Sunday, 19 February 2017

Ted Heath

I no longer have to explain HOW, Sir Jimmy was stitched up. The mail on Sunday and their chums have done it for me, with just one headline

That was published online last night and by this morning 

 Goodness gracious -  a 'police chief' is 'convinced the allegations are "120% genuine", or, so 'the mail on Sunday can reveal' 

Problem being, they have revealed nothing of the sort. They have NO direct official quotes from Wiltshire Police - but, of course one has to read the darned thing in order to know that ! I did, but I guess the world's media don't have to bother. Why let your brain get in the way of a good story ? 

One doesn't even need to read the whole thing - just four paragraphs in 

Obviously, someone cannot wait until June 

You see, they have been after Heath for some time. Friends and admirer's of the dead ex-prime minister have put up a semi-spirited defence. But, all such defences now pale into insignificance, why ? Well, because he could drive, that's why !

 'Detectives' ? Note, they do not reveal who these sources are. One can easily confirm whether someone ever held a drivers license - the DVLA could have saved the hack a few minutes research in photo archives but facts are not what these guys are after is it ? 

It goes on and on. We've heard it all before, as I said, I no longer have to bother trying to explain, to someone sensible, how they stitched Jimmy up. 

'Astonishingly' for me, is the fact that everyone appears to accept that Chief Constable Veale has actually said this. No one can have any illusions that Wiltshire Police have an agenda 

 From the independent in December

But, like the responsible blogger I am I thought I'd check with Wiltshire Police myself to see what official statements have or haven't been made. Here's their latest 'update' 

 Of course, the mail on Sunday has form when it comes to crackpot 'leaked confidential' reports.Again, from December 2016

Back to today or October 2012 if you like 

 BUT, and here's a big question folks - will they get away with this. Will enough people buy this bullshit like they did with Savile ? Safety in numbers as they say ! Let's see how many more complainants come forward. In the meantime, allow those of us who give a shit, to speak up for Justice. Justice for ALL, not just ex-prime ministers, but for everyone. And I hate to say I told you so, but I did, didn't I ?


  1. Well done, Rabbit. Wilts Police appear to have clarified a little with this statement from Mike Veale.

    “In relation to the recent unhelpful speculation regarding the veracity of the allegations made, let me once again be clear, it is not the role of the police to judge the guilt or innocence of people in our Criminal Justice System."

    It's not entirely clear when this update was posted, which is not very helpful, but it seems to have appeared in the last day or so.

    The Mail article is a traversty, but I don't suppose we can know whether they are playing silly buggers, or being played for silly buggers. I doubt they really care either way.

    1. Thanks Misa - indeed the cops don't put dates on these 'updates' for some reason. The only way I knew which was the latest was because it was appended to a tweet by the man himself. I tried to 'update' this post but I had technical difficulties !!! LOL - I'll try again

    2. Yes, I was almost tempted to forgive the Mail's trainee reporter, on the grounds that he may have gone to the Wilts Police site to check the position and found the December notice. But, obviously, the grown-ups at the Mail really shouldn't allow trainees to publish stuff all on their own.

  2. No, I still can't edit this post so here's Veal's tweet dated 19th Feb 2017
    Mike VealeVerified account‏@wiltspoliceCC Feb 19

    Please see my statement following stories in the media today re the investigation into Sir Edward Heath

  3. The logic that lies behind much of this Angels on heads of pins, almost defies Reason

    "HMIC says it stands by its 2014 recommendation that the “presumption that the complainer should always be believed should be institutionalised”.

    But it added that this applied to recording crime and officers “must always proceed with an open mind” in investigations.

    so what they seem to be saying is that any crime NOT investigated is recorded as a guilty verdict.

    1. Maybe Henriques should do another 'report'. Maybe an addendum would do - 'complaints' should be recorded as just that, not 'crimes' ! Simples

  4. not only but also btw...