£170,000 worth of LIES !

I'm obliged to one of my regular commentators, Misa for posting this link to this article

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/feb/26/itv-jimmy-savile-sex-scandal-documentary
I'm also grateful to 'Anonymous' and 'Geoff' for pushing the question about how much Exposure cost etc
 http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/exposing-himself-to-more-ridicule.html
Some things are more important than money are they not guys and gals ? We learn a lot about the program making and, more importantly, the concerns ITV had about transmission. They were not alone !

And then, the LIE !

My source tells me otherwise. She doesn't recall being asked for any evidence to 'substantiate' her timeline at Duncroft. The makers obviously didn't ask Fiona either (read my recent blogs). It's all bullshit isn't it guys and gals ? 
As for being paid for their stories, my source tells me she was NOT offered any financial reward,she did get door to door taxi service laid on by Lesley Gardiner !
My source wanted to tell the truth about what she did and didn't see at Duncroft whilst she was there. And she WAS there wasn't she ? Her piece to camera never made it into the program. Her testimony was NOT what Thomas et al wanted to hear. Far better to give oxygen to this convicted fraudster instead 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_De%27ath
Anyway, back to more important players in this flight of fiction. Karin Ward's interview couldn't be broadcast for legal reasons. She may NOT have received payment for her tales. She didn't need to, she had a book awaiting publication after transmission. No wonder she was angry ! The BBC picked up on her and her pals possible motivations for taking part in what was to be, Meirion Jones' baby, Newsnight. Thanks to Liz Gibbons testimony to Nick Pollard 

http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/taste-trumps-haste-every-time-meirion.html
In the Guardian on 9th December 2012, Karin Ward is 'not angry with Jimmy Savile now'. She's described as being, a 54 year old mother of seven. She's also described as being in Exposure !

 http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/dec/09/karin-ward-newsnight-jimmy-savile

Ms Ward was certainly 'angry' a few months before when she focuses her attention on Freddie Starr 

Karin makes a big mistake in this piece, she changes her age from 14 to 15 the night she attended Cluck Click

I mean, she is described as ffffff 14 in other press articles

 

But, getting back to that 'motivation' Liz Gibbons became aware of 'subsequently'

Money guys and gals, money ! As for Fiona, my guess is she's a sad lady who seeks attention. Attention, MWT made sure she got when he got her into that brave woman awards thing.
As fir ITV, it got the story of a lifetime. A story that will come back to haunt them. Up there with World in Action, give me a break !

 

Exposing himself to more ridicule !

MWT who was an officer in Surrey Police for 12 years, according to him, has updated his updated Exposure program to the tune of about 5 minutes. He has an 'exclusive' you see, in that he has had a rather short telephone conversation with Margaret Jones the ex headmistress of Duncroft School, the subject of Operation Outreach by his old police force.

Thankfully, I was able to scroll along this nonsense and get to the point straight away. I've transcribed the conversation for you but you can hear it yourself here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwaT-mfqJpo&feature=youtu.be
He's having a go at his ex-Police force who conducted an investigation into Jimmy in 2007 as a result of claims made by two women who, allegedly resided at Duncroft in the late 1970's.
MWT : Officers decided not to interview any D staff because Barnado's had told them they had no record of any sexual abuse, nor has any former residents or staff witnessed, or aware of any incidents' Apologies, if I've misheard that last bit, he's not very clear is he ?
MWT : But should they at least have spoken to the school's headmistress, Margaret Jones ?

49.52 mins
Hello
Hello Margaret, it's Mark here.

She told me she'd have been very keen to help !

MWT : You weren't spoken to by Surrey Police ?
MJ : I was gob-smacked. I never have been spoken to.
MWT : You've never been spoken to at all ?
MJ : I should have been told he'd been interviewed 

MWT comments 'Jones who is now 90 claims she did not witness any abuse by Savile, nor did she have any suspicions . But (note these are Thomas' words) had Surrey Police have spoken to her they might have learnt crucial information about Savile's visits.

MWT : Did he take any of the girls out in his car ?
MJ : I'm not going to say anything
MWT : You're not going to say anything ?
MJ : I didn't see anything wrong  
MJ : Anyway, must go now thank you ! 

Now, you might come to the same conclusion as Mark. Maybe the cops should have spoken to Miss Jones in 2007/9. The 'crucial information' she would have given would no doubt be the same as the 'crucial information' she continues to give. Maybe then those two women would have been charged with wasting Police time and spreading malicious falsehoods. 

Thomas' stupidity knows no bounds. After all, he didn't speak to Margaret Jones before destroying Jimmy Savile's name. Had he done so, she could have confirmed that Fiona and her recently acquired, pals were lying not onle about their experiences at the school, but WHEN they were even there ! 
But then, Thomas wouldn't have had a television show then and I wouldn't be spending my life doing this !

Happy Holidays guys and gals !

BTW, I wonder WHEN this conversation took place ? Anyone catch that number plate ? 

 

1971

I wondered how Meirion Jones might react to the contents of outreach. My friends on twitter alerted me to the fact that he was NOT happy, not happy at all ! So much so that he has now dug a very big hole for himself by claiming that, contrary to all the evidence, he can place Jimmy at Duncroft in 1971 ! 

 Note, the use of the word 'we' ! Who knows what he means, who cares ? The point is, he now has to produce this 'pic' because if he doesn't he's a liar pure and simple.
Last month, Jones like his witless, shitless, witnesses, was not sure whether it was 1970 or 1971.

Meanwhile, his £500 mate was adding to his ever expanding CV as someone who can put the dead on trial, a 'full trial' at that . I'm NOT making this up.

Need I go on ? Now guys and gals, I thought I'd end the week on a light note. These two idiots will get the justice they deserve, regardless who their mates are !

 Any compo claims from 1970/1971 perchance ?
Jones didn't ask his aunt anything about Jimmy's visits to Duncroft. I'm sure she or the other 'suspect' he left at the mercy of the Savile Police will have something to say about this 'pic' in the unlikely event he decides to produce it ! 

 Freedom come freedom go, tells me yes and then she tells me no. Freedom never stays long, freedom moving along'
Love that song ! Happy May day folks !

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR699ItcMjU

 

Short-armed Outreach

What a coincidence when the outreach 'report' all 17 pages of it was published yesterday just 4 days after I wrote this 
 100 pupils questioned, yet NO charges arose out of any of those interviews. I find it strange that upon it's closure no report was ever published into the findings. All we and those 100 + gals got was a letter !
 http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/outreach-what-no-one-is-telling-us_26.html
Funny little coincidences like this have been happening to me since I took up the cause for Justice for Jimmy. So, let's go back yet again to the wording of that letter that the witnesses received last year at the conclusion of this so-called Police investigation.

Is there evidence against any member of staff supporting criminal liablity on the basis that they were complicit with Jimmy Savile in his offending against you at D School ?
Answer .. it could not be found that the suspects were aware of Savile's offending ..
If not is there any evidence that the suspects were aware ... and were complicit in it ?
It was concluded that the jury .. could not be sure that a complaint was made ....or that the jury could not be sure that the staff simply ignored .. genuine complaint. 
But how did they arrive at this conclusion ? They had had sight of written documents, logs etc (evidence we are not allowed to see), we can only conclude that, despite these witless cops decision to treat all these complainant's as 'victims', at the end of the day, they did NOT want to risk this case going to court.
I'm kind of sad that it didn't, in a way. No one wants to see old ladies in court BUT, at least this way, the press might be FORCED to report the story.
The 'victims' would also have been exposed as the liars they are. Somewhere along the line, someone would break because it's one thing to go on the telly and lie, and quite another to take the stand and do the same.
Furthermore, as I suspect that Ms Jones, the headmistress was one of the two 'suspects', the public would hear about Meirion Jones' dishonesty. Really, guys and gals, this was NEVER going to happen was it ? 
My source, there at the SAME TIME as Fran and Charlotte, tells me that she told the outreach cops that she had NOT heard of anyone reporting such things to the staff at the time. No doubt, she like Susan would have been called as witnesses for the defense. Imagine that if you will.
One court case involving the Duncroft 'victims' WILL be heard in the not too distant future, that of Frederick Starr V Karin Ward  in the High Court in London. The tables have been turned on Meirion's main witness and I wish Freddie the best of luck.
The living still have some protection under the law against liars and defamer's. Mr Starr was arrested FOUR times because of Ms Ward's tales. She has just released a new book, the royalties of which should cover about half an hour's court time ! Bring it on Freddie ! I hope you sue ALL those involved in your horrible experience !

 

What outreach doesn't tell us

On first reading Savell's latest report I wondered, where are the BBC related allegations. I overlooked this explanation

Aside from the fact that those alleged 'offences' now form part of a libel action to be heard in the High Court later later this year, I wondered, why aren't these included ? Has there been undue haste in publishing a report that omits such important evidence as that visit/s to Jimmy's TV show Clunk Click ?
Of course, should Karin Ward be found guilty of libeling Freddie Starr, her story, which is the one that kick started the whole sorry business, will be discredited.

 Karin wasn't in Exposure for the same reason the CC allegations are not considered by Savell. But, Fiona was, she  adapted Karin's stories for herself. She was also part of the 1977/9 claims as investigated in Ornament. 
How many others that I have investigated recently, can be found in this tract ? Well, here's  Francis Jennings for one !

It was FJ who told the press this 

 Fran also told the Mail about reporting alleged incidents to the staff !

 Now, her social worker and she seem to get on quite well. Why didn't she tell her about her alleged abuse ? After all, they were in regular contact ?

From it's inception, the finger of suspicion was pointed at the staff 

Unfortunately the report does not append details of the investigation that followed. Number's just numbers

 No appendices here guys and gals So we can't see who said what to whom when. where or how. 
We do however find out a bit more about how many D women reported to Yewtree 

 Then we're told why we can't be told about 12 women. They are the property of Yewtree

Now, I can only assume that amongst these 4/12 'victims' lie our CC girls ! If so, these 'victims' were accompanied by staff on these trips to the BBC so that evidence is crucial to this 'investigation' too !
One story they can't dismiss is Charlotte's. She says she was one of those abused 'offsite', in his campervan 
 http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/charlotte.html

Is she one of these 

Who are all these women ?

 The CPS did not feel they had sufficient evidence to pursue two members of the school staff, at the time.

We really need to see ALL the evidence don't we ? Not just this rehash of previous reports. Where is Susan's evidence ? Has her version of the events been ring-fenced by Yewtree ? There are useful snippets of information contained in this but they are few and far between. WHY did the CPS not pursue the two staff members accused by the same 'victims' whose tales of abuse appear to have been accepted, in part ? 

Onwards !

Outreach the report !

Oh my God, Surrey Police appear to have accepted all the Duuncroft women told them. Well, most of it that is ! Here's the report published today 
 http://www.surrey.police.uk/Portals/0/pdf/news/Operation-Outreach-29-4-2015-11186-link.pdf

The first thing anyone with a brain will notice is that the alleged incidents are not individually dated, not even by the year ! All we get is this by way of time is this 

Now then guys and gals, where's the Clunk Click/BBC claims ?  They are NOT included in this report ! It describes abuse 'off site' 

But how can this have happened when all visits to the school were so tightly controlled ?

Despite evidence to the contrary we are being asked to believe that Jimmy was given unfettered access to all areas of the school

This report is rubbish for a number of reasons. It was NOT an investigation at all, just another 'assessment' exercise like Yewtree. The people behind this have no interest in truth or justice. I feel only contempt for them

Strange, no one appears to have accepted the stories of the girls who told the press that they had told the staff about their experiences at the time. I'll be delving more into this later !

Yes, the same Jon Savell

Neither use or ornament !

Debbie Cogger, the new girl at Duncroft

No press or television show has bothered to get to the facts behind the Savile claims. Well, here's one : Cogger arrived at Duncoft Friday 1st November 1974 

This is an extract from a diary that exists. The Police etc would not have been interested in seeing this as part of Operation Outreach, so it managed NOT to get lost like Jimmy Savile's own diaries.
Is it half term ? The reference to 'no school' indicates this. That entry for 1st November reads : 'No school feels weird New girl (Debbie) 
Jimmy Savile appears on the following Friday : Jimmy came up brought records and posters' The author has met Jimmy several times already. She is not starstruck like some of the other gals and more importantly, she has never claimed to have been abused by Jimmy. For Cogger, Friday will be her 1st sight of Jimmy at the school. He brings records no doubt to play in the common room with the girls and cheers them up.
Now, what we have to remember guys and gals that this was not a holiday camp, this was a special school for emotionally damaged young girls. Imagine how excited they would have been to meet this pop star and get to visit London etc, under strict supervision that is !
Note the reference to the 'van' on the 9th : Went out in van, got some clothes from Top Store. Was Top store the precursor to Top Shop ?
The author recounts the mundane atmosphere that was only broken when a girl absconded (a regular thing by the looks of it) or events such as a 'sherry party' on the 6th December with the staff. No alcohol mind you but 'lots of drinks and lots of fags' 

Now, believe it or not, the author was actually interviewed by MWT for Exposure. Her contribution ended up on the editing floor. Why ? because she was not claiming that she was abused by Jimmy. She could NOT corroborate the others' claims either because all she had heard at the time, was gossip amongst the girls.  She KNEW the girls who went for a ride in his car. NONE of then recounted stories of blow jobs or anything that would be considered assault at the time. Wandering hands was the expression. Which made me think of this !

 Something as innocent as a tickle in 1976 became molestation in the days leading up to the Exposure broadcast on October 3rd 2012.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEZH2rmk11c
You can read her story here if you want
http://news.sky.com/story/1005362/savile-molested-teen-during-top-of-the-pops 
Is this the sort of thing that went on at the school ? That is exactly the picture that is being formed in my mind based on witness testimony. No assaults, no sexual acts performed in the car on a ride 'down the lane'. Just innocent banter and playful physical contact. 
Now, one thing that is very important for you the reader to know, is that my source was actually part of Fiona's FReunited group. Fiona conned her into believing she was another Fiona who actually WAS at D at the same time as her when she was not. She therefore believed that her and Keri etc might be telling the truth about Jimmy. A smart woman, she eventually realised she'd been lied to and that is why she came to me.
Next time I'll tell you more of what my source saw at Duncroft but think on, she did have a friend called Fiona. Fake Fiona used this information to ensnare a woman who was there at the same time as Karin Ward. Ward was resistant to the FR gals advances so others were needed to provide much needed information and contacts. 
My source has NO IDEA whether the claims made against Jimmy are true or not. She has her own mind just as she had back then. Her words remind me of another brave lady and friend of Jimmy who spoke her mind honestly and without fear of reproach

 http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/i-can-only-know-what-i-know.html
I'm so grateful to my source for choosing me to help her put some of the records straight. She remember's Jimmy as an extrovert, someone who would lift others up not bring them down.
I wished Jimmy Savile had shown up at my school ! To be continued !