cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home
Where has BRAVELY gone? PDF Print E-mail
Saturday, 23 July 2016
Police, Media, the False Allegations Industry and the case of the missing word.

Where has BRAVELY gone? In my day, 16 years ago, false accusers and, sometimes, victims BRAVELY waived their anonymity when they sold their story to the media, often in return for massive expenses (the fee had been also bravely waived and a donation given to a charity like Battered Bitches; the media usually failed to mention the fee, often described as substantial, was for twenty quid where the expenses reimbursed, to cover hotels, travel, loss of earnings, meals and taxis frequently ran into thousands).

But astonishingly, recently, BRAVELY has gone missing.

Could it be because the tide has turned? The media, never big on responsibility, way down the priorities list when faced by a good story, has started to realise that some victims were not really victims at all. And so has the law.

The case of David Bryant, the retired fireman falsely accused and wrongly convicted, now released after years in jail, starred a compulsive liar called Danny Day who waived his anonymity for large sums of money when he sold his story to the media. Just like my original false accuser, Kirk McIntyre, did to the Sun when I was released from prison after the miscarriage of justice started 16 years ago by his approaching publicist Max Clifford with a good story. But Danny is not seeing his foolish high profile described as having been bravely waived. Just waived. Danny may soon be waving goodbye to other things. I hope he does it bravely.

The authorities have begun to notice. Do not think the Exaro story finishes with its closure. Rumours abound that serious police are investigating their involvement in several false stories - to find out whether the part certain hacks played amounts to a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

There are rumours that certain victims or false accusers are being spoken to, very quietly, by police investigating the behaviour of lawyers assisting statements and helping to revive memories. And police too are being discreetly asked whether they or, in many cases, retired officers brought back to investigate the wealth of false allegations, have crossed the line.

Could they be encouraging dishonesty or even, God forbid, crime? Could they be approaching former victims or false accusers and suggesting they may have friends who could benefit financially from remembering other historical offences? Could they be using tricks and lies about signed photographs or fictitious performances to pervert the course of justice? Dim Plod tends not to understand that such illegal approaches might come back to haunt them. When asked what provoked certain claims, trawling will come to light. And sometimes trawling is now being recognised as a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

I still hope the man, who swore I had given him a photograph of myself and Sam Fox that we proved, in court, had been taken four years later than he had been given it, has the courage to come forward and admit how he received it. 16 years ago such anomalies were not examined. They are now.

As the Tremeloes case is dropped, as Cliff and Gambo are No Further Actioned, as Exaro is investigated, as Max Clifford gets his acquittal, as David Bryant has his appeal granted, the spotlight may be falling on police and CPS behaviour at last. And these will not be the only interesting developments. I wonder whether the Rolf Harris latest claims will actually reach the courts in January? Or, if they do, whether they may be as evidence of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice rather than the trial anticipated.

 
< Prev   Next >