JK's letter to FACTION, the news letter for Falsetely Accused Carers
And Teachers |
Wednesday, 08 September 2004 | |
JONATHAN KING (FP8782) HMP Maidstone. County Rd, Kent ME14 iUZ
Dear Faction/ Thank you for your excellent August, issue and for including my letter. I wonder how your readers reacted? I ask that because, after The Observer published a two page spread about prison food last month, they were deluged by mail from their normally intelligent, liberal, tolerant readers complaining that the paper carried anything by a "convicted paedophile". Ignoring the fact that I'm NOT a paedophile (I've never had any interest in children and my convictions concerned teenagers over 14... a "child" is legally under 14), I was amazed by the vitriolic response. The Editor supported me strongly, in print, but I'll bet you, at Faction, had several similarly negative reactions. The reason for mentioning this (and feel free to carry this on. your pages) is to focus attention on the human but disturbing habit of believing everything in the media even when, and if personal experience? has taught you how fictional many such reports are. So the families friends and victims of false accusers may well react in a negative fashion towards anything written by someone they've been told to hate. I'll bet most people who froth at the mouth when my name is mentioned have no idea what I was actually convicted of, so overwhelming was the sensationalist coverage in the tabloids. I mentioned that I was totally acquitted, in the second trial and that other false claims were ordered abandoned by the judge. This was ignored by the media, which featured those disproved claims in gory detail without mentioning that I'd proved they were lies. It's the way of the world. Why let the truth get in the way of a good story? My reason for highlighting this is... 1 can understand your nobler and sensible approach, demanding guarantees of total innocence before championing individual causes. Indeed, I agree that it's not only sensible but vital that your well intentioned crusade is not tainted by manipulative abusers who believe< they can "get away with it" because there's unlikely to be any proof. That was why, after all, then Home Secretary Michael Howard changed the law requiring corroboration in the 90's, directly provoking many of the false allegations ruining our lives. But his intention was good. We'd all, surely, support punishing and exposing people who abused vulnerable children decades ago. It's the misuse of the law by corrupt or deluded or lazy "victims" or police that we object to. But there are many men and women who may we11 have had unwise or foolish relationships decades ago that were absolutely consensual and positive at the time but have seen them desecrated and twisted now, years later. Exaggeration and inflation are just as unfair as total invention. I have to tell you that, in the happy 60's, when I was a pop star, there's not a single entertainer who wasn't cajoled into one or two pleasant one night stands with groupies who looked and claimed to be much older than they were. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that virtually every one of the 60's and 70's stars indulged in the odd consensual night of illegal passion. Just as I'll bet most of them (not including myself, actually) tried a joint of cannabis or took an experimental LSD trip, Indeed, I would say it's certain that Michael Howard and Tony Blair have the odd skeleton in their closet. Harmless and fun, but equally capable of being reinvented (for vast sums of compensation cash, media interview fees guaranteed anonymity or moments of tabloid fame) as those we victims of false allegations are serving time, for, at Her Majesty's Pleasure. So... a plea for tolerance and balance.. Don't believe the media hype. And don't condemn people for huge crimes if they may have committed little ones. Nobody's perfect, and the caricatures of only two extremes... guilty or innocent ... does nobody any favours and brings no real justice. JONATHAN KING (FF8782) HMP Maidstone, Kent ME14 1UZ |