Monday, 14 August 2017

They can't all be wrong (lying)

Goodness Gracious - thanks to one of our lot for bringing this wee gem to my attention ! Get watching folks, at least the first seven minutes 

For the last two years he's spent his life going through case by case, accusation by accusation ...resulted in Rolf being free two and a half years early.

My oh my, we knew Rolf had hired investigators, but to hear just how easy it was for them to get MOST of the claims chucked out, well now, this is interesting ! Mr M had worked on the DLT claims before he started on Rolf's, and had noticed 'similarities'. He decided that they warranted full investigation something the police hadn't bothered to do. In fact, they hadn't even covered first base !

'The first thing you'd do as a detective is check the credibility of your witnesses' The Met hadn't bothered with the most ' basic checks to see if they might be telling the truth'  and not just complainants, but the 'witnesses' whose stories they used to add weight to the claims. A 'number' of people whose stories sounded similar, they weren't witnesses as you and I would understand the term, but the ballast in the empty CPS cargo holds, keeping their Yewtree ship afloat - until it sank, by which time the rats who manufactured and carried the 'witch-hunt' virus were long gone. 

Thanks Mr M but some of us were onto this game a years before you were hired, your input is still useful though, at least you're there on you tube chatting away to a radio presenter who just happened to record one of, if not the LAST ever interview with Sir Jimmy Savile ! I've long since giving up hoping that just one of these former Savile admirer's would see past their next pay-packet and notice what's right there in front of their own faces. If only Mr Merritt would do some pro-bono work on the Savile claims. If only Alex Belfield would ask the same questions for him ! 

 Savile's 'last interview' in 2011, became his 'last confession' just a year later. Sir Jimmy - the gift that just kept giving - here's the full version, not just that bit where he says 

'I was lucky insofar as I got away with it' Jimmy really should have had his Miranda rights read to him before any of these interviews ! LOL (just an aside folks) 

Anyways, the idea was to go through the whole Merritt thing picking out all the bits about Rolf that could just as easily apply to Savile, but you already all that don't you ? However, I will pick up on one VERY important point and thank both Mr M and Mr B for the following Q and A.

B - Why someone would make make an accusation that isn't true - that can easily be proven to be not true, that's what we can't understand. Why would they ? 

M - They did not realise that this was going to go before a criminal court - they thought all they had to do was come forward 

Not quite sure what M means when he says that hundreds came forward but the police ? just picked a number, presumably he means to try in court whilst the others provided the corroboration by number.

'and that's the tactic they used .. they cannot all be wrong (read lying). All they had to do was come forward and they'd get a payment or whatever else they were looking for. It wasn't just  money involved' 

Apologies if I misquoted any of that, I've done my nearly best for you guys and I'm tired now. So you have a watch and see what you think of this. By way of Rabbit warning though I will warn all the Evil Ones reading this, that the inevitable occurs at about 6.56 mins in. Because, all is apparently a lot better now justice-wise - the courts have sharpened their act, the police no longer need convictions so much that they work hand in hand with no-win-nowt-for-you-but-thousands-for us lousy firms. Everything is OK now because they no longer need 

To Make up for what had they missed out with Savile 

Onwards ! 

Anyone know if Osborne Clark solicitors use Private Investigators ? They didn't want me .... for free ! Thank God more and more folk are opening their eyes, read between the lines of what M and B are saying. Surely they are not thickos are they ? 






  1. Great blog Rabbit - OC using PIs? I very much doubt it. don't think they particularly liked using us. Mucho Gracias ��

    1. Waynas diaz - as we used to say in class - sitting down ;-) x

  2. Rolf was released "early" simply because of the rules on parole - "on license" as they seem to call it now. Not sure Merritt meant to imply anything else but a little bit self-promoting perhaps.

    I assume his real work was on the second and third prosecutions by the CPS. The first trial seemed like an absolute Defence mess.

  3. I was also puzzled by the reference to hundreds coming forward. But it wouldn't be surprising, given this:

    That looks to me like an international fishing expedition, potentially telling anyone anywhere that Rolf Harris could be accused of Savile-type sexual offences, with "Savile" and "sexual offences" hashtagged, which would have increased circulation of his name in that context, retweeted closer to 900 times when I first saw it, and suggesting close contact to those directly involved, as it was broadcast in real time ("currently").

    The question is was it done on personal initiative or suggested and/or sanctioned by someone else?

    It went out first thing on the day the Leveson Report was published, which said:

    "I think that it should be made abundantly clear that save in exceptional and clearly identified circumstances (for example, where there may be an immediate risk to the public), the names or identifying details of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime should not be released to the press nor the public."
    (this passage appears twice in Volume 2 of the report: para 2.39 on page 791 and para 3.3 on page 984

    Was the tweet an attempt to spread the word in case the Leveson report prevented it?

    You may have found this already, but you could contact Mr Merritt directly: