Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:54 am  

http://newsthump.com/2014/07/08/mps-cla ... me-visits/

http://newsthump.com/2014/07/08/mps-cla ... me-visits/

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:07 am  

100% Wire wrote:

http://newsthump.com/2014/07/08/mps-claimed-expenses-for-childrens-home-visits/

Absolutely hilarious and totally appropriate for this thread.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Thu Aug 14, 2014 1:26 pm  

I see that Inspector Knacker has been round to search Cliff Richards' house in some historical abuse allegation investigation. Poor Kitty. First the Elm Guest House guest list, now this. One of many interesting articles

I see that Inspector Knacker has been round to search Cliff Richards' house in some historical abuse allegation investigation. Poor Kitty. First the Elm Guest House guest list, now this. One of many interesting articles

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Thu Aug 14, 2014 3:37 pm  

The Queen's honours list is starting to look like a right rogues gallery.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Thu Aug 14, 2014 3:47 pm  

King Street Cat wrote:

The Queen's honours list is starting to look like a right rogues gallery.

no surprise as it's decided by politicians!

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Thu Aug 14, 2014 10:04 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: I see that Inspector Knacker has been round to search Cliff Richards' house in some historical abuse allegation investigation. Poor Kitty. First the Elm Guest House guest list, now this. One of many interesting articles The offence was supposed to have taken place at Brammal Lane, Sheffield in 1985. The flat that the police raided is in Berkshire and was bought by Richard in 2008. Is that a genuine search for evidence linked to a crime or a fishing expedition to try and find out what porn he's watched on his computer?

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: I see that Inspector Knacker has been round to search Cliff Richards' house in some historical abuse allegation investigation. Poor Kitty. First the Elm Guest House guest list, now this. One of many interesting articles The offence was supposed to have taken place at Brammal Lane, Sheffield in 1985. The flat that the police raided is in Berkshire and was bought by Richard in 2008. Is that a genuine search for evidence linked to a crime or a fishing expedition to try and find out what porn he's watched on his computer?

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Fri Aug 15, 2014 11:15 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

The offence was supposed to have taken place at Brammal Lane, Sheffield in 1985. The flat that the police raided is in Berkshire and was bought by Richard in 2008.

Is that a genuine search for evidence linked to a crime or a fishing expedition to try and find out what porn he's watched on his computer?

I really wouldn't be surprised if it was the latter

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:34 pm  

South Yorkshire Police admitted this afternoon that they had tipped off the media about the raid on Cliff Richards home, hence the reason why the BBC were able to have a camera crew at the front entrance when the police arrived and also have a helicopter in the air to film cars arriving and cars departing.

Police justifying the tip off because the coverage has resulted in several other people contacting them about the allegations.

Makes you wonder why they don't just hand over criminal investigations to Rupert Murdoch, "Tonight on Sky, what do you know about Bruce Forsyth, The Duke of Edinburgh and a rabbit in Hyde Park in 1964 ?"

And here's me thinking that Monty Pythons "Blackmail" sketch was supposed to be the joke...

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:05 pm  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28807388 In a statement, South Yorkshire Police (SYP) said it had not alerted the media to the search in advance. It said: "When a media outlet contacted SYP with information about an investigation, we took the decision to work with them in order to protect the integrity of that investigation. "Since the search took place, a number of people have contacted the police to provide information and we must acknowledge that the media played a part in that, for which we are grateful." According to that they're claiming that they didn't tip the BBC off over the raid, they're admitting the BBC are their partners in the investigation. It makes me wonder whether this wasn't started by a complaint from the victim, but the BBC opening their box of archive filth that they've got on celebs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28807388 In a statement, South Yorkshire Police (SYP) said it had not alerted the media to the search in advance. It said: "When a media outlet contacted SYP with information about an investigation, we took the decision to work with them in order to protect the integrity of that investigation. "Since the search took place, a number of people have contacted the police to provide information and we must acknowledge that the media played a part in that, for which we are grateful." According to that they're claiming that they didn't tip the BBC off over the raid, they're admitting the BBC are their partners in the investigation. It makes me wonder whether this wasn't started by a complaint from the victim, but the BBC opening their box of archive filth that they've got on celebs.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:33 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28807388 According to that they're claiming that they didn't tip the BBC off over the raid, they're admitting the BBC are their partners in the investigation. It makes me wonder whether this wasn't started by a complaint from the victim, but the BBC opening their box of archive filth that they've got on celebs. And then you get this angle on the same statement on the other hand the BBC wouldn't actually admit that they got a tip-off from the police, being a "partner in the investigation" sounds so much better than "we probably leaned on someone a bit to get a tip-off" because of course news media teams aren't supposed to do that sort of thing anymore.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28807388 According to that they're claiming that they didn't tip the BBC off over the raid, they're admitting the BBC are their partners in the investigation. It makes me wonder whether this wasn't started by a complaint from the victim, but the BBC opening their box of archive filth that they've got on celebs. And then you get this angle on the same statement on the other hand the BBC wouldn't actually admit that they got a tip-off from the police, being a "partner in the investigation" sounds so much better than "we probably leaned on someone a bit to get a tip-off" because of course news media teams aren't supposed to do that sort of thing anymore.