A few weeks later, I happened to intercept the postman in my garden and one of the items of post addressed to me was an invitation from the inquiry team responsible for looking into the Savile scandal within the NHS/DOH.

It transpired that Liz Dux company had passed contact details from all their clients affected by the Savile scandal to the inquiry team. Once again, no care to accept my wishes to protect my family from discovering my victim status had been taken.

I emailed Liz Dux and she wrote to the NHS/DOH to affirm the requirement for communicating with me by email.

Shortly afterwards I received emails from Liz Dux and the NHS/DOH inquiry team, I was being requested to attend a meeting at the Leeds General Infirmary entitled “Speaking Out”. I was assured that they wished to meet with as many victims as possible and listen to their stories, this would assist the inquiry in making recommendations for the NHS/DOH and would ensure that no such scandal could ever reoccur. On this basis, I agreed to meet them to ensure they understood my story.

I felt it was my duty to attend and talk to the Speaking Out team, if nothing else, perhaps my story contained unique information that would help the inquiry, I agreed to a date for the meeting and supplied this back to Liz Dux so she or one of her representatives could be present.

The date for the meeting arrived and I found a parking spot immediately meaning I was forty minutes early. I was introduced to the inquiry team, Ray Galloway, and Claire Jones, I was invited to join them in an interview room and given a hot drink. I stated that I was expecting either Liz Dux or a representative from her firm to join me for the meeting. However, no one had arrived yet.

We started to talk, initially friendly and Ray Galloway stated that the inquiry team had received a copy of my statement as made to Liz Dux company and asked if I wanted to add anything further or simply submit the written statement. With the understanding that I was there to be listened to, I advised I would like to speak.

I started to tell the story of my childhood religious upbringing, poor due to my mother resigning her professional career and that we had no radio, TV, or car. I believed this has a bearing on the way I was groomed by and ultimately abused by Savile. I intended to detail the consequences on my life and career after the abuse. I though the team would wish to hear more about me than just what had been included in the written statement. However, the team were not interested in listening to me speak.

Cutting me short, the team started to ask questions about details in my written statement, they refused to accept that as I had been brought up in a family with no radio or TV, that I and my sister had not recognised Savile as he was so famous. They refused to accept that as a boy, despite being raised in a family without a car, I would not know the make of the car used by Savile when he assaulted me and the girl, only that it was large as in their opinion, boys always new about cars.

They called into question the likelihood that Savile, one of the most famous people in the UK, would risk assaulting two young children in daylight in his car whilst parked in a public place.

They refused to accept that the location given for the second incident in Savile’s car was in fact on the premises of St James’s Hospital, I was forced to state that it was my best recollection of the location, this was not satisfactory.

They then laid out the procedures used by all hospitals in dealing with a deceased person. Clare detailed the procedures step by step, then Ray, starting with the words, can you see there is a problem here, called into question my account, he stated that I could not have witnessed what I claimed, Savile in a lift with a trolley upon which had the body of a woman, because the procedures in pace in hospitals would have prevented this.

They stated that as I had admitted to looking at one of my sisters in my written statement, and that my younger sister had many years later made accusations of abuse, also in my statement, why should they believe that I had not indeed abused both sisters. I managed to splutter out a response that she had only been six at the time and it was the sight of pubic hair, hands, knickers etc which had caused me to become aroused. They sat back for a minute and looked at each other. Then came the attack, Ray Galloway said, you did not say that you knew it would be wrong.

Approximately forty minutes had elapsed, no solicitor had arrived, and I was in a state of shock and confusion, I was now in no doubt that I had been mis led into attending the inquiry, and that the main purpose of this meeting was not to listen to victims to learn from them, but to question their accounts with a view to determining civil liability.

At this point, Ray announced that the interview was now to start formerly and that he would be recording it. He switched on a recorder and both he and Claire announced their names, the purpose of the interview etc. I was in no fit state to be interviewed and had no one with me for support, but the interview kicked off regardless.

During the recorded interview both Claire and Ray repeated parts of what had already been said for the recording, it was described as highly unlikely that I had been assaulted in a car in public along with an underage girl by someone as famous and recognisable as Savile. It was described as highly unlikely that I had been assaulted in a car in the grounds of a hospital along with an underage girl for the same reason. It was described as impossible that I had witnessed Savile, pushing a trolley by himself with a dead woman upon it, again it was stated that hospitals had procedures in place, that these procedures prevented any one person from processing and transporting a deceased person, and would absolutely prevent the transporting of a deceased person covered only with a sheet. It was described as highly unlikely that someone as recognisable as Savile had assaulted me as I had described so close to the public entrance of a major hospital.

At that point, I started to lose my temper and asked silly questions about how long hospitals had had such procedures about deceased persons, could Savile have collected the body from A&E or even off an ambulance. I was rebuffed on all questions and told that the procedures were the same in the 1970’s, and that they applied in both A&E and when someone died in an ambulance.

I tried to say that other victims had told stories like mine about Savile abusing them in his car, and that footage of Savile abusing a young girl on Top of The Pops during a live show had been found and broadcast on the news. This really piqued their interest and they started to ask how much I had read/watched about Savile in the news and on TV.

The conclusions they drew were that I had concocted a story based upon news and TV documentaries. I was now flustered and out of control, I believed incorrectly they had my statement given to Liz Dux and a copy of my police statement I had authorised they obtain; however, they only had the former. Knowing the content of both, I blurted out about how I had been interviewed by the police, and reasons why my police statement was different to my full statement, because the police did not want to record some elements included in my full account.

The interview closed and the recording was switched off, however they had not finished yet, they went on to discuss more details from my written statement and what were the differences between this and my police statement, I tried to explain how I had been interviewed, and how I had not felt I could tell the whole story due to the way the interview was held etc.

Ray Galloway just stated he was concerned that my police interview and my recorded statement were different despite my protestations that the sections detailing my encounters with Savile were the same, only the preamble and consequences of the abuse sections had been dropped from the police statement.

That concluded the visit, I was physically shaking and obviously upset by the way in which the meeting had been conducted, when Claire Jones asked me if I would like to be referred for the psychiatric care package, they were offering all witnesses who came forward, I replied that I would like that and I left the room.