Mark Williams-Thomas making new three part crime series for Ch5.

[Eleanor]

Was it only Beech who accused Saville of some of the most horrific child abuse possible?

Certainly a lot of people got hand outs.  No one knows if they were telling the truth.

[G-Unit]

I love the way in which you have fallen lock stock and barrel for media hype in much the same way Yewtree was swallowed whole.

How many aliases did "Nick" have when grubbing around for pay-outs funding his allegations subsequently found to be false and for which he did time.
That information is a simple matter of proven fact and I would have said that MWT has a sin to answer for had he not just followed hard on the heels of the police guided by Nick.

How many names did "Nick" go by in the day when his word was gospel, until the bubble burst.

By the way - I was wrong that he stole from Savile's charities with his award for in excess of £40,000.  The sum he was awarded was only in excess of £20,000.  Still, not bad for a day's work if it's there for the taking.

Beech made false allegations against Savile and managed to fraudulently claim £22,000 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. That, imo, has nothing to do with whether Savile was guilty or innocent, it was just a chancer trying to jump on a bandwagon.

Were another 450 people lying too?

The Met stated that the total number of alleged victims was 589, of whom 450 alleged abuse by Savile.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal#Dame_Janet_Smith_review

[Mr Gray]

Beech made false allegations against Savile and managed to fraudulently claim £22,000 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. That, imo, has nothing to do with whether Savile was guilty or innocent, it was just a chancer trying to jump on a bandwagon.

Were another 450 people lying too?

The Met stated that the total number of alleged victims was 589, of whom 450 alleged abuse by Savile.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal#Dame_Janet_Smith_review

I actually agree with you that we apply the POI based on the evidence

[G-Unit]

Was it only Beech who accused Saville of some of the most horrific child abuse possible?

You would think so by some of the posts being made, wouldn't you? In fact at least 580 people were interviewed by the Met and many BBC employees gave evidence to Dame Janet Smith's probe into the BBC. His activities were carried out on BBC premises and her report found Savile had sexually abused 72 people and had raped eight people, including an eight-year-old.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal#Dame_Janet_Smith_review

Posters supporting Savile as a way to denigrate MWT are doomed to fail imo.

[faithlilly]

You would think so by some of the posts being made, wouldn't you? In fact at least 580 people were interviewed by the Met and many BBC employees gave evidence to Dame Janet Smith's probe into the BBC. His activities were carried out on BBC premises and her report found Savile had sexually abused 72 people and had raped eight people, including an eight-year-old.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal#Dame_Janet_Smith_review

Posters supporting Savile as a way to denigrate MWT are doomed to fail imo.

I’m really not sure why, with all the evidence against him, some even attempt to defend him.

There really is something wrong with their moral compasses.

[Eleanor]

I’m really not sure why, with all the evidence against him, some even attempt to defend him.

There really is something wrong with their moral compasses.

It's called Innocence Until Proven Guilty.  You obviously only agree with that Statute of English Law when it applies to some.  Where does Moral Compass come in to that?

[Venturi Swirl]

It's called Innocence Until Proven Guilty.  You obviously only agree with that Statute of English Law when it applies to some.  Where does Moral Compass come in to that?

I'm afraid you're on a hiding to nothing wrt to Jimmy Savile and presumption of innocence IMO.  He was never found guilty in a court but very clearly he was as guilty as sin.  Let's not forget there have been numerous monsters in history who were never found guilty in court but who indisputably were - Fred West for example, Hitler for another (sorry to invoke Godwin's Law!)

[Brietta]

Beech made false allegations against Savile and managed to fraudulently claim £22,000 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. That, imo, has nothing to do with whether Savile was guilty or innocent, it was just a chancer trying to jump on a bandwagon.

Were another 450 people lying too?

The Met stated that the total number of alleged victims was 589, of whom 450 alleged abuse by Savile.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal#Dame_Janet_Smith_review

Beech was not the only one fabricating false memories and contributing to documentaries devoted to destroying reputation while promoting that of the documentary maker.

I think if proper research is conducted it is evident that many false memories emerged as a direct result of the police practice of targeting individuals who might be eligible to victim compensation and a lot of compensation was paid as a result. 

The media really has reneged on their contract to relay information and not forcing the agenda because it is profitable .

Given that after a three year investigation

"Operation Yewtree recorded 11 ‘accounts of crimes’ said to have been committed by Savile at Duncroft, 5 of which were reported to have happened in the years 1970 – 1973.

Operation Outreach has now conclusively decided that Savile didn’t set foot in Duncroft before the 21st January 1974."

8.1 The evidence reviewed by Operation Outreach shows that Jimmy Savile first visited Duncroft on 21 January 1974, and ceased visiting when the school closed in 1979 for a restructure of management.


So that is at least five 'false memories' Britain's most prolific paedophile wasn't responsible for or noted by Mark Williams Thomas in any of his exposes.

[G-Unit]

It's called Innocence Until Proven Guilty.  You obviously only agree with that Statute of English Law when it applies to some.  Where does Moral Compass come in to that?

Can a dead person be tried and found guilty in a court of law? Then Article 6:2 of the ECHR cannot apply to them as they can't be charged with an offence.

[G-Unit]

Beech was not the only one fabricating false memories and contributing to documentaries devoted to destroying reputation while promoting that of the documentary maker.

I think if proper research is conducted it is evident that many false memories emerged as a direct result of the police practice of targeting individuals who might be eligible to victim compensation and a lot of compensation was paid as a result. 

The media really has reneged on their contract to relay information and not forcing the agenda because it is profitable .

Given that after a three year investigation

"Operation Yewtree recorded 11 ‘accounts of crimes’ said to have been committed by Savile at Duncroft, 5 of which were reported to have happened in the years 1970 – 1973.

Operation Outreach has now conclusively decided that Savile didn’t set foot in Duncroft before the 21st January 1974."

8.1 The evidence reviewed by Operation Outreach shows that Jimmy Savile first visited Duncroft on 21 January 1974, and ceased visiting when the school closed in 1979 for a restructure of management.


So that is at least five 'false memories' Britain's most prolific paedophile wasn't responsible for or noted by Mark Williams Thomas in any of his exposes.

The conclusion reached by Operation Outreach;

11.4 Surrey Police would like to thank all the victims who supported the
investigation. It was only with the support of victims that the Operation
Outreach investigation was able to search for the truth and uncover a large
number of offences against numerous pupils at Duncroft.

https://mandatenow.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Operation-Outreach-29-4-2015-11186-link.pdf

[Brietta]

I'm afraid you're on a hiding to nothing wrt to Jimmy Savile and presumption of innocence IMO.  He was never found guilty in a court but very clearly he was as guilty as sin.  Let's not forget there have been numerous monsters in history who were never found guilty in court but who indisputably were - Fred West for example, Hitler for another (sorry to invoke Godwin's Law!)

I think in this instance you are hastening to judgement VS.

In this instance Portuguese law is superior to ours in that it is illegal to defame the dead.

There is a long and very convoluted history to all of this which in my opinion starts with "Nick" and progresses through various stages and with the same victims to Duncroft and the Mark William Thomas contacts and association with that place as one thread.

[Brietta]

The conclusion reached by Operation Outreach;

11.4 Surrey Police would like to thank all the victims who supported the
investigation. It was only with the support of victims that the Operation
Outreach investigation was able to search for the truth and uncover a large
number of offences against numerous pupils at Duncroft.

https://mandatenow.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Operation-Outreach-29-4-2015-11186-link.pdf

Do you think I haven't read Operation Outreach?  There isn't even 20 pages worth of it to justify the three years time and effort spent on it.

Savile was dead but other members of staff were questioned.  How many prosecutions arose from that? and have you not yet worked out what Mark Willian Thomas' locus might have been in that.

Twenty pages on an investigation which took three years.  Well that seems to have been productive and value for money in some circles.

[G-Unit]

Do you think I haven't read Operation Outreach?  There isn't even 20 pages worth of it to justify the three years time and effort spent on it.

Savile was dead but other members of staff were questioned.  How many prosecutions arose from that? and have you not yet worked out what Mark Willian Thomas' locus might have been in that.

Twenty pages on an investigation which took three years.  Well that seems to have been productive and value for money in some circles.

You may have read the report, but you didn't quote it's conclusion. Now you're trying to discredit it and link it to MWT. Try to present some evidence instead of relying on insinuations.

[Eleanor]

I'm afraid you're on a hiding to nothing wrt to Jimmy Savile and presumption of innocence IMO.  He was never found guilty in a court but very clearly he was as guilty as sin.  Let's not forget there have been numerous monsters in history who were never found guilty in court but who indisputably were - Fred West for example, Hitler for another (sorry to invoke Godwin's Law!)

I had to Google Godwin.  You don't half learn a lot on this Forum.

I have no idea about Jimmy Savile's guilt, or that of Brueckner either.  Although Brueckner sounds a tad more evil than Jimmy Savile and with Convictions to prove that opinion.  If in fact it is proof.  But then that is my point.

Meanwhile, Mark Williams Thomas picks up a suggestion and then runs with it until he is caught out.  And then he bogs off.  Until another suggestion comes along.  This time it is an Untouchable who will never be caught until he is dead, so no end to the latest disclosure of Mark Williams Thomas who incidentally is being paid for this garbage.

When this Untouchable dies what fun we can all have deciding on his guilt or innocence.  Depending on which Big Cheese dies next.

However, I have to remain true to my belief in The Justice System.  Otherwise I have nothing to contribute to The Human Race.

[Eleanor]

Beech was not the only one fabricating false memories and contributing to documentaries devoted to destroying reputation while promoting that of the documentary maker.

I think if proper research is conducted it is evident that many false memories emerged as a direct result of the police practice of targeting individuals who might be eligible to victim compensation and a lot of compensation was paid as a result. 

The media really has reneged on their contract to relay information and not forcing the agenda because it is profitable .

Given that after a three year investigation

"Operation Yewtree recorded 11 ‘accounts of crimes’ said to have been committed by Savile at Duncroft, 5 of which were reported to have happened in the years 1970 – 1973.

Operation Outreach has now conclusively decided that Savile didn’t set foot in Duncroft before the 21st January 1974."

8.1 The evidence reviewed by Operation Outreach shows that Jimmy Savile first visited Duncroft on 21 January 1974, and ceased visiting when the school closed in 1979 for a restructure of management.


So that is at least five 'false memories' Britain's most prolific paedophile wasn't responsible for or noted by Mark Williams Thomas in any of his exposes.

Thank you for that because I didn't know how to approach Duncroft.  Anna Racoon or Susan Nundy, was a resident of Duncroft at the time.  She was a friend of mine.  And on her Blog she said that none of this happened.  And that Jimmy Savile never did anything even remotely inappropriate to any of these vulnerable girls.