Re: The Mark Williams-Thomas thread

[nomendelta]

There's certainly a lot of paedophiles very close to home whom they could round up before the ones in the Far East.

It's what Sociologists call 'othering'. Making something seem remote. It happens to 'them' not 'us'. By reporting on other countries as places where child abuse occurs, he is feeding into those myths. I'm rather surprised that MWT would want to get caught up in that. So many people abusing children in this country.

Yes, exactly and the issue is that there have been some revelations of child abuse by some pretty high level British citizens who have connections to even higher level British citizens suggesting that the paedophile network isn't just widespread but has some very important people driving it.

[Guest]

for memory:snippet from Annaraccoon's FOI request [to which a reply has been delayed till today ...]

it was
necessary to give several uniformed police officers temporary
status as Temporary Detective Constables in order to assist with
enquires to be actioned, including within Surrey Police.

1. Could you please confirm whether Mr Mark Williams-Thomas was one
of those uniformed officers.

2. Could you please inform me whether Mr Mark Williams-Thomas has
ever sat/passed the National Investigators Exam (NIE); completed an
Initial Crime Investigators Development Programme (ICIDP); PIP
Level 2 Portfolio; or otherwise be entitled to be referred to as
having attained the rank of Detective Constable without use of the
word 'Temporary' or 'Acting'. ('T.D.C. or A.D.C.')

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[columbostogeys]

Mark Williams-Thomas was in Praia da Luz during the first week that Madeleine was reported missing.

On another thread here, he was seen pontificating about "What the Portuguese Police should be doing if I was in charge".

He was apparently contracted to the McCanns for a period.

He has made pronouncements on the McCann case, including saying that the murdered 8-year-old Joana Cipriano had really been abducted, and that there was probably a connection between her disappearance and that of Madeleine McCann.

Perhaps his most famous and boldest comment on the Madeleine McCann case was that 'after studying 10,000 pages of documents' on the case, his professional opinion was that Madeleine had wandered out of Apartment 5A and then been abducted by an 'opportunist abductor'.

In view of (1) this man's fame, (2) his personal exposure of Jimmy Savile, (3) the choice of Rupert Murdoch's SKY News to employ him for years as their 'expert criminologist and expert on child sexual abuse' etc. etc., and (4) taking into account his amazing views on Madeleine - from adivisng the PJ what to do, to explaining what really happened to Madeleine - I thought this man richly deserved his own thread.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I will start it off with a couple of quotations:

From the Sunday Times news item and Review article about him a few months back:

'25 celebrities to be arrested for sex crimes'.

The headline in the Review section of the paper says:

"I had to leave the police to expose Savile"

Oh really? Is the final truth about why Williams-Thomas left Surrey Police?

Later in the interview, Williams-Thomas is asked about the arrest of Stuart Hall and Max Clifford (not to mention another entertainer who was 'outed' by Williams-Thomas).

The great man seriously thouight it was all his own work!!

He told the interviewer, quote:

"I opened the can, didn’t I? The beast is out".


The man who exposed Savile.

The man who single-handedly 'opened the can'.

The man who knows what really happened to Joana Cipriano.

Is there anything he can't turn his hand to?

I find this highly amusing. I remember way back when all this happened. He was on a talk show I think it could be The Richard & Judy chat show, sure it was. Mark Williams-Thomas clearly said that it was nearly ALWAYS SOMEBODY in the family....END OF.


I know he said that, then later i saw him on sky or similar spouting off how it couldnt be the McCanns, so what changed then.


I am 100per cent certain he said that.

[Guest]

MWT is in a programme called "On The Run" at 9 this evening on ITV1. It's about people who do a bunk from the law.

I think it was scheduled some time ago but was withdrawn for legal reasons.

[Gillyspot]

From the Telegraph 2002

"
A FORMER detective with Surrey Police, the force leading the hunt for 13-year-old Amanda Dowler, says officers "don't seem to have a clue" what has happened to her.
Mark Williams-Thomas, who retired from the force 18 months ago as one of its leading paedophile specialists, said that while he was not part of the investigation, he was worried by its [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
Amanda - known as Milly - has not been seen since she disappeared while making her way from her school in Weybridge to her home in Walton-on-Thames 17 days ago.
"They don't seem to have a clue what has happened to her," said Mr Williams-Thomas, a detective constable in Surrey's child-protection squad before leaving to set up his own business.
"I heard recently that they had taken away a computer from her home, but they seem to have done that only recently, while it should have been one of the first things they did."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 05 Apr 2002
He said Milly's case bore striking similarities to that of another girl, Ruth Wilson, who vanished from nearby Dorking more than six years ago and is still missing.
"There are a lot of similarities between the cases, not least the fact that they lived near each other and had no history of family upset. Yet both seem to have just disappeared," he said.
Mr Williams-Thomas, who acted as the Wilson family's liaison officer, wrote an internal report criticising on the methods used by the force to try to locate 16-year-old Ruth.
"The force never formally acknowledged the points I made," he said. His report, written five months into the search for Ruth, highlighted what he regarded as a number of inadequacies.
"The search was just not done well enough. To be absolutely honest, Ruth could still be up there," he said, referring to the Boxhill area where she was last seen.
"There was also a lack of sufficient house-to-house inquiries, and numbers of people were not spoken to until later on. These were fundamental errors."
He added: "The report went to the superintendent, but it was never signed to indicate that it had been seen. I got no actual response at all, other than the report being handed back to me. To the best of my knowledge, no action was taken."
He could only hope that detectives leading the hunt for Milly were not "making the same mistakes that were made with the search for Ruth".
Milly was last seen on March 21 as she walked near a railway station in Walton-on-Thames. Police said last weekend that they did not think she had been forcibly abducted and were hopeful that she was alive.
They have conducted a thorough search of her home. Last week, they trawled a river, but found nothing. Despite widespread media appeals, they have so far drawn a blank.
Last night, they released stills of CCTV footage - from the day she vanished - taken of her at Heathside School, Weybridge, and at the nearby station where she caught a train home.
A police spokesman said: "We're hoping these images may jog someone's memory. This is being treated as a critical incident." Members of the public helped in a fresh search of open ground behind her school yesterday.
Like Milly's disappearance, the case of Ruth is one of the most perplexing ever to face Surrey Police. The file remains open. After hiring a cab to take her to Boxhill on November 27, 1995, she was never seen again. Letters addressed to her parents and boyfriend were later found, but no indication of what had happened to her.
The National Missing Persons Helpline launched a new campaign last week to try to trace her and nine other long-term missing children by featuring their faces on the sides of a fleet of lorries owned by Ford.
Police were unable to comment on the Ruth Wilson inquiry, but said they had been doing everything possible to find Milly.
A spokesman said: "From the outset, we have treated this case as a critical incident. We are following all lines of inquiry and not discounting any options at this stage.
"Since she went missing, we have invested significant resources in the investigation. On any one day we have had more than 100 officers working on the case."

Link [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So "sardine munching PT police weren't the only ones in saintly MWT's crosshairs then.

[suep]

Whilst searching on Google Scholar yesterday for something totally unrelated to the McCanns I came across the following piece written by Mark Williams-Thomas

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Entitled "Review of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann From the holiday resort of Ocean Club,Praia Da Luz, Portugal on Thursday 3rd May 2007" it claims to be "based on a critical analysis of over 10000 documents, including statements, photographs, and official reports amassed by the Portuguese police during their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007, and which are now in the public domain" and further claims to be "constructed not only through this critical analysis, but
also informed by applied criminological theory related to child disappearances, and professional experience" (my emphasis)

MWT acknowledges the help of Professor David Wilson from Birmingham City University in producing his 'review' of the case, presumably in an attempt to give it more academic weight.
He certainly needs all the help he can get in this respect, since the document is all of 27 pages in length and has no less than five references in its bibliography, only two of which bear any resemblance to academic texts containing any semblance of criminological theory.
If MWT is studying for a PhD he's going to have to do whole lot more reading if he wants to convince an examiner he's a credible academic. My undergraduates manage to cite more academic sources in their short essays than this charlatan!

In the document he mentions that two ransom demands were made. I was aware of one of these, the one that emanated from Holland and was investigated, leading to a prosecution. The other I hadn't heard of and wondered if anyone on the forum knew anything about it. He describes it thus,
"An employee of the resort did receive a £1 million ransom demand on 22 June 2007. This demand was received via a mobile phone voice mail from an adult male, where an English child was clearly speaking in the background. Although an intercept was placed on the employee’s line no further calls were received and this resulted in no further investigation."

Also, there seems to be a belief that WT Associates Ltd was set up in 2005. This would seem to be incorrect according to the website Company Check. It was actually started on 12th June 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Prior to this MWT was director of a company called WT Productions and also the company Matters2Me. He runs all three companies with a woman called Ms Karen Williams-Thomas, possibly his wife.
If the above information is accurate, given that MWT was in PdL on 12th June 2007, it would seem WT Associates was possibly set up as a response to ongoing events there.

[Guest]

SueP, there's a mention of WT Associates on page 8 of this topic. It could have existed as a trading name prior to being incorporated as a limited company.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It's interesting that his profile doesn't record anything prior to 2005.

[margaret]

"An employee of the resort did receive a £1 million ransom demand on 22 June 2007. This demand was received via a mobile phone voice mail from an adult male, where an English child was clearly speaking in the background. Although an intercept was placed on the employee’s line no further calls were received and this resulted in no further investigation."

Rubbish. I don't believe any call is untraceable, the mobile phone company could have traced the originating call somehow.

MWT certainly is a charlatan.

[gbwales]

My god that's a remarkably poor piece of documentation. I've seen more thorough school essays!
It's certainly not a patch on the detailed and referenced PDFs of case details that get shared on here. I'm amazed that this is considered in any way a worthy professional piece of work in such a serious case. It takes an incredible amount for granted, especially regarding statement and timeline inconsistencies and impossibilities. It leaves the description of "checking' to a single sentence - one which is hugely inadequate for describing the utter lack of process of checking and coherence in the various individuals' descriptions of checking arrangements.
And how he concludes that Madeleine walked out without leaving her fingerprints on the patio door (please correct me if I am mistaken on that) to corroborate such a theory is quite bizarre.
Amazing how people like MWT and the McCanns insist on theories that simply aren't supported by a single shred of forensic evidence.

[Issy]

My god that's a remarkably poor piece of documentation. I've seen more thorough school essays!
It's certainly not a patch on the detailed and referenced PDFs of case details that get shared on here. I'm amazed that this is considered in any way a worthy professional piece of work in such a serious case. It takes an incredible amount for granted, especially regarding statement and timeline inconsistencies and impossibilities. It leaves the description of "checking' to a single sentence - one which is hugely inadequate for describing the utter lack of process of checking and coherence in the various individuals' descriptions of checking arrangements.
And how he concludes that Madeleine walked out without leaving her fingerprints on the patio door (please correct me if I am mistaken on that) to corroborate such a theory is quite bizarre.
Amazing how people like MWT and the McCanns insist on theories that simply aren't supported by a single shred of forensic evidence.

If MWT thinks Madeleine walked out of the apartment and was then abducted, how does he account for Kate's insistence that the window was open? He can't have it both ways, either Madeleine left by the door of her own volition and Kate is lying about the window, or Kate is telling the truth about the window in which case Madeleine was abducted from inside the apartment. 

Not that I believe in the abduction theory, but those who do need to try being logical.

[suep]

My god that's a remarkably poor piece of documentation. I've seen more thorough school essays!
It's certainly not a patch on the detailed and referenced PDFs of case details that get shared on here. I'm amazed that this is considered in any way a worthy professional piece of work in such a serious case. It takes an incredible amount for granted, especially regarding statement and timeline inconsistencies and impossibilities. It leaves the description of "checking' to a single sentence - one which is hugely inadequate for describing the utter lack of process of checking and coherence in the various individuals' descriptions of checking arrangements.
And how he concludes that Madeleine walked out without leaving her fingerprints on the patio door (please correct me if I am mistaken on that) to corroborate such a theory is quite bizarre.
Amazing how people like MWT and the McCanns insist on theories that simply aren't supported by a single shred of forensic evidence.

Those were my thoughts exactly, gbwales. To call 27 pages of remarkably bad synopsis a 'review' is ludicrous. If this guy was a policeman he must have been a very sloppy one, yet he has the gall to make 'recommendations' to the Portugese police!!
I was amazed when I read his conclusion that Madeleine left the apartment and was subsequently abducted. He provides no corroborating evidence for it and his alleged application of criminological theory is laughable.

[Guest]

Every time I see MWT's name come by in a discussion, I am reminded of the very intriguing questions in an FOI, which AFAIK have not been replied to since September last year ...

***
With reference to the sheer quantity of information that was placed
on HOLMES 2 following Operation Ore, I understand that it was
necessary to give several uniformed police officers temporary
status as Temporary Detective Constables in order to assist with
enquires to be actioned, including within Surrey Police.

1. Could you please confirm whether Mr Mark Williams-Thomas was one
of those uniformed officers.

2. Could you please inform me whether Mr Mark Williams-Thomas has
ever sat/passed the National Investigators Exam (NIE); completed an
Initial Crime Investigators Development Programme (ICIDP); PIP
Level 2 Portfolio; or otherwise be entitled to be referred to as
having attained the rank of Detective Constable without use of the
word 'Temporary' or 'Acting'. ('T.D.C. or A.D.C.')

3. Could you please confirm whether all those interviews, actioned
by HOLMES 2, if carried out by Mr Mark Williams-Thomas, were
formally and specifically requested by his supervising officer.

4. Was there any discrepancy between the formally requested number
of interviews assigned to Mr Williams-Thomas and the number of
interviews actually carried out by Mr Williams-Thomas? If so, could
you please inform me how many of the interviewees had already been
interviewed by other police officers.

5. If the answer to 4. is affirmative, could you please inform me
whether you had reason to carry out any preliminary or informal
disciplinary investigations with regard to additional interviews
conducted with alleged sexual offenders by Mr Williams-Thomas.

6. Would Mr Williams-Thomas have been eligible for promotion within
the Detective squad, Temporary, Acting or otherwise, had he not
chosen to resign?

7. Following Mr Williams-Thomas' arrest at Gatwick Airport Hotel
(not airport, so within your 'area') for alleged blackmail - a
matter I am aware has since been satisfactorily discharged by the
magistrates with NO stain on his character, could you please
confirm whether a separate investigation was carried out at the
same time by officers from the Surrey Police Force internal
investigation department, concerning other matters NOT connected
with the alleged Blackmail?

8. Can you please confirm whether any papers, notes, records,
photographs, digital electronic communications or equipment, which
identified names or action plans from HOLMES 2, were removed from
Mr Williams-Thomas' home or person for inspection during such
additional investigation.

9. Could you please tell me whether the outcome of such
investigation resulted in any report to The Child Exploitation and
Online Protection Centre (CEOP)?

10. Could you please tell me whether any subsequent internal report
was prepared by CEOP?

11. If the answer to 10. is affirmative, could I please have a copy
of such report?

12. Could you please give me copies of any advice subsequently
issued by CEOPS to the Portuguese Police in respect of Mr
Williams-Thomas' presence in Portugal on behalf of any British
television company.

13. Could you please give me copies of any such advice issued by
CEOPS to any British Police Force in respect of official press
conferences open to accredited British reporters.

14. Could you please tell me whether you have been required to
furnish any information concerning Mr Williams-Thomas activities
whilst a serving Police Officer within your force to the
investigating officers concerned with the charges laid against Mr
Max Clifford under Operation Yewtree.

14. Could you please advise me of the contents of any communication
you have had with the Portuguese authorities specifically
referencing Mr Williams-Thomas between July 1st 2013 and August
20th 2013.
***

[Lance De Boils]

Intruguing questions indeed.


The questions suggest that the person making the request has some specific knowledge, or at least grounds to suspect certain things. 

How odd.

[tigger]

This is the first time I've heard of this CCTV:
This camera was pointing up towards the rear entrance/exit to Apartment 5a and would have been able to have captured anyone walking down the pavement past the front entrance of the Ocean Club and Tapas Restaurant.
Unquote

I can't believe this was the case and I'm more inclined to believe such a camera was installed against theft from the supermarket. In which case it would never point at 5a imo.

There is a CCTV near the church apparently, but I understand there were very few in PdL making an 'abduction' so much easier and allowing for any number of suspicious characters to be seen whenever the need arises.

[suep]

Intruguing questions indeed.


The questions suggest that the person making the request has some specific knowledge, or at least grounds to suspect certain things. 

How odd.

Very intriguing questions indeed. Since the FOI request doesn't seem to have elicited any response it would be interesting to know if the requester of that information has followed it up with a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

[Lance De Boils]

Perhaps the same request needs re-submitting by others.

[Guest]

Snipped from Tony Bennett's post re Guardian article

"He left the force in 2000 and set up an independent child protection firm, WT Associates, in 2005. Since then, Williams-Thomas has been a regular pundit on Sky News, commenting on high-profile criminal investigations including the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and the case of the Ipswich serial killer Steve Wright. His television work includes stints on ITV1's current affairs show Tonight and reports for BBC2's Newsnight."

With regards to MWT having studied at Birmingham City University it is worth noting that David Wilson PhD is Professor of Criminology at Birmingham City University. A former prison governor, he is a noted criminologist and expert on serial killers through his work with various British police.

Snipped from David Wilson's wiki page

"Wilson acts as an advisor to various police forces as a criminologist, and in 2006 was involved in the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], which lead to the successful arrest and prosection of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]"

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I've seen Professor Wilson many times on documentaries. He's an expert criminologist.

ETA. Professor Wilson declined to profile Madeleine's 'abductor'

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

MWT on the other hand has a theory of Madeleine walking out of the apartment and being abducted by an opportunist.

What did he do for a living between leaving the force to set up his own business, and setting it up in reality five years later in 2005?

[Guest]

As a criminologist, former detective and authority on paedophile crimes, I have followed the Madeleine McCann case from the very beginning.......




   NVQ level. 4?

Wot, from April 28th 2007?

[Guest]

 

[Tony Bennett]

 

This cruel, mocking video of one of the true heroes of our time is disgusting - no-one should be allowed to trash the reputation of this saint and get away with it. I cannot recommend members here to waste a second watching it. 

The video did make one valid point towards the end though, describing him as 'the only man in the country above the law'.

Indeed, Williams-Thomas is AFAIK the only man able to watch tons of child sex abuse videos on his personal computer (as he himself has admitted on Twitter), without police authority, and not get prosecuted.

[Guest]

You're absolutely right, Tony. It's a shame to mock the reputation of a True Hero. And a Saint on top of it.
But I'm glad you agree, that he's the "only man in the country above the law" ...
  

[Liz Eagles]

Here's a few 'words of wisdom' tweeted by Mark Williams-Thomas.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
If 2 police officers did lie about reporting a child abuse case to the CPS & failed to gather evidence how have they still got a job ?
0 replies 34 retweets 27 favorites


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I used to say to other officers 'The time it's taken you to try & get out of doing the job - you could have almost finished it.'

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
'Often the best person to help you is the person who is already very busy.' Compared to the lazy person - who is probably useless anyway

.......................................................................

Words fail me.

[Doug D]

TB, 20 May 2014 9.26
 
‘Indeed, Williams-Thomas is AFAIK the only man able to watch tons of child sex abuse videos on his personal computer (as he himself has admitted on Twitter), without police authority, and not get prosecuted.’
 
Is it just me? Pot, kettle black?
 
MWT Twitter 8^th March 2015:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 · 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I firmly believe that if you possess child abuse material - for which a child has been abused - you should receive a minimum 1yrs jail


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 · 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Along with minimum 1yr jail for child abuse material - you should get 2 years treatment programme - a SOPO & registration

[Tony Bennett]

It is said of some: "You can't keep a good man down".

But it is also said, for example of Mark Williams-Thomas: "He always seems to turn up, like a bad penny".

And now 'aquila' has brought us this information, from the Oscar Pistorious thread:

-------- 

Back onto the Pistorius case, there is a forthcoming documentary where Oscar Pistorius speaks to Mark Williams-Thomas

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for 24th June.

This is British media gaining a scoop. What it has to do with British media beats me, however Mark Williams-Thomas is the go-to man for securing an interview with Oscar Pistorius. This is the same Mark Williams-Thomas who has been discussed on this forum many times with regards to his less than transparent occupation/short time served within the UK police.

Mark Williams-Thomas' forthcoming documentary due to be scheduled on ITV on 24th June is also a part of the sentencing trial. It's been taken to task by Gerrie Nel when questioning an expert psychologist giving evidence on behalf of Oscar Pistorius.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

-------- 

For those members and guests not aware of why we take a keen interest in all the doings of Mark Williams-Thomas on this forum, it's largely because of his asinine remarks on the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

In 2005, there was a notorious murder in Portugal. Leonor Cipriano, together with her brother Joao Cipriano, killed her 8-year-old daughter Joana, then cut up and disposed of her body, and pretended she's been abducted. The lead detective in the case was Goncalo Amaral, and, after receiving a full, voluntary and detailed confession from Joao Cipriano, and having gained more-than-adequate fornesic proof of the brutal murder of this poor girl, had the evil pair convicted. YThey were each handed down 16-yerar jail sentences.

Mark Williams-Thomas, a self-styled expert 'criminologist' and 'child sexual abuse expert', thinks the Ciprianos are innocent!

Moreover, the seemingly deluded man has said on the record that the abduction (as he says) of Joana Cipriano bears many similarities to the abduction (as he believes) of Madeleine McCann.

Over and above that, he appears to be a 'media darling', beloved by SKY News and other TV media as the 'go to' commentator and documentary-maker on the above subjects. He routinely made comments on the Madeleine McCann case and other high profile child sexual abuse and other criminal cases.

He was then chosen to be the one man who presented the first TV documentary which exposed Jimmy Savile as a serial paedophile. His undeserved reputation has soared even further since then; he is hailed as a dedicated campaigner against the evils of child sexual abuse.

As 'aquila' has pointed out, he has poked his nose in a big way into the murder of Reeve Steenkamp by Oscar Pistorius. Below I reproduce his 2014 article: "Mark Williams-Thomas: Why I believe Oscar Pistorius is no murderer and Reeva's death was a tragic accident".

In the current court case, it appears that Oscar Pistorius was able and willing, a few weeks ago, to take part in filming wit5h Mark Williams-Thomas for a documentary to be shown on ITV 24 June. However, a few weeks later, Pistorius was deemed by doctors to be 'seriously mentally ill and depressed' and 'unable to testify'. Quelle surprise!

This prompted this exchange in court, prosecutor Nel quizzing Pistorius's expert witness, Scholtz:

Nel: Did Mr Pistorius indicate to you that he intentionally shot at the door knowing there was a person in the bathroom?

Scholtz: Yes …

Nel: That’s the first version of him intentionally shooting at the person that we’ve had in this court.

Nel told Scholtz that June Steenkamp had forgiven Pistorius for her daughter’s murder “for her sake, not for his sake”, after the doctor suggested this was a mitigating factor in sentencing.

The prosecutor argued that information in the psychological report about Pistorius being assaulted in prison and witnessing a hanging were untrue, and said he had acted aggressively towards a prison staff member.

And Nel wondered why, if Pistorius was too unwell to speak at this hearing, he had been able to give an interview to ITV, to be broadcast next week.
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here is Mark Williams-Thomas defending the indefensible actions of Oscar Pistorious:

------ 

Mark Williams-Thomas: Why I believe Oscar Pistorius is no murderer and Reeva's death was a tragic accident


21:00, 10 Sep 2014


Opinion

by Mark Williams-Thomas

Watch: Award winning investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas is in South Africa to report on the Oscar Pistorius trial exclusively for This Morning. He is the only journalist in the world to get access to Oscar himself and he has spent the last few days in his company

Get daily news by email[Verdict due on Friday: Oscar Pistorius]

I believe the shooting of Reeva Steenkamp was a tragic accident.

I am in no doubt that Oscar loved Reeva and had no intention to kill her. On that fateful morning he reacted instinctively.

Shooting when he heard noises and fearing he was being burgled.

I am the only independent observer who has heard Oscar’s personal account away from the courts.

And while some believe Oscar is guilty, I believe he genuinely thought an intruder was in his house.

His love for Reeva is clear and is evident in everything I have seen and heard from both him and those close to him.

He is a broken man but asks for no pity and his pain is clear to see. He doesn’t sleep and struggles to concentrate on the simplest of tasks.

Lost by so many is the fact he had only just started his relationship with her. They were three months in and very much in the courtship stage, spending as much time as possible together at every opportunity. This raises the very obvious question which I believe the prosecution have failed to answer. Why would he murder her?

Over the past year I have got to know Oscar and his family quite well. I have travelled to South Africa a number of times and am, to date, the only journalist in the world to have spoken to Oscar directly about what happened in the early hours of the 14th February 2013 and everything that has happened since.

I have carefully considered all the evidence put before the court as well as other information made available to me. This has allowed me to assess each piece of evidence as to its value and strength.

During my career I have spent a lot of time speaking to and interviewing alleged and convicted offenders.

My experience, as a qualified risk assessor, has over the years meant I have interviewed and completed a considerable number of assessments of dangerous offenders. I am not afraid to ask the difficult questions and challenge individuals about the accounts they give.

As a result of my contact with Oscar and those closest to him, and my evaluation of the evidence, I truly don’t believe Oscar is guilty of murder nor of the lesser charge of culpable homicide. The second charge is certainly a strange fall back option for the court. In effect it offers the prosecution a second chance if they fail to secure a conviction for murder.

One of the most important aspects central to the background is had Oscar not had a loaded gun under his bed, I strongly believe and indeed all the evidence points to the fact, that Reeva would still be alive.

It is vital to remember that Oscar is an elite athlete who has an additional vulnerability due to the fact he was born with malformed legs and uses prosthetic limbs. These are both significant to understanding why he responded and behaved like he did. Elite athletes make split-second decisions, often reacting instinctively to situations on adrenalin. For many elite athletes this is what stands them apart from you and I. 

One thing I have learnt over the years from interviewing people accused of a variety of serious crimes is people react differently to different situations. The concept that a ‘normal’ reaction exists under immediate stress and danger is to fail to understand the uniqueness we have as human beings.

We are different. We look different, think differently, talk differently and respond differently to same or similar situations. This is what sets the human race apart - we are all different.

This provides a perfect explanation as why Oscar did what he did on that morning. Not turning on the light or checking to see if Reeva was in bed.

Some criticism has been applied to Oscar’s behaviour and responses during his evidence. 

What I have encountered is a man destroyed by what happened that night. He is unwell and still trying desperately to remember the events on that night. The brain naturally attempts to fill in the gaps. During those seven days Oscar was asked to recall information and detail that occurred in split seconds and that at the time was just not relevant to him. But when he can’t recall it, it is treated as suspicious or evasive by the prosecution.

What of Oscar as a person? He is caring and sensitive but also very focused, determined and driven. This is why he got to the top of his sport. He is a true dedicated elite sportsman. An Olympian. But he also has a much more vulnerable side. A double amputee from childhood he has had to adapt yet his vulnerability without his prosthetic limbs is very evident.

During my time with Oscar and those close to him, I have been left in no doubt Oscar is devastated and not through self pity. He is distraught due to the fact he killed someone whom he truly loved.

Overwhelmingly his communications and actions towards Reeva during their relationship show this very clearly. They were a newly courting couple, three months into their relationship and they had so much to look forward to. Indeed they were looking to build a future together.

The fact Oscar had a gun under his bed raises for me the very real fear many South Africans live with day in and day out, and the serious issue of gun laws. The fear of crime is usually always greater than the reality - and this is the case in so many countries. However the crime rate in South Africa really does make that ‘fear’ a ‘reality’.

During my visits to South Africa, I have heard so many stories of violent crime and house break-ins. Crime and in particular burglary drives fear - not the other way round. Gated communities exist and are not for show. The houses have huge fences and gates along with 24 hour armed security.

Oscar himself has been subject of burglaries and threats in the past which is not surprising given his huge celebrity status in South Africa.

Oscar’s very real fear was evident in a tweet he posted in November 2012. This tweet totally contradicts the prosecution’s belief that Reeva’s death was murder but totally supports Oscar account.

“Nothing like getting home to hear the washing machine on and thinking it’s an intruder to go into full combat recon mode into the pantry!”

Oscar had drawn his gun and it turned out to be his washing machine making the noise. However, had someone been downstairs it could have been a very different outcome.

Indeed the accidental shooting of a loved one in very similar circumstances to Oscar occurred in 2004 when former Springbok rugby player Rudi Sisagie shot and killed his daughter Marie. It occurred when Visagie was woken at 5am on a Sunday morning by the sound of his daughter’s car being driven off their drive.

Visagie thinking his car was being stolen grabbed his loaded 7.65mm pistol and fired through the bedroom window at the driver, killing them. It was his daughter, who he mistook for a thief. Rudi Visagie was arrested and charged with murder. Three months later the state dropped charges on humanitarian grounds. His daughter’s death had been punishment enough.

And what of the police’s account when you compare it with Oscar’s? Two accounts but only one which has been consistent. Oscar’s account has remained almost entirely the same with the exception of small additional information which he has provided when individual elements have been explored in detail. Yet the police have, from the very beginning, made assumptions and changed their accounts. Their version of events has repeatedly been shown to be inconsistent and inaccurate.

One element which the police have looked to rely on in order to build their case of murder against Oscar is based on neighbours who claim to have heard a woman screaming. Given the location, issues of how sound travels and the fact that people claim to have been woken from their sleep, these accounts alone need to be treated with the greatest of care.

Crucially the prosecution never set to undertake sound tests in line with its version of events - testing the exact gun, bat or repeating the screaming from Oscar’s house to the relevant witness’s house under the same or very similar conditions.

When I was in the police, we would regularly gets reports of the sound of a woman screaming which would nearly always turn out to be a fox.

Another major concern is the actions of the police and the investigating officer Detective Botha who had a history of dealing with Oscar. It seems to me he had clearly made his mind up quickly and made some very damaging assumptions. Remember this is the man, a serving police detective at the time, who was later removed from the case and who was charged with attempted murder in an unconnected case. He retired from the police ahead of the trial.

It is important to remember during the initial search of his home. Oscar had watches and other items stolen and subsequently the crime scene preservation and examination has certainly been identified as being very poor.

State prosecutor Gerrie Nel gestures during the trial of Oscar Pistorius at the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.  

For the last five months Oscar and Reeva’s lives have played out as if it were a drama in front of a worldwide TV audience. Oscar is on trial charged with premeditated murder, two separate unrelated indictments with regards to discharge of a firearm in a public place and one count of illegal possessing of ammunition.

And finally in a matter of days Oscar will learn his fate. His future and freedom sits with a former social worker turned crime reporter and now presiding Judge in what is arguable the most high profile court case in decades. No jury system exists in South Africa so the final decision rests with Judge Thokozile Masipa along with her two assessors to decide if Oscar is guilty of the crimes he has been charged with.

In respect of the charge of murder, I believe the police carried out a very poor investigation with contamination of the crime scene and the loss of evidence. They fall a long way short from proving murder to any degree pre-meditated or otherwise.

Oscar admits to killing Reeva but it is up to the Judge to decide if she believes Oscar and his account that he believed an intruder was in the house, or if, as the prosecution claim, Oscar planned to kill his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

If Judge Masipa decides Oscar planned the murder of Reeva then he will be guilty of premeditated murder with a minimum sentence being 25 years in jail. The alternative verdict could be one of murder but not pre-mediated in which case Oscar will get a minimum of 15 years.

If not guilty of pre-meditated murder or murder then the Judge will have to decide on the second option of ‘culpable homicide’ ‘Culpable homicide is the closest charge to one of manslaughter which we have in the UK. The question which must be asked is: ‘Were Oscar’s actions reasonable?’ If the Judge believes he believed an intruder was in the house and he acted reasonably then he is not guilty. However if she decides his actions were not reasonable, based on the reckless firing of the gun then he is guilty of culpable homicide.

Again for exactly the same reasons as being found not guilty of murder, I believe Oscar should not be found guilty of culpable homicide because he genuinely believed an intruder was in his house and he was in danger. 

In respect of the two charges of discharge of a firearm in a public place, it is now accepted that in regarding to one of these charges, the discharge in the restaurant, Oscar should be found guilty.

However, the evidence for the other charge of discharge of a firearm is highly questionable and contradictory and I believe on this charge he should be acquitted.

In regards to the possession on ammunition, this should never have been charged. The police found the ammunition during the house search following the murder, in a safe on the ground floor.

The ammunition was with some of Oscar’s medals and rather than seize it, the police gave the ammunition and medals to a family member to take home. Days later the police contacted the family member and asked them to bring back the ammunition. The police then charged Oscar with unlawful possession. I believe this is an abuse of process and dereliction of police duty.

Throughout all of my time with Oscar and his family, and my considering of the case, I have kept the tragic events of the early morning of the 14th February 2013 at the forefront of my mind. On that morning Reeva’s life was cut short in its prime as a result of what I believe were the reactions of a very frightened man reacting instinctively.

Yes he had discharged a firearm in a public place and for that he should serve a community sentence but I don’t believe he is guilty of murder and or culpable homicide.

However, for Oscar no punishment will live up to the torment he will have to live with for the rest of his life.

[tinkier]

It never ceases to amaze me, how money can change peoples perceptions/opinions on anything....say the right things in the correct circles your popularity rises, say the wrong thing and your billy no mates. Money/greed, sure is the route of all evil!

[Tony Bennett]

It never ceases to amaze me, how money can change peoples perceptions/opinions on anything....say the 'right things' in the correct circles your popularity rises, say the wrong thing and you're 'Billy no mates'. Money/greed, sure is the root of all evil!

Yes.

Two prime examples being:

1. Support for man-made climate change and the world-wide attack on the alleged 'evil' of carbon dioxide, and

2. Support for the long-discredited theory of evolution.

[Liz Eagles]

It is said of some: "You can't keep a good man down".

But it is also said, for example of Mark Williams-Thomas: "He always seems to turn up, like a bad penny".

And now 'aquila' has brought us this information, from the Oscar Pistorious thread:

-------- 

Back onto the Pistorius case, there is a forthcoming documentary where Oscar Pistorius speaks to Mark Williams-Thomas

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for 24th June.

This is British media gaining a scoop. What it has to do with British media beats me, however Mark Williams-Thomas is the go-to man for securing an interview with Oscar Pistorius. This is the same Mark Williams-Thomas who has been discussed on this forum many times with regards to his less than transparent occupation/short time served within the UK police.

Mark Williams-Thomas' forthcoming documentary due to be scheduled on ITV on 24th June is also a part of the sentencing trial. It's been taken to task by Gerrie Nel when questioning an expert psychologist giving evidence on behalf of Oscar Pistorius.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

-------- 

For those members and guests not aware of why we take a keen interest in all the doings of Mark Williams-Thomas on this forum, it's largely because of his asinine remarks on the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

In 2005, there was a notorious murder in Portugal. Leonor Cipriano, together with her brother Joao Cipriano, killed her 8-year-old daughter Joana, then cut up and disposed of her body, and pretended she's been abducted. The lead detective in the case was Goncalo Amaral, and, after receiving a full, voluntary and detailed confession from Joao Cipriano, and having gained more-than-adequate fornesic proof of the brutal murder of this poor girl, had the evil pair convicted. YThey were each handed down 16-yerar jail sentences.

Mark Williams-Thomas, a self-styled expert 'criminologist' and 'child sexual abuse expert', thinks the Ciprianos are innocent!

Moreover, the seemingly deluded man has said on the record that the abduction (as he says) of Joana Cipriano bears many similarities to the abduction (as he believes) of Madeleine McCann.

Over and above that, he appears to be a 'media darling', beloved by SKY News and other TV media as the 'go to' commentator and documentary-maker on the above subjects. He routinely made comments on the Madeleine McCann case and other high profile child sexual abuse and other criminal cases.

He was then chosen to be the one man who presented the first TV documentary which exposed Jimmy Savile as a serial paedophile. His undeserved reputation has soared even further since then; he is hailed as a dedicated campaigner against the evils of child sexual abuse.

As 'aquila' has pointed out, he has poked his nose in a big way into the murder of Reeve Steenkamp by Oscar Pistorius. Below I reproduce his 2014 article: "Mark Williams-Thomas: Why I believe Oscar Pistorius is no murderer and Reeva's death was a tragic accident".

In the current court case, it appears that Oscar Pistorius was able and willing, a few weeks ago, to take part in filming wit5h Mark Williams-Thomas for a documentary to be shown on ITV 24 June. However, a few weeks later, Pistorius was deemed by doctors to be 'seriously mentally ill and depressed' and 'unable to testify'. Quelle surprise!

This prompted this exchange in court, prosecutor Nel quizzing Pistorius's expert witness, Scholtz:

Nel: Did Mr Pistorius indicate to you that he intentionally shot at the door knowing there was a person in the bathroom?

Scholtz: Yes …

Nel: That’s the first version of him intentionally shooting at the person that we’ve had in this court.

Nel told Scholtz that June Steenkamp had forgiven Pistorius for her daughter’s murder “for her sake, not for his sake”, after the doctor suggested this was a mitigating factor in sentencing.

The prosecutor argued that information in the psychological report about Pistorius being assaulted in prison and witnessing a hanging were untrue, and said he had acted aggressively towards a prison staff member.

And Nel wondered why, if Pistorius was too unwell to speak at this hearing, he had been able to give an interview to ITV, to be broadcast next week.
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here is Mark Williams-Thomas defending the indefensible actions of Oscar Pistorious:

------ 

Mark Williams-Thomas: Why I believe Oscar Pistorius is no murderer and Reeva's death was a tragic accident


21:00, 10 Sep 2014


Opinion

by Mark Williams-Thomas

Watch: Award winning investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas is in South Africa to report on the Oscar Pistorius trial exclusively for This Morning. He is the only journalist in the world to get access to Oscar himself and he has spent the last few days in his company

Get daily news by email[Verdict due on Friday: Oscar Pistorius]

I believe the shooting of Reeva Steenkamp was a tragic accident.

I am in no doubt that Oscar loved Reeva and had no intention to kill her. On that fateful morning he reacted instinctively.

Shooting when he heard noises and fearing he was being burgled.

I am the only independent observer who has heard Oscar’s personal account away from the courts.

And while some believe Oscar is guilty, I believe he genuinely thought an intruder was in his house.

His love for Reeva is clear and is evident in everything I have seen and heard from both him and those close to him.

He is a broken man but asks for no pity and his pain is clear to see. He doesn’t sleep and struggles to concentrate on the simplest of tasks.

Lost by so many is the fact he had only just started his relationship with her. They were three months in and very much in the courtship stage, spending as much time as possible together at every opportunity. This raises the very obvious question which I believe the prosecution have failed to answer. Why would he murder her?

Over the past year I have got to know Oscar and his family quite well. I have travelled to South Africa a number of times and am, to date, the only journalist in the world to have spoken to Oscar directly about what happened in the early hours of the 14th February 2013 and everything that has happened since.

I have carefully considered all the evidence put before the court as well as other information made available to me. This has allowed me to assess each piece of evidence as to its value and strength.

During my career I have spent a lot of time speaking to and interviewing alleged and convicted offenders.

My experience, as a qualified risk assessor, has over the years meant I have interviewed and completed a considerable number of assessments of dangerous offenders. I am not afraid to ask the difficult questions and challenge individuals about the accounts they give.

As a result of my contact with Oscar and those closest to him, and my evaluation of the evidence, I truly don’t believe Oscar is guilty of murder nor of the lesser charge of culpable homicide. The second charge is certainly a strange fall back option for the court. In effect it offers the prosecution a second chance if they fail to secure a conviction for murder.

One of the most important aspects central to the background is had Oscar not had a loaded gun under his bed, I strongly believe and indeed all the evidence points to the fact, that Reeva would still be alive.

It is vital to remember that Oscar is an elite athlete who has an additional vulnerability due to the fact he was born with malformed legs and uses prosthetic limbs. These are both significant to understanding why he responded and behaved like he did. Elite athletes make split-second decisions, often reacting instinctively to situations on adrenalin. For many elite athletes this is what stands them apart from you and I. 

One thing I have learnt over the years from interviewing people accused of a variety of serious crimes is people react differently to different situations. The concept that a ‘normal’ reaction exists under immediate stress and danger is to fail to understand the uniqueness we have as human beings.

We are different. We look different, think differently, talk differently and respond differently to same or similar situations. This is what sets the human race apart - we are all different.

This provides a perfect explanation as why Oscar did what he did on that morning. Not turning on the light or checking to see if Reeva was in bed.

Some criticism has been applied to Oscar’s behaviour and responses during his evidence. 

What I have encountered is a man destroyed by what happened that night. He is unwell and still trying desperately to remember the events on that night. The brain naturally attempts to fill in the gaps. During those seven days Oscar was asked to recall information and detail that occurred in split seconds and that at the time was just not relevant to him. But when he can’t recall it, it is treated as suspicious or evasive by the prosecution.

What of Oscar as a person? He is caring and sensitive but also very focused, determined and driven. This is why he got to the top of his sport. He is a true dedicated elite sportsman. An Olympian. But he also has a much more vulnerable side. A double amputee from childhood he has had to adapt yet his vulnerability without his prosthetic limbs is very evident.

During my time with Oscar and those close to him, I have been left in no doubt Oscar is devastated and not through self pity. He is distraught due to the fact he killed someone whom he truly loved.

Overwhelmingly his communications and actions towards Reeva during their relationship show this very clearly. They were a newly courting couple, three months into their relationship and they had so much to look forward to. Indeed they were looking to build a future together.

The fact Oscar had a gun under his bed raises for me the very real fear many South Africans live with day in and day out, and the serious issue of gun laws. The fear of crime is usually always greater than the reality - and this is the case in so many countries. However the crime rate in South Africa really does make that ‘fear’ a ‘reality’.

During my visits to South Africa, I have heard so many stories of violent crime and house break-ins. Crime and in particular burglary drives fear - not the other way round. Gated communities exist and are not for show. The houses have huge fences and gates along with 24 hour armed security.

Oscar himself has been subject of burglaries and threats in the past which is not surprising given his huge celebrity status in South Africa.

Oscar’s very real fear was evident in a tweet he posted in November 2012. This tweet totally contradicts the prosecution’s belief that Reeva’s death was murder but totally supports Oscar account.

“Nothing like getting home to hear the washing machine on and thinking it’s an intruder to go into full combat recon mode into the pantry!”

Oscar had drawn his gun and it turned out to be his washing machine making the noise. However, had someone been downstairs it could have been a very different outcome.

Indeed the accidental shooting of a loved one in very similar circumstances to Oscar occurred in 2004 when former Springbok rugby player Rudi Sisagie shot and killed his daughter Marie. It occurred when Visagie was woken at 5am on a Sunday morning by the sound of his daughter’s car being driven off their drive.

Visagie thinking his car was being stolen grabbed his loaded 7.65mm pistol and fired through the bedroom window at the driver, killing them. It was his daughter, who he mistook for a thief. Rudi Visagie was arrested and charged with murder. Three months later the state dropped charges on humanitarian grounds. His daughter’s death had been punishment enough.

And what of the police’s account when you compare it with Oscar’s? Two accounts but only one which has been consistent. Oscar’s account has remained almost entirely the same with the exception of small additional information which he has provided when individual elements have been explored in detail. Yet the police have, from the very beginning, made assumptions and changed their accounts. Their version of events has repeatedly been shown to be inconsistent and inaccurate.

One element which the police have looked to rely on in order to build their case of murder against Oscar is based on neighbours who claim to have heard a woman screaming. Given the location, issues of how sound travels and the fact that people claim to have been woken from their sleep, these accounts alone need to be treated with the greatest of care.

Crucially the prosecution never set to undertake sound tests in line with its version of events - testing the exact gun, bat or repeating the screaming from Oscar’s house to the relevant witness’s house under the same or very similar conditions.

When I was in the police, we would regularly gets reports of the sound of a woman screaming which would nearly always turn out to be a fox.

Another major concern is the actions of the police and the investigating officer Detective Botha who had a history of dealing with Oscar. It seems to me he had clearly made his mind up quickly and made some very damaging assumptions. Remember this is the man, a serving police detective at the time, who was later removed from the case and who was charged with attempted murder in an unconnected case. He retired from the police ahead of the trial.

It is important to remember during the initial search of his home. Oscar had watches and other items stolen and subsequently the crime scene preservation and examination has certainly been identified as being very poor.

State prosecutor Gerrie Nel gestures during the trial of Oscar Pistorius at the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.  

For the last five months Oscar and Reeva’s lives have played out as if it were a drama in front of a worldwide TV audience. Oscar is on trial charged with premeditated murder, two separate unrelated indictments with regards to discharge of a firearm in a public place and one count of illegal possessing of ammunition.

And finally in a matter of days Oscar will learn his fate. His future and freedom sits with a former social worker turned crime reporter and now presiding Judge in what is arguable the most high profile court case in decades. No jury system exists in South Africa so the final decision rests with Judge Thokozile Masipa along with her two assessors to decide if Oscar is guilty of the crimes he has been charged with.

In respect of the charge of murder, I believe the police carried out a very poor investigation with contamination of the crime scene and the loss of evidence. They fall a long way short from proving murder to any degree pre-meditated or otherwise.

Oscar admits to killing Reeva but it is up to the Judge to decide if she believes Oscar and his account that he believed an intruder was in the house, or if, as the prosecution claim, Oscar planned to kill his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

If Judge Masipa decides Oscar planned the murder of Reeva then he will be guilty of premeditated murder with a minimum sentence being 25 years in jail. The alternative verdict could be one of murder but not pre-mediated in which case Oscar will get a minimum of 15 years.

If not guilty of pre-meditated murder or murder then the Judge will have to decide on the second option of ‘culpable homicide’ ‘Culpable homicide is the closest charge to one of manslaughter which we have in the UK. The question which must be asked is: ‘Were Oscar’s actions reasonable?’ If the Judge believes he believed an intruder was in the house and he acted reasonably then he is not guilty. However if she decides his actions were not reasonable, based on the reckless firing of the gun then he is guilty of culpable homicide.

Again for exactly the same reasons as being found not guilty of murder, I believe Oscar should not be found guilty of culpable homicide because he genuinely believed an intruder was in his house and he was in danger. 

In respect of the two charges of discharge of a firearm in a public place, it is now accepted that in regarding to one of these charges, the discharge in the restaurant, Oscar should be found guilty.

However, the evidence for the other charge of discharge of a firearm is highly questionable and contradictory and I believe on this charge he should be acquitted.

In regards to the possession on ammunition, this should never have been charged. The police found the ammunition during the house search following the murder, in a safe on the ground floor.

The ammunition was with some of Oscar’s medals and rather than seize it, the police gave the ammunition and medals to a family member to take home. Days later the police contacted the family member and asked them to bring back the ammunition. The police then charged Oscar with unlawful possession. I believe this is an abuse of process and dereliction of police duty.

Throughout all of my time with Oscar and his family, and my considering of the case, I have kept the tragic events of the early morning of the 14th February 2013 at the forefront of my mind. On that morning Reeva’s life was cut short in its prime as a result of what I believe were the reactions of a very frightened man reacting instinctively.

Yes he had discharged a firearm in a public place and for that he should serve a community sentence but I don’t believe he is guilty of murder and or culpable homicide.

However, for Oscar no punishment will live up to the torment he will have to live with for the rest of his life.

I'm adding the link for MWT's latest scoop, the text of which Tony has posted above.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

.....................

Here you have it folks, Mark Williams-Thomas, all-round crime expert, has declared Oscar Pistorius innocent.

[willowthewisp]

Perhaps MWT would have liked to swapped places with Reeva Steenkamp, being behind the Bathroom Toilet Door eh MWT on that fateful evening as part of a re-enactment of the crime scene,with special calibre bullets to ascertain more damage to the target?
MWT shouldn't be given the time of day on television, if he is stating an accident over Reeva Steenkamp's Death, as I may be wrong but, didn't he spend a lot of time on the unsolved Jill Dando Murder, which one Hamish Campbell was the lead Detective, who tried to frame Barry George as the killer?
If Jill Dando was about to blow the lid on the BBC over it's cover up of paedophiles working for the organisation, why hasn't he found Jill's killer with his apparent expert knowledge on these possible related abuses of children, were he investigated a cigar smoking champion of good causes?
It is a good job we have people who are able to remind people of their involvements to past Crimes, that are still unsolved that they had some capacity of input on investigations,eg Madeleine McCann, disappearance,MWT?

[Liz Eagles]

I've just watched a catch up episode (the first part of a four part series) on ITV player of 'The Investigator' by Mark Williams Thomas, which looks at the disappearance of Carole Packman in 1985.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

After watching it, I went onto youtube to see if the second episode was available and got this:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Yes, Simon Cowell has joined forces with Mark Williams Thomas to launch a crime series.

I kid you not.

It is described as a stylized drama documentary. I can't believe how accurate those words are. It's so faux and padded out.

[Jill Havern]

Mark Williams-Thomas is some crime investigator if he can't even get the Madeleine case right.

He's rubbish.

And he's blocked me on twitter!