Pages

Friday, 20 January 2017

It's raining Police Investigations Hydrant, Midland and Yewtree

I should have been able to publish this post yesterday. The reason I didn't was because I got lost in the midst of all these bloody Police 'investigations' on the go since 2012.

I needed to understand exactly what information Henriques was basing his recommendations on. This was his remit



 Sir Bernard (Hogan-Howe) wanted to know what lessons can be learned. In other words, Operation Midland had pushed the envelope just that little bit too far. There had to be an explanation as to why some 'prominent' men were being accused of the unthinkable. Not ALL 'prominent' men mind you, just the really important ones. You see, from the get-go (October 2012) some people accusing the likes of Sir Jimmy Savile, were also pointing the finger at bigger, living, fish 

  

No, I'm not going into the various strands of various strands of every 'investigation' strand known to God and the Met Police since 2012 (and long before). I'm keeping it simple. For the moment all I need to understand is Operation Hydrant if for no other reason than it is being overseen by Chief Constable Simon Bailey. 


Not sure I recall any Police statements to the effect that any Yewtree 'victim' was being less than honest. Not in 2012/13 anyway.





Read that again. In Operation Fairbank ... the vast majority of 400 complaints were without merit. 

Still trying to keep this simple guys and gals - it's bloody hard work



In other words, people lie or exaggerate or whatever you want to call it depending on which umbrella you happen to be sheltering under ! 

So now we know who Simon Bailey is, we can move on to Henriques various criticisms of him and his team.



 Folks, these are the people who've been running all these expensive and time consuming operations since 2012. Bravo to Henriques for giving some of those accused a voice.


Henriques recommendation 


Background information such as ?

Fill your own blanks in on that one folks. One for me would be the case of a woman who, prior to accusing Savile, accused dozens of other people of similar offences including her own father, a 'prominent' person himself. In case you haven't guess her identity, this is her 


Karin Ward - without whom, there would have been no Yewtree, no Midland, no Hydrant .... blah blah blah

Henriques even goes so far as to suggest the utilisation of a 'checklist' where non-recent cases are concerned 



Taken by surprise in Court - in other words, being expected to answer basis questions such as : How old were you when you met the accused ? Where exactly did the alleged incident take place ? 


The bad old days when - genuine victims were treated very badly and let down by the Justice system. How ironic that victims themselves couldn't care less about the terminology used to describe them. Better a fairly treated 'complainant', than an ignored or manipulated 'victim'. 





How the hell have we been putting up with this since October 2012 ?


Henriques is a bit more subtle than me when it comes to individual's motives or excuses, when it comes to False accusations.


'Investigation' not 'assessment' mind. Not like what they did with Savile. No checklist there - go straight passed GO and collect your compensation while we bag our 'crime' stats.






No Lords or MP's in that court round up. 

Enough for now - keeping it simple. I need a break. Read the Henriques report yourself. It's not that long - I can't do all the work ! 

Oh, I forgot to mention and link this fine blog post the other day. Hats off again to my learned friends who try and keep the rest of us on an even keel 

http://barristerblogger.com/2016/01/21/the-henriques-report-contains-no-evidence-of-an-establishment-conspiracy/

http://barristerblogger.com/2015/03/02/has-the-guardian-gone-mad-about-jimmy-savile/


 




4 comments:

  1. You seem to be on a roll, Rabbit!

    Sir Richard's report, or the little of it that's in the public domain, makes for interesting reading. It would have been nice to see the rest of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, and it would be nice to know more about those 400 Op Fairbank claims that were dismissed as being 'without merit' !

      Delete
  2. Thank you from South Carolina from your standing Prince friend - I'll be chasing those diaries when I get home 😉

    ReplyDelete