By John Ward: We are witnessing a battle going on for our minds in this country – but far too few of us are conscious of it.
On one side are those media owners, rapscallion bottom-feeders, slur doctors and quack coppers who would have you believe that a person is guilty until proven innocent. They titillate the dirty mack brigade and feed what’s left of the woman-hating drongo bloke population…but in the next breath, tell you that every male celebrity is a beast who must be hung before any de iure process has looked with due diligence at all the evidence.
The pornographer Richard Desmond, owner of the Daily Star, is just such a greasy hypocrite. His Star “news”paper has published a front page lead today which is inaccurate, ill-informed, and misleading from the first word to the last.There comes a time in the decline of every formerly Alpha culture when the drongos running horsesh*t for the titillation of the knuckle-draggers need to be reminded that there is still a thing in Britain called the due process of the Law. We don’t do chucking millstoned witches into the village pond any more to see if they float. We’ve moved on ever so slightly to a system where there’s not much equality before the law, but lynch mobs are still very illegal indeed.
I’ve ringed the three subhead words in the above utterly risible piece in today’s Daily Star simply to point out why it is wrong, wrong, wrong.
The Star is owned by Dirty Dick Desmond f’nar f’nar, a shining media crusader whose previous incarnations included the adult TV channels Television X, Red Hot TV, and others too tediously unpleasant to mention. These ‘media’ exploit women for the dribbling satisfaction of pervy blokes; so of course, DDD enjoys exactly the right provenance to add credibility to a “story” like this one.
These are the holes in the story:
1. Jimmy Savile’s Estate does not have ‘victims’: it has alleged victims with money to gain from being considered victims. Their evidence has not even been tested, in or out of a Court of Law.
2. There is no compensation ‘threat’ from any charity, there is merely a desire by two legally appointed testators nominated by the disgraced star to see the DJ’s £3.5m given to people in pain and suffering NOW – to whom the dead man’s dosh CAN make a difference…not necessarily to 120 alleged victims some of whom – ask any cop who’s ever worked in child abuse celebrity cases and they will tell you – are out for vicarious fame and/or money.
What TF else are responsible testators supposed to do?
3. There is no seedy, tax-evading ‘charity’ trying to ‘block’ deserving victims: there is a charitable trust in name, beneath which are several highly deserving, pain relieving charities of whom all of us would approve – but desperately in need of the money. Not a percentage who may well be genuine: all of them.
I’m sorry if this gives some people offence, but what’s really happening here is that alleged Savile victims are holding back the charities nominated by a rich, dead man from getting the money they desperately need.
The Star, it seems, has “a source”. This coy source is ‘a source close to one of his victims’. Don’t you mean alleged victims, Daily Star? Oh sorry – I forgot: you can’t defame a dead man, can you? Now, there’s an infamous source often close to sexual abuse “victims”. This person has had three high-profile TV stars on the rack in Court over the last three months. All three men were acquitted.
The agreement between journalists involved closely in the case and the Court (which will begin hearing it tomorrow) was to observe an embargo until such time as some decision had been reached. But the Star’s source decided to break it. Why would that person do that? Such a person would, after all, have to be someone fond of slurs, making money from accusing untried suspects, creating a media furore to poison the atmosphere….and a bit of a dickhead when it came to the finer points of the law. Too much of a dickhead, in fact, to do what the complainants’ Law firm Slater and Gordon told the Star: that it was unable to comment.
There are, I’d imagine, folks who could quickly come up with a name to fit that pen picture of a person desperate to retain just one remaining tattered thread of credibility. But I couldn’t possibly comment further, because I’m…er, a professional.
So what’s it to be, you the British People? The tabloid lynch-mob or the Rule of Law? That’s not a trite, simplistic comparison: it’s me asking you to face facts – however unpalateable they might be to your driven obsessions. But to make it easier, I’m including these delightful stories from today’s Daily Star to help you decide whether that paper contains the truth on newsprint, or an almost never-ending tissue of soft-porn dick stimulation.
Now set against the giant and entirely self-interested sexual sanctimony of the Murdochs and the Desmonds, we have a brave and comprehensively expert blogger on legal affairs with no axe to grind at all. Anna Raccoon continues to be what a radical blogger should be: someone trying to out-think the directors of the Mob, out-smart the self-inflated jerks, and present facts for the due consideration of those still in charge of a functioning brain within which the Left Hemisphere enjoys final sway.
She and her bloke have learned the hard way – and by God has it been hard – that such is not a popularity context. In a disappearing civilisation sinking under the weight of undeserved celebrity bullsh*t, Ms Raccoon has an eye for the Truth that pierces tabloidism like a punishing laser beam. I invite you to read her learned, fully-informed and accurate account of Claim No:HC13F00335 in the Chancery Division at the link below.
Then I would ask you to email, link, tweet, facebook and blog this piece far and wide….if only to tell those harbouring grave doubts about British culture that there are still enough decent people here who understand constitutional rights to make their voices heard.