Police officers receive libel damages

Published Date: 09 October 2008

Thursday, 2pm - TWO officers from Lincolnshire police, have accepted
"substantial" but undisclosed libel damages along with a public
apology at London's High Court over book allegations about them.

Det Con Kevin Gooch and Det Con Alison Smith were criticised in an
autobiography called 'Our Little Secret' written by child abuse victim
Duncan Fairhurst and published by Hodder Stoughton.

The book criticised the way they dealt with the author's complaint.

Solicitor for the two officers, Jeremy Clarke-Williams, told the judge
the book "told the harrowing story" of how Mr Fairhurst was "regularly
sexually abused by his father from the age of four to 14 and of how
his childhood and youth were devastated by that abuse."

He said the book went on to describe how he had overcome the effects
of the abuse and had gone on to see his father prosecuted, convicted
and jailed both for offences committed on him and for sexual offences
committed on another boy.

However, Mr Clarke-Williams continued : "The book makes a number of
criticisms of the police handling of Mr Fairhurst's complaint and of
he prosecution process leading to his fathers trial. In the chapter
devoted to that period DC Gooch and DC Smith are identified as
officers dealing with the investigation of Mr Fairhurst's complaint
against his father."

He said that both Mr Fairhurst and the publishers acknowledged that,
contrary to any suggestion in the book, Mr Gooch and Ms Smith were not
in any way incompetent in their conduct of the investigation of Mr
Fairhurst's father. Nor were they in any way incompetent in their
response to any information that Mr Fairhurst provided about other
potential victims of his father or other potential abusers.

In addition to agreeing to pay damages Mr Fairhurst and the publishers
had also agreed to pay the legal costs of the two police officers.

http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/Police-officers-receive-libel-damages.4576733.jp

*****
WM
www.critest.com

Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> Police officers receive libel damages
> 
> Published Date: 09 October 2008
> 
> Thursday, 2pm - TWO officers from Lincolnshire police, have accepted
> "substantial" but undisclosed libel damages along with a public
> apology at London's High Court over book allegations about them.
> 
> Det Con Kevin Gooch and Det Con Alison Smith were criticised in an
> autobiography called 'Our Little Secret' written by child abuse victim
> Duncan Fairhurst and published by Hodder Stoughton.
> 
> The book criticised the way they dealt with the author's complaint.
> 
> Solicitor for the two officers, Jeremy Clarke-Williams, told the judge
> the book "told the harrowing story" of how Mr Fairhurst was "regularly
> sexually abused by his father from the age of four to 14 and of how
> his childhood and youth were devastated by that abuse."
> 
> He said the book went on to describe how he had overcome the effects
> of the abuse and had gone on to see his father prosecuted, convicted
> and jailed both for offences committed on him and for sexual offences
> committed on another boy.
> 
> However, Mr Clarke-Williams continued : "The book makes a number of
> criticisms of the police handling of Mr Fairhurst's complaint and of
> he prosecution process leading to his fathers trial. In the chapter
> devoted to that period DC Gooch and DC Smith are identified as
> officers dealing with the investigation of Mr Fairhurst's complaint
> against his father."
> 
> He said that both Mr Fairhurst and the publishers acknowledged that,
> contrary to any suggestion in the book, Mr Gooch and Ms Smith were not
> in any way incompetent in their conduct of the investigation of Mr
> Fairhurst's father. Nor were they in any way incompetent in their
> response to any information that Mr Fairhurst provided about other
> potential victims of his father or other potential abusers.
> 
> In addition to agreeing to pay damages Mr Fairhurst and the publishers
> had also agreed to pay the legal costs of the two police officers.
> 
> http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/Police-officers-receive-libel-damages.4576733.jp
> 
> *****
> WM
> www.critest.com

CSA? Child Support Agency?

And who is the zealot? The person who was sexually abused for 10 years?

Why have you invented your own headline and not used that of the article 
you have posted? You seem to be gloating about his misery.

-- 
Robbie

On Oct 9, 8:02 pm, Robbie  wrote:
> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> > Police officers receive libel damages
>
> > Published Date: 09 October 2008
>
> > Thursday, 2pm - TWO officers from Lincolnshire police, have accepted
> > "substantial" but undisclosed libel damages along with a public
> > apology at London's High Court over book allegations about them.
>
> > Det Con Kevin Gooch and Det Con Alison Smith were criticised in an
> > autobiography called 'Our Little Secret' written by child abuse victim
> > Duncan Fairhurst and published by Hodder Stoughton.
>
> > The book criticised the way they dealt with the author's complaint.
>
> > Solicitor for the two officers, Jeremy Clarke-Williams, told the judge
> > the book "told the harrowing story" of how Mr Fairhurst was "regularly
> > sexually abused by his father from the age of four to 14 and of how
> > his childhood and youth were devastated by that abuse."
>
> > He said the book went on to describe how he had overcome the effects
> > of the abuse and had gone on to see his father prosecuted, convicted
> > and jailed both for offences committed on him and for sexual offences
> > committed on another boy.
>
> > However, Mr Clarke-Williams continued : "The book makes a number of
> > criticisms of the police handling of Mr Fairhurst's complaint and of
> > he prosecution process leading to his fathers trial. In the chapter
> > devoted to that period DC Gooch and DC Smith are identified as
> > officers dealing with the investigation of Mr Fairhurst's complaint
> > against his father."
>
> > He said that both Mr Fairhurst and the publishers acknowledged that,
> > contrary to any suggestion in the book, Mr Gooch and Ms Smith were not
> > in any way incompetent in their conduct of the investigation of Mr
> > Fairhurst's father. Nor were they in any way incompetent in their
> > response to any information that Mr Fairhurst provided about other
> > potential victims of his father or other potential abusers.
>
> > In addition to agreeing to pay damages Mr Fairhurst and the publishers
> > had also agreed to pay the legal costs of the two police officers.
>
> >http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/Police-officers-receive-libel-d...
>
> > *****
> > WM
> >www.critest.com
>
> CSA? Child Support Agency?
>
> And who is the zealot? The person who was sexually abused for 10 years?
>
> Why have you invented your own headline and not used that of the article
> you have posted? You seem to be gloating about his misery.
>
> --
> Robbie

CSA = Child Sexual Abuse

No, the Zealot is Duncan Fairhurst.

I am not gloating. I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues to
be challenged.

We have shut a few up, Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.

WM

Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> On Oct 9, 8:02 pm, Robbie  wrote:
>> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
>>> Police officers receive libel damages
>>> Published Date: 09 October 2008
>>> Thursday, 2pm - TWO officers from Lincolnshire police, have accepted
>>> "substantial" but undisclosed libel damages along with a public
>>> apology at London's High Court over book allegations about them.
>>> Det Con Kevin Gooch and Det Con Alison Smith were criticised in an
>>> autobiography called 'Our Little Secret' written by child abuse victim
>>> Duncan Fairhurst and published by Hodder Stoughton.
>>> The book criticised the way they dealt with the author's complaint.
>>> Solicitor for the two officers, Jeremy Clarke-Williams, told the judge
>>> the book "told the harrowing story" of how Mr Fairhurst was "regularly
>>> sexually abused by his father from the age of four to 14 and of how
>>> his childhood and youth were devastated by that abuse."
>>> He said the book went on to describe how he had overcome the effects
>>> of the abuse and had gone on to see his father prosecuted, convicted
>>> and jailed both for offences committed on him and for sexual offences
>>> committed on another boy.
>>> However, Mr Clarke-Williams continued : "The book makes a number of
>>> criticisms of the police handling of Mr Fairhurst's complaint and of
>>> he prosecution process leading to his fathers trial. In the chapter
>>> devoted to that period DC Gooch and DC Smith are identified as
>>> officers dealing with the investigation of Mr Fairhurst's complaint
>>> against his father."
>>> He said that both Mr Fairhurst and the publishers acknowledged that,
>>> contrary to any suggestion in the book, Mr Gooch and Ms Smith were not
>>> in any way incompetent in their conduct of the investigation of Mr
>>> Fairhurst's father. Nor were they in any way incompetent in their
>>> response to any information that Mr Fairhurst provided about other
>>> potential victims of his father or other potential abusers.
>>> In addition to agreeing to pay damages Mr Fairhurst and the publishers
>>> had also agreed to pay the legal costs of the two police officers.
>>> http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/Police-officers-receive-libel-d...
>>> *****
>>> WM
>>> www.critest.com
>> CSA? Child Support Agency?
>>
>> And who is the zealot? The person who was sexually abused for 10 years?
>>
>> Why have you invented your own headline and not used that of the article
>> you have posted? You seem to be gloating about his misery.
>>
>> --
>> Robbie
> 
> CSA = Child Sexual Abuse

You abbreviate far too much it's been pointed out to you before.

> 
> No, the Zealot is Duncan Fairhurst.

He being the guy who was sexually abused by his father?

> I am not gloating.

Yes you are

  I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues to
> be challenged.

Why? Was he sexually abused or not? And what has it got to do with you?


> We 

We?

have shut a few up

Abused children?

, Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.
0
That he was abused? Or that he couldn't substantiate a claim? Again, 
what has it got to do with you?

> WM

It's not a classic either, by the way.

-- 
Robbie

Webmanager_CritEst wrote:

> I am not gloating. I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues to
> be challenged.
>
> We have shut a few up, Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.


"We" implies that you are a member of a co-ordinated group which aims to 
discredit and/or suppress victims of sexual abuse.

If you could go back 20 yrs and ask your younger self what he thought of 
this, do you think he'd be excited by the life which awaited him?

If you could go forward 20 yrs and ask your aged self what he thought of 
this, do you think he'd be satisfied by the rich & worthwhile life he'd led?



-- 
Criticising the government is not illegal, but on investigation often
turns out to be linked to other offences

On Oct 9, 8:18 pm, Robbie  wrote:
> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 8:02 pm, Robbie  wrote:
> >> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> >>> Police officers receive libel damages
> >>> Published Date: 09 October 2008
> >>> Thursday, 2pm - TWO officers from Lincolnshire police, have accepted
> >>> "substantial" but undisclosed libel damages along with a public
> >>> apology at London's High Court over book allegations about them.
> >>> Det Con Kevin Gooch and Det Con Alison Smith were criticised in an
> >>> autobiography called 'Our Little Secret' written by child abuse victim
> >>> Duncan Fairhurst and published by Hodder Stoughton.
> >>> The book criticised the way they dealt with the author's complaint.
> >>> Solicitor for the two officers, Jeremy Clarke-Williams, told the judge
> >>> the book "told the harrowing story" of how Mr Fairhurst was "regularly
> >>> sexually abused by his father from the age of four to 14 and of how
> >>> his childhood and youth were devastated by that abuse."
> >>> He said the book went on to describe how he had overcome the effects
> >>> of the abuse and had gone on to see his father prosecuted, convicted
> >>> and jailed both for offences committed on him and for sexual offences
> >>> committed on another boy.
> >>> However, Mr Clarke-Williams continued : "The book makes a number of
> >>> criticisms of the police handling of Mr Fairhurst's complaint and of
> >>> he prosecution process leading to his fathers trial. In the chapter
> >>> devoted to that period DC Gooch and DC Smith are identified as
> >>> officers dealing with the investigation of Mr Fairhurst's complaint
> >>> against his father."
> >>> He said that both Mr Fairhurst and the publishers acknowledged that,
> >>> contrary to any suggestion in the book, Mr Gooch and Ms Smith were not
> >>> in any way incompetent in their conduct of the investigation of Mr
> >>> Fairhurst's father. Nor were they in any way incompetent in their
> >>> response to any information that Mr Fairhurst provided about other
> >>> potential victims of his father or other potential abusers.
> >>> In addition to agreeing to pay damages Mr Fairhurst and the publishers
> >>> had also agreed to pay the legal costs of the two police officers.
> >>>http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/Police-officers-receive-libel-d.> >>> WM
> >>>www.critest.com
> >> CSA? Child Support Agency?
>
> >> And who is the zealot? The person who was sexually abused for 10 years> >> Why have you invented your own headline and not used that of the article
> >> you have posted? You seem to be gloating about his misery.
>
> >> --
> >> Robbie
>
> > CSA = Child Sexual Abuse
>
> You abbreviate far too much it's been pointed out to you before.
>
>
>
> > No, the Zealot is Duncan Fairhurst.
>
> He being the guy who was sexually abused by his father?
>
> > I am not gloating.
>
> Yes you are
>
>   I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues to
>
> > be challenged.
>
> Why? Was he sexually abused or not? And what has it got to do with you?
>
> > We
>
> We?
>
> have shut a few up
>
> Abused children?
>
> , Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.
> 0
> That he was abused? Or that he couldn't substantiate a claim? Again,
> what has it got to do with you?
>
> > WM
>
> It's not a classic either, by the way.
>
> --
> Robbie

I know you are angry, but please try to keep your formatting
reasonably clear.

[> CSA = Child Sexual Abuse
You abbreviate far too much it's been pointed out to you before.]

In the context of the story, the abbreviation is clear.

[> No, the Zealot is Duncan Fairhurst.
He being the guy who was sexually abused by his father?]

He, the one, who had sex with his father, according to the reports,
yes.

[> I am not gloating.
Yes you are]

I am happy with the wrist slap. Professional Victims have had it far
too easy for far too long. The fact it was plod, who did it, makes it
a classic. The law is the law, after all.

[I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues to
> be challenged.
Why? Was he sexually abused or not?]

Unknown.

[And what has it got to do with you?]

Professional Victims make money of the backs of others (including
actual victims) and their actions have led, directly, to the deaths
(and destroyed the life chances - including mine) of millions of
people, with little or no challenge or proof to back up their claims.
They need payback for something, and they do not care how they get it
or who from.

> We
We?]

Yes.

[have shut a few up
Abused children?]

Professional Victims and liars.

[Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.
That he was abused? Or that he couldn't substantiate a claim? Again,
what has it got to do with you?]

Both have been covered, above, I believe.

[It's not a classic either, by the way.]

Opinions differ.

WM

On Oct 9, 9:40 pm, "Steve Walker"  wrote:
> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> > I am not gloating. I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues to
> > be challenged.
>
> > We have shut a few up, Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.
>
> "We" implies that you are a member of a co-ordinated group which aims to
> discredit and/or suppress victims of sexual abuse.
>
> If you could go back 20 yrs and ask your younger self what he thought of
> this, do you think he'd be excited by the life which awaited him?
>
> If you could go forward 20 yrs and ask your aged self what he thought of
> this, do you think he'd be satisfied by the rich & worthwhile life he'd led?
>
> --
> Criticising the government is not illegal, but on investigation often
> turns out to be linked to other offences

[> I am not gloating. I am making sure Duncan's credibility continues
to
> be challenged. > We have shut a few up, Duncan keeps surfacing. So this is good news.
"We" implies that you are a member of a co-ordinated group which aims
to
discredit and/or suppress victims of sexual abuse.]

Absolutely not. I abhor suppression. I have challenged many of them to
meet me, where they like, with any form of media present, so I may
challenge them. They have declined and, in fact, in one important
case, they had the opportunity and refused.

Yes, only by discrediting them, may their fraud be exposed.

Conversely, any real victims of 'abuse' may be recognised.

'We' are present in all legitimate areas of study and the media.
'They' are just not as open, as I am, as 'they' wish to keep their
jobs/funding etc. .... or you do not read in those circles.

[If you could go back 20 yrs and ask your younger self what he thought
of
this, do you think he'd be excited by the life which awaited him? ]

My position has always been the same.

I will not tolerate liars, charlatans or frauds in any area. If it
affects me, directly, then I will act.

[If you could go forward 20 yrs and ask your aged self what he thought
of
this, do you think he'd be satisfied by the rich & worthwhile life
he'd led? ]

It will not take 20 years, to complete, I can assure you.

I appreciate you posted, before you saw my reply on PVs.

WM