MY LIFE IN THE DAY - Sally Stevens

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 ...