Rolf Harris cautioned. Do we need Royalty any more?

I didn’t cover the Rolf Harris caution, and his inclusion in the list of entertainer suspects.  He’s another entertainments industry sacrifice, no doubt selected to feed the media machine, to get the politicians and the Royals off the hook.

COMMENTS –

Anonymous said…
Has Rolf Harris actually been formally cautioned?

Bearing in mind that a police caution is a criminal disposal, is an admission of guilt, and is on the offender’s record.

What’s the provenance of this caution?

(Genuine inquiry – not a prurient bystander.)

10:03 AM

 Delete

Blogger Tapestry said…

I saw the word cautioned elsewhere, and have not checked it out.

That said he’s yet another Royal favorite..

As Bill Oddie said, everyone in the BBC knew Savile was ‘at it’.   Oddie believes Savile was untouchable as he was a ‘friend’ of the Royals.  In other words, the Royals set the standards which the BBC observed.

Throwing Rolf Harris as a decoy isn’t going to stop the flames burning their way all the way to Buckingham Palace.  Does anyone feel proud any more of Britain’s Royal family?  Wouldn’t we be better off without them?

Someone must have made allegations against Harris.  Let’s see how it goes.  As it’s all gone to the Police, we have no idea who’s behind it, or what the story is.

The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

18 Responses to “Rolf Harris cautioned. Do we need Royalty any more?”

  1. Lionheart says:

    as they say…off with their heads!!!!

  2. Anonymous says:

    If it’s any consolation the broadcast media in other countries seem to be equally infested with perverts. A friend of mine belonged to an amateur musical society in a north Dublin suburb in the late 1980s. For one of their shows they drafted in the assistance of light entertainment professionals from RTE, the Irish state broadcaster. During rehearsals the RTE guys made a habit of sexually molesting the young men and boys taking part in the show. The chief culprit was a very very senior figure in RTE management, who was also a co-star of one very popular Irish light entertainment show during this period. Like the BBC, RTE has dwelt obsessively on the scandals in the Catholic Church. I’m not seeking to downplay the crimes of Catholic clergy, but there is a pretty nauseating double standard at work here. RTE, like the rest of the Irish media (and the BBC), went into paroxysms of ecstasy over the Queen’s visit to Ireland last year. This visit took place only a few weeks after it was revealed that the Queen’s son, Andrew was a close friend and golfing buddy of a convicted child trafficker and paedophile. Needless to say there was no mention of this little detail in media coverage of the visit or indeed in coverage of the royal wedding or jubilee.

  3. Tapestry says:

    It seems that only pedophiles are allowed to become close friends of Royalty. That suggests the facts that David icke has been claiming since 1998 in his book The Biggest Secret.

  4. 2:17 Stop being anonymous and stand up and shout it

  5. Anonymous says:

    13:12 So an “Analiensaturn” is your real name? Your parents sure had a wacky sense of humour. My comments about RTE staff are second hand information. I didn’t witness the events I described – as I made clear. If the person who told me of the sexual assaults wishes to make his claims public that is his choice. I cannot do so on his behalf. The idea that everyone who makes an allegation against the establishment is morally obliged to identify himself when doing so is of course precisely what those who wish to neuter the internet have been calling for for years – e.g., Abe Foxman. Still looks like I rattled someone’s cage, which is interesting…

  6. Anonymous says:

    I worked at the BBC some years back, there were certain people you just did not get caught in the lift with, luckily when i started an older guy warned me about the poofs mafia as they were called. peter wyngarde was a bad offender who would bring in rent boys to the building, Frankie Howard could never keep his hands to himself either, people are saying we are becoming pedophobic, but we all need to be vigilant
    pete wilson

  7. Tapestry says:

    analiensaturn is very recent to his ID.

  8. Tapestry says:

    pedophobic? that seems a most sensible approach to this topic.

    not to be confused with David Cameron’s homophobic witchhunt. the paedo-elites want all accusers to be called phobics of one kind or another. yet they are simply victims of abuse. sorry about that, abusers incorporated.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Don’t use their buzz words, they’re trying to normalise it, it’s not a phobia anyway, a phobia is a fear of something, I do not fear them, they disgust me. BIG difference!

  10. Anonymous says:

    And the reason we should assume that the Royal Family are likely to be aware of (and tacitly condone) the private behaviour of people they ‘know’ is…? Do paedophiles announce themselves as such? If there was no Royal Family, would there suddenly and miraculously be no paedophiles? Don’t paedophiles happen in republics?

  11. Tapestry says:

    Savile procured kids for members of the Royal family. The standards are set at the top. If the Royal Family wanted paedophiles stopped from operating inside the BBC, I am sure they could do so. And the opposite is true.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Has Rolf Harris actually been formally cautioned?

    Bearing in mind that a police caution is a criminal disposal, is an admission of guilt, and is on the offender’s record.

    What’s the provenance of this caution?

    (Genuine inquiry – not a prurient bystander.)

  13. Tapestry says:

    I saw the word cautioned elsewhere, and have not checked it out.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Tapestry said…
    I saw the word cautioned elsewhere, and have not checked it out.

    10:49 AM

    Ok, thanks for that.

    Is there any way we can get a robust confirmation of this caution? Or the place you read this?

    Otherwise, he was interviewed UNDER CAUTION which is not at all the same as “being cautioned”.

    My apologies for seeming to be picky. It’s that, in the light of certain knowledge, I’m really tired of reading people’s disbelief and would like to have something verifiable to quote.

  15. Anonymous says:

    I think this blog article, and some of the comments on it (such as the ones implying the gentleman named in the article is a ‘pervert’), are a moral outrage (and possibly also a criminal one, though I’m no lawyer, so I can’t be sure). It seems not merely potentially libellous, but a form of psychological abuse that helps to wrecklessly endanger the mental health and perhaps even the life of a very likely entirely innocent elderly gentleman, and one who is certainly entitled to the presumption of innocence, especially from people who seemingly know absolutely nothing about the details of the case.

    There is no evidence that the gentleman has been cautioned (which would imply some kind of admission of guilt), merely interviewed under caution. He has not subsequently been charged with anything, and has not been publicly named by the police, nor has the police felt it necessary to warn the public that he is any kind of threat to them or their children – all of which is evidence that he is innocent.

    He has however reportedly had to spend a significant amount of subsequent time being treated in a psychiatric hospital for what must have been an appalling experience, (due to both the accusations themselves, and the nowadays seemingly inevitable subsequent presumption of guilt on many parts of the internet). Such experiences probably carries a high suicide risk, as well as a high risk of stroke or heart attack from such terrible stress and distress being inflicted on a gentleman of his age.

    For more on the sort of horrors that people are liable to experience as a result this kind of moral panic, see for instance Richard Webster’s writing at http://www.richardwebster.net/#false

    Might I suggest that you please either delete this article, or better still, amend it to reflect the kind of points that I have just made.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Lets just say with the news that is known in Australia from a contact, I don’t think that he can escape this on.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Groper and Fiddler Rolf Harris will be known by his new theme, Tie me Private Parts Down !

  18. rob johnson says:

    paedophobic does not mean fear of paedophiles. it means fear of children. paedophilephobic would be more correct surely

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.