Al-Fayed

You’ve got to be gobsmackingly naive to be surprised by any of this. You can see it all the time, people punch down, blame the victim, side with the powerful.

Not all of the people all of the time, but enough of the people enough of the time. Standing up for the truth costs time, effort, it makes enemies. Lots of people can’t be bothered or wouldn’t dare. Look at that post office scandal for example. The people involved in that weren’t all uniquely evil monsters, just people “keeping their heads down” and “doing their job”. Many people reading my post would do the same in their position. Most, in fact, given the rarity of whistleblowers.

As for “different times”. Give me strength.

Is an HR person, or solicitor, who knows or suspects what’s gone on and arranges a “pay off” and “NDA” that prevents* reporting it to the police guilty of an offence?  It seems that might amount to attempting to pervert the course of justice.  It’s only by making these third parties liable that we can stop such cases from being properly reported and investigated.

That HR person or solicitor will also be subject to the fear of repercussions. You are asking them to put themselves at risk to prevent future occurrences. Where do you stop? Are each of the victims equally guilty of “perverting the course of justice” by not going public at the time and therefore encouraging future offences?

ones in the know (body guards probably), need to face the consequences. Sad to think ‘some’ of our armed forces were paid to turn a blind eye, when protecting the monster.

wasn’t the head of security an ex senior copper?  Obviously the lure of £ overrode any notion of wrongdoing that may have come from his previous employment.

This did not stop with Saville, Fayed et al.  Someone is at it today, terrorising victims and hiding behind the asymmetric law (I can ruin you long before I get to court).

And we will have to wait until a few months after their death to have suspicions confirmed.

This is no doubt happening now.

This is no doubt happening now.

Obviously there will always be sexual predators but I think what has probably changed in recent years is the cultural which plays down sexual predators as being just dirty old men whose unacceptable behaviour we sometimes have to tolerate because of their status in society.

At exactly same the time when Mohammed Al-Fayed was leering at young sales assistants on the shop floor and chasing them around his office we were all laughing at the dirty old man Mr Grace of Grace Brothers and his inappropriate sexual behaviour on Our You Being Served?

It was funny because it was portrayed as innocent and consensual but that was hardly representative of real-life situations. I think we probably now understand that in a way that we didn’t appreciate at the time.

The problem is, remembering my time at university first time around, that all this awareness is taking us more or less up to the level we were at in the early 1980s. Being aware of predation, especially of vulnerable women is not new.  It’s being able to do something about it…. the law is still asymmetric and they can use it, the victims cannot.

And there are still plenty of pals in high places, although one deep pocketed (£12M) cover up artist is no longer with us.

Having read the Secret Barrister’s book, although there are things that we could do to improve the law (speed and quality of justice, reforming our ridiculously biased libel laws), the presumption of innocence is always going to be an issue in these sorts of cases, especially where the defendant has greater resources than the prosecution.

I do think that the culture needs to change. Optimistically I think it is, although I’m aware as a man who works in a female dominated environment that I’m likely to be blissfully unaware of most of it.

I may have missed something but didn’t they say some or all women were afraid to say anything until after his passing because he was so powerful that they feared the consequences

I once worked for a national newspaper and the journalists knew who all the wrong’uns were. They’d come in and say “yeah… insert rich and powerful persons name here… is known to be a bit rapey, or likes beating up rent boys while off their heads on coke, but obviously we can’t publish that because we can’t prove it”

Unless it’s absolutely water-tight they just can’t and people won’t go on the record because they know it will end their careers and catapult them into a whole world of shit

Things have changed though, for example think of Rolf Harris and Max Clifford. And Gary Glitter is currently in prison.

Unfortunately there have also been some spurious allegations which seriously undermines genuine cases.

Greedy men with a sense of entitlement and financial fortunes will use the privileges they have in a way that other men simply can’t.

The easier it is to commit rape the more likely it is to occur.

I’d like to think that more accurately the kind of person who can amass such wealth is more likely to be the kind of sociopath that thinks only of there own power and disgusting urges.  If I won the euro-lottery tomorrow it wouldn’t make me think “at last, what can I get away with now”.

We all like to think that but the evidence is clear that a large majority at all levels are at least prepared to turn a blind eye and/or side with the power.

wasn’t the head of security an ex senior copper?

Ex met police officer, par for the course.

I’m intrigued by the timing. No prosecutions are possible. His estate will have been distributed as per his will so there is no money to be gained by the late accusations.  I’m not sure what the Met are supposed too do. He was clearly protected but then he was friends with the royal family and they seem to have a dubious list of friends, Saville, Epstein any number of Middle Eastern royal families and their links to terrorism.

He was clearly protected but then he was friends with the royal family

He really wasn’t. Quite the opposite after all the frightful business with Diana and his son. Many people may have protected him, but the royal family would have been more likely to have him bumped off than cover up his dodgy deeds

He was up to his neck in the sleaze of the Major years with mates like Neil Hamilton and Johnathan Aitkin

Wasn’t he always on about the Duke of Edinburgh or someone wanting him dead and using the security forces against him, i don’t think you can lay any blame at their door for Fayed, he was a law unto himself as many have explained.

I’d go so far as to suggest that if the Royals didn’t have their own Andrew shaped skeleton in the cupboard, they might have even blown the whistle on Al-Fayed.

If I won the euro-lottery tomorrow it wouldn’t make me think “at last, what can I get away with now”.

You’re an exception on here, the standard STW go to in the case of unexpected income and what to do with it is “coke and hookers”.

I’m intrigued by the timing.

I must admit I did wonder what it was being used to hide.

If I won the euro-lottery tomorrow it wouldn’t make me think “at last, what can I get away with now”.

It’s a little more nuanced than that, assume you were born into a family with great wealth and surrounded by  people happily enabling all your whims 🙂

He was up to his neck in the sleaze of the Major years with mates like Neil Hamilton and Johnathan Aitkin

I had forgotten about that.

Here’s some interesting comments about Al-Fayed from another paedophile

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-max-clifford-boasts-covering-33718425

It’s a little more nuanced than that, assume you were born into a family with great wealth and surrounded by  people happily enabling all your whims

Then add in you grew up in an exceedingly chauvanistic society, and started working professionally in the 60s/70s. Back when pinching a girl’s bum in the lift or on the tube was perfectly acceptable.

Again the police have absolutely failed a group of mostly young woman.

TBH the numbers of successful convictions for rape are mind bogglingly bad. 🙁

during 2021-2022, of the 70,330 rapes reported to police only 1,378 led to a conviction. This is a conviction rate of less than 2%.

It’s also about 1-2 years for a hearing date.

To be fair the low conviction rate must in part be linked to the nature of the crime – typically a lack of witnesses and  victims who struggle processing what they have experienced preferring instead to detach themselves from the memories of the crime if at all possible.

Which is obviously why specially trained investigators are the key.

Yep I’d expect a low rate but 2% !!!

I found this an interesting read

https://www.saunders.co.uk/news/virtually-all-rape-victims-are-denied-justice-here-is-the-roadmap-to-failure/

I’d not really thought about the generational differences to consent.

You’re an exception on here, the standard STW go to in the case of unexpected income and what to do with it is “coke and hookers”.

Speak for yourself – neither have held any interest for me. Nicer means of transportation, more gigs, and expensive whiskey here.

It’s an observation, Countzero. Make of it what you will.

My favourite transport is my feet followed by a bike, skis and arms to drag myself through water. I’ve given up going to gigs, the last one was as an artist and I think that was my last. I don’t drink or do drugs except minimalist use of Becotide. Not sure what that’s got to do with Al-Fayed though.

  think of Rolf Harris and Max Clifford. And Gary Glitter is currently in prison.

I’d rather not think of these (and Stuart Hall) people. However they are in prison because they didn’t have the funds to ‘cover up and blackmail’.

Sad to hear that in 2015 the crown prosecution couldn’t take action against Al-Fayed for 2 cases of rape, due to lack of evidence.

That HR person or solicitor will also be subject to the fear of repercussions. You are asking them to put themselves at risk to prevent future occurrences.

no im not questioning if someone who covers up evidence is guilty of failing to prevent future offences, thats some sort of moral or ethical dilemma.  My question was a genuine one, could the use of NDAs to prevent an alleged victim of crime (or other witness) reporting that crime amount to attempting to pervert the course of justice. (Or perhaps “Assisting and Offender” or other such charges).  It seems unlikely that Fayed could pull off shutting up the victims without help from others, who perhaps should bear some of the criminal responsibility – which would make it harder for the next Fayed (be under no doubt there will be more rich people exploiting their power).  I appreciate that to some extent these people might also claim to be victims of the Fayed machine – but unless they quite their jobs asap after I am not convinced.

Where do you stop? Are each of the victims equally guilty of “perverting the course of justice” by not going public at the time and therefore encouraging future offences?

im not saying someone who hears a complaint and doesn’t report it is guilty, im saying someone who hears a complaint and offers you money and makes you sign an agreement never to speak of it again might be guilty.   Its quite a leap to get from that to blaming the victims for not speaking up sooner.

Are you sure Bunnyhop? I’ve just checked and Rolf Harris left a £16 million estate when he died last year.

His and Max Clifford’s convictions happened as a result of Operation Yewtree which also included another 5 successful convictions. It does suggest that there has been a change of attitude following Jimmy Savile’s death and being wealthy and high profile no longer gives quite the same protection as it previously did.

Yes An estate of £16 million is large, but possibly Harris wasn’t able to ‘get’ to so many people, or his funds may have been tied up in property, bonds, investments. Whereas Al-Fayed  probably with many more millions at the ready was able to pay off his ‘subjects’. We’ll never know.

My very first full time job at the age of 17 was at a family run firm. The boss was a female. However once or twice a week her husband would wander in (dip his hand in the till) and try it on with the mostly young, female staff. Nobody warned me about this letch. He once pushed me against a wall when everyone else was out of sight. It was extremely frightening and somehow I pushed back and ran out of the door. After that episode I never went near him alone, he abused the little bit of power and wealth afforded to him. Also I never told my father, as he would have knocked the guys block off.

At least coke and hookers involve a consensual financial transaction. There’ll be less money for coke this year.

Marina Hyde absolutely nails it once again

Behind every Al Fayed or Diddy, there is a small army of enablers: this column is dedicated to them

I always thought Michael Cole was a wrong ‘un, interesting to see what Private Eye say today, they didn’t like him, or, obviously, Al-AFayed.