Jimmy Savile, Ian Blair, the police and the IPCC

Spread the love

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary reports on the many instances that the police refused to pursue allegations against Jimmy Savile due to his status and affiliation(s?). Savile was effectively above the law because it was not applied to hime

The missed chances to get Jimmy Savile

The official report into what police knew – and, critically, failed to do – about Jimmy Savile makes grim reading.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, the watchdog that looks at how the police function, looked for evidence of reports, complaints and intelligence that had been gathered on Savile down the years.

They didn’t find a great deal – just seven potentially actionable complaints which emerged during a series of incidents. The inspectorate lists a further series of incidents in which people tried to report Savile and, in effect, failed to get the police to record what they were being told. …

I want it on record that I have experienced the same in trying to get the police to investigate allegations of very serious crimes against former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Ian Blair. I have made serious allegations to the police which are simply ignored. This is exactly the same as with Savile – he’s protected through the police’s refusal to record or take action on any credible allegations against him. Similarly, again it is because of his status and affiliation(s?) although I’m sure that Blair can’t now have any friends and must be universally hated for the useless little shit that he is and has been.

Which brings us to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). Why are police treated so differently when they are accused and investigated? Shouldn’t they simply be investigated like any other criminals? Why are they told of accusations against them?

Continue ReadingJimmy Savile, Ian Blair, the police and the IPCC

About the spook and an earlier one on 7/7

Spread the love

On Christmas Eve, I claimed to have discovered a nasty spook. A spook is a term for a spy – somebody who presents a fake image for unsavoury purposes, usually to deceive.

I had had a few drinks so I could be mistaken … but it was wierd. We had been talking only briefly when I realised that I recognised him but I was unsure from where. I told him that I recognised him and then I realised from where. He presents himself totally differently elsewhere with totally different clothing and even a different nationality of accent.

As I say, I suppose that I could be mistaken but when you know somebody visually well, you can recognise them. I hadn’t seen this person for four months or so but I do believe that I recognised him and he didn’t deny it.

I know that this is one of spooks’ techniques because I’ve seen it before. At the bus bombing of 7 July, 2005 there is a white haired man with a strong Blackcountry accent giving statements to television reporters. I recognised him as a spook because he was one of UK’s biggest spooks, working for UK defence company Quinetic at the time. I know he’s a spook because we followed the same course at University.

It was a fake accent but he was exactly where one of UK’s highest spooks would be expected on 7 July, 2005. Spooks must practice the accents. His surname was correct while his first name was not. I’ve published his name elsewhere.

later edit: You may as well have the name. The name is Bryan/Brian Jones.

29/12/12: To be entirely correct: I am aware that he worked for Quinetic 1999-2000.

Continue ReadingAbout the spook and an earlier one on 7/7

UK politics news review

Spread the love
  • A Step Towards the Dock

    The offence is known by two names in international law: the crime of aggression and a crime against peace. It is defined by the Nuremberg Principles as the “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression”(2). This means a war fought for a purpose other than self-defence: in other words outwith articles 33 and 51 of the UN Charter(3).

    That the invasion of Iraq falls into this category looks indisputable. Blair’s cabinet ministers knew it, and told him so. His Attorney-General warned that there were just three ways in which it could be legally justified: “self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UN Security Council authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case.”(4) Blair tried and failed to obtain the third.

    His foreign secretary, Jack Straw, told Blair that for the war to be legal, “i) There must be an armed attack upon a State or such an attack must be imminent; ii) The use of force must be necessary and other means to reverse/avert the attack must be unavailable; iii) The acts in self-defence must be proportionate and strictly confined to the object of stopping the attack.”(5) None of these conditions were met. The Cabinet Office told him “A legal justification for invasion would be needed. Subject to Law Officers’ advice, none currently exists.”(6)

    Without legal justification, the attack on Iraq was an act of mass murder. It caused the deaths of between 100,000 and a million people, and ranks among the greatest crimes the world has ever seen. That Blair and his ministers still saunter among us, gathering money wherever they go, is a withering indictment of a one-sided system of international justice: a system whose hypocrisies Tutu has exposed.

  • Law criminalising squatting to be challenged in court by cottage dweller

    A woman who has lived in an abandoned Welsh hillside cottage for 11 years is to challenge legislation that criminalises squatting.

    Irene Gardiner, 49, raised her family in the 500-year-old timber and stone house at Newchapel, near Llanidloes, Powys.

    Backed by lawyers in London, Gardiner is bringing a test case against the police and Crown Prosecution Service seeking assurances she will not be thrown out of the home she has inhabited since 2001.

    Her cottage, which has no electricity or running water, has been occupied by squatters for several decades.

    Gardiner’s case is supported by the law firm Leigh Day & Co. The claim, to be lodged in the high court in London next week, alleges prosecution would breach her rights to personal and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

    Ugo Hayter, of Leigh Day & Co, said: “This legislation will have impacts on the most vulnerable people in society, and will be a further burden on already strained public services.”

    She added: “There is existing criminal and civil law which enables property owners to swiftly evict squatters.

    “Homeowners will derive no further protection from this new legislation. It will simply criminalise the homeless.”

  • Crackdown on squatters ‘will put people on streets’

     New squatting laws have sparked fears of a rise in homelessness across Manchester.

    From today, squatting in a residential building becomes illegal – meaning anyone doing it could be jailed or fined.

    Ministers say the move will protect homeowners – and ‘slam shut the door on squatters’.

    But campaigners have told the M.E.N. most squatters are genuinely homeless and will now be left on the streets.

    They argue it is better to use an empty house rather than let it fall into disrepair.

    Currently squatting is initially treated as a civil matter, meaning homeowners must go to court to prove trespass first.

    In future, police will be able to arrest squatters on the spot. They will then face six months in jail and a £5,000 fine.

    But one 38-year-old man, who has lived in squats all over the city for more than 20 years, said: “Everybody doing it is homeless. They don’t live in a flat or anything – they just get their head down wherever they can. We’re going to get more people on the streets, definitely, but at the end of the day people are not going to stop doing it.”

    [edit: Uk prime minister David Cameron is also altering his cabinet today. Small changes are expected.]
Continue ReadingUK politics news review

News review

Spread the love
  • Craig Murray writes on UK threats to invade the Ecuadorian embassy for its insolence in granting asylum to Julian Assange. Of course UK Neo-Cons in support of US Neo-Cons have absolutely no right to invade the embassy. Assange has not even been charged with an offence FFS.
  • Former friend, Murdochist and spin doctor to Prime Minister David Cameron – Andy Coulsdon – appeared in court yesterday on phone hacking charges. Murdochist friend and associate to Prime Minister David Cameron – Rebekah Brooks – due to appear at seperate phone hacking hearings in September.
  • Louise Mensch’s seat of Corby to be lost to Labour

This will be, beyond any argument, a blatant breach of the Vienna Convention of 1961, to which the UK is one of the original parties and which encodes the centuries – arguably millennia – of practice which have enabled diplomatic relations to function. The Vienna Convention is the most subscribed single international treaty in the world.

The provisions of the Vienna Convention on the status of diplomatic premises are expressed in deliberately absolute terms. There is no modification or qualification elsewhere in the treaty.

Article 22

1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter
them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.
2.The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises
of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the
mission or impairment of its dignity.
3.The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of
transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.

Not even the Chinese government tried to enter the US Embassy to arrest the Chinese dissident Chen Guangchen. Even during the decades of the Cold War, defectors or dissidents were never seized from each other’s embassies. Murder in Samarkand relates in detail my attempts in the British Embassy to help Uzbek dissidents. This terrible breach of international law will result in British Embassies being subject to raids and harassment worldwide.

The government’s calculation is that, unlike Ecuador, Britain is a strong enough power to deter such intrusions. This is yet another symptom of the “might is right” principle in international relations, in the era of the neo-conservative abandonment of the idea of the rule of international law.

 

Dark day for Andy Coulson and Co as wheels of justice begin to turn

Andy Coulson, David Cameron’s former spin doctor, was among seven former News of the World employees who saw their normal roles reversed yesterday as they sat together behind a glass panel in Westminster Magistrates’ Court.

The veteran editors and reporters will have watched dozens of court cases in their long careers, but always from the press benches. Yesterday the six journalists, together with the private investigator Glenn Mulcaire, were in the dock, being stared at by a huge, curious throng of members of their old profession.

The prosecutor said the six journalists were accused of conspiring to hack the phones of as many as 600 people. In addition to the general charge of conspiracy, Coulson, a former editor of the now defunct News of the World, is also accused of being implicated in targeting the phones of the murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, the former Labour Cabinet ministers David Blunkett and Charles Clarke, and the footballer George Best’s son Calum.

They spoke only to confirm their names and addresses, but what might have been a very brief court appearance became substantially longer when Westminster’s deputy chief magistrate, Daphne Wickham, decided that the full list of charges should be read out.

The list – so long that it took a clerk a full 20 minutes to get through it – was studded with famous names of alleged hacking targets, including four Cabinet ministers from the Tony Blair years – Mr Blunkett, Mr Clarke, Tessa Jowell and John Prescott – the fire brigade union leader Andy Gilchrist, the former Liberal Democrat MP Mark Oaten, as well as such household names as Jude Law, Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Sir Paul McCartney, Heather Mills, Sven-Goran Eriksson, Wayne Rooney and Delia Smith.

Although none of the defendants is accused of hacking everyone on that list, each is accused of targeting some of them.

The defendants sat impassively through this litany, except for 72-year-old Stuart Kuttner, a News of the World journalist for more than 30 years, who shook his head repeatedly when the three charges against him were read.

The name of News International’s former chief executive, Rebekah Brooks, also cropped up in the indictment. She is due to appear at a separate hearing on 3 September. Coulson and his fellow defendants were bailed to appear at Southwark Crown Court on 26 September.

 

Tories facing heavy defeat in Mensch seat by-election poll by the party reveals

 

David Cameron is facing a resounding defeat by Labour in the Corby by-election, the Tories’ own polling revealed last night.

The seat is being fought after the sitting MP, Conservative A-lister Louise Mensch, decided to leave Northamptonshire for New York to spend more time with her American husband and three children.

Labour looks set to seize Corby in November after a survey commissioned by Tory tycoon Lord Ashcroft put Labour support at 52 per cent, the Conservatives at 37 per cent and the Lib Dems at 7 per cent.

Lord Ashcroft said Labour was set for a ‘comfortable win’ but added he was surprised that Labour’s lead was not bigger.

27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.

I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.

Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.

dizzy

 

Continue ReadingNews review