MY LIFE IN THE DAY - Sally Stevens

KRISTOFFERSON REDUX - Part Three.

As 1970 rolled in, the winds of change were blowing over all of us, some riding the waves, some not. 

I was at work (at Elektra), when Paul Rothchild arrived from the downstairs garage.  It was mid-afternoon on a Friday, far as I recall. I went to Sunset Sound, where he was working with Janis on the "Pearl" album, for Columbia.  Things weren't lovely. 

Kris and Janis had struck up a friendship, which resulted in her recording Me and Bobby McGee.  Just a perfect song for Janis.  

I stuck to the studio walls, while Paul and Janis were overdubbing vocals.  All of a sudden, we noticed that the recording engineer (Columbia/union) was reading a newspaper and nothing was happening recording-wise.  He was taking his "break." Janis was livid, and rightfully so.  Paul called the session, bemoaning he would have loved to have sidekick/engineer Fritz Richmond on the board, and we went down to the Troubadour for libations. 

The sun was setting as Janis and I conscripted a couple of bicycles parked outside, and rode up and down the railroad tracks, laughing and falling about. 

Not too much later, maybe a couple of weeks thereafter, she died.  We were all devastated.   Kris in particular. 

Janis was a generous artist and until the end, she gave it all she had.   And she had a lot more than she knew.  Me and Bobby McGee - looking for that home, and I hope she found it. 

MEANWHILE, OUT IN THE ALLEYWAY ...

When I was working as a publicity director at Elektra/Asylum, one of my label clients was Jackson Browne. 

Those were high times in the music business, and Elektra/Asylum, the record company combination of the skills of label heads Jac Holzman (Elektra) and thereafter David Geffen (Asylum) handled a successful stable of folk-rock, singer/songwriters who were at the apex of 70s west coast introspective rock music, dominating the airwaves, selling albums by the bucket load, and roaring around the concert circuit with gratifying success. 

But it wasn't always that way.

I first met Jackson in early 1970 at the Troubadour, courtesy of my friend Glenn Frey.  Glenn, JD Souther and Jackson were inhabitants of a duplex in Echo Park.  Jackson in a $60 a month sort of closet downstairs, which he shared with a hot plate and a piano, and Glenn and JD upstairs in a place with little or no furniture - you sat on the floor when visiting. 

Generally, I'd see Jackson emerging from the kitchen hatchway behind the bar at the Troub,  like a cuckoo popping out of a clock.  Glenn and I would chat with him from our bar stools. 

Along the way, I learned that Jackson was signed to Nina Music, a publishing division of Elektra, and had been lately in New York, where he'd had a colorful time, while honing his not inconsiderable songwriting skills.  He was, btw, 17 when this ball started to roll.

I was hired by Elektra in 1970. 

So, fast forward to the mid- 70s, where I often encountered Jackson about town.  We had great mutual friends in Lowell George and Van Dyke Parks, at the very least.  We ran in the same pack, chasing the same rabbit.  

I didn't get back to Elektra/Asylum until late 1976, when Joe Smith came in to run things.  Jackson had released The Pretender by that time, and the Eagles were dominating with Hotel California. 

Jackson was launching the Running on Empty project in 1977; I went out with the tour - and also on Warren Zevon's Excitable Boy tour, which ended in a three-day run at the Roxy in LA.  Jackson was in attendance in the New York dates in the winter of 77.  So was I.  The label was between regional directors, so I went to NY to cover those bases. 

Now, to the photo.  Art Fein took about six photos of me and Jackson one morning in 1977.  He was just trying to shoot off the end of a 35mm roll of another event (Ray Campi, if memory serves). I got some prints of each shot. 

In around 2011 or so, and I'm sure he'll correct me, my friend Paul Neve had a print made up of one shot, and about five years ago, attended a Jackson concert in the UK, north of England.  He managed to get to the backstage door, and was accosted by the usual resistance.  He gave that individual an envelope containing the print, a note from him, and a return envelope.  Mr. Resistance said, "Jackson never signs anything."  But he took the envelope. 

Paul reported that about a week later, he saw the postman coming up the path, with an envelope that looked pretty familiar.  Signed, sealed, delivered. 

We were there.  That much I can read!

 

 

 

 

 

 

KRISTOFFERSON REDUX - Part Two.

July 5, 1969, I had just returned to LA. I first arrived in November 1968 and stayed for a few months, going back to London in February 1969 and leaving thereafter on July 3, after getting a last phone call to tell me that Brian Jones had died the previous night.

On that cheery note, I flew to Toronto,  friends picked me up at Lake Erie, crowded with July 4 holiday-makers.  A huge storm blew up, which drove everyone to the border; when we got to Buffalo, the sun was shining, I went to a block party, changed into more suitable clothing, then hopped the bus to NY where I met up with my friend Angela on West 83rd Street.  That night we flew out of La Guardia and landed at LAX at 5am. 

I moved in at Holly Drive with Kris and my friend the same day, and started work at Thee Experience on July 6.

Scarcely a month later, August 9, 1969, horror struck at 10050 Cielo Drive, with the slaughter of Sharon Tate and her friends, at the order of cult leader Charles Manson.

Fingers were pointed here, there and everywhere.  Anyone who had anything to do with that house took off, producer Terry Melcher; Pik, a boyfriend of Cass's was also suspected - he left the country.  People stopped hitchhiking around town, paranoia hung like a noxious fog over the once-cheery peace and love parade. 

About two weeks after the murders, Carol told me that her father and some of his colleagues, were having an afternoon gathering, to celebrate the 'cure' of a schizophrenic patient, Eric.  Carol's father was a well-respected psychiatrist, working with other psychiatrists and psychologists in the field of schizophrenia, transactional therapy, and also very involved in the founding of Esalen. And we were invited to perform a couple of songs for the guests.  One would be Me and Bobby McGee, which I could play pretty easily.  Harmonies, of course.

So, on a late August/early September weekend afternoon we arrive at  10050 Cielo Drive.  Didn't mean anything to me, nice house.

The place was empty of furniture, freshly painted and carpeted, except for some Abbey Rents chairs and trestle tables.  Two young people sat away from everyone else at a small table by the window, dressed in black.  Actors Christopher Jones, a diagnosed schizophrenic,  and everyone's "Juliet" for all seasons, Olivia Hussey.

Various medical types got up and made speeches, then Carol and I did our short performance which was well-received as I recall.  We had champagne and cake.  Eric, the patient, was presented for everyone's view and made a little speech. 

After that, Carol and I left and went to the Troubadour, where I was asked if I had felt anything about the house; I didn't except it was very devoid of energy.  Wasn't sure about the huge American flag hanging over the balcony.  I was not happy to hear that I'd gone there without knowing what was going on.

Rudy Altobelli, the actual owner of the house, allowed this gathering to take place.  He was a regular at Esalen.  As was Manson.

None of this negates what a great song Bobby McGee is, and I hope it did something to clear the atmosphere. 

Next time I encountered it, was at Sunset Sound, Janis at the helm and Paul Rothchild at the board.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KRISTOFFERSON REDUX - Part One.

The dementia has turned out to be Lyme disease; such a relief for his family and friends.  Kris is coming back to his old self.  It would've been a cruel sentence for someone renowned for his intelligence, to wander about in a mental fog, struggling to put the ends together and make sense of daily life, day after day. 

Lyme disease is a plague, the medical community by and large still don't believe it exists, but fortunately more and more of them have become enlightened.  The treatment is antibiotics, and is found to be successful in the majority of cases.  Kris Kristofferson Lyme disease misdiagnosed.

I met Kris in 1969 in Los Angeles.  We were roommates for a few weeks.  A friend of mine who worked for the Mamas and the Papas, went to Pomona College with Kris.  Kris went off to Oxford on his Rhodes Scholarship, got a Masters in English Literature, stumbled into an odd and unsuccessful music career in the UK, managed by the notorious Larry Parnes ("Parnes Shillings and Pence," as he was waggishly known), then returned to the US, joined up, became a Captain, became a Ranger, flew choppers.  But though he was pretty gung ho, he chucked it in 1965 and moved to Nashville to be a songwriter.  His family disowned him.

So, my friend accompanied Cass Elliot to Nashville on a business trip in 1969, and while there encountered Kris.  He ended up in LA by July that year, and was staying with my friend.  I showed up from London at the same time, and moved in to the little back house of an address on Holly Drive in the Hollywood Hills. 

I was already an aspiring singer/songwriter, hacking about on an acoustic, trying to learn as much as I could from all the musicians I encountered.   I was also working as a cocktail waitress at the notorious Thee Experience on Sunset, so I'd be home in the wee small hours, and Kris would be sitting up, writing.  I first heard Kris's work version of Sunday Morning Coming Down around 3 am on a work night. 

In the morning, he'd come through my bedroom, where I slumbered on a mattress on the floor, on his way from the bathroom to the kitchen.  He'd shake my foot and ask me to make coffee. 

Not long after, he moved to the Montecito Hotel on Franklin. 

We kept up, and I remember about a year or so later - after Cash recorded Sunday Morning, and Janis Me and Bobby McGee - he was a luminary and man about town, moving to the notorious Tropicana, where he celebrated his 35th birthday with a big bash around the pool.  We were invitees.  In those days he was imbibing a-plenty, enjoying the success.   As the party grew more hectic, we decided to take off - still daylight - and were looking for Kris to say goodbye.  He was dressed in black, so not too hard to spot in the bright California light.  I scanned the colorful crowd of well-wishers. No sign. 

I don't know what made me look down into the pool; he was lying on the bottom, not moving.  Easy to spot, the black against the turquoise pool paint. I yelled for help, friends standing near by jumped in and got him out.  We took off once it was obvious he was okay. 

More reminiscences to come. 

 

 

 

 

 

UPDATE ON JONI MITCHELL

An attorney appointed by a judge to represent Joni Mitchell says in court papers filed Tuesday that although the singer’s health has improved, she should remain under a conservatorship.

“While (Mitchell) has made great progress toward recovery, the Capacity Declaration of (neurologist, Dr. Paul Vespa) indicates that she lacks capacity to make informed medical decisions,” lawyer Rebecca Thyne wrote.“I agreed that (Mitchell) still needs assistance with such decisions.”

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Cunningham had previously named the 71-year-old singer’s longtime friend and administrator of Joni's official website, Leslie Morris of Sherman Oaks, as temporary conservator, giving her interim authority to oversee Mitchell’s care, but not her finances and business interests.

A hearing is scheduled Wednesday on Morris’ bid to be named Mitchell’s permanent conservator.

On March 31, Mitchell was taken to UCLA Medical Center to undergo tests after collapsing at her Bel Air home. Mitchell was found unconscious at home, but regained consciousness in an ambulance en route to a hospital.

Attorney Thyne says in her court papers that Mitchell was unresponsive when she visited the singer at the hospital on April 30, a month later. But when she went to Mitchell's home on June 26, Mitchell was sitting at her kitchen table eating lunch. Mitchell said she was pleased with Morris’ role as her temporary conservator and that she would like her friend’s authority to be extended, according to Thyne. “She also told me that she receives excellent care from caregivers around the clock,” Thyne states in her court papers. “It was clear that she was happy to be home and that she has made remarkable progress. She has physical therapy each day and is expected to make a full recovery.”

Very good news.  Now, if she can just quit smoking, she's good to go for a while yet.

 

COURT AND ...?

UPDATE: The very brief hearing on May 4 resulted in the appointment of the Petitioner as a temporary conservator, permitting her to communicate with Joni's medical providers and to try and figure out what to do next.  Joni has a court-appointed attorney, who will presumably work with the conservator with the goal of providing her the best care available.  The conservator has no access to the assets of the Estate, just the power to make medical decisions on Joni's behalf, as she is not in a condition to do so, according to Dr. Paul Vespa of Cedars-Sinai.   If she was, she would not need a conservator. 

July is the next hearing, but we can hope that Joni starts to recover from this and will be able to make her own decisions about her welfare going into the future.

Joni Mitchell, who suffered a medical emergency in March and remains in sad shape in the ICU at Cedars-Sinai hospital, has become the subject of a recently filed Petition for Conservatorship.  Which of course has riveted the attention of the media.

The Petitioner is an individual who first met Ms. Mitchell when she worked for her management team, headed by Eliot Roberts, as a secretary.  Long, long ago. She claims to be a close friend of Joni's for 44 years.  This claim requires a close look.

I work in probate law these days, and after a read of the Petition, some glaring errors bounced out at me.  Notably, Petitioner alleges that Joni has no family.  However, she does.  A turbulent daughter, who she adopted out when she was 20, and a granddaughter, turning 15  this year.  Still both living in Canada. The mother and child reunion was the result of a mutual search in 1997. Daily Mail report on Joni and her daughter.

Ultimately, it didn't work out.

And now, when Joni is in bad shape, the vultures begin to circle.  PVP counsel, court appointed to represent Joni's interests, has been recently advised that the Petition is inaccurate prima facie, and that Joni does have family, who Petitioner has omitted from the Petition. The first hearing is on Monday. 

In the spring of 1969, I got to spend an afternoon with Joni in London at the mews house of Larry Curzon, a William Morris agent who represented the Hollies.  She had contacted my friend Shawn Phillips, who she knew from their days playing the New York folk clubs.  Shawn was in London working on his album for A&M.  So we took a taxi to Kynance Mews, and hung out with Graham and Larry, while Joni stayed upstairs.  Finally, Graham went up and brought her downstairs, where she played the entire Blue album live for the four of us.  Graham played rough mixes of the first two or three CSN songs.  Then we split for the pub, leaving Larry to his telephone calls. 

Joni and I fell back behind the boys, and we discovered that we had a mutual friend from her New York days, Jim Sherwood of the Mothers of Invention.  So that was a good reference for me!  We had a nice natter, as they say, and after she and Graham left for the States the next day, I wrote my first song.  It was good, btw.  Kris Kristofferson heard it and liked it.  He said "Joni Mitchell." 

Joni's life looked good on paper and sounded like heaven when recorded, but it was bought at a high emotional price. 

She found it increasingly difficult to trust people.  But she still has friends who want nothing from her but happiness and peace.  Like it used to be.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE END OF THE BEGINNING ...

On November 27, 2014, a letter under the signature of Detective Inspector Jon Savell of the Surrey Police - in charge of Operation Outreach,  specifically set up to investigate the claims of certain women from Duncroft that they had been subjected to sexual abuse by Jimmy Savile between 1974 and 1976 - was composed and sent to about 100 Duncroft women who cooperated in the investigation. 

Most notably certain complainants stated they had notified members of the Duncroft staff about abuse at the hands of Jimmy Savile during visits to the school, or at the BBC on permitted school visits, only to have their complaints allegedly dismissed.

Many former Duncroft women were interviewed by Outreach in an exhaustive effort to get at the truth of what happened - or didn't.

The Outreach findings were submitted to the CPS who, after review, declined to prosecute the remaining staff.  They found that the claims were flimsy at best, and doubted that a jury would be persuaded.  You can see the letter at this link Outreach concludes. 

I was at Duncroft in 1965 for a couple of months, having left in 1964.  There was neither hide nor hair of Jimmy Savile then.  Bebe Roberts, take a bow for Bullshit Artist of the Decade. Ordeals.

The same staff were running the school in my day as during the time frame when Jimmy Savile visited the school.  Knowing these women pretty well, I couldn't believe for one second that any of them would've continued to allow Jimmy to come to the school if there was a reported problem.  Complaining would have meant no more trips to the BBC, no more little trips into Staines in the Rolls for the sole purpose of buying ice cream;  let alone there was nothing to complain about.  Jimmy was there to support the daughter of a friend, not to use the school 'like a sweet shop,' to paraphrase one of these accusers. 

Let's be clear - I'm not giving Jimmy a hall pass, but by the standards of the day he wasn't a rapist, a paedophile, or anything criminal.  Ruth Cole, the deputy head at Duncroft, from Yorkshire herself, and a former nun, bluntly informed Outreach that he was "a toucher" but not a paedophile in her opinion. 

Once he was dead, the Duncroft fraud machine, assisted by BBC producer Meirion Jones (nephew of Margaret Jones, former head of Duncroft for 20 years) and Mark Williams-Thomas (suss former cop with the Surrey Police), swung into self-interested action.  The jig is now up.  There won't be jolly holidays in Bermuda for the Duncroft complainants, for starters.

Based on the declination of the CPS to proceed further, surely this is going to create a problem for the Duncroft claimants.  Why should the estate pay off on any of these specious claims, which are nothing but hearsay and lies? 

What Jimmy really was was a product of his times. In those days it was thought a pat on the bottom, or a kiss on the hand, or an invasive kiss, was acceptable. You learned to handle that yourself. Been there, done that.

Ultimately, Jimmy Savile wanted to help those who were less fortunate, who needed a cheery word, a sympathetic ear, and help if he could provide it.  And during his life, this was quite obvious and was appreciated by the British public.  He was a great help to the music community of the day as well. 

In closing (for now), please check out Anna Raccoon's latest post on the finale.  Duncroft: The Finale - Part One.  

 

 

 

EXCUSE ME, MISS, BUT YOUR PANTS ARE ON FIRE

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? 

 

 

 

Related articles

Savile - the Mail on Sunday Investigation.

SERIOUS CHARGE

A public outcry against the sleazy treatment of Cliff Richard, by both the police, the BBC, and whatever 'informant' was involved in leaking details of the police raid to the BBC has resulted in hundreds of complaints being received by the BBC regarding their presence at a police investigation at Cliff's Berkshire residence, while he was in Portugal.  Cliff has called the accusations made against him "completely false." 

Accordingly, Home Affairs Select Committee Chairman, Keith Vaz, has called on the BBC to explain how and why they were notified of the raid on Cliff's Sunningdale residence in advance. 

There's a blizzard of bluster going on, of course, fingers pointing here, there and everywhere, with the South Yorkshire Police stating that they were basically blackmailed into providing the information about the raid to a "BBC reporter."  Additionally, Chief Constable David Crompton, in his letter to Mr. Vaz, accuses the BBC of a "cover up."  

The BBC responded that the media has a right to report stories that are in the public interest.  Er - so the laws of the land apparently have no effect on a pack of press hounds in hot pursuit of a person who has not been charged with anything whatsoever?  Because a 'victim' comes forward with a story that has yet to stand the test of a trier-of-fact, now 'they must be believed.'  I think it high time this inappropriate circus stopped.  You can't go making wild accusations any longer folks, or if you do, it'll be an entirely private matter between the authorities, the accused, and the accuser.  It is NOT the business of the public until charges are brought. 

In the meantime, Cliff remains on his summer holiday in Portugal, is happy to cooperate with any investigation, but nobody appears to have shown up, nor is he required to return to England for any reason. 

On Thursday, August 28, 2014, BBC Director General Tony Hall, and Chief Constable David Crompton of the South Yorkshire Police will appear before the Committee to answer serious questions about police procedures and the role of the media.

MPs to quiz BBC and police bosses over Cliff Richard raid.

And about time.

 UPDATE:  On Saturday, August 23, 2014, without fanfare and screeches from the media, Cliff Richard flew into the UK and met with the police in Yorkshire, then flew back to the Algarve to host a dinner gathering.  He was all smiles and in good spirits.  He continues to deny the accusations, and he was not charged with anything. 

Cliff flies to the UK for interview with police.

 

 

 

 

 

CLIFF HANGER

When I was young and living in England, Cliff and The Shadows were worthy competitors in the world music arena.  Cliff was a very good vocalist, merged well with his band, but unlike the Beatles, couldn't conquer the American market.   The Beatles had a clearly-stated political position,  they were pretty much above competition, they wrote almost all of their songs.

Ultimately John Lennon was assasinated for his political views.  I remember John thought Cliff was a good musician.

When the balloon went up regarding child abuse at the hands of celebrities, Cliff was in the cross-hairs from about 2011 on, via an allegation to Mark Williams-Thomas from a 'child' who 'claims' he was 'abused' by Cliff at a Billy Graham revival in 1985.  Why is this ongoing? I was at a loss for words at this point.  Then, this excellent summation caught my eye.  I don't know who "Paul" is, but I hope he'll contact me if he objects to the reprint.  

"
Are we nearing the end of this cliffhanger?  Is someone riding to the rescue?  See you at the movies!

"It’s exactly what a lot of people want. This type of (alleged) crime is the utterly perfect ‘excuse’ for just that. For most of the public, it trumps murder in its abhorrence. They WANT it to be true. They want blood.

This includes all the so-called ‘truthers’ and conspiracy theorists, who otherwise (on other subjects) may be correct in what they say (communism, cultural Marxism, banking & finance, etc – many rational people would agree with various aspects of the ‘conspiracy community’ on these and other subjects). How curious then, that many so-called ‘truthers’ have been so taken in by this entire fiasco and taken the diametrically opposed path to the actual truth?

But the fact is that very many of the internet theorists and conspiracists are, at heart, merely part of ‘the mob’. To some degree they play a part (along with the MSM) of whipping up the frenzy among the herd, together becoming the mob as a whole. Most of the underclass want to riot again (they would at least rather welcome it). Many of the more supposedly ‘switched on’ type of ‘truther’ want various flavours of civil war and revolution. And somewhere along the line, their oft-mentioned devices of ‘lamp-posts and piano wire’ are destined to come into the picture.

Now it’s one thing to string up perceived enemies for financial and constitutional wrongs (much of this bluster is ill-thought-out bravado – though no less dangerous for it ….. or the words of psychopaths) but how much easier is it (in the mind) to propose its use for the additional crime of child abuse? This is how a lot of people are thinking. They are still essentially brutes, who wish to respond to very real wrongs that have been perpetrated, with lynch-mob violence. A belief in a witchcraft type of fever sweeping the land is just the extra juice they need to justify their already well-developed blood-lust.

That’s what I think. I’ve asked a few ‘truthers’ (and admittedly more dedicated conspiracy loons, of the Icke type devotee) whether they have ever considered that they are hoodwinked on this one and have gone totally in the wrong direction entirely. That the real conspiracy is the one as discussed on this very blog – that it’s mainly all lies.

No – they don’t want that. They’re too emotionally invested, both initially and definitely by now. They WANT it to be true. It’s too juicy and salubrious to ever let go, and that’s the thing that captivated them initially. You could say that deep down they are also perverts of a sort, though not direct perpetrators. They are fantasists and lechers. Voyeurs. They WANT sexual crimes to have occurred – just not perpetrated by themselves. “To Hell with the wicked – but not I”. And self-righteous indignation and the need to feel (or rather display) compassion for ‘victims’ is also paramount in this age*.

To the people I know I have asked – ‘would you rather that the names you accuse were in fact Not Guilty (and so by implication the ‘victims’ were not abused, but safe and unharmed) or would you rather that they were indeed Guilty (and so people have been abused for real)? The overwhelming (and passionate) answer is – GUILTY! These people care little about the victim – what they care most about is the prospect of a sentence being passed. Besides, in the modern world, one can assuage any tinges of regret by the comforting thought of financial compo (from a 3rd party source – the public purse) for the victims themselves. But we want Guilty and then we want blood – that’s the sentiment.

*It’s all a form of brain-washed soft-leftism too of course, a cultural Marxist desire in so many: The need for a victim – the ‘other’. The need to preach a moral superiority. The desire to snoop and accuse. The desire for state heavyweight action. A hive-like mentality. Groupthink. Constant tension and a desire for ‘revolution’. General barbarism and depravity.

Paul."

Here endeth the lesson. 

THE TRUTH WILL OUT

I've been a bit absent from commenting on the sturm and drang of the Savile situation, but now reports are available regarding his alleged predatory behavior at a slew of hospitals, the procuring of knuckle-duster rings from a barrow in London, allegedly a glass eye from a corpse, I kid you not, and more last gasps from the MSM, before they come to their collective senses, and start reporting responsibly.

First off, glass eyes are commercially available and have been for years.  Taxidermists use them, as well as others, which would include opthalmic surgeons.  My Dad was an opthalmic surgeon. So, let's all dust ourselves off, and stop being absolutely stupid in front of the whole population of cyberspace. 

The hospital reports are extremely inconclusive.  Extremely.  To the extent of finding absolutely nothing.

After the Rolf Harris verdict was in (and I hope he appeals - needs to be tried in the Central Criminal Courts at the Old Bailey, not some second-class rubbish like Southwark), an ITV program was hastily assembled, with uninformed morons on the 'jury.' 

And then - drum roll and lo and behold - the audience was polled. 

Did they think Rolf's 'victims' were entitled to compensation, and please raise your hand, if so!  Can I get an 'amen'!?

And not a hand went up. 

Well, you lot (and you know who you are), the jig is up. 

The truth, like a caterpillar breaking out of its cocoon, must be revealed in its own time, but now the cocoon is cracking open. 

 

 

TEA AND CONSPIRACY

The indefatigable Anna Raccoon blog has broken an important story in the Savile saga, which continues to keep the UK legal community, social media, the MSM, various other opportunists,and the British police continually on their toes since Jimmy Savile died in 2011. (Photo: Ben Franklin in his coonskin hat. )

Long ago and far away, there was an approved school called Duncroft. It was extant from about 1959 to 1980. I hope we're all thoroughly briefed on that one! Still a subject of litigation in the Starr v. Ward defamation. 

 So, in 2011, a few women from this school, which was designated a Care Home with Education in 1969, further to amendments to the Children's Act,  (a CHE for short), banded  together via social media, under the aegis of a BBC producer Meirion Jones and reality show witch-hunter, Mark Williams-Thomas, deciding it was time to sue the estate of Jimmy Savile, an eccentric but very well-liked host of several successful BBC TV programs, notably Top of the Pops, Jim'll Fix It, and Clunk Click. 

Jimmy's main preoccupation was his charity work, particularly to medical institutions.  He generated a potload of money and it mostly all went to charity.

Until his death, not a whisper of scandal was heard in the land.  He set up Trusts for his charities upon the event of his death, and passed away at the age of 85 in October 2011.  He had a very elaborate funeral in his home town of Leeds, and was laid to rest under an ostentatious gravestone. 

Then, along came the Duncroft accusers, led by Meirion and Mark.  Meirion is the nephew of the former headmistress of Duncroft, Margaret Jones, the son of her deceased brother.  Meirion and his mother used to visit Duncroft. (Margaret Jones is still alive and kicking, 93 and in full possession of her faculties.) 

From thereon, the whole country squirmed under the hell-fire unleashed against Jimmy Savile by these accusers and their MSM exploiters.   Up came the pitchforks and the shrieks of "paedo!!"  His homes were defaced, his relatives took his gravestone down and had it smashed up, most of the country reeled back in horror.  What viper had they been nursing in their collective bosom?? 

The MSM danced around the bonfires they were creating, (a big bonus after being recently disgraced in the Murdoch scandal.)  Exonerated!  We've got the goods!  Follow our lead, believe the nonsense, Jimmy is a monster, bla bla bla! Sell papers, sell papers!

What these various characters were not quite prepared for was ex-Duncroft women who weren't buying it.  We have Bebe Roberts to thank for that.  Bebe, who flat-out lied to the Mail, with her simpering photograph.  Bebe, who claimed that Jimmy was at the school in 1965.  Bebe who was called out for the liar she certainly is. 

At last, a woman who was at Duncroft at that time, someone whose identity was known at least to me for a long time via conversations on a site for people who had been in care, has decided she should speak out.  She chose the Raccoon blog as her platform, and spent long months providing her story. 

Meet "Susan" - who was first allowed to invite Jimmy Savile to tea at Duncroft, after he passed muster with Susan's mother and the extremely strict headmistress. 

Like a coonskin cap, thereupon hangs a tale.   Read all about it. 

READY FOR HIS CLOSE UP

Bryan Singer, director of the hugely-successful X-Men franchise, has withdrawn from participation in the promotional ramp-up to the release of "Days of Future Past," the latest in the series.  (Photo: Bryan Singer on set with Patrick Stewart.)

This decision follows accusations by Michael Egan an obscure actor from Nevada, who claims that Singer, among other Hollywood power brokers, molested him at sex parties in Hollywood in 1998, when he was 15, and again in Hawaii in 1999, when he was 17. (Photo: here we see Michael Egan exhibiting pathos, while his mother emotes.)

"Egan filed suit in federal court in Hawaii last week, accusing the director of sexually abusing him during the late '90s as part of a “sordid sex ring” that preyed on teen boys looking to break into the industry.

Egan, now 31, claims Singer and three other media moguls began sexually assaulting him at “notorious” drug-fueled house parties when he was new to Los Angeles and working as an actor for another member of the alleged ring. Egan’s lawyer said Singer first victimized Egan when he was 15, and that Singer and the other men continued the abuse in 1999, during a series of house parties in Hawaii when Egan was 17.

In four highly similar lawsuits filed in the last two weeks, Egan lodges sexual abuse allegations against Singer, 48, as well as former WB Chairman Garth Ancier, 56, former Disney exec David Neuman, 53, and producer Gary Goddard, 61.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/singer-bows-x-men-press-lawsuit-scandal-article-1.1768082#ixzz2zr1XGulO"

 

So, I live here, and I know stuff goes on, but I also know that verification of age is de riguer.  Nobody wants to go to prison, thank you.  Mr. Egan has a lot of 'splainin' to do, imo.  But he has some plump partridges in his sights, and he has a lean and hungry look.  His 15 minutes are ticking away.

 

We await events.

NIGEL EVANS ACQUITTED - ACCUSERS SAY THEY WERE NOT VICTIMS

MP Nigel Evans has now joined the growing list of falsely accused sex offenders, and has been acquitted of all charges brought against him by seven men, all of whom should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for ever agreeing to participate.  Nigel Evans acquitted of all charges.

Again, this is why we need to change the law, to punish those bringing false charges. Their identities should be revealed if a jury finds they lied - either when they turn 18 in the case of a minor accuser, or forthwith if of age.  And they should be charged with perjury, as well as possible exposure to civil charges for defamation. 

However, in the Evans case, his accusers came into court saying all the wrong things for the prosecution, i.e. they did not consider themselves victims, and that they were pressured by the police to appear, which to my mind exonerates them from further problems - they were honest when it counted.  How the case against Nigel Evans fell apart.

In the past, I've been rudely informed that making these sorts of posts discourage 'victims' from coming forward, and I reiterate, if you're thinking about lying then think again.  And again.  The juries are no easier to fool than anyone else with half a brain prepared to look at both sides of the situation. 

Of course, all these false charges could likely have been dealt with before any legal action was contemplated, if the CPS was paying the slightest attention to the prevailing climate whipped up by the MSM via the likes of Mark Williams-Thomas, and the law firm of Slater & Gordon to name a couple of offenders. 

The police, now freed from the surly bonds of ACPO, can proceed on a local level and conduct thorough investigations, hopefully aided by mental health professionals, to establish to their satisfaction that the accusers are telling the truth before wasting limited legal resources on these  circuses.  

We've had far too much of this going on since Jimmy Savile died.  I'm sick of hearing from people who continue to believe Savile was the greatest pedophile who ever lived, while all these older celebrities are leaving the courthouse to get back to their ruined lives, after being found innocent by a jury of their peers. 

These are people who have not investigated the Savile time-lines, photos, and other contrary evidence, who want to continue to believe that he did something appalling.  If Nigel Evans had been dead instead of alive, then perhaps he would've met the same fate as Jimmy.  But Nigel was not dead, and was able to face his accusers.  And the jury did their job. 

I hope Mr. Evans is reinstated as whip as soon as possible, and that this sorry travesty of justice, along with the other unsuccessful celebrity trials, fades into one of those phases in history when a country appears to have collectively consumed the Kool-Aid.

 

THE MILLS OF GOD - ACPO CLOSES DOWN

On April 9, 2014, in a bombshell announcement, the significance of which was probably missed by most of the population of the world, including its home base, England and Wales, ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers), has announced it will dissolve the organization, effective immediately. It's Game Over

(Photo: Sir Hugh Orde, unemployed former Chief of ACPO.)

This is tantamount to the Spanish Inquisition admitting wrongdoing.  Or the NSA folding their tents and creeping away. ACPO

This unregulated cadre has been controlling all UK police activity for much too long.  Instead of letting the local elected police officials run their own districts as requested by their constituents, this little gang of lovelies has squatted like a poisonous spider over procedures as vital to the public well-being as responding to Freedom of Information inquiries relative to certain policing activities.  They have ignored members of Parliament and the public in this regard.

With this decision, the elected local police will henceforth handle their own specific issues, and respond to the concerns of their constituents, without 'oversight' and without accountability to ACPO, and can turn their attention to problems the public is really interested in, i.e. graffiti, local yobbos, etc. 

It took persistent efforts by Mark Reckless, MP for Rochester, to accomplish this.  But then it only took one small boy with his thumb in the dike to save Holland.  And one legislator with his head on straight  to stop the Salem witch-hunt.  Thank you, Mark.  Well played.

So, we await with interest the response to a submission of a well-respected blogger's thoughtfully- crafted request under the FOI relative to a certain former police officer, who has taken on the mantle of public inquisitor without accountability, without brief, apparently with the cooperation of ACPO,  as far as can be determined if failure to respond is any indication.   The response was due in early February, and has yet to be answered as required by law.

And how come this individual can actually be shown scanning the internet for kiddie porn, when any other British subject doing the same would be whipped smartly into court and rightly so?  Who has appointed himself a "child protection expert," with no obvious qualifications to do so?  Who was asked by the McCanns to stop acting as if he represented them in their continued search for their missing daughter?  Let alone the Jimmy Savile situation, which has resulted in absolutely nothing to date, except a pile of legal bills mostly for the benefit of plaintiff lawyers, also hopping on to the gravy train, driven by this person who was obviously enjoying the protection of higher-ups, who are now cast down?

Mr. Williams-Thomas, your wild ride may be coming to an end.  And not a day too soon.

It's been a long, long time but ... 

"Though the mills of God grind slowly;
Yet they grind exceeding small;
Though with patience he stands waiting,
With exactness grinds he all. " - Longfellow

"Vengeance is Mine, and retribution, In due time their foot will slip; For the day of their calamity is near, And the impending things are hastening upon them." - God, Deutoronomy 32:3. 

Sleep well, Peter Spindler et al.  Time's up.

 

-

 

 

 

EIGHTEEN

The High Court in Britain ruled today that once a child involved in court proceedings attains the age of eighteen they are no longer protected under the Children's Act (1933) and their anonymity is stripped away.  High Court ruling.

However, this only pertains to children involved in family law proceedings and does not pertain to those who allege child abuse.

If abuse is reported to the authorities who presumably then investigate and prosecute the alleged offender, then the alleged offender has his/her day (or two) in court before a jury of their peers.

During the pendency of the proceedings, the accusers' identities are protected - BUT  when the outcome of the trial goes in favor of the alleged offender, the accusers just scamper off, without any retribution for their claims.  Been seeing a bit of that lately. 

No doubt exists that a real victim should be protected in perpetuity.  And their cases should be investigated and tried away from the light of public opinion, not on the telly, the web, social media. 

The alleged offender, [these days likely a celebrity from the 60s/70s, with a continued successful career] is now found not guilty, but left with a burden of legal bills to pay their defense. 

They go up against predatory personal injury lawyers, who promise their clients the earth and generally fail to deliver much more than what we call here in the States "go away money." 

 This is time-wasting nonsense for the quaking legal system in Britain. 

My late brother in law,John Cornwell QC (Dawson and Cornwell) initiated a handy trick for resolving legal claims against contractors for shoddy work.   Instead of hours of tedious testimony, bad photographs of bad work, and a lot of squabbling between the homeowner and the contractor, he changed it around. 

Instead of the cases coming to him and his juries, he was able to marshal mini-buses to take  judge and jury to the construction site, so they could inspect the bad work for themselves.  He told me that this reduced the case load by about 90%, as the dodgy contractors knew they didn't have a prayer against live inspection by a trier of fact. 

In that spirit, I would hope that the law can be changed regarding sex abuse claims.  If the accuser(s) were found by a jury to have brought false allegations, their identity should be a matter of public record when they turn 18. 

Just like the contractors who were suddenly exposed to objective scrutiny, these accusers might then think twice before running to the authorities to make false accusations in hopes of major compo, attention from the public via the MSM, revenge, whatever. Up to their counsel to advise them accordingly. 

Doesn't mean the authorities shouldn't pay attention and do what is needful to verify claims that could be completely legitimate.  But it does put potential accusers on notice that there are penalties for lying.

And that would probably reduce the case load substantially.  Let alone the expense to the public. Just saying.

 

THIRTEEN

Recently an investigation into rape accusations by a 13 year old girl in the UK was halted when the girl admitted to lying.  After costing the local tax payers quite a few quid, she will not be charged for this time-wasting nonsense.  Sussex police drop investigation costing thousands of pounds

So, where's the lesson here?  The accountability?   The responsibility?  What message does this little escapade sent?  You tell me. 

We're up in arms about defending the 'victim', but if you look at the laws as written, they are also about defending the rights of the accused.  There is no more powerful term than "Jailbait."  Most boys get advice from their fathers or peers about the lure of the sirens.  In Europe nobody carries a photo i.d., and even if they did, like here in the US, forged documentation abounds if you can pay the freight. And not too sexy to ask for i.d. I guess.

So, what is it about age 13 for girls?  It's well known that girls mature sexually faster than boys.  13 year old boys are of little or no interest to 13 year old girls - older men are - that's from 17 to what-have-you.  

So, gentlemen, you have been warned.  You know the law. Proceed at your own risk.  I know biology is working against you.

Going back to the witch-hunts of the 1600s, the most celebrated is Salem. But in England, the Pendle Witches were a very big case of the same era.   Both these cases involved accusations by minor girls.  

There's a fascination with witchcraft that continues to this day, certainly through music. Witchy Woman - Eagles.  Rhiannon - Fleetwood Mac. Black Magic Woman - Santana. And the super-succesful musical, "Wicked," celebrating the Witches of Oz. 

I hadn't heard about the Pendle Witches before, but did some research today after a heads-up.  You have to wonder why this motif keeps up through the ages. The Pendle Witches.

I guess when you're angry with parental or authoritarian restrictions, and you have the law on your side, then just go ahead and make false accusations.  Happens all the time.  It's up to the 'authorities' to make a mature judgment call, and realize that just 'giving victims a voice' in a willy-nilly fashion is NOT the answer. 

Give them a voice by all means, but that voice should speak to professionals in law enforcement and mental health, not the public via television producers, dodgy 'journalists,' fee-seeking lawyers, or other parties looking to make a buck or reputation. 

This is a private matter, and any 'victim' reporting for duty with a gaggle of glory-seeking opportunists at their back should be subject to extreme scrutiny.  So far, I have yet to see any mental health professionals render an opinion, even in a general sense, when it is patently obvious that some of these 'accusers' have their genesis in institutions serving those with mental illness. 

And complainants should stand ready to defend their case; don't bring it when you're in your 50s, over something you allege happened when you were only 13 and knew just what you were up to.  

Great BBC4 documentary here.  Pendle Witch Child.

MAX CLIFFORD TRIAL: THE PITCHMAN COMETH

The Max Clifford trial.  Well, at least he's getting one, and it's mostly nonsense, as might be expected.  Seems to be mostly about penis size and obscure Wimpy bars at the moment, while the usual crew of dodgy claimants contradict each other's testimony. 

Max, a heavy pitchman since the 60s, has been accused of inappropriate behavior back in the day.  One of his accusers says she was 14 at the time - she is now 62, and frankly should know better than to involve herself in this rubbish.  She alleges that Max picked her up in a Wimpy Bar in Morden (of all places) in 1966,  lured her to his car with promises that he would arrange for her to meet the Walker Brothers, and after showing her photographs of himself with the Rolling Stones and The Beatles,  flung himself on her and, allegedly wielding a penis the size of a peanut, violated her.   In your dreams. 

A doctor has been called to testify as to the size of Max's penis, which is apparently normal.  Nice to know. (Photo: The Walker Brothers - Gary, Scott and John.)

Max must've had a hell of a lot of spare time on his hands if he had nothing better to do than hang around some poky little Wimpy bar for hours on end, drinking coffee.   If you're going to do that, why not a Wimpy in the West End?  Morden??  Come on, dearie. 

I worked in public relations in the music business in Los Angeles in the 70s and into the 80s, with firms representing bands like the Stones and Led Zeppelin.  We had a goodly amount of very powerful male public relations heavies here who, like Max, were gatekeepers to the music and movie stars some girls wanted to climb all over.   Max knew that game well.  He was a star in his own right, he didn't need the pickings of others. He had adult relationships with his female peers, and he lived the good life.  Inexperienced and very young outsiders were of no interest to the  big-time players, who figuratively ran the casino and didn't mingle with the punters. 

Raised in Surrey, I also worked in the music business in the UK in London, before moving to Los Angeles in 1969.  I knew some interesting people, heard all the latest scandals and gossip, hot from the allnight newsboys.  I was also friendly with Gary Leeds of the Walker Brothers; a decent guy, from Pasadena, here in California.  He was a roommate of Graham Nash's, right before the CSN days.   Known to his friends as "Beeds." I also knew Scott. 

I mention this because the Walkers, among Max's other very successful clients, would not have tolerated risky behavior from their representatives.  That, at the very least, would expose them to legal problems. In those days rock musicians were under extreme police scrutiny; a known association with a employee who was perhaps indulging in "jailbait" would simply have to go.  But, as with Jimmy Savile, there were no rumors or allegations to be heard.

So, let's stroll past the Wimpy Bar issue.  Big problem with that fantasy is that Max didn't own a car in the 60s.  Easy to prove that, as he would have had to do all the paperwork concerned with car ownership.  Most of us didn't own cars in those days, as public transport  has always been one of the better features of British life, and if Max was in London, he was using taxis in all likelihood.   He's said that the only reason he would have been in Morden at all is if he had fallen asleep while traveling on the Northern Line, and that he doesn't like Wimpy food.  Me neither.  And if he'd fallen asleep, surely he would have stayed on the platform, waiting for a train taking him back from whence he came.  None of this makes the slightest sense.

It's also noteworthy that after Jimmy Savile died and was then accused via the infamous Exposure! show, Max, who had a long professional association with Top of the Pops, was approached by a gaggle of female opportunists, waving photographs of themselves with Jimmy Savile, demanding that Max validate their claims against Jimmy for molestation.  

This egregious behavior follows the same pattern as Jimmy Tarbuck, who was also approached by a group of women, looking to enrich themselves at the expense of the Savile Trusts.  Does anyone see a pattern here?

When Max quite reasonably said he couldn't corroborate their evidence, and would not get involved further, he was then arrested and here we are.  Up to our hip-boots in more of the usual, as we go trippingly down Compensation Street.

 

 

Related articles

'It's just crazy, it's a load of lies' Max Clifford denies indecent assault charges

Max Clifford: 'My Accusers Are Fantasists'

Max Clifford trial live: PR guru "used famous contacts to bully and manipulate teenagers into sex acts with him"

Max Clifford Trial Inches Towards Conclusion

JIMMY TARBUCK RELEASED WITHOUT CHARGES

In what is looking like even more light at the end of the celebrity witch-hunt tunnel, Liverpool-born comedian Jimmy Tarbuck, generally known to his friends as Tarby, was released from bail without any charges for child abuse, after nearly a year of suspense.  

The North Yorkshire police, who were investigating accusations made by six complainants, presented their file to the Crown Prosecution Service in November 2013. CPS have declined to proceed further and issued the following statement:

" This file of evidence included six allegations made by six separate complainants.  All the complaints have been reviewed in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, and the CPS legal guidance on rape and sexual offences.  We have determined that there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction in relation to all complaints, and have advised North Yorkshire Police that no further action should be taken.  All those involved have been informed of the decisions, and we have offered to meet with the complainants should they wish to have the decisions explained in person."

Tarby is kind to his accusers, understands that they might not be well, and doesn't blame the police for doing their job.  He's home in Kingston on Thames again, and apparently enjoyed a couple of glasses of vino and a nice dinner to celebrate, in the company of his wife Pauline, to whom he has been married since at least 1965. 

This must have been hell to go through.

Parenthetically, Tarby attended Dovedale junior school in Liverpool with one John Winston Lennon, who allegedly spiked his drink with speed!  Ah, halcyon days, eh Tarby?!   George Harrison also attended Dovedale. 

Tarby, like John and George,  went on to earn his keep in show business, and also did well.  His daughter, Liza Tarbuck, is a well-known actress and television personality. 

So now Tarby joins the growing list of celebrities who are being acquitted or released without charges.  I note that the hand-wringing/rabble-rousing term "victim" is now being replaced by the more cautious "complainants." 

Ahem, just a reminder folks, nobody is a victim until evidence is presented and  the accused has been found guilty, either by a bench trial or a jury of his/her peers.  And until they are, in a court of law, the accused is presumed innocent until proven otherwise; let alone they also have the right of habeas corpus. Let's keep our minds firmly set on that doctrine, and then let justice prevail.  Not based on false accusations by people who might not be well. 

Tarby also notes, " a group of women "jumped on the bandwagon" after his arrest became public last year.  "‘They claimed I had made inappropriate sexual advances during Top of the Pops in 1963, he said. ‘Not only have I never met these women, I have never appeared on Top of the Pops – which in any event didn’t start until 1964."  The worst year imaginable.

So, playbook to date:

Dave Lee Travis: The former Radio 1 star  was acquitted on 12 of 14 sex assault charges made against him. He will be retried on two allegations, which a jury failed to agree. (What's your guess on this outcome?  Thought so. - Ed.)

William Roache - The Coronation Street actor was cleared last month of sex charges dating back to the 1960s. The 81-year-old always maintained his innocence, and blamed hysteria after the Jimmy Savile scandal on 'money-grabbing' women who falsely accused him.

Gary Glitter: The former pop star was arrested on October 28, 2012, on sex abuse allegations. The 69-year-old convicted paedophile has now been on bail for a year and a half as officers piece together their case. (Get over it.  He paid the price. Don't make the British taxpayer do the same. - Ed.)

Freddie Starr: The comedian was initially arrested on November 1, 2012 and has since been rearrested three times after fresh allegations emerged from further alleged sex assault victims. He is now taking High Court action after he was re-bailed again on Wednesday until April, despite assurances that a charge or release decision would be made prior to that. His lawyers say the decision to keep the 71-year-old on bail is unlawful due to the extraordinary length of time the investigation is taking. (He is being denied his habeas corpus rights A travesty. - Ed.)

Wilfred De’ath: The former BBC producer was arrested on November 11, 2012 on suspicion of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl, but was released without charge after a woman withdrew a complaint against him. The 76-year-old has blasted police for being ‘overzealous’, pursuing ‘spurious’ claims, and failing ‘lamentably’ to stop Jimmy Savile’s reign of terror while he was still alive.   (This slimeball is entitled to his opinions, but stop with the 'reign of terror' rubbish - Ed.)

Jim Davidson: The comedian was arrested on January 2, last year on suspicion of sexual offences, but the 60-year-old Big Brother winner was later told he would not face further action.

Mike Osman: The 54-year-old radio DJ was arrested on January 2, last year on suspicion of sex offences but was told he will not face any charges last August.

Max Clifford: The public relations expert was arrested on December 6, 2012. In April the 70-year-old was charged with 11 counts of indecent assault on teenage girls. (So far, all we know is that Max had a penis the size of a peanut. Size apparently doesn't matter when the 'victim' is being offered a movie role - Ed.)

David Smith: The former driver who worked for the BBC was found dead at his home on the first day of his trial in October last year. The 67-year-old was arrested in December 2012 and charged in April last year with abusing a 12-year-old boy in 1984.  (Just a reminder - there is no record that Mr. Smith worked for the BBC.  He may have been a contract limo driver - Ed.)

Ted Beston: The former BBC radio producer was arrested on December 19, 2012. In May last year it was announced that the 77-year-old would not face any further action.

Rolf Harris: The 83-year-old Australian entertainer was questioned under caution on November 29, 2012 and then arrested on March 28 last year. He has been charged with 12 indecent assaults of young girls and four counts of making indecent images of children. He is due to face trial in April.  (Not sure how this will play out. Likely acquittal - Ed.)

Paul Gambaccini: The radio presenter was arrested on October 29 last year on suspicion of sexual offences. He has been bailed by police until March.  (Oh the irony!  Gambaccini - among the first to finger point at Jimmy Savile - gone from accuser to accused! )

Chris Denning: The Radio 1 DJ was first arrested on Monday, June 3. He has since been re-arrested twice over alleged sexual offences. The 72-year-old has been bailed until March.

Investigations by other UK forces 

Stuart Hall: The broadcaster was arrested in December 2012 and in April last year pleaded guilty to 14 charges of indecent assault. He is currently serving 30 months in prison. Last October he was charged with 16 new offences including rape and sexual assault.  (Should never have taken the deal - Ed.)

Ray Teret: The former chauffeur of DJ Jimmy Savile was arrested on 8 November 2012 by Greater Manchester Police on historic sex allegations. He was charged with a total of 32 offences spanning several decades, including rape, indecent assault and gross indecency involving 14 children and a 17-year-old girl. He is currently awaiting trial.  (Did I miss something?  A 17 year old?  Isn't that over the age of consent? - Ed.)

And let's not forget Michael LeVell, another Coronation Street regular, who was also acquitted of all charges.

 

THE LONELY DEATH OF L'WREN SCOTT

It's probably redundant to note that the world today is obsessed with fame.   Having the paparazzi in hot pursuit, finding your face plastered over just about every form of media, having your own 'reality' television show is the dernier cri of the hoi polloi.  

At one time, you had to earn fame by actually doing something worthy of comment, not just having a pretty face,  a famous boyfriend/girlfriend, or being the flavor of the month.  The publicity machine rattles on noisily in every corner of the planet, and whoever can afford it, well, ping! - now you're famous!   Nothing to do with whether you really have what it takes to make a difference and earn that fame. 

Once upon a time, I was a press agent for two major record labels among other publicity jobs here in Hollywood, so excuse me for having a little inside knowledge of how the star-maker machinery is stoked.  And how it can suddenly run out of control and claim victims.  Like the fated moth, L'Wren Scott was dancing too near the flame.  And it consumed her.

For 13 years or so, L'Wren, an adopted child of a Mormon family in Utah, was the constant companion of Mick Jagger.  Another statuesque beauty - 6' 3" to his maybe 5' 9" - (like his ex-wife Jerry Hall), L'Wren fought her way up from relative obscurity and, capitalizing on her stunning good looks and knowledge of fashion and design, established herself in New York and Hollywood society.  Her reward?  Movie star clients, a jet-set lifestyle, and a luxury New York apartment, purchased for her by Mick, where she hanged herself last week, after a dizzying plunge into financial problems that completely overwhelmed her. 

She proudly sported a diamond as big as the Ritz, his promise to her that they were bonded, but he wouldn't marry her.  Based on Mick's marriage history, not surprising, but L'Wren hung in despite his skittishness.

Mick bought the apartment for her, but she took out a second mortgage without his knowledge, to try and right the capsizing ship of her fashion career.   He was not very pleased.  They had words. And he went off on a tour of Australia, without healing the breach between them, or apparently recognizing how desperate she was. 

Was she punishing him with her lonely death in the deluxe apartment in the sky?   He's canceled all concerts until the fall, and a battle is ensuing between her Mormon family in Utah, and Mick, over L'Wren's final resting place.  My guess, for now, she'll rest here in Los Angeles, in a burial plot he's paying for, in another attempt to assuage his own conscience, the selection of which he is leaving to his oldest daughter Karis, (with singer Marsha Hunt.) 

 The best revenge is living well, L'Wren.  And good lawyers.  

(Photo: Karis touring cemeteries in Los Angeles.)

 

STILL MISSING ...

Maddie New clues in McCann disappearance . 

Resolutely, the MSM does nothing more than support reports of a mystery man, of Mediterranean heritage ('tanned') wearing a shirt that appears to be an official Arsenal garment. Well, that eliminates about 10% of the male population of Portugal and surrounding countries; at least the plods admit that they might not have been informed of (or, perish the thought, investigated) reports to the Portuguese police about other assaulted and abused young girls, on holiday in the Algarve in the relevant time period.   Last I looked, there was something called Interpol. 

Flight 370 simple explanation of the plight of 370 by experienced pilot.

This theory has been largely accepted by the on-line community.  Simply because it makes sense. 

While the various law enforcement forces involved continue to explore these sad situations via the media, let's spare the families of the missing as much as possible.

In both cases.

 

SAD STORY

I went to my first school when I was perhaps 3.  The school was right next door to my house, and the windows overlooked the lawn in the back, where the children went out for break. 

I assume my mother would hear the resultant sounds and have a look to see if she could see me with my new friends.  Wouldn't any parent do that?  Just making sure that everything was all right, maybe a wave from the window if the child happened to look their way?  Of course.   That's what children deserve and parents want to do.

Martin Daubney, a writer for the Telegraph, had a sickening experience recently, when he made the mistake of attempting to say hello to his little boy, at his first school.  Martin was passing by the schoolyard on his way to an appointment, just as the kids were let out for break. 

As any normal caring father would, he stopped and, because he's a tall man, had a look over the fence to see if he could spot his little boy, maybe exchange a wave or hello. 

At this point in the proceedings, the paranoid and groomed English public, lined up at a nearby bus stop, interfered in this completely benign incident, in the person of a 20-something man [most likely not a parent.]

Instead of coming over to Martin and in a low-key, non-challenging way asking "Everything all right, mate?" allowing Martin to explain what he was doing, this hyper-vigilante yelled from the bus stop, got everyone else involved, and left Martin with no other choice but to hurriedly leave.No, men are not all potential paedophiles

This is very sad. 

Men have the right to be parents without the fear that any sign of caring on their part will be construed as something unsavory. 

The public in Britain need to stop allowing themselves to be manipulated by a small group despicable opportunists who have no real interest in the welfare of children, only in their own ambitions.  

But, as long as someone throws the bait, the feeding frenzy will continue. 

 

 

ENGLAND'S GREEN UNPLEASANT LAND

Gary Glitter has a lot to answer for.  I am no apologist for his despicable past behavior, and if the Thai authorities threw his sorry ass in jail, it must have been well-deserved. 

The Thai people have a tolerant approach to relationships between couples of very different ages, but exploitation of children does not sit well; they have very strong family standards.  Yes, of course some spectacular vice exists in Bangkok, just as it does in most major cities of the world, but if child exploitation is uncovered it is punished, and punished severely.  Mr. Gadd paid for his sins in a Cambodian prison, and I bet that wasn't much fun.  Unfortunately, he was released and then, because other nations didn't want him, he had to return to the UK.  And thus it began. Our obsession with paedophilia is more dangerous than Gary Glitter's return.

Glam rock had some incredibly talented artists, but Gary wasn't one of them.  Just a pop poseur in a silver suit with a pedestrian voice and blah songs.  But the girls liked him, apparently.  No accounting for taste. 

By late 2008, Gary's return to the UK seems to have sparked the now out-of-control paedo conflagration.   The UK press actually commented on the syndrome at the time, expressing some concerns about a rising tide of reactionary behavior and citing incidents such as the arrest of a grandmother, who was guilty of nothing more that taking a photograph of a completely empty public swimming pool.  

Paedophilia Hysteria Makes Life in Britain a Misery. 

Jimmy Savile was still above ground at the time of these writings at the links.  He had been interviewed in 2007 under caution, by the police, after allegations made by someone at Duncroft, and sent on his way.  The Surrey police provided a letter to the complainant, simply stating that they had found no grounds to take matters further.  The complainant then forged this letter, to state that they declined to proceed because Savile was "old and infirm."  Legally, they can't do that.  Age is no defense to a criminal charge if warranted. Fake letter that cast doubt on Savile victim's claims

Savile's name does not appear in any press coverage of paedophiles, suspected or otherwise, until after his death, when he could apparently be accused of just about anything. 

The 'thousands' of accusers have dwindled down to less than 150, and none of their claims have seen the stern light of the law, just their say-so and a law firm that's doing what they have to do to make payroll.  I'm not even sure that they believe these stories any longer. 

Nowadays, as the Savile affair drags on - still not paying off for complainants or counsel - should you so much as disagree on-line with the likes of Liz Dux of Slater & Gordon, plaintiff counsel for the claimaints with unproven accusations, or with an unbalanced woman who is part and parcel of the Duncroft conspiracy, or with self-appointed 'child protection expert' Mark Williams-Thomas, [who seems to do nothing these days but stake out celebrity trials, tweeting endlessly and quite often inaccurately, about the various goings-on, as if his opinion is somehow sacrosanct], or  their flotilla of self-interested and usually misinformed supporters, then prepare for attacks of such juvenile spite it would make your head spin. 

However in 2009, Digital Spy hosted a discussion on paedophilia panic and the tone is, well, quite restrained, compare to today's screeching and slapping. 

There is a reference to a preoccupation with books such as the one Karin Ward wrote which included her mostly imaginary experiences at Duncroft and the BBC, as well as recollections of her abuse at the hands of family.

"Daddy's Little Girl," by Julia Latchem-Smith is particularly mentioned. It was published in  2007. 

Same year that someone from Duncroft went to the police and alleged that she saw something, and then the search on social media began. 

I am not in favor of the snobbish title of this thread, and the original poster is ticked off mildly, but it makes interesting reading. Why are working class people obsessed with paedophiles?

So, why is this still going on? Why was Ben Ibrahimi murdered for doing nothing more than taking photographs of some young yobbos trashing his hanging plants and being a person who wanted to keep himself to himself?

There is something sinister about the continued prurient interest.  I can understand a certain class of lawyers wishing to jump on the gravy train. But why has the press joined the pursuit, when in 2008 they had a clearer and more objective view of the impending storm? 

Now, they are as bad as the pitchforkers, and in fact do everything in their power to keep the hounds whipped up - using such words as "pervert," "shocking" and of course, that old chestnut, just bound to get the attention of the bottom-feeder, "Jimmy Savile."  As a former press agent, I'm tempted to note that the advertisers have a role in this sort of frantic hyperbole.  Circulation, or what we call hits/view these days, was/is all-important to the survival of the media outlet. 

Why don't all these self-righteous "do-gooders" realize that the decimation of the Savile Trusts would leave deserving charities and the complainants with nothing if the lawyers had their way, and their considerable pound of flesh?  I speculate that Justice Sales felt that way, when he ruled that the charities were to remain involved in the distribution of the Trust monies.  I haven't read his opinion, if indeed he's published it yet, but that would be equitable to my way of thinking. 

Just what is everyone getting out of this, besides a chance to indulge their ongoing obsession, i.e. fingerpointing, blaming, excoriating, accusing - who appointed them judge and jury? Do they seriously think that all that foaming at the mouth does anything to change the status quo? Money doesn't fix anything in the long run, and at this rate it looks like the payout will be in favor of the lawyers, unless they drastically cut their fees in favor of the claimants. Let's not hold our breath on that one.

Most importantly, what does all this do to protect children from paedophiles who are not celebrities or staff of care homes?  Or what we call here in the States "deep pockets."  

Far as I can tell, sweet bugger all.  Just the continued rattle of empty vessels at work in their own interest.

 

ALL IN THE FAMILY

Hopefully, at some point in the not too distant future, this debacle of law/yellow journalism/mob hysteria/false accusations/moral panic, Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all, will become just another page in British history. Reminiscent of the time of the Civil War, the Bloody Assizes, witch-hunting and other unreasonable and inexplicable behaviours.

The complainers ultimately took ship and went in search of a place they could be grumpy without interference, and have their own witch-hunt.  Now, Salem is a tourist attraction. 

So, for those of you who toil in the fields of English law, and have occasion to traverse the portrait gallery of Lincoln's Inn, you have probably passed a painting of Sir John Glanville the Younger many times. He was Speaker of the Short Parliament among other accomplishments. 

Sir John is one of my maternal great-grandfathers, as is his father,  a Judge in the Court of Common Pleas during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. 

There has been some misunderstanding about the findings of Justice Sales vis a vis who 'won.'  The Chancery court is a Court of Equity  Justice Sales basically allowed NatWest to continue as Executors, but did not block the rights of the beneficiaries, i.e. the charities under the Trust, to be involved in the distribution of the trust assets. 

Slater can crow all they want, but it's a stalemate.

Let's be clear that Justice Sales was not sitting in judgment on the claims of the 'victims,' which appears to be the common misconception.  While the Trust was represented by two lawyers in 'pro bono,' i.e. no fee, working for the common good, Slater loaded in a raft of unnecessary, high-priced QCs, to further drain the trust resources, all to the detriment of the 'victims' and to the financial benefit of plaintiff lawyers. 

Two skilled plaintiff counsel with a knowledge of the issues should have sufficed to plead the case, but they elected to grandstand and take more money from their clients in fees.  No wonder nobody trusts lawyers these days.  Their actions were despicable.

So, if any of them slither through the portrait gallery of Lincoln's Inn, perhaps they should pause a moment and reflect.  Would they be willing to serve three years in the Tower of London for their convictions?  Didn't think so.  Sir John Glanville did.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AND THE OSCAR GOES TO ...

Oscar ramp-up blathering on the background, which inspired me to share the contents of a couple of emails I received this morning from a former Duncroft woman who takes exception to my opinion that she has a lot to answer for when it comes to the original complaints against Jimmy Savile. 

First, this person needs to understand I can say what I wish as long as it's not untrue.  She's welcome to have her brief contact me if she wishes, but none of it's enforceable; I am not located in the UK. I've combined both emails, and add my own comments in parens. 

Are you sitting comfortably?  Then we'll begin. 

Under the subject line "Please stop now." 

" You have taken the bate (sic). As she wanted you to. (Er - what?  She?  She who?)

I have not got a Twitter account. I am not any character on Twitter.  (Yes, you are.  You're a couple of characters at least. That's always been your m.o.  Pretending to be a whole lot of people. I've already discussed this in my post about Miss McGoo.)

Alastair Scott Johnston never legally adopted me.  (Did he illegally adopt you?  How did that all come about?  Why are you using his name?)

We all know the comments you allowed from Ellen Coulson are wrong. (Dead giveaway with the familiar phrase "we all know."  Who is "we all" exactly?  I keep hearing about these entities but it's never explained.)

1. I never contacted Savile or posted in 1979 that I did..please provide evidence. (You posted that on Friends Reunited.  Here's the photo you shared.  1979, at Duncroft.)

2. It is Fran, as you well know on his car. (I'll give you that, and I don't think it was Savile's car either.) (Photo of Fran and Savile below.)

Because I blocked you I could not have taken any pictures of you. (Well, if you had no Twitter account how could you block me?  Try and think things through before you hit 'send.')

You have publicly blamed me for others actions.  I have never had a web page, stolen or stalked you or even posted about anything on any site like Amazon.  (Don't give yourself airs, I never thought you were the poster on Amazon.  Not your writing style at all. That poster, btw, stated that she thought Karin Ward's sad little memoir was a work of fiction. You are stalking me now; however,  if itamuses you, go ahead.  It's a long swim from Weymouth to Los Angeles, so the sharks would get you long before you landed on the west coast. They apparently already have!

Who said you had a web page?  Someone was running the Duncroft FB page, selling t-shirts and mugs and so on, but though I believe you participated, I've been otherwise informed the moderator was someone who lives in the Antipodes. )

Yes you have pissed someone off. She was a professional poker player.  (Oh PLEASE!  A what??)

Try looking at Angela Mitchell/Lancaster/Lettscallit-Smith. (No, you try looking at it.  Let me know when you find something.)

I think you will find that she and her boyfriend have been responsible for all you blamed me for. (I think I will find that you are responsible. As usual. Stop blaming others.  Vague claims about poker players just don't wash.  Much more information needed about that, and I have no interest in doing any research about this fictional character.)

Just for your information The Navy Lark did not end in 1976. (Yes, it did.)

How could a man, of his age be my father? (You're in your late 50s aren't you?  Of course you could have a father in his late 30s when he adopted you.  Don't be silly.)

Yes I am a Lady Freeman..I don't mind you checking. (Did you mean Lady Freemason?  You have to be of good character to be a Mason, and a spell in an approved school would eliminate you right there.  There's certainly no Lady Freeman according to Debrett's.  How did that come about?)

A skin disease...yeh? Well you do not know my medical history do you? (Just reporting what you already claimed elsewhere.  You said you were in a wheelchair.  I looked up the disease you allegedly had and that's what it is.  Sorry. )

Btw I have reported all this to the police. No I have not lied. (No, you probably haven't because this is a civil matter, and yes, you have lied.  Repeatedly.)

They have been very informative, as have the legal profession. (I await a communication from your brief then.  They run pretty expensive these days. Waste of your ill-gotten gains, I'd say.)

You think you know my syntax, well, like you do, it can be changed. (Well, "we all know" about your syntax.)

Forgot to add. I have never forged a letter.  Spoken to police about that too. (Someone forged a letter, and you reportedly have a lot of forged documents on the walls of your home.  Let alone the silly photoshopping you've been engaging in with my photos.)

Also kindly note your information is wrong, many, including Carol lied to you.  She thanks you btw for telling everyone what a good pupil she was. (I bet Carol appreciates being called a liar. And under the bus she goes, folks!)

Yes we do all have our records from Duncroft and the social services. (And?)

The only reason Carol posted that no one made any money was because we believe there is a possibility that Toni Txxxxxx sold her story to the Sun newspaper. (I believe Debbie C also sold a story.  And I don't think Carol posted anything to that effect.)

You really have fallen for this one and we do know what info she and her boyfriend have on you. (Oh stop it! Nobody has anything 'on' me.  If I had anything to hide, you think I'd be using my real name?)

The following was passed on to me by an official who states that it does not matter where you live, if your posts are visible in any country you come under that countries laws. (Tsk, it's "country's" laws. And in this country, we have something called freedom of speech.)

You are not only responsible for the veracity of your own posts but those of your commentators.  (Others are entitled to their opinions.  And unless there is some sound legal reason, i.e. pending litigation, to remove anything anyone has said, it stands.)"

 

I wanted to add that this woman represents herself as being a 'doctor' of some sort.  Is there any end to the fantasies? 

 

And the Oscar for bullshit artist of the year goes to ...

 

 

 

HELL HATH NO FURY - PART FOUR

Who is Alastair Scott-Johnston and how could he have affected the accusations of abuse on the part of Jimmy Savile by the Duncroft conspirators? (Alastair Scott-Johnston with Frankie Howerd.)

In 1959, the BBC Light Programme aired its first episode of The Navy Lark - written by Laurie Wyman and George Evans, and produced by Alastair Scott-Johnston.

"The Navy Lark" movie was also released in 1959, from the same writing team, and featuring many of the cast from the radio show.  "The Navy Lark" was an unstoppable franchise from its beginnings. 

The successful series made household names of Leslie Phillips, Jon Pertwee, Ronnie Barker and Richard Caldicot, among others.  It ran from 1959 to 1976, during which time Alastair Scott-Johnston was a person of considerable influence at the BBC. 

So powerful was Alastair that he changed Ronald Barker's name to Ronnie Barker overnight and would brook no discussion on the subject; what Alastair said was the law of the land as far as the show was concerned.  And that remained the case until the series aired its final episode in 1976.  He was a rainmaker at the BBC, and powerful enough to begin or end careers.  I'm sure that to the end of his life, he could pick up a phone, speak with whoever he wanted at the BBC, and get things done that needed to be done.

Alastair adopted his daughter Fiona around the time the series began, and if one is to believe Fiona, they had a difficult relationship and were mostly estranged.  But, we've learned not to believe one word this woman says. 

From a reliable source today, it appears that Alastair came to Duncroft 'many times' while his daughter was there, and during the time she was ostensibly going up to London to see Jimmy Savile. She has never mentioned this.

So, it begs the question;  if Jimmy Savile, pretty much a new boy at the BBC compared to Scott-Johnston, was misbehaving to the extent accused, then WHY didn't his daughter Fiona go immediately to her father and have Savile dismissed or at least hauled off the road and given a serious talking to?  Scott-Johnston could most certainly have made an enormous amount of trouble for Jimmy, given his power position.

But she didn't complain to her father, which suggests to me that nothing went on with Jimmy Savile at the BBC or at Duncroft, except for what has been reported - a drive in his Rolls and some visits to the studio for Top of the Pops.  Further, as Fiona always used her father's last name in her Duncroft social media communications and when she was at Duncroft, surely Jimmy, not exactly a slouch, would have put the two names together and steered absolutely clear of Fiona at the very least, let alone her school-mates.  Or if he did encounter Fiona, he would have been nothing more than respectful.  In fact, that seems like a more likely scenario.  She has never once intimated on social media at least, both in public posts and private communications, that she complained to her father and/or that he refused to believe her.

In closing, please take the time to read this excellently-researched blog entry by "Moor Larkin," from last year.  Jim Cannot Fix This: The Navy Lark.  A lot more to think about.

 

 

HELL HATH NO FURY - PART THREE

Since the inception of the Savile/Duncroft allegations, one name has been repeated again and again behind the scenes.  Fiona Scott-Johnston.  This woman has much to answer for.  So far, her tarradiddles have cost the British taxpayer in excess of three million pounds - and if Justice Sales doesn't find against NatWest, tort lawyers will drain the Savile Trust resources, and rob the intended recipients of the charity monies.  Further, it could cost the taxpayer an additional thirty thousand pounds per claim.  This has to stop.

British television viewers will perhaps remember this face from the ITV show - for some odd reason she retained her real name in the show, i.e. "Fiona."  But first, let's review an message that many former Duncroft women received from her via Friends Reunited in December 2011, to wit:

"Hi,

I hope you had a very happy Christnas and that you and your family/loved ones have a wonderful New Year.

I am sorry to contact you like this but as you may or may not know a very emminent TV presenter/prog. maker, has been contacting many girls who are aware of what happened at Duncroft. Many of us were interviewed by Police andJournalists, but nothing has been achieved as not enough people would 'speak out'. Most of us have put those awful years behind us and grown on the experience of being a 'Duncroft Girl''. I know Mark, (W-T) has contacted many people directly, he has spoken to those staff who are still living and as he says he has "dotted the i's and crossed the t's". It is now up to us to help him. Many of us know what happened, experienced it or just pretended it is not our problem etc. well, I think it is our problem as most of the e-mails I get from ex-girls concern the offences of past visitors to Duncroft, spanning many years. I was not at Duncroft for many of the years concerned but I am aware of what happened. Being aware and the person concerned giving first hand reports are two different things. I would therefore urge you to take this, our last chance to get the many people who exploited us. We know who they are and if you would rather contact Mark directly then I think that is correct (if you want his email address or further details then please ask me!). Please, please take this last chance to do the right thing. even if you know nothing then that is important as it puts the timeline in perspective.
I know what I am asking is very difficult but many have families and have been told to 'Forget'. I am not certain how we can forget until it is corrected, so, I would therefore ask you, and no one else, to do what is right as we will never have another chance.
I am seeing this man in a few days and as I have much memorabilia from those days I would also ask you to sort out your physical memories and contact either Mark or myself. Please remember that NO ONE else can do this for you and we must speak out if we want to correct history. This is really our LAST CHANCE.
Thank you so much for putting up with my ranting and remember all you have to do is press the reply button even if you think it is not important or anything, we still need to know.
Thank you again and Happy New Year,
Lots of love
Fiona (Scott)Johnston..."

Now this Friends Reunited message contains at least a few lies, i.e. Mark Williams-Thomas NEVER spoke to staff members or other girls.  I was not a recipient, but a friend was, and she forwarded it to me, expressing disgust with its motives.   Williams-Thomas certainly was not an 'eminent' anything.  And why a 'round robin' message on social media, instead of contacting these "ex-girls" that she has received emails from in private as she claims? 

Fiona has additionally claimed to be a degreed professor, to be suffering from a debilitating disease and was in a wheelchair (the disease she claimed to be suffering from is a skin disease, and very unlikely that you would end up in a wheelchair as a result) and one lie piled atop the other.  She called herself "Susan Melling" which may have been her birth name before she was adopted by BBC power-producer Alastair Scott-Johnston.  And that family relationship is the key to this whole sorry mess.  Along with Meirion Jones' relationship to Margaret Jones, the former headmistress of Duncroft.

Fiona informed another former Duncroft woman that she used the "Melling" persona because she didn't want her 'pupils' (whoever they might be) to find out she'd been at Duncroft, and admitted she was really Fiona Scott-Johnston.  I have an email from that woman to that effect, as well as a copy of the email that this woman sent to Scott-Johnston expressing her disgust with the deception.  I've got lots of things in writing, unfortunately for Fiona/Susan Melling.

Although this is hearsay, a Daily Mail reporter told me that Fiona's sitting room was lavishly decorated with fake diplomas - maybe that was when she delivered the forged letter from the Surrey Police to the Mail, but the letter was also a clumsy forgery as everyone knows, and the police of course did not write it. 

Back when all this was blowing up, I contacted a Duncroft staff member who knows Fiona well, to try and tamp all this down;  this staff member told me that she was very angry that her personal telephone number had been given out without her permission. 

Fiona also had possession of a database that contained the contact information of many former Duncroft women.  This violates the Data Privacy Act.  She further claimed to have gotten it from a 60s woman, yet another lie.  She then allegedly created a video of herself burning the memory stick.  Never saw that, but you can burn any old memory stick and claim whatever you want.

I suspect maybe Fiona had a bit of a 'thing' for our Jimmy, and he likely rebuffed her.   She certainly kept photos of them together in her house, and boasted on line that she had been asked by Margaret Jones to contact him for the purpose of having him come to a fundraiser in 1979, I believe it was.  He had not been to the school in several years prior to that, otherwise Margaret Jones would have picked up the phone herself, doncha think? 

Notice that Fiona even wears her hair a la Savile, but it's flaming red, like the lies she tells.  I don't think she can stop at this point, she's in waaaay too deep.  She's lied to the police for a start and because of her lies a nation has gone mad and at least one man has been murdered as a result of the ongoing hysteria. I think we've all had enough of Miss Fiona and her fibs.  Time to put an end to it.

Many thanks to Eric Hardcastle, blogger and former consultant in the security field, and private investigator, based in Melbourne.  All on his own, he figured this one out in July 2013.  I have never communicated with Eric, and didn't know of his existence until about a week ago when he commented on this blog, noting that Maddie McCann's family had asked Mark WT to stop insinuating that he was working for them. 

I found this entirely by accident today.  Except for a misunderstanding about how Duncroft was run, he's spot on.  The Family Ties That Bind.  

 

"FOLLOW THE MONEY."

A legal battle for £3.7 million left to charity by Jimmy Savile commenced in the High Court in London on Monday, February 24, 2012. The Savile trust litigation.

Two Trustees of the dead disc jockey’s charities are attempting to get NatWest Bank removed as executors of his will.  NatWest is well compensated for their administration of the Savile Charitable Trust. 

Swiss-based businessman Luke Lucas and Dr Roger Bodley, clinical senior lecturer at the University of Tasmania and former consultant radiologist at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, are seeking the appointment of an executor prepared to investigate over a hundred claims for compensation for sex offences. Claimants are jointly represented  by the Manchester lawyers Pannone and the Australian-owned solicitors Slater & Gordon (UK) LLP who took over Pannone on February 14. 

Dr Roger Bodley is a trustee of both the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust and the Jimmy Savile Stoke Mandeville Hospital Charitable Trust, which have together around £5 million in reserves. After Jimmy Savile died at 84, Dr Bodley said, ‘He was the cleverest man I ever met, a genius at persuading people to part with money happily for good causes.’

Jimmy Savile raised £40 million for the establishment of Stoke Mandeville’s National Spinal Injuries Centre and supported 14 hospitals and hospices.

The Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust, active in Yorkshire, also took personal donations from other people besides the disc jockey. The Charity Commission says its object is to ‘provide funds for the relief of poverty and sickness and other charitable purposes beneficial to the community’ and for the ‘provision of recreational and other facilities for disabled persons’.

NOT for the purpose of unjustly compensating alleged victims and, worse still, their lawyers.

Liz Dux of Slater is the chief steward of the claimants' interests for both Pannone and Slater.  She should be a tad nervous at this time.

If NatWest are relieved of their fiduciary responsibility by Justice Sir Philip Sales, considered to be one of the most able judges of his time, it will be a game-changer for the alleged victims seeking compensation.

Sir Philip, 51, was also the "Treasury Devil",  effectively the Government's chief advocate, advising all departments. He was appointed to the job aged only 35 and has been involved in high-profile cases including defending in the High Court the Government's decision not to hold a public inquiry into the Iraq war in 2005. 

Justice Sales continues to hear oral argument this week, and if he finds in favor of the Estate, then a compensation arrangement between NatWest and  the predatory tort lawyers will no longer exist, and the new executor will require that each and every claim be exhaustively investigated. The BBC and the NHS are supportive of the current scheme now in place with NatWest. 

So far, all claims are based simply on allegations, made after the death of Jimmy Savile - no hard evidence of offending has ever been presented other than rumor, innuendo and memories of victims that go back many years, which could be unreliable and influenced by the constant mention of Savile in the media.  In the NSPCC report recently released, the claimants themselves say that the constant media coverage was unnerving to them. 

If Justice Sales finds that a new executor is appropriate, that will hold up claims of alleged victims for years in the courts, and may actually require Pannone/Slater & Gordon  to present all their clients' cases individually.  Without Mr. Savile there to defend himself, the arguments against him are severely weakened.     

Liz Dux said in a statement on Monday that the High Court hearing involving Savile’s £4 million estate was ‘important’.  "It is not about amounts or cold hard cash, but redress. The victims suffered some horrific abuse, often in silence. It is right and proper that their suffering is now recognised. I urge everyone involved in the process to make it as smooth and pain-free as possible in order to guard against any further suffering." Well, she would say that wouldn't she? 

But the fact remains that the entire apple-cart could go over with the appointment of an executor for the Trust, and all those champagne wishes and caviar dreams could simply fade away for the claimants and their counsel. 

Best outcome, the money goes where Jimmy Savile intended it to go.  NOT to compensating alleged victims and, worse still, their lawyers, who have, thus far, proven nothing.

WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH MISS MCGOO?

Over on Twitter there is a very sad person, known as "Pat McGoohan."  There is something psychologically wrong with her. 

Oh yes, there are plenty of people on Twitter who disagree to a greater or lesser degree with the Savile situation and they voice their opinions as is their right, but Miss McGoo's remit seems to be only to pursue, like a shrieking harpy, myself, rabbitaway, Anna Raccoon, and attorney Margaret Jervis.  Her attacks are juvenile, pointless and presumably boring to everyone but herself.  I see none of her 'followers' even bothering to respond to her and in fact her bias and viciousness may be putting off even those of a like mind when it comes to Savile, etc. 

Why does it matter that three girls absconded from Duncroft in 1964?  Lots of girls absconded, most came back, some did not and fell among thieves, so to speak.  I was not one of them, despite her innuendoes, nor was anyone I know.  I have been accused by this foul hag of being a 'pedo supporter,' and I hope my last blog entry has put paid to that impression.  But I will not support the continued pursuit of the Savile charity monies when NO PROOF EXISTS that he did anything inappropriate. 

Miss McGoo would likely have put the boot in when Ben Ibrahimi was on the ground.  And probably would have lit the fire that killed him, then danced around it. 

Her attacks are so personal that there is no doubt in my mind that she is ex-Duncroft or a relative.   Interesting, psychologically, that she takes the screen-name of  the actor who portrayed The Prisoner in the 60s TV series.  And a prisoner she is - of her own hatred and anger.

She goes to the trouble of obtaining photos of me from unknown sources and photoshops them in ridiculous ways, spends her time poking around the internet looking for anything she can find about her enemy(ies) of the day, and in fact is not interested in the Savile situation at all as far as I can tell, but very interested in 'getting' anyone she perceives as crossing her.

For example, I recently visited the Facebook page for Stonepound House in Hassocks, Sussex, and made an inquiry of the moderator there.  I was at Stonepound in 1962, and it was a horrible place. It closed in 1980, and is now remodeled and serving another purpose (see photo.)

I wish good luck to the women who are now trying to obtain their records from East Sussex authorities to prove how badly they were treated.  There was a riot there in 1966.  By the time all this was going on, the former superintendent, Mrs. Parker, was gone, but she caused a lot of trouble for me with her lies.  Her successors sound dreadful. I can't imagine how Mark WT missed this - but then, no celebrities were involved, so not interested.  I have not been back to the page myself - the women involved seem to know what they're doing and I don't need to engage in any further drama.  I've got enough with the hurly-burly of the Duncroft saga.

Miss McGoo immediately twisted this into alleging that I was trying to show sympathy for them simply to get information.  Oh please. 

So, I suggest to anyone who believes anything this poor woman writes about Duncroft - she's irrational.  If it's who I think it is, this is well-known in police and press circles.  They don't take her seriously, you shouldn't either. 

NOCENTE!

Los Angeles, the largest Catholic archdiocese in the United States, has already paid out $720,000,000 to victims of clergy abuse.  On February 14, 2014, on the courthouse steps, they agreed to pay out another $13,000,000 to settle the last of the outstanding cases, involving a  de-frocked fugitive priest who abused 25 boys here in Los Angeles, and over 100 in Mexico.   He went on the run in 1988 after being tipped off by the archdiocese with the authority of Cardinal Mahony that the police were going to be notified;  he is believed to be alive somewhere in Mexico.  His name is Aguilar Rivera. He would now be in his late 60s.

Former Cardinal Roger Mahony (pictured above) devoted a lot of his time trying to shield these serious offenders.  When he stepped down in 2011, he was rebuked by his successor, Cardinal Jose Gomez, for his actions. 

The authorities have not, as yet, brought Mahony to the seat of justice for his part in condoning the despicable conduct on the part of Rivera and others.Los Angeles Cardinal unlikely to face charges

Retired at age 78,  Mahony keeps a low profile these days, though he did go to Rome for the College of Cardinals enclave to elect Pope Francis, and has since met with the Pope in private.  I'm sure those were very interesting conversations.

I like Pope Francis, and I wish him health and a long life.  He has said he will end this cycle of child abuse within the church.  He's been supportive of gays.  He's humble, he still lives in the Vatican guest house, carries his own luggage when traveling, all very much in the style of his former life as an Argentinian archbishop; living in a small flat, cooking his own meals, and riding the bus to work.  He's wordly, inasmuch as he used to love to dance the tango, worked as a nightclub bouncer, and certainly dated women.  His devotion and attention to the poor would have brought him into contact with abused and exploited children. So, the slimy halls of child abuse would be anathema to him,  not something he would defend under any circumstances.   He's been offered the riches of the world, and he has chosen to reject them.  When he was shown the Papal apartments he remarked that 600 families could be housed in them, and went back to his quarters at the guest house.

As someone who endured prejudice because I reported child molestation to the headmistresses of my first boarding school, Langsmead in Pyrford, on behalf of a terrified school mate, I know how those complaints were received in the 50s.  Especially from someone as young as I was. 

For my pains, at age 8, I was then shunted off to Ascot Priory, and subjected to abuse at the hands of a Sister Florence, who supervised St. Christopher's, the junior school. 

I was singled out by this woman for absolutely no reason.  She would steal  gifts that were sent to me by mail, thereby making it seem that I was ungrateful because I had not thanked the person who sent me the gift, took money from my Post Office account, put me in coventry for an entire term - meaning none of the other girls were allowed to speak to me and vice versa, only my teachers, and other abusive behavior.  The whole school knew, and were talking about it, and though I complained to my mother, she brushed it off as drama, and it took nearly three years for her to understand I wasn't lying. (Eternal thanks to family friend Kay St. George and her daughter Mirabelle - a senior at Ascot Priory, who asked her mother why my mother wasn't doing something - for convincing her).  I left mid-term, after profound apologies from Reverend Mother, and went to day schools after that - Sarum in Walton on Thames and Oakfield School in Pyrford.  No more boarding schools, thank you.  (Unless you count Duncroft, of course, who have indicated in my file that they believe something bad happened at Ascot Priory.  Well, they got that right!)

I've been accused of being a 'paedo defender' because I've expressed serious doubts about the veracity of accusations against certain elderly celebrities in the UK.  All I can tell you about celebrities is that I felt safer around them than I ever did around clergy.  Not a one that I met ever behaved inappropriately in any way.   

I can only add that if a child comes to you with a complaint of abuse, please take it seriously, and waste no time looking into it. Contact licensed professionals, and keep it out of the press.  Do not go to self-proclaimed "child protection experts," or television producers or, worse still, journalists looking for some titillating scandal to whet the appetite of certain members of the public. These matters are best left in private - they are not for entertainment, profit,  fifteen minutes of fame, or the News of the World.  Real victims shrink from such exposure. 

So, will Cardinal Mahony pay the price for his gross negligence and conspiracy against the many victims of scum of the earth such as Aguilar Rivera, who is still out there, in all likelihood still molesting young boys in Mexico?  Someone needs to pay for this and not just with money. Rivera is a fugitive on the run - surely his co-conspirator Mahony should face a jury of his peers?  Something tells me he won't, but one thing is for sure, he's as nocente as hell in the eyes of heaven.