Pages

Sunday, 28 February 2016

Remember member member - it was Xmas !

The dame's ditty has helped expose another lie guys and gals. In a story so unlikely to be believed by anyone with a brain and a stem attached to it, comes the claim that Jimmy Savile dressed as a womble raped children in his dressing room after an episode of TOTP in 1973. Yes, really, here's how the Times reports this 
 Now, see if you guys can spot what's wrong with this next bit !
Mmm, now a lot of men folk have queried the logistics of being able to perform such feats as the above, but me being me, noticed something else ! Thanks to an earlier post of mine that is, I mean there couldn't have been that many times Jimmy wore a womble costume on the show in 1973 could there ?
Yes, it's December 20th 1973 and it's a Xmas edition of TOTP ! Xmas ? the 'victims' don't mention this. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if you'd been raped by some geezer in a womble outfit, you'd absolutely remember if you were 9,10,11 and it was Xmas. You would definitely include this detail as opposed to your bloody 11+ exams ! 
Of course, there could well have been other times Savile wore this costume, I'll leave that to my TOTP's experts to figure out. In the meantime, lets watch that great episode again, the bit we can watch that is ! By the way, the link on my original blog does not work tsk 
http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/merry-xmas-everybody.html

But this does 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLWrJYLmgGE

Remember, the gals ran away from Jimmy at the end. They were more interested in Slade than him. As was I as I recall !! 

December 20th 2013 was a good night as I recall pals ! 

Friday, 26 February 2016

Jimmy's 'London Team'

I've now scoured all 793 pages of dame Janet Smith's BBC report. One, I wanted to find the one voice that no one in the msm seems to want to know. Two, I wanted to see if/how her evidence might differ from that foisted upon us for the last three years ! 
Straight down to business then with 'The London Team', in plain speak, the girls who hung round Jimmy Savile for years, yet still describe themselves as 'victims'. First up 'Val' and 'Angie'
 'Angie's' evidence changed, the dame finds her credible anyway. She cannot be bothered to pursue the inconsistency 
 Go to page 275 http://downloads.bbci.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/dame_janet_smith_review/savile/jimmy_savile_investigation.pdf

 It seems the gals were 'happy' with Savile back in the day. They even had a 'reunion' with him years later, ALL OF THEM. Oh, and 'Angie' went with him for TEN YEARS 
 P282 
Next up - this load of bilge, yes, this woman believes this. Take a deep breath !
Her conclusion 
I'm actually laughing as I'm typing this ! 
By p318 we get to the Duncroft gals, kinds outside her remit but, they went to his show at the BBC so ... She starts with C30 whom I shall refer to as Fiona for reasons that will become obvious 
Now, what's really interesting about C30 is the fact that the dame DOESN'T BELIEVE HER !
 Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ! The old gal must have read my blogs ! I did send her an email. Moving along, it seems the D gals were actually fighting over JS, what a revelation we have here
She obviously didn't read the blogs exposing Karin Ward's lie about her age. Even the press had to reveal that one when the Starr case came up 
Best of all, is the evidence provided by a staff member ! Well, hurrah for Ms Figgins ! First Ward's version of a trip to Clunk Click 
Not a dressing room then ? 
 Then Ms Figgins's account

The dame finds Figgins an 'impressive witness' but, as she didn't hear anything bad about Savile, she's out !

Finally, for now that is, is that wee 'voice', a woman who was closer to Jimmy than anyone at Duncroft, and has only fond memories ! Indeed, she is the reason Jimmy came to the home in the first place ! Susan gets a mention, blink as you skim and you will miss it ! I had to look very intensely to find her ! I dedicate this blog to a fine lady whom I've been privileged to meet myself. Thank you 
The dame's report cost about £10,000,000 we are told. I could have done it for a lot less ! 



 

Sunday, 21 February 2016

" Quick on the draw"


Apparently, Jimmy Savile wore tracksuits because they provided him quick access to his genitals ! Goodness gracious, I remember hearing this tosh at the beginning of this saga, but with the leaking of parts of the dame's report, it appears we may be in for more 'forensic' examination of this all important aspect of Savile's alleged 'abuse'. I kid you not ! The times 22nd Jan 2016

The government's response to this leaky 'draft' is kind of previous, given that the contents have not been released yet. Oh, and was anyone aware that this thing has allegedly cost us £10,000,000 !
 Dux reacted to the news that the BBC bosses had been 'exonerated' by the dame 

Summat tells me, Ms dux is not going to like the finished product scheduled for release this week ! She'd had such high hopes for the dame two years ago !
 Two years old, yet some 'source' was feeding the media information even then. Could they have had access to this 'draft' as far back as this ? After all, it had been due for release then, hence the article, and while Dux was disappointed in the delay, she accepted it because
 Oh yes, Ms Dux had only 74 'victims' back then, her 'scheme' had not yet been sanctioned in the high court back then.
And, she was counting her money before she had any idea of what it would be. You have to hand it to dux she has some brass neck  on her when she says
The report was delayed a second time at the start of last year, but this time, it was, we are told, at the request of the met 
The Savile compo scheme was in place, no new clients for Dux after June 2014 (if my memory serves me right), yet her claimants now numbered 168
Then the cops revealed that Yewtree was still on the go (was it ?) Surely, they had moved on to more 'important' people ? 
My only interest in the 'VIP' claims/assessments/investigations, lies in any aspect that might affect a reasonable person. One aspect being the now, sort of, admission by Police that their findings that 'Nick's' claims about Leon Brittan, were 'credible and true' were wrong ish ! 
The VIP's fought back you see, the one's who could, but what about the dead ? Let's go back to 2012 shall we ? It's days before Exposure airs and things are looking pretty grim for Jimmy because, the claims previously restricted to relatively minor alleged incidents, now use the word RAPE ! Two of the women found by MWT who appear on camera, allege that they had sex with Savile against their will. 'Val' and 'Angie'
I remember her saying this on the telly
'Credible' ladies and gentlemen ? I think not, you see Jimmy appears to have changed his MO since the 2007/8 police investigation, because now he's being accused of something he was NEVER ACCUSED OF BEFORE ! Time to refresh your memories about Alison Levitt QC's findings into that investigation. You see, the complainants or 'victims' as Ms QC had decided to call them, made no mention of serious sexual assault. In fact, the alleged incidents were anything but, moreover they involved just TWO women Ms A and Ms C, the latter of whom never even made or wanted to pursue a complaint. And, what were Ms QC's conclusions as to the TWO alleged incidents ? What should the cops have done, that they didn't do but that's OK, it wasn't their fault, they should have BELIEVED Ms A and told her and all the others who came forward via the internet, that other 'victims' existed. 

Really ? Prosecution for what ? Read Ms A and Ms B's accounts, the former involving a B&B, a chaffuer and a crucifix, the latter a blanket, a television room in 1978 or 1979 (Jimmy only frequented the place in 1974) and most famously, involved the words 'beef biyani' !

'Credible' Ms QC ? One of the only two people willing to speak to the her, and not even an alleged 'victim' 
 She changed her story ? What, you mean like 'Nick' ? Ms QC covers 'B' here by, well blaming the copsand their crap note-taking ! 
Goodness Gracious, and from this, hundreds of 'crimes' have been attributed to Jimmy Savile. Ms QC made her agenda all very loud and clear back in January 2013. It was time to 'believe' everything a 'complainant' says. Why, Goddam, let's go all the way, let's call all these folk 'victims' shall we, because that is our agenda now !
Sorry Ms QC, but I don't believe Ms A,B,C and G and I suspect you don't/didn't either ! Ms G ? why that would be this liar 

Next time, gals who became gals, teenager's who became children. Don't expect too much sense in the dame's report either. Their agenda has not changed yet, not for ordinary folk that is ! 


 


 
 
 

Friday, 12 February 2016

A watershed moment - I hope !

Something special happened yesterday. A well read, well regarded, online publication published an article that, for the first time, casts doubt on the integrity of Operation Yewtree. Spiked has crossed a line that Fleet Street drew in the sand in September 2012, and exposed the hyperventilating hypocrites for what they are ! Because, if Operation Midland should not have happened, then neither should Yewtree ! 
 http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/believe-the-victim-this-is-bigger-than-bernard#.Vry3kFIlNLN

Gittos gets it doesn't he ? As anyone with a brain, not beholden to some powerful media mogul or dodgy political agenda, got three years ago, when some of us, decided to not just 'believe' her or him. We don't want innocent folk dead or alive, stitched up or used as scapegoats for your mistakes. 

I want those responsible for GVAV to eat their words. Most of them have moved on from the positions they held in October 2012. But let's just remind them anyway in case they think they can continue to LIE in plain sight forever ! 

First up, spinning Spindler chief at the Met Police who heralded his Savile stitch up as a 'watershed moment'
 Spindler's previous 'watershed moment' in 1999/2002 cost hundreds of innocent men their lives. You can read more about 'ore' here
http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/spindlers-list.html

Within 3 months of launching Yewtree, the report was ready, and not just one, but THREE, all on the same day ! Along with a statement from Sir Keir, all basically saying the same thing, Savile was a criminal, the Police got it wrong but it wasn't their fault because they didn't know any better at the time ! 
Here, guys and gals are two of the most important paragraphs in GVAV
Spindler's conclusion ?
 
His sidekick David Gray 
 One of, if not, the sickest Savile headline's at the time
Goodness gracious, what sort of mentality writes this ?
Note, none of these 'allegations' were either investigated or 'corroborated'. They were simply believed, the fact that Savile was a monster that is ! But even hard nosed, gutter-scraping, daily mail hacks found it difficult to get their heads around one of the more outrageous and ludicrous expressions to come out of a policeman's gob that day !

'Every waking minute' What the actual fuck ? 
This hack shows promise 
Savile is definitely a monster though, and the media is to blame for enabling him. Not so much, his bit of the media world mind, the other bit, the BBC bit
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2261888/Jimmy-Savile-report-How-police-know-spent-waking-minute-planning-abuse.html

Meanwhile, the impartial QC and non-impartial DPP decide Savile should have been prosecuted in 2007/9. 
 Because, there is little doubt that the 3 'victims' are credible, had a 'different approach' been taken ! Mmm, would that be the same 'approach' taken in respect of the 'VIP's' in Operation 'credible and true' Midland Ms L ? 
Imagine Hogan Howe's review arriving at the same conclusions as Alison Levitt QC ! You just cannot can you ?
Cue the Sussex and Surrey police chief's response 
Yes, really ! as I often exclaim on twitter !

Now, they've got that off their chests, next senior cops/cps/dpp gold meeting agenda. Believe every bastard who comes a long now, forget investigating, just get the bastards in the dock, preferably alive but even better dead cos then we can just try the 'facts' instead ! 
No more 'caution' now lads, get your men trained !


What does spiked say three years down the line ?
Better late than never guys and gals - isn't it ?