One of his properties being searched in relation to "historical sexual offence"

We are not told whether it involves The Young Ones !

In The Know (as always) wrote:

We are not told whether it involves The Young Ones !

Lad, under the age of 16 - at Bramall Lane, Sheffield (during a Billy Graham convention !)

Lets also remember - this is South Yorkshire police (those of the Hillsborough fame !)

... as represented by RJW, which employed LD, and was taken over by S&M, which is representing victims of Savile, Clifford (1.5 million), Hall, Harris, Smith, Denning and ...???

I wonder what exactly the police were searching for?

The fact that the media were tipped-off was despicable

So how many episodes of Top of the Pops will the BBC have to edit to remove his performances until he's found not guilty or they decide not to charge him?

" ...other have come forward with information ..." - S Yorks (Hillsborough !) police.

I bet they have ! - but if you advertise for nutters you should not be surprised when they materialise !

In The Know (as always) wrote:
" ...other have come forward with information ..." - S Yorks (Hillsborough !) police.

I bet they have ! - but if you advertise for nutters you should not be surprised when they materialise !

South Yorkshire Police have admitted working with the media before searching Sir Cliff Richard's home in Berkshire.

They said when they were contacted by BBC journalists with information about an investigation, they decided to "work with them in order to protect the integrity" of that probe.

They added: "Since the search took place a number of people have contacted the police to provide information and we must acknowledge that the media played a part in that, for which we are grateful".

news.sky.com/story/1319369/police-admiss...-richard-home-search

I have a feeling that Cliff will be the one to bring this house of cards tumbling down !

(which is a pity as I wanted him to send his knighthood back and apologise for all those terrible records).

well worth reading -

The way the police have treated Cliff Richard is completely unacceptable
Due process has been subverted in a case that raises urgent questions on civil liberties

www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the...eptable-9672367.html

Police codes require that “searches must be conducted with due consideration for the property and privacy of the occupier and with no more disturbance than necessary” - here, the media were tipped off well ahead of time, and a smug officer read to the cameras a prepared press statement while the search was going on.

The police, by choosing to raid the property in broad daylight where they must have known its occupant was away, deliberately chose to defame him. Police codes also insist that “the officer in charge of the search shall first try to communicate with the occupier” but of course no such attempt was made - Richard first heard of the search when his lawyers called him after watching it on television.

Why was a search warrant granted? The law (the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act) requires police to satisfy a justice of the peace not only that there are reasonable grounds for believing an offence has been committed (if so, why had he not already been arrested?), but that there is material on the premises both relevant and of substantial value (to prove an indecent assault 25 years ago?).

Moreover, the warrant should only be issued if it is “not practicable to communicate” with the owner of the premises - and it would be a very dumb police force indeed that could find no way of contacting Cliff Richard.

This in itself is an interesting example of how historic English liberties - the rule against “general search warrants” achieved by John Wilkes in the 18th century - are now ignored. Although there is a section of the law headed “Search warrants - Safeguards” and a provision which requires police when applying for a warrant to actually identify the article they are looking for, this is routinely ignored. Here the police searched for five hours and took whatever they wanted.

both South Yorks police chief, and BBC head to appear before Keith Vaz in the House of Commons to answer questions relating to this (unlawful?) search.

Written questions submitted - answers required before friday.

I don't understand what evidence would be left after nearly 30 years or has this raid just been stunt by South Yorkshire Police for their friends in the BBC, lets face it the BBC have gone easy on South Yorkshire Police with regards to Hillsborough maybe this was just to say thanks.

Dickie Shoulder wrote:
I don't understand what evidence would be left after nearly 30 years

Exactly !

Police should stipulate what they are looking for before a search warrant is issue (not just search generally hoping to find something to build a case around).

As I asked above, what could there possibly be (in a flat in the South) as "evidence" of an assault in Sheffield 30 years ago?

In The Know (as always) wrote:
Dickie Shoulder wrote:
I don't understand what evidence would be left after nearly 30 years

Exactly !

Police should stipulate what they are looking for before a search warrant is issue (not just search generally hoping to find something to build a case around).

As I asked above, what could there possibly be (in a flat in the South) as "evidence" of an assault in Sheffield 30 years ago? Probably nothing to do with the almost certainly fictitious case, but everybody's computer has images of teenage girls on because they pop up every now and again for no reason. Probably over eighteen, but they might "appear" younger to the police officers, leading to lurid headlines about "paedophile images" so everyone assumes he is guilty, a heap more nutters "come forward" and the trial is nobbled.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Probably nothing to do with the almost certainly fictitious case

... and did you know that the "complainant" only came forward last year (after 30 years)?

Probably prompted by the publicity that BIG BUCKS were on offer (and he had never met Savile !)

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Probably nothing to do with the almost certainly fictitious case

... and did you know that the "complainant" only came forward last year (after 30 years)?

Probably prompted by the publicity that BIG BUCKS were on offer (and he had never met Savile !)


And seen as the rumours of arrest started way before last year, it is very clear indeed what has happened.

I don't know why people cant see that when they advertise free money for anyone who wants it, people come forward and grab it!
I know sometimes claims are made by attention-needers, or distorted memory, or lunacy, but I think Most people just want free cash, and are jealous of fame and wealth.

In The Know (as always) wrote:
Police should stipulate what they are looking for before a search warrant is issue (not just search generally hoping to find something to build a case around).

As I asked above, what could there possibly be (in a flat in the South) as "evidence" of an assault in Sheffield 30 years ago?

I've always suspected that a number of media people visit this site ... this is not the first time that something I have said here has (very soon) been echoed in the national media.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2729290...ex-claim-battle.html

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Most people just want free cash, and are jealous of fame and wealth.

Yes ... when did you last hear of someone accusing a tramp of sexually assaulting them 30 years ago LOL ?

They ONLY make claims against people (they see) as wealthy and famous.

In The Know (as always) wrote:
I have a feeling that Cliff will be the one to bring this house of cards tumbling down !

The headline-grabbing raid on Sir Cliff Richard’s home has left him subject to a storm of loathsome accusations

Lost in an unfamiliar landscape? Ask a policeman. What I want, officer, is statistics on the usefulness of dawn raids, especially where the allegation involves not weapons, drugs, account books or contraband but a sexual misdeed 30 years ago. Do you generally find a diary from 1985 saying “Molested X today”? Or is there always some extreme porn left around to confirm dodginess?

www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4179118.ece

What if he has more than one home and the dodgy stuff is in one of the other (unsearched) ones? The one in Barbados for example?

all this 'border control' is a modern invention that does not work.

I agree..no borders. free movement. If you think a million people are going to flood into freezing old UK to sleep in the streets you have rocks in your head.

as it is, the country absorbs those that come and if it didn't they'd go home or elsewhere.

"illegal immigrants" are up there with "terrorists" and "pedos" as the new bogeyman.