NOT defending Jimmy Savile - Prosecuting Beech

Some years back - I wrote a number of posts called -  Case for the Defence. It was my way of telling anyone who wanted to listen that what had happened to Savile was unfair. I know that sounds like a very small word to describe what took place back in October 3rd 2012, but it's a small word with a HUGE meaning, for ALL of us. One does need not a law degree to instinctively know when something unfair is happening. One just KNOWS !
  I wasn't the first to know or begin to know that something nasty was happening. My first post of the series provides content from two bloggers who were - almost immediately, onto it. Without them, there probably wouldn't have been yours truly. I'd have probably never bothered to do anything with that gut feeling, I had, listening to Fiona. Something wasn't right. This wasn't fair !

http://rabbitaway.blogspot.com/2014/09/case-for-defense-day-1.html 

Had Sir Jimmy had the opportunity to enter a courtroom back in 2009, he would be leaving that room probably without even giving evidence. The case (that wouldn't have got there in the first place) would be thrown out by a competent, sensible Judge.

 Jimmy Savile has *appeared* in absentia in a few high profile court cases. And in each case bar none, no Juror has been persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt or whatever the phrase is now, that any claims directly involving him are true !

NOT ONE of these criminal cases has seen the accuser himself in the dock until Carl Beech was charged, basically, of LYING, of making up stories about 'very important people', not just dead, or nearly dead celebrities, but important people like MP's, ex-Prime Minister's - that sort of thing ! Fortunately, for my current purpose, Carl also known as Nick, placed Jimmy Savile in one of his fairy tales. 

Beech's trial had to include reference to his Savile claims. Not because anyone at the CPS, had any interest in wittingly proving - beyond a reasonable doubt, that Savile DID NOT abuse or molest someone, but because the prosecution had to convince us that Beech was 100% lying about others he'd accused ! Everything he claimed had happened to him, had not. And if that resulted in some of us thinking we could at last rejoice about something, well - that collateral damage would be have to be tolerated, but NOT made anything of. Not by the press, the media or the CPS. Savile was still a serial abuser, end of. His name was not even mentioned in the - guilty as charged sheet ! The first four being

But, don't feel too crestfallen folks. The prosecuting barrister did well and truly sock it to Beech, during his cross-examination. It is really the closest we've got to an official defence of Sir Jimmy Savile yet ! 

It's Tuesday July 9th at 3.30 and Tony B QC continues his cross examination of Carl Beech. He describes this portion of the prosecution case as MEDIA APPEARANCES. 

Crimes that shook Britain was first shown on 17.08.2014 two months BEFORE you spoke to the Met Police !

  You told Wiltshire Police about this in 2012. You'd made a claim for compensation. You were writing a book. "Did you tell WP all there was to know about about Jimmy Savile" ?

"Let's watch it"

The video is then played in court. 

 So that you understand exactly what I'm doing here - the Barrister's questions and/or remarks are in italics. Where these are verbatim direct quotes I have placed speech marks around them. I include live tweets submitted by members of the press - and others, to show how the press reported this questioning.

So here's the video - the bit where 'Stephen' begins his tale starts with the ominous piano music at about 30.52 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0ZhEsSf008 

 From the press -


Beech admitted withholding some information about his allegations at an initial interview with Wiltshire police in 2012, in which he claimed his stepfather had abused him.
Asked why he told detectives that he did not know the names of many of his alleged abusers, Beech replied: “It was information that I did not feel I could share at that time given my own mind.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/09/vip-abuse-accuser-carl-beech-claims-flown-paris-child 

Tony Bradenoch QC to Beech :"You told them you'd never seen his face" ?

" Do you maintain the position that you never saw his face" ?
Beech - "Again, I don't recall"

"Over how many years did Jimmy Savile abuse you" ?

Beech - " A couple"
"Where ?" 

Beech "Bicester"

"Did you tell DS Townley about this broadcast ?" 

Beech - "No"

 

Beech's local press provided several articles about that day's proceedings. Yes, some members of the press, did give - some attention to the Savile questioning.

https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/17758631.vip-paedophile-ring-accuser-admits-withheld-details-swindon-police-2012/

The Prosecution in the Beech case, achieved something me and a few others have been trying to do for SJS since October 2012. He demonstrated that the allegations one of his accusers made, was - demonstrably untrue 

The Judge in his closing submissions, directed the Jury to make commonsense conclusions. They must reach reach their decisions in a fair, calm and analytical way ... you must not speculate ....... Pay heed to your own view of the evidence .... it's your decisions that are crucial' 
Juries are required to make an assessment of the person (who's alleging the abuse)


See what happens when an accused person is given a chance to defend themselves ? Ordinary people like you and I are advised by wise men how to make fair decisions. The world's media are in attendance but they cannot influence the individual juror, well - that's the idea anyway. 

Next time - 'Wor Simon' 

A blog post honoring the late Simon Warr's contribution to journalism during the closing stages of the Beech Trial. Up shortly !

WHO evidenced Beech's CICA claim ?

I've been contemplating several different blog posts since completing my last. You see I can't leave the subject of Carl Beech's criminal injuries compensation claim alone. I'm not alone, even them that get paid for doing this are querying the fact that this man was given £22,000 of tax payer's money, basically for nothing ! Certainly nothing, in comparison to Karen McPhillip's ordeal !

A mother who cradled her dying son in her arms after he was fatally stabbed has criticised the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) for denying her a payout while giving £22,000 to convicted paedophile Carl Beech, aka the fantasist Nick.
Karen McPhillips has had to spend her own money appealing against the decision not to give her a payout on the grounds she was not sufficiently "emotionally involved" in her son Jonathon's death - despite accompanying him in the ambulance and switching off his life support machine.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/04/carl-beechs-compensation-payout-criticised-mother-refused-money/ 

I do NOT know if Savile was named on Beech's claim. How would I ? I've never seen it ! Why haven't I seen it ? This is bothering me big time, because I want to know Wiltshire Police wrote in support of his application, and why ? You see, despite all the - in vogue at the time - believe the victim bull, Wiltshire police had spent hours and hours with Carl Beech, listening to him, watching his body language, probably a lot longer than anyone in Newcastle Crown Court. DS Lewis persevered in a thorough investigation for more than four months and found NO corroborating evidence. NONE ! 

So how did Beech manage to get £22,000 ? Here's the timeline

Always good to check how someone other than Mark Watts describes the same evidence, LIVE !

 Lewis told the court how Beech was reluctant to assist in the investigation of potentially living suspects, initially that is

And, apparently, Lewis made said in court that he had made no note of speaking about compensation during the closure meeting at the end of his investigation.

Mark Watts provides this by way of Lewis's first impressions of Beech as a witness as presented in evidence to the court, the same day

Give him his due DS Lewis followed all leads the best he could.

Now, let's just backtrack a little here in order to establish for exactly how long Beech had been considering claiming compensation, as I think this might help us understand why he didn't claim via the Savile scheme. You see, he could NOT apply for both but I'll come back to that later. 

From Jordan Milne 10th July

Beech takes to the witness box. Badenoch QC begins by looking at Beech’s claim for compensation.

Beech kept a document on his USB stick about reporting child abuse, within this was the CICA scheme. Beech says this was part of a support pack. He says he first became aware of the compensation scheme when his mother fostered children. He knew about it before Wiltshire police.

At first I thought the following said GPS as in ... but it's GP's as in doctor. He never supplied his GP's details in the form ? 

Beech did not enter his GPS details when asked, he says he doesn’t know why that was left off and that he subsequently gave it at a later date. He says he can’t “answer why it isn’t filled in here”.

He says he entered not attending his dentist - despite a broken tooth in other writings of his - he says because this was something he later recollected, not when he was filling in the form.

Obviously the court has access to his claim

In the box asking for injuries sustained, Beech doesn’t mention hospitalisation or fractures that he has previously said he sustained form the abuse. He says he was hospitalised while he was in Wilton and Kingston. He has not set this out in the “additional information”. 

He is finally paid in March 2015 after the Met Police appear to have followed it up for him.

14 March 2015 Beech signs a settlement form claiming £22,000 from the CICA. Badenoch QC says this was 15 months after Beech made his claim. He says between those two dates important things had happened. Beech says he had gone to the Met police in 2014.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1148510766166921216.html 

 For clarity sake DS Chatfield is one of the two officers in charge of the raid on Harvey Proctor's home. He was also Beech's family or victim liason officer ! Just so you know.

  

 How the hell was he paid at all ? Here's some information about the Criminal Injuries Compensation Application scheme that Beech had been aware of since his mother began fostering kids !!!!

1) There are time limits for claiming. In reality he should NOT have got through just on this, depsite the special circumstances clause.

 He'll definitely fall at this one - on a balance of probabilities to have occurred - really ?

And then there's this useful piece I said I'd come back two. It seems that compensation payments have overlapping rules a bit like welfare benefits do. You can only claim ONE.

Oh and here's how one gets £22,000 in case you want to know

Serious internal injury or mental injury clinically diagnosed by a medically trained psychologist or Psychiatrist ... A counsellor or therapist won't do ! 

Was such evidence obtained ? 

I have no idea. Show me the form someone !

Did DS lewis really find Beech a credible witness in those few months he knew him ? 

And there's the evidence he supplied to the Yewtree hotline before they'd even met. Surely Beech is that ONE Wiltshire entry on the Yewtree graph. Note the discrepency in the number of years he'd claimed to have been abused by Savile to them by comparison to Lewis !

 And - following a Freedom of Information request, we now have even more detail about the Wiltshire One !

 Seven to fifteen ? Lewis did feed back to Operation Yewtree at the end of his investigations. 

Maybe we need to see the initial referral form ? Why the hell do we have to do all this ? 

So, now I want to know for sure if Wiltshire Police or anyone else subsequent to the closure of their investigation, supplied any supportive evidence for Beech's compensation claim. Don't you ? Because, any half-sensible person would only had to sit and listen for a few minutes to Carl Beech to know he is either lying or mad ! 

How on earth did they establish this ?

Even Vera Baird would struggle to believe 'Nick'. Or would she ? Here she is in Newcastle but not during his trial ! Well, it made me smile anyway !!

Next time - Tony Badenoch QC defends Jimmy Savile. Well, sort of !!!! 

Addendum 6th September 2019

Rather than doing another blog post, I thought I'd add the following to this one instead. I did come across this article during my research, but sometimes one gets overwhelmed by the amount of information one collects for subsequent use. Detective Lewis 'backed up his (Beech's) story on the basis of his performance during interviews ?

Beech had gone to Wiltshire police shortly before making his claim. The force took no further action. Even so, what officer in the current climate — when police are encouraged to believe ‘victims’ — would rule out that someone had been abused all those years ago, effectively branding them liars

So when CICA contacted the detective who had interviewed Beech, he backed up his story and said Beech had exhibited a ‘significant degree of psychological suffering’ when he spoke to him. The details emerged during Beech’s trial at Newcastle Crown Court, where he was convicted of fraud and perverting the course of justice on Monday.

Let me just play that sentence back, just in case I didn't emphasise it enough -

Even so, what officer in the current climate — when police are encouraged to believe ‘victims’ — would rule out that someone had been abused all those years ago, effectively branding them liars ?

Indeed !   

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7291191/How-Nick-got-22-000-false-claim-just-simple-form.html 

Must watch those ABE videotaped interviews again.  

When NAPAC asked Jimmy's charity for cash !

So Peter Saunders of NAPAC was himself accused of sexual impropriety in a toilet with a woman in 2008. Her Police complaint went nowhere etc etc. You can read about it here !

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7391713/Charity-chief-quits-child-sex-abuse-inquiry-drunken-lunch-tryst-molested-victim.html 

The only reason I'm blogging about this matter is THIS ! 

I love love love this story ! I was actually researching another blog post or two, when I came across the story again. Lovely isn't it ? 

https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/national-abuse-charity-told-it-will-not-receive-jimmy-savile-trust-funds.html 

I remember it well !  The irony is delicious !

 Why is it almost always - about the money ? 

People in glass houses really shouldn't should they ?

Sorry I've no idea what Fry did or said to elicit such criticism, I guess you could look it up. It was in my library and it fitted. As does this 

 
 

A Private Eyefull !

The other night Rosie Waterhouse who writes for Private Eye, sent me her latest article - hot off the press. In case it's not available online or you're not able to get a copy of the latest magazine, I'll publish it here, in full !

x

Rosie Waterhouse is one of only TWO mainstream journalist's to have shown some genuine interest in Operation Yewtree, and I raise my hat to both of them. But, reading Rosie's and especially those references to Keir Starmer, took me back to a post I published in December 2013 wherein I postulated a possible motivation behind the authorities rush to judgement on Sir Jimmy. Could it be that Jimmy's death - right slap bang -  in the midst of Starmer's - Rochdale mea culpa, was his (and others) chance to make good for their failure to help the Susie's ?

http://rabbitaway.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-puppets-on-string.html 

Moreover, would anyone have even known or cared, had it not been for the CARL BEECH REVELATIONS ? I'll use terms because these are the sort of phrases used in reference to Jimmy Savile - STILL ! And not just in the press or on the telly, but in a court of law. Yes really ! Everything bad that has happened to accused innocent people falsely accused of crimes involving sexual abuse, has only happened since Savile was found out, because Savile was, and is - definitely guilty, despite never being charged with one single offence during his whole 84 years ! 

Ex-DPP Starmer is one of those, quite rightly in the crosshairs of those put through the CPS Beech mangle since 2014. You see, Starmer was head of the Crown Prosecution Service from 2008 until 2013 and this - as a matter of interest, is how much he was getting paid in 2010.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/62343/high-earners-pay_0.csv/preview 

Now, I've nothing against anyone getting paid for a job well done, but it wasn't was it ? Him and his minions failed to listen to the Susie's in Rochdale for THREE YEARS ! Read my blog again - 'Susie' first reported her exploitation in 2008, yet her claims were not taken seriously by the Police or anyone else until 2011. The year Sir Jimmy Savile just happened to die ! 

 The men involved were finally convicted in 2012, yet - for the life of me, I cannot name ONE of them*

 Note the small print under that photo - Starmer has ordered a comprehensive restructuring of the CPS response to sex grooming. I can't read the whole of the Times article but I can just make out that the comprehensive restructuring of the CPS will include 'historic cases of ...' . Exactly three weeks to the day that Exposure was broadcast. The die was cast ! We didn't believe any claims of sexual abuse, so now we're going to believe them all ! We're even gonna call them victims instead of complainants, and we'll soup up that Achieving Best Evidence initiative, while all the time, Police resources are being cut to the quick. Not that Starmer is/was completely to blame for the madness that ensued as a result of his clearing the decks  etc etc, he wasn't the ONLY person involved in this sea-change in departmental policy. The Police chiefs helped him in his endeavour ! Imagine the pressure they must have been under following Rochdale ? Just look at some of the press headlines from May to October 2012 

It took just three months to decide that Jimmy Savile had committed 214 crimes. I always wondered what the hurry was ? I guess if he hadn't been found guilty, Starmer would not have been able to name him and his crimes, as a rationale for what came next ! *From one version of his - time for a National Consensus 

In the Police chiefs version dated the same - 6th March2013, the Police and Starmer set out their store for how such investigations should go henceforward. 

https://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/the-criminal-justice-response-to-child-sexual-abuse-time-for-a-national-consensus

Best practice ? I heard many references to so-called best evidence during the Beech trial. His initial  filmed interviews were conducted within the parameter's of Achieving Best Evidence policy, heck they were called - The ABE interviews. Carl Beech's credibility was not called into question by either the Met or Wiltshire Police. Indeed he'd probably be in Sweden running a guesthouse, no doubt hosting the family of the boy he spied on, had he not accused the VIP's, and had one of them, not bravely stood up to him - and the Police officer's who tried to ruin his life ! Well done Harvey Proctor !

Before clearing the presumption of innocence, decks and clearing off to a knighthood and a life in safe-seat parliament, Keir Starmer told us that we couldn't afford another 'Savile moment in five or ten years time'. We certainly can't, but not in the way Sir Keir meant it ! 

Oh, and getting back to Rosie Waterhouse's piece. Isn't it strange how it's Private Eye she writes for ? It's longtime previous editor had never heard any serious rumours about Savile, not one ! And yet, it was next magazine - The Oldie, that broke the Newsnight story, while most other paper's wouldn't touch it.

Thank God for Private Eye is all I can say ! I've blogged about them before too ! They do make me laugh ! 

http://rabbitaway.blogspot.com/2017/12/private-eyes-and-ears.html