In whose bedroom was Ford allegedly attacked ?

I've decided that the least stressful way to approach this case is to blog as certain questions come to me. The last few days I've been comparing and contrasting what CBF said at the Senate Judiciary Committee to what she said elsewhere, specifically in her original letter to Senator Feinstein.

The 'full unredacted letter' was published in various publications. I cannot access the Washing Post because it's pay-walled,  but thankfully, Newsweek magazine isn't ! 

https://www.newsweek.com/christine-blasey-fords-unredacted-letter-accusing-brett-kavanaugh-sexual-1135066 

The latest news on the story is that the FBI will, rightfully in my opinion, be investigating the claims, and that's no small juice. As NPR very helpfully - and more importantly - impartially explain, lying to a Senate Committee is one thing, lying to the Feds is quite another ! 

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/28/652558787/what-difference-would-it-make-if-the-fbi-were-to-investigate-kavanaugh

OK, so let's go to the contents of the letter as published in Newsweek. The way CBF describes the incident in her letter is different to what she said later, and contrary to what some may claim - these differences are, as far as I'm concerned quite important !  I've already covered the number of party-goers angle, so I'll not repeat that right now !

1) WHO allegedly pushed her into that bedroom ? 
July 30th Version 

The Polygraph Statement Version 7th August 2018

  

How does she go from K pushing her to she's not sure if it was him or his friend ? Now, it is of course, perfectly reasonable to not know who pushed you from behind, indeed - how would she know it was BK ? So why say this in her letter to Feinstein ?

Now - read what she says to the JSC on 27th September 

Why has she inserted the "I drank one beer" into this account ? What's happened to make her remember the fact she'd only drank one beer ? Would you remember this ? I don't think I would, but it sounds like a good way of saying, I wasn't drunk, like they were. I could speculate more, but I'll not. 

But, here's the corker for me. Here's something that jumped right at me - the bit about the music ! No, not the loud music that was playing downstairs - the music already playing in the room she's been pushed into ! 

2) Whose room did this alleged attack take place in ? This is someone's bedroom right ? That person must surely have been in the house at the same time ? CBF has to know exactly whose house this was. She remembers the names of just about everyone who was there, so she must know not only WHOSE house it was, but where this bloody house was !

I don't know about you but I'm suspicious of anyone whose story keeps changing, and the more I listen to and read about CBF the less credible I find her story. Not necessarily her by the way - her story ! There's a difference between the two ! 

To be continued

 
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/politics/a23489662/christine-blasey-ford-opening-statement-transcript-brett-kavanaugh-hearing/


 

Christine Blasey Ford's Doors

Never mind Mark Judge someone tell Brett Kavanaugh's lawyers to issue legal proceedings against Christine B Ford, if for no other reason than I want to know if every Goddam house she's ever lived in needed renovation in the form of extra doors. And I'm deadly serious folks, listen up !

A few days ago someone had the presence of mind to publish CBF's Polygraph test along with a printed statement regarding an incident in which she claims Federal Judge Brett Kavanaugh assaulted her. 

https://www.scribd.com/document/389529497/Read-Ford-polygraph-report#from_embed 

I immediately noticed some discrepancies between the handwritten notes and the typed version of events. They're not much in themselves but then one starts burrowing and well, all sorts of holes start appearing - pun intended - everywhere ! 

In her original letter to Sen Feinstein Ford dated July 30th 2008 she claimed there were just five people including her at the gathering at which the alleged attack took place 

 https://www.vox.com/2018/9/16/17867706/christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-allegations

Her handwritten note dated 7th August 2018 says 4 boys and a couple of girls, I expect not including her !

 So what you might say, and I might agree if it weren't for where these documents led me next, to the Daily Mail for God's sake ! Yes REALLY ! 

You see, I've read her statements, I've heard her testimony (some of it) but what I haven't seen so far is any physical proof that what she's saying is accurate ! Notice I didn't use the word 'true' ? I'm getting a tad wiser in my old age (since yesterday). CBF may well have told her therapist and her husband that Brett Kavanaugh was her assailant, but unless I see those notes, it's just her word, and that's not enough for me ! 

Ford's detractors say she only brought BK into her assault story, when she discovered he'd been nominated for the Supreme Court a few months ago, but Ford is adamant that she told her husband during a couple's counselling session in 2012. It had to be 2012 because that's when she had to explain why she wanted an extra/new/second door in her home !

 could not be understood ? Does this mean her husband was unaware of her issues regarding confinement, in 2012 ? The next bit (from yesterday) is even more bizarre !

She recalled that someday the boy who assaulted her 'could someday be on the US Supreme Court' ? Really - she was saying this in 2012 ? Sorry folks, but I don't believe this and I hope you don't either ! But hold on, for a moment, I'm not alone in my door fetish (I've been questioning her references to the need for extra doors for days), there is intelligent life in the media ! Please someone - give a round of applause to Dr Ford's local missive - the PA Post

 

Anyone else see Dr Ford's problem here ?  This extra door was fitted in 2008 by which time her husband should have got used to her special needs in the door department, so it's highly unlikely they'd be arguing about it four years later. 

Unless, they were short of cash that is ! But that's another story, I'm knackered . 

To be continued ! Oh but before I go, someone explain to me why Ford's lawyers are withholding her therapy notes ? Maybe the FBI will tell us ! 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6211925/Christine-Ford-passed-Kavanaugh-polygraph-test-lawyers-REFUSE-hand-therapy-notes.html

And, what does she mean by this ? She's received 'medical treatment' 

Is she considering a civil claim ?

Oh, and you might want to look up these guys too ! 

 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/ford-caught-in-major-lie-city-remodeling-permits-show-project-she-linked-to-kavanaugh-was-in-2008-not-2012/
 



 

Blackmailing the Police

We now know that Dan Johnson's accounts of the discussions he' d had with SYP from the 8th July 2016 cannot be relied on. And I for one was getting a tad vexed that I no one was able to ascertain exactly HOW he came by whatever information he had about Cliff. And then I happened across the following, and it was App 12 of the Pollard Report all over again - well almost

Could this Judge be any more helpful to the cause of Justice ? Only if he'd wanted the actual name of Johnson's source maybe, but I guess we can forgive him for not pushing that too much, after all, the hack was entitled to 'protect' his 'source'. 

https://www.simkins.com/sir-cliff-richard-obe-v-1-bbc-2-south-yorkshire-police-witness-statements/


So now we can establish the details of the Police operation such as it was, in July 2014. Not much was happening you see, there had only been ONE allegation made against Sir Cliff, via MWT sometime in 2013, to the Met Police. Supt Fenwick, helpfully explains WHY the Savile cops passed this to SYP.

Note the words who was aware of the full facts of the investigation. They're important for anyone trying to work out exactly who knew what and when ! Stay with me folks.

He knew it had been passed from Operation Yewtree to South Yorkshire Police Force. .... He asked me why SYP was investigating and not Operation Yewtree. 

Let's stop there for a moment shall we ? This ONE accuser had, appeared in 'late 2013' via MWT, whose Savile expose had aired in October 2012. Now, we don't know exactly what happened between 'late 2013' and March 2014, but we can almost certainly assume that the Police were NOT taking the accusation very seriously. 

Now, the next bit is a bit more of an eye-opener, for more than reasons than the fact that Fenwick mentions MWT

Supt Fenwick is referring to Johnson's note of that meeting. WHY is MWT's name on it ? Remember, MWT supplied this one complainant to the Police, presumably in secrecy. How come he's being discussed or not discussed, at this meeting in July 2016 ? 

Strewth guys and gals, that thought has, just this minute, come to me. Indeed, there can be only ONE of two explanations for his name being on that note. Either MWT is his original 'source' or his original 'source' knew MWT's involvement. 

I like this Supt Fenwick, he seems like a good man to me, the more I read about him. I kinda like DCI Orchard from Yewtree too, for this 

cc

Suddenly, Johnson is detaching himself from all references to Yewtree. Just one day after the Cliff raid. 

Carrie Goodwin's opening remarks in her statement are really useful too. Note that this refers to that first phone call between her and Johnson. She's clearly left with the impression that Johnson knows even more about the Cliff story than she does. She's being reeled in, wasn't she ?

 Remember, it was the FACT that the Police believed that the 'source' of his information was Yewtree, that led them to take him seriously. Either they give him what he wants, or he publishes what he knows. And they fell for it. 

All Johnson seems to have had, at this time was that this bloke had claimed to have been assaulted at some Billy Graham rally in the 80's. That appears to be all the Police had too, but that's another story for later. At this point, no specific year has been mentioned, just that it happened in the 80's and that the alleged victim was underage. 

There had only been ONE allegation, just one, and the Police were not about to go trawling for others. The fact that there had only been one at that point in July 2014 is in itself staggering, given what was being said, or hinted at online and in print for over a year at least.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/feb/24/mark-williams-thomas-jimmy-savile

Mark Williams Thomas continued to act as some kind of advisor to Cliff's one accuser. By May 2016 someone was getting pissed off at the length of time the investigation was taking.

Maybe the fact that a few more accuser's had managed to appear might shake them up hey !

Bastards 

Despite someone's best efforts, the claims came to nothing. Sir Cliff was NOT arrested and he chose to take action against the BBC and South Yorkshire Police for their part in his sorrows. He was especially saddened by the way the BBC had treated him, a bit like they'd treated Sir Jimmy Savile really wasn't it ? Of course, no one would have bothered with Sir Cliff, had someone not have bothered to destroy Savile. *To their credit, the BBC did hold out against Meirion Jones's efforts, until someone managed to persuade the Police via ITV that they, like Johnson knew something, they actually didn't. I think you know where I'm going with this. * I hope you do anyway. See Addendum below.

It's not all doom and gloom though folks. I did have to smile when I read this part of Cliff's Witness statement. 

Time consuming ? Tell me about it Cliff. But, if you ever need a hand, let me know. Some things are NOT about the money, are they ? The online trolls continue to troll, they really cannot help it can they, it's their nature. They just cannot get their heads around the fact that Sir Cliff took the action he did, once he was cleared, not for himself but for others who find themselves in the same position as he did, but without the means to defend themselves.

Well done Cliff. I wish you well ! 

Addendum 28/7/18 *

I need to clarify what I meant when I wrote this earlier today. When the BBC rejected Meirion Jones project, MWT took it to ITV. Neither the Police, the BBC or indeed ANY other media outlet, save an almost unknown magazine (The Oldie) showed any interest whatsoever in 'exposing Jimmy Savile' until ITV got involved. And, what exactly did ITV in October 2012 have, that the Police in 2007/9 didn't ? Well, not a lot as it happens. Here's a bit of reading which I hope will help you (and me) understand the point I am trying to make. 

http://rabbitaway.blogspot.com/2015/04/one-victim-and-rochelle.html

http://rabbitaway.blogspot.com/2016/09/he-couldnt-sue-so-what-stopped-them.html

 





 

He's not dead, and I hope he sues ALL OF YOU

How did Sir Cliff Richard come to be investigated by the Police in the first place ? Dan Johnson hasn't named the so-called original source, and no-one appears to have the power to make him, so we'll have to make do with what's out there folks. Problem is, there's so much out there ! 'Rumours' about Cliff had been circulating for years, I read them myself on the crazy one's site, and elsewhere. But, I never published them. I'm a responsible person you see.

Let's go back to the beginning of Yewtree. After all, this investigation has been kind of established (at least to the satisfaction of Justice Mann, who prefers the Police's media officer's evidence to that of Mr Johnson), as the originating 'source' of the 'source', if you get my drift ! 

Operation Yewtree started in October 2012 following the ITV broadcast of 'Exposure - the other side of Jimmy Savile'. The Police said they would not be investigating the Savile claims because he was dead, but they would be going after living subjects. And they did, several high profile arrests followed, but NONE of these involved a 'world famous pop legend' did they ?

 
 Note the date of the 'update' a few weeks after Cliff's raid ! Coincidence ? I think not ! Please also note, that this is from the Daily Mirror who describes the complainant as 'convicted sex offender' who allegedly made this claim to Police officers in 2008. 

I include this article only as a point of reference as to the gossip online and in print around the time that Cliff's accuser had allegedly, contacted Mark Williams-Thomas. Stay with me folks. 

On the 22nd August 2014 the Telegraph published this

2013 ? Exactly when in 2013 was this allegation made to Yewtree ? I should add that the Mirror's 'sex offender' allegedly supplied Police officers with some 'list'. That would be the Elm Guest House 'list' I presume ? 

 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-sex-abuse-scandal-1491904

So, the Police were allegedly investigating a pop legend as early as December 2012 ? Really ? As far as I'm aware, the Police were not even aware of any accusations until Mark WT's accuser eventually made his way to Scotland Yard in 2013. In February 2013 MWT was bragging about how he'd ran his Savile investigation 'like a criminal investigation'. The final paragraph saying 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/feb/24/mark-williams-thomas-jimmy-savile 

The response on twitter ? 

 
 MWT's twitter time line became a magnet for the 'nutter bus' crowd, as I endearingly call them. Liars and shit-stirrer's is of course, a more appropriate description. How much damage have these people's gossip caused ? 

Now, here's an eye opener folks ! You know before Justice Mann issued his decision on Cliff V the BBC and SYP, he ordered a Home Affairs SElect committee to attempt to identify Johnson's original source. Of course, he wanted to KNOW if that person had actually been a serving Police officer, or someone else involved in Operation Yewtree. Well, Go Judge Mann ! 

 In this Press Gazette article the accuser was still making his way to Scotland Yard in 'late 2013' 

h

Mr Justice Mann said the singer wanted to know whether the BBC’s source was from “within Operation Yewtree” or someone who had obtained information from Operation Yewtree.

He said he had weighed Sir Cliff’s rights to a fair trial against journalists’ rights to protect sources before reaching a decision. 

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/bbc-ordered-by-judge-to-reveal-more-details-about-cliff-richard-sexual-assault-investigation-source/ 

All parties in High Court trial had, earlier in the month, agreed a 'ceasefire' during which a settlement might be reached. 

 The singer, who has sued the BBC and complained that his human right to respect for private life was infringed, said reporter Dan Johnson “knew full well” that information acquired from a police source had been “covertly” disclosed

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/lawyers-for-sir-cliff-want-to-know-about-police-source-who-tipped-off-bbc-about-sex-assault-investigation/ 

The question any reasonable person would now ask is :

Why would someone involved in the the Operation Yewtree investigation wait all that time, from late 2013 until July 2014, to leak the story to Dan Johnson. Remember, we're referring to the fact that CR was being investigated, NOT the home invasion raid (which, of course hadn't as yet been conceived).

We're being asked to believe some nonsense aren't we ? Johnson admitted reading the rumours about CR online. Did he even need a Police source ? 

Anyway, that's enough from me for now. Cliff is, as I type, still alive. He can sue those who peddled nasty stories about him online. How delicious would it be, if the same person who began the Savile thing on the basis that the man was dead, so he couldn't sue, was sued himself, for this !

Happy Days 

Will Justice Mann get his man ? Who knows, we can wait !