed.
Make an accusation against Vera Baird, her husband (?) or son (?), publicise them in the press as Paedos because they are “believable”, see how these sh*ts like it.
- Eric
- Marion
February 15, 2016 at 1:17 pm -
An aside re Jimmy Savile and the press: it was reported in the Glasgow Herald of 12th July 1989 that Jimmy Savile sued News Group Newspapers – and won. The article states, “Last January the Sun and The News of the World published articles wrongly suggesting that Mr Savile was in a position to secure the release of dangerous patients without proper heed to public safety and medical advice.” In a nutshell, he won ‘substantial’ undisclosed damages, had his costs paid and received an apology. Unfortunately I can’t get the link sorted but the article can be found on the Google News website.
{ 57 comments… read them below or add one }