Pages

Tuesday, 15 September 2015

Operation Newgreen Recalled

The reason for the title of this blog post is the fact that the latest Savile report, re-iterates WYP's earlier findings (Operation Newgreen). But, it goes quite a bit further forensically speaking. 

 On 7 November2011 the Home Secretary commissioned Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) to conduct a review to assess the police knowledge of and response to historical allegations made against Jimmy Savile and related individuals between between 1964 and 2012. In response West Yorkshire Police established their internal review, Operation Newgreen, on 21January 2013, to review all past contact between WYP and Savile

Operation Newgreen addressed the issue of a letter received by the
Metropolitan PoliceService(MPS) in 1998 in which an anonymous person
detailed their concerns about Savile’s sexual offending.The letter was
published in HMIC’s ‘Mistakes were made’ report in March2013.
Operation Newgreen sought to establish how the information contained in
the letter was shared with WYP and whether it was appropriately recorded and managed. Issues raised by these enquiries were subject of a separate referral to the IPCC and were not addressed in this investigation.

All those interviewed by Operation Newgreen stated they had never seen,
or were aware of the existence of,any letters making accusations against
Jimmy Savile. They had never been shown or been present when any
such material had been read out or referred to at any fmc gathering.

Given these individuals were acquaintances of Savile ,their accounts given to the police were not relied upon by the IPCC. Corroboration was sought to prove or disprove the existence of any letters which might have been shared with Inspector A. The IPCC traced and interviewed some members of the Friday Morning Club in order to obtain independent accounts which specifically focused on the subject of letters containing complaints or allegations against Jimmy Savile.
 
'Not relied upon' ? 'Corroboration' ? there's a few words we don't here too often these days. And surprise surprise, they did ! 
 
Now, bear with me folks, because I'm trying a new way of presenting extracts from reports today as I've been made aware that my usual way is hard to read on mobiles. And we must reach as large an audience as possible chaps !
Here's the full report so you can correct me if I misrepresent, or indeed miss, anything important. It's the 3rd pdf down 
 
https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/investigations/jimmy-savile-west-yorkshire-police-surrey-police-sussex-police-and-north-yorkshire

Now I cannot publish all the witness accounts here, my head's in a whirl as it is. But, it's clear that the chaps spoke to most, if not all of the folk who attended the Friday tea and biscuits, minus the biscuits, mornings at Savile's Leeds home. They also questioned folk who worked with Jimmy, friends and associates to find out if they'd heard of any such letters. And the responses were the same ish. The only letters most were aware of were the funny one's he'd received FUNNY, not accusatory or sinister.


On 3 March 2014 Mr W1 was interviewed. He met Jimmy Savile whilst on
a cruise in the early 1990s and had become friends with him. He regularly attended Savile’s flat on Friday mornings. He was asked if he had ever seen or heard anyletters being read aloud at the FMC. The only items of
correspondence he had any recollection of were those similar tothe ones
relating to the television programme‘Jim’llFix It ’that‘ made requests for presenter Jimmy Savile to arrange to make their dreams come true’.Savile occasionally sharedthesebecause of their amusing content. He had no
knowledge of any correspondence that made accusations about, or threats toward Jimmy Savile.

The above's son said

He also had never seen or heard of letters/correspondence being read
aloud apart from amusing ‘begging letters’
 
W3 knew Savile from their school days and had attended these get-together's since the 90's. He was unaware of any accusations or threats made towards Jimmy.
 
W4 a neighbour since the 70's 
  stated the only letters he ever saw or heard read aloud were from‘
nutters’who were making ‘outlandish requests’of Savile. Unaware of any menacing type letter he was however aware of a 'stalker' type letter 
stalker’ type letter to police in the late 1990’s or early 2000’s but this was outwiththe FMC gatherings
 Strangely enough, our Insp5 (Mr A) supplied information about this to Newgreen
 Inspector A did recall that Savile had received a letter that was more sinister than the usual begging letters or requests for support. It contained threats of violence but nothing of a criminal or sexual nature and when Savile showed this to the FMC, the advice he received was to preserve the letter for fingerprints and to involve the Police.
 
W7 mentioned Jimmy shared 'begging letters he found amusing' This witness also remarked on Jimmy's propensity to big himself up 
 He felt that Savile had made statements to ‘big himself up’ which,
since his death, had been misconstrued and taken out of context by the
popular press. 
 
Let's just stop there for a minute shall we ? Let's reflect on Savile's Police interview, the contents of which were twisted and presented by the media and others, including Liz Dux as proof of a 'disdain' for his 'victims' etc. The following being a perfect example
Yes Mr Goslett, one really should READ the full transcript, and see how you change the content to suit yourself. The 'midges' reference being a prime example. But that's for another day guys and gals. Plenty of time, the truth won't disappear, it's going no-where and neither am I !

 

 

 
 

 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

1 comment:

  1. This has become a bureaucratic, paper-pushing wet-dream. Police accuse each other of being corrupt and then get paid to write reports absolving each other of all corruption but whilst they are innocent, Jimmy's guilt remains unquestioned and only re-emphasised by the reportage.

    "He saw how a light flickered on and the two halves of a window opened out, somebody, made weak and thin by the height and the distance, leant suddenly far out from it and stretched his arms out even further. Who was that? A friend? A good person? Somebody who was taking part? Somebody who wanted to help? Was he alone? Was it everyone? Would anyone help? Were there objections that had been forgotten? There must have been some. The logic cannot be refuted, but someone who wants to live will not resist it. Where was the judge he'd never seen? Where was the high court he had never reached? He raised both hands and spread out all his fingers.

    But the hands of one of the gentleman were laid on K.'s throat, while the other pushed the knife deep into his heart and twisted it there, twice. As his eyesight failed, K. saw the two gentlemen cheek by cheek, close in front of his face, watching the result. "Like a dog!" he said, it was as if the shame of it should outlive him."

    ReplyDelete