“I celebrated victories on their behalf, I picked up awards on their behalves. When they made mistakes, I carried the can”. -Keir Starmer
For now, we will not get into his boost about turning on his staff, another lie, proved when we see Labour staff voting to take strike action over a real-terms pay cut being imposed on them.
We would all like to see the Tories get their just deserts. Not just for what seems like a constant string of parties carried out at No10 while we were restricted under their oppressive covid rules. But we would like to see them fall for the years of hardship they have imposed on the working class.
And in no way does this alleviate the disdain we feel for the establishment and their stooges within the Tory party however, the one thing Johnson’s accusation made at Starmer over Jimmy Savile has proved is that the establishment are willing to defend their own.
Never has a Labour leader been defended by so many Tories and to the point of resignation before. It’s as if the malicious calculated lies made against Jeremy Corbyn never happened. Even with those damning lies, not one Tory lifted an eyebrow but now we see Tories are resigning to protect one of their own.
As we have always said, Starmer is not there to challenge the Establishment, he is there to protect the status quo.
Most of us realised a long time ago skeletons would fall out of his packed closet but now we see how guarded he is even by the right-wing press. The same press willing to make up stories and stick a Russian hat on Corbyn just in case he rocked the boat.
Not one Tory or MSM journalist expresses any concern over the blatant lies made against Jeremy Corbyn, collectively they carried out collaborative ruination to ensure the system was maintained but for Starmer, they are prepared to sacrifice their careers and even resign, it begs the question what secrets does this former prosecutor really hold.
It’s as if the establishment will sacrifice anybody to keep their Red knight safe. Unfortunately for them, on this one, they have overplayed their hand.
You cannot have it both ways, you cannot boost your position as head of an organisation claiming their victories were your victories then pretending stoicism stating you also carried the can for their failures, confronted on which you then claim you had no attachment.
Sir Keir Starmer was Director of Public Prosecutions and Head of the Crown Prosecution Service from 2008-2013.
As DPP, Keir was responsible for all criminal prosecutions in England and Wales from 2008-2013 and in his words was also responsible for their failures.
A video has emerged, Starmer boost, I celebrated victories on their behalf, I picked up awards on their behalves. When they made mistakes, I carried the can. I never turn on my staff and you should never turn on your staff, in this case, while he distances himself from any blame it looks like he has left his former staff out to dry.
“Hear me out: I had 8,000 staff for five years as the director of public prosecutions. And I acted, I hope, in the right way with them, which is when they had victories I celebrated victories on their behalf, I picked up awards on their behalves. When they made mistakes, I carried the can. I never turn on my staff and you should never turn on your staff… I will carry the can for mistakes of any organisation I lead.”
Starmer was made Director of Public Prosecutions, head of the CPS, in 2008.
The CPS is responsible for prosecuting crimes in England and Wales. As part of this it decides which cases should be prosecuted and what defendants should be charged with. It is independent of the police and government.
During Sir Keir Starmer’s tenure as director of public prosecutions from 2008 to 2013, detectives had sought advice from the CPS on four allegations that Savile had sexually assaulted girls and young women in the 1970s.
In 2007 and 2008, Surrey Police investigated three complaints that Savile had “engaged in sexual behaviour with young girls”. During the same period, Sussex Police investigated a similar complaint involving a young woman.
Savile was interviewed under caution by police in October 2009 and denied wrongdoing. He was not arrested. No prosecution was brought in relation to any of the four complaints, on the grounds that none of the victims were “prepared to support any police action”, for example testifying in court.
The review of the police investigation and CPS decision
In January 2013, after Savile’s death and when his abuse had been revealed, an investigation into whether the CPS had been right not to charge Savile in 2009 was published by Alison Levitt QC. She was asked to investigate this by Mr Starmer.
Ms Levitt said she had “reservations” about the prosecutor’s decision not to press charges.
She said: “On the face of it, the allegations made were both serious and credible; the prosecutor should have recognised this and sought to “build” a prosecution.”
She said the police treated the victims and the accounts they gave “with a degree of caution which was neither justified nor required”.
Three of the victims told her that if they had received more information from the police at the time of the investigation—and particularly if each had been told she was not the only woman who had complained—they would “probably have been prepared to give evidence.” Ms Levitt said that, in the case of two of the allegations, there would have been a “realistic prospect of conviction” if the women had given evidence.
“Having spoken to the victims I have been driven to conclude that had the police and prosecutors taken a different approach a prosecution might have been possible,” she wrote.
Ms Levitt is critical of the approach taken by both the CPS’ reviewing lawyer and the police in failing to build a prosecution against Savile in 2009, but said there was no evidence of any “improper motive on the part of either police or prosecutors”.
Following the review
When the investigation report was published in January 2013, Starmer said in a statement that he accepted the conclusions and hoped it would be a “watershed moment” for the CPS.
He said: “I would like to take the opportunity to apologise for the shortcomings in the part played by the CPS in these cases.
“These were errors of judgement by experienced and committed police officers and a prosecuting lawyer acting in good faith and attempting to apply the correct principles. That makes the findings of Ms Levitt’s report more profound and calls for a more robust response.” -Keir Starmer
Later in 2013, the CPS updated its guidance on prosecuting child sexual abuse in England and Wales.
A spokesperson for the CPS said that, “in line with the established data retention policy”, none of the records for the decision not to charge Savile in 2009 were kept.
He added: “There is no reference within the [investigation] report to any involvement from the DPP in the decision-making in the case. The reviewing lawyer at the time set out their own reasons for the decisions they took, which are reproduced in the report.”
There is no suggestion that officially Starmer had any involvement beyond his role as head of the CPS. however, it was one of the most explosive police interviews of the year — and you might reasonably expect that the head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) would have been closely involved in checking that the case was being handled properly.
“Savile was not charged with any crime. We respectfully agree with the DPP who has concluded that there were no insurmountable barriers to a prosecution being undertaken. And so the question remains: why was there not a single charge laid against Savile. The DPP answers this in part and points toward the failure of the Sussex and Surrey investigations (the DPP was unaware of the MPS 2003 investigation) to work together with the CPS to “build” the cases.”
The question will always remain is Starmer to blame for the failure to bring Savile to justice?
That depends on whether you believe the person at the top of an organisation ultimately bears responsibility for mistakes that happen on his or her watch. And on that score, Starmer’s own position could not be clearer.
Leadership, Starmer has often opined, ‘is about taking responsibility’. ‘The culture of an organisation is set from the top.’
On that many fully agree and for many, that is precisely why Boris Johnson must go, but seems Starmer thinks that only applies to others in charge and not himself.
The stench from Savile will always be present in the dark corners of Westminster and anyone named will be forever tainted, guilty or not.
Whatever happens to Boris Johnson, no matter if he stays or goes. The accusation made towards Sir Keir Starmer over the role of the CPS in failing to convict Jimmy Savile will always remain.
It is now part and parcel of the Party Gate scandal and has designed will become part of the collective consensus, more so it will be whispered not just by the far-right as Starmer hit back but by every voter not wedded to Labour and Starmer’s new regime, as for Johnson and the Tory party no matter how some may protest, job done!