Stick to your delusions then – the bit that says “Brittan died in January 2015, aged 75, not knowing that police had four months previously concluded he had no case to answer. His widow, Diana, was only informed in October 2015” and

The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, is to meet Lord Brittan’s widow later this month to apologise for his force’s handling of a false rape allegation

obviously passes you by. Continue spreading your delusions – I can’t be bothered to further engage with you. I’m obviously only feeding your sad addiction

So what about the people whose entire lives were damaged by abuse when they were children?

Your addiction appears to be ignoring anything other than tiny passages which suit your deluded argument.

My addiction happens to be riding bikes…

Right, so all these people are ‘in on it’.
I see lots of pictures of the Queen from you, so surely she’s in it on too?
What has she been up to?

Don’t start him!

For me the profiting out of war thing is bad enough and doesn’t need the ring bolted on.

This kind of ties in with the recent trend to start new articles with something like…

“The Prime Minister will announce, later today, that he’s increasing VAT to 25%…”

You’re reporting it, so he’s already announced it, you Muppets!

It seems like the authorities/media are trying to prejudice cases/opinions before they’ve even got started.

Another step in the decline of society, driven by the mutual obsession of the media and politicians
🙁

“Jimmy Saville seems never to have been called out in his lifetime, not because he was surrounded by paedos but that his accusers were not believed because of his fame”

Not so. There was at least one big in vestigation and the police spent a fortune checking it out.

A woman said as a girl she’d given him a BJ in his car at a school in front of a largeish number of witnesses. The police went to massive lengths to track most of the witnesses down but none had any memory of it. (IIRC)

Anna Racoon’s blog is worth a read for the inside story from the school.

I just ate some fruitcake

SHit he is into cannibalism now

I doubt it, he’s been dead for a while

FROWNS

I have no idea why I doubt your ability to process complicated information and reach sound conclusions when you are so good with the simple stuff…..go on play the edinburgh card just for me

I see lots of pictures of the Queen from you, so surely she’s in it on too?
What has she been up to?

She is the head of an establishment paedophile ring which is vital to the control structures of the political and religious elite.

If she wasn’t she wouldn’t have allowed herself to be photographed with all those paedophiles.

What’s the Edinburgh Card? Google doesn’t seem to know.

Saying you did not mean it and it was just a joke- used by folk to have a go at TJ.

Thanks.

That Anna raccoon blog is indeed a good, Tx

Though of course I don’t agree with Anna Racoon, it’s better that there is critical thinkers on both sides of the debate, however, siding with the powerful, who have extensive influence in the media, government and police (which is in many respects how Jimmy Savile and others got away with it in the 1st place) is a strange angle to take and some might say, a touch cowardly.

As for what role the Queen has in all of this, aside from the allegations of involvement of a member of the Royal Family, there doesn’t seem to be many (if any) other people who’d be in a position to have authority over both Jersey and the UK Home Office (which is responsible for Borders and Customs).

For some indisputable photographic evidence here is the Queen with her nurse

Notice the buckle on the nurse’s belt, it clearly shows the compass and square and pentagram of the masonic order

I don’t agree with Anna Racoon

Even the facts?

Is that the few facts she picks of the many available, or the vast majority she chooses to ignore?

jivehoneyjive – Member
Is that the few facts she picks of the many available, or the vast majority she chooses to ignore?

That could very easily apply to someone else…
Makes you think…
Oh, and while the subject of accusations against various people in high profile places regarding so-called historical abuse, the police are currently actively persuing cases against 256 people who are, in fact, dead!
Under English/UK law, there is no legal avenue for taking a case against a dead person before a court of law, as I understand it, so just why are these muppets spending huge amounts of money and squandering valuable resources chasing people who can never, ever be prosecuted?

so just why are these muppets spending huge amounts of money and squandering valuable resources chasing people who can never, ever be prosecuted?

Because the victims have the right for it to be legally established that the allegations they made were true, if indeed they were.

In too many cases the claims made by victims of child abuse were falsely dismissed as unreliable. Establishing that they told the truth, whilst obviously denying them full justice, could perhaps help to bring some sort of closure for them.

Furthermore it can highlight institutional failures and reduce to possibility of institutional failures in the future.

Establishing whether child abuse occurred is not just about punishing the perpetrators.

Fair point ernie

Also perhaps a means of piecing together the wider network, to prevent continuing abuse to children right now and in the future?

Whatever the reason, there is no doubt that when it comes to the amount of money and resources (and lives) squandered, it’ll pale in comparison to the defence industry arms trade and wars started under false pretences.

At least Cliff is a good Christian:

Tony Blair is a nonce ?

When the person who has been accused, is unable to defend themself, due to being dead, then the justice being s dished out is somewhat flawed.

The accused cannot answer charges and therefore we have a somewhat one sided investigation here. The accused always is assumed innocent and always has the right to a fair trail. This cannot happen with a corpse.
You both have a point as we do need to expose cases where agencies turned a blind eye or were remiss as we need to learn the lessons to prevent it happening again

Is that the few facts she picks of the many available, or the vast majority she chooses to ignore?

Staire is dead

It was beaten to death by the limp flaccid body of self awareness 😯

Catch 22, as the cases of Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith, Leon Brittan, Greville Janner and many others show…

On the one hand, the accused is no longer around to defend themselves… on the other, there is a significant body of evidence to show they were protected on multiple occasions, under several different governments, by several departments and agencies, whilst alive.

All very odd…

The accused always is assumed innocent and always has the right to a fair trail. This cannot happen with a corpse.

Why not? Today Matthew Daley was found guilty of manslaughter over a ‘road rage’ killing, he did not give any evidence in court, does that mean that he didn’t receive a fair trial?

It is perfectly possible imo to have a fair trial even if the defendant can’t defend themselves.

EDIT : This a bit of a side issue which isn’t really relevant to the historic child abuse cases. If Lord Janner were still alive there would be, due to his dementia, be a “trial of the facts”, as he is now dead there will instead be an investigation into the allegations against him. This both fair and money well spent imo.

In some circumstance their best defence may be to not give evidence
However they will still talk to and instruct a solicitor thereby defending themself. Clearly, clairvoyance aside, a corpse cannot do this

Your broad point about learning the lesson is a fair.

Out of interest what punishments were you thinking of dishing out to the corpse? Community service? Hard labour. I reckon solitary confinement 6 foot under in a wooden box is a good one.

Out of interest what punishments were you thinking of dishing out to the corpse? Community service? Hard labour. I reckon solitary confinement 6 foot under in a wooden box is a good one.

I thought I had dealt with that point with my previous comment :

“Establishing whether child abuse occurred is not just about punishing the perpetrators.”

I don’t think I can expand on that really.

Perhaps it’s more about relief for someone who has spent a lifetime trying to come to terms with what happened to them and not being believed…

and:

a means of piecing together the wider network, to prevent continuing abuse to children right now and in the future

For Ernie, in true JHJ style.

I remembered that Blair had been prosecuted for sex in the toilets but all trace seemed to have vanished from the web. Some references still remain on blogs if you use duckduckgo. Anyhow: Blair

I can no longer find any reference to his victims being younger boys.

@ ernie and JHJ
Both of which laudable aims can be achieved without a “trial ” of a corpse.

I don’t know why you keep wanting to drag “a corpse” onto the thread.

The following question was asked :

“so just why are these muppets spending huge amounts of money and squandering valuable resources chasing people who can never, ever be prosecuted?”

To which I pointed out : Establishing whether child abuse occurred is not just about punishing the perpetrators.

No where have I suggested taking a corpse to court. I find your apparent obsession with cadavers a little bizarre.

Nice try ernie at a dig but nowhere near as funny as usual but possibly more caustic than usual.
Anyway we agree we should not take the dead to court so lets all move on to something a little more rational.

nowhere near as funny as usual but possibly more caustic than usual.

Thank you for your critique. I’ll bear in mind your comments.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36546038

I will just leave that there.

I’ve just spent five minutes hunting for this thread when rt60 had already bumped it.

I’ll still add my link: Cliff goes free.