Pages

Sunday, 13 September 2015

An Inspector called - Ornament revisited Pt 1

On September 10th 2015, the IPCC decided that, had Jimmy's friend (Inspector 1) still been a serving officer, no misconduct case would be brought against him for the phone call he made to Surrey Police in June 2009. I've read through the report guys and gals, and I suggest you do too. Because by reading it, in conjunction with the transcript of Jimmy's Police interview, and the findings of both Operation Ornament and Newgreen, one sees the bigger picture of exactly what went on back then.
Well, almost ! Let me explain ! The link to the pdf document is here 
https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/investigations/jimmy-savile-west-yorkshire-police-surrey-police-sussex-police-and-north-yorkshire

The Operation Ornament report confirmed that Jimmy had spoken to DI 3 after receiving a recorded delivery letter. Apparently, the latter outlined the allegation, BUT, suggested a meeting next time JS was in the area. 
Now, thanks to the latest publication, I can look at Ornament in a different way. DI 3 wasn't treating these allegations lightly, and neither were his bosses, despite the CPS' initial instructions.

The CPS indicate that they saw the alleged incidents as 'relatively minor' 

 'Minor' or not, Senior Police officers met NINE times over the course of 2008.

These Senior officers, mindful of the CPS advice decided that Savile should be given the chance to answer the accusations made against him. There is NO suggestion at any time that he will be arrested. In short, the case is not strong enough and the claims made are minor. 
My previous blog posts on the matter appear to have missed some of this vital information contained in Ornament. Information including the CAUTION exercised by both North Surrey and West Yorkshire Police at the time. After all, Jimmy did NOT have to submit to any interview under caution. 

The Police displayed tact and sensitivity in their handling of the case. Especially after the 'friends reunited' women appeared on the scene.



 Before moving on to Inspector 1's report, let me introduce another interesting fact contained in Ornament previously overlooked. The fact that ALL the women including Fiona (miss D) did indeed receive letters at the end of the investigation. Letter's that outlined the REAL reason for no further action. Which begs a question; was the 'fake' letter really just Fiona's idea, or had someone/s put her up to it ? 
Why on earth have we not seen this letter ourselves ? The fact of it's existence mad all the more startling given the FACT that Barnados appeared to have received a copy too !
Remember the ONE Duncroft allegation at this time relates to incidents alleged to have happened in the late 1970's. No Karin Ward here, no Clunk Click or trips to TOTP's etc etc. This was the time period discussed in Savile's interview in October 2009. But I'll tell you all about that in part two. Hang on to your hats guys and gals, it's gonna be an eye opener. 

1 comment:

  1. Interesting cross-references with my four-part "Chant" last week, and as you say, extremely informative cross-references with your canny past blogging about Ornament and how senior police officers kept it live for two years!

    Strange how Surrey have suddently reinvigorated the Walton Hop hystery, just as all this is reported by the IPCC. Stopped believing in coincidences some while ago.

    ReplyDelete