NYP and Jimmy Savile : How much did they know?

NYP and Jimmy Savile: How much did they know?

• – TIM HICKS examines recent developments in the Jimmy SAVILE investigations.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In a recent article in the Sunday Express, a senior Officer of the North Yorkshire Police commented that he would be “completely staggered” if the Savile allegations did not spread north.

Inevitably, they have.

Real Whitby has already published three articles on the subject. In summary, by collating information from open sources and obtaining information from local people, Real Whitby investigative-journalists have identified eight locations in Scarborough and one in Whitby that were associated with Savile and the paedophile-ring of influential people that he operated there for over forty years.

It would appear that four of these locations are unknown to the police. The single location in Whitby still exists and is alleged to have had a whipping-post in it.

Also, a member of the public has used the ‘comments’ section of one Real Whitby article, to provide information on an alleged male rape by Savile, in which he was assisted by others of his circle.

Given the lack of interest or support from North Yorkshire Police, this information has been passed to Operation Yewtree via the NSPCC.

On Wednesday the 14th November, two of Savile’s associates were arrested by Greater Manchester Police for rape; thus supporting the allegation made in Real Whitby that Savile and his entourage were involved in rape.

Since North Yorkshire Police are known to monitor Real Whitby, it seems reasonable to conclude that it is aware of our articles and the evidence we have amassed.

One would think that the existence of a room with torture equipment in a location known to be frequented by a gang of paedophiles, would have been of interest to Whitby Police – particularly as there is reason to believe that some of the people involved in these matters may still be alive and, if so, could be arrested and prosecuted. Yet North Yorkshire Police has not contacted us for assistance.

According to another Sunday Express article, ace Yorkshire investigative-journalist Mark Branagan (who broke the Scarborough Borough Council corrupt procurement fiasco involving the HighPoint Rendel sea-defence contract in 2005), has confirmed that North Yorkshire Police have not even searched Savile’s apartment in Wessex Court, Scarborough.

Yet Strathclyde Police consider his house in Glencoe is a key crime scene in their investigation into offences committed there! Why can’t the good people of Scarborough rely on the same high standards of investigation as those of Strathclyde?

This lack of any North Yorkshire Police investigation or interest in the Savile case is perplexing and deeply concerning, particularly considering the high profile of the case and the local impact.

On the 10th and 11th of October, two victims came forward to report serious sexual abuses by Savile in the late-’60s and late-80s, respectively.

Yet an article in the Daily Express on the 24th of October states:

“Yesterday North Yorkshire Police insisted they had no record of an investigation into the star.”

On the 31st of October, a statement published by North Yorkshire Police on its website read:

“When the allegations surrounding Jimmy Savile were publicised, we carried out extensive searches of force records which did not reveal a local connection. However, following the coverage, two women came forward about alleged offences committed by Savile that occurred in Scarborough in the the late 60s and late 80s.”

Clearly, North Yorkshire Police are denying all knowledge of the paedophile-ring that Savile and his high-profile associates (including his worship the Mayor of Scarborough, Councillor Peter Jaconelli) – collectively known as ‘The Club’ – are alleged to have run for over forty years in Scarborough and Whitby.

Curiously, the link to North Yorkshire Police website on which the statement “we carried out extensive searches of force records which did not reveal a local connection” has been revised and now declares only that two women have now come forward to make allegations.

The denial that North Yorkshire Police were aware of any local connection has been completely removed.

What can be the explanation for this apparent about-face by North Yorkshire Police?

The Real Whitby investigative-journalists have constantly maintained that it must have been impossible for the North Yorkshire Police – in Scarborough or Whitby – to have been ‘unaware’ of Savile’s activities, or those of the other high-profile members of his paedophile-ring.

The Express has arrived at the same conclusion, running not one but two articles alleging that North Yorkshire Police knew that Savile was targetting under-age girls for sex, and stating that during a major paedophile investigation in Scarborough in 2003, members of the public were questioned by Scarborough Police about Jimmy Savile’s involvement in it.

I do not agree with speculation, but it would therefore appear to me that the only conceivable reason the above statement exonerating North Yorkshire Police of any knowledge of the Savile ring (or “club” as it was apparently known in Whitby) has been removed, is because they fear it may no longer be tenable in the light of comments by the Express and Real Whitby, and, in fact, force records did reveal a local connection, which the police ignored.

I have asked North Yorkshire Police for an explanation but they have not responded.

The Daily Mail and The Times have recently run ‘must-read’ articles alleging that Savile had extensive social contacts with the Police and met with them regularly; their social group was also known as a “club”. Savile is also alleged to have routinely bribed Police Officers and to have used a policeman as his bodyguard, a practice strictly prohibited by Police disciplinary rules, but which was nevertheless permitted.

These allegations concern West Yorkshire Police and other forces, not North Yorkshire Police. However, it is clearly a concern that this was obviously part of his modus operandii to evade Police action and it is not impossible that he employed it equally successfully wherever he committed offences.

It certainly seems strange that if indeed “senior police officers investigating a suspected paedophile ring operating around seafront arcades in Scarborough in the 1980s had concerns that Jimmy Savile may have been involved. Although his name was repeatedly mentioned to the 2003 investigation team, Savile was never quizzed over targeting under-age girls for sex between 1982 and 1986”.

It is also strange that no-one from the North Yorkshire Police said anything two years later, in 2005, when the proposal that Savile should receive the accolade of being appointed Honorary Freedom of the Borough of Scarborough proceeded through Council without impediment – particularly as Councillor Tom Fox had been the Acting Chief Inspector running Scarborough Police until his retirement and in fact actually presided over the awarding of this accolade in his new rôle as Councillor and Leader of Scarborough Borough Council.

Why would that be?

I think we should be told.