Pages

Monday, 18 April 2022

The Most Influential Liar : Part One

 The British Press (Fleet Street) gossiped about Jimmy Savile's alleged 'liking for little girls', decades ago. We know this, not because Meirion Jones, or Andrew Neil says so. We know, because someone questioned Savile directly about it in 1990. That someone was Lynn Barber.  She'd heard the rumours, she asked him about them, she wrote about asking him, and then published an article about it in a Sunday supplement of a British Newspaper, and she didn't get sued. 

I don't like this film because it does exactly what it accuses its subject of. It's complicated, but I'll try explaining what I mean, as best as I can.  





Here's how it begins. Cast in order of appearance :

Jimmy Savile, Fix it footage, Savile on Parkinson, running for charity, the London Palladium, opening of Stoke Mandeville, Prince Charles, some establishment dinner, the Pope, Thatcher, Jersey 

FOR OVER 50 YEARS A NATION WATCHED HIM

Savile at the door of Big brother 2006

BUT NO ONE SAW THE TRUTH 

Commander Peter Spindler Scotland Yard :



"We received over 400 lines of information from the public. We. Are. Investigating. Major Crime here". My full stops reflect how he's speaking. You'd have to watch it to know what I mean. 

The viewer isn't told the date, but ITV published the following on October 25th 2012.


 

https://www.itv.com/news/2012-10-25/jimmy-savile-police-investigate-400-lines-of-inquiry-and-300-victims-of-abuse-of-dj-and-others

The film has hardly begun, and I know it's going to be awful for me personally, to watch. The global audience for whom this film was commissioned, isn't told that the British Police did NOT investigate Spindler's alleged '114 allegations'   The British Police misled the British audience in 2012. Out of their mouths came one thing, one message : that they were 'investigating', when really they were NOT. Not the claims about Savile anyway. They would investigate but not investigate, the word/expression they came up with was 'assess', they would 'assess' those lines of information and yet, to this day, they haven't adequately explained to any of us, how they did this. That : 'not investigating , yet deciding that 214 crimes had been committed didn't make sense to me in January 2013. It still doesn't, and I'm bloody sure I won't let some  film maker get away with pulling the wool over the eyes of newcomer's to the story. This is what the British public were told three weeks earlier.


 



The credits begin and above the music one hears :


"Steven King would struggle to come up with something like this".

Savile : "If you are clever, you can slip up. You never slip up if you are tricky". 

Clips of : Roger Ordish, Tina Davey (BBC secretary 1971 - 1975), Martin Edwards (BBC reporter who spent a week with Savile, running for charity and next : Jones.

"My dealings with Jimmy Savile started years ago. My aunt ran this very strange institution called Duncroft. I started going there when I was, sort of, probably 6 or 7.


From 1970 we would regularly visit about once a month. 



"It was very grand and yet there were bars on the upstairs windows where the girls were at night ... this was called an approved school .. a prison for 14 year old girls who'd done bad things. Some of them had done very bad things. You know at times there were child murderer's here and all sorts of things.

I found it unnerving. Some of these girls had been accused of very serious offences. When I was a little kid, I'd come here and they would be like - babysitting me while the adults went, you know, had a few drinks or a party or something".

Now, had Jones said something like this in a film that wasn't this one, someone - say, me, would be challenging what he'd just said. My questioning would have gone something like this : "Child murderer's ? What child murderer's ? Babysitting ? You mean your parents left you alone with girls who had committed very serious offences ? Have you reported them to the Police ?".

He continued :

"In the middle of all this Savile arrived when I'm probably about 16. At first it seemed he was just another of the celebrities there, but he kept turning up. Very often when we turned up we would see Savile. It was the first time I'd dealt with him face to face. 

All his phrases : now then, now then and all this stuff. It seemed to be a screen . So there he was in his shell suit and he was making a screen in front of him and it was like - you couldn't see through it. A lot of the girls were drugged up a lot of the time (how does/did he know this ?). Psychiatrists often over-prescribed just to keep them quiet (he's not speaking about what he witnessed at Duncroft here, is he ?) But never mind, this is his story after all !

I remember seeing him driving off with three girls from the school. In the back seat, they were very excited. They were waving at their friends up at the windows. I mean they're locked-up. Suddenly one of the most famous people in Britain is turning up, and that started to become a bit of an issue for my parents who were both teachers, who would say to my aunt 'why are you letting this guy hang around with 13 year-old girls, and she would always say 'well it's Jimmy - he's a friend of the school, raising money for charity, helping people, you know, Jim'll Fix It'."

Roger Ordish

A Jim'll Fix It Participant

Mark Lawson

Lynn Barber :

"I was the Independent On Sunday's celebrity interviewer. I mean I was called 'Demon Barber' which was a bit hard I thought. More of my interviews were nice but the bitch ones were the ones the readers loved. Before I worked for the IOS I worked for the Sunday Express. I did a series called : 'Things I wished I'd known at 18. Jimmy Savile - I'm not sure what he said he wished he'd known at 18, but I asked him about the fact he'd never had a girlfriend. He said that he was so busy he didn't have time for girlfriend or children or a proper home. And he was always travelling.

Some time after, I asked around the office and what was striking was how many people said to me : 'you know he likes little girls. It was a very widespread rumour, but it was a feature of Fleet Street that rumours could go on round and round and round, so you did hear the same thing from twenty people, which did make them sound plausible. But then you had to try and get some back-up : 'have you any evidence for this ?', and they never did. 

We leave Barber there for now. After a short clip of Savile on Russell Harty, we have Dominic Carman, son of George Carman Q.C. who gives us hearsay, and an insight into what he refers to as the 'invisible club' that is : the establishment. He's one of two 'establishment' contributors in this film. The message is clear : Savile only raised £10,000,000 for the rebuilding of a hospital wing, in order to impress and thereby win the protection that being in this 'club', affords. A sort of : 'immunity from prosecution' if you will. 

Says Carman : "People can enter the establishment from modest backgrounds. To be taken 'seriously' by the establishment, one has to make a very strong impression on them. A BIG impression (his emphasis)". 

The wards of The Spinal Injuries Unit at SM Hospital, were in a bad way. The ceilings were literally falling in on top of the patients. Sylvia Nichol offers the following :

"On the Second of January 1980, we had bad snow. One of the patient's is lying in his bed, can't move, and the ceiling above his head, which was all he'd got to look at for a few months, was beginning to BULGE (her emphasis)". 

 "One of the consultants phoned Jim and said can you help us, and that's when all hell broke loose". Footage of the start of the appeal to rebuild the National Spinal Injuries Centre, bagpipes included. 

Clip of Savile eating fish and chips with Russell Harty.

Christine Checkley a patient at SM : "Stoke Mandeville keeps me going. That's why I'm still here now. I was given a life expectancy of ten years, and look at the age of me now. We NEEDED that hospital". 

Parkinson with Alan Alda

Fix It with Margaret Thatcher

Lord Robin Butler :

"When I became Principal Privy Secretary to MT in 1982, her relationship with Jimmy Savile had really become quite established. Their relationship was pretty close, he was writing letters to her, she had invited him to the PM's country residence : Chequers. Stoke Mandeville is on the doorstep of Chequers, it was round the corner. MT partularly liked Jimmy Savile because he wasn't relying on what the state, could do". 

A doctor in Stoke Mandeville :

 "This place would not be in existence without Jimmy Savile. He has been the driving force. The focal point. The Engineer. The saint".

Sylvia N : "I 'd never seen anyone. Do that much good. He kept it up, never faltered. I just, sort of - I probably loved him".





Next up : Footage of Prince Charles and Diana opening the new hospital wing in 1983. Repeated visits by Diana - sometimes on her own, etc etc etc.


 Alison Bellamy former reporter for The Yorkshire Evening Post and Savile biographer. 

"I was the Jimmy Savile correspondent, covering all his news ... I DID like him ... I did know quite a lot about him, so I was asked by a book publisher to write his biography. It was published three months before the scandal erupted. After the scandal I was shown all of this stuff. Lots of letters, here. He kept everything, you know, meticulously". 

"So these letters, from the Royal Family. They include Prince Charles and Princess Diana".


In 1987 Prince Charles writes to Savile : "I do so want to get to parts of the country that others don't meet. What I really need is a list of suggestions from you. Perhaps I am wrong, but you are the bloke who always knows what's going on". 

Ms Bellamy expresses some surprise that some one like PC would seek advice from someone like Jimmy Savile. I'm more surprised that he uses the word 'bloke' myself.

Back to Lord Butler's recollections of Thatcher "pressing" for him (Savile) to get a Knighthood, "in the early eighties". 

Jimmy Savile : "It said in the magazine the other day that the only person she listened to was Jimmy Savile (he and reporter laugh about this) which in itself is an oddity. We'll go down and sit with the prime minister over the Christmas period  and I think that someone like me is invited into a family circle like that, because I'm not a political person and maybe she just wants a bit away from politics over Christmas. 

Here's Jimmy Savile at his best in my opinion. You'd need to watch it to know what I mean. 

Lord B reflects on Thatcher's countless attempts to get Savile a knighthood.



"My predecessor, chairman of the main honours committe, he said : 'Mr Savile is a strange and complex man. He deserves high praise But he has made no attempt to deny the accounts in the press about his private life accounts of his private life, WHY ?". I'm not sure if that 'why' is his predecessor's words or Lord B's, but next up is Meirion Jones 

"My contact with Duncroft School and in fact Jimmy Savile, really ended in about 1976 ... I got to university, became a journalist, sort of, invested my life in it. I mean, I always remembered, what I had seen, back in the 70's. Looking at these cuttings from the Sun (On screen is the paper dated Monday April 11th 1983)  It's billed as 'the dark side of Britain's top DJ, but actually, it's a dark side that he can live with. Er, it's not a dark side that's gonna lead him to being prosecuted for anything ... safe confessions for him to have been associated with, and perhaps he then gets rid of the reporters ... he's coughed, he's admitted. We don't need to look at him, anymore .. he was very good at distracting people".

But Meirion, this is what 1983 ? Weren't you a journalist by then ? Why didn't you speak up back then ? 

Next the audience is offered an example of how the camera apparently LIES. I'm still getting my head round the irony of Selena Scott's contribution and the message her latter day testimony regarding her experience of interviewing Savile back in the 80's, repeatedly. 


'He was odd but you said - he made people laugh and it's a gift to make people laugh, and television studios are desperate for light entertainment. I was as much an act in this as he was, and that's embarrassing'





'I know what I was thinking when I was looking at him there. It's a totally different experience when you are sitting at home and looking at this set. It's like I'm a liar, like (inaudible) sitting there telling fibs, when the truth is very different (inaudible) A camera never lies does it ? (shakes her head) A camera never lies.

So what I'm looking at here is something totally different to what I actually felt at the time. SO THE CAMERA DOES LIE. You know - if the camera never lies the the camera would have picked up on him years ago. Yeah, Yes IT'S THE BIGGEST LIAR - THE MOST INFLUENTIAL LIAR'.

It's not the camera that's lying and it's probably not Selena either. Bless her, she's just doing her job. And Savile is just doing his and the 1980's audience loved it. Meanwhile, behind everyone's backs, the Fleet Streeter's were gossiping that Savile 'liked little girls' but no one had any evidence, so no one could print that gossip, back then. That's not how they did things back then. 


To be continued !


















Friday, 11 February 2022

Operation Ornament Revisited Again.


January 2013 was the month of the Savile Reports. We had Giving Victims A Voice wherein the Met Police and NSPCC decided that Jimmy Savile had committed 214 crimes. We had Det Supt Jon Savell's Report Into Operation Ornament and we had Alison Levitt Q.C's In The Matter  Of  The Late Jimmy Savile. 
All three were published on the same day : 11th January 2013. Alongside these the CPS released this statement.








https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130703160030/http:/www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/dpp_statement_about_savile_cases/

In October 2012 Keir Starmer made a number of announcements per his office's handling of Operation Ornament, a two year Police investigation of claims made against Sir Jimmy Savile (2007-2009). One being that he'd already had the Chief Prosecutor for the South-East (his 'Chief  Legal Advisor'), reviewing the CPS decision making, and concluding that it was correct,, but he was going to ask his 'Principal Legal Advisor' Alison Levitt also look at the case, just in case he'd missed something or 'out of an abundance of caution' as he described it.










Anyone knowing nothing about how criminal prosecutions happen might forgiven for thinking that the fact there'd been an almost three-year investigation of the most famous man in the country, had come as a shock, to the Director of Public Prosecutions in 2012, that this had been a revelation to him and the Chief Prosecutor. 

Of course they knew. They may not have had any direct involvement - none that anyone will ever find an evidence of, that is. But they would have been aware of the case. 

But never mind who knew what. What I'd like to know is exactly WHAT was it that Salazar and Levitt had go on in 2012 ? The Files they reviewed apparently didn't exist. Yes really ! Levitt actually had the front to include this startling admission in her report.









Read that last sentence again. She hadn't seen what the reviewing officer had seen, and he couldn't remember what he'd seen, yet she had seen 'more' than he had. 



Yes Alison. Anything you say Alison.

To be continued !

PART TWO 

13th February 2022. 

" A Prosecution Might Have been Possible".

I decided to update this post rather than starting another, because I wanted all the evidence to be in one place and easily accessible. 

In January 2013 Keir Starmer said that he agreed with Alison Levitt whose extraordinary findings included the following.


In short : the police in 2007-9 had not the benefit of her 2012 'objectivity'. There was -  according to her , nothing to suggest (to the investigating officers) that the complainants had colluded in their accounts, nor that they were in any way, inherently less reliable than complainants in other cases. 

Notice their crafty use of words ? They're both careful not to explicitly accuse the officers of 'consciously' misleading the women. 


 

2022 me : 

A work in progress - To be continued


Two serving police officers were referred to the IPCC as a result of the above findings. Guardian 7th November 2013.


 






Their supervisors suffered a similar fate. 


The IPCC published its findings in May 2015. 









In short, the complainant should have been encouraged to pursue her complaint. 


Thankfully, all four got to keep their jobs. 


Time to read Miss A's story yet again. This woman claims that Savile had assaulted her, she had emigrated soon after and on returning to England in 2007 decided to write to the sun about it. In November a reporter showed up and tried to get her to file a police report. She initially refused, but succumbed on the next visit in March 2008 and phoned Sussex Police the same day (3rd March 2008). 



"Had he asked to see them" ? Did you ask him about that Ms Levitt ? Whatever ! Moving on.







"Any more hassle". Hassle as in the possibility that her ex-husband might not corroborate her story ? He was. after all, in the house when she went out in a chaffeur-driven car to meet Jimmy Savile, and he was there when she came back. She even told him what has happened, why wouldn't the police want to speak to him as part of their inquiries ? 







And for this, two police officers were subjected to a lengthy disciplinary process. The fact that they told a complainant what a police investigation involved. Not a prosecution, but a police investigation. The fact that they didn't tell her something they themselves weren't aware of at the time (the other 3, at least two of whom were adamant they would NOT go to court). 

No disciplinary for the Senior Prosecutor, as far as I'm aware.

To be continued !

In January 2013 Levitt and Starmer told the rest of us, that they believed that the 2007/9 Savile complainants might have proceeded with their cases, had the police taken a different approach. The : no corroboration necessary approach to criminal prosecutions. The : Don't worry, you won't be named whatever the outcome. 






'she might' !

Reader, have you ever heard anything so ridiculos as what Levitt a Q.C mind you, told Miss A during their meeting ? There were three people in that room and by far the most clued-up was Miss A. She had to know that in the real world, one had to at least offer some credible evidence in a 2007/9 courtroom. Maybe not so much now, (thanks to the Levitt's and Starmer's etc) but certainly back then. The Police officers were right. Any barrister would make 'mincemeat' of her and anyone else stupid enough to support such nonsense ! 

It's Levitt and Starmer who should face some sort of proceedings. 

NEXT : Surrey ! But in the meantime, you might want to read this. Thank you Moor. Then and now ! 


We continue because we must.