Contact
with IICSA
I then contacted IICSA as below
31 March 2017
IICSA
PO Box 72289
London
SW1P 9LF
Your reference IICSA-0003691
Sharing my experience in writing
Please note: My family are unaware I was a victim of Savile aged 12, this document should be treated as confidential and all correspondence should be via my email address above.
To whom it may concern.
My account describes how I was abused by Savile as a child in Leeds General Infirmary and St James’s Hospital and what has happened following my decision to come forward and tell my story to the police, and the NHS speaking out enquiry. I wish to share this with the IICSA as I feel that lessons need to be learned about the way in which the police, NHS, DOH and the Parliamentary Ombudsman treat historic abuse victims.
The abuse
In 1971/2 I was groomed by Savile whilst visiting my sister in the LGI, I met with him in Headingley where I lived and was abused in the back of his car along with a young girl. I enjoyed the experience and sought out Savile for more which happened on one more occasion this time outside St James’s Hospital Chapel again with the young girl present. I bumped into Savile again in the LGI whilst my sister attended a clinic with my parents, on this occasion he was pushing a woman on a trolley, he asked me to help him, we went into a lift and he abused the woman who was dead. Afterwards, Savile took me to the exit and then physically assaulted me, grabbing my testicles and causing a grievous injury I lived with for many years as a warning not to tell anyone.
The decision to report to the police
On 12th November 2012 the television news at 6:00 broadcast the erection of Savile’s gravestone which bore the words ‘it was good while it lasted’. At around this time a few people had started to come forward to say that Savile had abused them, in particular a few women who featured in a documentary. When I saw the news, I was incensed and I decided I would go to the police and make a statement.
When I arrived, and told them I wished to make a statement, I was ushered into a small room and an officer who was dressed for street duty, hi-vis vest, stab vest, radio, handcuffs etc. was appointed to listen to me. I was physically shaking as I related my story, the officer made a few notes but did not take a statement, during the interview his radio and mobile phone constantly interrupted us along with a plain clothes officer who kept entering the room to talk to the officer in body armour. I realised that he was checking if I had a police record/file and was taking snippets of my statement away with him to discuss with others. This made the whole process shambolic, part way through I realised I may be admitting to committing crimes.
On one occasion the plain clothes officer entered the room and stopped the interview, he advised me that I did not have a police record/file and that what I was reporting was not for them to handle as the Met police had taken control calling the case Operation Yewtree. He advised me that he had passed my details on to them and that they would be contacting me for a formal statement. I was now frightened that I may be about to be arrested, the two officers now started to take a different tone, they were looking into what I had said so far with a view to crimes I may have committed, one said that I must tell them everything in order for them to determine what would happen next. At that I clammed up and did not discuss Savile and the dead body as I feared what they would say next. Once they seemed satisfied I had finished, they locked me in the room for 25 minutes by myself, when they returned, they again said, have you told us everything in a manner which made me think an arrest was imminent. The officer in plain clothes following advising me on what would happen next then said that as I was a child at the time, no crime had been committed by me and that no charges would be brought. I was free to go but should expect contact from the Met police.
As I left the station, I was physically shaking and was now considering what would happen when the Met contacted me. That evening I wrote down my recollections of the meeting.
A few days later a solicitor Liz Dux was interviewed on the news, she was encouraging victims to come forward and to contact her, I sent her a copy of my notes on the meeting with the police and her company accepted me as a client. Liz advised that by her estimate at the time of my statement to the police, I was one of the first 30 or so victims to come forward and the only male at that time. To protect my anonymity and with her agreement I set up an email address for all communications and passed this to Liz who agreed that she would advise all future contacts to be via email.
Months passed and I heard nothing from the Met police, at one stage I received an email saying that they may not require statements from all Savile’s victims as over 400 had come forward.
I decided to write out my statement including the incident with the dead body and forwarded a copy to Liz Dux and to the Met police.
Eventually, Liz Dux firm called to visit me and take a formal full statement including the effect I deemed the abuse had on my life to that point.
West Yorkshire police emailed to say “I am the West Yorkshire Police detective that has been assigned your complaint. I have tried to call you on a number of occasions but have not been able to get through to speak to you. I have seen the recent update on our enquiry log regarding your request to be contacted by e-mail, and I contact you via this means in future.
You should be hearing from staff from Operation Yewtree in the coming weeks, but I am afraid I am unable to be more specific as to when this will happen. In the meantime if you have any further queries please feel free to contact me, either by e-mail or on the number below.”
The Met police then telephoned my home, my son answered the phone and was told that the caller was an officer working with Operation Yewtree and that he wanted to speak to me. Despite my request for all contact by email?
The Met police decided to ask West Yorkshire police to record my formal statement, on 07 April 2014 they used my written version to prepare a statement for me to sign, the police statement stripped the consequences and some other incidental details, sticking just to the facts of Savile’s abuse.
The police recorded four crimes committed by Savile as a result of my testimony, considering they recorded a total of 208 crimes posthumously, my statement accounted for some 2% in all.
I received a letter from Leeds General Infirmary ‘Speaking Out’ enquiry team at my home, the letter wrote to me addressing me as a Savile victim and asked if I would be prepared to meet with the enquiry team to tell my story of historical sexual abuse. Considering that Liz Dux had written to the enquiry team asking they only contact me by email, I was concerned to receive such a communication in the post. Fortunately, I opened the mail that day, however normally my wife would open our letters.
The purpose of such a meeting I was advised both in the letter from the team, by email from Liz Dux and again by email from Claire Jones of the speaking out team which said “I am hoping that you will have received an e-mail from the Jimmy Savile investigation team based at Leeds teaching hospitals which was sent to you on the 15th March 2013. I would be grateful if you could contact the investigation team either by telephone or e-mail in order to discuss the possibility of us conducting an interview with you?” and then “I am really pleased that you are prepared to come forward to be interviewed as part of the investigation - every single experience adds a significant amount of value to our investigation. “.
I was led to believe the speaking out meetings were being held to better understand what had happened and to improve procedures in the hospital to ensure that such abuse could never happen again. I was being encouraged to meet the team and tell my story, I believed I would be listened to and that if by telling my story I could possibly prevent another such situation I would be helping all concerned.
I agreed attend on 23 May 2013 with the speaking out team and copied this to Liz Dux company. When I arrived 25 minutes early I was shown into a room with two members of the team Claire Jones and Ray Galloway, we started to discuss my story informally as I waited for my solicitor to arrive from Liz Dux company, we had been talking informally for 50 minutes when I realised that no solicitor was coming. At this point the meeting turned formal and was to be recorded, however, during the informal discussion the team had called my account into question and as I was expecting my solicitor, they now had me on the back foot.
The recorded element of the meeting included details of the procedures employed in hospitals about the handling of dead bodies which they claim were in place, these involved the use of two people at all times, they claimed this made my story of meeting Savile alone with a body impossible. They went on to say that Savile, a well-known and recognised celebrity, sexually abusing children in his car in a public place was highly unlikely. Further, they went on to say that the same well known celebrity, Savile assaulting a child in a public place in a hospital and then walking off leaving him in agony was highly implausible.
After the interview concluded, I was asked if I needed psychiatric counselling, I accepted this offer and expected to receive an appointment in due course.
When I left the meeting, I was annoyed and upset, I had been ambushed and my story called into question without representation being present. I had received no warning that the meeting was a damage limitation exercise by the hospital.
I contacted Liz Dux by email and described what had happened, she replied “We were very surprised to hear about this as the enquiry have been very supportive and sympathetic on the phone. We will call them this week and speak to them about your experience and will let you know what they say.”
A few days later I received an email saying “I have today spoken to both Claire Jones and Ray Galloway and have discussed your concerns with them. They told me that you had had a long meeting with them both and were able to explain what happened to you in your own words. As you have said they asked a number of questions. The process is not meant to be an adversarial one however they do have to follow the correct process and where necessary have to question and/or challenge evidence in order to establish what happened, the same would happen at court should your matter continue to trial. Nonetheless I have highlighted your concerns to them and they have noted these.”
Later I received a letter by email from Liz Dux which said, “Jessica immediately spoke to Claire Jones and Ray Galloway and raised concerns on your behalf. Their response was that they would not want you to feel you were not believed, but that they felt there were factual inaccuracies in your evidence which they found hard to reconcile” and “I’m afraid I don’t accept that we have in any way let you down. If you had specifically requested that we come along with you to the LGI inquiry then we would have been willing to do so. We would not have had any rights of audience and we would not have been able to represent you so the most we could have ever done is to attend as a watching Breif.
On 1st May 2014 Ray Galloway contacted me to ask “I wanted to advise you that our report is due to be published in June of this year, although we do not yet have a confirmed date. When we do have that date you will be further advised.
I also wanted to check with you as to whether you were able to provide any form of corroboration for your account that is over and above what we covered in your interview. At this stage I cannot confirm that your account will be included in the report.
I'd also be grateful if you were able to provide me with the date that your sister, REDACTED, was a patient at the LGI, when you met Jimmy Savile for the first time.
I realise that you may not have the exact date but any help that you could provide may be helpful.”
In May 2014, a compensation tariff was agreed by the solicitors, Judge the NHS, BBC and Savile’s estate, my claim was described as “Indecent assault under clothes involving genitalia £7,500 plus 25% uplift due to there being more than one incident £9,375. It would seem that my abuse which has affected my whole life was worth about the same as a second-hand car.
On 21st July 2014, I received a request from Liz Dux for more information which had been requested by Osborne Clark. The information requested was not possible to supply, they asked for;
1. A copy of any evidence that my sister was in hospital at the time of the assault
2. Any medical records of the assault to my testicle
3. Any evidence I can produce from members of my family regarding reporting of the assaults
4. Any evidence that can pin point more specifically when the assault took place
Impossible questions;
1. This would require a copy of my sister’s medical records which I cannot access
2. I have stated that I hid the injury and therefore there are no medical records
3. I have stated that my family are unaware I was a victim
4. I was 11/12 years old at the time, I had stated I thought it was Autumn in either 1971 or 1972 I cannot provide any more evidence.
I wrote to Liz Dux in September 2014 advising that I still had not received an appointment for the psychiatric care promised by the speaking out team.
On 3rd November 2014, I received a letter from Liz Dux which said “I regret to advise you that your application for compensation has been rejected by the NHS” and “I know this decision will come as a massive disappointment to you. However, unfortunately there is nothing that we can do.”
On 11th November 2014, I wrote to Jeremy Hunt MP, my email said “I have felt compelled to write to the Health Minister to give an overview of how victims of historical child abuse at the hands of Jimmy Savile on NHS property have been handled after my decision to come forward”. The letter was 11 pages long and detailed my case including all that had happened in my life as a consequence of the abuse as a child. I received no reply.
On 24th November 2014, I received copies of all correspondence from Liz Dux, included was a letter from the DOH legal team, this was a one line letter simply saying “We confirm that the Secretary of State for Health rejects the claim by REDACTED Wilkinson in his completed Scheme Form dated 15 May 2014”. It is unsurprising why my letter to Jeremy Hunt went unanswered.
