Until you've been in the system, you cannot understand how disruptive and horrible it is to be ripped out of your cell (which has become your home when you've settled in) and crammed into another cell in another jail (Wandsworth in Rolf's case). You need to get used to a different system, different officers and staff, different food. Visits are complicated to arrange, if not impossible. To do this to someone in his 80s is a subtle torture. Nasty, unfair, indecent, cruel torture. Those who consider torture just being waterboarded or having fingernails tweaked are unaware of the psychological torture that is regularly practised in the UK (and probably in other countries - I just don't have experience of them). I watched it destroy younger, stronger men than I, when incarcerated for 7 years for crimes that never took place. British society deserves all the bad Karma it gets because it turns a blind eye to the crimes being committed in our name. By deciding not to care we approve of torture.

Here's hoping that his transfer to Wandsworth has its compensation in the right verdict.

I notice that the October 2012 ITV This morning interview with Jimmy Savile's great niece, Caroline Robinson, uploaded to YouTube that month and available on YouTube until last year, has since disappeared from YouTube. It is therefore no longer possible to compare it with Rolf Harris accuser Tonya Lee's Australian TV interview, recorded six months later and uploaded to YouTube in May 2013 (one whole year before Rolf Harris's first trial), and still available on YouTube, and see that both women said:

1. They sat on Jimmy Savile's/Rolf Harris's lap
2. Were wearing a skirt
3. Had their legs either side of/on the outside of his legs
4. Felt him moving around
5. Were groped
6. Were in a room with other people
7. The other people didn't notice
8. They got scared
9. And went to the toilet

What are the chances of a lap-groping story about Rolf Harris (1) being so similar to an earlier published lap-groping story about Jimmy Savile (by someone who was incidentally investigated for fraud) and (2) actually being true?

If Tonya Lee copied her lap-groping story from Caroline Robinson (Lee actually said in a pre-trial magazine interview that she became "fixated on child sexual assault cases", suggesting she did online research),
- how much truth could there be in the other part of her allegation, that she was groped outside pub toilets at 15 after Harris lay in wait, a scenario that along with her lap-groping claim has been argued to be highly implausible,
- and why should that allegation so neatly corroborate perhaps the most serious allegation by Harris's main accuser (who also alleged that he groped her on his lap) that he groped her outside the shower at 13 after he lay in wait?

I think there's only one realistic answer to that which does not defy the law of probability. Tonya Lee was a lynchpin that held things together, backing up the main accuser, and vice versa, and lending credence to the other two accusers.
(Main accuser: 7/12 charges, Tonya Lee: 3/12 charges, Wendy Wild: 1/12 charges, Cambridge accuser: 1/12 charges)

He was such a big fish and it was all so very neat.

A site that two people have done some astounding field work in photos and so on to demonstrate visually how ridiculous the claims were. (Possibly better than the PI's did!!!)

www.rolfharrisisinnocent.com/

Yes and when the law was changed in 2004 allowing police officers to serve on juries many were amazed.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rolf-harri...er-operation-6002707

John Marsh wrote:

www.rolfharrisisinnocent.com/

That website is a great read, and remarkable for two reasons. Firstly, it utterly disembowels Rolf's prosecution. Secondly, it does so in a very commonplace manner. No subtle insights, no complicated analyses, no convoluted reasoning. It merely sets out in very plain fashion how the allegations cannot be true.

Rolf's trial reminds me of JK's in many respects. Several of the same legal issues that are quite hard to accept can actually be allowed in a modern-day liberal democracy.

Wandsworth.
The wings that Rolf is being held G,H, K wing unless he is in the hospital wing which I doubt. These 3 wings are victorian just like in 'Porridge' 23+7 foot 2 per cell he is also I would think on the 2s (ground floor)
You sleep eat drink in your cell along with your toilet duties.
Your lucky to get an hour out of your cell in any 24 so phone calls practically imposible to make its not a nice place.

To be taken to southwark from Wandsworth.
You get woken by a prison officer just before 6am, you put all your personal items in a large plastic bin bag are taken at 6.30am to reception and processed ready to leave.
Search, bag sealed then into the main holding area where all court productions will be a very dangerous scary place for anyone due to the stress levels of all going to court. Rolf will of course be identified by 99% in the holding area and will be getting all kinds of abuse and threats from the main wing prisoners.
Between 7.00 and 7.30 you will of been put in a 'sweat box' (the white court vans) along with up to 11 others. Off to southwark crown unloaded and put in a single cell 10 foot by 4 foot single for sex offenders offered a microwave breakfast and await your councils arrival for a quick brief.
Your day at Southwark ends when by 6pm you loaded back on the van for the return trip again Rolf will be known to be on the van and more than likely getting verbal abuse all the trip back.
Into Wandsworth reception,processed fed taken the 5 minute walk and about 11 gates that need to be unlocked back to the Sex offender wing to your cell between 7 and 9pm into bed and the whole thing starts 5.30am the next morning with the guard kicking the door "Harris your in court this morning"

Please feel free if you wish me to expand on that 14/15 hour day, not gteat at any age but that's how it happens to be, "yea mate prison is like a holiday camp"

What about the torture his victims have gone through?

Quite Carl; that's what we are all wondering about. Like us I'm sure you want the truth.

Carl wrote:
What about the torture his victims have gone through?

Of course Carl I'm not supporting anyone here just pointing out some facts of how an 8 year old man is being treated I do not know what went on and none of us have been privy to all te events.
Rolf knows what he did or did not and the accusers know what really happened.
So in the Savile case that never was we see TV clips of a man with his arm around girls looking like an over friendly uncle but I have noted with Rolf Harris nothing of such has been put towards us has there?
Back to pris on it would be nice to think that an 82 year old could be treated with some dignity but even remand prisoners not convicted of anything go through that process of going to court only to maybe be found not guilty.
The scale of fright for a person not used to going in and out of prison is 11 out of 10 but for someone known by most a celebrity you 200 out of 10 scared for your life that is not the punishment that you were sent to prison for.
Please Carl I do hope you never get to see the process of reception in prison where the officers at Wandsworth have a pen the shape of a pens for sex offenders sign back in their belongings no I do not jest.

Carl wrote:
What about the torture his victims have gone through?

Yeah, because tormenting Rolf Harris will make that all better, won't it?

Assuming they are victims of anything except their own wretched nature, of course.

My post might seem a bit complicated, but I think that Tonya Lee's story shows he was not just facing false allegations but actually stitched up.

BBC news today has this story

www.bbc.com/news/uk-38830191

Interesting there is "good evidence" and the guy is beyond understanding. The real cases for certain do demonstrate there is normally very clear evidence to follow up. These characters do fit some profile that others "fitted up" do not.

It will be noted that profiling and all those criminology studies seem non existence amongst the "no evidence" historic sexual abuse cases.

I find it helpful often to try and find the real paedophile ring and sexual abuser to compare with the hype. From available information paedophiles exist and paedophile rings do exist. But both really do seem to a lot less than we are lead to believe and the high ups do seem more interested in normal partnership relationships (i.e. of consenting age etc) or normal adultery etc that have included former prime ministers.

Randall wrote:
Yes,because tormenting Rolf Harris will make that all better, won't it?

Assuming they are victims of anything except their own wretched nature, of course.

No, tormenting him won't make it any easier for the victims Randall, but he does need to be punished.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Jo wrote:
My post might seem a bit complicated, but I think that Tonya Lee's story shows he was not just facing false allegations but actually stitched up.

problem is no-one saw the ghastly Tonya as I did here on Oz news TV reports,

she was interviewed after British cops left her house and her excitement was a wonder to see.

Broad grins and no Carl like statements like 'do crime do time blah blah" just "they're going to fly me to London and put me in a hotel etc etc"

## this is after she had already made around $60,000 for magazine & TV interviews,

She was acting like someone had just told her she had won the lottery.

Then her drunken friend and 'witness" chimed in.."yes they're flying me to London as well it will be so exciting.." but didn't quite finish 'exciting'..but said.."we may be there for months and they're putting us in a top hotel"

## In Australia no-one can tried in the same way they can in the UK. Charges cannot be bundled together as they were with Rolf and others. Unless the charges involve one person with several claims of assault...you cannot be tried for several assaults against several people over years...and for very obvious reasons which if you don't understand you are a nitwit.

Rolf's first trial was a complete travesty of justice.

His defending counsel allowed prosecutors to get away with so many unjust aspects and the judge was shockingly biased..ripping into Rolf because of a mailed memory from 40 years ago & then doing the complete opposite to a claimant..basically agreeing that the same memory loss (like their discrepancy on age) was justified.

Just that alone would grounds for appeal in Australia. Getting an appeal seems outrageously difficult in the UK.

I know someone accused of murder who got an appeal on the judge's mis-directions on a couple of small points and the Appeal Court eventually found him to be innocent.

When you get the NSW Chief Prosecutor Nicholas Cowdrey QC saying Rolf's trial was a travesty of justice you sort of get the idea something is wrong.

Thought for the day.

Not everyone who is convicted is guilty, not everyone who is acquitted is innocent.

Carl.
At the time some of the events allegedly took place your arm around someone or kissing someone was not a crime.
Forgetting Rolf for a moment lots of the trials in ' non current ' sex cases were not offences at the time ie a kiss now can be classed as rape so I hope you did not give a tongy to a girl or boy at school or in a night club who may just not wanted you to do it.

Remember Wolf whistling? No you can be kicked out of your job or even arrested for that now so let's hope you did not wolf whistle at any point in your life.
Oh did you do 70mph over the QE2 bridge ? Yes well now it's a 50mph limit so shall we charge you with speeding 20 years ago?

MWTW wrote:
Oh did you do 70mph over the QE2 bridge ? Yes well now it's a 50mph limit so shall we charge you with speeding 20 years ago?
That's a very good analogy.

Bundled charges relating to historical sexual allegations seem to go hand in hand with police 'fishing' expeditions.

I believe that this tweet by Mark Williams-Thomas was an attempt at fishing for Savile-type sex offence against Rolf Harris:

"Breaking : Rolf Harris currently being interviewed under caution at police station as part of #Savile other #sexual offences"
twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/274181776283406337

Retweeted over 800 times, i.e. far more than usual for that account, and revealing a close link to Operation Yewtree as he was able to tweet it "currently". Also tweeted on the day the Leveson Report came out, which said:

"I think that it should be made abundantly clear that save in exceptional and clearly identified circumstances (for example, where there may be an immediate risk to the public), the names or identifying details of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime should not be released to the press nor the public."
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140...c07/0780/0780_ii.pdf

Even if the actual accusers didn't see the tweet, I think it reveals a certain intent. The question is, did he do it off his own bat, or did someone ask him to get that message out and spread it around?

Correction: ...an attempt at fishing for Savile-type sex offence allegations against Rolf Harris.