Pages

Friday, 18 September 2015

Jimmy Savile's 'YOUNGEST Victim'

Remember this ?
 This is Francis Rossi's recollections of Savile published on 5th November 2012. The same article features comments ascribed to Liz Dux regarding one of her claimants being an 8 year old girl and a patient in SM hospital in 1986.

For mobile user's 

Rossi’s revelations come on the same day as Savile’s youngest alleged victim came forward to sue the late broadcaster’s £4.3 million estate.
Aged just eight at the time of the abuse, the unnamed woman claims Savile abused her at Stoke Mandeville hospital while she was recovering from an operation in 1986.
Liz Dux, from law firm Slater & Gordon, said of the then eight-year-old victim: 'This was a little girl who went in for treatment and came out an abuse victim. She should have been protected.'

 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/status-quo-frontman-francis-rossi-jimmy-savile-invited-me-to-sex-party-in-his-dressing-room-8282508.html

I've blogged extensively on this story, taking it as face value that Ms Dux actually made this statement. Slater Gordon's press office refers to it on their website, which would lead any reasonable reader to the conclude that the content was factually correct ?
 For those who don't want to wade through previous posts, here's the gist of my story ! It began when I watched Meirion Jones' 'After Savile, No more secrets' broadcast on 4th November 2013 during which Dux recounted a similar story to the above. But this one involved an 12 year old patient in SM in 1977, who contributed in person and claimed a 'porter' raped her.
 I transcribed 'Celia's' story here
http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/after-savile-no-more-tears-enough-is.html

The fact that this involved a child in hospital, got my dander up. I wanted to see if this had been reported before to the Police, to anyone. I didn't find her in Yewtree and I didn't find the 8 year old either !

 Bear in mind, the above is a collation of all reports made to the Met Police and the NSPCC between October and early 2013. Dux' 1977 and 1986 claimants are nowhere to be seen.
http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/the-jubilee-lie.html

Being an obsessive truth seeker, I asked Ms Dux about the two stories. Was the 12 year old and the 8 year old the same person ? To her credit, she responded, politely advising me to wait for the official report to be published. So I did, and guess what, the only eight year old it contains is a BOY ! 'Victim 36' as it happens 

  There's also a 12 year old girl in 1977 too 

 For completeness read the 'victim' accounts from page 37 of this very badly compiled 300 + page report. No page reference for the statements included so I did it for you. Take my advice, none of the rest of it is worth reading 

http://www.speakingoutinvestigation.com/reports.htm 

OK, let me get to the REAL point of this post and that is the fact that whilst Dux did NOT respond to me, she did respond to another concerned individual, by email, some of the contents of which I shall disclose here, in the public interest and for no other purpose than an attempt to set the record straight ! 

Victim 36.

The press assumed it was a female and I didn't correct them as I wanted to preserve
my client's anonymity which has been of paramount importance.



 When asked about the year 

I would never have given the press the exact year of the assault at that stage so to  avoid any identification of the victim .
Liz
Dux
Head of PI Central and South East


 

Here are my thoughts about Ms Dux' response. 

I for one find it odd that the press would 'assume' this alleged victim was female ? Did they also 'assume' that : "this was a little girl who went in for treatment and came out an abuse victim. SHE should have been protected" ?

Not being able to find the video and the words coming out of Dux' own mouth while her lips move, I set off to find other articles where the alleged assault on an 8 year old is featured, and found this. The eight year old was recovering from  an operation, it's 1986, and, best of all, she's planning to sue !


 

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2227996/Jimmy-Saviles-youngest-victim-launches-claim-sue-estate-builder-52-claims-hes-BBC-stars-lovechild.html


Investigated: There are now 300 child abuse allegations against Jimmy Savile
Jimmy's Savile's youngest victim was just eight years old, it has emerged after she came forward to sue the late DJ's £4.3million estate.
She says he molested her at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, in Buckinghamshire, while she was recovering after an operation in 1986.
Her shocking revelation comes as a man also scarred by the paedophile's legacy admitted he is haunted by the possibility he may be Savile's love child.
The sick BBC star, who has now been exposed as one of the UK's most prolific abusers, had a fling with Mr Biven's mother when she was a teenager.
Liz Dux, from law firm Slater & Gordon, said of the eight-year-old victim: 'This was a little girl who went in for treatment and came out an abuse victim. She should have been protected.'

PART 2

Mmm, I've been busy guys and gals ! I'm sure I still have Meirion's film 'After Savile, no more secrets' somewhere. But I haven't been able to find it YET !

However, I tried the second part of Exposure; Exposure, the update, and guess what ? our EIGHT YEAR OLD GIRL, gets a mention ! 

Scroll to about 18 mins 
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xvaawm_exposure-update-the-jimmy-savile-investigation-full-documentary-21-11-2012_news

MWT "one of her client's claims to have been just eight years old when Savile attacked HER" 

LD "We're talking abiut people who went in as, er patients and came out, abused victims' 

Remember folks, this is near the start of the 'trawl' for 'victims'. This thing was shown on telly on 21st November 2012 and tweeted about two weeks earlier by the man himself

 
Dux was adamant that TWO of her clients TOLD hospital staff at the time. When asked, the hospital stated that they had received NO such complaints. Ms Dux was not a happy woman when the official report was published in June 2014.

Ms Dux followed me on twitter for a short while. She blocked me when I questioned her about 'Celia' the 12 year old and the other girl, an 8 year old. Now, it's one thing to keep an anonymous blogger in the dark. But as a lay person, I cannot help but feel slightly confused as to why, a solicitor would think it necessary to keep the press in ignorance about key features of her client. Especially while she uses the media repeatedly to promote sympathy for her client’s cause. By law the press were prohibited from identifying the man anyway - unless he agreed to waive anonymity. But then, who am I to question the wisdom of experienced lawyers like Ms Dux? 

I'm just some one who wants to know that the media  correctly reported what Ms Dux said in November 2012. Is that too much to ask ?

 

 
 







3 comments:

  1. I had it ingrained that the 8 year old was a girl after Dux talked about her coming out of hospital as an abuse victim so I was really surprised to read about JS putting his hand under the blankets and touching her penis.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not on Twitter myself, but did notice Dux being questioned about the 8-year old a while back, even promising - from memory - to point her/him/it out in the SM-report "tomorrow". She never did, so far as I'm aware.
    Are the snippets from emails from around this time?

    I don't buy the "wishing to protect the claimant's anonymity" excuse; the anonymity proferred by hiding the claimant's sex is neglible & would inevitably disappear anyway, with the publishing of the SM report.

    It seems clear that some horror stories were used as 'bait' to draw people into complaining, or in some cases merely into 'helping the investigation' by recounting totally innocent tales. The reports are littered with kisses, cups of tea being offered - the horror! - and adults voluntarily having (or claiming to have had) sexual relations with Savile.
    It is often the report which states they are 'victims', not the 'victims' themselves; I'm sure that many were as bemused by the conclusions as we are, but if they thought they'd had contact with a child-rapist then they'd be more likely to pick up the 'phone.

    Whatever happened to 'Savile's youngest victim Mark II', the 2-year old? Again, with the relentless media onslaught such a tale would have sent a shiver up the spine of ANYONE who had had dealings with him. More 'phone calls to be made...

    (The fact that the 8-year old's mother "didn't believe him" is interesting in itself; I had my tonsils/adenoids removed probably around the same age, and if I'd told my mum that I'd
    been assaulted as described there is NO WAY that it wouldn't have been followed up by her. Who ARE these strange people?!?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Bandini the snips are from that time earlier in the year (March) I'd asked her in Sept 2014 and even before the reports were published (June 2014). She only told me to read the reports, she was more affable with another questioner for some reason.
      What happened to the 2 yr old ? probably the same as what happened to the 5 year old I guess !

      Delete