Book recommendations.

[FISHY1118]

In the first trial there were 4 complainants and and 12 counts.

One complainant who was responsible one count was dismissed later on appeal. Leaving 3 complainants and 11 counts still standing.

So not including the first and second trials , does the book give any evidence that might change ones mind regarding the victims version of events that led of the remaining original 11 convictions that still apply today.?

[Herlock Sholmes]

So not including the first and second trials , does the book give any evidence that might change ones mind regarding the victims version of events that led of the remaining original 11 convictions that still apply today.?

The 11 convictions do remain from the first trial. The writer does go into one (or maybe more) of them. He says this in the ‘conclusion’ section:

“The calls for a retrial have come not just from Rolf Harris supporters but also from leading barristers who have read the judgments and studied the evidence that led to the convictions. Should there be a retrial? The answer to that is a resounding YES. Will there be a retrial? The answer to that is no. The chance of the Appeal Court allowing a retrial is very slim. Even if a retrial were granted, there is no way that the Harris family would want Rolf to go through this again. He is now in his nineties and, contrary to speculation in the media, his resources are limited.”

Obviously it’s up to individuals to come to their own opinions Fishy but all that I’d say is we shouldn’t just go with what appears in the newspapers. There is much more to it than that though of course it’s a very sensitive subject that none of us would want anyone to escape justice on. I certainly had no preconceptions about the case until I read about it. Operation Yew Tree was a huge crusade in the wake of the clearly guilty Savile. We only have to look at the list of exonerated celebrities to give us at least pause for though. When the Press jump on board and paint someone as a monster it’s difficult for people to see otherwise. It all began with the accusation of Wendy Rosher. This is what branded Harris and let to an outpouring of hatred. Then when it was announced that alleged victims would automatically be believed, that they would have anonymity and that they could get £200,000 it’s perhaps unsurprising that people came forward. It should at least give cause for doubt especially, and this is vital, now that we know for certain that the first alleged victim clearly made her accusation up. I do have to stress this. There is absolutely no doubt that Harris never met her.

Anyway Fishy. The book is there and I think that it’s worth a look. Others might disagree.

[FISHY1118]

Perhaps in the end somewhere in all this lies the truth , theres more i could say but i wont go int that as you said its a senitive subject one that im all to familiar with . But having studied and followed the case with close attention when it was covered by our Aust media extensively, i have formed my own opinion which ill keep to myself . Maybe there were false claims made by some, some may also be telling the truth, the remaining 11 convictions may well attest to that . Seeings how the appeal for the convictions was rejected which covered the 1st trial , and never re applied for by his Lawyers at the time,this one detail might sway peoples opinions in favour of those perticular victims.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Perhaps in the end somewhere in all this lies the truth , theres more i could say but i wont go int that as you said its a senitive subject one that im all to familiar with . But having studied and followed the case with close attention when it was covered by our Aust media extensively, i have formed my own opinion which ill keep to myself . Maybe there were false claims made by some, some may also be telling the truth, the remaining 11 convictions may well attest to that . Seeings how the appeal for the convictions was rejected which covered the 1st trial , and never re applied for by his Lawyers at the time,this one detail might sway peoples opinions in favour of those perticular victims.

But the appeal was against one of the ones from the first trial. To sum up, over the 3 trials, there were 11 separate complainants. Of the 11 there were 3 guilty’s and 8 not guilty’s.

[Ms Diddles]

I’ve just finished a real cracker of a true crime book. It’s the Dublin Railways Murders by Thomas Morris. It’s about the bloody murder of a railway cashier in Dublin 1856 called George Little. One man was tried for the murder but found innocent although many believed him guilty. This is a really well written book which keeps you interested all the way through. Some books imo tend to add pointlessly irrelevant detail simply as padding but there’s none of that here. Definitely recommended.

Curiously the last two books that I’ve got from Amazon are both signed copies despite not being advertised as such. I might order The Pickwick Papers next

Thanks for this tip, Herlock.

I was looking for something a bit different to read and gave this a shot on your recommendation.

I really enjoyed it.

It was extremely well written and well researched.

I liked the historical context too of Dublin (and bits of rural Ireland) after the famine.

I second your recommendation.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thanks for this tip, Herlock.

I was looking for something a bit different to read and gave this a shot on your recommendation.

I really enjoyed it.

It was extremely well written and well researched.

I liked the historical context too of Dublin (and bits of rural Ireland) after the famine.

I second your recommendation.

Cheers Ms D. I really liked that one.

[Ms Diddles]

A few years ago I went out for a drink with an old mate and a few others. One of the others was his brother who was a Solicitor and we got talking about crime. Someone mentioned Jimmy Savile and someone else mentioned the celebrities who had been arrested and found not guilty after lengthy periods (Cliff Richard, Paul Gambaccini, Jim Davidson, Jonathan King, Dave Lee Travis [apart from one trumped up charge]). Then the conversation got around to Rolf Harris. A couple of those present were quite vocal in their opinion which was the opinion expressed in all of the media. The solicitor though said “I wouldn’t be so quick to judge if I were you.” He then starting talking about ‘witch hunts’ after Savile and pointed out about the Carl Beech who spoke about being abused by a huge government level paedophile ring (which included murder) involving well known names like Leon Brittany and others. The guy was found to be a liar and he’s now serving a lengthy sentence. Anyway the solicitor said that he knew of quite a few people, intelligent, educated, legally-minded people, who had very serious doubts about Harris’s conviction after a virtual trial by media; especially in the wake of the undoubtedly guilty Savile.

After this I did a bit of checking up online, there’s a group campaigning for him, and found some extremely alarming facts. Not conspiracy stuff or wild imaginings or just a desperate family trying to salvage a reputation either. Proper, provable facts. Then a few days ago I saw an Ebook written by a former NZ police officer who was brought in for as an investigator on Harris’s 2nd and 3rd trial. It’s called Rolf Harris: The Defence teams Special Investigator reveals the truth behind the trials by William Merritt.

Miscarriage of justice cases get plenty of interest and traction but less so when alleged crimes of this type are involved because of our very natural revulsion but this book is worth reading. It might not be a ‘popular’ opinion but I do think that that Harris was probably the victim of a miscarriage of justice and was part of this witch hunt. A combination action of the ‘no win no fee’ offers and the guarantees of anonymity are real temptations and while all potential victims should be listened to with sympathy and fairness (something that certainly hasn’t always happened in the past especially in rape and sexual assault cases) it was made public at the time that possible victims “will be believed.” So an assumption of honesty?

He had three trials. In the first there were 4 complainants, Harris had no investigator working for him and so was completely reliant on police evidence and he was found guilty on all. In the second and third there were a total of 7 complainants, by this time he had his own investigators to look into the evidence thoroughly and he was found either not guilty or the jury could convict on all complaints. To add to this, at the first trial the very first complainant was the most serious because she was very young at the time of the alleged offence (8 years old rather than a teenager) so this set the tone for people’s opinion of Harris. They took this one to the Appeal Court and it was shown categorically that Harris had never met her and it was 100% proven that he’d never been at the venue that was claimed. The charge was thrown out on appeal. The doubts about the 3 remaining complainants just mount up.

With Savile you had so many people claiming over the years that everyone knew that he was ‘creepy.’ It was common knowledge. There’s just none of that with Harris. He had 2 affairs but one of the girls claimed that it began before she was 18 but the evidence doesn’t back this up. This is a worrying case and a book worth reading imo.

Hi Herlock,

By sheer coincidence I was out at my friends house for dinner last night.

There was a woman there who told a story about Rolf Harris grabbing her bum when she was waitressing at an event in Henley on Thames aged 17.

She was completely credible and it would be fair to say that everyone who heard the story was 100% inclined to believe her.

Now, I get that in terms of evidence "some woman from the casebook forum met another woman who claimed to have been manhandled by Harris" is on a par with "a bloke down the pub told me..."!

Also she was not underage when the incident occurred, but I thought it was interesting in light of the discussion on here.

Sounds like there are some people who can attest to his "creepiness" after all.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

By sheer coincidence I was out at my friends house for dinner last night.

There was a woman there who told a story about Rolf Harris grabbing her bum when she was waitressing at an event in Henley on Thames aged 17.

She was completely credible and it would be fair to say that everyone who heard the story was 100% inclined to believe her.

Now, I get that in terms of evidence "some woman from the casebook forum met another woman who claimed to have been manhandled by Harris" is on a par with "a bloke down the pub told me..."!

Also she was not underage when the incident occurred, but I thought it was interesting in light of the discussion on here.

Sounds like there are some people who can attest to his "creepiness" after all.

Hi Ms D,

Yes, who knows. Maybe in the case as a whole an element of truth is combined with an element of jumping on the bandwagon? Also there certainly was a culture in the fairly recent past where this kind of unacceptable behaviour was considered par for the course and ‘harmless.’ We’ll never know the full truth and any historical case is fraught with problems especially when it’s one persons word against another’s.

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms D,

Yes, who knows. Maybe in the case as a whole an element of truth is combined with an element of jumping on the bandwagon? Also there certainly was a culture in the fairly recent past where this kind of unacceptable behaviour was considered par for the course and ‘harmless.’ We’ll never know the full truth and any historical case is fraught with problems especially when it’s one persons word against another’s.

It's a tricky one, isn't it?

I have always disliked the old "there's no smoke without fire" saying, as that outlook has ruined many innocent peoples lives over the years.

You are of course quite correct in that such behaviour was deemed "harmless fun" during the era in question.

Well, it certainly was by the perpetrators and the institutions which enabled them. Less so by the victims of the unsolicited attention.

I'd say don't feel too bad for Harris if you think that there's a chance he's innocent of the charges.

He is at the very least an arse-grabber!!

[bjgourley]

Halfway through Lost Girls (Gilgo beach et al) and Robert Anderson was right, great book, but so hard to follow the timeline.

[Abby Normal]

Halfway through Lost Girls (Gilgo beach et al) and Robert Anderson was right, great book, but so hard to follow the timeline.

yes good book. I cant remember if they named him, but the LISK is JohnBittrolff, in prison for the murder and dismemberment of two sex workers just prior to the gilgo beach victims disapearances. He lived in manorville, LI (where several links to victims were found) and partial DNA was matched. He was a hunter and used a shed in his back yard where he cut up his game, and probably his victims too. The prosecutor in his case named him a suspect in the gilgo beach murders and the killings stopped after he was arrested and imprisoned for the afore mentioned crimes.

[bjgourley]

yes good book. I cant remember if they named him, but the LISK is JohnBittrolff, in prison for the murder and dismemberment of two sex workers just prior to the gilgo beach victims disapearances. He lived in manorville, LI (where several links to victims were found) and partial DNA was matched. He was a hunter and used a shed in his back yard where he cut up his game, and probably his victims too. The prosecutor in his case named him a suspect in the gilgo beach murders and the killings stopped after he was arrested and imprisoned for the afore mentioned crimes.

I think Bittrolff is one LISK, though I don't think he's responsible for all the killings. Also, I would assume they moved their dumpsite as opposed to stopping the murders. Nobody in their right mind is going to dump another body there, that doesn't mean they stopped killing, that's all conjecture and/or wishful thinking. Then again, so is my opinion.

[Abby Normal]

I think Bittrolff is one LISK, though I don't think he's responsible for all the killings. Also, I would assume they moved their dumpsite as opposed to stopping the murders. Nobody in their right mind is going to dump another body there, that doesn't mean they stopped killing, that's all conjecture and/or wishful thinking. Then again, so is my opinion.

the killings and disapearances stopped after bittrolff was in prison. and there is no evidence that bodies were dumped anywhere else after they were discovered in and around gilgo beach. But After they discovered his first two victims cut up and stuffed in suitcase off the side of the highway, Bittrolff DID start dumping them somewhere else,in a more hidden location nearer to the beach.

And there might be a onesy or twosy in there that wast him, but the majority of victims were from the LISK, who was undoubtedly Bittrolff.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m going to recommend a book that I’m only half way through. It’s called Witchfinders by Malcolm Gaskill. Not surprisingly it’s about the Witchfinders of the Civil War era, notably Matthew Hopkins (of course) and John Stearne. This is a brilliantly written book that really evokes the atmosphere and paranoias of the time. A time when the supernatural (imps, and demons and witches) were an absolute reality to most people. At time when an unexplained illness or death could lead to an accusation and a trial. It reminded me a little of todays conspiracist paranoia and how it only takes one accusation against someone disliked. This is a cracker in my opinion.

The reason that I recommended it before I’d finished it was for UK readers. If you have a branch of The Works in your local town pop in and have a look. They’re on sale there. Worth £3 of anyone’s money.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve just started this book which I picked up on the shelf in Waterstones. It’s started really well.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/We-Keep-Dead-Close-Harvard/dp/1785151991