Thursday, 30 April 2015

Short-armed Outreach

What a coincidence when the outreach 'report' all 17 pages of it was published yesterday just 4 days after I wrote this 
 100 pupils questioned, yet NO charges arose out of any of those interviews. I find it strange that upon it's closure no report was ever published into the findings. All we and those 100 + gals got was a letter !
Funny little coincidences like this have been happening to me since I took up the cause for Justice for Jimmy. So, let's go back yet again to the wording of that letter that the witnesses received last year at the conclusion of this so-called Police investigation.
Is there evidence against any member of staff supporting criminal liablity on the basis that they were complicit with Jimmy Savile in his offending against you at D School ?
Answer .. it could not be found that the suspects were aware of Savile's offending ..
If not is there any evidence that the suspects were aware ... and were complicit in it ?
It was concluded that the jury .. could not be sure that a complaint was made ....or that the jury could not be sure that the staff simply ignored .. genuine complaint. 
But how did they arrive at this conclusion ? They had had sight of written documents, logs etc (evidence we are not allowed to see), we can only conclude that, despite these witless cops decision to treat all these complainant's as 'victims', at the end of the day, they did NOT want to risk this case going to court.
I'm kind of sad that it didn't, in a way. No one wants to see old ladies in court BUT, at least this way, the press might be FORCED to report the story.
The 'victims' would also have been exposed as the liars they are. Somewhere along the line, someone would break because it's one thing to go on the telly and lie, and quite another to take the stand and do the same.
Furthermore, as I suspect that Ms Jones, the headmistress was one of the two 'suspects', the public would hear about Meirion Jones' dishonesty. Really, guys and gals, this was NEVER going to happen was it ? 
My source, there at the SAME TIME as Fran and Charlotte, tells me that she told the outreach cops that she had NOT heard of anyone reporting such things to the staff at the time. No doubt, she like Susan would have been called as witnesses for the defense. Imagine that if you will.
One court case involving the Duncroft 'victims' WILL be heard in the not too distant future, that of Frederick Starr V Karin Ward  in the High Court in London. The tables have been turned on Meirion's main witness and I wish Freddie the best of luck.
The living still have some protection under the law against liars and defamer's. Mr Starr was arrested FOUR times because of Ms Ward's tales. She has just released a new book, the royalties of which should cover about half an hour's court time ! Bring it on Freddie ! I hope you sue ALL those involved in your horrible experience !


Wednesday, 29 April 2015

What outreach doesn't tell us

On first reading Savell's latest report I wondered, where are the BBC related allegations. I overlooked this explanation
Aside from the fact that those alleged 'offences' now form part of a libel action to be heard in the High Court later later this year, I wondered, why aren't these included ? Has there been undue haste in publishing a report that omits such important evidence as that visit/s to Jimmy's TV show Clunk Click ?
Of course, should Karin Ward be found guilty of libeling Freddie Starr, her story, which is the one that kick started the whole sorry business, will be discredited.

 Karin wasn't in Exposure for the same reason the CC allegations are not considered by Savell. But, Fiona was, she  adapted Karin's stories for herself. She was also part of the 1977/9 claims as investigated in Ornament. 
How many others that I have investigated recently, can be found in this tract ? Well, here's  Francis Jennings for one !
It was FJ who told the press this 
 Fran also told the Mail about reporting alleged incidents to the staff !
 Now, her social worker and she seem to get on quite well. Why didn't she tell her about her alleged abuse ? After all, they were in regular contact ?
From it's inception, the finger of suspicion was pointed at the staff 
Unfortunately the report does not append details of the investigation that followed. Number's just numbers
 No appendices here guys and gals So we can't see who said what to whom when. where or how. 
We do however find out a bit more about how many D women reported to Yewtree 
 Then we're told why we can't be told about 12 women. They are the property of Yewtree
Now, I can only assume that amongst these 4/12 'victims' lie our CC girls ! If so, these 'victims' were accompanied by staff on these trips to the BBC so that evidence is crucial to this 'investigation' too !
One story they can't dismiss is Charlotte's. She says she was one of those abused 'offsite', in his campervan

Is she one of these 
Who are all these women ?
 The CPS did not feel they had sufficient evidence to pursue two members of the school staff, at the time.
We really need to see ALL the evidence don't we ? Not just this rehash of previous reports. Where is Susan's evidence ? Has her version of the events been ring-fenced by Yewtree ? There are useful snippets of information contained in this but they are few and far between. WHY did the CPS not pursue the two staff members accused by the same 'victims' whose tales of abuse appear to have been accepted, in part ? 

Onwards !

Outreach the report !

Oh my God, Surrey Police appear to have accepted all the Duuncroft women told them. Well, most of it that is ! Here's the report published today

The first thing anyone with a brain will notice is that the alleged incidents are not individually dated, not even by the year ! All we get is this by way of time is this 
Now then guys and gals, where's the Clunk Click/BBC claims ?  They are NOT included in this report ! It describes abuse 'off site' 
But how can this have happened when all visits to the school were so tightly controlled ?
Despite evidence to the contrary we are being asked to believe that Jimmy was given unfettered access to all areas of the school
This report is rubbish for a number of reasons. It was NOT an investigation at all, just another 'assessment' exercise like Yewtree. The people behind this have no interest in truth or justice. I feel only contempt for them

Strange, no one appears to have accepted the stories of the girls who told the press that they had told the staff about their experiences at the time. I'll be delving more into this later !

Yes, the same Jon Savell
Neither use or ornament !

Monday, 27 April 2015

Debbie Cogger, the new girl at Duncroft

No press or television show has bothered to get to the facts behind the Savile claims. Well, here's one : Cogger arrived at Duncoft Friday 1st November 1974 
This is an extract from a diary that exists. The Police etc would not have been interested in seeing this as part of Operation Outreach, so it managed NOT to get lost like Jimmy Savile's own diaries.
Is it half term ? The reference to 'no school' indicates this. That entry for 1st November reads : 'No school feels weird New girl (Debbie) 
Jimmy Savile appears on the following Friday : Jimmy came up brought records and posters' The author has met Jimmy several times already. She is not starstruck like some of the other gals and more importantly, she has never claimed to have been abused by Jimmy. For Cogger, Friday will be her 1st sight of Jimmy at the school. He brings records no doubt to play in the common room with the girls and cheers them up.
Now, what we have to remember guys and gals that this was not a holiday camp, this was a special school for emotionally damaged young girls. Imagine how excited they would have been to meet this pop star and get to visit London etc, under strict supervision that is !
Note the reference to the 'van' on the 9th : Went out in van, got some clothes from Top Store. Was Top store the precursor to Top Shop ?
The author recounts the mundane atmosphere that was only broken when a girl absconded (a regular thing by the looks of it) or events such as a 'sherry party' on the 6th December with the staff. No alcohol mind you but 'lots of drinks and lots of fags' 

Now, believe it or not, the author was actually interviewed by MWT for Exposure. Her contribution ended up on the editing floor. Why ? because she was not claiming that she was abused by Jimmy. She could NOT corroborate the others' claims either because all she had heard at the time, was gossip amongst the girls.  She KNEW the girls who went for a ride in his car. NONE of then recounted stories of blow jobs or anything that would be considered assault at the time. Wandering hands was the expression. Which made me think of this !
 Something as innocent as a tickle in 1976 became molestation in the days leading up to the Exposure broadcast on October 3rd 2012.
You can read her story here if you want 
Is this the sort of thing that went on at the school ? That is exactly the picture that is being formed in my mind based on witness testimony. No assaults, no sexual acts performed in the car on a ride 'down the lane'. Just innocent banter and playful physical contact. 
Now, one thing that is very important for you the reader to know, is that my source was actually part of Fiona's FReunited group. Fiona conned her into believing she was another Fiona who actually WAS at D at the same time as her when she was not. She therefore believed that her and Keri etc might be telling the truth about Jimmy. A smart woman, she eventually realised she'd been lied to and that is why she came to me.
Next time I'll tell you more of what my source saw at Duncroft but think on, she did have a friend called Fiona. Fake Fiona used this information to ensnare a woman who was there at the same time as Karin Ward. Ward was resistant to the FR gals advances so others were needed to provide much needed information and contacts. 
My source has NO IDEA whether the claims made against Jimmy are true or not. She has her own mind just as she had back then. Her words remind me of another brave lady and friend of Jimmy who spoke her mind honestly and without fear of reproach
I'm so grateful to my source for choosing me to help her put some of the records straight. She remember's Jimmy as an extrovert, someone who would lift others up not bring them down.
I wished Jimmy Savile had shown up at my school ! To be continued !

Sunday, 26 April 2015

Outreach : what no one is telling us !

Remember Operation Outreach, the one that investigated claims made by some ex Duncroft women that they had told the staff that Savile was sexually abusing them ? Here's what we were told about this 
 100 pupils questioned, yet NO charges arose out of any of those interviews. I find it strange that upon it's closure no report was ever published into the findings. All we and those 100 + gals got was a letter !
Now, bear in mind, this was NOT about Jimmy's 'offending'. that was something the cops accepted anyway. This was about reports said to have been made to Miss Jones and her staff, at the TIME of the alleged assaults.
Here's one of the first to accuse to implicate the staff, Francis aka Sandra 
Fran wasn't alone, another who claimed to be in D in 1974 is Deborah Cogger, who sold her Savile story to Bella Magazine. She's another whose age varies according to circumstances. Here she is on the Voy forums in August 2012, courtesy of the raccoon blog
In the cash for stories arena she's in D in 1973. She says she'd been there 6 months when Jimmy first visited 
The title of the article is fitting isn't it ? I don't believe her, do you ?
She gives her age as 52 in October 2012, so there's a good chance her birth year is 1960. She then tells us she marries for the SECOND time in 1979. Two marriages by the age of 18/9 ? I think not pet !
It was Cogger the hacks questioned when it was revealed that Angela Sullivan was going to be involved in outreach ! Sullivan had worked on the 2007/9 investigation and the media were NOT happy. Not happy one bit that someone involved in a proper Police investigation lasting two years that found insufficient evidence to charge, was now involved in the Duncroft investigation.
We're told that Sullivan is DCS in Ornament. She comes in for a lot of stick including this from another EX Surrey Police constable
 What came of this complaint I wonder. Who made it and WHY  ? Fiona knows Sullivan, from 2007/9. Did she interview her ? The former did say the fake letter was from Sullivan
I wonder how Fiona managed to get the year she was interviewed wrong ? Is 2006 the year she and her pals began plotting Jimmy's downfall ?
To be continued guys and gals !

Thursday, 23 April 2015

Charlotte !

Another day another exposer exposed ! Today it's Charlotte's turn. She's the first Duncroft woman he presents. But before she opens her mouth, he says this 
MWT "Savile was invited to the school to help raise it's profile" Er, no he wasn't, he was invited by Susan with the staff's and her mother's approval !
MWT "But soon, his frequent visits became the talk of the common room. Charlotte says she was 14 when she first met Savile there in 1974"
She then talks a load of nonsense about "teenage banter" and "oh here we go again, Jimmy Savile, so the way THEY spoke about it sometimes was like having a cup of tea"
Not to be outdone by her contemporaries, she recounts a tale about a campervan and a recording for a radio show.

Her story has been confirmed to be untrue because it implicates staff who've since been exonerated following Operation Outreach !
Now, the beauty of Charlotte's story is that it's been lifted from an event that actually happened. Jimmy DID record some of the girls in his camper van for his Savile's Travels program. BUT, the girls were from Norman Lodge so NONE of them were 14. Charlotte, you're a liar !
I wonder if anyone bothered to search the BBC radio archives for this recording ? Was it broadcast ? Why didn't Thomas use it ? 
Fiona's right in the middle of it again. In an extract from an email, she talks about the filmed interviews with MWT

 They filmed me back in March about 6 weeks ago and Charlotte was filmed on the Friday of the same week.  Mark has sent me emails EDITED   With regard who else will be there, I know that they want to film Carole Allen (Wells), Rochele Conway (Shepherd), Francis and of course Kat.

Carole Wells ? Was she in exposure ? Here's what she told the Telegraph

Here's how SWNS describe her 
I haven't spotted her yet ! maybe someone else could help and watch this shit again to see if her story matches anyone else.

By the way, I was wrong about Tracie's sister being on camera in Exposure, an actress played her instead. Not that it matters, she provided the story, the responsiblity is hers ! 

Who's next Guys and Gals ? Watch this space !
Just been reminded that Susan recounted the story about the radio show recording in the raccoon blog. Here's her recollection of the event !

Apologies for all these updates guys and gals. But I think you'll agree they are important.  

Wednesday, 22 April 2015

Exposer's Exposed !

One 'Miss' from the Levitt report has been bugging me since I found out who she is.
What a bloody WASTE of time any OUR money that report was. Let me explain, here is how Tracie and her sis are described in Levitt. Miss B is the one who came up with the TV room beef biyani nonsense by the way.
Here's the list according to Fiona 
Miss A not at D but reported to Police 2007
Miss B witness of abuse See next
Miss C victim of abuse 1977 Beef Byrani
D Tracie's sister
E Tracie 
F uck know's
G 'me' 

Read her sister's statement to the Police, 'she might know of others' plural ! Strange thing to say when the only other you claim to know is your sister !
Tracie didn't want to speak to Levitt who managed to assume from that the following

Tracie's sister didn't refuse when MWT came a knocking in 2012. She's actually featured on camera as 'Sarah'. Credit for this earlier t bit of detective work to Moor Larkin. 
Try not to LOL at that 'her family know nothing' nonsense.
Here's the 2007/8 version of the alleged 'assault'
Larkins conclusion ?
Nice one mate

Here's how Fiona describes Tracie or Tracy as she called her on CLR in May 2012.

The only other thing I know is certain people have not been asked to join this other group. I was asked to stand assurance for  (my opinion is she is an adult and has her own views and can make her own decissions) and Sheila  has not been asked as she is friends with a Barnardos girl called Tracy  and it was BLANK who set fire to Queen Anne. Nobody really trusts Tracy..
Now, bear in mind this is a censored extract from a post she made to another ex Duncroft woman. She posted as Susan Melling. Does this woman lie straight in bed ?
Getting back to Tracie and her sis. It does seem strange for them to report such a minor incident as the one they describe don't you think ? Was the sister in touch with the Beef Byrani gals ? Had the three of them conspired to contact the cops in 2007 ? Notice how Thomas never informed his audience of 'Sarah's' link to Duncroft (her sister) again credit to ML. 
I wonder when Tracie first contacted Thomas ? She is certainly a fan of his. Imagine my surprise when I found Tracie on Twitter. She uses her real name so I've censored it, just in case. Now, it could be that this is NOT the same Tracie, but I think she is !
To MWT 12th January 2012

Justice is rarely the outcome if they are famous, to many people willing to cover for them

In response she says rather tellingly 

now r they sure that he is not to old to be charged!!!!!!
She RT'd this Thomas tweet on 20th Sept 2012
What do you make of this reader ? She sounds like a bitter sort doesn't she ? What's more she's clearly someone who's been in touch with Thomas at the start of his attempt to stitch Jimmy up. Who knows she may be one of Jones' a'R'ses. I don't care because she's just another nasty piece of work, willing to tramp all over Jimmy's grave. And, for that, I despise her and her mates ! 


I've altered my blog slightly because I think I may have got the sisters mixed up. Strangely enough someone purporting to be Tracie's sister. found herself on the raccoon blog, exchanging comments with Sally Stevens. WHY she chose to call herself 'Tracie' ? Who knows ? Judge for yourself. It would be great to hear from either Tracie or her sister, but I'll not hold my breath