'Detective who exposed Jimmy Savile heading to Nicola Bulley scene as search continues'

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/detective-...immy-savile-29200973

God, how did the chancer MWT get fame?

Lets hope that this time he can manage not to call innocent people liars and presumably murderers, and an entire police force incompetent, when he appears to have never actually solved a crime himself?

I am confused - is he working for Lancashire Police? He says he will write a quick turn around report but for who? Us? Police? Media? I hope he is not just self promoting off the back of this poor woman...

Honey wrote:
Lets hope that this time he can manage not to call innocent people liars and presumably murderers, and an entire police force incompetent, when he appears to have never actually solved a crime himself?

He jumped on the Yewtree bandwagon and made a fortune from it. Freddie Starr died from manslaughter from the press, media and Yewtree cops. Freddie Starr could be an odd bloke at times. However when I met him with his manager, he looked a very shy and timid man to me.
I do believe he was mentally damaged by his upbringing he was in a children's home or hospital lost his voice and was bullied by his family.

He didn't make much money or success from the 1960's pop career either. I think he was another 1960's performer stuck in the 1950's. A bit like the glam era when punk arrived the glam stuff was out, uncool and forgotten.

I wonder if Starr indulged in heavy drug taking in the 60's and 70's. I do believe the side affects of drugs and booze affects you later in life, things catch up with you eventually.

Jim Davidson, is a man I really do despise both on and off camera; I met him at some private functions. On another occasion, I randomly saw him in a high street in Dorset. Getting very bitter, obnoxious, sweary towards a small, quiet spoken, female shop manager.



"I'll get you whether you like it or not"

I am surprised that no one from Surrey Police has not come out and exposed this ambulance chasing charlatan for what he is.

Pip1459 wrote:
I am surprised that no one from Surrey Police has not come out and exposed this ambulance chasing charlatan for what he is.
One would think that they could at least clarify what his rank was and what kind of police work he did. He seems to be regularly referred to in the media as an ex police "detective". This is echoed by his LinkedIn profile, in which he claims to have been a "detective" with Surrey Police from 1988 to 2001, i.e. from the ages of 18 to 31. That would seem to be misleading and unlikely.

Someone posting under the Daily Mail article about his comments on the Nicola Bulley case says "He was a detective constable for a very short period, never led a major enquiry and has no relevant experience".

There used to be a police document online which referred to him as a PC, but it seems to have disappeared.

This article from 1998 (Man charged with dozens of child sex offences) refers to him as a PC: "Anyone with information should contact PC Mark Williams Thomas on 01306 874001". This suggests that the above comment about him having been a detective constable for a comparatively short period is correct.

Some of the other people commenting under the Daily Mail article are speculating that he's commenting on this case because he's planning to bring out a programme about it.

Funny how people go missing everyday in the UK...however why has this on gone mainstream?


Is it because she is from the middle class?

Jo wrote:
Pip1459 wrote:
I am surprised that no one from Surrey Police has not come out and exposed this ambulance chasing charlatan for what he is.
One would think that they could at least clarify what his rank was and what kind of police work he did. He seems to be regularly referred to in the media as an ex police "detective". This is echoed by his LinkedIn profile, in which he claims to have been a "detective" with Surrey Police from 1988 to 2001, i.e. from the ages of 18 to 31. That would seem to be misleading and unlikely.

Someone posting under the Daily Mail article about his comments on the Nicola Bulley case says "He was a detective constable for a very short period, never led a major enquiry and has no relevant experience".

There used to be a police document online which referred to him as a PC, but it seems to have disappeared.

This article from 1998 (Man charged with dozens of child sex offences) refers to him as a PC: "Anyone with information should contact PC Mark Williams Thomas on 01306 874001". This suggests that the above comment about him having been a detective constable for a comparatively short period is correct.

Some of the other people commenting under the Daily Mail article are speculating that he's commenting on this case because he's planning to bring out a programme about it.

I believe he was an acting DC for under a year.

I bet there are plenty of ex-cops and current who think he's a plonker.

The Met and other forces do not release details of an ex-plod's career so they can really say anything..caught Jack the Ripper if they wanted to and no-one on the force will correct them.

hedda wrote:
I believe he was an acting DC for under a year.
Interesting!

I bet there are plenty of ex-cops and current who think he's a plonker.

The Met and other forces do not release details of an ex-plod's career so they can really say anything..caught Jack the Ripper if they wanted to and no-one on the force will correct them.
Pity that the police can't say anything.

Jo wrote:
hedda wrote:
I believe he was an acting DC for under a year.
Interesting!

I bet there are plenty of ex-cops and current who think he's a plonker.

The Met and other forces do not release details of an ex-plod's career so they can really say anything..caught Jack the Ripper if they wanted to and no-one on the force will correct them.
Pity that the police can't say anything.

His ex boss, Graham Hill evidently doesn't think much of him, nor his involvement in the bizarre TV show last weekend relating to the disappearance twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624326182907924481?s=20

Foz wrote:
His ex boss, Graham Hill evidently doesn't think much of him, nor his involvement in the bizarre TV show last weekend relating to the disappearance twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624326182907924481?s=20
That's an interesting tweet and replies. Thanks for posting, Foz.

Going by Dr Graham Hill's profile on his website, it certainly sounds as if he has a greater level of expertise and more professional substance than MWT.

www.grahamhillcriminologist.com/

MWT still has his groupies, though, e.g. this one posting a comment under the above Daily Mail article:

"Mark is incredibly intuitive and insightful, been following him for years on twitter. I'm sure he will find something."

Jo wrote:
Foz wrote:
His ex boss, Graham Hill evidently doesn't think much of him, nor his involvement in the bizarre TV show last weekend relating to the disappearance twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624326182907924481?s=20
That's an interesting tweet and replies. Thanks for posting, Foz.

Going by Dr Graham Hill's profile on his website, it certainly sounds as if he has a greater level of expertise and more professional substance than MWT.

www.grahamhillcriminologist.com/

MWT still has his groupies, though, e.g. this one posting a comment under the above Daily Mail article:

"Mark is incredibly intuitive and insightful, been following him for years on twitter. I'm sure he will find something."

I am sure it was written by him!

Good call Honey.

I wonder if MWT, whistles Lonnie Donegan classics when he is in-between scrapping gum off the streets and enjoying the limelight?

There are a few other tweets/threads referring to MWT on Dr Graham Hill's twitter account, e.g. one where he says MWT used to work for him at Surrey Police, another where he says he's been blocked on Twitter by MWT, another where he says "For the record PC's and DC's don't lead major crime investigations. They follow the direction of Senior Detectives or they leave the service early and then tell everyone how to do it."

twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624334...HHwWhsC42f_u5YotAAAA

twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624324...HHwWgICx_bqM4YotAAAA

twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624081...HHwWhsC-ycrc8oktAAAA

Another relevant post from MWT's Ex Boss

Pip4356 wrote:
Another relevant post from MWT's Ex Boss



The URL is missing twitter.com/DrGrahamHill1/status/1624062830910529537

A couple of recent interesting posts about MWT from Tony Saggers
@SaggersT
Organised Crime, Threat-Risk-Strategy, Expert Evidence & Criminal Exploitation Consultant, Trainer & Speaker. Former NCA Head of Drugs Threat & Intelligence.

twitter.com/SaggersT

twitter.com/SaggersT/status/1626171170662895621

and

twitter.com/SaggersT/status/1626216349142843392

If Mark Williams-Thomas has been "employed" by newspapers or TV Stations who believed him to be a highly experienced Detective which has now been shown to be untrue would this not be obtaining employment by deception?

This used to be called "Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception" and was covered by Section 16 of the old Theft Act 1968 but that law has now been replaced by Section 2 of The Fraud Act 2006.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/section/2

2Fraud by false representation
(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b)intends, by making the representation—
(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2)A representation is false if—
(a)it is untrue or misleading, and
(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
(3)“Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—
(a)the person making the representation, or
(b)any other person.
(4)A representation may be express or implied.
(5)For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

Im not a Lawyer but thought it was interesting

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/index.html

A doubting Thomas?