A top consultant’ advises

If we are to be credible online writers, we must inform, not be uniform

The flatmate and former driver for Jimmy Savile was bailed recently after being charged with 40 sex offences against young girls. That’s rather a lot. In total, the 72-year-old Ray Teret stands accused of 32 instances of illegal intercourse involving 15 victims. The attacks allegedly took place between 1962 and 1966 around Greater Manchester. That’s rather a long time ago.

All the charges are termed ‘rape’ – an unpleasant word, but in this case as far as I’ve been able to establish, there was a statutory (ie, age-related) rape, not forced entry. I also understand that none of the women were prepubescent. So the charges do not represent paedophilia. Hence they aren’t at my dedicated page The Paedofile. It’s important to get all these facts straight before we start. And in doing so, its important to keep as much of an eye on the evidence as some bloggers do on the media and police handouts.

The date for his trial is set for October 6, 2014, and Teret is to plead not guilty to all the charges. I don’t believe this case is relevant to any existing British social problem, I don’t believe Teret will be found guilty, and I don’t know why we have to wait eleven months for one trial of one bloke. But there you go: it will all come out in the wash.

This next case, on the other hand, is entirely different, it does involve child sex and child porn, it does have strong suggestions of an international market in trafficking, it is a global problem, and I have been steadfast in my entirely fact-based view that Plod in Britain is either clueless as to the nature of this sort of crime – or covering it up. Three years ago the CIA no less issued a media note insisting that Britain is “without question an important global hub of trafficking children and other vulnerable members of society for sexual exploitation purposes”.

The case comes from Canada which (like Australia and New Zealand) does have form in the area. I don’t know if Dan Hannan and his space cadet friends see this too as part of the mythical culture of Anglosphere, but it is something worth asking about our societies versus those of Southern Europe. Anyway, the Canucks have penetrated and broken a paedophile ring with global reach following a three-year inquiry which led to the arrests of regiments of individuals, including clergymen and teachers, and the rescue of nearly 400 children who were at risk.

The child-porn network centred on a since closed sex-film business in Toronto, and involved hundreds of members. It extended across Canada – where 108 people have been taken into custody –  the US (another 76 people arrested)  several European countries….and all told covered six continents. It asked for and got the assistance of law enforcement agencies in Sweden, Spain, Mexico, Australia, South Africa and Hong Kong.

Just imagine: 250 arrests right across the world, active cooperation between countries – and not a celeb in sight. But this time (literally) tons of website, movie, paper, photographic and physical evidence of the most appalling psychotic sexual abuse and morbidity. So then, not much chance of saying this was a fitup, eh?

Now ripple dissolve back to West Yorkshire, where six months ago West Yorkshire Plod released Operation Newgreen, their own investigation into Jimmy Savile….in which they found no evidence of any wrong doing by Savile. Yes fine, I don’t believe it either because WYP are more crooked than a corkscrew. I’m merely establishing: no evidence. Hold that thought.

The same is true of Operation Yewtree against the BBC: no evidence beyond hearsay has been produced to damn Savile or any of the other defendants.

But both these investigations and forces are accepting as valid hundreds of pleas for compensation for Savile’s crimes…which I still maintain, were largely centred upon the disabled community. And by the cops’ own on the record estimation, these will include a number of bounty-hunters (their term) whose demands cannot be tested in any meaningful way.

However, what we do know is that at least 27 of the accusations involve attacks ‘while filming at the BBC’…which is a little odd as none of his series were filmed there.

Do I think Savile was a sexual predator? Yes. Do I think he groomed a nation? No. Do I think all the claims for money are valid and honest? No. Strikes me as a balanced view to take based on the evidence, which is..um, missing. But – and this remains my main point – do I think his crimes are in any way typical of paedophile crimes of a familial, systemic or trafficking nature? Absolutely not.

Now, here’s some odd evidence: the only non-BBC accused to date on Yewtree is Max Clifford. I have established to my own satisfaction (it’s not new-news, but that’s not the point) that on more than one occasion Mark Williams-Thomas referred to Clifford as “the top agent if you want to accuse a celeb of sex abuse”, but more importantly had dealings with Clifford about such matters. The Met must know this, because it’s in Max’s files.

Here’s some even odder evidence – on his website, MWT states the following:

‘Mark is a former police detective who has far-reaching experience of working at the centre of high profile investigations.’ Not true: he was not at the centre or anywhere near any investigations while he was a copper, in which job he rose to the dizzy heights of detective constable.

On his speaking engagement agency’s website it says ‘he appears regularly in the media providing expert commentary on stories such as the `Disappearance of Madeleine McCann’. Not true: He implied he was ‘assisting‘ the McCann family and ‘investigating‘ the case on their behalf on one or two news slots, so the McCann’s had to tell him to piss off out of it.

In the Daily Mirror article at this link he wrote “as a police officer, I worked in the area of child protection for 20 years”. Not true: he was a copper for eleven years, and only a detective for only the last two.

In his big-break exposure TV show on Jimmy Savile, Mark Williams-Thomas claimed to be at least partly responsible for the arrest of Jonathan King. I now have three sources who have all confirmed that King flatly denies that….and the record supports him: MWT left Surrey police in 2000, before the pop star and promoter was arrested. He had nothing whatever to do with the arrest of King.

Ladies and gentlemen, Mr Mark Williams-Thomas is a liar: half-baked, on the make, and in it for his own sake. Yesterday on Twitter he wrote:

Bllloooweeeuuurrggghh. Sorry, missed the wastebin. And coming from him of all people.

He is also a secretive liar. He told the Sunday Times in a December 2012 interview about Savile, ‘I had to leave the police to expose him’. Bollocks: MWT had been shuffled off from detective work to become a family liaison officer…a shove sidewards for the high flying, er, detective constable…the police equivalent of ‘Marketing Manager Bolivia’ in corporate life. But when asked for FOI information about his disciplinary record and departure in 2012, Surrey Plod refused it. And when you follow a link to other evidence of Williams-Thomas’s claims in relation to Jonathan King, this is what greets you:

But then, by the looks of things, MWT has quite a bit to hide. He once appeared in Court on a charge of blackmailing a funeral director. He’s nothing if not eclectic our Mark, but it is a fact that in January 2002 (by then grandly describing himself as a freelance reporter) Williams-Thomas was accused of trying to blackmail the owner of Dignity Funerals for burying more than one person in the same grave. He met the funereal chap at Gatwick Airport, and in Court claimed he only wanted the Dignity boss to undertake an internal enquiry. Why go to Gatwick for that? Why not just ring him up? And why – if he had something to hide – did the funeral director then call the police?

Still, nothing is certain with a jury involved. They cleared Mark within an hour, and who are we to argue with them?

????????????????????????????????

It all boils down, as I said at the outset, to being a question of evidence. Jonathan King insists he was banged up on the hearsay evidence of five people, with none off whom he’d ever had a sexual relationship. Mark Williams-Thomas was freed (rightly I think, in law) on the basis of knock-for-knock hearsay evidence. Jimmy Savile stands accused of hundreds of crimes for which there is no evidence. And our friend MWT lies his head off about almost everything to do with himself, but is believed by almost everyone.

I do not say there is necessarily injustice here: I say there is no consistency at all. You see, that’s the thing with crowds: the wisdom noun, when applied to them, is meant to be ironic. When the mass of uninformed crowds are so patently easily manipulated by political, media and police bollocks, why should anyone think well-informed bloggers with the facts at their side do not deserve to be even taken seriously? At the end of what has been to say the least of it a turbulent week, the attitude of people writing to ask me if I’m on something, way down the rabbit hole, writing while pissed, unbalanced at worst or undergoing a serious depression at best has moved on from being funny to tedious.

I’m not depressed about my life – I’ve been bloody lucky. I’m depressed by the ease with which others continue to soak up all this groundless rubbish like an army of blotting paper. Despite mountain ranges of evidence to suggest that the BBC Seven are part of an unjust agenda, that Mark Williams-Thomas is full of crap, that the police cases against many of the DJ defendants past and present are hopelessly flakey, that Newscorp is a ruthless and illegally-run organisation, that fame-seeking barmy bounty-hunters are two a penny – and that an anti-BBC campaign is being spearheaded by a two-bit online fraudster working for a corrupt government – the pavane of tosh continues.

And worst of all, some in the blogosphere are conducting the Community Cacophony. Maybe we do deserve to be turned off for good after all.

Related to this post: https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/autumn-statement-you-thought-osborne-simply-ignored-the-ons-data-read-the-obr-report/