An unfounded and false allegation

Westminster Confidential

This weekend Exaro News  has published a story by me where a prominent figure has been falsely accused of indecently assaulting a teenage boy. Exceptionally in this case I had personal knowledge of the events surrounding the incident and knew enough about them to give a statement to the  Met Police Paedophile Unit. As a result of my statement and statements from others  the police cleared the person.

The full story is behind the pay wall at Exaro News (http://www.exaronews.com and http://bit.ly/11vfyOn). Like the false accusation against Lord McAlpine, this is  another case of mistaken identity.

View original post

20 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

20 responses to “An unfounded and false allegation

  1. Pingback: An unfounded and false allegation » Alternative News Network

  2. nuggy

    what was the betting david henke will now be accused of being part of a government conspiracy.

  3. indespair

    David Hencke, former Guardian journalist, check out The Guardian’s recent record on CSA and articles in support / normalisation of paedophillia and compare these with Nick Davie’s strong reporting.. Incidentally, unlike Bonobos, they will never “nudge” us into normalising paedophilia!

  4. nuggy

    oh dear its started already.

  5. TonyM

    The problem is that a basic check of various events, dates alongside Ben Fellow’s age doesn’t seem to support some of the claims. Just today in an article in relation to the famous movie star who supposed abused a boy who was with Ben it is stated that Ben was 14 in 1993/1994 when that star’s film was released.

    An Express article states that Ben Fellows is 37 in October 2012. That would mean he was 17 in October 1992.

    http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/354771/My-hell-with-Britain-s-biggest-stars-says-Ben-Fellows

    In the article he says he was plied with alcohol and drugs and taken advantage of while filming Model Millie in Clapham in 1990 when he was 15. However according to IMDB Model Millie dates from 1994 and the earliest reference to it in the TV guides of back issues of The Guardian seems to be 08 Jan 1994. Surely the BBC didn’t film the show and then keep it on the shelf for three to four years?

    News reports show that Central was bought by Carlton over Christmas 1993 and the sale was completed by January 1994. Yet filming for the Cook Report seems to have been in 1994. So how could the sale be due to the Cook Report groping incident as has been claimed?

  6. Anon

    The Guardian, like most MSM, is scrupulous in avoiding and eliminating references to allegations that are otherwise widely referred and discussed on the Internet, probably because they are scared shitless of being sued into the ground by those whose integrity might otherwise be impugned.

  7. nuggy

    we should always be wary of a claim witch is only being made by 1 person.

    the fellows story always had the problem of corroboration.

  8. TonyM

    A few more dates in the David Hencke article would have been helpful eg. when the filming for the programme took place.

  9. TonyM

    A bit more research…

    Ben Fellows claimed that hidden camera footage for the Cook Report was captured of the “prominent figure” touching him up. He said that David Cameron (who worked for Carlton Communications at the time?) arranged for Central TV to be bought by Carlton so the tape could be disposed of.

    Also it was claimed that Carlton paid a very low price for Central.

    An article by David Hencke published by the Guardian on May 12 1994 reports that the Cook Report has been shelved and states:

    “The [Cook Report] investigation by Central Television was inspired by the Guardian’s disclosure of Mr Greer’s operations during last year’s Conservative Party Conference.”

    Back issues of The Guardian show that the Conference was held in early October 1993.

    In the article “Central TV Chief in line for windfall” published by The Guardian on Nov 30, 1993 it mentions:

    “…the £758 million takeover bid announced yesterday.”

    So just six or seven weeks after the Tory Conference the takeover had been announced. Had the Cook Report even started filming by then? We don’t know, but that isn’t much time for the Cook Report to decide to make the programme, do research, do filming, for David Cameron to find out what had been recorded and then for him to arrange a three-quarter of a billion takeover…

    £758 million doesn’t seem a small amount. On December 07, 1993 The Times reports that London Weekend planned to fight a £595 million takeover by Granada.

    Other articles in the Guardian state that the Carlton takeover of Central happened over Christmas 1993 and was completed by the first week of January 1994.

    Careers: Company Vitae 94: Carlton Communications
    The Guardian, Aug 3 1996

    “…in 1993 it acquired Central Television…”

    Carlton had bid for the London and South/South East regions during the ITV franchise round a couple of years earlier so was clearly on the prowl.

    It seems many bloggers aren’t doing the most fact and date checking in newspaper archives that are freely available via any public library and in some cases via the library’s website. Many just exist in an echo chamber of cut and paste accusations.

    The fact that the claims about the Carlton takeover and David Cameron don’t seem to stack up should sound an alarm when it comes to the other accusations for which there are apparently no other witnesses and no evidence.

  10. Facts before any arrest or exploted,this persons life will never be the same,he is tanished for life .like us victims.

    • wugahumfdumwif

      If true that Clarke is innocent of what Fellows claims fair enough, but to say he is tarnished for life is pushing it a bit. He’s not exactly a saint to begin with

  11. Paul

    Paid for establishment friends coming to the defence of the corrupt establishment, and you believe them?

    I think you need to wake up and see the agenda here. They are defending the undefendable and you are swallowing the establishment lies. Yes Ben Fellows allegations need looking into, but the fact that the Met Police will not is what is wrong here. Wake up will you and see that that is the main point I see in this. They basically came back and said they cannot investigate. If they had, and although they are no doubt full of funny handshake trouser lifters themselves, followed a checkable due process then everyone would have been happy and this would have been proved either way.

    But no, they won’t look into it. When the police do this, just like they seem to be avoiding many avenues in the other various pedophile investigations, is when red lights come on. Do no get distracted by their lies and rhetoric.

    • The Met did investigate.

      David Hencke’s blog and the Exaro article make this perfectly clear.

      The Met talked to 4 individuals involved in the C4Q investigation, including David Hencke, and each denied that Ken Clarke was ever involved.
      It is simply not true to suggest that the Met did not properly investigate Ben Fellow’s allegations against Ken Clarke. They did and found that they were not true.

  12. Little Me

    Hmm, so what if Ken Clarke was never involved in C4Q. That is a none issue. Am I clear in thinking BF accused Ken Clarke of groping him? Could he not have been in that very room at that time? Have the police even spoke to Ken Clarke? Surley if an accusation was made Ken Clarke should be questioned? If I accused someone of something are you telling me the police would ask their work mates what they think? MPs asside, is that what has happened or could happen to me? Logically for me it should be…….we have interviewed both Mr Fellows and Mr Clarke. There is no evidence to go any further with this investigation……that would be just? People can think cover-up if they like but in my opinion if Mr Clarke has not even been questioned then obviously there is something very very wrong with this so called system. More so than just plain wrong.

    • “so what if Ken Clarke was never involved in C4Q. That is a none issue.”

      Actually, it’s a very important issue. The Cook Report were investigating C4Q. Ken Clarke was not involved in any way. In other words, Ken Clarke never filmed and Ben Fellows never met him.

      There has been a police investigation. 4 people senior in the C4Q investigation were interviewed. They all said Ken Clarke was not involved. There is no case for Ken Clarke to answer. Other than Ben Fellows’ uncorroberated allegations there is no evidence. Furthermore, there is compelling evidence that Sir Peter Morrison may have been the person who assaulted BF.

  13. dpack

    when seeking truth cross referencing allegations to facts and stating what is found is needed.it seems that this has been done in this case.
    to disprove or fail to prove an allegation can be as informative as proving it in a complex situation.

    byzantine layers of smoke and mirrors are best explored with an open mind that considers evidence very carefully.if the statement in this case does not match easily checked dates,other witness statements,material evidence etc my first question would be what were the causes of mr fellows making it ?

    illuminating the truth depends on clearing the innocent as much as bringing the guilty to account by good investigation and checking facts.if the facts can be proven and do not confirm the allegations at an early stage it is better than wasting resources on a red herring or harming the innocent whilst obscuring truth.

  14. Little Me

    Gojam.. Am I right in thinking that BF delivered something to a person for the Cook Report? At the time he says he did this, in that very room he says was Ken Clarke? Are you saying that KC would not be allowed in that room unless he was part of C4Qs and because he wasn’t part of it he could not have been there? Maybe he just popped in that office for a coffee with a work mate? Can you see what I am trying to say? I haven’t spent much time reading through all of this as you can probably tell but I do feel I have a point to make. Has Clarke been questioned or not because if not then I think that is quite strange.
    I’ve read that BF lives in public sector housing, what does this mean? Anyone found out? and yes I do think that he has his own agenda but then who am I?

    • I’m trying to say that throughout the investigation Ken Clarke was never around.

      Ken Clarke was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time and his moderate politics would not have endeared him to Greer.

  15. TonyM

    And here’s something extremely interesting that I’ve just found:
    =========
    The Guardian Jul 13. 1994

    MPs demand to see Greer film

    THE Speaker has been asked to order Central TV to show the untransmitted Cook Report film on Ian Greer Associates if she institutes a wider inquiry into MPs and lobbyists following today’s debate, writes David Hencke.

    Alan Williams, Labour MP for Swansea West, wrote to the Speaker yesterday requesting the action after 104 MPs signed a Parliamentary motion calling for the showing of the film, the contents of which were obtained by the Guardian in May.

    He backed the action by tabling a new motion revealing that Ian Greer was using the names of 14 MPs, including Cabinet ministers, to back up his business connections. This is revealed in correspondence to the American company set up by Central TV which employed Ian Greer Associates to lobby for them to buy up the Insolvency Service, Patent Office, and Companies House.

    ========

    So according to this article written by David Henke in July 1994 The Guardian had obtaining the “contents” of the film in May of that year. Of course that could just mean a written transcript or script not the film footage.

    Did the Speaker institute a wider enquiry? Did MPs see the film? Did the programme ever reach a rough or final cut or was there just unedited film/video?

    Alan Williams the MP who called for the action is still alive and stood down as an MP in 2010. Someone could contact him?

  16. TonyM

    In his Exaro article, “How I helped police clear Kenneth Clarke of ‘sex assault’ smear” David Henke writes that the proghramme was abandoned because:

    “the team discovered that Greer had become a lobbyist for Carlton Television, which had taken over Central TV. The team feared that the sting would leak to Greer.

    The programme was not abandoned because it was failing to achieve results.

    I obtained the entire transcripts of the footage after it was halted. To the annoyance of Central TV, the transcripts then formed the main part of a front-page story in The Guardian.

    There was nothing in the transcripts about Clarke.”

    According to a Guardian article dated June 15, 1994, the previous day Andy Alan the Chief Executive of Central TV had refused to let MPs see the untransmitted film.

    In the TV column published on May 13 1994 it is mentioned that the Cook Report “returned for its ninth series last night”.