Matthew Steeples suggests that Met Police chief Dame Cressida Dick is not fit for purpose and must finally now resign
Dame Cressida Dick DBE, QPM shouldn’t be in charge of a bus ticket, let alone the nation’s capital’s police force. Here is a woman who spends her time moaning about the BBC’s Line of Duty drama series – which she claimed “absolutely outraged” her – rather than actually solving crime; frankly, she’s proved as useful as a chocolate teapot and now, today, I again call for her to just go.
Armed officer Wayne Couzens – who was indicatively nicknamed by colleagues at The Met ‘The Rapist’ yet nothing was done about him – has now pleaded guilty to the murder of Sarah Everard in March. How did his boss respond? With what The Sun quite rightly called out as “vapid assurances [that] lessons [have] been learned across the board.” Going further they added: “The people to blame for this predator being on the streets should be held to account,” whilst we add: SHAME ON HER.
Condemned also by the crusading blog From The Hornets Nest also last week as “presiding over our crime-riven city” and protected by a “pernicious, masonic like influence,” any respect there ever was for Dame Cressida Dick is well and truly gone. She now needs to finally do the only thing left to her: RESIGN and clear ‘orf.
Dick has also been criticised over the botched the Metropolitan Police’s handling over investigations into child sex abuse, their fruitless £30 million investigation into the murder of private investigator Daniel Morgan (pictured) and her force’s handling over the use of stop and search of those of black and other ethnic minority backgrounds.In 2018, this ludicrous woman blamed rising crime in London on social media rather than a lack of proper policing. She told Fiona Hamilton and Rachel Sylvester of ‘The Times’: “There’s definitely something about the impact of social media in terms of people being able to go from slightly angry with each other to ‘fight’ very quickly… It [social media] makes it harder for people to cool down. I’m sure it does rev people up.”
The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis’ decision to refuse to stand down over police handling of a vigil for the late marketing executive Sarah Everard – murdered in cold blood by one of her very own officers – provided proof of her arrogance. “No, I’m not considering my position,” she curtly commented.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elSZtYkRQyY
After the shooting of the entirely innocent Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005 by her officers, Dick did anything but take responsibility. She remarked of it: “The events of that day stay with one; I think about it quite often. It was a traumatic period. It was an awful time for so many people, obviously and most of all Jean Charles’s family, the people who were there when it happened, the firearms officers, the surveillance officers.” In response, de Menezes family called for her to be brought to book and quite justifiably later opposed her subsequent promotion.
Summing up how out-of-touch with reality she truly is, Dame Cressida stated of her force: “We’re not institutionally corrupt.” Her comments came after the failed £30 million investigation into the murder of Daniel Morgan was quite rightly condemned due to those involved most definitely being aided and abetted by corrupt Metropolitan Police officers. It is now time for her to consider her position and RESIGN.
It’s time for the ‘MeGain & Randy Show’… As dopey dipstick Diane Abbott MP sticks her gumboots into the fallout of the Duchess of Sussex’s car crash interview, the scandalous Prince Andrew should again be called to answer questions
This morning, however, seizing on an opportunity to shove her gibberish filled gumboots back into the fray in the wake of the Duchess of Sussex’s Prince Andrew-esque interview, Abbott decided to chuck a hand grenade into the mix and told the Guardian:
“One of the most upsetting things is when people, meaning well, will say: ‘Oh, but Diane, you’re so strong.’ Nobody is that strong. Nobody can take the sort of abuse that Meghan had to take and that I’ve had to take. And by dismissing it by saying: ‘Oh, black women are strong,’ that’s denying our humanity.”
“For a lot of black and mixed-race women, when they can look at what we’re now hearing, what’s happening to Meghan, they can realise: if this can happen to her and if it could be so crushing and humiliating to her, I can face up to how that sort of thing makes me feel.”
“We shouldn’t internalise the idea that we’re not supposed to feel vulnerable, we’re not supposed to get upset, and we should have people around us that we can confide in, or we can be open with. Otherwise, it’s incredibly corrosive.”
“[Palace officials] clearly very soon did not welcome a mixed race woman marrying into the Royal Family… There has got to be very serious reflection. They need to look at some of the people that work at Buckingham Palace.”
“I don’t think they necessarily need to get into a tit for tat publicly but they do need to think hard about some of the attitudes of the courtiers, the aides the advisers who are in Buckingham Palace because it is clear that on that level they didn’t adjust well to having a mixed-race woman marry into the Royal Family.”
“[The media want to] tear down a woman for no apparent reason.”
Whilst the brain of Britain that isn’t Miss Abbott’s influence in this matter will likely not go far, elsewhere in the Guardian this morning, the paper’s Ben Quinn reported that Gloria Allred, a lawyer for some of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, “has suggested that Buckingham Palace’s plans to examine bullying allegations against the Duchess of Sussex are a “calculated decision” to take the focus off Prince Andrew.”
Speaking of alleged bullying by the Duchess of Sussex specifically, Allred told the paper:
“Allegations about him are far worse than the allegations about Meghan Markle. Prince Andrew was a working royal when he became a friend of Jeffrey Epstein, who was a sexual predator… Prince Andrew is accused of much more than bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
“Why does Buckingham Palace not conduct an investigation and make a public statement condemning Prince Andrew for failing to provide what is requested to those who are seeking the whole truth and justice for the victims of crimes against children?”
“Why has Prince Andrew not been stripped of the royal titles that he enjoys, as has been the case for Meghan and Harry? He has certainly not brought dignity and respect to his work as a royal.”
“The investigation into Meghan Markle is a distraction, and it appears hypocritical under the circumstances. I have to wonder if it reflects a calculated decision to take the focus off of Prince Andrew.
“It is long overdue for the palace to change its priorities and announce that it is conducting its own investigation of Prince Andrew. In addition, it should immediately issue a statement condemning Prince Andrew for failing to provide full in-person cooperation in the ongoing criminal investigation by the United States justice department.”
Now, today, we join those calling for ‘Randy Andy’ to finally do the decent thing: Be a good boy and go to America and answer the FBI’s perfectly reasonable questions about your involvement with the mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell and your conveniently croaked ‘bestie’ Jeffrey Epstein.
The MeGain & Randy Show – For months now, people have been asking of Diane Abbott: “Have you seen this woman?” Well, this morning she predictably resurfaced and stuck her gumboots into the fallout of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s disastrous interview with Oprah Winfrey.The MeGain & Randy Show – The “publicity shy” Duchess of Sussex (or Meghan Markle as she then was) used to be happy to hang around with publicity loving Lizzie Cundy. Whether she actually “ghosted” her former ‘friend’ and Piers Morgan is also debatable.
The confusion of the woman formerly known as Meghan Markle
Given ‘MeGain’ banged on about her friendship with Prince Andrew’s daughters prior to meeting Prince Harry in the Oprah interview, is there really any truth to her having never Googled the royal family or researched them with a view to seeking them out?
Did the then Meghan Markle really “ghost” her supposed chums Lizzie Cundy and Piers Morgan or are they both just getting rather carried away with their own attention seeking agendas?
Prior to marrying into the royal family and since, has ‘MeGain’ “organised pap shots” of herself?
Why did the Duchess of Sussex lie and claim she hadn’t met her half-sister in over 20 years when photographic evidence shows quite to the contrary 13 years ago?
Why didn’t the Duchess of Sussex simply show herself to be a bigger person and make amends with her own father instead of going to war on him? If she had simply behaved with dignity and made one less enemy, wouldn’t she have been perceived as a far better person?
Why is the Duchess of Sussex claiming that the royal family “silenced” her at the same time as repeatedly giving interviews to the international media and taking the dime of the hardly quiet Netflix and Spotify?
Why are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex now suggesting they were “cut of financially” by the royal family when they previously stated they “wanted to be financially independent”?
Why do ‘MeGain’ and her drip husband think they should be entitled to have the public pay for their security when they turned their backs on public duty for first “privacy” and then personal profit?
If ‘MeGain’ wanted such a “simple life,” why did she seek out a career first in acting and then get herself into a relationship with a member of the royal family?
Why, subsequently, did this woman with a desire for “ordinariness” then return to Los Angeles and sign deals with the likes of Disney, Netflix and Spotify?
Has ‘MeGain’ ever used body doubles of herself and her son, Archie?
Did the Duchess of Sussex make up that she had already been married to Prince Harry for three days when she walked down the aisle on 19th May 2018?
How many times has ‘MeGain’ actually been married? Twice or three times?
The MeGain & Randy Show – The Duchess of Sussex’s claim that she hadn’t seen her half-sister Samantha Markle in 20 years has been proven to be a lie by fact of this photograph.The MeGain & Randy Show – The Duchess of Sussex also stands accused of organising paparazzi to take photographs of her, yet hypocritically still moans and bangs on about press intrusion.The MeGain & Randy Show – Ever since she came to public prominence, social media has been awash with rumours about the Duchess of Sussex and her use of body doubles and some go further even and remarkably suggest she faked her pregnancy even.The MeGain & Randy Show – Elsehwere on social media, this image of graffiti that read “Prince Andew is still a nonce” trended. Contrary to what many suggest, however, it is quite possible to actually dislike the behaviour of both the Duchess of Sussex and Duke of York as the two are not mutually connected.The MeGain & Randy Show – Those “in the know” continue to question when Meghan Markle first met Prince Andrew and what went on between them prior to her marriage to the alleged sexual abuser’s nephew.
Author Kirby Sommers reveals the actualite of Epstein-Maxwell documentation; more than six pages about Prince Andrew are missing
New York based “sex slave survivor and advocate for human rights” Kirby Sommers has taken to Twitter to highlight what many suspected in suggesting that there are a number of key pages missing from court documentation about the sordid activities of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
In a tweet about documents from the Giuffre vs. Maxwell lawsuit, posted on Sunday, Sommers – the author of Jeffrey Epstein: Predator, Spy – declared:
“Virginia Giuffre confided in her then boyfriend about having been instructed to have sex with Prince Andrew.”
“In his deposition when [he] begins to describe that she was ‘scared for her safety’ — the deposition, at this point, those pages are missing. 6 pages with that info missing.”
Sommers undoubtedly has a point and one can only anticipate that the next tranche of Maxwell’s deposition – if and when that gets released – will sadly likely be equally lacking in actualite.
Correction: This article was updated 1pm GMT, 3rd November 2020 to reflect further information supplied by Kirby Sommers.
The Actualite of Andrew – Kirby Sommers’ tweet revealed what many already suspected: The document released only contains the partial first deposition of Ghislaine Maxwell.
As it is revealed there is one rule for Ghislaine Maxwell and one for everyone else in the US legal system on visitations, her alleged links with the CIA and Mossad are again outed
Jeffrey Epstein and Maxwell also, according to the author of Jeffrey Epstein: Predator SpyKirby Sommers, allegedly worked for the CIA and Mossad and as a result of these dodgy connections, the mucky madam could well be in line for special treatment from the US legal system.
Whilst stories to date have suggested ‘Bouncing Bob’s’ deviant daughter is complaining about her lack of email and a desk, which indicate to the contrary, this could all be part of a distraction technique. Maxwell and Epstein most certainly had power in their vast address book and whatever may be said of this vile woman, she is still attracting the support of some of them and is far from stupid.
Aside from Donald Trump “wishing her well” in a signal that suggests he knows that she has more up her sleeve, the leakage of the story about her alleged affair with Bill Clinton was another sign that Maxwell will be playing every card she can. Don’t be surprised if she appallingly pulls off some kind of coup that disgracefully gets her off the hook in the near future. Stranger things have, indeed, happened.
Ghislaine Maxwell’s request to “keep nude photos and sexualised videos” out of her trial is yet more proof that she is nothing but gruesome
Ghislaine Maxwell might well think it clever to ask to “keep nude photos and sexualised videos” out of her trial, but the mere request is proof that this wicked woman is beyond evil.
With ‘Bouncing Bob’s’ daughter’s cronies also leaking suggestions that ‘Mucky Madam Maxwell’ has “videos of United States politicians having sex with underaged girls,” all we further learn is that this vile viper has lived a life that can only be compared to a slurry pit. If she were even vaguely, remotely decent why would she possess such in the first place?
Meanwhile elsewhere, Prince Andrew has once again been reminded that he should do the decent thing and speak to the FBI by Lisa Bloom, an attorney for a number of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims. In comments to the Mirror, she remarked:
“Unsealing of the Maxwell documents is a positive step. Secrecy favours predators. Transparency helps victims.”
“Anyone who was associated with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell should be very concerned. In particular, Prince Andrew should get ahead of this by cooperating with investigators as he promised to do months ago.”
That a convicted paedophile is able to avoid a jail sentence is an utter disgrace especially given pensioners get locked up for non-payment of TV licence fees; Old Etonian Andrew Picard shouldn’t be on the streets, he should be in the clink
Andrew Picard (AKA Andrew Laurence and Andrew Boeckman) was caught with 1,185 indecent images of children as young as eight on his computer. He admitted to possessing videos of a three year old being raped, children being forced to have sex with dogs and sharing indecent images on Skype with an undercover policeman yet he was spared jail and handed a derisory non-custodial sentence late last month.
Justifying why he spared Picard of Probyn House, Page Street, Westminster jail and why he also decided not to place this privileged pervert and predator on the sex offenders’ register, Judge Peter Ross remarked:
“It has been said that you and your family have suffered deeply as a result of your arrest and public exposure. Your family didn’t deserve that… [Prison] would undo the counseling you have undergone”.
Sallie Bennett-Jenkins QC, defending, added:
“This is a young and very able man who has hopes for the future… He was able to have this opportunity [to seek help] and this was something Andrew sought for himself, by himself”.
Matthew Steeples reacts to the BBC quietly dropping the “Sir”
This morning when I turned on Radio 4’s Today programme, as has become customary in the last weeks, the first item on the news was about a man who will forever be associated with abuse and paedophilia, Jimmy Savile.
In recent days, as more and more allegations have surfaced against the Jim’ll Fix It presenter, politicians like David Cameron have looked to make hay by calling for Savile to posthumously lose his knighthood. They talk twaddle as such a title cannot be taken from you once you are dead as that very title actually dies with you. To actually “remove” the title would involve a costly change in the law and frankly, as disgusting as this pervert now appears to have plainly been, is it really worth the expense and parliamentary time during these times of austerity?
Plain old Jimmy Savile
When Jeffrey Archer was jailed, calls were made to strip him of his seat in the Lords. In, my humble opinion, rightly, nothing was done. Since leaving prison, Lord Archer has righted his wrongs by doing much good. Archer’s situation and crimes, I admit, were different to those of Savile but his and that of Lord Lucan should be a guide.
If Jimmy Savile were to lose his title now, should the hereditary title of Lord Lucan also be removed? Should his son lose a title because, even though never convicted, his presumed deceased father stands accused of the murder of his children’s nanny? This area of law could indeed become very complex and frankly the exploration of it is pointless.
The Today programme, however, have found a far simpler and cheaper solution. This morning, they did what we should all do. They now simply refer to this revolting individual as plain old “Jimmy Savile.” Let’s all follow this lead, drop the “Sir” and leave it at that.
Matthew Steeples discovers a penthouse that even the most ambitious estate agent may struggle to flog
Estate agents are a tough breed and there are very few properties that they might admit could verge on being impossible to sell. We believe, however, that we might have found one that could be in the same league as, perhaps, the homes of Myra Hindley, Harold Shipman or John Christie. In fact, this Leeds penthouse could be even more difficult to sell given how many photographs the last owner had taken there during his lifetime.
The exterior of Lake View Court, Roundhay, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS8 2TX gives little a way other than the resemblance to a Soviet apartment block
The penthouse enjoys superb views across Roundhay Park and the Waterloo Lake
The split-level 33ft reception offers a vast entertaining space and comes complete with a shagpile carpet that Austin Powers would be proud of
In view of their tiling advertisement, perhaps the owner did a deal with Callerton Kitchens (http://www.callerton.co.uk)
A bedroom gives further indication that this place hasn’t had much done to it since the 1970s
On first inspection, this 3-bedroomed £325,000 top floor flat in Lake View Court at Roundhay in Leeds sounds like it could be a bargain. It includes a 33ft by 13ft split-level living room, a large balcony, a fitted kitchen (that bizarrely features tiling prominently displaying the name of the kitchen’s manufacturer, Callerton Kitchens), 2 bathrooms, a single garage and a double parking space in an underground garage.
Though the agents, Alan Cooke, give a hint that it needs a complete makeover when they state that the apartment is “now ripe for improvement,” it has a “security entry phone system, an automatic lift giving private access, gas central heating system and double glazing.” They also add that it features a “magnificent outlook” across Roundhay Park and the Waterloo Lake and is on a lease of 125 years from 1971. The ground rent is just £60 per annum and a maintenance charge of £2,000 per annum doesn’t seem to be too bad either.
“And here, for our home and studio audience, here’s who house it was…” Jimmy Savile
This image of Savile in a state of undress might indeed have put off a few buyers
Savile pictured in the reception room of the penthouse
Now what could be wrong with this pad and why has it languished on the market since the summer? Well, it turns out that this is the former main home of the late Jimmy Savile. Though his possessions were removed and auctioned some months ago, the disgraced television presenter’s tawdry style of décor remains as a legacy of his occupation of the flat. One simply would not want to think of what the Jim’ll Fix It presenter got upto in this place and frankly, who’d want to move into this poisoned chalice?
Equally, we don’t think Loyd Grossman will be calling round at any point in the near future to ask: “Now, who’d want to live in a house like this?”
For more information on The Penthouse, Lake View Court, Roundhay, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS8 2TX, contact agents Alan Cooke Moortown, Moortown, Leeds, LS17 6PY on +44 (0) 113 288 8666.
The purchaser of Sir Jimmy Savile’s Rolls-Royce whinges about his lacking lot
As 14 police forces announce that they are investigating an astonishing 340 leads and the claims of 40 alleged victims of Sir Jimmy Savile, we at The Steeple Times were equally astounded when we received a Tweet from one of our most esteemed followers @veniviedivici this afternoon.
In his Tweet, @veniviedivici provided a link to a SKY News “exclusive” with the purchaser of a 2002 Rolls-Royce Corniche that had been sold by auctioneers Dreweatts as part of an auction of the possessions of the late Savile that took place on the 30th July.
Charlotte Leeming of the BBC with the former Sir Jimmy Savile Rolls-Royce Corniche. Follow her on Twitter at @lottyleeming
Bidders at the Dreweatts auction of the possessions of the late Sir Jimmy Saville in Leeds on 30th July 2012
At the time, the Rolls-Royce, which Savile had (rather appropriately – given the current turn in events) nicknamed “The Beast,” was listed in the auction catalogue at a guide price of £60,000 to £90,000. It eventually sold for £130,000. With a buyer’s premium, this figure totaled a figure of £161,000 and of it the anonymous buyer, a scrap dealer from Poole in Dorset, told SKY News:
“I never met him, but he was someone I’ve grown up with. I’ll only drive it now and again.”
He added: “I bought it on a whim,” whilst the disappointed underbidder, a “colourful pie and peas” charity fundraiser named Leon Parrish, stated:
“I’m gutted. Good to luck to him [the buyer] but at the end, I hated him.”
He had a lucky escape: charity fundraiser Leon Parrish was pipped at the post and missed out on buying the late Sir Jimmy Savile’s 2002 Rolls-Royce Corniche
Mr Parrish may now have changed his mind. Readers may also recall our own coverage of the sale and we even admit to having been somewhat hoodwinked by Savile’s supposed largesse in the statement we made at the time:
“Jim fixed it that all proceeds will go to charity. Even in death, this top dollar gent continues to do good.”
Since then, Savile has been exposed at worst as a rapist and paedophile and at best as a dirty old creep. As he lies in a concrete encased grave (minus it’s headstone now), we retract our last sentence. He was not a good man and sadly, though he’ll be forever remembered as a disgrace, he’ll never face a single charge.
The new owner of Savile’s Rolls-Royce Corniche, as a result of the media furore over the current allegations, is certainly not laughing but today when he gave a bleeding heart interview, he just made a pathetic fool of himself. Here are a few sentences from it:
“I don’t want to be associated with it… I’m just gutted because all of this should have come out beforehand… The only way that car will sell is to get the Savile name off of it and try to sell it for £70,000 if I’m lucky… I’ve never even driven it… I bought it, they delivered it, I had it picked up, they took it to Surrey for servicing [he’s had to spend £8,000 on the brakes and other problems with the car] and it’s still there… A lot of people spent a lot of money on that stuff [other items in the Dreweatt sale], tracksuits and that, and they’ve got to burn them now because they’re worth nothing… I’ve got my lawyers looking at it now, but my solicitor has spoken to a barrister and he seemed to think none of us had a leg to stand on.”
The scrap dealer went on to add that his plans to rent the car out for weddings and children’s parties had been scuppered but worse still, he informed Gerard Tubb of Sky News that his wife knew nothing of his somewhat stupid purchase:
“She’d absolutely kill me, I’d get thrown out… Probably she knows deep down, but I’ve just got to deny it because I wouldn’t get away with this one.”
Whoever he may be, this scrap dealer is truly not worthy of any of our sympathies. He bought a car unseen and didn’t adhere to the principle: “Caveat emptor.” We at The Steeple Times have no sympathies for this nitwit.
