Monday, April 8, 2013

Jimmy Saville... How Bad Was He Really

Madlands’ Savile Article

Reviewing some of the comments left by readers replying to the Farewell Madlands post, I noticed that there was particular sadness that Madlands’ article on Jimmy Savile might have been lost forever. So, I’ve decided to recreate Madlands’ excellent post here, complete with all the links.
What Jimmy Savile Really Did
March 27, 2013 by themadlands
If you are not following the revelations about Jimmy Savile closely and believe that he was a loaner who touched-up a few young groupies, then you have been deceived. Jimmy Savile’s actions go far beyond what you can even begin to believe: until you look at the evidence.
In this article I am going to tell you exactly how you have been deceived, why you have been deceived and why it matters to everyone in the UK.
All links in this piece open in new browser windows to allow you to read the further information in conjunction with this piece.
The Cover-up.
On 11th January 2013, the Metropolitan Police and the NSPCC published their joint report into the Operation Yewtree investigation, titled “Giving Victims A Voice”.
The problems with that report were twofold. Firstly they did not actually give all the victims a voice, only the ones who reported lower-level abuse (and considering the abuse revealed included raping mentally and physically disabled people, the high-level abuse must be, as you will learn, far, far beyond even that). It will also become clear as to why some of the worst abuse will never have been reported to the Police.
The reason for this dumbing-down through an incomplete investigation, and reporting on it, is simple. The authorities failed at all levels when it came to Savile. By limiting the horrors we, the public, find out about, the less likely it is that there will be a public outcry against those who knew about, covered-up for and participated in the abuse at all levels of our society.
The second problem is that their main conclusion was false. It was part of a cover-up. The cover-up is in place to hide from the British public one very simple fact:
Child abusers linked to Jimmy Savile go right to the top of our society and acted with the full knowledge of our Government, security services, Police, Judiciary and Press.
“Evidence” I hear you scream!
DS David Gray, who helped to lead the Savile investigation stated there was no evidence to suggest that he was part of a paedophile ring.
We are meant to belive that a man who abused children over six decades never formed close links with those who shared his sickness? We are meant to believe that a man who had the ear of Royalty, Prime Ministers and the Police was not well-connected enough to know of other paedophiles and act with them? This predatory paedophile acted alone, or at worst as part of a “loose network”.
That sounds to me like we are being deliberately led away from the truth?
Jimmy Savile’s nephew, Guy Marsden, told the press:
“Uncle Jimmy took me to his sick parties”.
In the article he goes on to say:
“A nephew of Sir Jimmy Savile yesterday told how his celebrity uncle attended ‘paedophile parties’.
Guy Marsden was just 13 when ‘Uncle Jimmy’ took him to a wealthy celebrity’s house in London in 1967 for the first of many sordid social gatherings.
Over the next 18 months, Guy and his friends went to numerous ‘parties’ where he believes men sexually abused girls and boys as young as ten. Savile was at many of these events, he said.”
“Guy said Savile sometimes arrived with a man dressed as a priest and he believed the young victims may have come from an orphanage or children’s home.”
Does that sound like a man who is not part of a high-level paedophile ring? How was he informed the parties were happening?
Surely by definition, a group of men arranging for care home children to be brought to private homes to be abused must be….a paedophile ring?
Marsden goes even further, stating:
“The group of runaways ended up in a fabulous house – believed to belong to a famous pop impresario – with a big indoor swimming pool. The celebrity home was one of the party venues.
‘At night you would get about 15 or 20 people turning up. There would be music and tables full of food, we couldn’t believe it. There was everything we needed and we just hung around.
‘At first we automatically assumed the children lived there, but we soon realised they didn’t. They would be brought there, sometimes by Uncle Jimmy, and would stay for six or seven hours until 3 or 4am. They were just little kids, boys and girls.”
Guy Marsden, an eye-witness, close to Savile and with nothing to hide, states clearly not only that a paedophile ring was active, but that “Uncle Jimmy” sometimes supplied the children.
If you had the head of operation Yewtree in front of you now, would you not ask:
“How on earth did you conclude there was no paedophile ring when there is clear witness testimony that states the complete opposite?”
But That Was Just The Tip Of What Jimmy was involved in.
For decades there were rumours of a paedophile ring operating around the town of Scarborough, as this story from the Express shows.
Recently independent investigative reporters have started uncovering the truth of what happened there. It is a story that involves a widespread knowledge amongst the local people, that was ignored due to the power of the people involved in it.
It is alleged to have involved a prominent local businessman, Peter Jaconelli, a friend of Jimmy Savile as the picture on the Express story linked to above shows. There is also evidence it was a paedophile ring that involved local government officials and members of the North Yorkshire Police. The NY Police had evidence and reports regarding the ring, Jaconelli and Savile for decades, but all investigations cam to unexplained halts.
This article from the Real Whitby site, also gives evidence that Savile took children from a care home he had no jurisdiction over, for weekends away in, you guessed it, Scarborough. Jimmy used his cult of personality to take children to the abusers:
“The Sunday People article confirms that Savile took patients from the safety of a secure controlled environment at Rampton to visit his close friends Peter Jaconelli and Jimmy Corrigan. The patients did not meet anyone else.
They were taken to Jaconelli at his Council offices in 1971. During the 1972 visit they met him at one of his ice cream parlours (where Jaconelli is alleged to have routinely committed sexual offences) and from which the public had been specifically excluded, thereby ensuring that there were no witnesses to what happened.
The conclusion is therefore inescapable that Savile chose to take patients from Rampton to Scarborough in preference to taking patients from Broadmoor because:
Rampton is closer to Scarborough and where the other members of Jaconelli’s ring were located.
Scarborough was Savile’s preferred place to offend because Jaconelli’s status ensured they could operate safely without fear of arrest.
The sole reason behind both trips was to move vulnerable people to Scarborough to Jaconelli.
Given the allegations against Jaconelli and Savile, the concern must be that it is highly likely that the patients were abused on both visits, possibly even in the Mayor’s Council Offices.”
Savile was no lone wolf. savile was a procurer of children for multiple high level paedophile rings, operating in Britain with the full knowledge of, and at times participation of, the people who we trust to run our country

Read On, It Gets Much Much Worse

No comments:

Post a Comment