That fella 'Nick' who made the VIP paedo allegations including murdered children...

soapster said:
it is a very thin dividing line as to where there is not enough evidence or corroboration to say a person is telling the truth or whether they are lying.
In fact because there is no evidence of corroboration does not mean the victim is lying
at the time there was a massive outcry re Savile add together hall and that media rep, it was not a good time to come out and say the alleged victim is lying
the authorities would have been crucified
However they did handle the investigation very badly as did the Yorkshire force re cliff. What about Paul Gamberchini (sp).
The media were clambering to hang draw and quarter celebs, so there was a good number people who have to hang their head in shame
Not least Tom Watson who is saying all he did was tell the people to report it to the police. why did he make a statement in the HOC then

The police need to get back to basics of believe no one, check everything and assume nothing.
Click to expand...
Spot on, and stop hiding evidence that undermines their case.
 


sidneyeric said:
Spot on, and stop hiding evidence that undermines their case.
Click to expand...
I think a number of failings relating to disclosure is not necessarily hiding evidence but failing to disclose what they have not checked.

Most of the details of failing to disclose and later turns up has not been disclosed to the public, but from what I understand it relates to the examination of mobile phone and the various apps

The hard drive on these phones together with the micro sd cards is massive.

appropriate software I believe has now been devised to make searches easier but things like facebook refusing to hand over details doesn't make it easier.

if during interview a suspect gives information, that would life easier to investigate the drive as there is a starting point

I don't know the full details of the disclosure issues but I am sure if there is evidence it is undiscovered and not because the police are hiding evidence
 
just read a sobering run down of the whole sorry story on the bbc news website... what a f***ing shambles from start to finish, not sure there is a single person involved from top to bottom that comes out of this undamaged, over false allegations.

i know they get deserved criticism for their match day operations, but Northumberland Police seem to have done a good job in sorting the whole mess out mind...
 
soapster said:
I think a number of failings relating to disclosure is not necessarily hiding evidence but failing to disclose what they have not checked.

Most of the details of failing to disclose and later turns up has not been disclosed to the public, but from what I understand it relates to the examination of mobile phone and the various apps

The hard drive on these phones together with the micro sd cards is massive.

appropriate software I believe has now been devised to make searches easier but things like facebook refusing to hand over details doesn't make it easier.

if during interview a suspect gives information, that would life easier to investigate the drive as there is a starting point

I don't know the full details of the disclosure issues but I am sure if there is evidence it is undiscovered and not because the police are hiding evidence
Click to expand...
They are hiding evidence, when they get caught they blame Tory cuts, it's not just mobile phone evidence it's everything they think they can get away with.
 
errant said:
just read a sobering run down of the whole sorry story on the bbc news website... what a f***ing shambles from start to finish, not sure there is a single person involved from top to bottom that comes out of this undamaged, over false allegations.

i know they get deserved criticism for their match day operations, but Northumberland Police seem to have done a good job in sorting the whole mess out mind...
Click to expand...
when it went to Wiltshire, they refused to take it any further.

tom Watson got involved and there was a boat load of pressure from all the media and other groups that sexual assaults were being ignored / not investigated properly

hence the met investigating

there is a feeling amongst certain police / activists that the victim of a sexual assault must always be believed

there is a vast difference between being believed and being listened too and some people have great difficulty in understanding that
 
JonMc said:
Inconvenient for him. You think 'they' have stitched him up? The trial will be very interesting in that case.
Click to expand...
Whatever gave you that idea?

"He also said he was systematically abused and tortured by senior politicians and members of the armed forces during the 1970s and 80s.

The claims triggered the abandoned Met Police investigation Operation Midland.

Those he accused included former Conservative politicians Lord Brittan and Harvey Proctor, and Field Marshal Lord Bramall."
 
errant said:
just read a sobering run down of the whole sorry story on the bbc news website... what a f***ing shambles from start to finish, not sure there is a single person involved from top to bottom that comes out of this undamaged, over false allegations.

i know they get deserved criticism for their match day operations, but Northumberland Police seem to have done a good job in sorting the whole mess out mind...
Click to expand...

So it seems. The fall-out continues to happen with the met now open to possible investigations themselves over the operation. It's certainly not going away for them.

It just seems that the police handbook was ripped up and thrown away when it came to investigating these men. Plain lies told to judges when seeking search warrants, stating this Nick was a credible witness when it was obvious to them at an early stage that his story pushed the boundaries of credibility.

It seems like the police rolled the dice and threw those under instigation under a bus - but I suppose their same strategy had also worked in the past - blowing the case wide open in such a public manner which allowed a lot of witnesses to come forward in the investigation of Savile and other cockroaches. But not fun for the families involved on this occasion at all and I expect the compensation will come in at a pretty price.
 
JonMc said:
So it seems. The fall-out continues to happen with the met now open to possible investigations themselves over the operation. It's certainly not going away for them.

It just seems that the police handbook was ripped up and thrown away when it came to investigating these men. Plain lies told to judges when seeking search warrants, stating this Nick was a credible witness when it was obvious to them at an early stage that his story pushed the boundaries of credibility.

It seems like the police rolled the dice and threw those under instigation under a bus - but I suppose their same strategy had also worked in the past - blowing the case wide open in such a public manner which allowed a lot of witnesses to come forward in the investigation of Savile and other cockroaches. But not fun for the families involved on this occasion at all and I expect the compensation will come in at a pretty price.
Click to expand...
It's not a one off either, they manipulate evidence, hide evidence basically they'll do anything they can get away with to get a conviction.
 
JonMc said:
So it seems. The fall-out continues to happen with the met now open to possible investigations themselves over the operation. It's certainly not going away for them.

It just seems that the police handbook was ripped up and thrown away when it came to investigating these men. Plain lies told to judges when seeking search warrants, stating this Nick was a credible witness when it was obvious to them at an early stage that his story pushed the boundaries of credibility.

It seems like the police rolled the dice and threw those under instigation under a bus - but I suppose their same strategy had also worked in the past - blowing the case wide open in such a public manner which allowed a lot of witnesses to come forward in the investigation of Savile and other cockroaches. But not fun for the families involved on this occasion at all and I expect the compensation will come in at a pretty price.
Click to expand...

to be honest, I don't think you are miles away but certainly not that simple

history is littered with people who want to think fanciful theories are true and of course some people believe them and some don't. Difficulty is some theories are true, others are not.

Marietta Higgs for one. Orkney sacrificial rituals, vaccines, then the numpty Nick. there will be others.

Then we think back and there is Savile, Cyril Smith, hall et al

So we cannot dismiss these claims, but what we must do is for them to be investigated in a proper and just method.

At the time with nick, there was a clamour for victims to be believed in what they say, no matter what and the clamour was not just from victims it was from all the media, political organisations.

certain thinking within the police / political guidance also thought this and this is where the rule book was changed / ripped up.

people within the organisation wanting to be forward thinkers so went along with it, careers would improve. the age old mantra was thrown out by cods heeds who thought they could investigate.

the mantra was

Assume nothing
believe nobody
check everything

as simple as ABC

if that had been followed in this case and others the MPS wouldn't be in the bother they are now.
Its not the people investigating who are to blame, it is the people behind the scenes that dictate.
the cops applying for the warrant would be stating what the MPS new thoughts were. It is those faceless wonders who are to blame, yet those committees will be able to hide whilst others will have to face up and take the blame
 
errant said:
just read a sobering run down of the whole sorry story on the bbc news website... what a f***ing shambles from start to finish, not sure there is a single person involved from top to bottom that comes out of this undamaged, over false allegations.

i know they get deserved criticism for their match day operations, but Northumberland Police seem to have done a good job in sorting the whole mess out mind...
Click to expand...

What mess did they sort out?
 
soapster said:
to be honest, I don't think you are miles away but certainly not that simple

history is littered with people who want to think fanciful theories are true and of course some people believe them and some don't. Difficulty is some theories are true, others are not.

Marietta Higgs for one. Orkney sacrificial rituals, vaccines, then the numpty Nick. there will be others.

Then we think back and there is Savile, Cyril Smith, hall et al

So we cannot dismiss these claims, but what we must do is for them to be investigated in a proper and just method.

At the time with nick, there was a clamour for victims to be believed in what they say, no matter what and the clamour was not just from victims it was from all the media, political organisations.

certain thinking within the police / political guidance also thought this and this is where the rule book was changed / ripped up.

people within the organisation wanting to be forward thinkers so went along with it, careers would improve. the age old mantra was thrown out by cods heeds who thought they could investigate.

the mantra was

Assume nothing
believe nobody
check everything

as simple as ABC

if that had been followed in this case and others the MPS wouldn't be in the bother they are now.
Its not the people investigating who are to blame, it is the people behind the scenes that dictate.
the cops applying for the warrant would be stating what the MPS new thoughts were. It is those faceless wonders who are to blame, yet those committees will be able to hide whilst others will have to face up and take the blame
Click to expand...
It's more than that. They're under pressure of investigation because they broke rules all along the chain. Some weird goings on by all accounts. Junior officers sent to apply for complicated warrants when more senior officers were in the building in plain clothes.
So much so apparently that some of the accused including Brittan's family have managed to sue the police for trespass because they simply had no grounds to make a search in the first place and they knew they didn't.

But yeah. The police here just seem to have become affected by the hysteria surrounding the names on offer without doing the basics.
The Higgs analogy is good one to make.
 
Last edited:
JonMc said:
It's more than that. They're under pressure of investigation because they broke rules all along the chain. Some weird goings on by all accounts. Junior officers sent to apply for complicated warrants when more senior officers were in the building in plain clothes.
So much so apparently that some of the accused including Brittan's family have managed to sue the police for trespass because they simply had no grounds to make a search in the first place and they knew they didn't.

But yeah. The police here just seem to have become affected by the hysteria surrounding the names on offer without doing the basics.
The Higgs analogy is good one to make.
Click to expand...

I would not read anything into the fact that junior officers (I don't know the ranks) of officers obtaining the search warrants. Its normally the intelligence section that would do that, so maybe a DS or DI most probably.

for an investigation such as it was, there will nearly always be more senior officers about, but to be honest, the chances of them knowing the procedure or even the oath for a search warrant will be very low.

as it is likely to be a detective based investigation, most will be in suits, but again don't read anything into that. Somebody will have directed somebody to get a search warrant. The grounds and who ordered should be in a policy book.

It is a technical thing mind re breaking rules.

It appears to me, that their mantra or decision making was based on a flawed thinking (believe the so called victim) That is up to the force to decide what force policy will be. was it directed down to them from ACPO for instance.

I sometimes wonder on what grounds the search warrants were sought after. Taking into account the alleged offences happened 30 years previously and not in the locations of where these people lived.

I actually wonder if any of the tree searches were legally done.

Having said that, that media fella kept a letter that was sent to him, that indicated some involvement in an offence.

the police were affected by the hysteria and they didn't want to blamed again but by not doing the basics right they were doomed to fail, the exact thing they did not want to do.

Tom Watson has to take his blame. he stood up in the HOC and because of what he was saying was against the hierarchy, mp's would have been foolish to challenge him.

there had already been a campaign to get to LB because of this so called file in which unsubstantiated allegations were made.

A good number of people on here had a number of people hung over this
 
soapster said:
I sometimes wonder on what grounds the search warrants were sought after. Taking into account the alleged offences happened 30 years previously and not in the locations of where these people lived.
Click to expand...
That Nick was a witness they had judged to be 'consistent in his credibility', something they had on record as being false. The trial showed that he was notably inconsistent with the claims that he made over the years.
 
JonMc said:
That Nick was a witness they had judged to be 'consistent in his credibility', something they had on record as being false. The trial showed that he was notably inconsistent with the claims that he made over the years.
Click to expand...

rightly or wrongly people give allowances for things that happened so long ago as because it was so long ago. the other side of that is precisely because it was so long ago that the memory can be imperfect for some.

at one stage he got his location of a murder mixed up (therapy session). not something most people would do

Nick also had several meetings with therapists and went under a number of sessions to assist his memory, whether that had anything to do with "assisting memory recollection" and the fact he was shown photographs by a journalist and asked if they assisted his recollection. That alone should have thrown a great big doubt over the matter

however if you are told by eminent people, that these mistakes will happen because of the trauma they have suffered, as a minion you will have to accept that (if directed by the force to believe it) and wait for the courts to discredit that line of thinking
 
Last edited:
soapster said:
rightly or wrongly people give allowances for things that happened so long ago as because it was so long ago. the other side of that is precisely because it was so long ago that the memory can be imperfect for some.

at one stage he got his location of a murder mixed up (therapy session). not something most people would do

Nick also had several meetings with therapists and went under a number of sessions to assist his memory, whether that had anything to do with "assisting memory recollection" and the fact he was shown photographs by a journalist and asked if they assisted his recollection. That alone should have thrown a great big doubt over the matter

however if you are told by eminent people, that these mistakes will happen because of the trauma they have suffered, as a minion you will have to accept that (if directed by the force to believe it) and wait for the courts to discredit that line of thinking
Click to expand...
Also inconsistent in who he told and who he didn't. His wife was clueless about it all until she recognised his silhouette on Panorama.
 

Back
Top