Friday, 3 April 2015

One 'victim' and Rochelle

Jones only ever had ONE 'victim' willing to speak on camera about her days at Duncroft : Karin Ward R1. He knew he needed more and set about finding others who would 'corroborate' her story. Fiona fake letter R2 could not because she was not there at the same time as Karin. But then, neither was Rochelle.
Fiona's credibility was in question. Despite Hannah's 'most sorted' label, Liz and Mei were obviously not convinced. Fiona would NOT, be their 'main witness' 
 Jones himself interviewed BOTH Karin and later Rochelle
 Here's how he described Karin's interview in APP 10
Remember, he's speaking after the fact. Is he putting words in Karin's mouth ? Was she really that angry with the BBC at the time ? 
His 'script' dated 30th November 2011 shows how far he's got

Indeed, Jones draws up a diagram to show how, others will corroborate Karin's story
Try as I might, I can't see R2 anywhere in this. Note the date, December 5th 2011. This is the sum total of Jones' case against Jimmy Savile. Woman 3 will be R3, Shepherd 
Then he tells Pollard that his boss, Rippon had showed little interest in the project. Indeed, he states that PR hadn't even seen the filmed interviews.
Karin we are told was NOT involved in the 2007/09 Police investigation. But, Jones was not interested in that investigation outside confirming that there had been one. This is where MWT comes in, he never met ANY of Jones' women in 2011. His role was to establish whether an investigation had actually taken place. 
In other words, the mere fact that an investigation had taken place was enough for this award winning journalist to destroy a good man's name. He brazenly admits this 

That was his 'real story' a Police investigation that went nowhere. Jones couldn't wait to get his little project off the ground. He wanted to get in there first 
I'll let David Jordan have the last word on Jones' behaviour at this time. Have a great Easter Guys and Gals 

 Addendum 4th April 
In response to Misa's comment I went back to the diagram. R2 is in there, I was so tired I did not think to go back to see if I could get a clearer picture. But here it is, make of it what you will. The point stands that Jones still only had Karin and Rochelle willing to go on camera. But, the diagram is useful in other ways. To be continued 
App10 M Jones' statement P76


  1. Dear Rabbit,
    I know it's not very clear, but you might try blowing up the bird's nest diagram - I think top centre is clearly R1 - the '1' is a simple handwritten 'stick'. The top of the left-hand column is quite possibly R2 - handwritten again, but with a base and top making it look like a typewritten '1'. If this is the case, then all eleven women are listed, including the one non-Duncroft woman, presumably (6) - a sister (?) abused at Stoke Mandeville?

    If that's the case, then R1's complete story runs down the centre of the page, with various parts corroborated by the other women, by Meirion himself, by Clunk Click footage, still photographs (presumably), and by the police.

    There is a connection from R2 to R1 - they're known to each other, presumably, though there are no links between the other women shown.

    Woman 4 seems to be the only person who corroborates every element of R1's story, but she's not on the list of poeple who say they talked to the poilce. Do you think it's possible that 'WOMAN 3' is not 'R3'?

    What exactly is Meirion's corroboration, do you think? He visited Duncroft and says (I think) he saw Savile there, did he see girls going for rides in his car and go along on trips to the BBC...or did he just 'know' that they were going on those trips?

    I'm not sure I'm helping here!

    1. Great work, with the blow up, Rabbit. But I thought you were supposed to be putting your paws up for the weekend...don't be too hard on yerself.

    2. Thanks Misa, it's hard to catch a break when you get summat important in your teeth. Did this post very quickly last nite cos I had all the material and Moor's comment on R3 yesterday got me going !

  2. OMG!!
    I had never noticed that mad diagrammatic before!!
    It reminds me of one I found on the web once and then modified.... ;-D

    1. Ha. Nice. All my life I've been wondering what's really going on, and now I see!

  3. re. Karin being angry

    Her defence against her looming Defamation suit is that she never expected to be alive when the broadcast occurred, so hard to imagine how she would be so angry when in fact she had expected to be already dead.