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

[hot air baboon]

...latest from Sunday People...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/leon-brittan-abused-children-westminster-5038101


An alleged victim of a Westminster paedophile ring claimed to police that Leon Brittan abused him more than a dozen times.

The witness known as Nick said he also saw most of his friends molested by the former Home Secretary who died on Wednesday aged 75.

Making the bombshell claims, Nick first spoke to investigative website Exaro last year and identified Mr Brittan as being present at VIP abuse parties.

Police are also examining claims based on Nick’s evidence that Mr Brittan was present when two unidentified men, who were part of the network, murdered a boy in a physical beating following sexual abuse around 1981 or 1982.

And they have received further allegations he sexually abused boys at the Carlton Club in the St James’s area of London, as well as Dolphin Square and elsewhere.

The Sunday People has published a number of stories in the past 12 months into the allegations made about Mr Brittan.

The paper decided not to name him because of on-going police investigations into the claims.


...and the Star....

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/421888/Leon-Brittan-depravity

Police were looking into allegations made about the top Tory politician when he died of cancer last week.

Award-winning investigator Mark Williams-Thomas, the man who exposed Jimmy Savile as a paedophile, confirmed: “Police took the allegation very seriously.”

Lord Brittan’s apparent sexual deviancy has been rumoured for decades. But today, for the first time, the Daily Star Sunday can reveal what is actually known to authorities.

We can disclose that Brittan’s alleged victim said he was abused while at primary school.

And we can report sickening testimony from a social worker who describes seeing photos taken in the 1970s of Brittan dressed in kinky outfits with naked boys sitting on his lap.

Brittan is said to have abused children at Elm Guest House, a boarding house in Barnes, west London, run as a brothel in the 1970s and 1980s.

Documents placed online in recent years – but until today unsupported by independent evidence – said he was one of a number of high-profile attendees.

 

[laptop]

Ah. I had an image of dusty archives and half moon spectacles.

I'm not sure how much dust there is...

It's fairly common for the archives to reveal things because they point to the existence of a document, even though the thing itself is still under lock and key.

 

[1%er]

Tim Tate interviewed on The politics show, Bristol Community Radio BCFM
Youtube (can't embed for some reason).

 

[Roadkill]

Ah. I had an image of dusty archives and half moon spectacles.

Nah, the National Archives isn't like that.

The interesting thing is that this file made it into the public catalogue (which it has: it's here). Obviously TNA's catalogues do include secret files, both held by them and retained by government, but AFAIK that sort of thing often doesn't show up on the catalogue available to the public - or to staff without the requisite security clearances. The fact that this one has suggests either a cataloguing error (someone forgot to tick the 'secret' box, in effect!) or, conceivably, a deliberate leak.

 

[laptop]

Thanks for digging that out, Roadkill.

The fact that this one has suggests either a cataloguing error (someone forgot to tick the 'secret' box, in effect!) or, conceivably, a deliberate leak.

Mildly interesting:

Closure status: Closed Or Retained Document, Open Description

Could be an accidental failure to tick "Closed Description" or whatever it's properly called - or a decision.

 

[Lurdan]

The fact that this one has suggests either a cataloguing error (someone forgot to tick the 'secret' box, in effect!) or, conceivably, a deliberate leak.

Without seeing the content there's no way of knowing whether 'unnatural sexual proclivities' refers to sexual abuse, or indeed even to things which are illegal as distinct from being embarrassing. In 1980 it could quite easily have been referring to homosexuality. The 'security implications' of homosexuality was widely discussed after Anthony Blunt was outed in 1979 as the 'fourth man'.

 

[Roadkill]

Could be an accidental failure to tick "Closed Description" or whatever it's properly called - or a decision.

The former sounds as likely as any other scenario, doesn't it?

It's a good thing that its existence is common knowledge. I've heard tell of people digging up things in archives they suspected were supposed to be secret, mentioning it to staff, and then finding later that they've mysteriously disappeared. At least that can't happen in this case.

 

[Roadkill]

Without seeing the content there's no way of knowing whether 'unnatural sexual proclivities' refers to sexual abuse, or indeed even to things which are illegal as distinct from being embarrassing. In 1980 it could quite easily have been referring to homosexuality. The 'security implications' of homosexuality was widely discussed after Anthony Blunt was outed in 1979 as the 'fourth man'.

Oh definitely. It may well turn out to be a storm in a teacup. AFAIK it has been passed to the enquiry, though, which might suggest at least some of it is relevant.

*edit* Not passed to the enquiry, but police have looked at it.

 

[elbows]

I forgot to keep up with Telegraph Peter Morrison stories from early January. There was another one after we mentioned them on this thread a few page back, touching on a possible link to a murder.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...tcher-aide-accused-of-raping-teenage-boy.html

Scotland Yard is investigating a possible link between one of Margaret Thatcher’s closest aides and the unsolved murder of an eight-year-old boy in the 1980s.

Last week a 46-year-old man told the Telegraph that Morrison raped him when he was 14, and claimed Scotland Yard covered it up.

The alleged victim said he was walking in the tiny village of Harting in 1982 when the MP “appeared out of nowhere”, gave him some money and later lured him to London.

There the man claims Morrison raped him in the notorious Elm guesthouse in London, reportedly used by a Westminster paedophile ring for years.

Just months before, the skeletal torso of Vishal Mehrotra had been found in woodland less than two miles away from Harting, which is in a remote corner of West Sussex.

The eight-year-old had disappeared on the day of Charles and Diana’s wedding in 1981, less than a mile from the Elm guesthouse.

So its a sort of double geographic potential link. As usual its intriguing but I can't do anything with it unless it's explored and evidence or other missing pieces gathered.

 

[1%er]

It would seem the Ben Emmerson QC Counsel to the Independent Panel Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, feels that the panel as currently set up cannot continue due to the actions of Sharon Evans. She (Sharon Evans) has breached her contract and has also committed a series of breaches of confidentiality making it untenable for the panel to carry on effectively. He explains his reasoning in this video, which is his evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee 26th January 2015. The last 25 minutes (approximately) is the most interesting, the first hour deals with what is really a distraction and deals mainly with the allegations made by Sharon Evans against Ben Emmerson.

Theresa May has said she will make a statement about how things will continue with regards to the Inquiry by the end of January (this Saturday) and it looks to me that she will disband the current inquiry and set up something else.

 

[elbows]

Also on that topic:

• An internal Home Office report has been released showing the Home Office did decide that Evans had breached confidentiality. The home affairs committee published it on its website. In it Mary Calam, a Home Office director general, told Evans:

Such breaches of confidentiality are extremely serious. They must inevitably undermine the trust of Panel members in each other and therefore the ability of the Panel to operate effectively. They also undermine the confidence of survivors and others who engage with the Panel on the basis that information they provide and discussions they have with Panel members will remain confidential.

Calam also said that Emmerons had not bullied Evans, although Calam said he accepted Evans found his conduct “very distressing”.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics.../david-camerons-tax-speech-politics-live-blog

 

[laptop]

Also on that topic:



http://www.theguardian.com/politics.../david-camerons-tax-speech-politics-live-blog

Blimey.

Emmerson told the Home Affairs Committee:

It may be that in some areas Mrs Evans finds it difficult to distinguish between an accurate statement and an inaccurate one ...

Her conduct has been a massive distraction and has caused a great deal of damage in the final stages of this interim inquiry ...

That's QC-speak for "massive fruitloop". Of course she was upset when he told her so during the panel meeting, which he would have done forcefully.

 

[brogdale]

Hencke is reporting a further 'setback' for May in attempting to 're-boot' the CSA inquiry...

https://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2...ng-serving-judges-to-child-sex-abuse-inquiry/

I have learnt from a reliable source that Theresa May’s plans to appoint two highly qualified women judges on the short list to chair the Child Sex Abuse inquiry have been blocked by Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, Lord Chief Justice.

It's almost as though they're now looking to get through to April, and then it will fall to someone else...

 

[butchersapron]

Sky News Newsdesk
@SkyNewsBreak
Ministry of Justice says information relating to three judge-led inquiries into institutional abuse went missing in the post

 

[brogdale]

Sky News Newsdesk
@SkyNewsBreak
Ministry of Justice says information relating to three judge-led inquiries into institutional abuse went missing in the post

wtf

 

[articul8]

Sky News Newsdesk
@SkyNewsBreak
Ministry of Justice says information relating to three judge-led inquiries into institutional abuse went missing in the post

? Is this different from the Duggan/Rodney/Hamill stuff?

 

[butchersapron]

wtf

This might not be related on reflection as the next bit of info says Mark duggan files were among the missing. I think i may have jumped the gun at seeing the word abuse.

 

[butchersapron]

? Is this different from the Duggan/Rodney/Hamill stuff?

It's the same stuff. Ignore.

 

[Lurdan]

No this is a different matter entirely just breaking. Home Affairs Select Committee apparently published letters on its website on Monday containing names of abuse victims. Row both over publication and over how the letters were passed to them by a panel member. Just reported on Sky News.

ETA: actually two different stories. This one was about unredacted correspondence from victims and details about panel members being put online by the Home Affairs Select Committee. This presumably follows their session with panel members last Tuesday. The 3.15 Sky News report said a victim had received threats as a result. That wasn't repeated at 4.15. Vaz is apparently personally contacting the people named to apologise.

 

[bluescreen]

The Graun has an article on this unwitting release of email correspondence on the committee website, which included personal details and disparaging remarks about some of the victims. In the affectless tones of officialdom, the committee issued a statement

“Last week, some material from the independent panel inquiry into child sexual abuse came into the committee’s possession in the course of our inquiry.

“The material included directions to panel members about how they should answer questions from the committee, as well as email exchanges between panel members about the panel’s external communications strategy.

“These emails included the names of third parties. At the request of the individuals concerned the material has been redacted to remove references to these individuals. The names of all these individuals were already in the public domain.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/29/child-sex-abuse-victims-emails-commons-committee

 

[elbows]

Leaving aside for a moment the Sharon Evans/Ben Emmerson spat which takes up the bulk of the document in one way or another, I think its important to look at what was said about victims groups. It touches on some issues which have been lurking and aren't so easy to talk about.

Barbara Hearn said the following:

[redacted] and [redacted] like every other survivor and group of survivors will have their opinions about what is right or wrong and it is not for us to judge that or act and respond to one group while ignoring another. As I said at our meeting with the Home Secretary there is not one single survivors voice and we will not be able to please all. The inquiry has been developed by the Panel on the basis of collective responsibility, as Ben is regularly reminding us. We cannot isolate a member now.

We know that ' the taking of evidence' means something quite different to a lawyer, to a researcher, to a member of the public and to the media. This is unfortunate but a reality. Clearly some attendees at listening events thought that they were giving us their evidence of abuse and Sharon reflected this in what she said. However this is not evidence to the inquiry in a form which would lead to a determination in the manner a Judge would envisage.

I do think the matter of how many survivors and who x or y represents is a very messy and thorny area. The underlying competitive tone of the mail from [redacted] is unhelpful. By their own words [Redacted]is “[Redacted]". Therefore it does not represent 200 organisations concerned with child sexual abuse. We do not know how many of their groups speak about CSA and I have asked before that we discuss this with them to be sure we are not getting drawn into the business of adult rape or domestic violence etc which is outside our remit. We also need to know how many of their members are from the other nations, to be sure we are not responding to ideas and needs of the other nations or Ireland where there is a different policy and legal framework for handling CSA. The failures we are committed to identify and address will not necessarily fit if we do not take care who we listen to. The art of exaggeration is a core skill for those who need funding. I understand it but it should not be applied in the situation we find ourselves in. It is important that the Inquiry whether Judge or Panel is sure who it is vesting faith in and what the person(s) are actually representing. We do not want to fall foul of the same fault officials have done in taking the voice of individual survivors who represent no-one but themselves by their own admission or who know other survivors but have no mandate to represent them. I do believe the [Redacted] represent an important cohort and are the right organisation for us to work with but exactly who they represent in our territory also needs to be clear and correct.

She was saying this in the context of defending Sharon Evans, and I don't think she or some others on the panel are beyond the same whiff of competitiveness that she identifies above. But it still usefully describes a couple more fronts in which relations between the panel, the inquiry, victims and victims groups can go wrong.

I would suggest that some of these problems are made far worse by having some panel members deciding that there is a choice to be made of which groups to work with. If you are worried about the ugliness of competition, why are you talking like you have to choose particular groups to be more closely affiliated with than others? It is easy to understand her point that they won't be able to please everyone, just spend a little time reading what some victims say online for proof of that, but the panel picking favourites is hardly the answer.

Its hard to imagine a credible panel that didn't have victim representation on it, but its notable that panel members from precisely that charity/structured support/victim representation world are the ones that have ended up being most embroiled in these issues. I suppose it's hardly surprising, since even if they worked out how to be perfect panel members and separate their duty from the rest of their life and sense of self, they are the ones who are going to be known and targeted first by any non-panel victims/groups that want to have a go at the inquiry in certain ways. But the evidence so far is that it would perhaps be best to exclude panel members with those outside interests from aspects of the panels work that may involve such choices about how to respond to and work with victims/groups.

I get the distinct impression that in addition to any feelings towards the Home Office generated by leaving the panel in limbo for too long, this issue of competition and animosity between different victims and groups, on and off the panel, has sometimes been fought via the Home Office as well. e.g. when the home secretary meets victims and/or organisations directly, and they make their opinions loudly known about who should or shouldn't be the chair, on the panel etc, it's made some people on the panel rather twitchy.

 

[hot air baboon]

Top British diplomat was focus of secret Government file sent to Margaret Thatcher about 'unnatural' sexual behaviour

The file, which has just been released to the National Archives, names the late Sir Peter Hayman as the subject of a file prepared for then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
Sir Peter died in 1992 after a career working as a diplomat including as High Commissioner to Canada. He also worked for intelligence service MI6.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aret-Thatcher-unnatural-sexual-behaviour.html

 

[elbows]

The speculation was right then, makes sense.

Some other publications coverage of this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-peter-hayman-named-in-dossier-10014295.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31062904

Just another little piece to add to the picture of how such allegations were treated historically. Take the way Dickens was treated when he named Hayman in parliament, the way Hayman was treated by the law, and the language in this file and I think one picture that was quite bloody clear enough already just becomes even clearer. Its a shame the pictures that remain very murky and unclear indeed have not rapidly approached similar levels of revelation.

 

[1%er]

You couldn't make it up.

Lynne Featherstone MP, Minister of State for Crime Prevention, being questioned by Keith Vaz, chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, on 20th Jan 2015. This session was just prior to the HASC session with four members from the independent panel inquiry into child sexual abuse. It had been reported that intimidation of the panel members had occurred, and Vaz was asking the responsible minister for clarification.

 

[not-bono-ever]

maybe this is relevant, maybe not ( mail linky)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...investigators-ignored-TWO-YEARS.html#comments

vicar caught with kid vids, kills himslef late last year before his bail date

the mail focuses on the fact that the data from the site wasnt used for a couple of years, despite the Candians chasing it seemingly regular basis. Given the furore over incidents like this, it does seem strange/ incompetent that not much seems to have been done about it until the arrest of the vicar in May 2014. a surprisingly low key article for the mail, given they knew about the arrest & background - they were doorstepping parents at the school in May 2014.

 

[bluescreen]

Gojam has the Hayman paper trail over on The Needle. I haven't worked my way through it yet but on first glance it seems that the authorities' first thought was 'national security' and to hell with anything or anyone else.

 

[elbows]

The Guardian detail some of Thatchers handwriting on the Hayman documents:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/02/thatcher-peter-hayman-named-paedophile-archives

 

[elbows]

Also it appears to be several days into February and yet Theresa May has still failed to name a new chair for the inquiry.

 

[brogdale]

Also it appears to be several days into February and yet Theresa May has still failed to name a new chair for the inquiry.

Yep, and there's about 34 'working' days left for Teresa May until there is the dissolution of this parliament. Pretty obvious strategy, really.

 

[teqniq]

Not, I feel a huge surprise:

Westminster child abuse scandal: KGB and CIA kept secret dossiers on Britain's VIP paedophiles