fbpx
Log in

Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Create an account

Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.
Name *
Username *
Password *
Verify password *
Email *
Verify email *
Captcha *

Sir Cliff Richard - a villain or a victim?

cliffrichardSir Cliff Richard has maintained a low profile in Portugal this week while preparing for a return to Britain to face police questioning about his alleged sexual assault on a young boy. 

 

Many thought it almost inevitable that Sir Cliffwould one day be investigated for alleged child abuse and yet when the news broke it came as a shock.

 

The allegation of sexual impropriety was quickly eclipsed by a scandal in which investigating police and the BBC have been accused of collusion and orchestrating a public spectacle that has been branded a ‘witch-hunt.’

 

Sir Cliff, who was relaxing at his holiday home in the Algarve, suddenly found himself named and shamed globally because of a single complaint from an unknown individual about an as yet unverified assault nearly 30 years ago.

 

The way in which the police and media have handled the matter remains highly questionable. Serious ethical questions have been raised.

 

For starters, should someone be publicly identified by the police and have their name splashed on TV and in newspapers before they have even been interviewed let alone charged?

 

Gossip about the singing star’s sexuality had been rife for decades, of course. And since the outpouring of revelations about Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris and other entertainers, the Internet has been abuzz with suggestions that Sir Cliff would sooner or later be exposed as a paedophile.

 

The shock news hit the headlines last Thursday (14th August) with a live-on-TV police raid on Sir Cliff’s Berkshire home. When eight plain-clothed police officers arrived in five unmarked cars to search Sir Cliff’s penthouse property within a gated community, a BBC helicopter was already hovering overhead and another camera crew was at the front gate.

 

The BBC led with a report that the search, which lasted five hours, had been instigated by an alleged historical sex offence involving a boy under the age of 16.

 

Just a few hours before the raid, Sir Cliff had left his Algarve vineyard estateand travelled to the Alentejo with his youngest sister, Joan Pilgrim. They returned the next day.

 

By then Sir Cliff had described the sexual assault allegation as “completely false” and expressed anger that the police had apparently alerted the press before contacting him.

 

The following day, the galloping story of the search and assault claim appeared on the front page of most of Britain’s national papers and in many others around the world. Most people on the planet not otherwise preoccupied by a nearby war were soon aware that the iconic singer was in big trouble.

 

Trolls galore rushed to make asinine comments on social media. Droves of devoted fans countered with expressions of support on Facebook and Twitter, but it was already too late. As the saying goes, mud sticks.

 

What exactly had Sir Cliff done to deserve all this? It was far from clear, but obviously the media had enthusiastically latched on to the fact that Sir Cliff is famous and in danger of becoming infamous.

 

Apparently the allegation against him came from a man in his 40s who had watched a TV documentary about Jimmy Saville and then contacted the producer of the programme, the investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas. The allegation and other information was duly passed on by Williams-Thomas to Metropolitan Police Service detectives conducting the Operation Yewtree sexual abuse inquiry.

 

Last weekend the South Yorkshire Police revealed they had been contacted “weeks ago” by a BBC reporter who had found out about their supposedly highly confidential investigation into Sir Cliff’s alleged assault, said to have taken place in 1985 at an event in Sheffield that featured the US preacher Billy Graham.

 

The South Yorkshire Police said they had been “reluctant” to co-operate with the BBC, but believed if they did not the BBC would run the story anyway, potentially jeopardising the police investigation.

 

So the police struck a deal whereby the BBC was given exclusive information in advance of the Berkshire raid in return for delaying publication of their story.

 

Amid a flurry of reported denials, claims and counter claims from both the police and the BBC, Keith Vaz, chairman of the House of Commons home affairs committee, said: “The police have a duty to act with fairness and integrity. Incalculable damage can be done to the reputation of individuals in circumstances such as this.”

 

Former attorney general Dominic Grieve called the police’s handling of the case “odd.” A prominent human rights lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson, questioned both the judgement of the BBC and legality of the search warrant used by the police.

 

Former home secretary David Davis said the “extraordinary decision” of the police to allow filming outside Sir Cliff's home demonstrated that there is “something sick at the heart of Britain’s police and justice system.”

 

The police condemned the live coverage in an official letter of complaint to the BBC’s director-general, pointing out that the corporation appeared to have contravened its own editorial guidelines.

 

Despite all the huffing and puffing, the police expressed gratitude for the press publicity on the search because it resulted in a number of people coming forward with further information. They would not say whether the callers included more alleged victims or potential witnesses, but the plot was thickening.

 

So far, the police and the media had blackened a person’s name even though that person had not been confronted with any evidence of wrongdoing or given an opportunity to properly respond.

 

While being buoyed by a tight coterie of friends and advisers, Sir Cliff’s has had a visit from a highly-rated British solicitor, Ian Burton, whose legal firm has represented the likes of former Harrod’s owner Mohamed Al-Fayed, football manager Harry Redknapp, PR agent Max Clifford and TV celebrity Nigel Lawson. Ian Burton enjoys the reputation of being a particularly tough and canny lawyer adept at nipping criminal investigations in the bud.

 

_______ 

 

Len Port 2014

 

Len Port has been a journalist for 50 years, working as a staff reporter, broadcaster and freelance correspondent for many leading news organisations. He covered events in the Far east in the Sixties, and in Northern Ireland and South Africa in the Seventies. Since moving to Portugal in the early Eighties, he has edited regional magazines, contributed to national dailies in Britain and written several books, two of which are currently available as ebooks with Amazon.

Pin It

Comments  

+1 #12 Donald McDonald 2014-08-24 16:46
Here we have the Brits openly appealing to anyone with suggestions to come forward. Those suggested names being openly published in the national media.

So how would Portugal have even begun to track down a Jihadi Joao ? Given his right to total anonymity - however suspect he is !

Yet in Portugal you can be the victim or perpetrator of a stabbing - as in the lunchtime news today - and friends and family cannot refer to you.

The TV interviewer presumably stopping local people for comment saying 'You knew this 'unknown' man. When talking to the camera remember - you must not say his name. Because I must not know his name either and I will report you to this policeman standing behind me so that you are charged - if you state his name.'

No wonder the feet and hands are filmed so often !

As a victim - what if you have say a peniccilin allergy? At what stage does your identity get revealed, even to medical staff ?
+6 #11 chiptheduck 2014-08-24 12:06
I'm not surprised the BBC took such a great interest. After all they seem to have been a breeding ground for paedophiles for decades, so perhaps the BBC's executives are looking over their shoulders.
In my view there should be an in depth investigation into the BBC following immediate suspension of their Board.
0 #10 Bendix 2014-08-23 20:35
Thanks Henrik .... next time you are back in Scandinavia tell your friends about another oddity about Portuguese Police investigations.

That the only finger prints they hold are for those already convicted and in prison. So someone's finger prints could be repeatedly at the same type of crime scene - say an ATM robbery - but, if never caught AND CONVICTED, those finger prints are never kept.

Yet the PJ have just annonced a new multi-million euro facility in Lisbon, paid for by Brussels, that includes state of the art finger printing facilities.

All of northern Europe must ask .... having paid these millions - Is Brussels trying to tell Lisbon PJ something ??? :sad:
-3 #9 Henrik Jacobsen 2014-08-23 17:01
Excellently perceptive points from Bendix, Clarissa and Enid about the Portuguese Police not differentiating when someone goes missing between those 'at risk' to themselves and those who are 'a risk' to others. So neither gets any publicity.

But they are clearly foreigners. Quite possibly British?

If you expect a coherent explanation, you will not get it ! You expect too much !

It is inexplicable ....
+5 #8 RCK 2014-08-22 20:16
Quoting Peter Booker:
Am I alone in deploring the current spate of allegations of sexual misconduct from decades ago? How far are we, or any court of law, able to come to any reasonable conclusion about events which may or may not have occurred 30 years ago, when the whole process depends on the word of one person against that of another, and when standards of behaviour were different? These allegations run the risk of being labelled copycat processes, and the instigators labelled as seekers after notoriety or lucre. Is there no time limit to such an allegation?

Another issue is the naming by police or by the media of those against whom allegations have been made. Inevitably thrown mud will stick, and any hope of fair play or lack of bias will disappear. Fair play used to be considered an English virtue.

The past is indeed another country.
No you are not alone Peter. You have expressed very eloquently precisely what I myself have been thinking.
-2 #7 Enid 2014-08-22 18:07
Bendix and Clarissa are clearly making strong points - and getting the usuall silence in response.

It is fascinating now seeing on national TV, increasingly, ordinary citizens not satisfied with their Portuguese Police activity or non-activity. The Meco parents again and currently these missing elderly .

It becomes obvious that the mistake the McCanns made, in understandably taking Murat's advice onboard that they must generate their own publicity - was to do just that - in spades. Worldwide.

Because the Portuguese Police will not publicise anyone missing - at risk or not.

Whilst mentioning Murat - it is again obvious that his reputation had to be destroyed, because he had grown up in Portugal !

But the Portuguese press and the other trolls never held back an inch in rubbishing Murat and the McCanns !

And true to form the Police make the 3 Brits arguido's to stop publicity ! As any ordinary Portuguese fears !
-3 #6 Clarissa Thompson 2014-08-22 15:54
To paraphrase - sometimes the forgotten but not insignificant point that Richard Salgardo may indeed be totally innocent and all this rumour and conjecture that may have been instigated because of his dislike of "correct banking" behaviour.

Not correct british english grammar syntax (lend himself to be in a position - oh dear !!! )- so obviously no answer coming back to old Bendix on his perfectly reasonable question comparing a fundamental difference between 'modern' countries policing ie publicity to find people, wanted notices.

And todays Portugal's Police 'man hunts'; done in total secrecy regardless of whether someone is 'at risk' or 'a risk'.

Are Portuguese Police reluctance to naming someone solely due to a centuries old awareness that that someone may actually be SOMEONE - and will 'BITE' back ?

Being Portuguese justice - regardless of whether Guilty or not ? As we shall see with Ricardo Salgardo.
+6 #5 Robin Bradford 2014-08-22 10:53
Of course there is sometimes the forgotten but not insignificant point that Richard may indeed be totally innocent and all this rumour and conjecture that may have been instigated because of his dislike of "laddish" behaviour - will lend himself to be in a position where he can legitimately and probably will sue both the BBC, it's investigative reporter, the Yorkshire police and individuals who have written or spoken defamatory comments - civil damages equivalent to the loss of income for the remainder of his life, together with claims for all his costs that may run into years, plus emotional hurt etc - this could conservatively amount in the case of a top UK celebrity filing for £400m - yes half a billion pounds, proportionally claimed through the courts from the police, broadcasters, reporters and individuals - it is worth noting Lord McAlpine did, with some ease trawl the internet and sue for just about any tweet, Facebook or defamatory comment on the Internet.
+2 #4 Bendix 2014-08-22 10:08
the police expressed gratitude for the press publicity on the search because it resulted in a number of people coming forward with further information.....

Cliff refers to 'earlier complaints' - of which he was cleared. As we know with Saville, that was happening 20 years ago with ' Brit. celebrities'. Which explains why he must have assumed it possible this would surface again.

And, knowing this, explains the BBC running with the story.

To a Brit. - It still does not explain the total silence and zero publicity of Portuguese Police when they are looking for someone. As currently - a frail elderly or years ago, as with the McCanns 3 year old infant - but both needing to be found fast as being 'at risk'.

But zero publicity likewise by the Portuguese Police when searching for highly dangerous murderers and prison escapees ... who are 'A RISK'. No name - no face. NO CRIMEWATCH !

A major difference !!! :sad:
+11 #3 chez 2014-08-22 09:16
The so-called "tough and canny" Mr Burton wasn't able stop "I'm innocent" Max Clifford from prison! But after all, if Sir Cliff says he's innocent why shouldn't we believe him, the media believed him when he said he wasn't a homosexual.

You must be a registered user to make comments.
Please register here to post your comments.