THAT VACANT LOOK

Field: (Describing Peter): “Bent as a nine bob note. My ex husband and his workmates were working on a whole row of houses in Chelsea, can’t remember what it was called now, but Madonna had one, they had an underground car park, swimming pools in the basement, etc, and he (Peter?) would be outside every morning, cup of tea/coffee and fag in hand, wearing little white hot pants and staring at all the different tradesmen, “Morning boys”, he’d say, my ex said he made his skin crawl, this was in the late 80’s.

My Reply: I was with Peter for 30 years, right up to his death in 2018, and I can assure you that he wasn’t “as bent as a nine bob note” then!

I remember very well the workmen being there as I spoke with them myself on occasion. I recall one of them telling us about his wife who had been a life-long Jason King fan. Peter and I would often make tea for them and take out biscuits. It’s desperately sad that this was construed by your “ex” as something more sinister (no good deed ever goes unpunished?!). I suggest that what your “ex” told you says far more about him than it ever could about my Peter. Perhaps your “ex” was secretly pissed because Peter showed no interest in him and so concocted this story in lieu of a full-on hissy fit(?) Either way, it makes my skin crawl to hear such nonsense!

Oh dear! I do hope that Gaynor wasn’t quite as gullible as she appeared here when her ex-hubby was spinning her a yarn!

I find that people like dear ol’ Gaynor, when challenged by someone who was actually there and knows what they’re talking about, will either slither back under the stone where they came from in the hope that no-one has noticed what a complete prick they’re made of themselves, or when they realise they’ve been skewered, they’ll resort to foul-mouth abuse and personal insults because they have nowhere else to go.

Gullible Gaynor’s Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED X QUICKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME ✔ WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

Here’s a few more corkers for your delectation…

Robert Watson: He (Peter) was just a little bit gay though.

Me: He wasn’t during the 30 year relationship I had with him. Or when he was in relationships with Dorinda Stevens, Vivien Leigh, Mary Ure, Anna Massey, Kay Shanton (model). Diana Dors, Elisabeth Skjorekjole (model), Sally Home, Nyree Dawn Porter, Lady Victoria Berkley… the list goes on. I suspect you never came within a 1,000 radius of him during his lifetime, OR anyone who knew him. Your spectacular insight is doubtless based on tabloid tittle-tattle, internet gossip and that font of all knowledge, Wikipedia.

Robert Watson:: ok calm down’

Me: You do know that penis enlargers are widely available online. You don’t have to attack people who are no longer here to defend themselves and lash out at women to feel like a man.

On realising that he’d had his chair kicked out from under him, Watson went to the only defence he had, misogyny. The “ok (sic) calm down” jibe, I assume, is internet parlance for, “Right! I’m taking my ball home now because I realise I’ve been skewered and have nowhere else to go!”. Another case of those knowing the least knowing it the loudest.

Watson’s Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED ✔ QUCKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME X WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

No Name: “I saw him (Peter) at a film fair. He was wearing a baseball cap that had written FCUK on the front of it in gold ink” (This post attracted the grand total of 4 laughing emojis, not counting Mr. No Name’s own).


The inane laughter ended abruptly when I said, “The cap was a gift from his 9-year old godson who had terminal cancer. Not so hilarious now!”

Mr. No-Names Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED X QUICKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME ✔ WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

George Bowlocks: Heartthrob. He was a joke!

Me: Really? He was one of the most respected actors of the British stage; won praise from all quarters, and was presented with some of the most coveted awards in international theatre and television. Out of interest, what have you achieved to afford the luxury of sitting in judgement of others?

George Bowlocks: We thought he was hilarious when I was at school. A peacock.

Me: I’m sure he would’ve reciprocated given the opportunity.

George Bowlocks: That makes no sense. Do you mean he would have thought we were a peacock? Also, what are converted awards?

Me: No. He would’ve thought you were a joke, And for the record, the word is COVETED not CONVERTED. Perhaps if you and your mates had spent less time poking fun at people you considered a “joke”, you may well have spotted that!

When he realised he’d painted him into a corner, poor ol’ George began blathering on about women “creaming their knickers” over Peter in the 1970’s. When he finally clocked that he wasn’t screaming abuse at someone who’d had a 30-year relationship with Peter, he vanished in a puff of smoke. I dare say that charmer like this would’ve had to worry about women “creaming” their draws over him!

Bowlock’s Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED ✔ QUICKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME X WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

Lesley Price: I met him in the 70s and he was much more interested in my boyfriend than any of the women. He was positively rude to me.

Me::Genuinely, you’re the first person I’ve ever come across who claims that Peter was rude to them. He has only ever been described as charming, gentlemanly and kind. Perhaps he was having a bad day, or didn’t much like certain people’s company….

Lesley Price: possibly. I certainly didn’t like him. Maybe he thought I was in his way!

Me: How so – like you were sitting in his seat? Or blocking the corridor?

Lesley’s Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED X QUICKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME ✔ WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

Clearly, most of the above are just intellectually-challenged big-gobs who, rather than leave us just think they might be idiots, they can’t resist the temptation to post detritus like this and PROVE it! Inevitably, the subject of the Gloucester Bus Station incident in 1975 came around, which was quashed by the British Home Office in 2023. According to several all-knowing participants in this conversation, Peter was supposedly also arrested in Newcastle, Southampton, Portsmouth, Birmingham (see ‘ToTheHeartOf’ It’) and even Hyde Park Corner! Sweet Jesus! I’m surprised Peter found the time to do any acting!

It’s unlikely that any one of the above when challenged actually understood what was being said to them.there were some that were contrite when they realised that they’d been looking down the wrong of the wrong end of the telescope all these years. Others were damn right disgusting.

There were a few moments of hilarity, however. One chap claimed that Peter had lived at some castle in Northumberland (the name of which evades me) at some point or other in his life. This was news to me, and I said so. “Oh, yes,” this bloke continued. “He used to do public appearances up there. A friend of mine owns the place” He then promptly produced a screengrab of a post by his friend. Turns out said castle is a hotel, and that Peter had stayed there a couple of times when he was working at the Forum Billingham Theatre. Me: “So he DIDN’T “live” there!”

Needless to say, the original post was shared several times to other Facebook groups, which in turn drew out another wave of indolent muckrakers and halfwits who professed to be in the know. One of them stated in reference to a photo of Peter that had been posted, “As camp as Christmas”. And yet, as I pointed out, this supposed camp, effete man still managed to bed a harem of women, all of whom I named (see earlier in this post). “Well,” came the response from this oaf, “he may’ve been with them, but he still preferred his own type,” And so I asked him given the profound insight he professed to have, if he might care to provide the names of these men. Certainly, Peter’s friends who I’ve remained in contact with, not to mention me myself, would appreciate being enlightened by someone with such privileged insight. Despite giving him my email address so he could send this information without him having to suffer too much inconvenience, I’m yet to hear from him. No surprise there! As with all the characters mentioned here, there was not a single one of them who were able to put their money where their mouth is when required to do so.

There’s a psychological condition called the Dunning-Kruger Effect – some of you may’ve heard of it. Part of it explores how people with low ability and knowledge will often talk with faux authority about things they really know nothing about. I think that condition fits these people and of scenarios aptly.

While Peter collected critical acclaim for his work, both domestically and internationally, the type of people who seem to delight in spreading misinformation and lies about him while sniggering and snorting from behind the safety of their computer screen, have probably achieved little (if anything) of note throughout their worthless existence. They appear to measure success by the number of laughing emojis they can collect. What a delight it is to see those inane grins wiped off their faces when they’re confronted with the truth.

😂😂😂

Read our open letter to the admin of UK Nostalgia Vibe; his response and fans comments

Two of my most bizarre encounters with the dazed and confused, came back in September 2021.They came courtesy of Fank and Margaret – both strangers to each other and yet both were spouting the same old cr*p!

Our first case concerns a 75-year-old gentleman whom we shall refer to as Bill, for that was his name. He claims that Peter is a “Pervert” because – to quote him – “He was convicted of Gross Indecency in 1975 in Gloster (sic).”

While that may be so, such a conviction alone does not necessarily mean that someone is a “Pervert”. Therefore, I inquired of this rather confused old man what further evidence he possessed to substantiate his severe accusation.

“Well, he was also cautioned for the same offence in Birmingham. That makes him a perv,” he asserted with all the conviction of his own interlect. Really?! And from where did he obtain this information?

“It’s on Google.”

“And where, pray, did Google source it from?” I probed. Unsurprisingly, ol’ Bill was unable to provide an answer.

In reality, this particular tale originates from the well-known source, Wikipedia, which claims it was derived from a book titled, ‘Crime Through Time: The Black Museum’ (Mirage Publishing, 2003) authored by former convict, Stephen Richards.

However, Mr. Richards does not mention this alleged incident in his work, and inquiries I conducted with the West Midland Police (or West Midlands Constabulary, as they were known at the time of this… ahem... ‘incident’) while writing my book revealed that no arrest or caution was ever issued or recorded!

Read about this Wikipedia invention here.

When I brought this to the attention of a now battered and bruised Bill, the accusatory bravado he’d previously displayed seemed to abandon him, and he became noticeably more remorseful:

“But it still says it on Google,” he repeated. Oh dear, oh dear!

This statement reminded me of my Granddad, who would often attempt to win any debate regarding politics or similar topics by asserting, “Well, it’s in the Daily Mirror, so it must be true!”

I felt compelled to clarify to Bill that Google is merely a search engine that will continue to churn out such nonsense as long as arrogant, misguided gossips like his good self persist in disseminating any piece of unverified drivel they encounter. I inquired how he would feel if some fool with too much idle time began to circulate any scandalous nonsense they found online about one of his loved ones. Needless to say the silly old sod had no response to that either.

The second portion of absurdity on the agenda came from a woman – I shall refer to her as ‘Margaret’ for the sake of convenience – who asserted that her brother had, at some point, lived “near” Peter in London. He had claimed to have seen our man in a his car – cruising around Kensington and Chelsea with his “toy boys.” When I questioned this, ‘Margaret’ abruptly shifted the identity of the alleged ‘eyewitness’ from her “brother” to herself: “The young men,” she insisted, “all appeared to be foreign.” How on earth could she possibly ascertain that? Were they all adorned in keffiyehs or silk kimonos while playing the Balalaika? And when exactly did this occur? “In the late 60s or early 70s. He [Peter] then went to ground.” Oh, really!

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the sole vehicle owned by Peter was a two-seater Austin-Healey ‘Frogeye’. Therefore, unless he was reenacting a scene from the classic British game show, ‘It’s A Knockout’, I find it difficult to comprehend how many “foreign toy boys” could possibly fit into such a car?!

Left: An illustration of what Peter’s car likely resembled in the 1960s… at least according to dear old ‘Margaret’.

I presume that the point she intended to convey was that Peter frequently drove around the Royal Boroughs of London accompanied by a group of young, exotic men, which, in her perspective, unequivocally indicated that they were his romantic partners. Did this, in her view, provide a comprehensive understanding of Peter’s existence? I suppose I will never ascertain this, as ‘Margaret’ would abruptly ‘go to ground’ once she recognised that she had backed herself into a corner. Now, if I were to be uncharitable, I might speculate that her sudden withdrawal was related to her argument collapsing under scrutiny, but let us extend her the benefit of the doubt, shall we?

For the benefit of ‘Margaret’ if no one else – during the late 1960s and early 1970s, Peter was at the pinnacle of his fame. He was the highest-paid actor on British television and was performing to sold-out audiences in the West End of London. How this is interpreted as ‘going to ground’ remains a mystery, but it is likely that the old dear was becoming somewhat confused.

It appears that, over the years, humanity has diminished its capacity for independent thought – as demonstrated by individuals like ‘Bill’, who will read a statement from an anonymous source online and accept it as truth without question. Furthermore, they will not hesitate to replicate and disseminate it. It never seems to occur to people like him to investigate how the person who originally posted this information obtained it; were they directly involved in the event they’re discussing, or did they witness it firsthand? Did they have a personal relationship with Peter? Did they attend a court hearing in person, or do they possess privileged information such as court documents, witness statements, or transcripts? Given that 99.999% of the time the answer to such questions would be a definitive “No!”, what justification does ANYONE have to circulate scandalous rumours? Certainly, people like ‘Bill’ and ‘Margaret’ would not approach a random person on the street and accuse his or her spouse, sibling, child, nephew, niece, cousin, or friend was a “Pervert”. I suspect that ‘Bill’ would find himself with a broken nose if he attempted such a thing, which likely explains why he opts to make unfounded, outrageous claims about others while hiding behind a computer screen in the comfort of his own home!

Bill’s Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED X QUICKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME ✔ WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

Margaret’s Score’s On The Doors are:

RESORTED TO FOUL LANUAGE AND PERSONAL ABUSE WNEN HE REALISED HE’D BEEN SKEWERED X QUICKLY CRAWLED BACK UNDER THE STONE FROM WHENCE SHE CAME ✔ WAS CONTRITE AND ATTEMPTED TO RIGHT THE WRONG X

Knuckle-Dragger Score (out of five)

Update: After contacting the website on which Bill had TWICE referred to Peter as a “Pervert”, I was assured of the following: “I can confirm that we have now removed that post and reported the person responsible to the web host.”