Ben Fellows Found Not Guilty

Untitled

Ben Fellows has been found ‘Not Guilty’ of Perverting the Course of Justice

What a mess ! 

I don’t think this will be the end of this saga and it has now opened a very nasty can of worms. The allegations against Ken Clarke are entirely false but some foolish people will now mistakenly believe that this verdict validates these erroneous and ludicrous allegations. This verdict can only be based on the jury’s opinion that Ben Fellows did not deliberately and knowingly make false allegations against Ken Clarke and it can not possibly be seen as giving any credence to the allegations themselves.

Since Ben Fellows was charged I’ve made no comment regarding his character or this case. He like everyone is entitled to a fair trial and it is important not to publish anything that might prejudice that but now that the jury have delivered their verdict I’m free to say what I want and that is that Ben Fellows is a fantasist as anyone who has bothered to research his catalogue self-promotion activities online over many years will have seen.

Even if I were to believe that the allegation that Mr Fellows had been groped by someone, not Ken Clarke but someone (which incidentally I do not believe) I find it disturbing that a 19 year old actor who was playing a part of a younger boy to try and entrap gay men into such a pass should be taken up by those campaigning on behalf of survivors of child sexual abuse.

I’ll state this now; victims of CSA are not 19 year old actors playing a part and they do not get paid a wage to provoke a sexual assault. This was just another bandwagon that Mr Fellows has jumped on in an effort to promote himself.

I wrote at the top that I do not think that his will be the end of affair, I’ll explain, I expect that lawyers acting on behalf of Ken Clarke will be looking very closely at what people in the Alternative Media  and Social Media now publish and I’d expect that if anyone suggests that Ken Clarke is guilty of these false allegations then those lawyers will be instructed to begin civil proceedings. I had heard that Ken Clarke had been reluctant to do this prior to Ben Fellows being charged as it would have just given more oxygen to the stories floating around online but the circumstances have changed and I can’t see that Ken Clarke would have any other choice if he wanted to clear his name after this debacle.

Those that think that this verdict is in any way a victory for genuine victims of child sexual abuse are mistaken. False allegations like this, especially involving VIPs, are always found out in the end and do nothing but undermine the cases of those that were genuinely sexually abused as children by establishment figures. Furthermore, during the  6 weeks or so that the Metropolitan Police Paedophile Unit, who have limited resources, were actively investigating Ben Fellows’ false allegations they may not have been able to adequately respond and protect children that were in danger at that time.

I’d also like to point out that because of Mr Fellows’ behaviour since his contact with the police including him secretly recording discussions and publishing them online, I can not see any other outcome than that the treatment of future CSA victims coming forward will as a consequence become far less informal and less generous.

In no way can that be described as a victory for child sexual abuse victims

A man who claimed he was sexually assaulted by former Chancellor Kenneth Clarke has been cleared of perverting the course of justice.

Ben Fellows, 40, of Solihull, in the West Midlands, had said the Conservative MP abused him in 1994.

In the trial at the Old Bailey Mr Clarke – the MP for Rushcliffe – described the claims as “preposterous”.

The jury took eight hours to find Mr Fellows, of Redstone Farm Road, Olton, not guilty of the charge.

BBC News

Advertisements

89 Comments

Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

89 responses to “Ben Fellows Found Not Guilty

  1. Redondo

    Spot on in every way, Gojam. Fellows is a very odd poster boy for anti abuse campaigners. Not as obviously sinister as the Hampstead case, but could be even more damaging. I respect the jury’s verdict but share your unease.

    • Spell Checker

      Gobbo shows his spots,you mean?

    • me

      Ben Fellows now calling himself zed phoenix has posted a website under his new alter spouting more lies and BS. He would like everyone o believe he was homeless sleeping on the streets being bullied by other homeless people. Lies. He never spent one night sleeping on the streets. H had a place to stay he chose to leave and tell the kind person who provided him with a home to fuck off his words. Then 2 hrs later begged the same person to pick him up! He is a dangerous fraud and con man. He is a thief a liar and an abuser. He allowed his friend Amanda Gordon balls to attack and beat up his girlfriend Jackie in a hotel in India while he stood by and watched. He lies to everyone he meets to get money from them then he drops you once he has what he wants. He wants attention which is why he now has yet another idiotic website. He wants money for nothing. Stay away from him and his friends. He is the worst narcissist you could be unlucky enough to meet. Best thing to do is pretend he doesn’t exist. He thinks he is king of the world and hates anyone who doesn’t agree that he is. Lives in Ramsgate harbour.

      • Sarah Lavers

        Perhaps Brian Gerrish of ‘The UK Column’ was (/is?) his handler. Someone filmed them conferring before Fellows made his jesus-like resurrection when that Bilderberg meeting was taking place. They had a stage clse to the hotel, a controlled ‘demonstration’. Fellows was filmed verbally abusing that Hannah Remington. He lied about Clarke mentioning G4S, which didn’t even exist in 1994 (it was still Securicor and Group 4 then, separate entities at the time).

        Why wasn’t that mentioned at the trial? It was a scam, and I reckon Clarke was in on it. The whole thing took the attention from real victims of sexual abuse within the television industry. Gerrish always tries to make people believe that only Westminster politicians are to blame.

        Anyway, they gave ONE PERSON’S bullshit story, and ignored the rest.

        Fellows is a liar, and a malignant narcissist.

        The Clarke trial was an absolute joke. Fellows had all of the ‘alternative movement’ drones on his side, even though many people knew really that he is a terrible person. They ignore the inconsistencies in his story.

        NEVER join a ‘movement’, unless you want to be diverted from the truth.

        Ben Fellows is a UK Column Production.

        Shame on them!!

      • Sarah Lavers

        Yep, he’s a scam artist- played his role in the UK Column’s grand distraction!

        Controlled opposition- absolute filth!

      • Sarah Lavers

        Here’s a question about the UK Column:

        Why aren’t they covering this: http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/09/football/sex-abuse-scandal-football/index.html

        They leave the world of celebrity well alone, only ‘Westminster Politicians’ can be paedophiles! Why does Mike Robinson almost always wear black? Ian R Crane does as well, Jordan Maxwell…

        I believe this woman about Melanie Shaw (Another UK Column Production):

      • James

        Zed Phoenix as he calls himself is living on a small boat with his girlfriend and has set up an online motivation site. He uses his girlfriend in a video to extol his virtues. He also uses her acting students to make positive comments on the site, search for The Pheonix Centre and Zed Phoenix to get to the online course.

  2. gw

    What a bizarre series of events.

    I note that police have closed the investigation into Danczuck’s claims that Cyril Smith was arrested with CSA images – no witnesses.

    • dpack

      i also noticed that in relation to the quite believable cyril smith allegation,however “making the problem go away”should lead to a lack of evidence if it is done efficiently.in his case that there are other accounts of such “plumbing” by men in suits from london and/or local special branch officers and accounts of his misbehavior being covered up at a local level.

      re the fellows business juries have decided on the evidence presented to them which is ok by me.

    • Owen

      Eric, someone who can write “how he could have knowledge of Smith’s activities is a mystery” with a straight face, in the knowledge that Danczuk is MP for the constituency where a number of Smith’s victims live, is clearly not interested in the truth aboout Danczuk’s involvement. You’re part of the systematic effort not just to discredit victims but also to discredit their champions. You may not understand how the description “Paedo apologist” is relevant. What you should try to do is consider the impression created by someone who works very hard to minimise the possibility that allegations of paedophile crimes have some substance to them. The people who read you aren’t stupid, except in that they continue to read you.

      • Owen, here is Danczuk gurning like a good ‘un at the unveiling of a plaque to celebrate the hummungus man’s life & contribution to Rochdale society:

        The family of his wife – the second one, that is, not the first one who he lied to about having an affair with the second (until the point that #2’s baby-bump – he’d got her knocked-up, the randy rover! – could no longer be passed-off as something a few sweaty sessions down the gym could fix, at which point he abondoned both #1 & the children he’d had by her – are, as we all know, long-time fixtures in the Rochdale political world, and would undoubtedly have ‘known ‘all about Cyril Smith. How could they NOT have known?

        Being full-bore Labour-members, they really missed a trick in exploiting what they knew about Smith, wouldn’t you say? Local politics is frequently even worse than national, any excuse to smear & besmirch an opponent.
        A pertinent example: the recently-departed Matt Baker – he departed around the time that Danczuk decided to leave the child-abuse stuff alone – used such tactics on internet-forums & the like to attack critics of his boss under a number of false-identities.

        Despite ‘everyone’ knowing since 1979, somehow Danczuk didn’t.

        One of the 1979 journalists wrote in 2015:
        “… in a ceremony attended by the current MP Simon Danczuk, put up a blue plaque in his honour – now taken down, apparently to prevent vandalism. More rubbing the noses of many victims in their misery, on their home patch.”

        Baker, of course, was getting paid by the taxpayer to write a book for his boss who then used the publicly-funded propaganda to destroy his only opposition in Rochdale – the Liberal Party – and secure his thin lips around the public-money teat, falsely claiming that he was the co-writer as he went. The BBC has now paid Danczuk for the option to ‘develop’ a drama based on the book that he didn’t write. The book is a concoction of rubbish, complete with inventions that have wasted the time & resources of the police bullied into investigating the crap, which is beyond-difficult as the ‘top sources’ upon which he/they based the fantasies are, understandably, hard to track-down: they seem to have vanished into thin air – poof!

        Is this enough ‘truth about Danczuk’s involvement’, are would you like seconds?

        [Dear Reader, Owen & I have been tussling over the cretinous Danczuk for a while, but he’s yet to explicitly accept my offer to review ‘2015 – A Year Of Danczuk’ which I made at the end of 2014. I hardly need remind you of the revolting spectacle the potato-headed fraud has given us during the first 7-months of the year, 7-months during which even the patience of a masochistic repeat-forgiver of a serial-liar must have been tested. It’s such a foregone conclusion that I gave up taking notes in January! Yet hope dies last, eh, Owen?]

    • SpeLL ChecKeR

      mr Hardcastle,mr mark Williams-Thomas wishes to speak to both you and your good friend “rabbitaway”.

    • Andy H

      Apparently Owen failed to notice Simon Danczuk attendiing a grand ceremony in Rochdale in the not too distant past where a plaque was unveiled for Cyril Smith honoring his services to the area. Danczuk clapped politely along with all the others.
      Danczuk’s conversion to the Smith claims is only recent as Owen emphasises by pointing out that he is indeed Rochdale MP but of course he has been a decades long resident and politicial activist in Rochdale but apparently was oblicious even to gossip about Smith.

      Danczuk was also totally oblivious to the organised “Asian” abuse in Rochdale that took place over the past few years.

      Such are the complicatuons when you jump on band wagons.

      Owen also falsely accuses me as several of these fanatics who claim to be “child protection” campaigners tiresomely do. They merely demonstrate shocking ignorance about the 100s & 100s of genuine unsung child protection campaigners and indeed, insult them and treat them as non-existent because they are drowned out by the vocal bullies.

      The only alleged “champions” I might criticise number under about 4 amongst the genuine champions of abused children.

      Owen’s seemingly hero worship of these blatant opportunists who are using child abuse to further their careers in TV or politics also ignores the rampant infighting amongst these so-called “advocates” who are already at each other’s throats and gettiing worse as the CSA Inquiry advances.

      I am nothing compared to the vicious territorial fights that rage across Twitter, Facebook and such with this mob.

      As for Mark Williams-Thomas, he’d have to unblock me first but seeing he gives vastly differing accounts of his “career” in his tabloid tales – the most famous being his “30 years in child protection” (at age just 44) I wouldn’t trust him to give me the right phone number. Let alone waste 1 precious minute of my life talking to the goose.

      • Owen

        Andy, I guess you’re something to do with Eric since you have the same H and reply to my reply to him. Danczuk may have and have had his failings but looking from where I sit he’s put in a fair amount of effort to achieve something positive. Your mate Eric is simply an obstructionist and smart-alec. Give me the choice and I’ll take Danczuk and Mrs and all the other characters of a greater or lesser degree of dodginess any time in preference to Eric and his peculiar friends. But I’m not so overwhelmed by my own competence in information gathering that I’m not willing to listen to wise advice if genuine – please tell me who are the genuine voices I should be hearing.

      • Here Owen, why don`t you read this. Then contact Henry MacDonald and ask him if it is true? After that you can ask him why he is too frightened to name Alan Campbell as “the Demon Pastor” he is alluding to? http://psalm79.com/2013/08/20/the-demon-pastor-revealed/

      • Owen

        Hi, Sam, you sound like you know a lot on the subject already. Perhaps you’d do me the favour of explaining what it’s all about (a synopsis will do). Thanks.

      • Sorry I did not reply earlier Owen. as a synopsis you could start by asking yourself, who really governs the UK?
        1. Does the elected UK government control the non elected British intelligence agencies?
        OR
        2. Does the non elected British intelligence agencies control the elected UK government?

      • Sabre

        2 is closer than 1 but it only works as a synopsis.

      • Owen

        Thanks, Sam – however they’re questions above my level of knowledge and appreciation. Questions like that are best left to people who have the necessary familiarity with the subject while the rest of us concentrate on what we feel we do know a little about.

  3. Bishop Brightly

    I hope he gets some serious psychiatric intervention. He needs it, as was obvious from the start.

  4. Tsk. Tsk. Not believing a victim? What will this all lead to.

    • Owen

      I hope it will lead to a questioning of the agenda of a little sub-cult that systematically mocks, denigrates and misrepresents the experience of victims generally. What are you lot actually up to, Moor?

      • @Owen
        I am an individual not a Collective Owen.
        What you lot are up to is only too apparent.
        Why the Establishment is dancing to your tune is less clear.

      • Owen

        Moor, every dog in the pack is an individual but to the eye of the quarry they look very much like a collective. Over at Anna Raccoon, you may all come at the scent from different directions, but the common trail is quite clearly to promote the notion that allegations of child sexual abuse perpetrated in the past should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

        Nevertheless, I do find it anomalous that while you and the others are so quick to dismiss as ye unproven “historical” allegations in general as self-serving and untrustworthy but you yourself have no hesitation relying on an anecdotal comment posted at your blog of a regular visitor to Barnes to discredit the notion that children were abused at Elm Guest House. You argue with no substantial corroborating evidence that EGH was a vanilla gay establishment with no “dark side” despite the police raids and closure and you offer your own (rather facetious) reasons for disbelieving the Metropolitan Police’s statement that Cyril Smith visited EGH.

        More in line with the collectivity, you don’t seem uncomfortable with Anna’s congenial exchanges with Tom O’Carroll and you appear happy with her disregard for the mental and emotional arguments for a legal age of consent that doesn’t coincide with sexual maturity. When the subject of non-familial paedophilia arises you’re quick to stress that 90% of paedophile abuse is familial (not responding to Margaret Jervis when she suggests that this figure is not substantiated).

        All in all, your postings appear pretty consistent with the thesis promulgated at Anna Raccoon that allegations of non-familial historical abuse are generally to be dismissed as factually unreliable, financially motivated and probably concealing a substantial component of willing participation. In other words reinforcing the argument that the alleged perpetrators have no case to answer and serious investigation of the allegations is a form of unfair and oppressive treatment.

        That’s why you and the other chums in Anna Raccoon’s “snug” find yourselves accused of being a collective of “paedo apologists” and it’s the reason why I find it difficult to recognise you as the individual guardian of truth and freedom from oppression that you seem to want to portray yourself as in your assumed McGoohan persona. Maybe you should ease up a bit on accusing other people of hypocrisy and cant.

      • Hi Eric,

        Rumour is that you have a close relationship to a convicted child abuser. Is this correct ?

      • No more replies Eric until you answer the question.

      • Eric,

        I wasn’t satisfied with your reply and if I’m perfectly honest, I don’t like you.

        I’m sure I banned you a while back. Anyway, you’re banned now.

      • Eric H.

        Not only do I have no idea what you are talking about Gojam but your “when did you stop beating your wife” attempt is pretty low and quite childish.
        That said for all I know the bus driver on my regular bus route, the butcher and the man next door may well “convicted child abusers” but I ‘m not in the habit of asking.

        For all I know (which is little) you may well be a convicted child abuser Gojam. As I do not know anything about you can you either confirm or deny?
        Mind you, could have been worse. I may have been falsely called a christian fundamentalist.

        And show some sort of style & stop deleting posts that you simply do not agree with.

      • Sabre

        @Moor, when did the Establishment ever dance to the tune of the great unwashed? The establishment won’t rise from its seat for less than 9 figures. The very fact that the Establishment have started to foxtrot is an indication that they are delaying the break dancing. Perhaps you can enlighten us as to why the Establishment has decided to boogie with the masses.

  5. tdf

    Agreed, Gojam, Redondo & BB.

    More Barking,
    Some of us are capable of distinguishing between obviously spurious accusations and essentially true ones, such as the majority of those made against the vile predator Jimmy Savile. I know it’s complicated but do try to understand the distinctions otherwise people might mistake you for an idiot.

  6. gojam is full of s……………t

  7. Pingback: Ben Fellows ‘Not Guilty’ verdict at Old Bailey |

  8. Having your cake & eating it too, Gojam?!? You like the goose but ndon’t fancy that gander at all…

    In this case you set yourself above the courts: “… the jury have delivered their verdict I’m free to say what I want and that is that Ben Fellows is a fantasist as anyone who has bothered to research his catalogue self-promotion activities online over many years will have seen.”

    Yet with Starr v Ward (a fantasist as anyone who has bothered to research her catalogue of self-promoting activities online will know) you chose to side with the fantasist & opted for the blackest possible reading – that Starr could expect to have his case looked at once again by the CPS, which no doubt caused a quiver of excitement to run through your body (and a massive sigh of relief to be exhaled by MWT):

    https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/07/10/freddie-starr-loses-libel-case-against-karin-ward/comment-page-1/#comment-43258

    Is there any particular reason why the lies of one nutter are acceptable to you, but not the lies of another? Isn’t it the case that the ludicrous Fellows was just unlucky in that his rubbish was picked-up by ‘maverick film-maker’ Bill Baloney & not, say, ‘International Peabody’ – a self-invented moniker – Mark Williams-Thomson?

    Between Fellows and, say, MWT’s “Fiona” you’d have a job sliding a sheaf of paper. But you want to believe (or want everyone else to believe) one story but not the other. Ah, but those pre-determined holes we’ll fill by scissoring the truth into place, eh?

    P.S. Remember when you were falsely trying to suggest that I was anti-immunisation or summat? What was it, that I’d “been getting friendly” with people who held these views? Well, you might want to pay more attention to another of your problematic pals: Tabloid Timmy Tate. He’s well-in with a deranged nutter who thinks that Hep. B is a “venereal disease” (!) and offers us such gems as this:

    “What little baby needs to be vacinated for a venereal disease?!?”, the hysterical loon screeches? If you’re hoping that the calming voice of Timmy will reign her in, I’m afraid you’re going to be disappointed.
    Straight back atchya, champ!

    • @Bandini so tell me why you lot are a bunch of Paedo apologists? You never seem to answer that question

    • TIM

      Bandini. You really are a complete moron.

      If you bothered to check, I have repeatedly and very publicly stated that I disagree with almost everything Judith Reisman believes in – except for her genuinely excellent work on Kinsey’s use of paedophiles to provide bogus ‘data’ on how small children just love been sexually assaulted.

      Here’s a thought: why not use your real name so anyone with an interest can research your background ?

      No ? Thought not.

      • Tim, you old charmer!

        Last time you had me down as “a moron or something worse” but now I’m just a “moron” – albeit completely. I welcome this thawing in relations!

        Regarding Reisman, I was, of course, making a stupid & childish point, sort of an ‘ad hominem attack by proxy’, if you like. The reason I did so was because Gojam had done exactly the same to me, as explained. The cheeky monkey even blocked my refutation of his nonsense – what a scamp! – until I sneekily breached his defenses by inserting a screenshot into another un-related comment, after which he threw in the towel; defeated once again by a wiser & better man. Paid back in his own coin…

        (I must say, however, that by sharing a platform with the off-the-scale nutter you could be said to be giving succor to her lunacy: a ‘Reiso apologist’, perhaps. But enough of that.)

        After yourself and Bea Campbell moaned for Britain about David Aaronovitch’s ‘Analysis’ – and careful with that spelling, you professional journalist, you! – firing off doomed complaints to the BBC (but you got a piece in the Independent, so that’s alright) none of the whingerati seemed too keen on taking up the challenge of responding to his damning refutation of your crackpottery – how strange!

        So here’s a reminder:
        https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/02/an-response-to-bbc-radio-4s-analysis-programme-by-tim-tate/comment-page-1/#comment-43156

        Now, about this enticing offer to have “anyone with an interest” research my background: are you having a laugh?!? Have a good look at the drooling nuttery present on this very page – the mentally unhinged who get egged on by the pseudo-responible (“Oooh, Tim Tate said he was ‘something worse’ than a complete moron – and we all know what that means!”). I owe you for that one, Tim Tate. I’m not a welcher.

  9. Ken Clarke is a Bilderberg Steering Committee representative and is notorious for defending a VIP child rapist with the words ‘Leon Brittan was the outstanding politician of his generation’.

    Those who lack the intelligence to instinctively trust journalist Ben Fellows over Ken Clarke – have been, are, and will always be out of their depth on how power works.

    Ken Clarke ‘forgot’ he was a trustee of Bilderberg – Telegraph http://j.mp/1KCeks6

    • TonyM

      The same “journalist” who stated that Walt Disney Productions was taking over Stonehenge? When a basic Google search reveals that the firm Norman Disney & Young are consulting engineers on the project?

      Then there are the dates of other events and claims that simply don’t tally with the tales told by Ben Fellows who is age 40. Things like this:

      “It was in Clapham in 1990 that a 15-year-old Ben, who was filming Model Millie for the corporation, claims that he was plied with alcohol and drugs, seduced and then shamelessly taken advantage of by a BBC employee who, incredibly, later worked in children’s entertainment.”

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

      But look up “Model Millie” at BBC Genome, which is scans of back issues of Radio Times, and the earliest broadcast is actually Monday
      10 January 1994.

      http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/search/0/20?order=asc&q=%22model+millie%22#search

      Another claim from Ben was that David Cameron who worked at Carlton Television arranged the purchase of Central TV so they could get their hands on the Ken Clarke videotape. But you can look through back issues of The Guardian (this is a basic journalistic practice called “fact checking”) and see the purchase of Central being proposed in a Guardian article dated 29 Nov 1993 “Too Bad Too Little Too Late.” The Cook Report programme wasn’t filmed until sometime in 1994…

      The REAL story is that the Express and many alternative news outlets apparently don’t do the most basic fact checking before rushing to press.

      • You have so much to learn about MI5 and their use of blackmailing politicians, judges and all those powerful people you support in order to character assassinate Ben Fellows. It’s safe to assume you’re a Ben Fellows hater and this has priority over justice for survivors of the VIP child abuse network.

        Do you know what they called child rape victims before 2012?

        Fantasists. … Ring a bell sir?

    • Bishop Brightly

      You seem to be one whose tinfoil hat has been surgically embedded below the scalp.

    • SpeLL ChecKeR

      Mr Gojam,-the man who deletes nearly all replies,Charles,except,of course,the ones from the pedo-apologist group consisting of Hardcastle,Bandini,Moor larkin,etc etc..who all worship their Queen Raccooney.Gojam really needs to get out more and speak to Mickey Summers and his mounting mountain of evidence against a certain Mr K Clarke.

    • TIM

      Eric. I am not as you claim “a Christian fundamentalist”. I’m not even a practising Christian. I don’t trust, like or respect any organised religion.

      Next time before making defamatory remarks do a little basic checking. I have repeatedly published my religious non-affiliation.

    • Bandini, it’s plain that neither Gojam nor Tim are interested, so may I suggest you get help for your obsession with them, and use gay.com to find yourself a boyfriend instead.

    • The only way I can prove I’m not a coward is to provide you my telephone number and invite you to meet me and talk like gentleman about how MI5 uses child rape to blackmail the powerful and shape policy. You may want to change the conversation to name calling but it is not I who prunes my online name out of fear. +66 8 47 33 47 69

  10. “This verdict can only be based on the jury’s opinion that Ben Fellows did not deliberately and knowingly make false allegations against Ken Clarke and it can not possibly be seen as giving any credence to the allegations themselves.”

    Gojam, if you do not mind me elaborating slightly upon your statement (repeated above), the jury’s verdict can only be said with accuracy to reflect

    THAT THEY WERE NOT SURE THAT BEN FELLOWS WAS GUILTY OF PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE.

    This is all.

    As you correctly point out of course the jury has not and cannot by its verdict in this trial be said to have reached any determination about the guilt or innocence of Mr Clarke. The verdict is simply a reflection of the fact that they were not satisfied to the requisite standard of Mr Fellows guilt, and as any sane and sentient person knows this has nothing to do with the guilt or otherwise of anyone else.

    There may of course be many reasons for this verdict but we will never know those reasons due to the nature of the jury system nor should we.
    Speculation may even be harmful.

    Granted though no one has benefited from this protracted affair. This is hardly a ‘vindication’ of Mr Fellows who in evidence let us not forget while denying making things up did admit to exaggeration…
    Gojam has used the word ‘fantasist’ and that is not the first time we have heard that term used by moderate voices when describing Fellows. There was of course the most strange incident of the Olympics and his rent-a-mob whistle-blowing for hire. Troubling with a whiff of agent provacteur.

    It would be very disheartening to see the presence of Fellows damaging the interests of genuine survivors of serious abuse and so it will be best now for him to shuffle off quietly before he creates any more havoc.

    • * I think the Met made a hash of the case. *

      It would hardly have suited the Met to have a victim exposed would it.
      This fudge meets the needs of the establishment just now, who have a far bigger Crusade to pursue than a piffling matter like the truth. The courts are becoming enmeshed in it too now, witness this ludicrous verdict coming on top of the recent “Kat Ward” decision – another fantasist like Fellows in truth, but no such prosecution attempted; indeed the opposite. It is plain that Clarke has a lot more clout than Freddie Starr. After all Clarke was Minister of Justice not so long ago, until he made his faux-pas by challenging the “Lore of Rape” and was chased down the street by Cathy Newman and the New Journalism.

    • Do your remember what people called child rape victims post war to 2012?

      They called them fantasists.

      Ben Fellows walked free and your obsession with him rather than the MI5 blackmailed child rapists is very instructive.

  11. nuggy

    making a false allegation on its own is not perverting the course of justice unless you involve the police.

    if fellows genuinely believe what he wasint then hes not guilty in law perverting the course of justie has to be deliberate.

  12. Well 12 members of the public feel he was not lying, and no doubt the ins and outs of the accusation were discussed in a court of law.

    I think the Jury were better placed to decide the merits of this case than this blog or commentators.

    This verdict does open a can of worms.

    Interesting times ahead.

  13. nuggy

    what i would like to know is did fellows think this up all on his own or did somone put him up to it.

    and if so who and what are there motives for doing this.

  14. John

    ‘Bilderberg steering committee’ says it all. Thanks Frith.

  15. nuggy

    no 12 jurrers that it could not be proved beouund a reasonable doubt that he was lying wich it couldent becouse how can you prove someone knowingly lied and wasn’t just mistaken its very hard to.

    • Gary

      Rather an odd case all round. A criminal prosecution doing the work a civil case could’ve done..

  16. Gary

    A foolish prosecution. Even harder than proving that someone committed an offence 25 years ago, proving they didn’t. The barrier was proving the initial allegations false and further that they were malicious and not ‘mistaken identity’ etc. It makes me wonder why the case was brought. There are many cases where allegations are made but there is no evidence other than the word of a victim. We’ve seen DJs convicted for the same offences as Fellows alleged. But how do we know the genuine victim from the fantasist? You don’t. Many have opinions in this case but that’s all they are..

  17. Terry

    I do find it strange how the lines have been drawn in absolute terms; every allegation is false and those making the allegation are either damaged fantasists or money grabbing leaches vs. every allegation is true and those who argue against it are paedo apologist’s.

    Every allegation should be weighed up on it’s own merits and not simply accepted or dismissed because of someone’s agenda.

  18. I wonder why the likes of Tim Tate and Beatrix Campbell work so hard to perpetuate the myth of widespread Satanic Ritual Abuse. In reality any evidence of child sexual abuse related to Satanism is incredibly rare. The vast majority of reported sexual abuse cases involving religious groups come from Christianity and Islam.

    • TIM

      Answer: we don’t.

      because it isn’t widespread.

      It happens. Occasionally.

      • Wrong answer.

        “The Rochdale and Nottingham cases have revealed widespread sexual abuse of children based on satanic practices.”

        That’s how Beatrix Campbell’s ‘Marxism Today’ article begins; she links to it in her two-part OpenDemocracy piece. I have mentioned this before…

        https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/02/an-response-to-bbc-radio-4s-analysis-programme-by-tim-tate/comment-page-1/#comment-42763

        Only a few days ago you were criticising others for being ‘economical with the truth’. Yet here we are again, shot down in flames by another truth torpedo – boom!

      • Oh, and just a heads-up for Tim Tate & Gojam:

        – Tim, the link in your name leads to a non-existent web-address. It has worked previously, so perhaps you have logged-out & back in again, causing a problem along the way. Whatever, I’m sure you’ll want to correct it to drive traffic to your site.

        – Gojam, I fear that your machine may be haunted. As in the case above, the strange commentator ‘Hatchet’ has a non-functioning link
        (the post of August 1, 2015 at 2:00 pm).
        But that’s not the worry.
        I appear to be experiencing a problem in receiving notifications when comments are made. Well, ‘comment, singular’; one by Tim.
        (the post of August 1, 2015 at 2:53 pm).

        All other notifications have arrived as expected.

        I hope the Satanists haven’t put a spell on his words!

        If you need some East European help fixing the bugs – British Intelligence Service-quality for the price of a pint of mother’s ruin, they say – just let me know & I’ll drop you their BitCoin address & Darknet contact details – okay?

      • Great stuff, Gojam – Tim’s un-notified comment has now nudged its way round the u-bend & arrived in my inbox: better late than never, and wouldn’t want to miss one of his missives.

        Put your cryptocurrency back in your virtual-wallet & save it for a rainy day!

  19. Use Twitter to answer Eric. Ha ha ha…don’t hold your breath folks

  20. Owen

    Eric, I jump to when you say. Go dip a jamjar in at Anna Raccoon and you’ll find plenty to satisfy you in the way of denigrating and misrepresenting. As you know well.

  21. TiredofShills

    Well, well, well…

    I think this whole thing is one big controlled opposition psyops CIRCUS.

    Again, what about his fake ‘conversation’ with Kenneth Clark, the one about G4S? G4S wasn’t formed (Securicor/Group 4 merger) until 2004- so Clark could not have said about the Dollar sign being on the same button as the number 4 (the reason given, according to Fellows, for the naming of the merged company.

    Anyway, notwithstanding the charge (Perverting the Course of Justice)- one of them LIED under oath. Was Fellows groped (as per his gay fantasy), or wasn’t he?

    Why isn’t Clark fighting that allegation? Is this Clark’s ‘sacrifice’ for his position amongst the elite??

    His reason for not suing for Libel/Slander no longer holds any water, the cat is out of the proverbial bag!

    So, again, who LIED UNDER OATH?

    So now Fellows has agreed to talk no more about the alleged incident?? It’s all over the bloody Internet!! The damage has been done, this is pure, unadulterated bullsh*t!

    I can’t help but conclude that Clark is a willing patsy.

    The FAKE ‘alternative’ media never question a single word that flows from the mouth of Fellows.

    The whole thing stinks to high heaven!

    Why has Louise Collins ‘adopted’ him? She practically WORSHIPS him- weird!

    You have a great blog here, people can look for older entries about Mr Fellows, he’s so full himself, the darling of the controlled opposition.

    Is Brian Gerrish his handler? It seems that way…

    I should have guessed that this was all a farce (the trial), nice publicity for a known liar/Malignant Narcissist!

    Thanks.

  22. TiredofShills

    If I may, I’d like to add that Fellows at al have so many people fooled, and so many people feeling sorry for him. What about the REAL victims- hundreds of thousands of them? Why the focus on just ONE person? The ‘Truth Movement’ is in name only- they are pied pipers, steering people AWAY from the truth. They like to tell us which stories are ‘distractions’ or not. The drones who believe them were crying about Fellows’ case not being covered by the mainstream media. It was, just search via a search engine and one will see how practically all of the established press covered it.

    Wow, it’s just so frustrating, the usually suspects (Truth Movement gurus) treat Fellows like he’s royality. The boy who cried “Clark!”… but there’s a twist… so many people actually believe him! : -(

    Wake up, folks, you’ve been ‘had’!

    Again, great blog- unlike some who stifle free-speech and generally only allow pro-Fellows comments… talk about engineered!!!

  23. Owen

    Yes, Bandini, pretty creepy to listen to, but I think it was Menzies Campbell I heard speaking. I caught a brief glimpse of a background Danczuk and true the event does little credit to any of those present, but putting your little clip alongside Danczuk’s participation in a rather more recent event – http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141127/debtext/141127-0003.htm#14112768000002 – all I can say to you is that a telescope has two ends and we each have to find out for ourselves which is the most useful end through which to look at the world.

    It’s oddly comforting to know you still get such great pleasure from talking to yourself at length.

  24. Donna

    You are printing absolute rubbish. Ben was telling the truth. But you favor dirty nonces it’s why people don’t want to bother with your rubbish article.

  25. c.hodson

    do some of your correspondents remember the defences of Savile. Those who tried to bring his activities to light were labelled fantasists or liars. What worries me is how deep this goes and how many others in prominent settings are being protected because of who they are. Even if not offenders many have perjured themselves to cover tracks which may embarrass them of their buddies.

  26. TiredofShills

    Something else I’ve been thinking:

    The attention was successfully taken away from Savile by the authorised ‘truth movement’- Fellows is their poster ‘boy’. People’s collective anger was channelled into seeking ‘justice’ for ‘poor Ben’, after all, he ‘ran the gauntlet…’ at the BBC!

    This whole thing is nothing more than an elaborate charade.

    Not one person of the authorised ‘truth movement’ queries anything that Fellows says- that includes: Icke; Gerrish; Maloney… now we have women gurus too- Collins and Poulton.

    They are ALL on the SAME PAGE, this STINKS!!

    The court case was a sham, a ridiculous charge, always doomed to fail… by design.

    So, we have justice in the UK now… all thanks to BEN FELLOWS!

    Fellows is like a spoilt brat,the type who most people think is an angel. We can see that he isn’t, but no-one will listen, and his bullsh*t continues…

    He was groomed for his role- all of that Olympics crap, and the other rubbish. Again, he’s an ACTOR, playing his part.

    Gojam has been very fair, fairer than I would have been. He gave fellows the benefit of the doubt and stated that Fellows might have been mistaken (when Fellow’s allegations about Kenneth Clark first surfaced).

    I think the whole thing has been made up, fabricated, to DISTRACT the ‘truth movement’ followers.

    Again, what about the hundreds of thousands of children who were actually abused? I’m sick of this cult of the individual/celebrity- the irony!

    Anyway, remember that the ‘truth movement’ is still very much a fringe movement, most people don’t know who the hell Fellows is!

    It’s a cottage industry, like television evangelism- they make money out of gullible people who are largely bereft of the ability to think for themselves.

    Stand your ground, Gojam; an intelligent man (/woman) bases their opinion on information gleaned, instincts, and many other variables that often change one’s beliefs about any given subject. Only a MORON would steadfastly hold onto a lie, and try to rationalise it/ defend it etc.

    I didn’t explain myself well there, but I mean that by stark contrast, the likes of Bill Moloney and Gerrish will seemingly defend Fellows to the death, they close their eyes to the inconsistencies and inaccuracies, the defend the indefensible… just like fundamentalist/racist Xtians in the Southern United States (for instance).

  27. Sabre

    You have, for what it’s worth, my sympathy Gojam. The entrenched positions on all sides seem to be having a pop. We live in the connected age ladies and gentlemen, if you’re dissatisfied you can always start your own blogs. It appears that virtually everyone with an axe to grind is allowed full rein, even those threatened with exclusion are allowed yet another go, which is commendable. Perhaps those with outstanding complaints would like to declare their hands. Gojam, I’m sure that you can live without my advice, however, given that you allow everyone back despite the fact that they sometimes want to post that which you can’t risk publishing, consider allowing them to give a general indication of where one can catch up with their objective arguments and literary gems, short of tacit publication on your part. I apologise unreservedly should my interference meet with objection on your part.

  28. Phill GB

    If anyone knows Ben Fellows then can they please ask him to pay back the money he’s borrowed during his recent trip to India to meet the Dalai Lama. He promised to repay the money but so far has ignored our requests for him to pay the money back. If he is as honest and decent as he says he is, then surely he should repay his debts as he promised?

    • I suspect you can kiss that money goodbye.

      Put that one down to a hard earned lesson and don’t lend money to charlatans again.

      Sorry for the blunt response.