I can't stand liars me, and no, I'm not referring to Tony Blackburn guys and gals, because I don't know if he's lying or not. I do, however know that Dan Davies, was when he wrote these words
He's not saying this bright star is Jimmy, but, who else would the reader think it was especially when
Of course 'we now know'* that the TOTP presenter named in CM's diary, allegedly that is because no one except Vera McAlpine or the metropolitan police, appear to have ever seen it, was Tony Blackburn NOT Jimmy Savile. My first question to Lord Hall the boss at the BBC would be, WHY are we only being told this now ? I would not expect an answer, moreover I do not expect him to issue the apology TB has demanded, why ? because TB has been thrown to the wolves, and it's NOT Jimmy Savile's fault, it's Tony Hall's.
It's his fault because he should have tackled the question of CM as soon as it raised it's ugly head.
While Exagg news and other corrupt press folk were waiting for the go ahead to publish their dame 'leak', I had already established that it was NOT Savile's name in the diary. I'd concluded that the accused WAS more than likely, Tony Blackburn. It's therefore reasonable to conclude that whoever leaked that draft knew 'A7' was Blackburn. Worse still, the document revealed something a lot much more sinister than an entry in a 15 year old gal's diary.
It reveals HOW the BBC in 1971 dealt with a complaint from a mother concerned about her daughter after reading her diary. A fact made all the more pertinent when the girl killed herself a few weeks later.
Mr Blackburn was, we are told, sacked NOT because of anything he may or may not have done 45 years ago. He was sacked, according to Lord Hall because of the evidence he gave to the Smith inquiry, specifically this :
From this and chapter 9 in Smith's report, we can fill in at least one blank in Brian Neil's 1972 'interim report'
Let's see how the dame details events back then. 'The girl', along with other TOTP 'dollies' were interviewed by the News of the World a month before she died
The press had been sniffing around the BBC for sometime, as far back as 1969, following tip offs about corruption and sex parties involving pop stars and radio 1 DJ's. Nothing to do with TOTP but a 'wake-up call' according to our dame, that some one (gals) or thing (the BBC), might be in moral danger,
Then came the next 'wake-up call' says dame, the phone call from Mrs M.
The original 'note' of this call doesn't exist. But it was taken seriously as we can see from a memo sent from a Tony Peston to the BBC solicitor and Billy Cotton head of light entertainment.
Then things get tricky for Tony and/or his agent
Stay with me guys and gals, we're still in 1971 now, and even back then a question mark loomed over Tony and/or his representative had actually said or remembered about something as recent as a few weeks. He'd have to, not, remember this all over again 42 years later in 2013.
Now, guys and gals, here's where TB's scapegoating argument gains credence ! Bear in mind that Mrs B only spoke to the papers and the Police AFTER her daughter's death. Her recollection of how her complaint was dealt with a month earlier was somewhat different to Rex Moorfoot who recorded
Dame wasn't able to ask VB if this was true, so she did the next best thing, she consulted the NOTW dated 4th April 1971
The dame cannot check exactly what Mrs B said to Moorfoot, while his secretary listened in
The dame condemns the BBC's reaction to VB's telephone call despite not knowing what the poor woman actually said. Tony Blackburn rightly feels aggrieved because no one including the Police and coroner's office saw CM's diary entries as anything more than the fantasies of a young lass.
In all the article's I've been able to access online, one that stands out in terms of going that extra half inch, is CM's local newspaper, the Watford Observer. Amazingly this was published on October 5th 2012 ! The conclusions were wrong but the content is useful
Goodness gracious these guys predecessors were at Claire's inquest in April 1971. The diary was not produced, so where was it ? Does it exist ? because, if I were Tony Blackburn, I'd be very interested to see it
Nice try, wrong bloke
http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/9974776.Dead_Watford_teen_linked_to_Jimmy_Savile_scandal/
Jimmy's 'sumptuously furnished' London pad !
Additional information - see the exchange between me and Bandini in the comments below. The BBC version of what VB said in her chat with Rex M, is that, 'her daughter, after making the accusation, withdrew it'. This doesn't make sense to me, does it make sense to you ? Moorfoot was very careful to cover his back during this telephone conversation, so much so that he had his secretary listen in and sign a written record of Mrs M's satisfaction that 'A7' had been given a 'warning'. One really has to read ALL of this section of the dame's report in order to get the full picture starting from page 22 of ch9
http://downloads.bbci.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/dame_janet_smith_review/savile/chapter_9.pdf
You see it was the press that linked Claire's death to TOTP. As far as I can see, aside from payola there was little to indicate that audience members were in any 'moral danger' from anyone in the BBC until VB told them about her complaint. Indeed, the 'dolly' feature followed an innocent attempt to put more 'sparkle' into the pops by including these dolly dancers !
Was VB happy with that second phone call ? Neither I nor the dame knows, she certainly wasn't happy in the press version of events, but of course, let's not forget her daughter has just died she may even be blaming herself
Poor Vera, poor Claire ! Shame on those who may have covered their own backs at the expense of the innocents, Jimmy Savile included ! That's all for now guys and gals
The dame's ditty has helped expose another lie guys and gals. In a story so unlikely to be believed by anyone with a brain and a stem attached to it, comes the claim that Jimmy Savile dressed as a womble raped children in his dressing room after an episode of TOTP in 1973. Yes, really, here's how the Times reports this
Now, see if you guys can spot what's wrong with this next bit !
Mmm, now a lot of men folk have queried the logistics of being able to perform such feats as the above, but me being me, noticed something else ! Thanks to an earlier post of mine that is, I mean there couldn't have been that many times Jimmy wore a womble costume on the show in 1973 could there ?
Yes, it's December 20th 1973 and it's a Xmas edition of TOTP ! Xmas ? the 'victims' don't mention this. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if you'd been raped by some geezer in a womble outfit, you'd absolutely remember if you were 9,10,11 and it was Xmas. You would definitely include this detail as opposed to your bloody 11+ exams !
Of course, there could well have been other times Savile wore this costume, I'll leave that to my TOTP's experts to figure out. In the meantime, lets watch that great episode again, the bit we can watch that is ! By the way, the link on my original blog does not work tsk
http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/merry-xmas-everybody.html
But this does
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLWrJYLmgGE
Remember, the gals ran away from Jimmy at the end. They were more interested in Slade than him. As was I as I recall !!
December 20th 2013 was a good night as I recall pals !
I've now scoured all 793 pages of dame Janet Smith's BBC report. One, I wanted to find the one voice that no one in the msm seems to want to know. Two, I wanted to see if/how her evidence might differ from that foisted upon us for the last three years !
Straight down to business then with 'The London Team', in plain speak, the girls who hung round Jimmy Savile for years, yet still describe themselves as 'victims'. First up 'Val' and 'Angie'
'Angie's' evidence changed, the dame finds her credible anyway. She cannot be bothered to pursue the inconsistency
Go to page 275 http://downloads.bbci.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/dame_janet_smith_review/savile/jimmy_savile_investigation.pdf
It seems the gals were 'happy' with Savile back in the day. They even had a 'reunion' with him years later, ALL OF THEM. Oh, and 'Angie' went with him for TEN YEARS
P282
Next up - this load of bilge, yes, this woman believes this. Take a deep breath !
Her conclusion
I'm actually laughing as I'm typing this !
By p318 we get to the Duncroft gals, kinds outside her remit but, they went to his show at the BBC so ... She starts with C30 whom I shall refer to as Fiona for reasons that will become obvious
Now, what's really interesting about C30 is the fact that the dame DOESN'T BELIEVE HER !
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ! The old gal must have read my blogs ! I did send her an email. Moving along, it seems the D gals were actually fighting over JS, what a revelation we have here
She obviously didn't read the blogs exposing Karin Ward's lie about her age. Even the press had to reveal that one when the Starr case came up
Best of all, is the evidence provided by a staff member ! Well, hurrah for Ms Figgins ! First Ward's version of a trip to Clunk Click
Not a dressing room then ?
Then Ms Figgins's account
The dame finds Figgins an 'impressive witness' but, as she didn't hear anything bad about Savile, she's out !
Finally, for now that is, is that wee 'voice', a woman who was closer to Jimmy than anyone at Duncroft, and has only fond memories ! Indeed, she is the reason Jimmy came to the home in the first place ! Susan gets a mention, blink as you skim and you will miss it ! I had to look very intensely to find her ! I dedicate this blog to a fine lady whom I've been privileged to meet myself. Thank you
The dame's report cost about £10,000,000 we are told. I could have done it for a lot less !
Apparently, Jimmy Savile wore tracksuits because they provided him quick access to his genitals ! Goodness gracious, I remember hearing this tosh at the beginning of this saga, but with the leaking of parts of the dame's report, it appears we may be in for more 'forensic' examination of this all important aspect of Savile's alleged 'abuse'. I kid you not ! The times 22nd Jan 2016
The government's response to this leaky 'draft' is kind of previous, given that the contents have not been released yet. Oh, and was anyone aware that this thing has allegedly cost us £10,000,000 !
Dux reacted to the news that the BBC bosses had been 'exonerated' by the dame
Summat tells me, Ms dux is not going to like the finished product scheduled for release this week ! She'd had such high hopes for the dame two years ago !
Two years old, yet some 'source' was feeding the media information even then. Could they have had access to this 'draft' as far back as this ? After all, it had been due for release then, hence the article, and while Dux was disappointed in the delay, she accepted it because
Oh yes, Ms Dux had only 74 'victims' back then, her 'scheme' had not yet been sanctioned in the high court back then.
And, she was counting her money before she had any idea of what it would be. You have to hand it to dux she has some brass neck on her when she says
The report was delayed a second time at the start of last year, but this time, it was, we are told, at the request of the met
The Savile compo scheme was in place, no new clients for Dux after June 2014 (if my memory serves me right), yet her claimants now numbered 168
Then the cops revealed that Yewtree was still on the go (was it ?) Surely, they had moved on to more 'important' people ?
My only interest in the 'VIP' claims/assessments/investigations, lies in any aspect that might affect a reasonable person. One aspect being the now, sort of, admission by Police that their findings that 'Nick's' claims about Leon Brittan, were 'credible and true' were wrong ish !
The VIP's fought back you see, the one's who could, but what about the dead ? Let's go back to 2012 shall we ? It's days before Exposure airs and things are looking pretty grim for Jimmy because, the claims previously restricted to relatively minor alleged incidents, now use the word RAPE ! Two of the women found by MWT who appear on camera, allege that they had sex with Savile against their will. 'Val' and 'Angie'
I remember her saying this on the telly
'Credible' ladies and gentlemen ? I think not, you see Jimmy appears to have changed his MO since the 2007/8 police investigation, because now he's being accused of something he was NEVER ACCUSED OF BEFORE ! Time to refresh your memories about Alison Levitt QC's findings into that investigation. You see, the complainants or 'victims' as Ms QC had decided to call them, made no mention of serious sexual assault. In fact, the alleged incidents were anything but, moreover they involved just TWO women Ms A and Ms C, the latter of whom never even made or wanted to pursue a complaint. And, what were Ms QC's conclusions as to the TWO alleged incidents ? What should the cops have done, that they didn't do but that's OK, it wasn't their fault, they should have BELIEVED Ms A and told her and all the others who came forward via the internet, that other 'victims' existed.
Really ? Prosecution for what ? Read Ms A and Ms B's accounts, the former involving a B&B, a chaffuer and a crucifix, the latter a blanket, a television room in 1978 or 1979 (Jimmy only frequented the place in 1974) and most famously, involved the words 'beef biyani' !
'Credible' Ms QC ? One of the only two people willing to speak to the her, and not even an alleged 'victim'
She changed her story ? What, you mean like 'Nick' ? Ms QC covers 'B' here by, well blaming the copsand their crap note-taking !
Goodness Gracious, and from this, hundreds of 'crimes' have been attributed to Jimmy Savile. Ms QC made her agenda all very loud and clear back in January 2013. It was time to 'believe' everything a 'complainant' says. Why, Goddam, let's go all the way, let's call all these folk 'victims' shall we, because that is our agenda now !
Sorry Ms QC, but I don't believe Ms A,B,C and G and I suspect you don't/didn't either ! Ms G ? why that would be this liar
Next time, gals who became gals, teenager's who became children. Don't expect too much sense in the dame's report either. Their agenda has not changed yet, not for ordinary folk that is !
