Some of you may be wondering why Mark Williams-Thomas, expert Paedofinder General and all-round ignoramous, has not sued the comic Jim Davidson on the basis of what the now completely cleared “sex offender” wrote in his recent book about the affair No Further Action. This is the passage to which I refer:
1. Mark Williams-Thomas was working with Newscorp hacks on reportage of Davidson’s “case”, using information from Yewtree officers that he shouldn’t have had. This is an allegation which, if true, does represent less than ethical behaviour on Mr Willypuller’s part in his role as an ‘independent consultant’ – and criminal (albeit predictable) activity on the part of the Met officers on Yewtree.
2. He misled The Sun about the nature of Jim Davidson’s file….or was misled by Yewtree officers, and is thus something of an unreliable dumbo of a source. I’m torn on this one, as both explanations could well be entirely plausible.
Either way, it’s a clear case of bringing Stark Bilious-Toolkit’s reputation into question.
But our Greatest Living Self-Appointed Perv Expert has, to the best of my knowledge, not so much as sent a solicitor’s letter to James McKenzie Davidson.
At the time of Davidson’s original arrest, Mark Williams-Thomas told The Guardian that he ‘acknowledged concerns about the potential reputational damage to some of those arrested but said: “Concerns are being raised by some people – but is that a collective opinion of people up and down the country? I don’t think it is.”‘.
Here we see Mr Willingmans-Tosspot at his most dangerously ignorant: he clearly thinks that “collective opinion” is enough to excuse completely unwarranted and malicious damage to somebody’s life and career. But then, this is the man who let slip, in a litigious email to me, that he didn’t understand the difference between libel and slander. Such is the nature of expertise in 21st Century Cruel Britannia.