“Did North Yorks Police ‘fix it’ for Jim?”



“Did North Yorkshire Police ‘fix it’ for Jim?”

- by Tim Hicks

Sir James Savile, Freeman of the Borough of Scarborough, and recipient of a variety of civic honours including the re-naming of a street and even a statue (fortunately now cancelled) – is now commonly believed to be Britain’s most reviled and prolific child-abuser.

His high social standing – and the public honours accorded to him by SBC – are even more astounding given that North Yorkshire Police had access to ample intelligence that he was a member of a large, well-connected and very active paedophile ring that operated with impunity in Scarborough for over forty years.

Unfortunately the local press has no commitment to investigative journalism, preferring to avoid controversy by publishing only bland local news and press releases supplied by the Council.  Consequently national press coverage has focused on his activities in the BBC, London and Leeds; only the Daily/Sunday Express has given the Scarborough connection any quality coverage.  To address this ‘Corruption Busters’ have initiated an investigation using local contacts unavailable to the national newspapers and some new information has emerged as a result.

The facts about Britain’s most prolific child-abuser and his activities in the Borough of Scarborough are as follows:

  • From 1964 until his death in 2011, Jimmy Savile lived much of his life in Scarborough, According to the Metropolitan Police Operation Yewtree, Savile was abusing children from 1959 until about 2006.
  • Saville was a very close friend of Peter Jaconelli, the well-known Scarborough ice-cream magnate and ‘big-wheel’ at both SBC and NYCC, from the time he arrived in Scarborough until Jaconelli’s death in 1999.  He was also close friends with Scarborough amusement arcade operator, Jimmy Corrigan (deceased) who owned an amusement arcade in the town until his death.

  • It would appear (from press reports, local contacts who knew them both and from common knowledge) that Jaconelli was well-known locally for his homosexuality. Both he and Corrigan had a reputation for their predilection for minors. They employed young people in their businesses which by their nature, attracted other vulnerable youngsters.
  • In the 1960’s, Savile frequented the Scarborough Bowling Alley much-favoured by young musicians on the local music scene, with their customary entourage of young girls. Consequently, all three men had close contact with young people, no doubt facilitated by Savile’s charm and Pop/media status, and the enormous influence that Jaconelli and Corrigan wielded locally.
  • Local enquiries have ascertained that Savile was a frequent visitor to Scarborough Hospital, Scarborough College (a local grammar school), Throxenby Hall (a care-home for distressed children), Graham School, Woodlands School and Raincliffe School (all in Scarborough). This has to be a matter of grave concern, because although there is no evidence that children from these institutions were abused, it is also clear that Savile has abused children and other young patients at virtually every institution he visited – including schools and hospitals.
  • North Yorkshire Police have confirmed that two women have recently come forward, alleging that they were sexually abused in Scarborough, in the late ‘Sixties and late ‘Eighties, respectively.  Consequently, it appears to be a valid deduction that he was committing sexual offences against young people when he was in Scarborough.

Seaside towns have always been magnets for runaways and other vulnerable young people from unsettled backgrounds. Therefore, one would expect Scarborough Police to have been  alert to the risk of young people being abused and corrupted.  One would expect them to plan their local policing and intelligence gathering accordingly, thereby proactively seeking to detect this type of offence and thereby to protect young children in the community.

Yet a North Yorkshire Police spokesperson has stated:

When the allegations surrounding Jimmy Savile were publicised, we carried out extensive searches of force records which did not reveal a local connection.

– thereby completely and conveniently excusing NYP from any responsibility for their failure to arrest Savile, although it is blatantly obvious that a prominent local connection did exist.

Having established the following timeline of events, I find the official line of North Yorkshire Police lacking all credibility:

1958: Savile was interviewed under caution by West Yorkshire Police over allegations that he had abused young girls at the Mecca Locarno Ballroom in Leeds where he was manager. It has been alleged, by one of his associates at the time, that he bribed West Yorkshire Police Officers to drop the charges and that he routinely bribed Police Officers.

1971: Allegations were made that Savile was involved with a 15-year-old dancer from Top of the Pops who committed suicide. The investigation was led by a Detective Chief Superintendent and Savile was interviewed as a witness.

Late 1970s: Allegations were made that Savile had been abusing patients at Stoke Mandeville Hospital and this was reported to Buckinghamshire Police.

April 2000: In the excellent Louis Theroux documentary ‘When Louis Met Jimmy Savile’, Savile admitted that journalists had raised allegations that he was a paedophile.  He also boasted that he tied up young people and held them captive in the basement of the Mecca Lucarno Ballroom and of his ability to pervert Police investigations so that consequently he was left completely alone by them, despite the very serious offences he admitted.

2003: North Yorkshire Police conducted a major paedophile investigation in Scarborough. Two men were jailed for abusing girls in the ‘Eighties – John Thomas White was jailed for 20 sex offences. Another man, Brian Rutter, was later cleared on appeal. According to press reports, there were rumours about Savile during that investigation (which the police must presumably have known), yet they ignored this line of enquiry and Savile was never even interviewed by North Yorkshire Police.

The report then goes on to state that North Yorkshire Police believed that a number of paedophiles were operating within the Scarborough area, including a man who abused children at his caravan overlooking the seaside resort.  In the April 2000 documentary, Savile boasted that he had a Caravan in Scarborough where he took girls for sex. It therefore appears probable that the man who featured in the North Yorkshire Police  investigation was in fact Savile and he was using his caravan in Scarborough to commit sexual offences against children. Yet North Yorkshire Police did not make this connection.

2004: During the trial, it was claimed that there were no shortage of young girls drifting around Scarborough seafront in the 1980s, and no shortage of older men prepared to take advantage of them. North Yorkshire Police was clearly aware of the potential for this type of offence in Scarborough and had a duty to actively combat it.

2007: Savile was interviewed under caution by Surrey Police over allegations that he had abused schoolgirls at Duncroft Approved School in the 1970’s.

2008: Sussex Police initiated an investigation into Savile over a sexual assault in Worthing in 1970.

2008: Jersey Police confirmed in 2008 that an allegation of an indecent assault by Savile, in the 1970s, at the Haut de la Garenne children’s home had been investigated.

2008: Savile started legal proceedings over articles linking him to Haut de la Garenne which initially he denied having visited, but later admitted that he had done so, following the publication of a photograph showing him there.

2012: Last week, two women contacted Scarborough’s local paper separately, claiming that Police Officers interviewed them in 2003 while investigating a paedophile ring that targeted young girls on the seafront. They were not abused, but both said Savile’s name was mentioned to them by the in vestigating Officers. One woman told the Daily Express that Police also mentioned Mr Peter Jaconelli and Mr Jimmy Corrigan. This constitutes independent confirmation by two separate witnesses that North Yorkshire Police were aware of paedophile activity in Scarborough and of Savile’s part in it.

All of this information was, or should have been, available to North Yorkshire Police through open sources, via the Police National Computer, through contacts with local people, from interviews with victims and the observations of Police Officers on the beat in the community throughout forty years and the considerable amount of Police intelligence, developed by their own investigations.

Yet Savile was never even interviewed by North Yorkshire Police.

People that work with vulnerable and young people are required to be vetted, but this was also apparently ignored.

North Yorkshire County Council,  (the Local Education Authority) should also have been notified so schools could be protected.

In summary; the most prolific child-sex predator in the history of the UK operated alone and within a high profile paedophile ring in Scarborough for forty-two years, and although his offending has been covered in the national press and was well-known to journalists, to his colleagues, to local people and to SIX other Police Forces, North Yorkshire Police claim they knew nothing about it.

So why did North Yorkshire Police fail to protect the young people of Scarborough by detecting and arresting Savile?

There appear to be a number of possibilities:

  • North Yorkshire Police were clearly aware of a paedophile ring in Scarborough and successfully prosecuted one paedophile as a result of their investigation. The evidence was so strong and local knowledge of the paedophile ring so widespread that incompetence can probably be ruled out as an explanation for Savile’s offending with impunity.
  • We have identified that a Police Officer who served in North Yorkshire Police in the 1980’s was subsequently convicted of paedophile offences. However, we have no reason to believe that Savile, Jaconelli and Corrigan were protected by Police Officers who were themselves members of the ring. (Although we are aware of a case in West Yorkshire Police where it is alleged that a paedophile has been protected by fellow police officers).
  • DJ Paul Gambaccini has alleged publicly that it was “pretty widely known” that Savile had bribed Police Officers, although we have no evidence to suggest that he bribed Officers of the North Yorkshire Police. It appears that bribery of Police Officers was part of his modus operandi and a key factor in his success in evading arrest. Which Police Officers?
  • Jaconelli was a prominent local business man, Scarborough Councillor, County Councillor and the Mayor of Scarborough. Jimmy Saville was a major media personality connected at the highest levels in Yorkshire and nationally. Is it possible that North Yorkshire Police backed off from investigating Savile and His Worship Mayor Jaconelli because of their prominent positions in the local community?
  • Recently North Yorkshire Police tried to protect another high-profile and influential public figure – NYCC and SBC Councillor Jane Kenyon, (also Chair of the North Yorkshire Police Authority) – from further embarrassing press revelations, by interviewing a journalist under caution over a concocted allegation of harassment, seemingly because he was conducting an investigation into her expenses. This practice of ‘burying’ indiscretions and crimes of prominent local big wigs fits into a pattern of behavior by North Yorkshire Police.

Savile lived in Scarborough for over forty years, probably abused children for all of that time and, like former Mayor of Scarborough, County Councillor Peter Jaconelli, he was never inconvenienced by North Yorkshire Police at any time and completely escaped justice.

It is not well-known that Councillor Tom Fox served a thirty year career with the North Yorkshire Police, including a period as acting Head of the Scarborough Police division. He retired around 2000 and has since served as a prominent SBC Councillor and Leader for the past six years. A Real Whitby investigative journalist recently asked Councillor Fox the following question:

“Would the Leader confirm or deny that, as a former ranking Police Officer in Scarborough, and as long-serving leading Councillor since that time, he was aware that elements within the Authorities were cognisant of concerns of the gravest nature in respect of the activiites of Sir Jimmy Savile, yet nevertheless played a leading role in the lavish civic honours bestowed upon a man now widely reviled as the worst and most degenerate sexual predator inthe Borough’s history?”

Thus far, Councillor Tom Fox has offered no response – unless this statement to the Scarborough News (in regard to a proposal to strip Savile of his Freemanship of the Borough) can be considered a response:

“In addition, this council, in further acknowledgment of the serious predatory sexual allegations spanning over six decades, agrees that if the council had been aware of such revelations at the time of Sir Jimmy Savile’s nomination for ‘Honorary Freeman of the Borough of Scarborough’ the council would have refused it.”

That reads like a denial of all knowledge to me – one which has the same hollow ring to it as the one from North Yorkshire Police.


North Yorkshire Police were provided with the text of this article ahead of publication, to allow an opportunity for comment.

No comment has yet been forthcoming.

Share This Post

14 Responses to "“Did North Yorks Police ‘fix it’ for Jim?”"

  1. Peter Hofschröer  October 31, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    No answer yet. I wonder if I will ever get one…

    ——– Original Message ——–
    Subject: The Leeds Connection?
    Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:29:45 +0200
    From: Peter Hofschröer
    To: david.gray@met.police.uk
    CC: Imran.Beg@met.police.uk, Peter.R.Spindler@met.police.uk

    Dear Superintendent Gray,

    I’m sure you are being inundated with information on the Saville case, What I have to offer amounts to little more than suspicions at this stage and is probably not of use to you at present, but may help later in your enquiries.

    The “big picture”, as I have come to understand it from following the case, is that Saville operated as a procurer of children for prominent people – royalty, politicians, government officials, etc.

    To carry out these operations, he would need a supply of victims and enough influence to make sure he and his customers did not get found out.

    The obvious places to get victims would be schools and local authority homes, which would mean that teachers and social workers are involved. In the event of any victims reporting the abuse, he would have to be sure that the police, social services and local lawyers would not act.

    I do hope you follow my reasoning here.

    One of the places Saville lived was in Leeds and I have some information on abuse going on there which may be of interest.

    My 83 year-old mother Barbara Hofschröer is the victim of serious abuse, so serious the case has been raised in Parliament. Sadly, most abuse starts in the family and that is the case here. Her older son and grandchildren and the main abusers.

    The older son Robert Hofschröer is employed by York Social Service to run York & District Deaf Society, which operates throughout all of Yorkshire. He has easy access to deaf children, who by definition have difficulty in communicating with the world and make ideal silent victims.

    His daughter Diane Hofschröer works as a special needs teacher in Leeds. She too has access to vulnerable children, whose problems again make it difficult for them to communicate with the world.

    Some years ago, in the early stages of the abuse my mother was suffering, we went to our nearest Law Centre for advice. This is in Harefields & Chapeltown in Leeds, a deprived area of the city.

    It is on the other side of the Roundhay from where Jimmy Saville lived.

    We had a meeting with two lawyers there, Dionne Soloman and Sara Wilmot. It soon became very clear they were collaborating with the abusers, so we left in haste. I have obtained a copy of their meeting notes and can show that they lied and falsified the record.

    Judging by the way they went about this, they are well-versed in the methods of blocking abuse investigations.

    Bearing in mind this is a poor area of Leeds, then the only access to law local victims would have is through this Law Centre. Any complaints would not get any further.

    It gets worse.

    In my mother’s case of abuse, both North Yorkshire Police and York Social Services are actively involved in both the abuse and cover-up. I would refer you to one of the several questions asked by Lord Maginnis in Parliament on this case:

    http://www.epolitix.com/latestnews/article-detail/newsarticle/proper-delegation-please-not-abdication/

    The essential point Lord Maginnis made here was,

    > “The Hofschroer case has been on my desk for several years now. A widow in her 80s was dispossessed of her home in a way that implies collusion between certain family members and the Social Services. A son who has come to the rescue has been harried by the North Yorkshire police (that particularly dubious constabulary merits careful investigation) to the extent that he and his aged mother have been pursued through an Interpol warrant to their “refuge” in Austria.”

    The accusations of the collusion of my brother, my niece, the police and social services in the abuse of my mother are not being disputed.

    If my brother and niece are prepared to abuse their own mother and grandmother, then they are likely to be abusing others in their charge. If both the police and social services are colluding in this abuse, then my mother’s case is not likely to be isolated.

    Furthermore, there is a good deal of interchanging of personal in both the police and social services in the North-East, with Sir Norman Bettison being but one example. The same methods are likely to be employed in the entire region.

    And as mentioned above, there is likely to be a well-established local network. Let me give you an example of this based on my mother’s case in York.

    The main abusers include one social worker, my brother Robert Hofschröer, and one special needs teacher, my niece Diane Hofschröer.

    They have been given considerable support by the now ex-Inspector Colin Moreton, who was in charge of community policing in Acomb, York, before taking “early retirement” due to “ill-health”, then rejoining the police in a civilian capacity as community safety officer for neighbouring Selby. Selby’s MP and local councillors do not have a problem with a known abuser being in charge of community policing.

    My brother and niece have also been given considerable support by a local councillor, Tracey Simpson-Laing, who has the portfolio of adult social services in York.

    Moreton’s wife Helen works in a local hospice, where she too has access to vulnerable people.

    Here, we appear to have a network of influential people – police, social workers, politicians, council officials and lawyers – collaborating in the abuse of vulnerable people.

    Between them, they are in a position to cover up the abuse. Their attempts to silence me are now into their fifth year. In that time, several attempts have been made to arrest me, including one via Interpol. Had we not had a place of refuge abroad, then I have no doubt I would have been locked up a long time ago and my mother taken into “care”, where she would have died of “natural causes”.

    I have nothing to link Jimmy Saville to this directly, but I think it is very clear there is a well-established network of organised abuse in Yorkshire.

    As well as living in Leeds, Saville also had a home in Scarborough.

    I hope this information is of use and I would be happy to supply to documentation I have on this case.

    I appreciate you are probably inundated with reports and have stronger leads than this, but hope this information helps give you a picture of what is going on behind the scenes.

    Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

    Yours sincerely,
    Peter Hofschröer

    Reply
  2. Brenda McNamara  October 31, 2012 at 8:39 pm

    Wll written,and Well exposed ,how did this vile man get away with what he alledged too have done only by a big cover up job ,my god when will it stop ,his assocaites must be made accountable for,everyone of them ,for the vilefication and abuse that they have done no matter who they are ,clear the rats from the sewers ,cause thats what they are ,xxx god bless victims and survivors im an activist against child abuse aaged 68

    Reply
  3. Tim Thorne  November 1, 2012 at 12:51 am

    This part looks to be incorrect:

    “Savile lived in Scarborough for over forty years, probably abused children for all of that time and, like former Mayor of Scarborough, County Councillor Peter Jaconelli, he was never inconvenienced by North Yorkshire Police at any time and completely escaped justice.”

    There have been comments on the Scarborough Evening News that Peter Jaconelli was prosecuted for a sexual offence, not sure what specifically, but the comments are conflicting. One says he was prosecuted in York, another in Bournemouth and another somewhere else. They all say that the prosecution story never made it into the Scarborough Evening News for political reasons.

    Reply
    • Sarraceniac  November 1, 2012 at 6:24 am

      I do know that, like all the Jaconelli family, he was a ‘devout’ roman catholic, at least as far as the ritual was concerned, who went to mass at least once a week but never seems to have actually taken communion. I’m not sure how the catholic church works on this, which I find rather strange behaviour, but I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall at one of his confessions.

      Reply
      • narniagirl60  February 27, 2013 at 10:47 pm

        Confession (or ‘Reconciliation’) is to prepare one for receiving Holy Communion – if he did not take Communion, he did not confess either..

        Reply
  4. Jane Swales  November 1, 2012 at 10:14 am

    #Nigel.

    If you contact your old (London) drummer, he will give you my phone number. I have some information (from S in the early nineties). I am sure you will find it very useful.

    Reply
    • Nigel Ward  November 1, 2012 at 4:01 pm

      Sorted. Invaluable. Thank you, Jane.

      Reply
  5. Fogg  November 3, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Jim’ll Fix It was well good

    Reply
  6. Tom Brown  November 11, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    How deep can these crimes be buried? Who provides cover?
    Conspiracy theories DO NOT abound. Common Purpose is nothing but a communication method by which we are fooled.

    Reply
  7. Pingback: Jimmy Savile and other Party-Animals | Sovereign Independent UK

  8. Pingback: JIMMY SAVILLE POLICE PROTECTION? « freeasthysweetmountainair

  9. Pingback: SAVILE POLICE PROTECTION? « freeasthysweetmountainair

  10. Charlie Foulkes  February 2, 2013 at 12:06 pm

    This is really good, fearless journalism. For a small, local paper, particularly impressive. I live in South-East London and all our local papers are in the Council’s back pocket. They never publish any stories on poor Council services, it is all tame and lame.

    Once again, keep going with this, you are getting NATIONAL attention as the word spreads on Twitter. Great work.

    Reply
  11. Grant  February 28, 2014 at 10:54 pm

    The police knew about Jackonelli in the Early 70s. They asaked my brother who worked for The Jackonelli family about what went on. P Jackonellki used to pay young children to masterbate himself. The police failed then and today still cover up

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

whitby photography by glenn kilpatrick