Congratulations to David Rose of the Mail on Sunday who has finally turned the tables on the compo crooks, cantering around the estate of Jimmy Savile, waiting for the big pay-off. False claim against the Savile Estate. Big ol' oopsie - the great-niece who made up a series of whoppers about sexual abuse from her great-uncle - is being investigated by the plods for possible fraud. Her daughter has turned her in, to make it even better! Palm to face! So why, pray tell, are the rest of them not having their stories gone over with a fine-tooth comb as well? Especially that dodgy crowd from Ye Olde Approved School - Duncroft, the spawning ground of all this rubbish.
Let's revisit the first big oopsie, courtesy of the Daily Mail, and no doubt obtained at a price, from one former resident, Bebe Roberts. Bebe's interview with the Mail. I've had a go at Bebe before for her lies, but now this situation with the great-niece finally being investigated, time once more to remind everyone about Bebe, and Duncroft in the 60s. I was there, too, 1962-64 and then returning briefly in 1965. There was NO JIMMY SAVILE anywhere in sight, nor were any girls who absconded in 1964 and were up in London involved with him either. Members of a band from Newcastle perhaps. I never heard the name Jimmy Savile.
Bebe made up such a bunch of huge fibs, it boggled the minds of both myself and Sue Cameron-Blackie, who blogs under the name of Anna Raccoon. Sue was also there in 1965. Jimmy Savile lurking in the corridors? Really? Nope. The only person lurking in the corridors would be Bridie Keenan, one of the staff, who erred on the side of vigilance. Or perhaps Ruth Cole, the deputy head.
Anna Raccoon took to the keyboard and went after Miss Roberts. I had already had dealings with her on Friends Reunited and accused her of lying, whereupon she told me I was a disgrace to the love of God. She's a pretty confused woman, imo, which could be a result of other health issues she claims to have. I wouldn't know if that's true either. But despite being contacted recently by David Rose, she still says she's sticking to her story, but has not made a claim against the Savile funds. And I should think not. She's a bold-faced liar and she knows it. God would be very cross with her if she made a claim, not that He's impressed with the lies probably.
Another one of the women who actually was there in 1974 told me that Bebe was just trying to support them by lying to the press, as if that somehow made this lying okay. Pity she didn't think to contact the Mail and tell them just that. Or the authorities.
Additionally, there appears to be an issue with the birthdate of one of the claimants, which is recently commented on by someone called Karma Bites on my post, And The Oscar Goes To ... . This commenter appears to be a Duncroft insider. In fact, this claimant she refers to is the ringleader of the Duncroft claimants, who has always been closely allied to Mark Williams-Thomas and Meirion Jones, the BBC producer, nephew of Duncroft's then-headmistress Margaret Jones, who went internet trawling for other Duncroft residents who might jump on the good ship Savile, for untold riches. rewards and a nice dollop of vengeance against Duncroft, for good measure. That claimant's birthdate issue could bear some checking out balanced against when she claims she was 'molested.'
So now we have a lying claimant in the person of Jimmy's great-niece, being investigated by the police, and a lying former resident of Duncroft, who has long been hand-in-glove with the main group of claimants. How many others are there? Why is all this money being shelled out - or getting ready to be shelled out - because 14 women of a CHE nee approved school say Jimmy Savile molested them? Consider the source, all ye bold enforcers of the law. Does a leopard really change its spots?
To my observation, and it's been a close observation, they wanted to do this all along, but they knew full well that Savile would have had them laughed out of court without much effort. Dead, he couldn't defend himself. Such is the character of those that accuse him. And they deserve to be paid exactly why? Because they must be believed? What happened to verifying a few facts?