Wednesday, 31 December 2014

A Big Ben Fix 1923 and 1988 !

For many years I have enjoyed seeing in the New Year with the chimes of Big Ben. And what a coincidence to find that one of Jimmy's fix it's involved the great clock at Westminster. It wasn't aired on New Years Eve but I thought you'd like to hear about it anyway ! 

The accompanying video clip of the fix broadcast in March 1988 has been removed from the BBC online archive 
But, had I not stumbled across that I would not have been led to this rather charming story of how the beeb first captured and broadcast BB's wonderful sound for the first time on New Years Eve 1923 !
Shame we are no longer allowed to watch programs that we and our parents paid to have made but at least we KNOW that they were made. My burrowing led me to another great resource that called 'TV Cream' ! It has not removed it's tributes to Sir Jimmy
I can hear Big Ben on my radio or online later tonight. I doubt the tv listings will be as good, or as popular as they were thirty years ago !

I love the 'tags' by the way TV cream ! 
 Tags: ,

Oh, and btw did you know that Rick Wakeman among others combined to make a remix of 'The age of the train' featuring our Jim - 'as it happens'. Totally off-topic but I love it and I'm sure you will too !

Happy New Year all - Join me and Big Ben later !


Tuesday, 23 December 2014

My letter to Jim !

Earlier in the year, Jimmy McGovern made a documentary-drama called 'Common' about the injustice that is joint enterprise. Here's what he had to say about his 'campaigning film'
McGovern has brought us many great drama's including the excellent, Hillsborough (screened Dec 1996). He bemoans what he calls 'lazy journalism'
Only one person posted a comment, me ! 
 I didn't get a response from Jimmy but I think i did get one from Jim because he did indeed send us a 'decent journalist'.
On the 18th October 2014 the first of three Savile related articles appeared in the Mail on Sunday. I remember the excitement of the night before well !
Despite the Appeal decision going against the Charitable Trust, I still believe we've come along way since this time last year. More and more people are getting behind us. Just how many ordinary folk unaware of our blogs would have known about the fraudulent claims and the LOST diaries had we not found  Mr Rose ?
So, let's not been down-hearted Guys and Gals. Let's have a GREAT Christmas and a VERY Happy New Year and remember :
  'Those who bring sunshine into the lives of others can’t keep it from their own’

I thoroughly enjoyed re-reading Dave Hewitt's piece. I think the following words neatly sum up what most folk thought about the man.
And also because it provides a link to another fine tribute  to Sir Jim following his death on 29th October 2011 by Adam Sweeting

Thursday, 18 December 2014

Operation Pass the biscuits

Dear me I had hoped to make a light, uplifting blog this side of Christmas but, apparently, it's 'black Thursday' for us 'serial Savile deniers' !
 Naturally, when I first saw this I was kind of concerned. Until that is, I read this !
So, here we are, it's Thursday and so far, I'm feeling decidedly, well anything but black. WHY ? because, apparently you can NOT arrest the dead. Yes, guys and gals, NYP are alleged to have actually used these words
So, that's FIVE 'reported offences' relating to Savile, post October 2011 presumably ? Thought I'd better check that MPS report from January 2013 again
After, three months of TRAWLING for 'victims' only 8 accustions relating to North Yorkshire, OH *sighs*
Naturally, the friendly face of Slater Gordon will be on hand today to give her assessment of the latest. But, will she afford us sensible folk with the information I requested ? I very much doubt it, because, as far as I'm aware, NO formal complaints were made to NYP whilst Sir Jimmy was alive.
 Nope, definitely not 'black Thursday' for me. But thanks for the laffs North Yorkshire Police !

Wednesday, 17 December 2014

Final thoughts on Decision !

Why was I expecting anything at all from the three Judges who knows, but another wee snippet of information that I managed to glean from those 43 pages was this !
Of course, David Rose of the Mail on Sunday already told us this, but every little helps, and we've been granted a bit more insight into the claims that appear to be, in dispute !
 11 'accepted', 11 offered a smaller sum, presumably because they are slightly less credible ? And, 36 'rejected' The 11 'accepted' must be pretty high-end accusations or maybe the approx £30,000 average per claim is actually, £16,000 (£14K going to the lawyers ?)

For those wondering about the statute of limitations. Wonder no more because that little problem was taken care of by the tacit understanding that, any 'VULNERABLE CLAIMANT' would be treated favourably in the event of litigation as opposed to an agreed tariff of payments !
The Judges explain that 'unmeritorious' claims will  be 'statute barred' presumably because these folk are NOT considered 'vulnerable' and could have spoke up earlier
All very well, but we still don't know WHY those 11 have been 'accepted' but we are told how a claim should be made
Not exactly the TWO LINE summaries which the scutineer's receive is it ?

All told, it looks like Liz Dux was right in her reportage of the Judges views about the scheme and the scrutiny applied
 The Judges may well be 'satisfied' but, some claims, we are told, are being investigated by the Police. We are NOT told at what point those 36 claims were 'rejected' OR BY WHOM !
Que Sera Sera ! Ms Dux anticipates a speedy resolve to the issue. Indeed, she may well get her money 'by the summer'. But 'all over', I think not .... !

Tuesday, 16 December 2014

Mr Witcomb's NOTE !

This is Henry Witcomb. He is the barrister employed by Nat West's solicitors, Osborne Clark to 'review the claims submitted under the scheme' whatever that means !
Apparently, Judge Sales whose decision was the subject of todays judgement, had some details about how the scrutiny process would operate under the scheme previously agreed. 
It's not clear from the wording of the judgement whether those few lines are the actual wording of the 'note', make your own mind up. Your guess is as good as mine ! What is however certain from this 43 page document is that the three Law Lords were of the opinion that 'many' of the claims submitted would be successful 'if litigated' (page 10)
 It's not clear how the Judges arrived at this supposition, but it is clear that some 'evidence' had been 'put in', presumably to the Banks Solicitors (the witness statement being that of Ms Buncher of OC Clarke 13th Dec 2013)
Henry's 'note' gets another mention on page 26. 
 His lordship considers the merit angle again on page 28
 Fast forward to page 43 and this small glimmer of hope 
Is this what Ms Dux meant when she said this 
It would be interesting to see a copy of Mr Witcomb's 'note. Just to know it actually exists would be a start !