The allegations that Nick has made that readers will be more familiar with have been against powerful establishment figures. A former Prime Minister, a former Home Secretary, a former Head of MI5, a former Head of MI6, a former High Commissioner in Canada, a former Chief of the Defence Staff, a former Master-General of the Ordnance, and Harvey Proctor a former MP – among others.
*Nick has also made allegations against Leslie Goddard, Adam Ant’s father who was convicted in 1987 of child abuse as part of the notorious ‘Dirty Dozen’ which also included both Sidney Cooke and Lennie Smith who were later convicted for Jason Swift’s death.*
[A correction is needed here. I’ve been informed that despite Harvey Proctor having mentioned Leslie Goddard in his own statement, the Op Midland witness Nick has never made an allegation that Leslie Goddard abused him. This information comes from a reliable source and I accept it as true]
Yet another man that Nick has made allegations against is Jimmy Savile.
This five minute extract from a documentary called Crimes That Shook Britain: Jimmy Savile which was first broadcast on the Sky Crime and Investigation Channel on 17th August 2014, contains an interview with Nick about his abuse by Jimmy Savile. The full programme can be viewed HERE.
Nick’s allegations against Savile are very unusual. I’m not aware of any other genuine allegation against him which suggests that he was a sadist or that he ever abused within a group.
I should explain that in this documentary ‘Nick’ is referred to as ‘Stephen’
Transcript from programme
Stephen was only seven years old when he began to be abused at home.
‘My father started it, started being very violent. He used to drink quite heavily and it started from there. I suppose over a quite a short space of time it escalated quite quickly from, you know, just being hit to being kissed and touched and I don’t really know how many months before others were involved’.
As the abuse got worse, Stephen was handed over to an organised paedophile ring.
‘I just remembered my father coming away really pleased that he liked me and they wanted me in the group. I had no idea what that meant at the time and then it was only a few days, I suppose, after that that I was taken to my first meeting. There was only a few of them there and that was then set for years then.’
Stephen was abused by the group for the next nine years. He would be collected from home at any time, day or night and on occasions he would even be picked up from school. He was taken to various locations including houses and hotels where he, and often other boys, would be subjected to the most appalling sexual abuse by one or more men.
‘Nobody questioned it and, you know, sometimes it was during the day or the evening – at night, weekends – that was just part of life really and nobody said anything, not a word. It’s strange because they never said “Don’t tell”. You know, you hear people saying we were told not to tell – nobody actually ever said that but it was made very clear that if you broke the rules or if you went against the group, you would just disappear and no one would care. They had their rules and you had to follow their rules without question: no crying and not being unconscious. They didn’t like it if you passed out. No passing out. So that was it. That was the rules you had to follow and were pretty much broke quite regularly.’
Occasionally, Stephen would be brought to the group to be told that guests would be joining them. On more than one occasion the guests would include Jimmy Savile.
‘You didn’t always know beforehand. Sometimes we were told as we were being taken to wherever it would happen to be that there would be a guest coming that evening, or that day, or whenever it was, but not always. No names were ever used, you know – just didn’t use names at all, and yeah, he came probably a couple of times a year over several years, just odd occasions youknow, there was nothing different about the event. It’s just that there was somebody different there.’
Did Savile abuse you directly?
‘Yes. He was just sadistic in what he wanted to do and what he wanted other people to do. Yeah. Just evil and enjoyed seeing pain inflicted and humiliation I suppose. It was hard to comprehend because you know who it is when you’re sat watching TV and he’s on the TV and, you know, it’s just a really strange feeling. I think all of us were just objects, the best way I can describe it is like sweets in a bag that you hand round and share. We meant nothing, nothing at all.’
Stephen’s abuse at the hands of the group stopped when he was 16. Only recently has he been able to talk about his horrific ordeal. Following the Savile revelations, he reported his abuse to the police.
‘The police have been fantastic, because that was a nerve-wracking experience and positive I suppose for my own life because I’m now much more grounded with it I suppose. I know what triggers me, I know what doesn’t. I mean, it’s easier to live with now and hopefully that’s going to enable me to get another relationship at some point.’
59 responses to “‘Nick’ and the Jimmy Savile allegations”
Pingback: Op Midland Were Unaware Of Nick’s Savile Allegation Before Bramall Raid | theneedleblog
You are aware that there is a murder investigation going on? Is this not trying to ‘obstruct the course of justice’?
No it most definitely isn’t ‘obstructing the course of justice’.
Funny how you always become sanctimonious every time someone posts information which undermines your own theory. This post has been up since September 2015.
I do not have a ‘theory’, as you well know. I am just pointing out that there is a murder inquiry taking place, and ‘Nick’ is one of the witnesses?
Pingback: ‘Nick’, Bramall, Savile, And Janner. | theneedleblog
Reblogged this on Armor Of God Foundation.
DUST HAS NEVER SETTLED by ROBIN BRYANS is back up on scribd,get it while you can,it keeps being taken down.
I noticed that the book recently sold on ebay for 165 pounds, so many thanks for posting this!
Yes, I think it would be very relevant to look at who has been The Director of Public Prosecutions since Leo Abse MP( who may have had questions to answer himself, if he was still alive) set that one up. It would be particularly interesting to see the work they carried out, that’s if there are no missing files, closed files, ‘D’ notices etc!. The Director of Public Prosecutions- that’s a lot of power in one person’s hands!
Abse and Smith were both political nobodies, at least in the grand national and geo-political scheme of things – mavericks/eccentrics who never came close to ministerial office. It is indeed troubling that they managed to exercise such influence, and does raise questions that suggest that other, more powerful figures were sympathetic to their alleged proclivities.
QUOTE “It is indeed troubling that they managed to exercise such influence, and does raise questions that suggest that other, more powerful figures were sympathetic to their alleged proclivities.”
Very good point.
There would be no reason for the most powerful figures in the land (prime ministers, cabinet ministers, MI5/6 chiefs, etc) to cover up the paedophilia of Leo Abse, Cyril Smith and other nobodies, unless they could implicate much more powerful members of the establishment in child abuse.
Interesting article off the back of the Leo Abse amendment and DPP. In this case DPP from 1964-77 was Norman Skelhorn: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/15/tory-mp-victor-montagu-escaped-child-sex-abuse-trial-in-1970s
Vice at Piccadilly Circus and surrounding area: report on prevailing conditions:
Also a file on Leo Abse MP and how he created a requirement through an amendment to a bill, for the Director of Public Prosecutions to personally approve prosecutions of abuse of underage boys:
Isn’t it amazing that Leo Abse MP was able to specifically amend a bill so that the DPP could approve prosecutions of abuse of underage boys! In any other walk of life you would have alarm bells ringing, there it is, not even hiding, it’s in plain light for all to see.. Say if you get the right chap to be elected as Director of Public Prosecutions, as the sole, decision maker, he could potentially get another, ‘chap’ out of trouble, as Tim Fortescue alluded to, perhaps a “scandal involving small boys”! Wasn’t it rumored that Cyril Smith threatened that his friend was the DPP, when caught in a situation? Oh and wasn’t Leo Abse good friends with a Speaker of the House of Lords, who probably needed helping out a number of times. They must be laughing at us, one rule for us and one for them, so potentially they are free to abuse with out redress!
Aaronovitch seems to be looking forward to the temporary finger in the dyke that will be Panorama. Dave sees VIP as a euphemism!
I had several email exchanges with “daffodil rites” a while back. I’m not convinced.
It’s impossible to know on the basis of the limited info we have. These types of complainants will be vulnerable, unlikely to stand up to cross examination. One would have to be in charge of Yewtree/Midland to see what overlap there is between complainants.
I’m not as ready as Callie to discount the allegations on that blog. There may at the very least be a mix of true and imagined memories. The fact she isn’t shouting off to Exaro, Sky News, the Mail and all and sundry gives here more credibility in my view.
^ Daffs seems to believe it herself though – claims to have written to the Jersey inquiry.
In and of itself, forcing young children to sexually gratify you IS sadistic. In all the reports I have read, Savile operated within a group of pedophiles. So on both counts there is NOTHING unusual about him being involved-NOTHING!!
Raping defenceless kids is sadistic and he obviously had help from different quarters to get away with it for decades, so you’ve speaking rubbish.
Hi That is in response to Gojam’s comment not Anonymous, who speaks absolute sense.
I’m sorry but anyone who thinks the daffodilrites blog contains accounts of actual instances of abuse needs to reacquaint themselves with reality.
I agree. There are too many mixed up links to already established suspects. It’s highly unlikely that one individual could be targeted by so many individuals. I’ve no doubt the blog’s writer is deeply troubled & I hope they are getting the appropriate support (& I don’t mean that in any insulting way).
I’m not convinced the necrophilia was a fetish. I think he was practising necromancy….bringing the spirit of the dead person back to acquire occult power.
I think he was the Crown magician and that’s why we will never know what good he did for this country.
“I think he was the Crown magician and that’s why we will never know what good he did for this country.”
I’m confused, are you referring to savile here ?
Yes I am.
Isis that sounds utterly bizarre but eh, I’m interested. Crown Magician?
ookaaay….. backs away slowly not makinjg eye contact.
@ISIS – if you believe that Savile or any other person has ever “brought the spirit if a dead person back” – then you’ve just discredited any opinions you might have about any subject whatsoever. If you believe that impossible things are real, you will believe anything and are simply credulous. Period.
I think much more about Operation Spanner needs to come out. If you can get hold of Hames’ The Dirty Squad read the section reporting on who was involved and some of their backgrounds. I think it is beyond most people’s comprehension to understand why someone would be sexually aroused by cutting open someone else’s scrotum or penis and I remember learning about the Op Spanner case at uni (R v Brown) and it was characterised as limits of personal liberty (you can’t consent to violent assault however much as a masochist you might enjoy it) and for some reason I was taught to think of the case as homophobic. Re-reading about it now (as with DPP v Boardman & circumstances of similar fact evidence being so damaging to abusers with a specific M.O./fetish e.g. corduroy/powder puffs/) the facts take on a very different hue in context of what has been reported since 1970s. Spanner was kicked into existence by a dedicated paedophile who offered videos of the extreme S&M acts to police when caught in order to try and do a deal. This man handed over the videos at his home – in a room he’d decorated and set up as a child’s bedroom, right down to a dummy child sitting at a table. Who was he? And why did he have the videos to barter with in the first place?
I’m not sure I can conceptually place any limits on the behaviour of a man who thought necrophilia was a larf – and told people that. His behaviour was so extreme and his sexual preference so fixated on control power and domination it’s hard to know what aspect of his chosen prey being helpless, fearful, scared, even injured wouldn’t be arousing. Savile’s views on death and the wish to be present at the passing of life were also quite fetishistic – As it Happens has a few choice words and Dan Davies picks up on it too.
William ‘Bill’ Pate’s specialism was the ligature round the neck all limbs tied style of rape where the victim risked being asphyxiated and having to be revived. As you’ve posted about a while back, a number of MPs campaigned for his release (& there were issues with Mental Health Act 1959 re civil liberties – Pate just wasn’t the appropriate test case to fight those issues on). This should be a matter of public record – so hard to find out more on why those campaigning for Pate’s release thought it appropriate? When he attacked a young boy in his release as was so predictably going to happen?
I think sadism of paedophiles and specifically pederasts will come to be seen as just one reason why they went to such lengths during 1970s to rebrand from molestors/rapists to ‘paedophiles’, trying hard to sell themselves as the ‘gentle folk’ on the way.
“This should be a matter of public record – so hard to find out more on why those campaigning for Pate’s release thought it appropriate?”
With regard to William Pate and the parliamentary campaign to free him, the campaign was led by Geoffrey Pattie MP (Tory) and Christopher Price MP (Labour).
Chris Price MP died in February 2015, but Sir Geoffrey Pattie is still around, and could be asked why he thought Pate should be freed.
Search for William Pate here:
Quiet-Observer said: “I find it sad and disturbing that some people seem eager to try and poke holes in the girl’s statement (for example, asking: did she speak Latin? Was she a Catholic? How did she know what Savile was saying?).”
I am not eager to poke holes in the girl’s statement; I am interested in true justice. That means making sure that people’s guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt. Once that principle goes, the door is opened for a different kind of abuse; the abuse of justice. I am interested in getting justice for genuine victims….where guilt can be proven. But I do not just want to see one kind of injustice replaced by another. Some people would be happy with that: a kind of “they have had their day, now it’s our turn” mentality.” Not me….I (who have reaped the results of abuse first hand)….want real justice.
Considering how many years have passed since the abuse, and how young the victims were at the time, and how traumatised they were by the abuse, some inconsistencies in the victims’ statements and testimony are understandable and to be expected.
Decades after these devastating events, it is unreasonable to expect the victims to perfectly remember exactly where and when the abuse happened.
For example, it has been mentioned on some websites that although Darren was at Thornham Magna, Peter Righton didn’t officially live there until a few months later.
It’s possible that Darren got the dates/months mixed up after so many years. It’s also possible that Righton spent time there before he officially moved in.
I am just using Darren’s testimony as an example.
This also applies to the other victims of abuse, such as the little girl abused by Savile.
I find it sad and disturbing that some people seem eager to try and poke holes in the girl’s statement (for example, asking: did she speak Latin? Was she a Catholic? How did she know what Savile was saying?).
These points are largely irrelevant.
What really matters is whether the main claim (that she was abused by Savile) is true.
If that claim seems credible (which to me, it does), then it doesn’t really matter if there are some inconsistencies in the minor details.
Maybe the girl remembered what Savile was saying during the abuse and looked it up at some later time.
Or maybe she did know Latin (a lot of people do!)
Finally, I think that the claim that “most paedophiles don’t want to inflict pain” is ridiculous and false, and offensive to victims of paedos who did inflict pain.
I don’t think ANY paedophiles “love children.”
The paedos ALL know EXACTLY what they are doing, they know that it is wrong and will destroy the child’s innocence and ruin their life, yet they CHOOSE to do it ANYWAY.
There is no excuse for that.
If paedos really cared about children they wouldn’t want to destroy their innocence.
I think that the word “paedophile” is actually an inaccurate description of what they really are.
The term “child rapist” or “child molester” or “paederast” is more accurate.
Valerie Sinason presumably simply reported what she was being told. I think we just don’t understand what’s going on. I have read that followers of the left hand path believe that the sodomite gateway is the way to worship their Gods/demons and to acquire power…to become illumined.
There are different types of paedophiles just are there are different types of heterosexuals and homosexuals. There is the Paedophile who loves children and will spend time grooming them. If you doubt that there are paedosadists watch The Boy Business or Interview with a paedophile sadist. The paedosadist gets off on the violence. There is the paedophile who knows torture causes the victim to disassociate and split the mind – this is why the Intel agencies have been interested. There’s also a belief that stimulation of the anal nerves causing kundalini to rise and the paedophile somehow absorbs the life force of the child. The satanic paedophile requires sacrifice for the ritual.
“If you doubt that there are paedosadists watch The Boy Business…”
Unfortunately, The Boy Business features chronic liars as “whistleblowers”, and uses excerpts from “the Bjorn tapes” released by Swedish police that are falsely portrayed to be taken from an actual “snuff” film. Bjorn was not, however, murdered by his abusers either on film or off – as documented by Nick Davies.
“There is the paedophile who knows torture causes the victim to disassociate and split the mind – this is why the Intel agencies have been interested”.
This is an epic paranoid conspiracy theorist & fraudulent victim claimant/ whistleblower pile of lies. Dissociation DOES NOT “split the mind”, that’s nonsense. And it’s particularly sick & twisted to promote the idea that there could ever be a “formula” by which child abusers could use torture and rape of a child to turn them into a mind-controlled sex slave.
“There’s also a belief that stimulation of the anal nerves causing kundalini to rise and the paedophile somehow absorbs the life force of the child. The satanic paedophile requires sacrifice for the ritual”.
There is no such thing as “kundalini”, and there is no documentation that anyone – pedophile or otherwise – ever believed that raping children allowed the rapist to “absorb the child’s life force”, before that idea was invented by Bill Schnoebelen. Schnoebelen made that up and is the only person perverted enough to actually believe it.
The women in the Express story were patients of psychotherapist Dr Valerie Sinason. Sinason became well-known for promoting stories of widespread Satanic Ritual Abuse, for which no credible evidence was ever found.
Strange case. Second inquest coming up. Family have had to deal with missing crime scene photos and delay of Coroner’s Office.
It seems that CM complained of family abuse and was referred to FF for psychosexual counselling. FF had trained in the US and had dealt with cults there so perhaps brought a bias. The psychiatric evidence will be interesting; CM may have had paranoid schizophrenia or psychosis.
Therapists are in a difficult position with these clients. They can’t investigate or report to police without client permission. To treat them, they have to ‘believe’ the client, otherwise the client would not engage with the therapist. (Same protocol applies with the police which is why they announced they believed Nick.)
There doesn’t seem to be any suggestion she met with the Tory cabinet minister(s), although I’d like the names!
The women brainwashed by therapists to believe their parents abused them.
I had the impression he was taking kids to parties. His nephew said he was taken to a party at AlanFreeman’s IIRC.
There is also a blogger / Twitter user who claims her family were in a sex cult and she was taken to parties in the UK and Jersey by Savile where she endured sadistic and satanic ritual abuse. She claims kids were killed but also that killings were simulated to confuse the kids. She says intelligence recruits were sent to Jimmy to toughen them up and that Ian Watkins was involved. She’s DID and notes he wasn’t that good at mind control. Vulnerable witness and all that but maybe the powers that be wanted a UK Aquino but had to make do with Savile!
Pardon my ignorance, Isis, but what do you mean by ‘UK Aquino’?
Stephen, I was referring to Michael Aquino, former Army Lieutenant, occultist, founder of Temple of Set, psyop expert. He was accused and acquitted of sexually abusing children of Christian military officers at a nursery on the Presido army base; also linked to Franklin scandal. Check out what Douglas Dietrich has to say.
It isn’t just Savile. Time and time again Nck mentions the absolute sadism of his attackers.
Whereas few paedophiles actually like to inflct pain. Most want to think the child is enjoying it. It’s one of the reasons I don’t find him credible.
It’s the fixation with sadism that throws it for me too. There’s a varied and lengthy list of Savile’s offences. Some involve sudden or overpowering force but I’m not aware that the infliction of pain featured in the vast catalogue of accounts at all.
Nick has had the confidence to engage with various news outlets whose trust and their motives should have been as obvious to him as to us. If he’s as stable and credible as we are led to believe he would have the opportunity to strengthen his claims significantly by coming out of the shadows and do interviews in person. His living accusers have, I understand, been made aware of his identity so the threat of retaliatory litigation is already there. The chap who was in the Austrailian documentary talking about Kincora seemed very credible and confident in making his claims. I cannot presume to understand how challenging doing that must have been but the power of a public statement would allow us to form a more informed view of his credibility. Clearly it’s his prerogative not to do this but if his claims are true, I feel it would help him greatly.
I’d also add that, as Gojam has mentioned in a previous article, a national newspaper has recently published a story with significant pointers to who ‘Nick’ is. The paper is wholly wrong to have done this and the action is arguably in breach of the law.
Whilst I’d still have to argue that his real identity must be protected unless he wishes otherwise, he has made what is probably the most significant claims of establishment wrongdoing this country has ever seen, particularly as they involve allegations that a democratically elected Prime Minister was part of a child murdering child abuse ring.
Some posters have claimed that the allegations against Proctor may be as a result of mistaken identity and I’ve no means of telling if that’s the case but the claims about Heath are specific and not likely to be mistaken. I doubt Nick would have confused the someone else with the PM.
The claims are of clear public interest and massive historical significance therefore I wouldn’t again strongly suggest Nick gives them his full weight by making his claims openly & publicly.
Whether those he has accused are still powerful enough to cause harm today is irrelevant as they undoubtedly know who he is. That is even more so the case if the claims are true as Nick’s allegations are that his father introduced him to the group.
Continued anonymity is not helping the believability of this case.
I wouldn’t recommend it.
He should remain anonymous.
No, Saville wasn’t a sadist was he ? It’s really easy to convince oneself that children the sick and the mentally Ill are enjoying having one sate their psychological and sexual power. If he’s not a sadist fuck meeting one.
If we take a sadist to be one who enjoys inflicting physical pain & punishment on someone for pleasure, which ‘Nick’s’ claims are heavily laden with, then no, Savile does not meet that description. The distinction does not deny the fact he abused vulnerable people in a despicable way. I’d have thought the difference was obvious.
‘Nick’s’ description of Savile does not fit with Savile’s abuse profile but it does fit well with that of ‘Nick’s’ other abusers. I find it curious (not impossible) that he has been abused in the same way by a such wide spectrum of already known abusers.
If this case had gone to court, as a result of the statement below, I imagine that these might have been the kinds of questions asked. “She was molested, raped and beaten and heard words that sounded like ‘Ave Satanas’, a Latinised version of ‘Hail Satan’, being chanted.” The girl was 12 years old in 1975 and was probably born in1963. Regarding the claim about the Latinised words. Was the girl a Roman Catholic, in which case she would probably have made the connection with “Ave Maria, ” and would have been aware of who Satan is. If not, did she attend a Grammar School, where Latin was studied? If neither of these things apply, on what basis did she recognise the Latin words? How likely would any explanation of another basis be likely to be true. Secondly, she was “molested, raped and beaten.” If I understand it correctly, this happened whilst she was a patient at the hospital. How likely is it that the severe emotional trauma she suffered was not noticed by the staff? Also, how likely is it that she could have “disappeared” or been taken from the ward without anyone asking questions? Thirdly, when the nurses came to check on her, which would have been done a number of times a day; was she able to hide the trauma? Also, was she able to cover all evidence of having been beaten when the nurses washed her? On a balance of probabilities even; how likely are these events? I am not saying that the girl (reported it later as an adult?), is lying. I am just saying that putting emotional responses aside; there may be more reasons to doubt these events than to believe them. Unfortunately, that does not mean that they didn’t happen; it just means that a jury of rational people may not have convicted on this evidence.
“Nick’s allegations against Savile are very unusual. I’m not aware of any other allegation against him which suggests that he was a sadist or that he ever abused within a group.”
You might want to check out Jimmy Savile, Peter Jaconelli and the Scarborough paedophile-ring, finally acknowledged by the North Yorkshire Police after nearly three years of developing exposure on the North Yorks Enquirer and Real Whitby
I did check with an expert before posting that. He was aware of a couple of complaints that involved one other adult male being present but broadly speaking Savile was a predatory loner.
Incidentally, paedophile rings do not necessarily abuse together. they are more likely to pass victims around within the ring.
Are you going to un “ban” me, Gojam, so that I can once again correct your mistakes?
“Nick’s allegations against Savile are very unusual. I’m not aware of any other allegation against him which suggests that he was a sadist or that he ever abused within a group.”
Really? We only have to look to that sorry excuse for a journalist, James Fielding of the Express. (The same Fielding who worked with Fay & who “mysteriously” came to believe that a couple of initials in an ancient London Gazette-listing must, simply MUST refer to Leon Brittan. My memory is hazy here, but I could have sworn that some reluctant individuals still have some questions to answer on this point!)
“She recognised him because of his distinctive voice and the fact that his blond hair was protruding from the side of the mask. He was not the leader but he was seen as important because of his fame.
She was molested, raped and beaten and heard words that sounded like ‘Ave Satanas’, a Latinised version of ‘Hail Satan’, being chanted.”
Abuse within a group – check!
Sadistic – check!
No need to thank me – I’ll put it on the slate. I always do.
You’re still banned.
PS, not a mistake as I was unaware of it until you mentioned it.
“My memory is hazy here, but I could have sworn that some reluctant individuals still have some questions to answer on this point!) ”
If I recall correctly – and my memory, also, is quite hazy at times, so you’ll have to forgive me if I have misremembered – but I seem to recall that you were quite keen, at one point, on the rather odd internet news agency Exaronews – they were, you insisted, about the only investigative reporters on allegations of ‘VIP’ CSA that you placed your trust and faith in.
How’s that working out for you, as a matter of interest?
I seek merely information…
Please don’t ask Bandini questions. He is banned because of some of his associations and he can’t respond and it isn’t fair to him.
the plot thinkins i know its imposable as the law stands but id love to know who this nick really is.
Reblogged this on perfectlyfadeddelusions.