Wednesday, 17 September 2014

Case for the Defense Day 9

On the 19th October 2012 the Police have 400 'lines of inquiry' to follow and on 5th November, Liz Dux has 36 'victims' out of the 43 lawsuits filed and on 19th November 2012 the BBC sends this letter to their staff past and present !
They are are they not Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, admitting that they BELIEVE that the man they once employed was a 'criminal' ! They even supply a FREE Phone number to any potential claimant against THEMSELVES !
The BBC had already sanctioned TWO investigations into themselves (Pollard and The yet to be published, Dame Janet Smith Review) but, Ladies and Gentlemen, the BBC is NOT an individual, it has no face or family and, more pertinently, it has access to resources that Jimmy Savile's family and friends DO NOT.
The Police issued their own FREE PHONE number for 'potential victims' to call, not them, but the NSPCC.
Their language is confusing, vacillating between alleged victims and, 'victims'. But the message is clear : WE BELIEVE YOU !
 Now, Ladies and Gentlemen I want you to examine those words used by Commander Spindler in light of a reference made to some REAL criminals in that Telegraph Review dated 4th October 2012 
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I offer exhibit 18 one of a HUGE number of press articles relating to the trial of a number of men in Rochdale in September 2012 
 This sexual exploitation of youngsters was not exclusively a Rochdale problem, it was and is much bigger than that !

And this was not the first of these cases ! There had been several trials including this one in May 2012

Hindsight is a great thing Ladies and Gentlemen. In December 2013, I wrote this blog post about the Rochdale scandal. I did not know at that time that another northern town would be the subject of the same INSTITUTIONAL FAILURE less than a year later !
Exhibit 18 

Some days ago I asked a rhetorical question : What went on in those months in between the press first getting wind of the Savile newsnight story and the eventual airing of the expose on ITV ? How was it that the Police were so ready AND WILLING, to accept and act on uncorroborated allegations made on a television program ?
Speculation, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I am speculating. Time for some FACTS !
Yesterday I confirmed the FACT that until MWT appeared on the scene, no official complaints had been made against Sir Jimmy to the senior management in Stoke Mandeville Hospital. 
No complaints had been made to management of Broadmoor either.  
So, what complaints had been made about Sir Jimmy whilst he was alive ? Seven according to Commander Spindler in October 2012 and here they are :
 Now, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, bear in mind, these words were spoken THREE weeks after his 'assessment' had begun, yet this is the best he can do in terms of this potentially IMPORTANT information !
  'believed' 'possibly' ? Not good enough Commander, not good enough ! However, this article exhibit 19 throws up some very useful information despite the apparent uselessness of the head of the investigation.Consider this allegation !
2003 ? I have some questions to ask Commander Spindler, the first being this : 
Have you located the FILE yet ?
You see, ladies and Gentlemen TWO months later on January 11th 2013 the Metropolitan Police published their assessment report calling it Giving Victims a voice and there amidst the alleged rapes and sexual assaults we find this !

Had the Mail managed to contact the woman two months later eliciting further information about the alleged incident ?
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am not finished with that 26th October 2012 article yet. I'm not finished with the 2003 revelation either. To be continued after the recess !



No comments:

Post a Comment