Unlike the Met who claim Savile raped his way through Britain and 'spent every moment thinking about abuse', others seem to be doing a far better job at investigating the late DJ.

The Death of The Life of Jimmy Savile has come up with another corker...in the infamous photo that purports to show Jimmy at Haut de la Garenne in 1971 ( and which the wacko Karin ward claims she met him there at that time)..Savile is wearing an advertising promo of his book ""Love is a Uphill Thing" published in...1976.

When will that goose MWT be exposed ?

jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/...you-knew-it-jim.html

To misquote an earlier long-dead, much remembered (by some) NON-suspect Beeb star Yorkie used to say:

" DON'T Give Her The Money Mabel !"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_Pickles

hedda wrote:
Unlike the Met who claim Savile raped his way through Britain and 'spent every moment thinking about abuse', others seem to be doing a far better job at investigating the late DJ.

The Death of The Life of Jimmy Savile has come up with another corker...in the infamous photo that purports to show Jimmy at Haut de la Garenne in 1971 ( and which the wacko Karin ward claims she met him there at that time)..Savile is wearing an advertising promo of his book ""Love is a Uphill Thing" published in...1976.

When will that goose MWT be exposed ?

jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/...you-knew-it-jim.html


It is trivial but I cant help wondering...
"Fiona" says she was abused at Duncroft in 1973/74, around the time of "clunk click" and that the wire from her bra worked its way out while she was molested.
I think it is unlikely that she would have an underwired bra at that time.
They were available but very expensive and not something a teenager would wear. Nobody I knew had one, and we all had this style...
Maybe she just had unusual taste and a generous allowance.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
hedda wrote:
Unlike the Met who claim Savile raped his way through Britain and 'spent every moment thinking about abuse', others seem to be doing a far better job at investigating the late DJ.

The Death of The Life of Jimmy Savile has come up with another corker...in the infamous photo that purports to show Jimmy at Haut de la Garenne in 1971 ( and which the wacko Karin ward claims she met him there at that time)..Savile is wearing an advertising promo of his book ""Love is a Uphill Thing" published in...1976.

When will that goose MWT be exposed ?

jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/...you-knew-it-jim.html


It is trivial but I cant help wondering...
"Fiona" says she was abused at Duncroft in 1973/74, around the time of "clunk click" and that the wire from her bra worked its way out while she was molested.
I think it is unlikely that she would have an underwired bra at that time.
They were available but very expensive and not something a teenager would wear. Nobody I knew had one, and we all had this style...
Maybe she just had unusual taste and a generous allowance.


Good point

The stuff 'Fiona' was rabbiting on about on ITV Exposure never happend at all.

She was part of the 2007 - 2009 Surrey police investigation and never mentioned any of that back then. For the obvious reason (that I doubt can even have escaped Allison Levitt), she hadn't made the story up yet.

Same reason Karin Ward mentioned none of this in the synopsis of her online story in 2009. She hadn't made that part of her story up at that point either, not until she'd been on Friends Reunited and got back in touch with "Frances and others who were with her at Duncroft" and between them they started "piecing together their memories of events" (or concoct a load of bollocks based on the gossip that was circulating on Friends Reunited about the recent police investigation there had just been concerning Jimmy Savile - I doubt, and indeed it doesn't seem like, the truth is that important to any of these women anyway)...

as someone else pointed out- no rich person has yet claimed abuse.
They all seem to be poor and in need of cash but maybe that's co-incidence.

and that creep MWT who claims to have been in 'child protection' for 15 years yet was only in the force for 11, 10 in uniform and 1 as a detective constable, the lowest rung and never in charge of an investigation presented those 'witnesses' as 'independent' when they had clearly been in touch for years.

Over 500 the police claimed but now only tally around 200- clearly well over half the claimants were lying and still MWT says again on Twatter "always believe the children"..but they weren't bloody children- they were women in their 50/60s.

Someone at some stage must expose the liars in this whole affair or if not, then the truth in any matter is redundant forever.

hedda wrote:
as someone else pointed out- no rich person has yet claimed abuse.
They all seem to be poor and in need of cash but maybe that's co-incidence.

and that creep MWT who claims to have been in 'child protection' for 15 years yet was only in the force for 11, 10 in uniform and 1 as a detective constable, the lowest rung and never in charge of an investigation presented those 'witnesses' as 'independent' when they had clearly been in touch for years.

Over 500 the police claimed but now only tally around 200- clearly well over half the claimants were lying and still MWT says again on Twatter "always believe the children"..but they weren't bloody children- they were women in their 50/60s.

Someone at some stage must expose the liars in this whole affair or if not, then the truth in any matter is redundant forever.

I agree with you it's odd that over 500 have turned into just over 200, and clearly well over half were lying, but i'm a bit confused how the police can know that those people were lying, yet the ones included in their report were telling the truth as they haven't bothered investigating any of them adequately and seem to want to ignore any evidence that might contradict their allegations.

Maybe it's just any allegation that might appear vaguely possible at face value was included in the number of 'reported offences' in the report, but the others were just so obviously not true they wouldn't even be believable on the face of it? Or maybe the other 200+ complaints weren't included in the report because they were about things that wouldn't even have been considered criminal offences e.g trying to get off with a 22 year old or simply asking a 17 year old for a bj etc?

And as for 'always believe the children', is it not more sensible (while not making it obvious you don't believe them) to keep and open mind and reserve judgement until theirs or anyone elses allegations are looked into further and more is known about the situation?

Bit of an error by the blogger, though...Karin Ward wasn't on the ITV Exposure show. She was on the Panorama one. Fiona was the only Duncroft idiot on MWT's trash.

D bh wrote:
Bit of an error by the blogger, though...Karin Ward wasn't on the ITV Exposure show. She was on the Panorama one. Fiona was the only Duncroft idiot on MWT's trash.

Fiona and a woman named 'Charlotte' were both on the first ITV Exposure programme and were both from Duncroft and both talking complete and utter shite.

I don't think the woman Dee Coles, who says she and a friend of hers were attacked by Jimmy Savile in his caravan in Jersey was on either of the ITV Exposure programmes either, so probably a wee bit of a mistake there, though he has still made some great points, despite the odd error...

He certainly does make many good points.

And it's easy to mix the 2 awful programmes up. Which can be compared to some "moneygrabber" trying to remember what she was doing 40 years ago (to hopeless succes) & what we saw on whatever TV Channel 5 months ago.

I don't think there's one person that can make a clear picture of some "non event" that supposebly happen on one day, one hour, years & years ago.

The only days you'll likely to remember are birthdays, weddings, Christmas, hoidays etc. Major events. Arguments (where you can't remember how it started!).

Remembering a romantic or sexual encounter is also not too clear. Who found who, who did the running, was it equal, was it obsessive, were you led on & took up the garden path, on a hiding to be conned etc? As the saying goes "Love Is Blind". All speculation on what opinion/memory an individual has. In there own mind, they may not think they are lying or exaggerating, but events are cloudy & individuals may not reveal their real feelings, for fear of upsetting or annoying a third party, as in close families & tight nit communities. As in one sister likes someone, but is caught up in a dodgy relationship, through her other sister. Who it just so happens, seems to be being pushed into getting close, to her sister's boyfriend's brother, as they both spend a lot of time at their house. Confusing & dodgy, but it happens. Like just doing what is expected of them, by another. Almost by arrangement, like the awful arranged marriage thing, of some religions.

Mr & Mrs average (apparently) can't even remember what was playing on the radio, over a short period of time...Hence repetitive Radio stations of the Independant "variety" like Heart, Capital, Gold etc..

I want to see Mark Williams-Thomas have an open debate on this Savile bullshit, instead of blocking and deflecting any questions he doesn't want to answer. I'd say he has blood on his hands regarding the equipment now being lost to hospitals and the like due to these greedy lying bastards

Why no calls to Childline in the 80s? Savile was all over the TV in that decade, as this video proves:



The newspapers would have loved to have brought him down, considering that the Murdoch press was launching Sky TV in the late 80s, they would have done anything to knock down the BBC from it's perch.

None of this makes any sense. A Copper, acting like the discredited Dick Holland, Superintendent for West Yorkshire Police that screwed up the Leslie Moleseed case and screwed up the Ripper inquiry, allowing South Yorkshire Police to actually make the arrest in the end, going on and saying things like 'We know Savile is this that and the other'. No we don't Officer Dribble, you may think that, but you have provided NO SODDING EVIDENCE.

I've sad before, I didn't like Savile, mainly through influence of members of my Leeds family coming in contact with him, but him being arsey to them doesn't make him out to be a kiddie fiddler, a paedophile or a mass sex offender. If he ever did it once, that's appalling, but theres not even any evidence of that.

This country really is finished.

Chris Retro wrote:
I want to see Mark Williams-Thomas have an open debate on this Savile bullshit, instead of blocking and deflecting any questions he doesn't want to answer. I'd say he has blood on his hands regarding the equipment now being lost to hospitals and the like due to these greedy lying bastards

I know, what's more important, hospital equipment to help seriously ill and disabled people now and in the future or compo for some woman who gave him a bj or hand job 40 years ago when she was 15 and has had more men than hot dinners anyway so why would this particular event stand out?



P.s was just being hypothetical there, I don't believe any of his current accusers are telling the truth.

steveimp wrote:
Why no calls to Childline in the 80s? Savile was all over the TV in that decade, as this video proves:



The newspapers would have loved to have brought him down, considering that the Murdoch press was launching Sky TV in the late 80s, they would have done anything to knock down the BBC from it's perch.

None of this makes any sense. A Copper, acting like the discredited Dick Holland, Superintendent for West Yorkshire Police that screwed up the Leslie Moleseed case and screwed up the Ripper inquiry, allowing South Yorkshire Police to actually make the arrest in the end, going on and saying things like 'We know Savile is this that and the other'. No we don't Officer Dribble, you may think that, but you have provided NO SODDING EVIDENCE.

I've sad before, I didn't like Savile, mainly through influence of members of my Leeds family coming in contact with him, but him being arsey to them doesn't make him out to be a kiddie fiddler, a paedophile or a mass sex offender. If he ever did it once, that's appalling, but theres not even any evidence of that.

This country really is finished.


"Why no calls to Childline in the 80s?"

The stories hadn't been concocted at that time, same reason Stoke Mandeville hospital had no record of complaints.

"him being arsey to them doesn't make him out to be a kiddie fiddler, a paedophile or a mass sex offender"

It does in Mark Williams-Thomas book. You should tell him, you could be a 'witness' for his next show...

watching those rail ads (oh for those cheap fares!)and This Is Your Life that comes after- he looks so bloody normal even for then.

Yet the combined media have created a 'monster' by carefully selecting unflattering photos...quite scary. And of course the blatantly ridiculous claim he was so damned powerful..utter bullshit. he was a prime target for tabloid exposure.

However this whole bizarre affair has left a hole for an enterprising writer to produce an expose- one that blows the lid of so many false claims and shoddy work as in MWT's efforts.

I feel in my bones it will happen and a new scandal will emerge because of it.

hedda wrote:
watching those rail ads (oh for those cheap fares!)and This Is Your Life that comes after- he looks so bloody normal even for then.

Yet the combined media have created a 'monster' by carefully selecting unflattering photos...quite scary. And of course the blatantly ridiculous claim he was so damned powerful..utter bullshit. he was a prime target for tabloid exposure.

However this whole bizarre affair has left a hole for an enterprising writer to produce an expose- one that blows the lid of so many false claims and shoddy work as in MWT's efforts.

I feel in my bones it will happen and a new scandal will emerge because of it.


"However this whole bizarre affair has left a hole for an enterprising writer to produce an expose- one that blows the lid of so many false claims and shoddy work as in MWT's efforts."

Well they'll have a lot of material to work with, far more than Mark Williams-Thomas, and a hell of a lot more evidence to support it...

the Operation Ore was proved to be tainted with prejudice and dreadful FBI & Brit cop suppression of the true facts, by Duncan Campbell...Richard Webster pulled apart much of the child abuse claims in boys homes but I'm not sure much changed.

However as this is focused on one person and even if it could proved that Savile 'took advantage' of the willing, if it can be shown that so many conspired to create this hullaballoo and there heaps of false claims there may be a conspiracy case.

MWT's reputation depends on no-one delving deeply. I think he skates on very thin ice.

I think this may happen when the financial assault begins upon the BBC which belongs to the nation..and despite the wailings of News Corp and others, is still a much loved institution.

Another thing that puzzles me is the lack of "failed attempt" stories.
I understand that abusers will choose victims who are already troubled and consequently easy to groom or bribe and unlikely to tell, but some of the complaints are from people who say they were abused at the first meeting with no build up, so how would he know if they were vulnerable or the type to scream their heads off and kick?
If he tried to abuse almost everyone he came across, where are the thousands of people who didn't let him?

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Another thing that puzzles me is the lack of "failed attempt" stories.
I understand that abusers will choose victims who are already troubled and consequently easy to groom or bribe and unlikely to tell, but some of the complaints are from people who say they were abused at the first meeting with no build up, so how would he know if they were vulnerable or the type to scream their heads off and kick?
If he tried to abuse almost everyone he came across, where are the thousands of people who didn't let him?

I think it's many cases of buyer's remorse.

hedda wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Another thing that puzzles me is the lack of "failed attempt" stories.
I understand that abusers will choose victims who are already troubled and consequently easy to groom or bribe and unlikely to tell, but some of the complaints are from people who say they were abused at the first meeting with no build up, so how would he know if they were vulnerable or the type to scream their heads off and kick?
If he tried to abuse almost everyone he came across, where are the thousands of people who didn't let him?

I think it's many cases of buyer's remorse.


My belief is that all the accusations that have been made against him are complete fabrications. That my opinion...

hedda wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Another thing that puzzles me is the lack of "failed attempt" stories.
I understand that abusers will choose victims who are already troubled and consequently easy to groom or bribe and unlikely to tell, but some of the complaints are from people who say they were abused at the first meeting with no build up, so how would he know if they were vulnerable or the type to scream their heads off and kick?
If he tried to abuse almost everyone he came across, where are the thousands of people who didn't let him?

I think it's many cases of buyer's remorse.

...Apart from that Silvia Edwards woman from a 1976 episode of TOTP's there is a root of something to her claim, but it is still very obvious she has grossly exaggerated what happened and how it affected her so as far as i'm concerned she can get lost too.

Who hasn't had something stupid like that happen to them?