So what was the Waterhouse inquiry all about?..
My best guess is clinging onto the status quo by their fingernails while trying to cross their fingers at the same time and doing an ostrich. Bit like a game of twisters and bound to collapse. 
Looks like we're having another cover up but slightly less sophisticated..my heart brakes for the victims cos this is injecting fear and intimidation into them..
Exactly Cologne.Newsnight did not reveal anyones name,so why are they apologising for airing the interview.
McAlpine's name has been associated with a lot more than Mr Messham's reported abuse,is McAlpine hoping that this story disappears along with all the other stories about him.
The BBC has also apologised for broadcasting the interview. A spokesman said: "On November 2, Newsnight broadcast a report that looked into criticism of the North Wales Abuse Tribunal.
"The report included an interview with Steve Messham, an abuse victim who said that a senior political figure of the time had abused him.
Lord McAlpine vehemently denies the claims
"We broadcast Mr Messham's claim but did not identify the individual concerned. Mr Messham has tonight made a statement that makes clear he wrongly identified his abuser and has apologised. We also apologise unreservedly for having broadcast this report."
I think this is the important bit. Whether rightly or wrongly, Newsnight opened the floodgates for certain self-righteous internet inhabitants (not to mention Philip Schofield...) to make uneducated guesses as to who the individual was.
I know it seems unfair to blame Newsnight for internet rumours, but they may feel with hindsight that the current spotlight on the BBC meant that they have a responsibility to be even more careful than usual...
His name has been on the net longer than I can remember, this is'nt new Eugene..
Exactly Cologne.Newsnight did not reveal anyones name,so why are they apologising for airing the interview.
McAlpine's name has been associated with a lot more than Mr Messham's reported abuse,is McAlpine hoping that this story disappears along with all the other stories about him.
The BBC has also apologised for broadcasting the interview. A spokesman said: "On November 2, Newsnight broadcast a report that looked into criticism of the North Wales Abuse Tribunal.
"The report included an interview with Steve Messham, an abuse victim who said that a senior political figure of the time had abused him.
Lord McAlpine vehemently denies the claims
"We broadcast Mr Messham's claim but did not identify the individual concerned. Mr Messham has tonight made a statement that makes clear he wrongly identified his abuser and has apologised. We also apologise unreservedly for having broadcast this report."
I think this is the important bit. Whether rightly or wrongly, Newsnight opened the floodgates for certain self-righteous internet inhabitants (not to mention Philip Schofield...) to make uneducated guesses as to who the individual was.
I know it seems unfair to blame Newsnight for internet rumours, but they may feel with hindsight that the current spotlight on the BBC meant that they have a responsibility to be even more careful than usual...
His name has been on the net longer than I can remember, this is'nt new Eugene..
Precisely .......................is it just me or is the OTT apologies and hand wringing a bit much? All this poor man etc. and how he is so hurt over all this etc etc.
It's a game of chess IMO - I believe they knew if they turned the screws he'd eventually crack ...............now we've got all these denials followed by apologies(forced by the threat of serious legal action IMO). If he's so hurt by it why has it taken twenty years before he's attempted to clear his name? He knows the net is closing.
It's rather like a game of chess IMO - both sides are playing it - I can't word what I mean but I do believe The Newsnight thing with the tweets beforehand and the Schofield gaffe is all kind of deliberate.
I know what you mean soozy, it is a bit strange how he's been accused for years but all of a sudden lands in England straight after the Schofield/Cameron interview..I think Australia should look into him aswell..
OMG 
I do ramble on a bit late at night don't I? I can't even blame the alcohol anymore 
I guess it's just me - a cantankerous old bat
Suddenly we have a statement saying it's all a case of mistaken identity - just a simple mistake. And yet - the Newsnight team were in discussion all day with lawyers about naming 'the name'
Well I think there are definite issues here, but they're not necessarily the one's you'd expect.
Remember that Messham didn't mis-identify McAlpine - the police did. He correctly identified a photo of his abuser, but was then incorrectly told who it was.
And then there's the question of how it never ocurred to any of the Newsnight team throughout their investigation to just show Messham a photo of McAlpine...
Thing is back then the police may have suspected McAlpine as an abuser so found a way to get him named with a view to getting a conviction by suggesting to the lad that was who was in the photo. . albeit it never came to court anyway.. remember cops used to try things on back then and in recent yrs cases have been overturned because of that. . so he may still be a kiddy fiddler but just not the one doing it in that particular case.
The cops seem to have been found out in that case for trying too hard for a conviction. . I am not going down the 'he [victim] and others were got to' conspiracy road.. but, and this to me is the important bit, I don't for one minute suspect anyone believes the named victim(s) was/were and is/are lying about his abuse and others won't be believed because of this.. shame on anyone who would suggest such a thing 
OMG I do ramble on a bit late at night don't I? I can't even blame the alcohol anymore I guess it's just me - a cantankerous old bat
Nooo if its interesting it does not come under rambling..
Listened to the DG George Entwhistle on the radio this morning. He really has to be the least informed executive ever! It was woeful! I actually tensed up while John Humphries grilled him and felt a combination of pity and embarrassment for him when he said he'd been out when Newsnight aired, and hadn't read the papers yesterday.
I think that somewhere in a frenzy of buck passing; arse covering; agenda/limelight robbing (Tom Watson/Schofield) and a reliance on Twitter as some kind of investigative leviathan this has turned this in to an unholy farce. Shame really because an awful lot of wrongs could have been righted and the victims could have begun a process of healing.
And I believe Savile's Papal Knighthood has been revoked, or is in the process. So in answer to the thread title...no sainthood this side of Christendom.
Suddenly we have a statement saying it's all a case of mistaken identity - just a simple mistake. And yet - the Newsnight team were in discussion all day with lawyers about naming 'the name'
Well I think there are definite issues here, but they're not necessarily the one's you'd expect.
Remember that Messham didn't mis-identify McAlpine - the police did. He correctly identified a photo of his abuser, but was then incorrectly told who it was.
And then there's the question of how it never ocurred to any of the Newsnight team throughout their investigation to just show Messham a photo of McAlpine...
Thing is back then the police may have suspected McAlpine as an abuser so found a way to get him named with a view to getting a conviction by suggesting to the lad that was who was in the photo. . albeit it never came to court anyway.. remember cops used to try things on back then and in recent yrs cases have been overturned because of that. . so he may still be a kiddy fiddler but just not the one doing it in that particular case.
The cops seem to have been found out in that case for trying too hard for a conviction. . I am not going down the 'he [victim] and others were got to' conspiracy road.. but, and this to me is the important bit, I don't for one minute suspect anyone believes the named victim(s) was/were and is/are lying about his abuse and others won't be believed because of this.. shame on anyone who would suggest such a thing
Thats an interesting theory Olly. It does seem strange doesn't it. And the police were like that back then, indeed *nods*
Yup they were Rosie it was a case if we can't get them on something we know they are guilty of we'll fix it to get em on something else kinda thing.. anything to 'get their man' and a few innocents along the way too no doubt..
I had to view the begining of Newsnight for a second time.
The "We approached the BBC for a spokesperson but they would not appear!" is totally surreal.
I don't understand why the BBC is beating itself up. One would think that they directed Savile to go out there and abuse people. (shades of Doug and Dinsdale!)
Secondly, why apologise for not naming someone who had been making internet appearences for a long time?
The hypocrisyness of our press is terrific.
The BBC seem to be, at least in their own clumsy way, trying to find out the facts. The press meanwhile are interested in the BBC.
Do you not search the internet, do you just accept what msm tell you. He ~(McAlpine)paid off Meesham or put the heavy mob on him, he has the power to do such things.
Abusing children is of epedemic proportions among our so called up-right, upsatnding citizens, we put our trust in.
10SaturdayNov 2012
Posted in cynicism
(not satire â itâs the BBC!)
The BBC has apologised âunreservedlyâ for mistakenly not naming the name of an unnamed name it didnât name in a Newsnight programme after it emerged the name of the person it didnât name as a child abuser was a former Conservative peer â who it didnât name.
The BBCâs statement, issued on Friday evening and also broadcast at the beginning of Fridayâs Newsnight programme, said:
On 2 November, Newsnight broadcast a report which didnât name someone we shouldnât have named.
We apologise unreservedly for not naming the name we didnât name and we will endeavour to make sure we do not ever again not name anyone we shouldnât name â even if we donât name the name.
The BBC would also like to add that the name we didnât name was in now way connected to the former Conservative Party treasurer Lord McAlpine â a name we are not allowed to name. We think.
.
Do you not search the internet, do you just accept what msm tell you. He ~(McAlpine)paid off Meesham or put the heavy mob on him, he has the power to do such things.
Abusing children is of epedemic proportions among our so called up-right, upsatnding citizens, we put our trust in.
thanx for that link.
10SaturdayNov 2012
Posted in cynicism
(not satire â itâs the BBC!)
The BBC has apologised âunreservedlyâ for mistakenly not naming the name of an unnamed name it didnât name in a Newsnight programme after it emerged the name of the person it didnât name as a child abuser was a former Conservative peer â who it didnât name.
The BBCâs statement, issued on Friday evening and also broadcast at the beginning of Fridayâs Newsnight programme, said:
On 2 November, Newsnight broadcast a report which didnât name someone we shouldnât have named.
We apologise unreservedly for not naming the name we didnât name and we will endeavour to make sure we do not ever again not name anyone we shouldnât name â even if we donât name the name.
The BBC would also like to add that the name we didnât name was in now way connected to the former Conservative Party treasurer Lord McAlpine â a name we are not allowed to name. We think.
.
Good one erin 
10SaturdayNov 2012
Posted in cynicism
(not satire â itâs the BBC!)
The BBC has apologised âunreservedlyâ for mistakenly not naming the name of an unnamed name it didnât name in a Newsnight programme after it emerged the name of the person it didnât name as a child abuser was a former Conservative peer â who it didnât name.
The BBCâs statement, issued on Friday evening and also broadcast at the beginning of Fridayâs Newsnight programme, said:
On 2 November, Newsnight broadcast a report which didnât name someone we shouldnât have named.
We apologise unreservedly for not naming the name we didnât name and we will endeavour to make sure we do not ever again not name anyone we shouldnât name â even if we donât name the name.
The BBC would also like to add that the name we didnât name was in now way connected to the former Conservative Party treasurer Lord McAlpine â a name we are not allowed to name. We think.
.
Good one erin
Nice to see you velvet
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
My thoughts/feelings...
My thoughts...
This is obviously a very emotive subject and as such viewing it rationally can be quite an effort.
A major problem is that such abuse is so difficult to prove and there isn't really anything worse that an innocent person could be accused of.
My feelings...
That said. I can't but help but feel that there are (as theorised) some powerful people engaging/involved in all this. After all wasn't most of saViles power by proxy ? Not only was he not exposed let alone prosecuted for decades, he thrived.
I can't of course prove anything and as I say they are but my feelings, I don't think we will ever truly know. can't prove a negative and if there's truth in it the persons involved would be untouchable just as js was in life.
This explosive video from a few years ago has re-surfaced on the internet. He who knows where all the bodies are buried, the tabloid publicist Max Clifford, names Alan Clark as one of the alleged Tory paedophiles. Boasting about how he made the Harkesses a lot of money â Valerie the then 57-year-old wife of James Harkess, her daughters Josephine, 34 sister Alison, 36 â for their tale of the seduction of all three by Clark:
âThe only slightly serious side about it was heâd actually interfered with those girls from the age of fourteen.â
Clifford goes on to boast that: âIâve got all the evidence. Iâm the one whoâs hidden it from the world. I know where everything is and the proof isâ. Words he may come to regretâĶ
Will this appear in the tabloids? Donât count on it, Max is close to editors. He trades stories with them, suppressing stories about a clients who wants to keep secrets for a stories about clients who wants the limelight. Max has plenty he wants to keep hiddenâĶ
This is shocking. I'm fairly sure he's confessing to breaking the law, is he not ?
Perverting the course of justice ? witholding evidence ?
Or if allegations untrue, slander (or is it libel ?, always confuse the two)
Anyone with a good understanding of the law on here ?
Entwistle has resigned.
Entwistle has resigned.
Can't say I'm surprised. His early comments on the latest Newsnight cock-up sounded pretty much like he was taking responsibility for not being on the ball.
I think most considered Entwistle largely blameless for the spiking of the Savile programme (although some like Ian Hislop have suggested he share responsibility, as he was in overall charge of factual content before becoming DG), but he couldn't duck this one as he really should have known what was going on.
What bothered me most about Entwistle not knowing is that I'd have expected some of the compliance changes implemented as a result of the "Sachsgate" nonsense to have helped...
Check out this link http://t.co/gMdjTOn6 , you will find the whole article on your right. Clifford has that many peoples dirty secrets tucked away, he should be pulled in by the police for witholding information on certain crimes.
Entwistle has resigned.
Can't say I'm surprised. His early comments on the latest Newsnight cock-up sounded pretty much like he was taking responsibility for not being on the ball.
I think most considered Entwistle largely blameless for the spiking of the Savile programme (although some like Ian Hislop have suggested he share responsibility, as he was in overall charge of factual content before becoming DG), but he couldn't duck this one as he really should have known what was going on.
What bothered me most about Entwistle not knowing is that I'd have expected some of the compliance changes implemented as a result of the "Sachsgate" nonsense to have helped...
It seems incredible that he went around so blinkered. He appears to know nothing of anything, whereas, after the JS debacle he should have been crawling over everything going out connected with this and the follow ups. In his resignation speech he talks of 'shoddy journalism' (presumably by Newsnight). That one sentence makes it right that he's gone. You resign, you take the rapp, not point at other ppl. He sounded like a petulent child, not a decision maker.
It seems incredible that he went around so blinkered. He appears to know nothing of anything, whereas, after the JS debacle he should have been crawling over everything going out connected with this and the follow ups. In his resignation speech he talks of 'shoddy journalism' (presumably by Newsnight). That one sentence makes it right that he's gone. You resign, you take the rapp, not point at other ppl. He sounded like a petulent child, not a decision maker.
Totally agree, and it's even more incredible when you remember that he used to be Editor of Newsnight...
Check out this link http://t.co/gMdjTOn6 , you will find the whole article on your right. Clifford has that many peoples dirty secrets tucked away, he should be pulled in by the police for witholding information on certain crimes.
I was unaware Alan Clark was dead.
That being the case... is it illegal that he did not report what he knew at the time ? surely it would be ? at the very least it says plenty about his character.
If she wished and felt the allegations untrue I'm guessing Mr Clarks widow could sue for libel/slander ?
Anyway...
Yes, I'm betting he know's plenty but that can't be proven unless he's caught on camera blowing his own trumpet again but no doubt he'll now be more careful he is not being filmed during his bragging sessions.
I remember reading about him advising Simon Cowell to distance himself from Jonathon King after learning that he (Cowell) had paid ÂĢ50 K of Kings bail, not a crime of course but not terribly savoury either.
Check out this link http://t.co/gMdjTOn6 , you will find the whole article on your right. Clifford has that many peoples dirty secrets tucked away, he should be pulled in by the police for witholding information on certain crimes.
Agree, he's not covered by any ethical vow..
It seems incredible that he went around so blinkered. He appears to know nothing of anything, whereas, after the JS debacle he should have been crawling over everything going out connected with this and the follow ups. In his resignation speech he talks of 'shoddy journalism' (presumably by Newsnight). That one sentence makes it right that he's gone. You resign, you take the rapp, not point at other ppl. He sounded like a petulent child, not a decision maker.
Totally agree, and it's even more incredible when you remember that he used to be Editor of Newsnight...
After John Humphreys took Entwhistle apart today....I was left wondering what exactly his job is at the Beeb....sitting about looking important, being paid megabucks for knowing nothing about anything and doing nothing about everything
This explosive video from a few years ago has re-surfaced on the internet. He who knows where all the bodies are buried, the tabloid publicist Max Clifford, names Alan Clark as one of the alleged Tory paedophiles. Boasting about how he made the Harkesses a lot of money â Valerie the then 57-year-old wife of James Harkess, her daughters Josephine, 34 sister Alison, 36 â for their tale of the seduction of all three by Clark:
âThe only slightly serious side about it was heâd actually interfered with those girls from the age of fourteen.â
Clifford goes on to boast that: âIâve got all the evidence. Iâm the one whoâs hidden it from the world. I know where everything is and the proof isâ. Words he may come to regretâĶ
Will this appear in the tabloids? Donât count on it, Max is close to editors. He trades stories with them, suppressing stories about a clients who wants to keep secrets for a stories about clients who wants the limelight. Max has plenty he wants to keep hiddenâĶ
This is shocking. I'm fairly sure he's confessing to breaking the law, is he not ?
Perverting the course of justice ? witholding evidence ?
Or if allegations untrue, slander (or is it libel ?, always confuse the two)
Anyone with a good understanding of the law on here ?
No good understanding....but I think the Data Protection Act will have been used by both Clifford and his clients to ensure that neither has to divulge anything. I think in a criminal investigation the police can issue a writ for disclosure if that is in the public interest.....i'e if it's part of a specific criminal enquiry, although there are those in the legal professions and the police who no doubt wish it would all go away
This explosive video from a few years ago has re-surfaced on the internet. He who knows where all the bodies are buried, the tabloid publicist Max Clifford, names Alan Clark as one of the alleged Tory paedophiles. Boasting about how he made the Harkesses a lot of money â Valerie the then 57-year-old wife of James Harkess, her daughters Josephine, 34 sister Alison, 36 â for their tale of the seduction of all three by Clark:
âThe only slightly serious side about it was heâd actually interfered with those girls from the age of fourteen.â
Clifford goes on to boast that: âIâve got all the evidence. Iâm the one whoâs hidden it from the world. I know where everything is and the proof isâ. Words he may come to regretâĶ
Will this appear in the tabloids? Donât count on it, Max is close to editors. He trades stories with them, suppressing stories about a clients who wants to keep secrets for a stories about clients who wants the limelight. Max has plenty he wants to keep hiddenâĶ
This is shocking. I'm fairly sure he's confessing to breaking the law, is he not ?
Perverting the course of justice ? witholding evidence ?
Or if allegations untrue, slander (or is it libel ?, always confuse the two)
Anyone with a good understanding of the law on here ?
No good understanding....but I think the Data Protection Act will have been used by both Clifford and his clients to ensure that neither has to divulge anything. I think in a criminal investigation the police can issue a writ for disclosure if that is in the public interest.....i'e if it's part of a specific criminal enquiry, although there are those in the legal professions and the police who no doubt wish it would all go away
I don't think there can be a crime without a victim, I doubt those women will talk now..
I can only hope that the bastards involved are exposed.The real problem is the people involved run the feckin country.
I can only hope that the bastards involved are exposed.The real problem is the people involved run the feckin country.
Me too erinp but I think there's too many of the feckers to ever break their ranks..
I can only hope that the bastards involved are exposed.The real problem is the people involved run the feckin country.
Me too erinp but I think there's too many of the feckers to ever break their ranks..
I would LOVE that son of a bitch McAlpine to challenge all of the charges.
Steven Messham, the former care home resident who has admitted his sex abuse claims against former Tory chairman Lord McAlpine were fabricated, has never been good at dealing with questions about his allegations.
A victim of his delusions: Astonishing story the BBC DIDN'T tell you about its troubled star witness
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...ICO=most_read_module
Steven Messham, the former care home resident who has admitted his sex abuse claims against former Tory chairman Lord McAlpine were fabricated, has never been good at dealing with questions about his allegations.
A victim of his delusions: Astonishing story the BBC DIDN'T tell you about its troubled star witness
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...ICO=most_read_module
Fabricated by a policeman, surely?
Channel 4 News interviewed the wife of another victim, who had sadly killed himself, and she said that he, also, was told by the police that the name of the abuser in the photograph was Lord McAlpine.
The man, named locally, and on Twitter as former BBC producer Wilfred Deâath, becomes the third to be held as part of Operation Yewtree, the Metropolitan Police inquiry into the claims. He was arrested at 7.15 this morning in Cambridgeshire.
Neighbours confirmed that police had arrived at Mr De'ath's home this morning and escorted him away before searching the second floor flat.
He was later bailed to a date in December pending further inquiries.
Officers have been contacted by hundreds of alleged victims since Savileâs crimes were finally exposed by a subsequent ITV documentary. They said that the scandal has uncovered child abuse on âan unprecedented scaleâ.
Scotland Yard said in a statement: âOfficers working on Operation Yewtree have today, 11 November, arrested a man in his 70s in connection with the investigation.
Entwistle has resigned.
After hearing his abysmal performance on Radio 4 and the fact that a six figure salary at the helm of a mighty institution should invoke a tad more curiosity I still felt sorry for him when he fell on his sword. Bless his lil face!
I don't know who does these things, but they're so clever
Edit... sweary words in print
Steven Messham, the former care home resident who has admitted his sex abuse claims against former Tory chairman Lord McAlpine were fabricated, has never been good at dealing with questions about his allegations.
A victim of his delusions: Astonishing story the BBC DIDN'T tell you about its troubled star witness
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...ICO=most_read_module
David Mellor (the w*anker) called Messham a 'weirdo' on the Politics Show today. They still can't get it right. Some of the other pundits were quick to distance themselves from that lovely comment.
