When Louis laid down his friend for his career…
The late 90s were a time of geopolitical turbulence; the Berlin Wall had crumbled, then the Soviet Union. Nelson Mandela, so long the name of south London tower blocks, became reality as he walked out of Victor Verster prison before our very eyes. The upstart BSB was challenging Sky TV and both were challenging the safe solid BBC. The channel tunnel joined two historic adversaries in conjugal bliss. Identity politics was in its infancy, questions of race, class, and sexuality were being discussed openly. Barriers were being scaled on the flickering screen in our living rooms – to be a documentary maker in those days required something different, to be edgy, cool, to challenge the norm, to be the ‘Banksy’ of the silver screen or to disappear without trace. Shock value was essential.
Back in the late 90s, Louis Theroux was just such an ambitious young documentary maker. He made a documentary about the original ‘shock-jock’, Jimmy Savile in 2000. He threw in every tool in his toolbox of how to be ‘edgy, cool, and challenging’. It worked. The nation gasped as he asked Savile whether he ‘was a paedophile’. They gawped as he described how Savile’s devotion to his recently deceased mother was such that he hadn’t felt able to throw out her clothes. Despite the fact that probably half the nation sleeps in a bed, or at least a room, in which someone has died in, they gazed in awe as our edgy young documentary maker actually slept in the bed ‘that Mrs Savile died in’. How cool was that? What devotion to your art?
The only fly in the ointment was that Louis’ headlong dash to beat cool Britannia to the title of coolest of them all, didn’t look so clever fifteen years later when an amateur documentary maker took advantage of Savile’s death to declare that Savile ‘really was a paedophile’ and indirectly invite anyone who had ever met him to put in a claim for sexual abuse.
Louis’ edgy question as to whether Savile was a paedophile had turned into a Michelin tyre full of petrol round the Theroux gullet – only a matter of time before someone set light to it.
Something had to be done. A career salvaged. Perhaps a friend savaged? He was only a dead friend. Which was most important? Being a diligent honest documentary maker – or being a ‘still employed’ documentary maker?
We found out on Monday night.
We watched the ‘creepy and weird’ Louis riding his bicycle round an empty room with drawn curtains in Louis’ house, as you do, when you want to show how avant garde you are. His ‘subject’, his overnight guest, Jimmy Savile, a good enough friend to be invited to stay in his house a full year after the documentary was aired, sensibly sat downstairs smoking an early morning cigar, whilst this curious behaviour manifested itself. Later, we are treated to the sight of Louis on hands and knees withdrawing a box of ‘artifacts’ concerning the late Jimmy Savile, a man he now acknowledges to be a paedophile, a man he now says he had evidence in the form of a letter for the past 15 years, evidence that he has stored in his bedroom for the past 15 years…you want ‘creepy, weird’? Huh!
He started his re-examination of ‘the facts’ by travelling up to Oswestry to meet Kat Ward. Most people have no idea that Kat Ward didn’t appear on the ill-fated Exposure programme. They are not sufficiently interested to spot that the clip seen of her interview with Meirion Jones was never shown on BBC, but mysteriously managed to make it to ITV news. Most people are not sufficiently interested to realise that Kat never repeated to Dame Janet Smith her tale of being ‘forced’ to give Jimmy oral sex in his Rolls Royce ‘in order to got to his tv show’. Most people aren’t sufficiently interested to realise that this version of events only appears in her self-published biography where he is described as ‘JS’.
But then most people aren’t sufficiently interested to have tracked down the official transmission date of that programme and Kat’s birth certificate to find that it was a couple of days before her 16th birthday, that she wasn’t ’14’ as it was said she had claimed. Nor are most sane people sufficiently interested to plough through all the official documents to find that Jimmy first visited Duncroft a mere 6 weeks before that TV programme.
I was sufficiently interested. I was myself at Duncroft. Not a ‘boarding school for emotionally disturbed teenagers’ as described on Monday – but a locked approved school. Locked. We were prevented from seeing our boyfriends, in fact any single man – in my case the newly divorced husband of the couple who had taken the place of parents for me. It was that strict.
Not surprisingly, when I first published that fact, I was contacted by many long standing friends and family of Savile, anxious to make contact with anyone who wasn’t taking this strange tale at face value. Amongst those long standing friends who knew the man well, two stand out. A Mr Will Yapp and a Mr Louis Theroux. I have spent, or rather wasted, many hours on the phone with Will Yapp, Theroux’ producer. They were eager for ‘facts’, not ‘opinion – most commendable.
Amongst those ‘facts’ – not ‘opinion’, that were passed on, were inconvenient facts like Kat Ward’s birth certificate; the transmission date of the programme she appeared on, the police confirmation of the date Savile first set foot in Duncroft; the e-mails exchanged between Kat Ward and other Duncroft girls admitting that she couldn’t actually remember anything of her time there; the official confirmation that one’s first six months in Duncroft was a time of no home visits, certainly no trips out in any Rolls Royce with a disc jockey who had just come into contact with the school – and just for good measure, the contact details of the girl who to this day has a tea chest full of Savile memorabilia from her time as his ‘special friend’ when she was 15 – and unabused by him – and at Duncroft.
He hasn’t lost the contact details of any of the people he plagued for information – only a couple of weeks ago he was retweeting articles of mine, so I know he is still snooping.
I don’t bother to watch the plethora of ‘Savile’ documentaries that come on TV. Eager young producers looking for cheap time fillers. Knowing the amount of special access Louis had had by virtue of his ‘long standing friendship’ with Savile – I did record this one.
By three and a half minutes in, Theroux was tramping up the path of Kat Ward. ‘Can you remember the first time Jimmy Savile came to the school’ he asked. Did he follow up by saying how old were you then? No. Did he follow up by saying how long had you been at the school by then? No Did he follow up by saying ‘Do you know how he came to be visiting the school’ No. Just allowed the old meme of how Savile always brought records and cigarettes for all the other girls – not just the girl he was visiting. Terrible man!
Then Theroux asks ‘and some of the girls would get chosen to take a ride in the Rolls with Jimmy, is that right?’ Cut to a shot of Jimmy sitting in the back of his Rolls…Did Theroux ask the bloody obvious question ‘and were you one of those girls?’ No, he didn’t. The significance of that is that we know that during a fete in 1979, trips ’round the block’ for three or four girls at a time, in the back of Jimmy’s Rolls Royce, was one of the events of the fete. One of the stories that has been handed on from girl to girl – but Kat Ward wasn’t there in 1979. She had long since left.
So the juxtaposition of Theroux’s disingenuous question ‘and some of the girls’ – the interspersing piece of film of Jimmy sitting in the back of his car – and Kat saying ‘he had mainly been doing a bit of snogging’ – terrible man, disc jockey, kissing young fans, ooh er Matron – cut to more footage of Savile in a Rolls Royce – and back to Kat Ward. Finally, after all these years, she repeats her statement that Savile asked her to fellate him in the back of his car in order to go onto his TV programme.
Did Theroux ask how she came to be out with Savile in his car in that brief 6 week period between his arrival at the school and the TV programme? Did he hell. Did he ask whether anyone else had accompanied them? No Did he then ask how come she was allowed to go out alone in a car with a man who had come to visit someone else at the school? Did he hell again! Did he ask how it was that Operation Orchard hadn’t been able to find anyone else to verify the tale of the repeatedly abused (by her step-father) Kat Ward being allowed out of a locked facility in her first few weeks of incarceration with a single man, any single man, especially one who had come to see another girl in the Headmistress’s study?
Kat goes on to explain the finer gory details of ‘as a child’ fellating an adult, a description that would have made most people instinctively flinch; a gentle reminder, dear reader, that even if this version of events could possibly be true – within a fortnight of it supposedly taking place, she would have been free to marry James Wilson Savile…so much for ‘as a child’…but she continued ‘and he flung the car door open and said ‘not in the car, not in the car’ – but then there was nothing in this clip by which we could ascertain whether she was talking about Savile or her step-father. Our fearless documentary maker certainly didn’t bother to establish which.
‘Welcome to the 21st century’s strangest friendship’ boasted Louis.
Last Friday night, as the preview clips of this documentary were sent out. Louis was lauded by the Grierson Trust. The Grierson Trust commemorates the pioneering Scottish documentary maker John Grierson: the man widely regarded as the father of the documentary.
It was a desire to make a drama out of the ordinary, to set against the prevailing drama of the extraordinary: a desire to bring the citizen’s eye in from the ends of the earth to the story, his own story, of what was happening under his nose.
John Grierson.
I cannot imagine a less worthy recipient of that award than Theroux’ latest oeuvre. Manipulative; obscuring; unquestioning of the most salient facts – it was a publicly broadcast polishing of a curriculum vitae by one of the few people in possession of the facts that should be questioned.
I didn’t bother to watch the rest of the programme – why waste my time on nonsense?
Perhaps I am not alone in my despair at this lowering of journalistic standards.
As that Grierson award was being handed out, over at the Prix Italia festival in Lampedusa, one of our pre-eminent news journalists was sadly walking away from 34 years at the helm of BBC news.
To be frank, I worry about the direction in which we’re going. By “we”, by the way, I mean my profession, our profession – the media generally – not the BBC in particular.
Do we, the media, do enough today, to explain and explore? Or are we too busy moving on to the next thing, in thrall to the pace of news?
Yes, in a long and detailed speech, more than worth reading in full, Helen Boaden, doyenne of responsible news journalists, walked away from the BBC that she was once so proud to be part of – even as Louis Theroux was being showered with the Grierson award.
It’s a parable for our times.
- The Last Furlong
October 4, 2016 at 1:48 pm -
Oh. I enjoyed the programme. Always liked Louis Theroux. While we lived in Africa, he seemed to make more truthful documentaries than the (crap) others we saw. So I was sorry the Jimmy Saville thing had destroyed him. I’m glad he had a chance to explain himself. The first programme (2000) was my introduction to Jimmy Saville whom we had never heard of. I remember my revulsion and disgust at Jimmy Saville, the man, and wondered how on earth such an obviously creepy, weird, repulsive little person could possibly have had such an impact on the “strange” undiscerning British TV audiences so that they actually LIKED him! Of course, I know very little about any of it – it wasn’t any part of our African life. But, I must say, the need for money, which evidently is what he procured for Charities, corrupts, and “blinds” too. And still does!
- James
October 4, 2016 at 1:54 pm -
You’re new here aren’t you?
- Anne
October 4, 2016 at 4:03 pm -
Has to be a newbie!
- Ho Hum
October 4, 2016 at 4:06 pm -
Or a troll, or a thrall, or, heaven forbid, maybe even a shill
- Bandini
October 4, 2016 at 4:12 pm -
Aye, those shilling are apt to turn up like bad pennies! Unfortunately you DO get too many of them to the pound.
- The Last Furlong
October 5, 2016 at 7:21 am -
I pointed out clearly in my comment that I was a newbie to the UK when the first Theroux documentary was aired and had never heard of Jimmy Savile. And that I liked the Theroux documentaries because in them were fragments of truth in the country where I came from that censored the press and told lies.
I pointed out that as an off-comer, without any knowledge of who Savile was, the man, Savile was creepy, disgusting and completely weird to MY eyes. Imagine yourself watching such a strange creature as an ignorant foreigner (actually British returning to the land of The Swallows and Amazons, Pooh Bear and The Secret Seven)! He really was off the wall as an oddball, repulsive, nay, grotesque person. I thought he was repulsive. I thought someone might be interested in the response of a complete Savile “virgin”, here. Whether he was guilty of everything/anything he is accused of I haven’t a clue. I found THIS blog trying to find out the truth! I read this blog. In my personal life, I have met creepy people – not very often I must say, but I do try to avoid them for how they make ME feel..
Creepy people are not necessarily paedophiles. Creepy people are just – well – creepy! And that’s unfortunate. At my husband’s school (in Africa) the paedophile “ring” was made up of perfectly appealing people – sports masters, scout masters, maths teachers who looked normal and acceptable. Pillars of the community, role models for the boys even.
So, having watched the first Savile documentary, I had to wonder why viewers LIKED the man. Was there something strange about British viewers? In the twenty years I have been here I have found out that Britain is not the land of The Swallows and Amazons, Pooh Bear and The Secret Seven. I have gradually learned that I AM more British than foreigner and I have a right to my opinion too. And there is still a lot of TV here, that’s weird. And audiences still seem to LIKE it!
Don’t you dare call me a Troll!
I have also learned that having an uncensored press and a “civilised” government, doesn’t bring truth. It is as elusive as ever. It’s obscured in a more sophisticated way, that’s all.
There are probably spelling errors in this comment – I don’t care, though it would usually matter. It’s just dawn, I’m cold sitting at the kitchen table here while my husband sleeps. I need a hot coffee and a vape and I needed to get this off my chest.
- windsock
October 5, 2016 at 9:01 am -
Mrs Last Furlong: all I would say to your comment is: clowns. I find them “creepy, disgusting and completely weird”. But they are a staple of children’s parties. Go figure. (And let’s not talk about John Wayne Gacy.)
In many ways, as an entertainer, Savile was a clown without the make up.
- windsock
October 5, 2016 at 9:15 am -
And that comment was made before I read this:
- The Last Furlong
October 5, 2016 at 10:19 am -
We used to love Clowns – we only saw them at the Circus and they weren’t creepy to me. My generation entertained THEMSELVES at our parties by playing musical chairs or pin the tail on the donkey. Only rich people could afford to employ a clown for a kid’s party! And “our” clowns were nothing like the dreadful creatures in the Guardian report. Those are called “clowns”? The world is seriously sick if those are even vaguely percieved as “clowns”. And I’d never heard of John Wayne Gacy. But I am going to watch a video about him now. First impression is how UN-creepy he looks! Who would have guessed his secret? No Jimmy Savile there….HIS creepyness has been his enemy. It has been his “sentence” to a population of abuse hunting addicts.
- windsock
October 5, 2016 at 10:42 am -
We’re probably of the same generation and class – no clowns at the parties I went to – Blind Man’s Bluff, Musical Statues, Postman’s Knock… But, seriously, even clowns at the circus (one every year up on the local heath – followed, every year, by a traveling zoo) made me feel uneasy. “The League Of Gentlemen: picked up on it perfectly with their Papa Lazarou character – who could actually be Savile in blackface (not starting another rumour!)
- Peter Raite
October 5, 2016 at 1:36 pm -
The perception of clowns has probably shifted because they’re now something of a horror trope. COnsider that Googling “funny clown” gets 394,000 hits, but “scary clown” gets 912,000!
- Mrs Grimble
October 5, 2016 at 2:18 pm -
Serial killers are rarely creepy. Fred West was the jolly bloke who threw great parties, Peter Sutcliffe was a normal, sociable trucker who just liked to take long walks at night; Harold Shipman was a conscientious GP who thought the world of his elderly patients; Dennis Nilsen was an equally conscientious civil servant who liked to help out young gay men. And of course, John Wayne Gacy was a kiddies’ entertainer.
Savile WAS peculier – he kept up a permanent ‘front’, didn’t allow anybody to get near him emotionally (may have been why he fired Janet Cope?), disliked kids, liked his privacy. But, in his time and place, that wasn’t considered odd; men kept their emotions buttoned up and nobody went around telling all and sundry about how hard life was for them. Entertainers were expected to entertain and, to some extent, be masked-up clowns. People like Danny la Rue and Liberace could get away with appearing in the most outrageous outfits in public, just so long as they kept people entertained.
Everybody and their dog is jumping on the “I always knew…” bandwagon, whenever the subject of the Savile Paedomonster crops up. But I can’t be the only one who remembers how popular he was in his prime; not many people seemed to think he was creepy back then.
- windsock
- The Last Furlong
- windsock
- Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 12:45 pm -
Well, I’m very glad you cleared up that initial 200yds of confusion. That last 220 yds is much more comprehensible and worthy of the result!. So let me buy you a pint to slake your thirst after that admirable effort, and I trust that you see fit to come back!
And, in the interests of clarity, it might be worth pointing out that in joining in the initial surmising as to your status, the possibility of your maybe being a troll was related to the meaning that had when it was an honourable art. That’s not the same as the current, populist, one, which the MSM seems to have manage to discombombulate the public into believing represents the equivalent of many of, but mercifully not all, the nasty horrible people who are found at their level in the gutter, a place into which they seem hellbent on dragging as many gullible souls as possible
- windsock
- Bandini
- Ho Hum
- Anne
- Owen
October 4, 2016 at 4:26 pm -
You are new here. You won’t find much dislike of the obviously creepy, weird, repulsive under the flag flown on this ship. But there ar some of us who are happy enough that what we saw is what was there.
The business of this blog is to challenge (personally I’d use the word undermine) the evidence against Savile. But if at any time you feel confused, remember, out there is a normal world.
- James
- windsock
October 4, 2016 at 2:12 pm -
“an obviously creepy, weird, repulsive little person”… hmm, maybe, but that doesn’t make him a paedophile. Hell, half of the population are, to the other half “an obviously creepy, weird, repulsive little person”. That doesn’t make half the population paedophiles either.
- Owen
October 4, 2016 at 4:50 pm -
Do you really think that half the population think the other half are quite as creepy as Savile? You must live in an exceptionally unpleasant/unalanced neighbourhood. Just look at the mountain of evidence. Is it really all just a monstrous cospiracy of media and compensation-seekers?
- windsock
October 4, 2016 at 5:04 pm -
Not necessarily AS creepy as Savile – sometimes creepier, sometimes less, but I would have thought in every neighborhood “unpleasant/un(b)alanced” (?) exceptionally or not, people are judging each other, and thus gossip begins. Is there anything more than gossip keeping this particular Hallowe’en House of Horror going?
- Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 10:05 pm -
‘Just look at the mountain of evidence’
And a pile of poo is a pile of poo. Having read a lot of it, one wonders what happened to the spirit of the hard bitten generation that was my father and his siblings, who would, about much of it, have unanimously said ‘Try pulling the other one, son’
Sure, you can’t take every last thing that has been said as being totally untrue, but ‘when logic and proportion, have fallen sloppy dead, and the White Knight is talking backwards, and the Red Queen’s off with her head’, you do have to wonder who is feeding whose head, and with what.
- JimBob McGinty
October 5, 2016 at 10:30 pm -
“And a pile of poo is a pile of poo. Having read a lot of it, one wonders what happened to the spirit of the hard bitten generation that was my father and his siblings, who would, about much of it, have unanimously said ‘Try pulling the other one, son’”
The populace as a whole seems to have lost the ability to think critically or question received wisdom. I blame television.
- JimBob McGinty
- windsock
- Owen
- windsock
October 4, 2016 at 2:13 pm -
Anna, you have done sterling work with your blog in debunking the Savile mythology. What about getting someone on board to make your own documentary, with the questions you have posed?
- Peb
October 4, 2016 at 3:30 pm -
“make your own documentary, with the questions you have posed?”
I think it’s far too late for anything as simple as mere facts. Everyone just knows that Savile “spent every waking minute of his life thinking about abusing children, ” even if they’ve never read the papers or watched the tv then they’ve heard the chatter down the pub, in a queue. The message has been absorbed by osmosis, Savile was a paedophile! It’s a fact confined by thousands of voices. I think at the moment if you had a time machine and used it make a film of his every second between birth and death then no one would watch that film because everyone knows what he did and that he had friends in high places
- Peb
- Bandini
October 4, 2016 at 2:51 pm -
Anna, the rest of the mockumentary really is worth the bother – I rather fancy this was Theroux laying the foundations for his upcoming 2031 documentary, “Louis Theroux: Sir Jimmy – a heartfelt apology”.
Both Janet Cope and Sylvia Nichol (Stoke Mandeville) came across very well and went as far as any sensible person – who doesn’t fancy having their letterboxes stuffed with shut & midnight ‘phone calls threatening their lives – could go: they won’t have their decades of up-close memories browbeaten by nutters & serial attention seekers. (Particularly impressive given that Cope has a legitimate reason for feeling agrieved over the manner of her sacking.)
I commented under an un-related article here, for anyone interested in the curious creatures who ‘remember’ being kissed by The Phantom:
https://annaraccoon.com/2016/10/01/when-irish-eyes-should-be-sleeping/comment-page-1/#comment-18205726434457876- Moor Larkin
October 6, 2016 at 11:36 am -
@Bandini
I am confused as to why Looooois has plunged himself back into these waters. He did a trendy gig with Richard Herring a while back and thoroughly lambasted the evil Jimmy (live on youtube and very down wiv de kidz). Would have thought he’d laid the daemon to rest then, and wouldn’t have wanted to get involved ever again with the dead bastard. Have yet to watch the show but followed another blog about it, and it sounds completely batty and says nothing new. But the new footage that has excited Owen intrigues me. What happened to the damaged victims theory of being traumatised by the terror that stalks their minds made visual and…… fleshy?
- Moor Larkin
- James Hind
October 4, 2016 at 3:17 pm -
Despite the high probability that Savile has abused vulnerable and young people, I am cynical that all the claims are authentic. A lot of garbage has been written in association to Savile, who has become the media bogey man of modern times. The speculations sourced to Valerie Sinason that Savile was engaged in Satanic abuse rituals are pure fiction.
Louis Theroux has committed the cardinal sin of documentary filmmakers of becoming subjectively involved in the subject of his documentary, a weakness that Savile exploited. At least one, possibly others in the documentary commented how Theroux had been duped by Savile, for instance his belief that Savile spent the night in the van in Scotland. Because Theroux lost his objectivity, his material becomes tainted, and it impacts the credibility of Theroux.
Even when Savile is dead, there are many people with dubious agendas spinning fictions in the hope of financial reward and attention. This article shows that Theroux has been duped by at least one “victim” of Savile. Theroux comes over as gullible and stupid in this matter. The victim that claimed she was in a hospital bed, was spotted by Savile whilst jogging, who climbed in through a window, put his tongue down her throat and said some weird things to her, struck me as someone describing a dream rather than a real event. If one part in a chain of evidence in a documentary is found to be untrue, how many other links in the chain will fail on examination?
*This comment corrects two spelling errors*
- tdf
October 4, 2016 at 10:53 pm -
@James Hind
Yep. Your post very much reflects my own point of view.
- tdf
- Misa
October 4, 2016 at 3:57 pm -
Dearest Anna, I really ought to curse you. I was stumbling around the interwebs fascinated by the possible implications of the Savile revelations when I first learnt of your existence, and staggered into the Arms partway through your Duncroft memoir. I’ve since fallen into dubious company, whiled away hour upon hour in other hostelries opened by your patrons Mr Larkin in Ms Away. Oh, what have you done to me?
Perhaps you’ve restored my faith in my homeland. You and the majority of your patrons have assured me that all is not yet lost.
Please, forgive Louis. He’s not very bright, but just bright enough to know which side his bread is buttered.
For anyone who needs a bit of a lift, I suggest having a quick look at this:
https://profile.theguardian.com/user/id/14191163Someone, presumably someone who drinks here from time to time, spent the weekend patiently and politely correcting misunderstandings amongst the Gruaniad’s lamentable readership. Whoever you are, hats off to you…and, of course, hats off to the remarkable landlady.
- Bandini
October 4, 2016 at 4:08 pm -
Misa! We must have bumbled along here at more or less the same time – with the same cursed results!
‘Tis I commenting there, though you’ll only see the ones that haven’t been evaporated by the inscrutable moderators; I only piped up when I saw Mark Lawson’s latest work of fiction (his witnessing of a ‘sexual assault’ by Savile so harrowing he immediately called the police. Sorry, my mistake: he immediately interviewed Savile for the telly!)- DtP
October 4, 2016 at 7:37 pm -
Good work, Sir!
- JimBob McGinty
October 5, 2016 at 10:37 pm -
Seconded. A very enjoyable read!
- JimBob McGinty
- Misa
October 5, 2016 at 1:08 am -
Gawd bless ya, Bandini. You were the only person I could think of with the patience (sheer bloody-minded persistence) to do that, but I ruled you out on grounds of restraint. Ahem, please forgive me, but in my defence I have seen some of your discussions with Needlebloggers (sheer bloody-minded persistence). You spent two days wading through Gruan readers’ brain farts (the after-the-fact wisdom especially), restrained yourself to little puffs of the airfreshener, and didn’t get blocked? Did you at least have some comments ‘moderated’?
Great work. There’s a pint behind the bar.
- tdf
October 5, 2016 at 1:13 am -
^ I’ve never had an account there, but I’ve been told by many that the Gruaniard notoriously over-moderates comments deemed ‘inappropriate’ (‘not in line with community standards’, I think is the exact formula of words that they use).
- Bandini
October 5, 2016 at 2:17 am -
It’s a total mystery to me how it works. I signed-up a while back on seeing an article which was flatly contradicted by the same author (in a previous article in the very same paper!) and merely posted a quote without further comment (as the hypocrisy was so blatant there really was no need). It wasn’t even a subject to which I usually pay much attention, but it rankled… Deleted, I slung my hook.
(Perhaps the boards are manned by a team of nervous interns, as what you can ‘get away with’ seems to change by the hour. Melting snowdrops filled with warrior zeal? Who knows?)- tdf
October 5, 2016 at 2:46 am -
Major cutbacks in the offing all across the traditional media world, so it would not be surprising if the boards at the Guardian are indeed manned by nervous – and low-paid – interns.
- Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 1:01 pm -
This is interesting. Some of the comments just as much, if not more so!
But it’s still better than the Huffington Post! Crowd sourcing moderators is about as stupid as it comes. After one attempt to contribute to something that I knew about, it took less than 24 hours to realise that that easily degenerates to something like ‘you said something that I don’t like, so I’ll delete it’. Would be a bit like playing in, say, Ibrox or Celtic Park, where all your supporters are invisible and unheard, being placed behind one way, soundproof glass.
- tdf
- Bandini
- tdf
- DtP
- Ho Hum
October 4, 2016 at 4:32 pm -
Exactly why I ended up here too. Was trawling the net to see if there was anything out there that made any real sense of the accusations being made, when they first hit the media, and their volume – it seemed incredible, but if true there should have been a few dollops of poo out there, if not even a whole trail. So when found only one scurrilous tale, from a bloke in Leeds who said that JS had made a pass, or at least shown some interest, in his girlfriend in the Nurse’s Home at Leeds, and then this, with its dry factual content, I pulled up a stool and stayed
Might not agree with all the rest of what you said, but the regulars are good for a varied view on life, and where else do you get to meet a chain smoking Dwarf from Norfolk, who is neither a total Europhobe nor xenophobic?
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 4, 2016 at 5:48 pm -
The chain smoking dwarf ended up here via either Legiron’s site or N2D, I don’t recall..things blur…but my reason for coming here will no doubt have been smoking related, then I started to read regularly.
As to Savile I can say I don’t really give a flying whatis whether he, Jonathan King or even Gilles De Rais were guilty of the crimes they were accused of. What interests me, and i think The Landlady to a degree too, is the process by which the media brainwashed so many people into believing unquestioningly that they were guilty despite an almost total lack of anything that any rational person would consider evidence. I was going to be a priest -many years ago- and unthinking, unquestioning belief in the nuttiest of nutty ideas is kinda my ‘thing’ ( I can still beat any ‘door knocking’ sectarian ‘minister’ on knowledge of their own history). What interest me is the INJUSTICE done to those accused of historical abuse.Was Savile guilty? Did he have wall to wall armed Mossad trained bodyguards? If not then no he wasn’t. Ask any Dad here, all except the most quaking Quakers will confess there is a point where they would cheerfully kill for their child. Are you really asking me to believe that among the nation of children that JS so viley abused, not one ‘Dad’ with a kitchen knife could be found? Really?
- fred
October 4, 2016 at 6:43 pm -
TBF Yes it does seem odd that no one ever tried to exact any revenge.Back in the early seventies JS always led out the Manchester Taxi Drivers annual disabled kid’s trip to Blackpool and knowing the calibre of some of those big bad taxi drivers I’ve always felt sure if they had heard any rumours they would have well sorted him out.
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 4, 2016 at 8:05 pm -
Precisely! Even the worst Dads in the world (and let us not forget JS supposedly targeted the most vulnerable children) tend to ‘have a line’. They may come home drunk everyday Fright and beat the bejasus out of the wife, the kids and the dog. They may even genuinely be fully paid up members of the ‘beery breath’ brigade or worse still Xians/Satanists/Foreign BUT , especially in the East End or Moss Side or Castle Milk, as you say, just a rumour that someone was a noncing on their kids would have had them lighting torches (in Norfolk) and heading off to dispense ‘justice’ in the form of the sort of kickings that lead to comas.
Back in the day my Tranny friend was beaten to a pulp by the local Norfolk red necks who couldn’t get their inbred heads around the idea that a tranny wasn’t simply another sort of ‘homo’ (this was back when a man wearing a pink shirt risked his life just going to the Offy of a night). I recall getting run out of pub because the tinkers there thought my long hair meant i was a ‘poof’. Two things you never called any man unless you were prepared to back it up with real violence were ‘kiddy fiddler’ or ‘grass’.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Mr Wray
October 10, 2016 at 3:04 pm -
Spot on. No amount of threats of dire consequences from ‘men of power’ would stop me from eviscerating any one who touched my kids … and I’m not a particularly violent sort. It is incredible to think this did not happen earlier.
- fred
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Bandini
- Jonathan King
October 4, 2016 at 5:37 pm -
Theroux actually lied by omission – not revealing that his aunt, Mail hack Angela Levin, who spotted a pervert a mile off, is best known for co-writing the hagiography of Max Clifford. And by pointing out that having a relationship with a 15 year old was a criminal act (no, Louis, that’s sex). Dozens of blurred, sneaky, similar smears. Sylvia was superb – never claiming, as none of us do, that Savile was totally innocent; merely that she only, over 20 years, saw the good in him (like Louis). I suspect Judas was less creepy than Theroux who really came across as unpleasant and dishonest. And typical of those completely fooled by the media. But the really ghastly ingredient was the music. Louis Witch Project; even Williams Thomas must have winced. The truth is that nobody will know the truth about Jimmy but those with brains suspect he was a laddish, tasteless example of the time, winking, leering, pinching, groping but never raping or plundering. And the media loves extremes and simplicity because the public today prefers headlines, slogans and 140 characters and cannot cope with depth or complexity – not that Savile was anything but superficial. But I reckon St Paul will have welcomed him up there for the 85% good he did in his life balancing out the 15% bad.
- tdf
October 4, 2016 at 11:00 pm -
@Jonathan
Savile was a complicated character. In my view a lot of his psychology goes back to his early life. Certainly he did both good and bad.
Interesting to note from the Guardian article published immediately following his death (and, hence, BEFORE the recent media revelations regarding alleged abuse that he committed ):
“In 1983, he shocked many of his fans and charity recipients by giving an interview to the Sun in which he described violent and sordid incidents from his past. “The people who work for me call me the Godfather,” he claimed. “And nobody messes with the Godfather. He is the boss. The big man.” And, he added: “Some of the hairy things I’ve done would get me 10 years inside.” ”
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2011/oct/29/sir-jimmy-savile
So contrary to what many believe, the revelations Savile made in the first Louis documentary about having lads that were messing about with young ones in his nightclub beaten up was nothing new!
- Mrs Grumble
October 5, 2016 at 4:04 am -
Around 1965, my husband was helping to run a small music cub in Manchester. One night, Jimmy Savile turned up to watch the bands. He came on his own, didn’t make a big entrance, just stood on the stairs with rest of the crowd.
My husband needed to get up the stairs; Savile was in the way and for some reason wouldn’t move. So my husband, being in a hurry and quite drunk, punched him in the face.
And Savile simply moved aside with a mumbled apology. He didn’t hit back, he didn’t even send the “boys” around! There was no comeback at all, though he never came back to the club.
So I’m inclined to think that his 1983 claims of being a hardman were exaggerated, at the very least. Very like his 2009 claim to have spent Christmasses with the Thatchers – a claim for which there was not only no evidence but which was explicitly denied by Carol Thatcher.- Peter Raite
October 5, 2016 at 1:45 pm -
This probably taps into the old idea of wrestlers/boxers not actually being much good in a “real fight.”
- Peter Raite
- Misa
October 5, 2016 at 12:17 pm -
@tdf I think JS would have been no more impressed by appeals to psychology, professional or amateur, than I am, but I think you’re somewhere near the right ballpark. I don’t see JS so much as a complicated character as an exceptional one. One early experience which I think must have had a profound effect upon his life was his mining accident. As far as I can tell, he was caught in an explosion/roof fall, dragged out with a major spinal injury which left him horizontal for months, on crutches for about three years, and wearing a corset for most of the rest his life. It was a pretty exceptional character, presumably with pretty exceptional support, who got up to wrestle professionally, cycle competitively, run hundreds of marathons, and earn the respect of Royal Marines. It hardly needs saying that all his work at Stoke Mandeville was not the work of a ‘do-gooder’ but the work of someone passionately committed to a very personal (albeit ‘good’) cause. Given the well-known potential effects of this kind of injury, it might not be too surprising that he made a conscious choice to avoid marriage. Surely if one were looking to explain the ‘mystery’ of a man chosing not to settle down and have babies (shock, horror), one might look into this area before presuming that he was ‘into’ children, OAP’s, corpses, etc.
- Major Bonkers
October 5, 2016 at 10:26 pm -
I should like to congratulate and thank you for such a thoughtful comment.
- Major Bonkers
- Mrs Grumble
- tdf
- Andrew Rosthorn
October 4, 2016 at 7:40 pm -
I was caned many a time in the 1950s but even in those days, no teacher banged your head against a wall so often that your grandfather could hear about it and certainly not in a school for girls. Incredible.
- Andrew Rosthorn
October 4, 2016 at 11:40 pm -
Owen, we aren’t dealing with any jury of public opinion here. The allegations against Savile are ALL allegations of historic sex abuse. Some of us are conducting an investigation into the Savile Case using the canons of historical inquiry. That is because Savile is dead and the task has therefore become a task for historians rather than policemen, and certainly not for journalists of the limited ability of Louis Theroux. I would like to think we are using one of the principles suggested by Torsten Thurén in 1997:
“Human sources may be relics such as a fingerprint; or narratives such as a statement or a letter. Relics are more credible sources than narratives.” That’s why the recent discovery of a hidden collection of contemporary letters written by the girl whose mother introduced Jimmy Savile to Duncroft has been so important. That is why the dating of Savile’s first visit to Duncroft and the movements of the young Karin Ward are now known very precisely.
In R.J. Shafer’s ‘Guide to Historical Method’ there is a check list for evaluating eyewitness testimony. The first two checks are:
“1. Is the real meaning of the statement different from its literal meaning? Are words used in senses not employed today? Is the statement meant to be ironic (i.e., mean other than it says)?
2. How well could the author observe the thing he reports? Were his senses equal to the observation? Was his physical location suitable to sight, hearing, touch? Did he have the proper social ability to observe: did he understand the language, have other expertise required (e.g., law, military); was he not being intimidated by his wife or the secret police?”
We are well beyond judging Jimmy by the way he walks on one of Louis’s film clips. - Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 12:38 am -
And, even with the talk and the walk, you can even be confused by the way they sing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQwNN-0AgWc
Sorry, Windsock, but that was too good to miss!
- Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 12:39 am -
Rats! That was meant to reply to:
Andrew Rosthorn October 4, 2016 at 11:40 pm
- windsock
October 5, 2016 at 9:10 am -
My voice is a much lower register. No offence taken (or intended, I know). You can tell by the way they “use their walk”.. what a line.
- Ho Hum
- Owen
October 5, 2016 at 12:41 am -
Andrew, you’re a very experienced journalist. You know how effective the power of the press is. We have seen the impact of the Daily Mail’s campaign to challenge the allegations against Harvey Proctor and Lord Bramall. David Rose is a friend of this blog, so apart from any contacts of your own there is at least one conduit directly through to perhaps the most powrful newspaper in Britain today.
And yet I haven’t seen the measured conclusions of the contributors to this blog being taken up in any significant way by the press. Why hasn’t one of the maor media outlets tried to steal a march on its rivals by featuring the controversy and championed Savile’s rehabilitation? Of course there is rather more to Savile than Duncroft letters. A broadly-based narrative found generally convincing by numerous competent persons can sometimes carry more authority than a relic of service in relation ot a very narrow subject area.
I doubt that anyone concerned, professional assessor or lay wtiness, has judged Jimmy by the way he walks in one of Louis’s film clips. As far as your argument is concerned, it has yet to succeed in convincing the Department of Education to review the reports commissioned by Michael Gove or in persuading the BBC governors and the licence-fee payers to demand Janet Smith retract her findings. .When I see something along those lines happening it’ll be time to realise that history/the jury of public opinion’s interim judgment on Savile is not unchallenged.
- tdf
October 5, 2016 at 12:54 am -
@Owen
“We have seen the impact of the Daily Mail’s campaign to challenge the allegations against Harvey Proctor and Lord Bramall. ”
I didn’t need the Daily Mail or David Rose to tell me that those allegations were bunkum. I did my own researches. I’m not convinced that the Daily Mail ‘campaign’ had any impact as regards the above, incidentally. The case was dropped by the rozzers due to insufficient (or, more accurately, no) evidence.
- tdf
October 5, 2016 at 1:04 am -
@Owen
I do agree with you, in general, about the power of the media. That doesn’t make that power necessarily a good thing, of course. The ‘sceptics’ are, in a sense, fighting a battle that they cannot win.
- Peter Whale
October 5, 2016 at 9:00 am -
I agree, I have only asked people to look at some of the posts by our landlady and they say” but there is so much evidence against him” I then go straight into CO2 and global warming and am then considered an heretic. The power of the press is beginning to wane and blogs are gradually beginning to make the establishment lies be seen for what they are. Brexit anyone?
- Peter Whale
- tdf
- Obviously Anon
October 5, 2016 at 10:45 am -
Owen…………….. What do you think Louis Theroux promised? A balanced view………….. Didn’t happen. Daily Mail called a halt on outing lying claimants (ask them why, not me) and I could mention a fair few more journalists who literally sat with their jaw open when presented with EVIDENCE for the defence, not just rumour against the accused. There is no appetite from the media for the truth – don’t just assume they don’t know it, they have eyes, they can read all this evidence and plenty has been shared with them privately. Gutless? Maybe, or is it they will then have to say we were wrong for FOUR years? Hell will freeze over first.
It’s all there for the taking. Many hopes and trust were pinned on LT but he didn’t deliver, he chose to exonerate himself instead.
- tdf
- Savim
October 5, 2016 at 11:59 am -
Theroux’s so called documentary was a load of bunkum. I never admired Savile in any way ever. BUT in death the man has been hung drawn quartered and disembowelled. I thought we left all this behind, in Elizabeth firsts time, trashing Mansions in searches at dawn raids, to steal goods on the grounds of forbidden religious worship. Huge fines for failing to take the Oath of Supremacy. No travel beyond 5 miles without licence. Torture and imprisonment and worse to follow. Reputations, wrecked and families put to extreme distress, debt and penury. Tale tellers and whisperers believed without question.We are just as disgusting as our Elizabethan ancestors in our treatment of our fellow countrymen. Guilt by association. Of course we do not support peados in any way. We do not support injustices and wicked lies either. Or rewards for false witness. When I neared the end of this put together slivers of nonsense, as many programmes are these days. I switched off at the naughty vicar bit….so crass it was a complete nonsense. End of rant.
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 5, 2016 at 2:22 pm -
Wasn’t ‘drawing’ disembowelment ? And didn’t Charles2 have some of the ‘King-Killers’ h+d+1/4’d upon the Restoration. Pretty sure there were h+d+1/4erings into the mid C18 too…Christopher Layer Cake, the Jacobite Cream Cracker springs to mind (and his speech at the gallows is a must read for anyone interested in the oh-so-apposite concept of religious martyrdom btw. http://digital.nls.uk/broadsides/broadside.cfm/id/15594)
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 5, 2016 at 2:25 pm
- The Blocked Dwarf
- The Blocked Dwarf
- The Last Furlong
October 5, 2016 at 4:15 pm -
Mr Furlong came apon me watching the Gacy movie on YouTube. “What’s that”? he asked. I said “It’s a documentary that came up as a result of talking about clowns on the Racoon Blog.
“I HATED clowns when I was a kid! Didn’t they just give you the creeps!?” Looks at me quizzically….
?
I didn’t know that – surprise surprise! We’ve been married for 40 years.
So
NOT all kids of my generation liked clowns. I am mistaken.
But I do know more about John Wayne Gacy
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 5, 2016 at 6:55 pm -
There are people who LIKE Clowns?!?!?!?
Say it ain’t so! Clowns is nasty. Only good clown is a dead one.There was a post on this blog a while back…trust me no likes those evil little red nosed f*****s.
I’ve worked and drunk with some really BAD men over the years; drug dealers, paedos, murderers, rapists, former torturers, hell even people who voted for Blair! But Clowns? NO, you have to draw a line somewhere.- Major Bonkers
October 5, 2016 at 10:32 pm
- Major Bonkers
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Gaye Dalton
October 5, 2016 at 5:01 pm -
I don’t blame Louis Theroux, if he didn’t make this follow up his life wasn’t going to be worth living, and it was Saville’s fault for real. He gave some mischievous answers to some faux “cutting edge” questions and they were both having the time of their lives shocking people like a couple of 3rd rate obscene phone callers…creepy, silly, but life caught up and it became something it wasn’t…
I still get it from the strangest quarters myself. There is no doubt in my mind that refusing to join the Duncroft hue and cry against Savile cost me huge amounts of credibility in terms of debunking Rachel Moran and scroll down to “Karen Pastore” https://www.facebook.com/turnofftheredlight/reviews it gave blanket permission to start a hue and cry against me as some kind of pedophile enabler while my address and phone number were exposed online – and all the appropriate authorities become a stonewall at any request for it’s removal.
Best part is that I don’t fit either side because I have always been something of a real crusader against real child abuse who last drew the ire of the Gardai, civil society and Mark Williams Thomas by trying to get a REAL adolescent orientated pedophile stopped before he could reoffend…(three countries and a handful of traumatised boys later and he is back out again). I could also give you a list of real long term pedophile enablers withing the ranks of “Turn Off the Red Light” but if I did that I would wind up in prison.
This is the propaganda age. If you have the power you can say black is white without challenge. You can claim that whole families can live with no money or home after a 6 month benefit sanction, you can bomb an aid convoy and get away with saying they did it to themselves…
Get used to it, the propaganda age is now your only home. There is nowhere to run. Louis Theroux was just doing what he had to do to survive.
- Obviously Anon
October 5, 2016 at 5:49 pm -
After four years of canvassing , screaming, shouting, crying, sobbing and using the kind of language previously alien to me, I don’t know where to turn and more importantly who to trust.
- The Blocked Dwarf
October 5, 2016 at 6:46 pm -
and more importantly who to trust.
You can trust the Raccoon. I mean that. You can REALLY trust her. One of my few personal articles of faith is ‘Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead’, well she is the exception that proves that rule. She makes a Jesuit confessor look loose mouthed. Other victims (assuming you are one, sorry if i have misread things) of the most obscene, jaw dropping injustices do, some of them consider her a ‘true friend’. She is brutally honest, pulls no punches and never breaks a confidence, she won’t pass on your story to Lamplight nor the Mail nor anyone else. Just please, for all our sakes, remember she isn’t a well girl and does, believe it or not, have an actual real life outside this blog.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- Obviously Anon
October 5, 2016 at 5:51 pm -
That was an answer to Misa btw
- Misa
October 6, 2016 at 1:28 am -
Obv Anon, I too am struggling for words.
How’s about for now just making sure you have a very large cigar to light on the 31st of this October, and an oath that ten years hence the date will be properly marked.
- Misa
- Sean Coleman
October 5, 2016 at 8:00 pm -
It’s amazing. What were the odds that Anna of all people had gone to Duncroft too and had briefed Theroux? I agree he is worried about getting a Winnie Mandela necklace and, given the madness crowds, you would have a little sympathy. His ‘examination’ of his ‘conscience’ reminds me of Euan Ferguson’s abject apology in the Observer after Diana Spencer’s death for a joke he had made the previous week.
Talking of necklaces, in an excellent article about the Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse on Sunday and the kind of rumour that takes over countries on the brink of madness, Peter Hitchens mentioned the strange story of Marie Antoinette and the diamond necklace. The Wiki article is short and (for a change) interesting, featuring a fraud scam of low cunning, self deception on the part of a cardinal and innocence on the part of the Queen (who got blamed anyway).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affair_of_the_Diamond_Necklace
As to Jimmy Savile’s guilt I knew before I started looking at it that most of it would be made up but there was a chance a little bit would be true, seeing as that is what witch hunts are and if this isn’t a witch hunt then what on earth is? Now I don’t think any of it is true. Certainly, in a witch hunt the burden of proof is with the accuser. It stands to reason, if something appears incredible it is because it never happened. Having given the matter some thought I think complainants should face a tribunal made up of Eddie the Wonderdog, Rod Hull and Emu and John Lydon, looking for the truth in their eyes ever dawning.
- The Last Furlong
October 5, 2016 at 8:57 pm -
Oh, I must be so naive! My favourite Clown was a Clown I saw at the Circus on one of the few occasions my mother could afford the tickets. He was beautiful to me, with such a SAD face. He didn’t fall about and chuck buckets of paper-water over the audience to a drumroll. He simply walked in carrying a clarinet, sat on a hay bale and played The Shadow of Your Smile – exquisitly. And then he walked out again. I cried.
Many years later, I heard it played again by Dave Lee, (not in a clown suit), but equally exquisitely.
So there are clowns and clowns I suppose!
I met the amazing one.
- Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 9:47 pm - Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 9:50 pm - Ho Hum
October 5, 2016 at 9:55 pm -
It’s such a shame one can’t edit one’s posts.
I would have liked to add the your dedication to clowns is without parallel in my experience, and so touching
- Bandini
October 5, 2016 at 10:27 pm -
I already told the following story on Moor Larkin’s blog a while back but can’t ignore the clarion call of the clown’s kazoo, so…
While living in U.S. half a lifetime ago my former girlfriend’s retired father – a committed alcoholic & generally terrifying presence (to me at least!) – wiled away the few hours each week he spent NOT sat on a bar-stool pursuing his great love: being a clown. He would ‘entertain’ (or more likely terrify) poorly children in hospitals with his partner-in-greasepaint, ‘Wanker [sp.?] The Clown’. Let’s hope they were too poorly to give Wanker a big hand at the end of it.
- Bandini
- Ho Hum
- The Last Furlong
October 5, 2016 at 10:19 pm -
The shame here is there’s no spell-check! But thanks, people, for the clown conversation – the musical box is not to my fancy. Send in the Clowns is depressing beyond description! I can’t find any equivalent to my clwn song, or Dave Lee’s brilliance on YouTube, but this is the closest. Like lots of things, it’s best without the words https://youtu.be/qJWoWUKbFvs
- windsock
October 7, 2016 at 1:27 pm -
I think we’ve started a national conversation:
- Ho Hum
October 7, 2016 at 1:44 pm -
Senior UKIP members are bucking that trend….
- Ho Hum
- windsock
- tdf
October 6, 2016 at 3:13 pm -
Another article for the Savile file: http://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/living/2016/1006/821903-none-of-us-got-jimmy-savile-i-have-to-say-that-nobody-got-the/
- Alexander Baron
October 6, 2016 at 4:38 pm - Fiona Watts
October 7, 2016 at 10:47 pm -
Stunning article Anna!
Thank you putting the Spotlight on the factually correct data rather than the fiction and side-lining of honest data by LT. Many thanks to Simon McKay and Matthew Scott’s Tweets for alerting me to your riposte on LT’s documentary.
As a three times Child Welfare whistleblower ( from Liverpool to Suffolk) You know what really gets on my wick? Those who did NOTHING about Savile – are given a massive media profile and platform to tell their story whilst we hear ‘nowt from those who tried to do SOMETHING about him at the time!
You do know that the organised coverup of other Savile characters by the NHS, police and media continues?
Its SO funny how the men I caught out have continued to work and teach – whilst the person who tried to report them has been prevented from working ever again? There are so many subtle ways to make a whistleblower’s life an utter hell. in my case I became the victim of false data progressed against me, for example, in April 2009 my medical records stated that I had two children in care and a whole load of other tosh that wrecked my ability to move on from Bury St Edmunds. How high does the coverup of my case go? All the way to the Ministry of Justice who put an injunction on my legal attempts to resolve the history of coverup against me.
The experience challenges one ability to keep good mental hygiene too!
- Mr Wray
October 10, 2016 at 3:25 pm -
What do Neil Hamilton and Jimmy Svile both have in common, apart from the fact that I can’t stand either of them?
Both were accused either directly or indirectly of rape by Louis Theroux. In both cases there was no evidence supplied and in both cases the use of cleverly edited film was added to make them seem guilty, or at least shifty when questioned.
Funnily enough Theroux also did a programme on Max Clifford. No accusations were made against him. Then again Clifford was behind the Hamilton story that Theroux picked up and took his revenge on Theroux, for a less than flattering portrayal, by putting a salacious story about him in the press. Odd world journalism.
- Ho Hum
October 11, 2016 at 11:20 am - Bandini
October 11, 2016 at 2:02 pm -
Meirion Jones & Tabloid Tim have been having a heated discussion (after that Byline shindig I’d forgotten all about); amusingly, Jones responds to Tate’s refutation of the term ‘paedophile’ for Savile by posting a link to the story ‘Jimmy Savile dressed as a Womble to rape a 10-year-old boy’:
https://twitter.com/MeirionTweets/status/785072322801700865That really is the level at which he’s at. Quite incredible.
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 2:35 pm -
@Bandini
“That really is the level at which he’s at. Quite incredible.”
IIRC, I had to bring Meirion up on a point when he stated that a car that he’d photographed was a certain make. I am somewhat of a car buff – I knew straightaway that it wasn’t what he thought it was.
A small enough issue, granted, but it doesn’t necessarily speak well to his accuracy as an investigative journalist.
- tdf
- tdf
October 11, 2016 at 2:29 pm -
@Bandini
In my experience, Twitter shindigs in general descend to the level of arguing over the size of raindrops at times..
Did you get a chance to cast your eye over those links I put up from the Jersey inquiry?
- Bandini
October 11, 2016 at 10:57 pm -
I have to be honest & say that when I saw the length of the PDF (over a hundred pages) I wondered if I hadn’t something – anything! – better to do with my time, TDF! Nevertheless I quickly scanned (or skipped…) through.
The testimony started out with the copper’s fascinating tale of the sale of his first house at the age of 18 or summat – not a propitious beginning when there are a ton of pages lurking ahead of you. Perhaps he wove this detail into a later Big Case, but if he did so I missed it (and much more besides).
But a lot (of the few bits I read) of what he wrote sounded quite credible: ‘outsider’ encounters cold-shouldering from ‘this is a local shop’ islanders; hidden connections between people queering the investigative pitch; etc.. And his criticism of Loony Harper seemed spot-on: that Harper’s limelight-grabbing focus on HDLG drew the spotlight away from many other places where things that shouldn’t have ocurred most likely DID occur.
I was surprised to see several people named, as in the boat/sailing case; I couldn’t see any reference to the timeframe (but may well have missed it while ignoring whole chunks) so googled one of those names & saw that he’d been banged up last century (I think). The bit where a copper was tasked with sitting through a hundred VHS cassettes on the off chance that a recording of something untoward may have been deliberately secreted amongst the miles and miles of tape – it was! – caught my eye as a good example of what could be interpreted in different ways according to one’s pre-existing view: conspiracy or ineptitude.
It’s easy to see how anyone looking for a conspiracy would have found the recording that was ‘missed’/missed (depending on your point of view) by the first officer as pretty conclusive evidence of same. Then again, it may have been a lazy copper with kids screaming to be fed, inexperienced in that type of investigation. Either way they were at fault and merited the criticism (and perhaps more) but they may not have been a part of a Massive Paedo Ring Conspiracy. (I didn’t check to see if the named officer cropped up again.)
I’m not sure the ‘he deserves the perk of a young boy after all the overtime he’s done’ claim rang true, though (paraphrasing, but not much); would ANYONE really have said anything so bleedingly stupid to the police? Perhaps, but it sounded a little fanciful. Who knows?
I couldn’t muster much enthusiasm to carry on the slog. On the couple of occasions I’ve braved the intricacies of the Jersey Inquiry website I chanced upon a statement of a former long-term resident of HDLG – and you’ll have to forgive me for paraphrasing again but I really can’t be bothered trying to locate it once again – which went something like this:
– cruelty/favouritism showed to some children by some adults (the witness was lucky in that in his case he’d been treated with kindness by the same person/people who HAD, he said, been mean to others)
– Jimmy Savile had popped in or had been said to have popped in by others (with no mention of problems)
– he remembered one girl had been said to have been sexually abused by a member of staff (and I think the witness believed this to be true)
– the ‘dungeon’/’torture chamber’ was something the children would scare one another with – “If you’re not careful they’ll take you down there!”.
As kids we had similar stories we’d frighten each other with – a spooky house!/that weird woman with the cats!/etc..Er, and that’s about it. Is THAT the secret of Haut de la Garenne? That in a really odd little community – where children were sometimes removed from their families for really very minor reasons (but that some of them will undoubtedly have been ‘problem kids’) – some found the experience traumatic, some felt the sting of (now) outdated means of physical punishment, and, inevitably over such a long period of time, some came to the attention of rotters who’d take advantage of their position of power? It sounds credible to me, and certainly more LIKELY than the “children had been dragged from their beds at night screaming and had then disappeared” story that so enchanted the salacious press. But who knows? A good gambler plays the odd even though the fates sometimes favour the bad bet. I’ll stick on that.
- Bandini
{ 135 comments… read them below or add one }