Fanning the flames in the Ethical Vacuum.
‘It’s all the fault of the Internet’, cries the dead tree press. ‘We have to compete with them, and their wild landscape, and that has driven us to excesses we would never have thought of without their insane ramblings’.
Remarkable then, that Leveson has devoted 1973 pages to how the dead tree press should be behaving, and the nature of the naughty step that he thinks they should sit on when they fail to behave, and a mere 12 pages to the Internet that they claim to be aping in their rush to compete. The Internet is, Leveson says, an ‘ethical vacuum’, and as with the Curate’s egg, that is surely true in parts. Like Catholic priests, he believes the media should remain celibate, and foreswear the cyber pleasures. Theirs is a higher calling – that to inform, educate and entertain.
This morning, they are doing their best to do just that. To a man, they have eyed the excesses of ‘Rolf’ trending on Twitter, made their excuses and left, in time honoured fashion, pausing only to confirm that ‘an 80 year old man from Berkshire was interviewed under caution by appointment on matters not directly related to Savile’. Perfect – the Internet can do their dirty work for them, and they can merely slyly confirm that actually ‘it’ is on the right track, giving lofty credence to the rumours.
At a stroke, Leveson has ensured that in future the newspapers will behave – or face strict regulation to ensure that they do so. He has also ensured that it is the Internet which will be seen as the villain in the piece; the child that was left standing on the doorstep after the big boys had run away. Leveson claims that he was only mandated to look at the print media, not the Internet. Once the print media is behaving, assuming that this continues to happen as it has today, there will surely be renewed calls for a similar Inquiry into the Internet. Divide and Conquer.
That being said, we should look at who and why is busy fanning the flames in the Internet. Yesterday, whilst the Police were being suitably circumspect in giving information regarding the fact that ‘an 80 year old man’ had attended ‘an interview’ by appointment – which could be anything from, for instance, their role as Landlord of premises that might be of interest, to an allegation that had been made directly about them – ‘under caution’, which merely means that whatever they said was being formally recorded. The media followed in similar fashion.
However, someone, who self evidently didn’t get their information from either the media or officially from the Metropolitan Police, was very keen that the Internet should be given a new football to kick around. That someone was an ex-policeman.
Mark Williams-Thomas. A police constable who had finally climbed the greasy pole to get away from pounding the streets after 11 long years, and made it to Detective Constable – only to pack the job in a brief 12 months later. Mr Williams-Thomas claims to have ‘15 years in child protection‘ – the obvious inference from this statement, if not read in conjunction with his police record, would be that this was within a formal, professional environment such as the police. But he was only in the police for 12 years, and some of those would have been as a probationary PC. So a self made expert then?
When Mr Williams-Thomas first emerged from the police service, he described himself as a ‘freelance investigative journalist’. A much misunderstood ‘investigative journalist’, certainly misunderstood by one of his first subjects who was under the erroneous impression that Williams-Thomas was trying to blackmail him rather than document wrong doing within his organisation, a matter happily discharged by a jury.
A man who has since reinvented himself as a ‘child protection’ expert and talking head of choice to several TV stations whenever the issue of child abuse comes up. Madeleine McCann, Tia Sharp, Ashleigh Hall. A man who says he is all too well aware of the dangers to children posed by the Internet…and the need for, in his view, ‘policing’ of the Internet.
For the internet is full of people with sexually deviant desires – the level of danger goes way beyond even the most worried parent’s imagination.
Now why would someone who wants to see the Internet more effectively regulated and policed, ignore the restrained and professional behaviour of his ex-colleagues and the new found restraint of the print media – and, surely unintentionally, surely, be the cause of much possibly libellous chatter, speculation and gossip on the Internet by naming – and ‘hash-tagging’ with ‘Savile’ and ‘Sexual’ the mystery 80 year old as Rolf Harris?
The cynical amongst us, including myself, could almost believe that it was in such a persons interests to fan the flames in the ‘Ethical Vacuum’. Either that or he is a complete dipstick.
I can feel only sympathy for Rolf Harris – and his wife. We have absolutely no idea whatsoever why he was interviewed. It could have been as tenuous as having been named as an ‘alibi’ by someone else. At 80 years old though, at the end of his life, when he should have been reflecting with some satisfaction on his legacy, he is now subject to endless speculation on the Internet that he may be connected with such a vile practice as Paedophilia. Responsible people in the police and media gave him the benefit of the doubt pending concrete information, and chose not to link his name to Savile and the various allegations.
Mark Williams-Thomas didn’t.
‘Why not’? – is a question I shall ponder more over the coming weeks.
December 10, 2012 at 23:40
-
I have read occasionally in the last weeks comments about the stifling
nature of British Libel Laws wherein secret deals are done and the truth held
hostage to money. Clearly, if this is a feature of UK Law, it is by no means
unique to British Legislators.
“Now that there has been a settlement, we will probably never know exactly
what transpired between the head of the IMF and the immigrant hotel maid from
Guinea at the hotel Sofitel in Manhattan. There was forensic evidence of a
sexual encounter of some kind. Mr Strauss-Kahn insisted it was consensual, Ms
Diallo said he attempted to rape her.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20671916
“Mr
Strauss-Kahn had previously admitted to a “moral failing”, but insisted their
sexual encounter was consensual.
In the wake of Ms Diallo’s accusations,
other women came forward with sexual assault allegations against
him.
Details of the 63-year-old’s agreement with Nafissatou Diallo will
remain confidential, the judge added.”
- December 7, 2012 at 16:07
-
The police and the media working together?? No thanks.
- December 7, 2012 at 05:57
-
According to a 1997 newspaper report there was a PC Karen Williams-Thomas
in Surrey.
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/80182_thirtyfour_cars_vandalised_outside_showroom
I see from a twitter by Mark Williams-Thomas he is looking to expand his
empire?
“I believe strong opportunities exist where police can work with
the media to a common goal- catching criminals.”
- December 7, 2012 at 10:54
- December 7, 2012 at 01:26
-
Just about everything surrounding this Yewtree thing stinks to high
heaven.
- December 6, 2012 at 22:52
-
Something I discovered today was that a PC Karen Williams-Thomas was with
Surrey police in 1997.
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/80182_thirtyfour_cars_vandalised_outside_showroom
- December 6, 2012 at 20:50
-
Anyone else think it a bit odd that there are no ‘credits’ to be seen on
any of the newspaper still pics of the police at MC’s house? – unless anyone
has seen some I that have missed. After getting hammered for ‘stealing’
pictures that appear online, most are now getting quite punctilious about at
least putting some name to those, even if they have still been just ‘lifted’.
Otherwise it does beg further questions as to how the press got his identity
so quickly, and their maybe having been tipped off in advance, one of the sort
of bad practices that was supposed to have been curtailed by now
- December 6, 2012 at 18:10
-
It would be a good thing for this Yewtree business to be shut down, imo.
You’re right that the JS witch hunt was not only ‘foolish’ but dangerous and
damaging, beginning with unsubstantiated accusations from a woman at Duncroft,
which remain unsubstantiated, as do all the others, apparently. Mark WT
coerced these women to come up with these stories for his own benefit, imo,
with the collusion of Meirion Jones, who has a grudge against his aunt. Not a
ONE of them complained to the staff, and the same would be true of those who
claim they were abused elsewhere. There is no legal basis for ANY of this.
-
December 6, 2012 at 17:37
-
I cannot get my head around this. Has The World gone mad? These people
should not be named unless and until they are charged. We simply do not have
the right to know the names of everyone who is questioned by The Police.
A
Set Up? I really don’t know. But it stinks.
- December 6, 2012 at 17:50
-
Allegations made may or may not be true. But, unlike the Savile case and
the views able to be expressed here, that the women involved in these later
cases may never be identified also means that the chance of any of their
compatriots coming forth, even after all this time, as contrarians, is
limited, and that there is some potential for the application of justice to
be unfairly skewed
-
December 6, 2012 at 17:54
-
I’m starting to see the upside of it now, Elena. The more farcical it
gets, the sooner it will be acknowledged and admitted that the original JS
witch hunt was very foolish. Lots of these people now arrested were happy to
go along with the ‘guilty without evidence’ flow. Until now.
- December 6, 2012 at 18:33
-
This is true, Mina. And I would fall about laughing, if I thought it
was funny.
I don’t actually believe in Karma, but it doesn’t half bite
you on the bum when it gets going.
Perhaps someone should accuse mark
Williams Thomas and Martin Brunt. They must be worth a few bob.
-
December 6, 2012 at 18:59
-
Well, Elena, there just might be someone in their past who is short
of cash and eyeing up those tempting lawyer’s adverts. We can live in
hope.
- December 6, 2012 at
19:25
-
Find me a man of their age who never inadvertently groped a young
girl, and you will find me a Saint who saw this coming. This is
Feminism and Political Correctness gone mad. In a minute no man will
dare to chat up a woman, no matter what age, or ever to be nice to a
young girl.
This could be the end of The Human Race. But I’ve had
my day, and been groped a few times here and there, so I don’t really
care all that much anymore. It was fun while it lasted.
- December 6, 2012 at 16:40
-
Max Clifford is potentially an extremely dangerous man to involve in this
situation. He knows where ALL the bodies are buried. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Clifford
- December 6, 2012 at 16:48
-
Represented Freddie Starr, and was responsible for the “hamster sandwich”
stunt, btw. He also represented Simon Cowell. Let alone the alleged ‘cover
up’ involving MP Alan Clark and two 14 year old girls. Imo, this is a
frame-up to get him to give up more ‘others.’
-
December 6, 2012 at 17:48
-
Mewsical, that isn’t how the English police work, and MC is frankly the
last person they’d treat otherwise than strictly by the book.
-
December 6, 2012 at 19:05
-
Speaking as someone who is British and was raised in the UK (I was at
Duncroft in the 60s) you may take my word for it that the British police
are hardly a bunch of choirboys. I’ve had personal experience with their
complete lack of integrity when it comes to accomplishing whatever goal
they think they have. In my case, it backfired on them. If they’ve
changed in any way, I’m dubious.
- December 6, 2012 at 19:37
-
Policing today bears no resemblance to policing in the last
century. Johhny Crackhead Scumbag has his lawyers suing if there is
even a whiff of error about his arrest and 2 hour detention. There is
more chance of me walking on water than there being what you are
calling a ‘set up’.
- December 6, 2012 at
19:45
-
Sadly, you are right. I had my own run in with our wonderful Police
, who let me down wholesale. and then tried to stitch me up, mainly
because my apparently very wealthy husband had offended them. My
husband wasn’t actually all that wealthy, and I grew up in the gutters
of London, so I saw them coming. To this day I would have absolutely
nothing to say to them. Not even a “No Comment.” I have long been very
sad about this. But thar you go. I know who these people are, and most
of them don’t give a shit about Justice. I could go on, but there
would be no point.
- December 6, 2012 at 16:25
-
Been doing a bit of research into Mark Williams-Thomas as a PC…but got
diverted by this from 2009….
“Anthony Gormley’s One and Other live artwork has apparently been a good
excuse for several people to strip off. In plinth performer Justin Holwell’s
case, at least one person in the crowd took offence at having to view him
unclothed. Mark Williams-Thomas, a former Surrey Detective constable, was so
upset he asked the police to intervene. But far from arresting the pink
poseur, the police refused, saying it’s not a crime to appear naked in
public.
So Justin completed his allotted hour, as naked as the day he was
born, and Mr Williams-Thomas was left to lodge a formal complaint.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/surrey/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8234000/8234509.stm
- December 6, 2012 at 13:23
-
A few more logs to the fire, it seems
https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas
Mark Williams-Thomas
@mwilliamsthomas
I can confirm Max Clifford arrested by detectives from
Operation Yewtree as ‘Other’ http://itv.co/TLNEGP
http://www.itv.com/news/2012-12-06/max-clifford-arrested-jimmy-savile-police-operation-yewtree/
BBC just added name too
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20627765
- December 5, 2012 at 18:46
-
Don’t forget Princess Marina, James Robertson Justice and John Gregson in
the 60s. One of the former pupils has said she thought she remembered Nyree
Dawn Porter visiting on one occasion. I heard from some press types wanting to
know what other celebs visited, and were obviously disappointed to learn that
there really weren’t that many. Far as I know, that’s the lot.
Meirion was just trying to make something out of nothing, to bolster his
theory that Duncroft was a nest of pedophile vipers, and to get back at his
Aunt Margaret for beating his side of the family out of some real estate.
Really disgusting, when you think about it.
- December 5, 2012 at 18:35
-
In the Panorama programme on what the BBC knew about Savile, Meirion
said….
“It was a very strange place and it was filled with weird celebrities
coming along (or around) , film stars, all sorts of people, minor royals,
very, very, strange.”
Would he think the same of Great Ormond Street Hospital?
If he was quite young and only at Duncroft when there was an event, would
that leave him with the impression the school was filled with celebs &
Royals?
I would have thought the tabloids would gone to town listing famous names
that dropped into Duncroft in the 1970′s but so far there’s only Savile,
Princess Alexandra & her hubby?
- December 5, 2012 at 17:20
-
Don’t think he would have been a visitor to an approved school until he was
a bit older than that. In those days, Margaret and her sister were not on the
outs, so not distant. I’d say more like 18 myself. Margaret Jones has photos
of Meirion at the school with Jimmy Savile, during one of the famous “garden
parties” which were generally fund-raising events.
- December 5, 2012 at 17:40
-
I’ve established that Meirion was the paid editor of the Cardiff
University newspaper – Gair Rhydd – in 1980. Given that the average student
at university is 18-20, and that it’s unlikely he was a freshman editor,
plus giving him the benefit of the doubt regarding his age, I’ll say he was
20 in 1980, give or take. Therefore, taking that into consideration, as well
as Savile’s visiting period at Duncroft as being most prevalent in the
mid-70s, he would have been around 12ish. Therefore, Mina is right, but his
young age makes rubbish of his claim that he saw something inappropriate at
12 years old. Nonsense, Meirion, you saw nothing because nothing happened,
especially at a garden party with a fair amount of outside visitors
including, more than likely, cadets from the local police academy, who were
always invited to events at the school.
- December 5, 2012 at
17:49
-
Good research Mewsical – well done.
-
December 5, 2012 at 18:01
-
Meirion is remarkably coy about his biographical details, I must say.
I wonder if he and his mother weren’t invited to the event in May
1974, which also featured Princess Alexandra, etc. I think that was
quite a do. PA was and is the main patron of MIND, who probably had some
connections with Broadmoor as well as Duncroft in those days. Margaret
Jones told me that JS made his first ‘official’ appearance at this
event, which was also verified by a poster on DS. That’s more than
likely when M Jones got the photograph of Meirion and Savile together.
She did say that PA gave Savile a very enthusiastic greeting, to the
complete horror of Lady Norman, who was Chairman of the Board for
Duncroft, and quite the proper Edwardian lady.
- December 5, 2012 at 12:25
-
Does anyone know what age Meirion Jones would have been when he visited
Duncroft with his parents?
- December 5, 2012 at 16:31
-
In college we think. It was 1974 at the very least. No idea when Meirion
was born though. Margaret Jones was living in her own house on the grounds
when Meirion was visiting in the Savile days.
-
December 5, 2012 at 16:57
-
He just said, ‘as a teenager’. My take on that is, perhaps just 13 or so,
given that kids aren’t so amenable to being dragged off to visit fairly
distant aunts and uncles much past that age. I don’t know his current age
though.
- December 2, 2012 at 16:46
-
I like the idea of a National Report Your Groper/Abuser Day myself. It
could be celebrated on MWT’s birthday, perhaps. After reporting, out to
celebrate by dancing around a bonfire with a suitable figure atop to be
consumed in the flames. It could be called a “Jimmy.”
- December 5, 2012 at 12:23
-
I see the Berkshire 1 has been released and not asked to return…
“A Metropolitan Police spokesman said he was interviewed under caution by
officers working on Operation Yewtree and had not been asked to return for
further questioning.”
-
December 5, 2012 at 16:33
-
And I should think so. Absolutely ridiculous that he was ever bothered
at all.
-
December 5, 2012 at 22:18
-
‘…I see the Berkshire 1 has been released and not asked to
return…’
However, by contrast, another, famous 80 ‘odd’ year man has been
arrested and charged with historical sexual abuse against three girls
aged 9-16…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/dec/05/stuart-hall-charged-indecent-assault
Official sources have denied any connection to Operation Yewtree,
but…
-
December 2, 2012 at 15:07
-
I would just like to add that I am well aware of the real sexual abuse of
children, and I would not like my apparent sarcasm to be construed as
acceptance of this. I believe that it does happen, or did happen, and should
be punished and eradicated. But I do not see how trivialising it by often
false accusations is going to help anyone. Or if indeed it can be
eradicated.
I know without doubt that my carers would have believed me, and
it would almost certainly have been dealt with without recourse to The Courts
of Law. So perhaps The Carers should be held more accountable. They are not
“In Charge” alone.
- December 3, 2012 at 06:32
-
Of course it happens and for some : the feeling of powerlessness must be
devastating and have long term effects.
But I think the ‘private’ aspect
of this is a worry-such as the ‘self appointed’ experts and advocate groups
who have a financial interest in promoting child abuse figures.
We are
all different and cope in different ways : for some mental , physical and
abuse by neglect nay be far more soul destroying than a sexual encounter
particularly if the encounter was in some ways mutual. And I know if the
person is underage it’s always illegal.
The great danger of the self appointed ( and I include Williams-Thomas in
this as I believe he is a dangerous person) : constantly telling people that
“their lives have been ruined by child abuse”. Say it enough times and it
becomes self fullfilling.
-
December 3, 2012 at 15:25
-
I agree about MWT. He has become a real nuisance, at the very least.
The public accepts every word he says as if he has years of experience in
the field of forensic child psychology, when in fact he’s a former
constable, who more than likely had limited exposure to child endangerment
issues, who suddenly decides to take up a career in ‘investigative
journalism’ without a journalism degree. He seems only interested in the
sexual aspect of child abuse, although as Observor noted, there are other
components to abuse, including mental and emotional abuse, but Mr. WT is
not interested in such mundane matters. One has to wonder exactly what
motivates his interest is in the sexual component of child abuse.
However, if he’s no longer tweeting or planning any further television
shows, or having an opinion on naked men dithering about on statutes in
London, we can maybe count ourselves well rid of him, thanks to his
vaulting ambition which landed him squarely in the cross-hairs of the
lawyers retained by a certain gentleman of Bray.
-
December 2, 2012 at 14:48
-
What a very good idea, Mina Field. I can come up with several thousands of
my own, and All Troo. Not to forget the entire Female Population of Planet
Earth, presuming we can get them to talk about these deeply traumatic
experiences, which most of us thought were pretty pathetic at the time.
Oh,
and all that groping in Public Schools. Although I have to say that none of my
sons were ever groped in The Dormitory or on The Rugby Pitch. But then groping
on Rugby Pitches is endemic, and all part of the jolly old game.
-
December 2, 2012 at 11:29
-
I don’t really know what to think. But no one has yet explained to me just
how much damage can be done by a Groper, if any at all.
I was once groped
by the mentally retarded son of The Cleaner in the lovely Children’s Home that
I had the good fortune to be placed in, and I must have been about 13 at the
time. I didn’t tell anyone because I thought his mother would lose her job,
although I could have done without fear of being misbelieved. I just avoided
him like the plague after that. But haven’t we all got a similar story to
tell. He actually did me no harm at all, and I had completely forgotten about
it, along with several other groping incidents as the years went by, In fact I
was groped here fairly recently by some silly old fool.
But for certain
sure I would have felt dreadful if his poor mother had lost her job.
But I
am outraged by the headlong rush to name all and sundry without a scrap of
proof. Possibly my Lame Dog attitude, but it’s the sort of person that I am,
which is actually no credit to me. It is just so.
Perhaps I should sue The
British Legion who more than adequately cared for a lot of children of War
Torn Families. Most of what is going on at the moment is no worse than
happened to me. I got groped, oh my God.
-
December 2, 2012 at 11:40
-
The thing is though, nobody has yet been proved to be a groper or
anything else.
- December 2, 2012 at 12:13
-
No, I know they haven’t. And it is virtually impossible to prove
anyway. So why are reputations being trashed and acres of money being
wasted on something that isn’t actually Sexual Abuse, and generally does
no great harm. But perhaps I am old fashioned. Of course women don’t like
it, but half the time you can’t even be sure that any intent was there in
the first place.
I kiss a lot of people around here, and some of them
are men who get a bit familiar, probably because they aren’t getting
enough, but I am hardly likely to shame them by making it obvious. I put
up with it in exchange for a better life style, and the knowledge that
most of them would help me if I needed help. Not one of them has ever made
a real nuisance of himself, or given me any need to fear. And who knows?
Perhaps it’s a mating dance.
I just can’t get off on outrage about it.
And I didn’t when I was young.
- December 2, 2012 at 13:33
-
No you are right. When I was 11-years old, I was groped by a bigger
boy of 12-years old. By the next day I had forgotten about it. The
bigger boy is now a respected legal figure in the northwest of England.
Shall I out him on Twitter?
- December 2, 2012 at
14:12
-
Well, I don’t know, Jonathan Mason. Is there likely to be any
Compensation in it for you? e.g. has he got more than you’ve got? If
so, then deff on Twitter. The Twits will have it all over the place in
five minutes, but only if he’s got a Hashtag.
Mind you, you could
get sued, but the way things are going at the moment you will be
absolutely believed by the hoi poloi.
The up side for him is that
he can be a Litigate in Person, which seems to be popular just now,
even if you have been, “Disgraced” by Legal Bodies.
If you win can
you let me know, and then I will go for the snotty nosed little brat
who tried to have sex with me in the bushes when I was nine, and he
was the same age. He failed miserably, but he INTIMIDATED me which was
much more scary and damaging.
Oh My. It’s only just occurred to me of what a fascinating past I
had before I reached the age of consent. Perhaps I should write a
Book. What has happened to me since then will have to wait. But that
will definitely be a Gob Smacker.
- December 2, 2012 at 14:23
-
I think we should begin a movement towards a national ‘accuse your
groper day’ upon which we all (and we need a good few thousand to get
behind this) flood the police and the press with our allegations and
demand immediate action, compensayshun, and inquiries.
- December 2, 2012 at
14:32
-
DAMN! NOTHING happened to me!
One could start too feel left out and/or abnormal. (Could I sue for
that?!?)
- December 2, 2012 at 14:45
-
You can just pretend. Nobody is allowed to doubt you if you say
you’re a victim. Tell you what, you can borrow the name of my groper.
The more of us that name him the more it proves its true.
- December 2, 2012 at
15:23
-
Well, I never got groped by Jimmy Savile or anyone even remotely
famous, so shut up and stop complaining.
However, I did once get
chased through his Orchard by Old Mother Riley when I was scrumping
his Apples, and I am certain he would have groped me if he could have
caught me.
Old Mother Riley was a Man, by the way. And he lived in
Neasden. But not many people know that. No one in their right mind
admits to ever having lived in Neasden.
- December 2, 2012 at
16:21
-
I hope no one thinks I am making light of the problem, but there
deffinately appears to be a “ME TOO, ME TOO” element to all this. of
course, I would by showing my cynical side if I dared suggest it was
“Compo band wagon jumping”.
But then…. I was BORN cynical, and it went up hill from there.
-
December 2, 2012 at 09:35
-
Not sure if this is pertinent here. My apologies if not.
No Comments
allowed, but at least they printed it.
- December 2, 2012 at 09:54
-
It is more than pertinent here Elena, and thank you for finding it. Quite
horrifying.
- December 2, 2012 at 10:37
-
They probably wouldn’t have printed my comment anyway, Anna. I am still
having trouble on that score. Although they are more than happy to post my
insane ramblings on Stone Age Man being a bit more smart than first was
thought.
-
December 2, 2012 at 11:02
-
Thanks for the link, Elena. The one thing that this JS business has
done for me is to develop my interest in this false allegations,
compensation, and trawling malarkey, and its this aspect and the
suffering of the falsely accused that is horrifying me.
- December 2, 2012 at 13:30
-
The Daily Mail has done a pretty good job of getting this story
out. It does a great job of undermining the current barrage of
approved school claims and goes a long way to explain why so many of
the plaintiffs lack the kind of credibility one would expect,
especially when the accusations are against people in the public
sphere or media personalities.
Pedophilia is a very real thing and hardly a day goes by without
reports of someone somewhere being sent to prison for terrible sexual
offenses against children, but these 40-year-old allegations made by
prisoners, drug addicts, and ex-cons are getting to be a bit of a
joke. Hopefully the whole thing will soon implode and that will be the
end of it.
- December 2, 2012 at 11:50
-
Trawling should be outlawed, although I have no idea how. Perhaps it
would be easier to subject police officers to an operation whereby
‘common sense’ could be applied as an implant at the same time as their
credulity chip is removed.
- December 2, 2012 at
12:31
-
I don’t think it is the fault of The Police. They are never right
no matter what they do. And believe me, I have no great love of The
Police, on a personal level. In the end The Public Prosecutors have to
decide, and even they get it wrong on occasions.
It’s Lawyers and
the likes of Mark Williams Thomas who do most of the trawling. But The
Police most certainly should not.
- December 1, 2012 at 21:00
-
with my weary old age wisdom I perceive that MWT may have done a Tweet Too
Far.
The tone of this report in an Australian newspaper (owned by the American
R.Murdoch) has changed rapidly since this morning :
http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/police-interview-of-bbc-entertainer-a-shocking-slur/story-e6frfkp9-1226528126245
This line stands out :”Is everyone who has ever worked with that man Savile
going to be hauled in? He is being tainted with guilt by association.”
I always thought this may happen : that someone overwhelmingly popular
(despite being as corny as hell) would become entangled in the net and turn
public opinion.
I believe MWT will pay dearly for his Tweet and attempt to be the first to
break the news. An arrest like this would not remain a secret for long but MYW
has tried to stake his claim to an ‘exclusive’ and it’s worked : he is the one
quoted. I believe it will backfire.
-
December 1, 2012 at 22:50
-
You could be right, Observor. MWT has been silent on Twitter for almost
24 hours now. Looking at his timeline this appears to be very unusual. I
read up a little on the ACPO guidelines about naming people that have been
arrested, and gathered that it can be dodgy as it can only have a derogatory
connotation, and unless charges ensue then it is defamatory. I suspect it
was safe enough to name DLT, FS and GG because the public was aware pretty
much of what they appeared to have been accused of by alleged victims. But
this other chap was not even arrested and there was no gossip or accusation
about him at all. So, hugely damaging and defamatory to make it public, and
the press completely properly didn’t do so.
MWT possibly having to deal
with chap’s lawyers today.
Thank you for your reply about the JS recording and I appreciate your
taking the time to consider what a mysterious thing that is. I agree with
you also that in any event it does appear to be more about the relationship
between media and police than anything else.
-
December 2, 2012 at 01:17
-
Apart from being a bit of a selfish bastard to his wife and daughter at
one time – such a shock for a popular entertainer, of course – Rolf Harris
is probably above reproach otherwise. http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/317846/Lust-for-fame-that-almost-destroyed-Rolf-Harris-s-life
This is particularly slimy thing for Willliams-Thomas to do, and I hope
he gets his from Rolf’s lawyers.
-
December 2, 2012 at 01:37
-
I’m with Mewsical on this one. MWT is a slug for doing this to RH.
IF the investigation is going to trawl through every living
acquaintance of Sir Jimmy Savile then they’ll have their work cut out.
It is doubly significant that MWT did not tweet that RH had been
arrested, merely that he had been interviewed. The two do not
necessarily follow, one from another, nor is this evidence, in and of
itself that he is a suspect. MWT has, very evidently, ‘jumped the gun’
in tarring him with the same brush used on Saville. RH may have been
interviewed as a potential witness. No one, except those persons in a
position to know for a certainty know the truth.
Smearing all the people that were celebrities when I were a ‘nipper’
without the accompanying evidence seems to be a national pastime for
‘Twitterers’ and their ilk, but I think it will ultimately prove to be
an expensive game.
- December 2, 2012 at 06:30
-
“MWT has been silent on Twitter for almost 24 hours now.”
Ahhh, blessed relief!
-
December 2, 2012 at 12:21
-
Over 36 hours now. Marvelous. If I were a twitter user I’d be tempted
to tweet
‘Is Mark Williams Thomas being interviewed under caution’
Using the hashtags ‘#savile and #child abuse of course so that people
would know I meant that these are his specialist interests.
or
‘Is
Mark Williams Thomas’s sorry arse being sued’
- December 1, 2012 at 20:37
-
She did note that he was in a ‘glam rock band,’ so I’m thinking David Bowie
had better lawyer up! LOL! Doesn’t he show up in the Karin Ward’s book as
well?
-
December 1, 2012 at 16:45
-
Here is another victim. 38 years ago when she was 15 and her pop star idol
27 years old, he put his hand in her knickers after a few drinks together. She
has still not completely recovered. No doubt the police will be on his
doorstep tomorrow with a warrant to search for evidence.
- December 1, 2012 at 18:07
-
Well, I’m sure that MWT will figure it all out and tweet, tweet,
tweet.
- December 1, 2012 at 18:59
-
“He obviously thought teenage girls were there for the taking.
”
Possibly got that impression because you were in his room in your
underwear.
- December 1, 2012 at 20:17
-
He would have been born around 1947, the same age as David Bowie, Marc
Bolan, and Elton John (nah!), with most of Pink Floyd being a tad older.
“See Emily Play” was a hit single in 1967.
-
December 1, 2012 at 20:45
-
To be fair to Mooney, she does rather tell her some home truths – ‘It
wasn’t pleasant, I don’t condone it and I’m really sorry you were upset —
but I honestly don’t think you can call it ‘abuse’.
- December 2, 2012 at 04:21
-
I read that, no offence I know she was young, but she sounded like a bit
of a delusional stalker (bear in mind she’s in her 50′s now).
I was
pretty clueless when I was 15, i’d never have had the balls to follow a
famous singer to his hotel let alone think he’d want to talk to me, I knew
guys like that were busy people and had lots of women after them. But when I
was a bit younger than 15 I did sometimes have a few crushes on celebrities
and imagine what i’d like to happen if I was ever in the unlikely position
of getting to meet them – and it wasn’t holding hands or getting married
(they wouldn’t of been my first priorities anyway, lol) I can tell you,
sorry…
- December 1, 2012 at 06:06
-
Also, do tell ‘Mewsical’ that she needs some attention to spelling because
she felt compelled to point that out to me. But you know, people like
‘Mewsical’ don’t care for the rules that she catches out others on. We’re
supposed to be admiring of a play on words…hmmm.
Anna. you can allow, disallow, argue, mock, and claim offence. I make a
comment. If you don’t like it, it must be powerful in order to warrant censor,
because otherwise you would let it stand and have a laugh.
The power of wordpress is an illusion when it stiffles debate.
- December
1, 2012 at 09:44
-
Did you mean ‘stifles’..?
- December 1, 2012 at 10:47
-
Well Julia, really, it’s just a trifle.
-
December 1, 2012 at 19:11
-
Actually, it’s piffle.
-
December 2, 2012 at 01:20
-
Perhaps Jim was ‘Getting a stiffle’ when he wrote that…
- December 1, 2012 at 05:55
-
Yasser Arrafat is nothing to do with this nonsense, which smacks of keeping
the fires burning on non-stories., by any means. Relevance is important.
But I am banned. So…
- November 30, 2012 at 21:14
-
Anna, this rolling “paedophile under every gravestone” scandal is a bit
convenient. There are a couple of scandals brewing. One over the links between
Vince Cable and a Gordon Brown ‘ethical banking’ (Derisive snort) think tank
which was reported in the Scotsman as being under Police investigation. Said
article has since vanished, but the Times has this:
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Finance/article1167647.ece
In
the Torygraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financial-crime/9709823/Suspected-fund-embezzlement-puts-financial-think-tank-into-administration.html
Interesting
n’est-ce pas?
- November 30, 2012 at
21:30
-
Bill, I was seriously concerned when I heard they had dug up Yasser
Arrafat last week – turns out they were only worried that he might have been
poisoned…..huh! is that all?
-
November 30, 2012 at 21:40
-
The Duncroft women would be well-advised to listen to the Sligo judge
in his opinion before ruling as well. Let alone that ex-flatfoot.
-
November 30, 2012 at 21:42
-
Well, if they find he was poisoned – and traces of the substance were
found on a toothbrush and some garments – then the Palestinians will start
accusing the Israelis, and off we go again.
- November 30, 2012 at 23:33
-
Since there are no outside observers they will ‘find’ whatever they
want to find. Foregone conclusion anyone?
-
December 1, 2012 at 00:24
-
The exhumation and investigation is being conducted by an outside
forensic team – some are Swiss. They are there as neutrals. Far as I
know, no Palestinian is involved.
- November 30, 2012 at 20:29
-
I started looking about for more information, and saw that someone actually
believes that Tie Me Kangaroo Down is somehow suggestive. Pity they never
actually listened to the lyrics, but what can you do? Next thing we know,
Harry Lauder, who actually made the song Two Little Boys popular back in the
early 1900s, will be tried in the emdia, or his gravestone will be smashed, or
lord knows what other rubbish. All Rolf did was cover the song – he didn’t
write it, and he didn’t make it popular.
- November 30, 2012 at
20:48
-
Dear God, the mania spreads…http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1130/breaking33.html
Some
interesting comments from the Judge.
-
November 30, 2012 at 21:20
-
Wow. Sensible judge, but wouldn’t have minded if he had been less
diplomatic than he was and made the accusers weep a little
more.
Motive, money again I presume.
- December
1, 2012 at 06:58
-
“…and saw that someone actually believes that Tie Me Kangaroo Down is
somehow suggestive.”
Maybe they got it confused with that old rugby classic, ‘Bestiality’s
Best, Boys”?
- November 30, 2012 at 20:23
-
Only two celebs live in Bray in Berkshire. One is Val Doonican who is 85,
the other is Rolf Harris, who is 82. So whoever the 80 y.o. is it’s neither of
them.
- December 1, 2012 at 21:05
-
I hope it isn’t Rolf Harris but the police statement actually refers to
“a man in his 80s”, so it could be him.
-
December 1, 2012 at 21:51
-
I’m afraid it is, especially as it’s all over the Oz news. I can’t
imagine a more unlikely candidate myself.
- November
30, 2012 at 19:47
-
So Mr Thomas was a police constable, sort of adds yet more credence to my
thoughts during the 90′s of the channel 4 move to coincide with the rebirth of
the Templars. And speaking of Templars….two little boys and the wooden
horse…Mmmm
- November 30, 2012 at 19:39
-
“The cynical amongst us, including myself, could almost believe that it was
in such a persons interests to fan the flames in the ‘Ethical Vacuum’. Either
that or he is a complete dipstick.”
I suspect that he is a complete dipstick.
- November 30, 2012 at 19:33
-
Great piece as usual Anna.
My own view of MWT’s antics yesterday was
just that in his never ending quest for self aggrandizement he simply backed
the wrong horse, as it were. He thought his adoring fans would be thrilled to
bits – and after all, one gossip deprived follower was recently on DS
bemoaning the fact that no more famous people were being arrested after ‘they
had been all excited about it’. That thirsty fan ought to have perhaps
qualified that by including the words ‘people we don’t much care for’ after
the word famous.
One thing which puzzled me about that last tv program of
his was, why certain people would even agree to be on it. Alan Franey for
instance. After considering the blackmail business I’m suspecting that it went
along the lines of; On the program we will say that JS recommended you for the
Broadmoor position, and the viewers will make of that what they will unless
you want to appear and explain the position.
I’m still trying to figure out
how to interest the right people in investigating just what that alleged 2009
tape recording of JS talking about Gary Glitter really was.
- December 1, 2012 at 00:58
-
can this recording be heard anywhere ?. I was a recording studio
technician for many years. I can tell if a tape is spliced.
-
December 1, 2012 at 09:49
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xSCqZ5G06U
Here is a link, Observer. To me it does sound like it is JS, although I
guess an impersonator is not out of the question. But it does sound to me
as though there is a cut. Fore instance he says ‘they did nothing wrong’
when the use of ‘he’ would have been the appropriate pronoun if still
referring to GG.
It just doesn’t make any sense for MWT to claim this
is a recording by a journalist in 2009 because that begs questions such
as, which journalist; why hasn’t he or she been named; why didn’t they
publish it; how did MWT know of its existence?
-
December 1, 2012 at 19:12
-
What Savile is saying (if it’s him) is not at all that outrageous. He
is simply stating the facts. Sounds like he is commenting on today’s
tabloid mentality.
But I will run it through my system. It takes some
time.
MWT is weaving and spinning disparate items to produce a whole that
isn’t necessarily there. Not unusual of course but I believe it will be
found the BBC made the correct decision when they didn’t run his
show.
But your point about : who was the journalist and what is MWT’s
source ? is very valid. This is most odd. There isn’t a hack in
existence who wouldn’t fall over themselves today to claim ownership of
the item. And it isn’t good enough for MWT to just say “I have obtained
a recording etc etc”. This could easily be a forgery. And such an easy
one to produce and it helps kick along the story.
Apart from that.. I have some Hitler Diaries here if anyone
is………………………
-
December 1, 2012 at 12:24
-
@Mina -”he simply backed the wrong horse”- Hope you don’t mean to imply
anything relating to “Climb up here right behind me”?
-
November 30, 2012 at 17:17
-
I read an article in The Mail this morning, by Quentin Letts, and I am
still trying to figure out if it is some sort of Spoof, although I cannot for
the life of me see what would be the point of that. Anyone able to do better
than I?
I can provide a Link if you want, but it is easy to find.
-
November 30, 2012 at 19:39
-
No Elena, I failed too, and the comments below it indicate even his
regular readers aren’t clear. What I took from it was, he supports the
Tories, likes Cameron, and despised the inquiry. But then I’m a bit
thick.
- December 1, 2012 at 00:42
-
Best commentary I have seen so far is Dan Hodges-Telegraph.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100192335/the-vichy-evening-news-formerly-known-as-the-guardian-has-gone-bonkers-over-leveson/
- November 30,
2012 at 17:04
-
Just for the record, Anna,. Paedophilia is not a ‘practice’, whether one
deems it ‘vile’, or not.
One may be a Paedophile, without any action being carried out.
Such an
action, being being carried out, does not, alone, make one a Paedophile.
Pays to be accurate, on such things … medico-legally speaking.
WM
- November 30, 2012 at
17:22
-
Thank you Sir, and one cannot be a paedophile from accepting a blow job
from a 15 year old either – though that small detail seems to escape the
MSM.
- November
30, 2012 at 17:46
-
Yup.
WM
- December 1, 2012 at 20:25
-
Surely by today’s definitions it can?
- December
3, 2012 at 13:17
-
What ‘definition’?
WM
- November 30, 2012 at 21:37
-
One could go further. Paedophile means, simply, a lover of children.
Paedophilia should still be illegal, of course: I cannot stand the brutes
myself.
- November
30, 2012 at 22:15
-
It ‘means’ a great deal more than that.
WM
-
December 3, 2012 at 13:19
-
Might I quote the late lamented W. C. Fields who, upon being asked by
an interviewer how he liked children, is reputed to have replied “Fried or
boiled”.
Class.
- December 1, 2012 at 00:52
-
And surely because a person has a sexual encounter with an under aged
person it does not automatically mean they are a pedophile. They may break
the law however and pay the price.
Or are the publishers and owners of The Sun and it’s Page Three
nudes-Murdoch, Brookes, photographers and readers pre: 2003 all pedophiles
?.
-
December 3, 2012 at 11:52
-
WM, your website, which you link to here, troubles me greatly. I believe
you are attempting to hijack the issue, which is that people are being
accused and publically vilified of terrible crimes without evidence or even
trial, and slant it towards peadophilea being kinda ok. Peadophilea is not
ok.
Being in possession of indecent images of children, and being rightly
convicted as a sex offender is not the issue at hand. Just to be crystal
clear: children whose images of being abused are circulated are victims of
the original perpetrators, AND anyone who chooses to view/own/download these
images. Doing this makes the person a sex offender. It’s really very simple.
Your use of semantics does not change this.
- December 3,
2012 at 13:11
-
… and I claim my prize, that you are an anti, agent provocateur
Easily solved …
We have posted your comment, on The OSC site (http://therealosc.blogspot.co.uk/) … continue your
mission, there.
We will allow you 24h, so as to comment, further, before we
respond.
You will, now, not be replied to, here. TY.
WM
-
December 3, 2012 at 13:46
-
Ummm I do apologise as clearly I’m being a tad thick but what exactly
do you claim your prize for?
I am a secret “anti” ?
Well if you mean I am anti child abuse then yes, you’re right, well
done! Only I wasn’t aware it was a secret. I am also anti murder,
drink-driving, trial by Media and cruelty to puppies if that helps?
- November 30, 2012 at 16:59
-
Anna: I have said it before but whatever was in that breakfast, at that
unnamed UK golf club, that you and ‘himself’ devoured a short while ago, it
seems to have re-endowed you with your unparalleled journalistic and
investigative powers.
MWT has, very evidently, fallen into the same trap as the idiotic Bercow
woman, and others – for if it is indeed the case that a national icon has been
smeared in this way, by linking them in such a crass and unprincipled way to
an ongoing investigation, without a shred of evidence on which to base this
vile slur, then he can look to get himself sued… I hope.
This is all getting out of hand! Who is next??
- November 30, 2012 at
17:19
-
Bacon, Eggs, Sausage, Fried bread, Tomato, Baked Beans, fresh Mushrooms,
Grilled homemade bread, butter, marmalade, I dream of it still…
-
December 3, 2012 at 13:17
-
Aaaaaaargh. What a thing to read on a Monday lunchtime.
I’m salivating, thus corroborating those who consider me to be a
drooling idiot…
- November 30, 2012 at 16:46
-
The problem with legislating the press is the same problem that exists with
legislating everything. There are laws which, no matter how exactly
formulated, are open to interpretation* and there are lawyers, for hire at
better-than-minimum-wage, whose job it is to wring every last interpretation
out of them.
Of course, slot-gobbed lawyers will benefit from the increased business
generated and as numerous politicians are lawyers of some sort then it is
comforting they can make a living when their constituents vote them out at a
future date, at least if Europe doesn’t offer them a cosy job first.
In the usual nature of all this, yet more legislation and even more
regulations merely provide a temporary barrier to be overcome and any costs
incurred will, as usual, be passed on to the public.
*Years ago, I seem to recall a Sunday trading law that said it was illegal
to sell fish and chips on a Sunday. Oh dear, it was the little ‘and’ that was
the get out clause. Shops duly sold fish but gave the chips away free on a
Sunday, thus neatly avoiding the ‘and’ part of the law and continuing almost
as normal.
- December 1, 2012 at 00:40
-
possibly : but electricians and builders and all other ‘for profit’
entities are legislated and thankfully few of us are electrocuted or have
the ceiling fall in because of it.
the Big Lie pedaled by the media is that it is a Public Service when it
is no such thing.
- December 1, 2012 at 15:26
-
Hmmm… Perhaps, but there is plenty of evidence that despite all the
legislating there are still a few ‘cowboy’ electricians and builders who
don’t follow the codes or laws laid down for their (and our) safety. Those
that happily follow the safety guidelines and laws do in fact pass on the
costs to the purchaser; approved cabling comes at price, for example, and
even experienced practitioners have to take certificated courses insisted
on by the government, sometimes to tell them things they already know.
Those costs have to be passed on to the consumer.
My point is that with the media it comes down to an argument not over
material and measurable things but opinions and words. As such they are
perfect for ‘interpretation’ and protracted argument. Lawyers will win in
any dispute, even those settled ‘out of court’
-
December 1, 2012 at 19:18
-
But the poor cannot afford lawyers as the McAlpines can (and I
applaud him).
Lord Leveson made a very good point during the inquiry but not
followed up unfortunately : that there needs to be a sort of libel
tribunal accessible by the common man that could by-pass expensive
lawyers.
- November 30, 2012 at 16:41
-
‘The cynical amongst us, including myself, could almost believe that it was
in such a persons interests to fan the flames in the ‘Ethical Vacuum’. Either
that or he is a complete dipstick.’
Might your ‘either that, or’ be superfluous?
- November 30, 2012 at 16:17
-
The Interweb an “Ethical vacuum?”
Hmm. That may well be, but some of us in the outer obscurity have higher
standards than the lamestream.
- November 30, 2012 at
16:20
- December 1, 2012 at 09:23
-
The problem is with the term “ethical vacuum”: it’s more of an ethical
no-man’s land.
- November 30, 2012 at 16:09
-
It may be fair to summarise the Levenson Inquiry and Report as being
largely undertaken through the rear-view mirror.
Looking back over 300+ years of ‘free’ UK press, encompassed by flattening
dead trees and smearing them with ink-stain, then pontificating on its future
control whereas, as we all know, the front windscreen gives a view of an
emerging publishing world which, due to its flexible geo-location and almost
infinite range of sources, becomes impossible to police, manage, control or
regulate.
Probably the most significant feature of the Levenson Report will be its
complete irrelevance to the world of publishing as we see it emerging. Whether
Cameron is eventually beaten into legislating or not is unlikely to impact one
jot on the next generation of factual, or fact-free, output from that future
world.
- November 30, 2012 at 16:08
-
It’s not wrong to point out that MWT offered the director of a cemetery an
“opportunity” to have the story he had developed go away. The fact that the
matter even ended up in front of a jury is worthy of remark. It shows what
sort of character he was and is. It’s all about Mark.
- November
30, 2012 at 17:47
-
“It’s all about Mark.”
Oh, that’s the crux of it, isn’t it?
-
November 30, 2012 at 15:38
-
Does the case of the 80-year-old man have anything to do with “two little
boys”?
- November 30, 2012 at
15:40
-
I haven’t missed the point you are making – but we have absolutely no
idea why he was interviewed. None whatso-remotely-ever!
- November 30, 2012 at 17:20
-
Newspapers (The Daily Mirror reflects) are now reporting:
“The arrested man attended a South London police station by appointment
where he was quizzed for around five hours on suspicion of sexual
offences.”
“His Berkshire home had already been searched by officers on Saturday
after they obtained a warrant.”
- November 30, 2012 at
19:53
-
“His Berkshire home had already been searched by officers on Saturday
after they obtained a warrant.”
Did they find two little boys? Perhaps they went to untie a kangaroo
– it was needed as judge in the court of public opinion.
- November 30, 2012 at 20:15
-
Can you tell who it is yet ?
- December 1, 2012 at 02:00
-
“Did they find two little boys?”
I imagine the two little boys would now be grown up men, but they
may have been looking for two little toys for corroborative evidence.
The police are not fools.
-
November 30, 2012 at 15:31
-
Interesting to compare the UK press to the US press. A story that has got
some attention concerns an obviously out-of-control 11-year-old girl who had
sex, willingly it seems, with as many as 19 men in a kind of orgy that was
inevitably filmed on cell phone cameras and circulated at her school. Some of
the defendants were schoolboys and some of them adults with criminal records.
Defense lawyers have pointed out in mitigation that the girl appeared much
older than her years and may have lied about her age.
The interesting point is that although there has been a fair bit of
discussion about issues of (inability to ) consent and “statutory rape” (which
is the legal name of the offense of having sex with someone underage), I have
not seen the work “pedophilia” even mentioned in any discussion of the
case.
- November 30, 2012 at
15:38
-
And yet that is undoubtedly paedophilia – not because of the nature of
the offence, but purely on age grounds. Unlike those in the UK who have been
subjected to the term for ‘breast jiggling’ of a just under age girl.
- December 1, 2012 at 06:55
-
It seems no soap actor is safe:
“The alleged offences are believed to date back to when he was a
trainee actor called Andrew Watkinson.”
And when the age difference was not so great, either…
- November 30, 2012 at 14:49
-
It seems that Mark Williams-Thomas likes hearing the echo in the
echo-chamber that is twitter, either that or he is proving he is a twit.
-
November 30, 2012 at 14:27
-
So Mark Williams Thomas is an Internet Investigative Journalist then, is
he? Is this to be the new face of Journalism? How will they make their money?
They can’t all be talking heads. Perhaps people will have to pay to access his
Website, and the rest. And then The Government can have another Inquiry about
The Internet.
Me? I’m all for Independent Regulation of the lot of them.
Sorry about that. But those who don’t advocate Lies and Libel won’t need to
worry.
-
November 30, 2012 at 14:18
-
Be fair:- It is wrong to cast up an allegation against Mark Williams-Thomas
that was dismissed by a jury. I am otherwise in agreement with you.
-
November 30, 2012 at 19:29
-
Surely it would be wrong to mention the allegation without mentioning the
jury’s verdict? Otherwise this is just stating a fact, he was charged but
found not guilty. His reputation remains intact (at least as far as that
allegation goes).
- December 1, 2012 at
12:55
-
XX he was charged but found not guilty. His reputation remains intact
(at least as far as that allegation goes).XX
Except you can not mention his name, without mentioning that he “was
charged with…xyz”…..??!!
“Reptation remains intact” means that his name is never brought up in
the context again.
But as we see, “innocent” means bugger all, once it reaches the
media.
- December 1, 2012 at 00:35
-
It is correct to expose Williams- Thomas’ background because he presents
himself as an ‘expert’ on serious matters.
His background and ways of operating must be looked at in detail
particularly as he inflames claims and presents bogus ‘facts ‘ : such as the
lie in his second program re Savile had been exposed as a pedophile when no
such thing has happened.
: Williams-Thomas approached an undertaker and declared he had proof of
the (bogus) claim that more than one body was buried in a casket and on the
receipt of money he would sell that story to that undertaker rather than the
media. The jury found that he was ‘not guilty’ of blackmail but
Williams-Thomas operates in the court of public opinion..he has placed
himself there and we are entitled to find a different verdict.
-
December 1, 2012 at 01:14
-
Well said. Mark needs to be careful that this doesn’t turn on him. He
is milking this ‘paedophile under every bush’ thing to death for his own
gain.
Here in the States, we had the Jerry Sandusky scandal and he has gone
to prison. Our media here, much to my surprise, has not drummed up
suspicions against every college football coach they can find. We moved
on, at least in terms of exploiting pedophilia.
Mark wants to keep this flame fanned for his own gain, far as I can
see. If he’d shut the f-k up, instead of making pompous announcements on
Twitter and elsewhere, the police could quietly get on with it, the
various inquiries could go on without his constant harping, and the
British public could stop suspecting every celebrity over the age of 65.
I’ve actually spoken to Mark in the past. He would have enjoyed a job
on the Spanish Inquisition, imo.
- December
1, 2012 at 01:20
-
Yes, Mark made a full risk assessment, on me, on-air, after a few
minutes, on The John Gaunt show
He is special.
WM
-
December 1, 2012 at 02:35
-
MacBeth: “Vaulting ambition, which o’er leaps itself and falls on
the other.”
-
December 1, 2012 at 06:32
-
This man is a disgrace. His tweet message is reverberating around the
web and no doubt by now is being hailed by David Icke as further proof
of the Zionist/Royal family/Freemason/ etc pedo/one world govt
conspiracy. Australian newspapers are quoting him which basically urges
readers to click on his Twitter account.
He has linked the man with Savile without proof and when the police
obviously had good reason to not release his name. He is a menace. I’d
like to see him in the libel courts one day.
- December 1, 2012 at 06:53
-
He’s chosen his targets too well for that..
{ 144 comments }