John Leslie

Appeal's on the grounds of: Furthering - listed criteria of good standing behaviours and other


Uncredited Presenter of nightclubs' and other hosting DJ-ing of Musicals', and theater under-takings-without prior experience of entertainments' of celebrity status', all due crediting and established career persona, gathered from education, handwork of attainments and the ability to publicise in self-promotional; campaigns'.

No prior reports of indiscretions of behaviours', no prior reporting of affairs, rapes and or other associated criminality's'.

A selection of work placements', filled with the opportunities to be associated with criminal-affiliations' of prostitutional-workshops' and the opportunity to take heedless rape-date victims and or, a array of sectional-women for free associations of out-side links of friendship and or other bonding unmoral ties' of conduction's'.

To state: No reporting of any crime associations of this natures, all the time surrounded by a work-placement-credited for such affiliations of criminality's', if a stigma of such effective character was the core of John Leslie nature, the announcement of such acts of forced sex crimes and or other would have been under-lined and his career dissembled into furthering, small gangland affiliations of scum-street-workers', pimping and other.

Not one lady of effective prior associations came forward to announce such claims when John Lesley came to and or found success.

After establishing a good reputation of clean-nightclub-entertainments', in the early eighties when crime rate, and other associated data was 50% lower and or even more, then at present, John Lesley, won his credibility's as a Television-Presenter, hosting a children's' Channel of sort after entertainments', of high wage and good standing, representing the Queen, and associations of linked networking charities, also in line with his Job-Descriptions'. Such a high-Job Credibility would have been screened with the up-most of scrutinies of profile character ships before this position allocated to represent Queen and county and poverty stricken children, and children with high-persona-attributes of terminal-illness.

John Lesley, hosting alongside most renowned charity-representatives', the likes' of Anthea Turner, whose reputation was at that time, solid and without skirmish, long side all other workers', with high profile status of accounts' and solid reputations'.

Accusations of unfounded enlightenment's', that had never been raised before, in light of any up-risings' of John-Lesley's career of substantial standards' of high-ranking position and representing Britannia as a country hosting associational net workings of bondings with the Queen of Britain, and Charity affiliations'.

Question to the prosecution:

Had such a person worked in such a position, with children and other vulnerable characters of natures of innocence, the sick, emotionally abused victims', the youth and or other, wouldn't anyone of these supposedly raped and or abused women, taken it upon themselves to safe-guard further vunerable victims', younger-available women and or other, from furthering abuses' of dangers'?

Question to the Prosecution:

The allegations' of rape in an auto-biography created and written by - another presenter EUREKA JONSON, of daytime television, who appeared to be the almost look-a-like version of Anthea-Turner, who by no means', had and or has reported any official and or other indiscretions', while working alongside John Lesley as a co-host, nothing ever coming to light?

Anthea Turner, a beautiful persona of firm character, cheery and always' in good friendships with John Lesley, a brotherly-sisterly associations of working correspondence, spending so much time together hosting and achieving great standards of beneficial aid, with mutual respect and love of being able to credit such needed specialised foundations for the poverty-stricken-vnnerable-terminally-ill and other, there would be no way of bonding further sexual advances of out side natures', within this relationship of charities and sponsorship campaigns'.

After claiming a rape of effective natures', maybe to boost book sales' and gossip of celebrity conduction's', Jonson-never went ahead to confirm, but only indirectly point the finger at, several celebrates that posed a direct threat to her establishing career, because of a look-a-like credibility of status', would go on to impair her own career of standing orders for work.

And I state again, would not such a caring and or representative of productions programmes', came forward to safe guard others from victimisation's of accounts had these allegations been true?


And I state, isn't it so, that Anthea Turner, is a direct look-a-like of natures of facial representations as Eureka Jonson, who might have been advised by other production-and or managements of promotional careers to indirectly claim rape against the closet figure to Anthea Turner, to discredit Anthea Turners career, and still keep Eureka Jonson in a well- and or to well establish and give precedence over, in a productions of other affiliated programmes', of what then back-fired and a revolt of hate began, because the allegations were and in light of the circumstances , absolutely absurd.

And that's why, Eureka Jonson never brought formal charges of rape and or indecent assault against John Lesley.

However, to raise book sales', this stigma of assault and or rape stayed, partly destroying all the representatives' of long term Charity workers', reputations' of effects'.

In that, also other non associational women, after reading and or hearing such gossip, came forward in reporting further abuses', and that in such a position of credibility's', wouldn't they have come forward prior to, these allegations, to safe-guard other vunerable people from such a criminal character?

Appeals for compensation, loss of career and other, to go against the initial instigator of unfounded and or uncharged, rape allegation that saw the allegations against John Leslie, and thus brought him down. Eureka Jonson

This issue will be against Eureka Jonson, for instigating this whole affair of an opportunity to enhance book sales', that saw the foreclosure of three other charity, high-profile workers', whose reputations were partly destroyed and yet to be re-covered. Without prior skirmish and or bad influence of known and or other reputations of outside forces of friend ties', employment ties and or former associations of work and or other.

We are looking at the substantial amount of all book sales funds', to be returned to John Lesley and Anthea Turner as a compensation rights claim. A hald split of shared funds.

We will be looking at, compensation for discredits' , of personal life, and shaking the former chariest of representations of sick children, causing a reaction of stimuli, taken because of the subjected pressures' over-ridden at the time, by the un-relenting press. Thus discretion's' furthering and more.

We will be looking at the suing of the promotional agents for allowing such allegations to be rolled out and circulated, in media press, from the advisers of Eureka Jonson. And that as stands, no evidences of improper conduction's of the rape charge, was ever announced as verified from any one of the claimants of victimisation's'.

We will be looking at public apologies' for the discredits', in the disgusting act of accusing someone and associates', who worked for the betterment of the vulnerable.

We will be asking for compensation,in line with the pushing of personal information from childhood, that had nothing to do with the allegations and or discredits brought up against John Lesley.

And that had no allegations been brought, this personal information would have been concealed as negative childhood memories, that Saw him fight for a good standing career out of poverty.

We will be looking to sue, Channel five, for instigating furthering reports', of unfounded confirmations that were never verified and or confirmed and or proven to be confirmed.

These allegations are complete bull shit.


We will be looking to re-instate are well-loved representative, who is so missed by daytime telly viewers', who have chosen to boycott the associated airings because of this instigation against our representative of country, land, children's charities and other.