[IzzyS]

Originally Posted by fizzycat

A brief update on my story, for those who remember my earlier posts.

I had another call from the Met last week. The investigation into the direct complaints about JS is now too big for the Met to handle so is being passed to an overseeing body whose name I can't remember. They rang to ask for my permission to pass my statement onto the new investigating team, as well as to the BBC and the NHS who are carrying out their own investigations. The NSPCC and Child Protection are also receiving the Met's evidence but may not contact me as I was not underage when the assaults took place.

Thanks for the update. The report published last month spelt the end of their investigations into assaults by him alone, I thought? so that would make sense I guess. I wonder what they may be doing with the information they've compiled at this point, whomever receives it.

[gregsanison]

Originally Posted by Scraggy Taters

Hum-heh-hum-heh-hum-heh

Can ya tell who it is yet ??

hum-heh-hum-heh-hum-heh

Peg out and tell us

[jamtamara]

Being arrested does not necessarily mean 'guilty' of anything. It does not mean the same as tried and convicted.

I hate all this guessing and joking about people. It's not funny, either for victims or those arrested, their families or anyone else.

We all know 'who it is (yet)' for goodness sake. Sorry for the mini rant.

[IzzyS]

Originally Posted by jamtamara

Being arrested does not necessarily mean 'guilty' of anything. It does not mean the same as tried and convicted.

I hate all this guessing and joking about people. It's not funny, either for victims or those arrested, their families or anyone else.

Agreed. I try to ignore the FMs who make crass comments. I don't feel its very amusing anymore really...and there's no need to apologise. You have every right to feel that way and post as such, I don't see what you have to apologise for (though im also bad at apologising unnecessarily. I felt like apologising for my perhaps naivety re the whole Sinason/satanic angle, since I know little about it but then I stopped myself....I don't really think I need to apologise as such(?)).

[jamtamara]

Originally Posted by IzzyS

Agreed. I try to ignore the FMs who make crass comments. I don't feel its very amusing anymore really...and there's no need to apologise. You have every right to feel that way and post as such, I don't see what you have to apologise for (though im also bad at apologising unnecessarily. I felt like apologising for my perhaps naivety re the whole Sinason/satanic angle, since I know little about it but then I stopped myself....I don't really think I need to apologise as such(?)).

No you shouldn't apologise. You are entitled to post your own well-considered opinions. As you suggest, apologising may weaken a person's position.

On the other hand, the most dogmatic people can be dictators and all-round bad guys. However, I think it's true to say that if anything you err on the side of being over-apologetic.

[IzzyS]

Originally Posted by jamtamara

No you shouldn't apologise. You are entitled to post your own well-considered opinions. As you suggest, apologising may weaken a person's position.

On the other hand, the most dogmatic people can be dictators and all-round bad guys. However, I think it's true to say that if anything you err on the side of being over-apologetic.

Tell me about it lol sorry *doh*

[Scraggy Taters]

Originally Posted by gregsanison

Peg out and tell us

Best not.There's sensitive posters on here who take offence.
This thread's not for me.

[fizzycat]

Originally Posted by IzzyS

Thanks for the update. The report published last month spelt the end of their investigations into assaults by him alone, I thought? so that would make sense I guess. I wonder what they may be doing with the information they've compiled at this point, whomever receives it.

I'm not sure but the officer asked if I'd be willing to be interviewed by the BBC and NHS investigators.

[Sad_BB_Addict]

John Ward's Slog Blog - Paedophiles in politics
http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/02/...david-cameron/

[IzzyS]

Originally Posted by fizzycat

I'm not sure but the officer asked if I'd be willing to be interviewed by the BBC and NHS investigators.

I hope you don't feel too pressured into these things?. I had phone calls years ago from magazines wanting to interview me after picking up a story about me in a local paper, it got very frustrating...I didn't want to keep talking about it repeatedly (though it wasn't about anything like abuse but it was still a bit of an embarrassing story for me in a way).

[fizzycat]

Originally Posted by IzzyS

I hope you don't feel too pressured into these things?. I had phone calls years ago from magazines wanting to interview me after picking up a story about me in a local paper, it got very frustrating...I didn't want to keep talking about it repeatedly (though it wasn't about anything like abuse but it was still a bit of an embarrassing story for me in a way).

No pressure so far. I've said I'll do interviews if they need them for the investigations but not tv/press/magazine stuff.

The Met have been fantastic so far. They've spoken to me 3 times now and each time they've asked if I'm happy speaking to a male officer about it and offered a female one if I prefer. (I don't mind at all). They've asked every time if I want signposting towards counselling of any kind.

And the last one who rang ended the call with 'Thank you for the information, babes'. Undoubtedly a slip-up and a lapse of professionalism but it made me smile

[IzzyS]

Originally Posted by fizzycat

No pressure so far. I've said I'll do interviews if they need them for the investigations but not tv/press/magazine stuff.

The Met have been fantastic so far. They've spoken to me 3 times now and each time they've asked if I'm happy speaking to a male officer about it and offered a female one if I prefer. (I don't mind at all). They've asked every time if I want signposting towards counselling of any kind.

And the last one who rang ended the call with 'Thank you for the information, babes'. Undoubtedly a slip-up and a lapse of professionalism but it made me smile

Thats good I'm glad to hear that. Lol babes *cringe* who are you calling a pig? (I only thought that as someone at work was chatting about the 'Babe - Pig In The City' movies the other day lol!)

[Asmo]

Originally Posted by IzzyS

I felt like apologising for my perhaps naivety re the whole Sinason/satanic angle, since I know little about it but then I stopped myself....I don't really think I need to apologise as such(?)).

'Course not. If anything it's illuminated a new and unexpected can of worms in the making - That Sinason seems to be bottling up a whole new slew of cases using Savile to reignite the hysteria. Might be another book in it. Maybe an Express column. Now if that erupts we'll know what the source was.

Bizarro factoid of the day, as a result of further reading on that issue:

Sinason claims she was first informed of Savile's 'Satanic' activities in 1992. She published the notorious book "Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse" in 1994.
Amongst the contributors to the book was a piece by one Dr Gwen Adshead, entitled "Looking for clues - A review of the literature on false allegations of sexual abuse in childhood", apparently Dr Adshead is a friend of Sinason.
Dr. Adshead has also been the Consultant Psychiatrist / Consultant Forensic Psychotherapist at Broadmoor Hospital for almost 20 years!
Wouldn't you imagine Savile would have been a topic for discussion between the two?

/end bizarro world.

[Sad_BB_Addict]

More Daffodil Rites
http://daffodilrites.blogspot.co.uk/...44e791e3e6f145

[Linda_Danvers]

Originally Posted by Sad_BB_Addict

More Daffodil Rites
http://daffodilrites.blogspot.co.uk/...44e791e3e6f145

Yep. More and more weird. And I at first believe her. I don't know if it is the result of serious psychological issues or she is making it up because she enjoys the attention.

[Asmo]

Wandering mix of grammar, spelling, tense, and textspeak. Now Savile bent on World domination or something...

I get the impression it's being tailored for the audience.

[Linda_Danvers]

Originally Posted by Asmo

Wandering mix of grammar, spelling, tense, and textspeak. Now Savile bent on World domination or something...

I get the impression it's being tailored for the audience.

LOL, that was what I thought.

[Saltydog1955]

Personally I couldn't believe anything so badly written and with so many spelling mistakes.

Attention seeker I think.

[IzzyS]

Originally Posted by Asmo

'Course not. If anything it's illuminated a new and unexpected can of worms in the making - That Sinason seems to be bottling up a whole new slew of cases using Savile to reignite the hysteria. Might be another book in it. Maybe an Express column. Now if that erupts we'll know what the source was.

Bizarro factoid of the day, as a result of further reading on that issue:

Sinason claims she was first informed of Savile's 'Satanic' activities in 1992. She published the notorious book "Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse" in 1994.
Amongst the contributors to the book was a piece by one Dr Gwen Adshead, entitled "Looking for clues - A review of the literature on false allegations of sexual abuse in childhood", apparently Dr Adshead is a friend of Sinason.
Dr. Adshead has also been the Consultant Psychiatrist / Consultant Forensic Psychotherapist at Broadmoor Hospital for almost 20 years!
Wouldn't you imagine Savile would have been a topic for discussion between the two?

/end bizarro world.

I don't really know what to make of such things but yes, I guess you would.

---

Re:- Daffodil Rites - I hope they'll be alright, whatever the issue is/whatever happened :-/ what I'd read I didn't notice too many errors I think but then maybe their dyslexic? I usually cringe at professional blogs with multiple spelling or grammar mistakes though, right enough.

[Linda_Danvers]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

Personally I couldn't believe anything so badly written and with so many spelling mistakes.

Attention seeker I think.

I know what you mean, but that is not the problem for me. Her Savile story just keeps growing and growing. At first he was just one of the men who abused her, then he was the owner of her life, now he is the man behind the scenes, the one who has the control. At any moment, he'll be secretly ruling UK. I agree that she is playing for the audience. And I believed her in the first time I've read her, hmpf! I she wants to keep an audience, she should be more consistent with her story.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by Linda_Danvers

I know what you mean, but that is not the problem for me. Her Savile story just keeps growing and growing. At first he was just one of the men who abused her, then he was the owner of her life, now he is the man behind the scenes, the one who has the control. At any moment, he'll be secretly ruling UK. I agree that she is playing for the audience. And I believed her in the first time I've read her, hmpf! I she wants to keep an audience, she should be more consistent with her story.

I haven't read the rest of her blog, so that part's all I have to go on.

I'm just a bit of a pedant Linda, but that's me I guess!

[Romola_Des_Loup]

Originally Posted by IzzyS

As a parent, presumably you have to put trust in alot of other people because lets be honest, its pretty much impossible to run checks on every single adult a child will come across be it at school, at after school clubs, in hospitals, relatives of friends who want them to visit or anywhere and everywhere else. I'd have been exasperated if my parents told me I couldn't go to my friends house every so often because they weren't sure about her dad or something like that, I imagine I'd have been annoyed and figured out a way to go anyway, being a bit rebellious and all that (lol). I fear if they became increasingly strict like that, then I'd have been less likely to listen to their warnings and feel more like their trying to stop me from going places and having fun (which you need to do as a kid, heck knows I barely get to nowadays as an adult), so I'd have been angry at them.

I'm not sure how I feel about the link to whether he had children of his own or not somehow helping prove he's decent or not - I don't have kids and I've felt for some time that I'd struggle if I did so that might never happen but obviously I know I'd never do anything untoward, um, toward them if I were to supervise younger kids. Do people view those who don't have kids as selfish or weird? I sometimes wonder if they do, as a kind of societal judgement... thats a shame if so .

I can understand it if the argument is that they know others have stayed at his place and been ok, so he must be alright then but I guess it depends on how you look at things - JS didn't abuse every kid he came across, obviously - he chose the most vulnerable victims, those least likely to speak out, so that may not prove anything. It feels very paranoid to say that though - at the end of the day, as a parent I guess you just have to come to your own conclusions and decide who your happy for your kid to spend time with and so on.

BIB - It's not that people without kids should be looked at as wrong or weird, it's just that your 10 year old asking if she can stay over at her 10 year old friend's house in the care of her friend's parents would not often be scrutinised very much. Your 10 year old asking if she could stay over at a middle aged childless man's house, with or without other chldren, would be far more likely to ring alarm bells. We assume that sleepovers are for the benefit of the children, generally, and that the hosting adults are hosting for that reason alone.

[Phoenix Lazarus]

Re: the unnamed man in his 80s, questioned recently, and soon to be arrested soon, allegedly, it says here he wrote a letter of regret to an alleged victim.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...candal-1571408

[Romola_Des_Loup]

Originally Posted by IzzyS

Thats what I would have thought. It looks like there are plenty of volunteering opportunities available though (at least in Northern Ireland anyway):- http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/volunteering-in-hospitals



They don't check everyone, only some people and your asked to declare if you have a record - whats to stop someone from just not declaring it then?

They do check everyone. It would also be an enhanced CRB check, which would disclose anything even remotely questionable or relevant that was known to the police, including being questioned, arrested or suspected without charge.

[Linda_Danvers]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

I haven't read the rest of her blog, so that part's all I have to go on.

I'm just a bit of a pedant Linda, but that's me I guess!

It's ok. The mistakes annoy me too