Back in 2001 - before my trials then - Surrey Police discovered the main False Accuser (who originally went to PR Guru Max Clifford without any "celebrities" in his stories so went away, added my name - I had never met him but one of his "abusers" had once worked for me - and returned to Clifford who then told him to approach police) had spent time in 29 different mental institutions or rehab units before 2000. They went to any remaining institutions and examined available records. I was never mentioned - not even once - to any doctors or psychiatrists. Realising this damaged their case Surrey Police withheld the information from my defence. In 2018 Surrey Police revived the man's claims (again not disclosing to us) and investigated all the institutions as can be seen in the photo of the restricted report. Discovering this HHJ Taylor demanded we (and the Court) be shown this evidence and the CPS decided to withdraw his claims - causing a Not Guilty verdict by the Jury and the trial collapsing. The man had "bravely waived" his anonymity in 2005 in return for a huge cheque from The Sun, who carried a spread on him confronting me when I was released. Despite that I have redacted his name in the photos.

By 2017 - as can be seen by the report, both now in PHOTOS here - Surrey Police had re-investigated and found all 29 institutions had destroyed all records. This, again, was withheld from the Court until HHJ Taylor insisted on it being placed in evidence.

Do take a look. Your jaw will drop.

www.kingofhits.co.uk/component/option,co...,64/?g2_itemId=12798

Reminds you of a certain early 80s hit.
The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

I like to know how he found the time for you JK; on a serious matter it's disgusting how the courts, media, police treated you.

We were told and bought up to respect the police, the respect soon goes when you see their tactics.

I don't understand it at all. What is the evidence and what were they looking for?

It's a double thing Honey; it doesn't actually prove I didn't assault him but it does show he was mentally unstable. And if Surrey Police did, indeed, trace and examine the reports back in 2001 when many of them would have been available, and if he HAD mentioned me (as he mentioned many others by name), it would have helped the prosecution case. As they did not produce such evidence and indeed failed to disclose any of his medical history it implies he did not mention me at all (in 29 institutions) and the fact that he only named me after Clifford had rejected his claims ("no celebrity names") might well have convinced a jury that he made up his claims about me (as he did) in order to get publicity, compensation and huge media cheques (like that one from The Sun in 2005).

JK2006 wrote:
It's a double thing Honey; it doesn't actually prove I didn't assault him but it does show he was mentally unstable. And if Surrey Police did, indeed, trace and examine the reports back in 2001 when many of them would have been available, and if he HAD mentioned me (as he mentioned many others by name), it would have helped the prosecution case. As they did not produce such evidence and indeed failed to disclose any of his medical history it implies he did not mention me at all (in 29 institutions) and the fact that he only named me after Clifford had rejected his claims ("no celebrity names") might well have convinced a jury that he made up his claims about me (as he did) in order to get publicity, compensation and huge media cheques (like that one from The Sun in 2005).

I thought you needed to be sane to give evidence in court ?

It's funny how Clifford popped his clogs in prison, did he piss off any other people off ?

That this guy didn't mention you for years, in dozens of interviews, is critical and crucial and should have been in the open.

Non-disclosure of his medical history too. Hard to fathom that good eggs like Dick (later) wouldn't speak out.

It looks like you certainly would have fared better under an Inquisitorial rather than Adversarial system of law.

www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/crimi...stems-of-justice.php

An Inquisitorial system, it seems to me, would have looked at all evidence in the round to find the truth, rather than pitching two sides against one another. The evidence omitted you post here would have been central to an Inquisitorial trial. Not something to play strategy with.

Not much help to you I know but interesting. I wonder do the campaign groups you are involved with ever raise this issue?

It is shocking WYOT and the CCRC is currently deciding whether or not to send back my wrongful 2001 conviction to the Court of Appeal. Evidence like this - Deliberate failure to disclose - was less known about 21 years ago.

Trevor wrote:
That this guy didn't mention you for years, in dozens of interviews, is critical and crucial and should have been in the open.

Non-disclosure of his medical history too. Hard to fathom that good eggs like Dick (later) wouldn't speak out.

The all powerful media can destroy at will and the police are more than happy to assist ..in a mutually beneficial enterprise.

It happened in the Cardinal Pell case and there are similarities to JK..Victoria Police having no accusations still launched an investigation and trawled for accusers.

The Australian media (apart from the Murdoch outlets) were outrageous relentlessly driving accusations against him. Especially the government funded ABC that devoted endless hours to false accusers, but eventually a 5 minute segment on Pell's victory.

Ironically Pell being the first Catholic leader to set up a "no questions asked" generous $$ compensation scheme, became a victim of it.

## Sad there is not a higher British court JK can appeal to unless he has new evidence which he may have.

the "check and balances" in the Pell case worked when he appealed to the bipartisan Supreme Court in Canberra where every judge overwhelmingly threw out the conviction but not before he spent a year in jail.

#### Are UK matters before the European Court still pursued after Brexit?

JK2006 wrote:


By 2017 - as can be seen by the report, both now in PHOTOS here - Surrey Police had re-investigated and found all 29 institutions had destroyed all records. This, again, was withheld from the Court until HHJ Taylor insisted on it being placed in evidence.

Do take a look. Your jaw will drop.

www.kingofhits.co.uk/component/option,co...,64/?g2_itemId=12798

Do you know how many of the 29 institutions would have supplied or been able to supplt information to Surrey Police in 2001?

Having a quick look at the list it seems most of the time spent in the institutions was in the mid 1980's and according to the document records were destroyed after around 8 to 10 years so no material from these would be available for the police to see in 2001. Destruction of paperwork after 10 years is relatively common practice so in itself it is not particulary suspicious.

Your case is supported by the omission of your name but that can only be demonstrated if the records were available to the authorities in 2001 and those records were sufficently detailed so it would be reasonable to assume you would be namechecked if you had been involved in any way.

Exactly BB and if you look closely at this recently revealed report, half a dozen (or more) WOULD have still been open and with existing records in 2001. I'm certain Surrey Police did approach them all, did find detailed records, did see that I was never mentioned in any of them and not only failed to disclose that to our defence but destroyed all evidence of that before the trial. More and more DELIBERATE failures to disclose are emerging - a lot thanks to the 2015-2018 investigation which accidentally revealed just how badly - and dishonestly - the 2001 investigation was handled.

JK2006 wrote:
Exactly BB and if you look closely at this recently revealed report, half a dozen (or more) WOULD have still been open and with existing records in 2001. I'm certain Surrey Police did approach them all, did find detailed records, did see that I was never mentioned in any of them and not only failed to disclose that to our defence but destroyed all evidence of that before the trial. More and more DELIBERATE failures to disclose are emerging - a lot thanks to the 2015-2018 investigation which accidentally revealed just how badly - and dishonestly - the 2001 investigation was handled.

again similarly some Pell accusers had lengthy criminal records and had been in and out of psychiatric units.

Victorian Police weeded out the ones who would have made bad witnesses and promoted the clever ones who had lying down to a fine art.

2 accusers accused Pell with great synchronicity as the Archbishop in full regalia with a choir of raping them on an altar in front of packed congregation.

They didn't make it as potential police witnesses as Pell had been a lowly trainee priest at the time who had never taken a service.

Can you believe it - this thread has had 4500 more views than the Robert Maxwell one. He'd be furious!
But it illustrates - more and more people are still being affected by the False Allegations Industry; often by total liars; sometimes by criminals; sometimes by the genuinely confused (often through fake or exaggerated media coverage) but, for me, worst of all by ENABLERS; those who know the truth yet continue goading and encouraging. Cunning, clever lawyers or police with much to gain (99% financially). Example - Max Clifford; the man who pushed Kirk McIntyre into adding my name to his claims because then they would be worth something.

JK2006 wrote:
Can you believe it - this thread has had 4500 more views than the Robert Maxwell one. He'd be furious!
But it illustrates - more and more people are still being affected by the False Allegations Industry; often by total liars; sometimes by criminals; sometimes by the genuinely confused (often through fake or exaggerated media coverage) but, for me, worst of all by ENABLERS; those who know the truth yet continue goading and encouraging. Cunning, clever lawyers or police with much to gain (99% financially). Example - Max Clifford; the man who pushed Kirk McIntyre into adding my name to his claims because then they would be worth something.

It's funny how Max Clifford snufffed it in prison, whilst you survived it.

I wonder if Max pissed anyone else off ?

JK2006 wrote:
Exactly BB and if you look closely at this recently revealed report, half a dozen (or more) WOULD have still been open and with existing records in 2001. I'm certain Surrey Police did approach them all, did find detailed records, did see that I was never mentioned in any of them and not only failed to disclose that to our defence but destroyed all evidence of that before the trial. More and more DELIBERATE failures to disclose are emerging - a lot thanks to the 2015-2018 investigation which accidentally revealed just how badly - and dishonestly - the 2001 investigation was handled.

Apart from the official records though, individual workers would have their own notes or memories, if anybody bothered to ask them.

I'm certain they WERE found and not a soul said he'd mentioned me. Why would he have done? He'd never met me (I have a witness statement that he begged several people to introduce him to me after Johnny Reggae).