What is it that’s changed in the paedophile inquiry? We’re now looking at a triple murder inquiry and the police seem to be taking it deadly seriously. I have a theory. North Yorkshire police just apologised for denying for years that they ever suspected Jimmy Savile or his associate, Peter Jaconelli. In fact, they investigated but nothing ever happened and for years they claimed there were no files.
This is important because Jaconelli was a significant figure, as mayor of Scarborough, borough councillor, county councillor, and chairman of the Yorkshire & Humberside Conservative party. I suspect, but I don’t know, that he might also have been the local Conservative Association chairman at some point.
On the other hand, he owned most of Scarborough, specifically the ice-cream business, slot machines, restaurants, and venues. How Savile might have known the owner of a high traffic seaside venue ought to be obvious. This is part of what I meant with this post. So it looks like Jaconelli was the intersection between Savile’s northern/showbiz circle, and the southern/political one.
Now the Tories are historically a decentralised organisation, much more so at the time, and he would had a lot of influence over candidate selection, most of all on his own personal patch. It is a matter of record that the man who is alleged to have received Geoffrey Dicks’ dossier in 1981 before it went missing was MP for Cleveland and Whitby, a constituency split off from Scarborough, between 1974 and 1983.
Dicks, of course, was a Yorkshire Tory himself, from Huddersfield West. If by chance the document was treated as a party matter, keeping it out of the civil service’s hands, that might explain where it ended up.
Not relevant but ……
I lived in Pickering around then and IIRC Jaconelli from a Look North program he was also holder of the world oyster eating record, or at lest attempted it.
weirdly, as well as being very, very fat he even dressed like Cyril Smith: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnyenquirer.uk%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F06%2FDOB_Jeffels_Jaconelli_9740.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnyenquirer.uk%2Fresign-tom-fox-spare-scarborough-council-further-disrepute%2F&h=400&w=480&tbnid=ht3hxM0vL_KExM%3A&zoom=1&docid=L-0X_ycW05LNlM&ei=k_SXVJOGBYPe7AaC94D4Dg&tbm=isch&ved=0CCcQMygGMAY&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=2748&page=1&start=0&ndsp=16
I think ‘owning most of Scarborough’ is stretching it a bit. I suspect he might have had close connections with the people that he shared ‘ownership’ with, though.
I suppose in places of the size and the type of Scarborough that kind of influence is less likely now, mainly because that kind of local businessman has been in decline for years now, and the local politicians and ‘personalities’ are relatively unknown even in the towns themselves.
I’m not so sure it’s in decline in seaside towns, even though seaside towns are themselves in decline: a friend of mine reports all sorts of stuff from a seaside town I’ll leave unnamed to protect the innocent. You still see the interplay of seasonal and year-round business, and the way in which everyone with political clout is a property dabbler or developer or one degree of separation away from one.
That gets me thinking about the Kippers again, and how they work both within and against the political status quo of slightly shabby seaside towns.