Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
I had a brief look but nothing jumped out.
How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?
- Thread starter free spirit
- Start date
I had a brief look but nothing jumped out.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
I worked at Rochdale Town Hall in the early 80s and there was always said to be an inch thick file on him over the road in the police station (somebody told me earlier it was on the Manc news that it's now gone 'missing'
). The stories that circulated were pretty much a rehash of the piece that appeared in RAP (Rochdale Alternative Press).Badger Kitten
oof
There are ways to work with this shutting down of the victim's physical and mental capacity during and after trauma when interviewing them. Apologies for getting personal but this seems relevant.
After I was attacked I had rape trauma syndrome, basically disasociative amnesia following the attack during which I mentally and physically shut down. The police called in Professor Ray Bull who used a technique called cognitive interviewing on me, sitting behind a screen and giving the female police interviewer guidance through an earpiece to help me pull back what I had blocked out. It worked, amazingly - although it was a very slow and difficult process and I was able to recall things that I previously was unable to remember leading to a conviction. Without this technique I doubt we would have got one.
See http://www.freedomfromtorture.org/sites/default/files/documents/Ray final_0.pdf
Now, cognitive Interviewing is the complete antithesis of the typical police or journalist interview technique and requires a lot of time and skill and training to use. However, it could be a powerful weapon if there are to be further investigations and testimony taken into these historic abuse cases. Fractured memories and broken stories can be put back together to devastating effect.
What worries me though is that any victims thinking of coming forward now will be walking into a firestorm of media interest, political machinations and public near-hysteria and the chances of being heard calmly, supported through the secondary trama of giving evidence and the aftermath and then getting justice diminish all the time.
A fetid climate has been created with a burning thirst for revenge and a tidy ending to years of horror. But this is not a narrative with a climax and a resolution, it is messy and painful and the wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow and small. It could take years but I would rather it DID and get done properly than rush the vulnerable onto the airwaves and Internet with no skilled, patient, properly resourced support behind them to get them justice or at least, peace.
elbows
Well-Known Member
I d not have a high degree of confidence in how the justice system may treat victims, but I hope victims realise that there is no reason why they have to be subjected to hassle from journalists at all, they can choose to keep out of that. I assume some only speak out to the media once they feel the justice system has failed them, and hopefully that will be slightly less likely to happen right now.
Badger Kitten
oof
I hope so.
I really hope so.
If nothing else, the police must be taking historic abuse reports extremely seriously now and prioritising them as there is so much public interest in this. That is at least one small positive.
I really hope so.
If nothing else, the police must be taking historic abuse reports extremely seriously now and prioritising them as there is so much public interest in this. That is at least one small positive.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
The file went missing? How convenient.I worked at Rochdale Town Hall in the early 80s and there was always said to be an inch thick file on him over the road in the police station (somebody told me earlier it was on the Manc news that it's now gone 'missing'
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
No need for apologies. Thank you for replying.
I've read the literature on the technique. It is filtering into mainstream teaching at police colleges on interview techniques, which is a big improvement on being taught the Reid technique to cover all interviewing possibilities.
While we supposedly, since 2002, have decent legislation about vulnerable witnesses, it is still more observed in the breach than anything else. Defence lawyers still use the standard examination techniques on vulnerable witnesses, and then excuse themselves to the Bench. Perhaps if their disciplinary procedures were slightly more effective...
That "burning thirst for revenge" does seem to be most prominent in the same sort of people who a couple of decades ago were dismissing even the possibility of widespread sexual abuse in institutional settings out of hand, too. Quite pathetic how quickly the pitchforks get snatched up.
I don't have much faith that this will be managed correctly, though. It's already obvious that the government would much prefer to let this all sink into the background, and their resistance to any over-arching public inquiry isn't inspiring. As for the continued trauma of victims, it's always appeared to me that the victims, whether of this institutionalised abuse, or of child abuse generally, are the last to be considered with reference to either criminal justice practice or the manouvres of the wider Establishment.
I doubt Cyril Smith will turn out to have been tied in with Savile. Rochdale's the kind of place where corruption has been allowed to flourish as long as the ambitions of those involved don't extend beyond Rochdale. Smith was undoubtedly a wrong un, but the stuff involving Savile goes right to the top, whereas the situation in Rochdale was/is a load of third and fourth raters who'd sell the town out for a mess of pottage. Rochdale has always been a hotbed of civic corruption but, due to the paucity and tawdriness of the imaginations of those involved, any brown envelopes that may have changed hands would've been more likely to contain money off vouchers for a Berni inn or something equally small time rather than wads of twenties.
Badger Kitten
oof
It seems that even when not allowed to discredit using sexual history, defense briefs now go for the jugular with mental instability. Any victim who has seen a GP for ADs or had counselling is discredited as being an unreliable loon in court. If victims are damaged psychologically they are not to be trusted and if they seem too unmoved and calm they are also not to be believed.
Rape myths abound wrt victim presentation and demeanour, whether the victim has been recently attacked or years have passed. The media - I am thinking of the foul Mail piece - and the politicians - I am thinking of David Mellor - and the public - I am thinking of numerous comments I have read online- all seem to collude in shaming and silencing victims who don't fit the mould. There is no mould in any case. There is no typical abuser and there is no typical victim.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
And yet that too is supposedly protected, so that the defence can't imply such things. The excuse currently deployed is that the "new" rules will eventually become commonplace, but how much sexual, mental and physical abuse will be swept aside before this happens? It's not like either the charge rate or conviction rate for sexual offences has changed for the better in the last decade.
Well quite, just as no offender is typical. People who should know better (Mellor is no longer a politician, btw, he's a radio hack IIRC) deploy ignorant stereotypes because it allows them to sensationalise and to maintain a particularly outdated and outmoded status quo around gender relations and roles. Such people should be, if not liquidated, at least repudiated by anyone with an ounce of decency.
Personally I favour liquidation, but then I'm comfortable with my darker self.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Not had the email myself but thought I would pass on this warning.
Mark Williams-Thomas @mwilliamsthomas
Email circulating with a link asking recipient to see if they can identify person. DO NOT open link as it contains child abuse image.
Mark Williams-Thomas
Email circulating with a link asking recipient to see if they can identify person. DO NOT open link as it contains child abuse image.
Treacle Toes
Time
Big claims about Daily Mail journalist.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Well I have no problem with people slagging off the Daily Mail or the media in general, but I think we've already seen that Messham is not the best foundation on which to build elaborate subplots. Perhaps I should laugh that the Mail are getting flak for an article that actually contains a fair amount of truth for once, but really you dont need to be a present or former MI5 man in order to point out some of the flaws in this whole side of the story.
Personally I feel the best bet for exploring the truth and ensuring that the important issues are not forgotten is not to persist with Messham-related lines of enquiry.
Personally I feel the best bet for exploring the truth and ensuring that the important issues are not forgotten is not to persist with Messham-related lines of enquiry.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Also unless we have missed something important thats right under our nose, the potential for internet research to uncover much more of interest right now is pretty low. Happily there are clearly still various journalists beavering away at other stuff, which will hopefully lead to something. And the inquiries have been set in motion, even if they end up being something of a whitewash they will still have to touch on some things which may reignite the important issues.
Treacle Toes
Time
.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Buckaroo
Donkey piss and tractors
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i can't sayWhat are youat?
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
Treacle Toes
Time
Fine
Badger Kitten
oof
Poster on Mumsnet has just written this
I have just started a new discussion and this is the post that goes with it;
I have avoided posting on here for rather a long time. I have read ALL of your comments re the Jimmy Savile Expose, even ones including the blog by and ex duncroft girl fro the 1960's!
Many many remember that you (as a group) gave me support when I needed it on MSPB threads relating to Roy Meadows.
What none of you know is that I am one of the five women in the origional ITV expose programme about Jimmy Savile. I do know a lot more than was shown but I have kept my silence and not spoken to anyone. I have been beseiged by the press, had notes pushed through my letterbox and even had my neighbours upset. I do not wish to upset anybody.
The whole purpose of the ITV expose programme was to expose JS for what he was. It took the programme makers a whole year just to find 5 women who would speak on camera. I was subjected to many indignities during this period of time. I even had to produce private documentation and see specialists in the field of child/adult abuse. I only ever expected very small percentage of the country to believe what we stated. There was no collussion between parties. No one was paid or is making a claim from his estate. The whole programme was about exposing JS for what he did to young girls.
I am shocked to be told that 97% of the country believe what we said. I always felt that the message should have been that Jimmy Savile, he may have done good deeds but he had a 'dark side' to his personality. I personally had to weigh up as to whether it was in the public interest to know anything, now he had died.
I have read that I lied, I only did it for money and a lot of other rather derogatory comments. I live in a free society and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I should however point out that I am not taking part in the follow-up programme on ITV (wed 21st Nov) at 10.35pm. My point was to expose Savile.
It seems that the main comment seems to be why now, he is dead. I agree, but many need to get closure and for that the country needed to know the truth. I have got closure, eventually but perhaps you, as a group should be aware that not everything you read, see or hear is true. I am personally aware of a 1975 report made to Staines police. I was interviewed by Newsnight but refused to go on camera. I was also interviewed by a tabloid newspaper and the police in 2007. I am tired of being told what I have said and done. It appears that if you do not talk to the ptress that they make up the story!
I have kept my own counsel for months and it has got me knowhere apart from being a victim that is 'ripe' for public attack and ricicule. I do know others who were involved and I have not spoken of them but to read about Frank Carson, Earl Mountbatten or various other people has turned a simple expose about a man into a witch-hunt. My credability has been questioned. I have had to take lie detectors and produce qualification and employment documents all for the legal dept of the television company.
My life is my own and I am responsible. My question now is WHY? How come so many knew and yet said nothing? This site even deleted a post of mine that broke no site rules, named no one but gave a personal opinion on a discussion thread about JS when he died. While you were all sad about his demise I wrote that I was not, I hoped that one day the truth would be known. This post was deleted by MN. So I did try to even say on this site, without naming him and yet my post was deleted. Now people accuse me of not saying.
I do suggest that you look closer to home before you start to critisize others, my life has been made very difficult for weeks, I knew this would not be an easy path, but one I personally felt I had to take.
I have just started a new discussion and this is the post that goes with it;
I have avoided posting on here for rather a long time. I have read ALL of your comments re the Jimmy Savile Expose, even ones including the blog by and ex duncroft girl fro the 1960's!
Many many remember that you (as a group) gave me support when I needed it on MSPB threads relating to Roy Meadows.
What none of you know is that I am one of the five women in the origional ITV expose programme about Jimmy Savile. I do know a lot more than was shown but I have kept my silence and not spoken to anyone. I have been beseiged by the press, had notes pushed through my letterbox and even had my neighbours upset. I do not wish to upset anybody.
The whole purpose of the ITV expose programme was to expose JS for what he was. It took the programme makers a whole year just to find 5 women who would speak on camera. I was subjected to many indignities during this period of time. I even had to produce private documentation and see specialists in the field of child/adult abuse. I only ever expected very small percentage of the country to believe what we stated. There was no collussion between parties. No one was paid or is making a claim from his estate. The whole programme was about exposing JS for what he did to young girls.
I am shocked to be told that 97% of the country believe what we said. I always felt that the message should have been that Jimmy Savile, he may have done good deeds but he had a 'dark side' to his personality. I personally had to weigh up as to whether it was in the public interest to know anything, now he had died.
I have read that I lied, I only did it for money and a lot of other rather derogatory comments. I live in a free society and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I should however point out that I am not taking part in the follow-up programme on ITV (wed 21st Nov) at 10.35pm. My point was to expose Savile.
It seems that the main comment seems to be why now, he is dead. I agree, but many need to get closure and for that the country needed to know the truth. I have got closure, eventually but perhaps you, as a group should be aware that not everything you read, see or hear is true. I am personally aware of a 1975 report made to Staines police. I was interviewed by Newsnight but refused to go on camera. I was also interviewed by a tabloid newspaper and the police in 2007. I am tired of being told what I have said and done. It appears that if you do not talk to the ptress that they make up the story!
I have kept my own counsel for months and it has got me knowhere apart from being a victim that is 'ripe' for public attack and ricicule. I do know others who were involved and I have not spoken of them but to read about Frank Carson, Earl Mountbatten or various other people has turned a simple expose about a man into a witch-hunt. My credability has been questioned. I have had to take lie detectors and produce qualification and employment documents all for the legal dept of the television company.
My life is my own and I am responsible. My question now is WHY? How come so many knew and yet said nothing? This site even deleted a post of mine that broke no site rules, named no one but gave a personal opinion on a discussion thread about JS when he died. While you were all sad about his demise I wrote that I was not, I hoped that one day the truth would be known. This post was deleted by MN. So I did try to even say on this site, without naming him and yet my post was deleted. Now people accuse me of not saying.
I do suggest that you look closer to home before you start to critisize others, my life has been made very difficult for weeks, I knew this would not be an easy path, but one I personally felt I had to take.
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
Good for her
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
You cover-upaloon! Probably filed in the wrong draw :-D
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
Someone I know went to the press re: JS. Gave an interview (not on camera) to the BBC, signed an anonymity form and after it had aired had all manner of phone calls on his house number from tv, radio and newspapers. He complained to the BBC reporter who denied giving his number out. Eventually a sunday newspaper ran an extended version of what he had said that could only have come from the original BBC reporter.
Oh plus they said they'd alter his voice and they didn't. Local landlord had to tell staff to report anyone asking questions to him after people started turning up asking where he lived.
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
Shredded
Wouldn't surprise me if someone somewhere kept a copy. As a small aside, last year we found in our archives a final year dissertation from a health care student who in the forward thanked a doctor for his "unfailing assistance and help" in writing his essay. The doctor he credited was Harold Shipman :-P
Similar threads
- Poll
