[Closed] Cliff Richard's former flat complex searched in 80s Child Sex Abuse investigatio

Truth is often stranger than fiction; would we be riding bikes of the calibre we are today if it wasn't for the Eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815?

Much of what you say is not even tenuous
That is laughable.

We did not get bikes then. let alone npw, because horses died. The first bike [ usually accredited as in 1816/17 was not designed to replace a horse [ nor are any today]

Are you permanently stoned dude ?

Truth is often stranger than fiction; would we be riding bikes of the calibre we are today if it wasn't for the Eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815?

There you go with your Daily Mail headlines again. Here's a tip: facts don't have question marks at the end of them.

The answer to your question is, "almost certainly." An event 200 years ago [i]may[/i] well have prompted folks to come up for alternatives to horses, but if Drais hadn't invented the Draisine at that moment, there's nothing to say that he wouldn't have invented it later or that someone else entirely would have. It seems highly unlikely to me (and I expect to anyone else who stops to think about it for more than a second) that but for one particular man attaching a couple of wheels to a plank, bicycles would never have existed.

The resulting ash cloud affected the weather to such an extent that crops died and as a result many horses perished, necessitating the development of alternative transport.

Wild, wacky, tin foil stuff, but true nonetheless...

It might be true. It might be a convenient coincidence. I don't think it's known for certain either way.

at least I have the gumption to actively investigate and fight back...

I hate to break it to you old bean, but you don't have anything of the sort. You instead have the remarkable gumption to believe without question any old shit you read on the Internet.

"Investigating things" involves a degree of critical thinking which, as demonstrated repeatedly on this very thread, eludes you. You may well be correct in some of your theories, but if you are it'll be down to the law of averages and blind luck rather than your l33t investigating skills.

[b]epicyclo[/b] I took up your invite, googled that, found that the main 2 protagonists were actually completely cleared, but one killed himself after being outed and the other was killed. So what exactly is your point? Seems to me to show that irresponsible reporting or use of parliamentary privilege isn't always such a good thing.

I believe there have been medium level cover-ups of things in Ireland, Jersey and elsewhere, not sure this goes all the way to the top.

I believe there have been medium level cover-ups of things in Ireland, Jersey and elsewhere, not sure this goes all the way to the top.

Does the home office constitute medium level?

"Investigating things" involves a degree of critical thinking which, as demonstrated repeatedly on this very thread, eludes you. You may well be correct in some of your theories, but if you are it'll be down to the law of averages and blind luck rather than your l33t investigating skills.

Thanks for the vote of confidence Cougar, it's nice to know the time I dedicate to pursuing justice for under-privileged victims of abuse is appreciated.

Your valuable contributions to exposing crime by the elite are a true credit to humanity. 😉

I hate to break it to you old bean, but you don't have anything of the sort. You instead have the remarkable gumption to believe without question any old shit you read on the Internet.

Would you be so kind as to tell me where you get your information?

Jivethingy. Show me evidence rather than innuendo of ministers acting together to cover something up, or proof of suppression of legal or police action after intervention a minister.

I deal with survivors of abuse a fair amount. Have to go to court to help get one offender convicted in a few weeks time. All this concentration on conspiracy theories clouds the fact that must abused people know and are related to their abuser.

Rolf? Not surprised.
Cliff ? Who knows. But there is this awkward presumption of innocence thing

I do think that obsessive conspiracy theorists should take occasional breaks to look long and hard to understand the motivation for their quests.

I'd quite like to know at what point I've strayed into conspiracy theory territory with this particular thread... everything I've presented has been backed up by evidence.

I appreciate in the majority of cases the victim knows their abuser, but nonetheless, trafficking rings have existed for quite some time and continue to this day; that this has been linked to care homes which are supposed to protect the vulnerable is frankly shocking...

Time and again evidence has pointed to collusion within the authorities to cover their tracks, as they often have members of their own ranks involved.

Margaret Hodge's response regarding the Islington Child Abuse Linked with Jersey is clear example of inappropriate action:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/new-social-worker-condemns-hodge-6959684.html

Needless to say, Cyril Smith and Jimmy Savile were both protected at high levels:

http://www.channel4.com/news/cyril-smith-child-abuse-mi5-rochdale-elm

so much so, that it appears the current government may have aided an attempt to cover up Savile's exploits on Jersey:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leah-mcgrath-goodman/david-miranda-uk-detention_b_3844480.html

Of course, as grum's link suggests, the missing home office files and Leon Brittan's stumbling and meandering story regarding the dossier are a strong indicator of collusion.

I have contributed all my knowledge on the subject - not very much.

You contributed all your knowledge a long time ago as well. Repeating the same thing over again and again doesn't make it any more proven.

When you first posted up some of the links I was interested enough to follow them up. Now you are just coming across as annoying and actively putting people off finding out about the things you seem to care about.

It's a wise man who approaches the world with an open mind. It's a wiser man who knows when to give it a rest for a few weeks at least!

I believe Jivehoneyjive is a serving Mi5 officer.

His unit's task is to make sure that we associate stories of government child abuse rings with internet conspiracy theorists.

So when any [b]real evidence [/b] does seep out, we all think “Not that old tosh again".

Remember - just because some "loony" wrote it on the internet, it doesn't mean its not true.

(and if you don't hear from me again, you'll know this is too close to the truth)

You contributed all your knowledge a long time ago as well. Repeating the same thing over again and again doesn't make it any more proven.

That's not strictly true... you are under no obligation to study all the links provided, but there's plenty of fresh links today which I've not previously disclosed.

Nonetheless:

It's a wise man who approaches the world with an open mind. It's a wiser man who knows when to give it a rest for a few weeks at least!

That's probably good advice and I'll try to give you time to digest what I'm attempting to expose, for the greater good.

*Unless some cantankerous bugger riles me up 😆

I believe Jivehoneyjive is a serving Mi5 officer

Close... truth is I came from the future to save you all from being bummed by lizards 😉

Stoatsbrother - Member
epicyclo I took up your invite, googled that, found that the main 2 protagonists were actually completely cleared, but one killed himself after being outed and the other was killed. So what exactly is your point?...

I googled again and got different results. However my point is this was actually happening at top level in the state I was living in.

For example, the leader of the Queensland Labor party, Keith Wright was jailed for 14 years for rapes, and serious sexual offences against juveniles. There was also Keith Darcy - jailed for 13 years for similar. Another that comes to mind in Oz is Theoipholous.

What I recollect from the time is that investigations were stalled at top level by people who subsequently were convicted.

If somebody is accused of an offence then of course the police are duty bound to investigate. This may involve interviewing people and searching premises or computers. What I don't get is the fact that all the world's media are tipped off in advance so that somebody's reputation is then trashed guilty or not. If somebody is subsequently charged that is different as the CPS feels there is sufficient evidence for a likely conviction. The argument that this somehow flushes out further witnesses is not justified in my book.
I have no insight btw with regard to Cliff or any other celeb accused, convicted or politicians for that matter - I just think the police should not tip off the media. Oh and the Beeb should not have this as their lead item on the 10 o'clock news FFS!

So I've been out of this thread for a bit and bullshitting conspiracy theories in the pub and clubs as you do, but the more you delve, the more this is beginning to look like something actually real, that Leon Brittan cover up thing in the papers a few weeks back.

Then [url= http://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/the-elm-guest-house-vip-paedophile-party-list/ ]The Elm guest house list[/url] keeps cropping up.

Where there's smoke...

If that's true and someone called cig papers can crack the case, our boys in blue will have no problem.

But there are some real fruitcakes on the net and I don't know if cig papers is one of them or not so will leave to the police.

Although the fact they needed 5 cars to convey 8 police officers and there just happened to be a press helicopter in he area despite them saying no one tip off the press makes me wonder if there next move is getting cliff in and wacking him on the bonce with a yellow pages to see if it jogs his memory.

But there are some real fruitcakes on the net

I'm sorry but that link on the cigpapers website is at best anti-semetic rubbish, what relevance has their religion, is one question.

I do so hope as well that someone riles up Jive-BullshitBunny or whatever they call themselves so we don't have anymore posts of their drivel.

Benji old chap, you misunderstood... like a Genie in a lamp, if you rile me up, I appear and irritate your well packaged mind 😆

Think outside the box dude... push the envelope, shred the [s]documents[/s] gnar

As this seems to be the thread for conspiracy theorists then i'm surprised no one has mentioned the Prince Philip link to the paedophile ring, apparently in the late 60's/70's he used to drive around London in a black cab to the suspected paedophile ring safe houses and partake of the flesh so to speak, this is one of the reasons given for the immunity of the royal family from any public prosecution.

Dunno if it's true or not but a good rumour is hard to keep to oneself 😉

Blimey, thanks for that somafunk; I'll have to stay up all night in order to get enough facts to educate everyone in the minutest detail with indisputable proof come sunrise 😀

Does make you wonder:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/royal-family-granted-new-right-of-secrecy-2179148.html

Especially since GCHQ reckon if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear...

Blimey, thanks for that somafunk; I'll have to stay up all night in order to get enough facts to educate everyone in the minutest detail with indisputable proof come sunrise

I'm sure google/bing/search engine of paranoid nutter choice is delighted.

I'm sure google/bing/search engine of paranoid nutter choice is delighted.

The way I figure it, if I was privileged enough to be on Mi5/GCHQ watchlists, the stuff I browse would help educate the folks monitoring me.

All good fuel for the revolution... When I'm king, I'll free up loads of cash from all the Tax Havens in the Commonwealth and Crown Dependencies and sort the NHS right out, whilst kicking the banks into shape bigtime.

Now here's an investigation waiting to happen.
[img] [/img]
Crrrraaaaaaccckkkkkeeeeerrrr jjjjjjjjaaaacccckkkkk

I'm not gonna say where or who i heard it from but there is absolutely no reason why i should doubt the veracity of what was said, I'm not going to elaborate as i'd rather not die in a french tunnel car crash.

It wasn't Dave down the pub was it.

It wasn't Dave down the pub was it.

No, mock if you like, i believe what was repeated to me to be true - i couldn't give a flying toss about forum acceptance or suchlike.

[img] [/img]

Good article:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-way-the-police-have-treated-cliff-richard-is-completely-unacceptable-9672367.html

br just beat me to posting the Independent piece. Lots of questions need answering about how the police handle case like this.

The fact the police denied tipping off the media but now claim they were right to work with the press due to new information.

I though that if a witness in court was proven to have lied in any part of there testament, there whole testament is thrown out, also if they are proven to be a liar about a completely unrelated subject there testimony is worthless as you can not believe a word of what is said by a proven liar.

Yet the police have acted completely underhandedly and lied again.
Wether cliff is eventually found guilty or not, my trust and respect for the police is dwindling fast.

The way the police have handled this is a bit of a double edged sword.

Naming him before any charges have been leveled at him obviously predisposes the general public's opinion to believing he's guilty, and therefore could influence a jury if charges were ever bought.

But, it also means victims will feel they can go forward to the police if they were abused. But, again, this opens the way for false allegations, which again effects the public, and potentially the jury's perception of the potential defendant.

Not naming him, obviously protects his anonymity, but it may also stop victims coming forward, which means a guilty defendant could escape prosecution as there's not enough evidence against them.

There's no easy answer in my eyes.

The article you are referring to re cliff Richard is utter rubbish
Why would the police have to communicate with a suspect before obtaining a warrant or search the premises?
Hello mr Richard, it's the police, we are investigating an offence of. .............., do you mind if we come and search you flat for any evidence, we will come next Wednesday at 1000.
What do yiu think would happen if the police had to announce searches, all the evidence would be disposed of.
The article is factually incorrect

easygirl, i don't think that's the issue.

The issue is the police tipped off the press they were going to carry out a search of his property, the press were waiting for the police at the gates.

I think simon cowell has bought the television rights to cliffs trial.
Which will be held at wembley arena in front of a audience, hosted by ant and dec with cowell himself in the wig.

It will be shown live every Saturday night leading up untill Christmas and will culminate in a star studded live finale where the public will decide cliffs innocence or guilt with a phone in vote.

If cliff by a miracle is found not guilty he will get to perform his latest single live guaranteeing him the Christmas number 1 spot (reason enough for some to vote guilty).

There have been rumours for a week before this. Did the media only just turn up before the police or have there been some there for days ?

Having the press there is a difficult call
If there are other victims out there, the press coverage may help them come forward.
There will have been a decision made about informing the press based on that, or do people think the officer in case just decides to ring the papers to show off?
All these decisions affect the outcome of the case and will all be documented with the reasoning behind it.
I have witnessed planning and decision making processes for high profile cases, a correctly planned case is complex and impressive , although I will agree that a lot do cases are far from perfectly planned, it's all down to the lead officer

And if he is found guilty a boy band manufactured from cliffs victims called "the abused" will sing there single securing them the festive número uno.

Press just happened to be flying past, mmmm (itch my chin).

It would not suprise me if there was a helicopter in the sky that just happens to film his arrest.
And a large 4x4 nearby with the keys left in it and the door ajar bait car style.
In the hope cliff makes a run for it in an OJ Simpson like car chase. Tv gold.

Some really wretched attempts at "humour" relating to this case, here and on social media.

What case, no has one been arrested.
Let alone charged.

Pedantry winners award is in the post

Sorry for being pedantic about due process over trial by media.

Investigation is what's happening, into a sexual abuse on a boy by a man
Let's not forget that, it's a serious allegation

I did not realise there was a due process for trial by media - that is worse hyperbole than the [ non legal] use of the word case. We all know what the poster meant when he said case and , IMHO, one is certainly being made at the moment, unless you wish to argue they raided his house to not make a case.

Sorry for being pedantic about due process [b]over[/b] trial by media.

I did not realise there was a due process for trial by media - that is worse hyperbole than the [ non legal] use of the word case.

I think the use of the word "over" was intended to mean "rather than"

Not to mean "with regard to"

The bastardisation of the justice system for media sensationalism is a sorry affair. That could prejudice a jury in a future trial.

Innocent till proven guilty is right not supported by all countries and this is one step backwards towards the lynch mob.

I think the use of the word "over" was intended to mean "rather than"

Not to mean "with regard to"

The bastardisation of the justice system for media sensationalism is a sorry affair. That could prejudice a jury in a future trial.

Innocent till proven guilty is right not supported by all countries and this is one step backwards towards the lynch mob.

Put yourself in cliffs situation, would you feel safe about leaving your house right now.
Would worry that people would stare, point fingers, spit or even roll
there copy of the paper your plastered all over into a millwall brick and hit you with it.

You would be under a self inflicted house arrest.
Yet you have not even been arrested never mind had charges bought against you.

It is truly shameful and the police best hope he is guilty.

Let's not forget that, it's a serious allegation

This should mean that there is more caution about exposing it to public scrutiny, not less.

Innocent till proven guilty is right not supported by all countries and this is one step backwards towards the lynch mob.

Generally this principle is sound, BUT;

It's a bit of a catch 22...

If you have sufficient reason to believe guilt, but not enough evidence for a guaranteed prosecution, then exposure by the media will bring more witnesses forward.

If you didn't, then a guilty party could get away with it.

If they've pursued this particular avenue of enquiry for the reasons I believe, things could get very interesting indeed...

thank god chip is here to ground the debate

there are two issues regarding anonymity here
1. Being anonymous is good if you turn out to be NOT guilty
2. being anonymous is good if you are GUILTY as it may stop other victims coming forward

Deciding which way to go is difficult, as mud sticks, and neither option is perfect.

I doubt cliff is shitting it going out tbh and I am not sure why you wish to rail against OOT social media reports if you are going to do them yourself [ all be it from the accused [ or investigated ] perspective.

Well if only half of the rumour and conjecture over an MI5 lead high level cover up is true, then using the media is at least going to make another one (cover up) difficult.

I doubt they'd do it unless they have been frustrated over the years with cover ups, super injunctions and the like.

That's disturbing news about the freedom of information act being curtailed in regard to the Royal Family, there's enough mud being slung, some of it will bound to stick now..

the media is at least going to make another one (cover up) difficult.
I doubt they'd do it unless they have been frustrated over the years with cover ups, super injunctions and the like.

It was a BBC helicopter, you know the BBC who employed Jim'll fix it.
There sick of the cover ups.

as somewhat of a pedant in this area, I'm not aware of a single formal definition of "case"...

the way the police are back up to their dishonest leaking shenanigans is outrageous. if the purpose really was to encourage victims or witnesses to come forward, the right way would have been simply to say "we are investigating x, anyone with information y should contact us on z".

I though that if a witness in court was proven to have lied in any part of there testament, there whole testament is thrown out, also if they are proven to be a liar about a completely unrelated subject there testimony is worthless as you can not believe a word of what is said by a proven liar.

chip - Member

It was a BBC helicopter, you know the BBC who employed Jim'll fix it.
There sick of the cover ups.

So what are you inferring chips? There's not been a cover up? Those files that Leon Brittain 'misplaced' genuinely accidentally vanished? Nobody, not one of all those care home kids didn't try and get his/her case heard?
The Jill Dando thing, just a coincidence she was doing an expose piece for crime watch (allegedly).

No, there's just to much albeit circumstantial, virtual bollox about for my liking, I think that's why they leaked it.

Funnily enough, Leon Brittan is related to Sir Malcolm Ri****d, who is the current Chairman of the Intelligence and Security committee, appointed by David Cameron...

Cliff Richard and Jimmy Savile were both on an investigation into pornography, [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y8x4j ]where they apparently visited sex clubs in London and Copenhagen[/url] set up by [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/430115.stm ]Lord Longford[/url], who also campaigned for the release of Myra Hindley...

The Jill Dando thing gets more interesting too, but I don't want to be accused of flooding the thread with facts...

Dont worry, no matter what you type or claim, you wont ever be accused of that.
Innuendo, supposition, linking tow events without any facts, ludicrous claims, YES too many facts Not likely ..perhaps if you post on Icke websites you might be a bit fact heavy but not here.

You really should make it clear that you are saying Lord longford set up an enquiry that as part of its research visited sex clubs.
that reads as if you are saying he set up the sex clubs.

His anti-pornography campaigning made him the subject of derision and he was labeled by the press as Lord Porn when he and former prison doctor Christine Temple-Saville set out on a wide-ranging tour of sex industry establishments in the early 1970s to compile a self-funded report. The press made much of his visits to strip clubs in Copenhagen.

Have you a credible link to sy cliff or saville went with them mr Facts - Hilarious the self delusion of conspiracists.

C'mon Junky, compared to most of the 'what's the most I can spend on a bike to make everyone love me?'/'How often should I frotter myself against my Santa Cruz?' threads on here jhj's mostly harmless, isn't he?

At least he's not invented a new wheelsize or asked for advice about manbags, funbags or bodybags.

So let me get this straight, I supply facts, and you lamely attempt to discredit them... this is a fun game!!

NINJA EDIT to acknowledge Rusty Spanner :D:

650b is definitely better, because despite weighing more, having more inherent flex and weakness for a given rim profile, you can run the bottom bracket below the axles for better stability + cornering and sell more bikes (I must admit, picking a man bag was a burden on my turbulent hormones 😳 )

So Mr Junky sir, do you have any facts I can try and discredit, or don't you want to share?

xxx

If you can provide proof that 650b is a perverted conspiracy organised by Cliff, Simon Cowell and Carol Smillie I GUARANTEE you'll never pay for beer in Burnley again

Dude, that is a challenge I would relish, though even I might struggle at this early stage; however, give me 30ish years and I'll see what comes out in the wash...

I agree Rusty but he is just as delusional as thinking a 650 b tyre will bring the[s] trial[/s] trail alive but no where near as evil 😉

There are facts in my reply 🙄 but you cannot beat delusions with facts

There are facts in my reply but you cannot beat delusions with facts

You appear to supply delusions with facts...

The facts remain; the spin is optional 😉

These recent revelations remind me of the Operation Ore/FBI dirt on Labour Party/Iraq War scenario and also members of the establishment/military boarding schools/Dunblane tragedy.

Each one on their own can be viewed as dubious at best but when all put together you have to wonder if something really sinister has been going on all along.

Sadly I don't think we will ever know.

I wonder what realistic chance the police saw that by raiding the flat they might find evidence involving a 29 year old crime committed?

Its the type of decision that got the police into trouble in the Hanningfield case (where they arrested Lord Hanningfield in a dawn raid, just so they could search his property - ruled illegal in court with a massive damages paid)

Blatant fishing trip!

If you are older, then you should have the maturity to not shag if in doubt.

I grew up in the 60s and we knew to avoid children, we knew it was illegal, and had serious consequences.

There's no excuses, 15 years and 11 months means you should display some maturity and wait a month.

We knew it then, we know it now.

ninfan - Member
I wonder what realistic chance the police saw that by raiding the flat they might find evidence involving a 29 year old crime committed?

CountZero - Member
....We were pretty much inseparable for the rest of the holiday, and things got pretty steamy, but didn't go quite as far as full intercourse. As far as I was concerned, she was at least my age, if not slightly older, and I never felt any need to interrogate her, so imagine my shock when, in a letter she wrote later that year she happened to say it was her birthday coming up, and in reply to my next letter asking how old she was, she said 14!...

Well underage, steamy eh? and evidence in the form of correspondence?

Mate, if I were you, I'd get a shredder before you start hearing BBC helicopters... 🙂

Seems a reasonable version of events TBH...
[url= http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a590851/police-disappointed-by-slow-bbc-cliff-richard-search-leak-denial.html#~oNbl1oxhz0IY1U ]http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a590851/police-disappointed-by-slow-bbc-cliff-richard-search-leak-denial.html#~oNbl1oxhz0IY1U[/url]

Of course it's easy to say they're covering their tracks, but it's quite easy to imagine an unofficial leak to the BBC as well, no?

Unless the BBC were psychic it was a bad police officer who leaked it unofficially, maybe for payment.
They should be trying to weed that person out to be sacked at the very least.

So the police force then effectively crumbled under fear of blackmail that if they did not agree to work with the reporter they would publish the story .

In my mind that is even worse than if they officially leaked it .

Means we have got atleast one corrupt police officer serving on a weak force that are not fit for purpose .

That's a bit of a naive position, if it's genuinely what you think and you're not just arguing for the sake of it.

Really, surely loose lips sinks ships is covered in police training.

So how would the BBC know the polices business, phone hacking maybe.
Some one would have had to tell them.

If the BBC rings up and say we know you blah blah, surely the correct response is, we do not discuss police business with anyone, sorry and put the phone down .

They are basically saying what happened was because the BBC had them over a barrel and it was not how they would have done things otherwise.

There should be an official investigation in to how the BBC knows police business,
And how the police would let the BBC have influence over the investigation.

It's a mockery of a sham.

Cliff Richard and Jimmy Savile were both on an investigation into pornography, where they apparently visited sex clubs in London and Copenhagen set up by Lord Longford, who also campaigned for the release of Myra Hindley...

Out of interest, which biography?

ninfan - Member
I wonder what realistic chance the police saw that by raiding the flat they might find evidence involving a 29 year old crime committed?

Exactly my thoughts. The alleged 'crime' was carried out nearly thirty years ago in South Yorkshire, and they're looking for evidence a couple of hundred miles away, in a place the 'suspect' not only wasn't living in at the time, but wasn't even accommodation, but commercial premises.
There would be no computer files, probably no clothing or other likely forms of 'evidence' that could yield anything at all that could incriminate anyone after all this time.
Captain Ahab would be well proud of a fishing expedition on this scale.

+1 My thoughts entirely, and did you see how many police cars went along for the ride?

Were any lessons learned from Levison?

Main lesson is just how deeply intertwined politics and the media are: Andy Coulson being a prime example, but David Cameron is still strongly linked to the Murdoch Empire through the [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chipping_Norton_set ]Chipping Norton Set[/url]

Given that level of collusion, can anyone genuinely doubt coverups have been perpetrated and still continue to this day?

So, the police explanation now is that a BBC journo phones them, saying they were aware of an ongoing police investigation into Cliff, and were ready to publish

The police 'bought' their silence on the issue by agreeing to give them the inside scoop on the search warrant - saying that was justified because publication would have endangered the evidence/investigation.

The police say the initial 'leak' (ie. that there was an investigation) was not from them.

In this what I find most preposterous is the suggestion that they had to buy the journo's silence - it seems to presuppose that the BBC would have gone ahead and published information that would endanger an investigation into child abuse despite being asked not to (GIven everything thats gone on, I find that hard to believe) and that the only way to deal with that was by, essentially, inviting them along, rather than the editorial process or even an injunction preventing publication.

can anyone genuinely doubt coverups have been perpetrated and still continue to this day?

I think everyone now accepts there's been some shocking cover-ups, no?

Media, police, politicians are all self-serving and as entwined in their own lies and deceit that they no longer know how to behave with any integrity or conscience.

They all seem to have made a closed doors pact of covering each other's arses. At least they can do one thing well.

Out of interest, which biography?

Edit: I've just to the chapter which discusses Savile's Jim'll Fix It trip to Israel and it says all that Begin-Sadat stuff he talked was total fantasy.

What amazes me is that these superannuated halfwits that somehow manage to attain Chief Constable rank should appear on TV and think we might believe a single word they say.