Read all about it - especially regular silent visitors who have suffered - can you see who it is, now?

www.kingofhits.co.uk/content/view/1250/46/

That's shocking. How can they get away with that?

With Rolf Harris, browsing activity was reportedly an issue, along with a note in his handwriting in his diary on how to delete his browsing history.

Rolf Harris viewed websites of indecent images of children

"Harris had searched online for terms such as "just teens" and "younger girls", Wass added."

It seems a very neat match for the allegations made against him, but if they were false, what then?

And prosecutors lie like crazy - almost every word is false. As you'll read in Guilty, bloody Cottage QC even read out passages from Pamela and Elizabeth (two ladies of uncertain virtue from my novel Beware The Monkey Man) and told the Jury "when he says she, of course he means HE". No I bloody didn't! Agatha Christie would be doing life, prosecuted by the Cottage woman. I suspect WASS was the same - full of shit. Wouldn't believe a word of it if I were you.

Somewhere, in a crumpled scribble book, I have detailed instructions on how to clear the browsing history (among other things) which helps when my laptop has gone bananas.
I thought everyone did this?

Oh yes - these days very easy; there's a simple button to push. But, of course, like so much else it remains buried in the depths of all hard drives, freely available to future detectives. Which is why police worked out how to plant porn, just like they used to plant drugs (do they still do that?). But as in all things, there then emerge ways of finding evidence about that - which I suspect Surrey Police realised I would swiftly discover if they had continued. All I did was mock them - insulted that anybody could believe I would ever have anything of that amateur, pathetic quality in my possession. Apart from anything else, since it was not tailored to fit my false allegations, featuring old women, donkeys and the like, no judge or jury would have taken it seriously.

The pigs never planted porn on me but most UK citizens would not believe the lengths they went to just to try and pin a charge of assault on police on me. People might think that you couldn't get a whole police station of pigs to lie in unison in court but yes you can! I actually got found innocent due to video evidence but how many did not? Justice is a joke.

It was even easier a few years back in know of one case where a phone had its photos removed because they did not fit the dates the police wanted but they messed up.
Forster they removed photos nothing sordid at all.
They then took the phones date back to the earliest they could and then put the photos back on the phone giving a correct time to fit their dates.
The balls up came when they reset the phone back to the correct time and date and then put the photos that did not matter in the case back on the phone with one big mistake, the owner of the phone who had been in prison on remand for at least 16 days a photo of himself and then partner at a party date stamped a good two weeks after he went to prison
This only came to light after the policevent returned the phone post release from prison 30 months later and yes he still has the phone and hopes one day to be able to use it in evidence against the officer who did it back in 2007.
We know 100% that this has gone on but proving it is incredibly costly but we know one day that officer will be investigated then at least the phone tampering can be shown.
It was key evidence in a 4 and half year sentence .

Jk says "It became hilariously obvious these had never been on my computer and officers", but how was it obvious you don't really say. Is there any way that you could tell that the system clock had been turned back and files added? What was obvious here JK, please tell.

Because of the pictures which were of subjects even police knew would never have been of interest to me and the awful quality of them - blurred, out of focus, ridiculous.

This is why a computer crash is sometimes Heaven sent as long as you always back up your important files- twice - because even back-up systems crash and everything is lost.

I know people who regularly every few months completely wipe their computers and reload the operating program, not for nefarious reasons but because if one is a heavy computer user the system becomes so clogged they like to revert to an almost new machine.

But I guess nothing will stop a bent cop from dodging up evidence. It would have to be reasonably amateur cops with a history of success at this as well as I doubt they could use one of their computer experts as if it ever came out (as these things eventually do) such an expert would not only face years in jail but every case they were involved in would face examination.

Challenging this false or planted "evidence" would probably take someone as outspoken like JK so I wonder how many innocents have succumbed to these tactics?

Recall the infamous & extremely dodgy Operation Ore which The Met used as a world-wide PR exercise claimed many innocent men. And one was, as previously mentioned on here, a computer expert who was having great successes in challenging police "evidence" before they decided to take him out by wearing him down legally.

Police tend to operate in a vacuum with each case so their previous manipulations and creations of faked 'evidence' matter little as there never seems to be any legal repercussions for their malfeasance. I wonder if the time is coming when the law may even collapse over matters like this: as we are seeing with the Op Yewtree calamities?