Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?

Don't know if this has been linked to yet:-
It appears to be a copy of the westminster secret service doc from 1995. Would be interested in where the recently quoted segment is.
 
Baroness Butler-Sloss's broader, independent inquiry, will look at how seriously public bodies and other important institutions have taken their duty of care to protect children from sexual abuse.
...
Mr Sedwill said Lady Butler-Sloss's inquiry would not be pursing individual cases, although she would want to hear cases of that type.
...
Her report on child sex abuse in Cleveland during the 1980s - which had led to more than 100 children being removed from their families - resulted in the Children's Act 1989.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914
I am less interested in the probity of public bodies, or even kids being taken from their families, I am interested in prominent perpetrators, if there are any, being punished.
As part of a two-pronged attack on child abuse, Home Secretary Theresa May announced on Monday a separate review, headed by the NSPCC's Peter Wanless, which would focus on concerns the Home Office failed to act on allegations of child sex abuse contained in a dossier handed over in the 1980s by former Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914
So the first and second reviews both focus mainly on institutions, rather than perpetrators. I suppose police investigations are ongoing, but they don't seem to be ongoing very quickly, these allegations are many years old.
 
Sedwill's ineffectual incompeto-fuckwittery today was probably a micro model of the coming process(es). When asked questions like 'did you read it, did you speak to them, did you look in the cupboard', the answer was always an astonished 'no'. He undertook a 'review' which appeared to involve him doing nothing at all. I somehow can't see teams of investigators crowbarring cabinets open (or electronic versions thereof) or chasing down the clerk who might have been given the shredding job in 1984. There will be some interviews, a lot of submissions - and a report that is a cautious assemblage of that which can't be ignored, but nothing more radical. No risks taken, nothing pushed and nothing more than an allusion to events which are plainly true but can't be proved beyond 'reasonable doubt'.
 
The quoted segment is by Tim Fortescue and is at 23.50

The whole documentary is very interesting, if you are into that kind thing. And it is extremely relevant to the matter at hand.
 
From last year. Some of this article is touched upon in the youtube video "Nightmare at Elmtree Guesthouse" a few pages back.

Chris Fay said he was pinned to a wall and throttled before being given a chilling warning to “back away” from allegations surrounding the notorious Elm Guest House in Barnes, south-west London.

Young boys in care were allegedly taken there in the Eighties to be abused by high-profile MPs and other powerful establishment figures.

Mr Fay, who worked for the now-defunct National Association of Young People In Care, accused the Metropolitan Police of acting like “gangsters” when news of the scandal broke in 1990. He revealed how some Special Branch members routinely threatened him and his colleagues and even victims over a three-month period of intimidation
 
To give Hodge her due, she's not kept her gob shut on the stuff that's arisen post-Savile, even though she must be painfully aware that the meeja are just waiting to trot out her past.

True... though normally when she opens her gob a foot goes in it.
 
Retired judges are quite often used for inquiries. Provided she still has all her faculties, there is no reason why EB-S shouldn't do a perfectly good job, at least as far as her age is concerned: her experience as a lawyer will be useful in examining evidence (assuming there is any) and questioning witnesses.

Butler-Sloss knows an establishment cover-up when she sees one

The ‘establishment’ have decided to respond to allegations of an ‘establishment’ cover-up of the wholesale abuse of children by ‘establishment’ figures, by installing an ‘establishment’ figure to investigate them…. Dame Butler-Sloss will lead a review into whether “public bodies had failed in their duty of care towards children.

Whether there is any significance in the fact that Dame Butler-Sloss’ brother was the Attorney General who decided not to prosecute Peter Hayman, the Paedophile diplomat, exposed by Geoffrey Dickens MP, is open for debate. However, in the interests of 100% transparency, only an idiot would make such an appointment, knowing the questions that would likely be raised.

The family connection is no coincidence. It just sheds further light on the horrible, grubby nepotism that exists within the judiciary and wider ruling elite….

http://winterofmalcontent.wordpress...-an-establishment-cover-up-when-she-sees-one/
 
So the first and second reviews both focus mainly on institutions, rather than perpetrators. I suppose police investigations are ongoing, but they don't seem to be ongoing very quickly, these allegations are many years old.

The age of the allegations will make the police work slower, since they are mostly reliant on finding enough victims who are willing to co-operate, and most other potential forms of evidence are long gone. And the police only restarted this work in recent years, and will be hindered not just by any present willingness for fresh coverup, but all that was lost by coverups that happened long ago and may not be undoable.

My faith in police investigations snaring some high-profile perpetrators has diminished somewhat over time, but thats not just because of how long its taking, but rather the way the mood of Exaro news pieces has changed over time. They started off sounding quite confident, and had some good police and/or victim sources, but the relationship with the relevant parts of the Met seems to have been more antagonistic as time has gone on, and with less confident hopeful details to report.

I hope there turns out to be a difference between the reality of police investigations and the public understanding of such at this point. And I certainly hope there are other cases getting somewhere beyond the Elm Guest House stuff, I don't want to put all my eggs in one basket on that one. For numerous reasons, including the apparent lack of victims willing to cooperate, some questions about exactly how well run and thorough NAYPIC was, and also the complications stemming from the fact that this case was the one rumoured about most strongly, and with most detail, all those years ago. These questions don't make me think any less of the possible abuse that took place there, not by any means, and I want it to get somewhere, but I would he happier if I knew that there were other cases involving high-profile people being pursued, so we aren't left with nothing if that particular case goes nowhere. And when we speak of the dark arts, I cannot rule out the possibility that some of the info that appears in the public domain in relation to that case, was a load of crock that stemmed from a different sort of spooky game being played back in the day.

It doesn't help when we get confident stories about imminent arrests stemming from other branches of police investigation, and then nothing happens. For example this piece about operation Cayacos from Feb 2014, which spoke of charges being pressed within weeks:

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5...evel-charges-in-paedophile-ring-linked-to-mps
 
<snip>
I was surprised when the Police stated a few years ago such films were a myth, how could they say that ?

One possible interpretation is that 'snuff film' is often taken to imply something made primarily for commercial gain, where the very few actual cases of filmed sex murders are more like 'sex killer home movies' ie more in the nature of a trophy than a commercial thing.
 
I’m not saying that won’t happen.

Just that the line that they knew nothing or that “we’ve lost them, they got shredded, the dog eat them” or any other similar tripe simply won’t wash anymore with an increasing sceptical public who will no longer uncritically swallow anything the Government says in the way they would, say, 40 years ago.
Well, I imagine what will happen is:
The Agencies will say - we are unable to release these files, as release might compromise national security. Never mind that this is a crock of shite. The Express/Mail papers will get behind this - do you want to jeopardize national security? What are you, some kind of traitor?
 
One possible interpretation is that 'snuff film' is often taken to imply something made primarily for commercial gain, where the very few actual cases of filmed sex murders are more like 'sex killer home movies' ie more in the nature of a trophy than a commercial thing.

A more careful version of that classic police line, which would also have been used at the time and I'm sure I heard in at least one documentary from the late 80's or early 90's, is that 'the snuff movie(s) may exist, but we've not seen one and until we do we'll have to treat it as an unsubstantiated rumour'.
 
A more careful version of that classic police line, which would also have been used at the time and I'm sure I heard in at least one documentary from the late 80's or early 90's, is that 'the snuff movie(s) may exist, but we've not seen one and until we do we'll have to treat it as an unsubstantiated rumour'.


Just came across this :

Police did nothing to track down victim of child porn snuff film

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film
 
A more careful version of that classic police line, which would also have been used at the time and I'm sure I heard in at least one documentary from the late 80's or early 90's, is that 'the snuff movie(s) may exist, but we've not seen one and until we do we'll have to treat it as an unsubstantiated rumour'.

Sure but as far as I know (and I'm willing to be educated here), even if you include sex killer verite (but exclude stuff like the 911 footage) there are only about half a dozen documented cases ever, anywhere, that didn't turn out to be sfx fakes, run of the mill Japanese porn or various sorts of myths (e.g. every case of the many mentioned during the Satanic Panics, including one that turned out to be a Derek Jarman/Throbbing Gristle movie, but which sensation seeking journalists at C4 didn't bother to check the claims of xtian loons about).

So given the number of actual occurences vs myths, I don't think it's unreasonable to treat any claim of snuff movies as unsubstaniated until you've got a case that'll stand up in court.
 
Last edited:
So frightening, what really goes on...

I find it equally frightening that despite several years of trying to consume all the info that is out there for a layman to get his hands on, I don't have that much clearer a sense of what really goes on, or did go on.

Just to pick one example, I have no clear sense of how many MPs or other prominent outsiders abused kids from children's homes. It sounds like it happened, but I really need a case to go to court to firm up the couple of plausible examples we've heard about, let alone those whose plausibility was damaged by the damaged nature of some of the victims, witnesses, and their ability to correctly identify perpetrators. If that doesn't happen, I'll be left with the sense that some bad shit happened, but no real idea about who did this shit, and what scale it happened on.
 
My faith in police investigations snaring some high-profile perpetrators has diminished somewhat over time, but thats not just because of how long its taking, but rather the way the mood of Exaro news pieces has changed over time.

David Hencke was used to getting faster responses to his stories on important but less-explosive issued when he was at the Guardian, before he went over to Exaro.

It's in the nature of things that it's even easier to slow down responses to decades-old events (particularly when those events are said to be coverups).

And slowing things down is one of the main purposes of inquiries.

And it's particularly important to quieten everything down in the year before an election.
 
Sure but as far as I know (and I'm willing to be educated here), even if you include sex killer verite (but exclude stuff like the 911 footage) there are only about half a dozen documented cases that didn't turn out to be sfx fakes, run of the mill Japanese porn or various sorts of myths (e.g. every case of the many mentioned during the Satanic Panics). So given the number of actual occurences vs myths, I don't think it's unreasonable to treat any claim of snuff movies as unsubstaniated until you've got a case that'll stand up in court.


It has to be out there, the fact now adays everyone has a phone camera means its inevitable.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film
 
Another thing I think we need, especially when considering the potential for continued abuses today, is for society to have a whole bunch of frank discussions about 'rent boys'. But we actually seem to get less of this these days than we did back when it was 'mainstream acceptable' to spout a load of awful shit about homosexuality, gender issues, etc.
 
It has to be out there, the fact now adays everyone has a phone camera means its inevitable.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film

Perhaps so. Certainly, all of the less than half a dozen documented cases that I'm aware of have been 21st century.

Thousands of others that have been claimed to exist since Ed Sanders coined the term in the late 60's for the alleged Manson Family home movies (which have never surfaced) have turned out to be bullshit of various kinds.

Edited to add: so just to be clear, I think the weight of evidence vs quantity of claims warrants treating stories about snuff movies with slightly less, scepticism than claims of psychic spoon-bending and about the same as claims of satanic ritual abuse. It could happen, especially with modern technology, but historically an awful lot of sensationalist snuff movie stories have been circulated and virtually all such claims have turned out to be bogus.
 
Last edited:
Another thing I think we need, especially when considering the potential for continued abuses today, is for society to have a whole bunch of frank discussions about 'rent boys'. But we actually seem to get less of this these days than we did back when it was 'mainstream acceptable' to spout a load of awful shit about homosexuality, gender issues, etc.

umm

or about prostitution and /or under-age prostitution in general? (I assume the latter exists with both genders) - and I'm not sure that a "rent boy" is necessarily under age, even now. it's also worth bearing in mind that until the mid 90s, a 20 year old was 'under age' as regards gay male sexual activity.
 
Just came across this :

Police did nothing to track down victim of child porn snuff film

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/47...to-track-down-victim-of-child-porn-snuff-film

Express stories should set alarm bells ringing - the plot line and American accent suggest a fake snuff film - Charlie Sheen I seem to remember was taken in by the sick Japanese Guinea Pig films which are sfx and gruesome and loathsome. For some reason they survive uploads on You Tube - search guinea pig japan TRIGGER ALERT - disturbing horror material which still remains very controversial more than 20 years after their release.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_Pig_(film_series)
 
Cover up without doubt on the way.
All blame will be laid at the door of some long deceased scumbucket.
All will be well in the island of Angels, we can all sleep a little less soundly in our beds tonight.:(
 
That list has been around for a while. Thing is note the MI 5 names on there, and the name of Leon Brittan. It's hardly likely that the dossier given to Brittan ever went anywhere than the bin, and MI5 are not going to drop their own in the shit. Expect a cover up!

I'm surprised none of these names come out fighting McAlpine stylee as their reputations are being chipped away with innuendo and if they are totally innocent or unconnected have nothing to lose. Peter Bottomeley was quick out of the traps.
 
I'm surprised none of these names come out fighting McAlpine stylee as their reputations are being chipped away with innuendo and if they are totally innocent or unconnected have nothing to lose. Peter Bottomeley was quick out of the traps.
I was thinking just the same. I wonder how long that list has been online.
 
Back
Top Bottom