Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Everytime Cameron has been asked directly about this - by tom watson or by Phillip 'paxo' Schofield - he has the look of someone about to drink a bucket of cold sick.
Its also interesting that there has been no concerted effort by any part of the political establishment or the media to rubbish the claims of a padeo-ring involving senior people.
Basically it makes me think that these cunts know exactly what the truth is and are frantically busy trying to find ways to limit the damage.
 
Kaka Tim said:
Basically it makes me think that these cunts know exactly what the truth is and are frantically busy trying to find ways to limit the damage.
Click to expand...
They will certainly know everything was either discovered or suspected 20 years ago. Today, I suspect they'll be playing catchup, checking with police and civil servants what the Tom Watson and the internet might know.
 
This child abuse crackdown comes too late for too many

The case of prolific paedophile Neville Husband is a tale of horrendous abuse and deplorable handling by officials

Simon Hattenstone and Eric Allison
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 7 November 2012 18.08 GMT

It's welcome news that the coalition government and Labour party are united in their determination to tackle child sex abuse. This follows allegations that a senior Tory politician was involved in child abuse at homes in north Wales and the fallout from the Jimmy Savile revelations. It's just a shame that they weren't so keen a few months ago.

Earlier this year, we reported on one of Britain's most prolific paedophiles – a prison officer called Neville Husband, who preyed on young offenders at Medomsley detention centre over a 15-year period. His victims told us how he had systematically abused them in the 1960s, 70s and 80s.

It was a horrific story – he chose teenagers who were unlikely to be believed, were isolated and too terrified to report him to the authorities. He took them to his store room above the kitchen where he ligatured them and raped them. He was so confident that he was untouchable that sometimes he took them out of Medomsley to his house, where other men abused them.

Kevin Young told us that a rope was put round his neck till he passed out and was then raped by three or four men in Husband's house. He was one of a number of victims who alleged that Husband was part of a paedophile ring involving establishment figures from the prison service, the police and local politicians.

And it gets worse. The prison service had substantial evidence for many years that Husband was a paedophile. Indeed, it was stamped in his records. In 1969, eight years before Kevin Young was jailed, Husband was arrested at Portland borstal in Dorset and charged with importing pornography, including sado-masochistic images involving teenage boys. Husband admitted he showed it to the boys, and said it was all part of "research" he was undertaking for a potential book. Police and the prison service accepted his word.

Yesterday the home secretary, Theresa May, announced that there would be an investigation into the initial investigation into abuse in children's homes in north Wales. May said: "If you have suffered and you go to the police about what you have been through, those of us in positions of authority and responsibility will not shirk our duty to support you. We must do everything in our power to do everything we can to help you, and everything we can to get to the bottom of these terrible allegations." Well this is exactly what Young did – and he found that the police did everything in their power to bury the allegations.

When Young came out of Medomsley on 17 June, 1977, a day before his 18th birthday, he went straight to Consett police station and told them he had been raped again and again. He was told that simply by making a claim like that he could find himself locked up again. Twenty years later when another victim, "Steve", told police about Husband's abuse, he was advised to forget it because "you wouldn't want people on your estate to know about stuff like this".

Eventually in 2003, Husband was convicted of abusing five young inmates, after pleading not guilty. The recent testimonies about Jimmy Savile echo many of the statements made in that court 22 years ago, as officers came forward to say they suspected Husband was an abuser but did nothing about it. One officer said: "Husband used to keep one boy behind in the kitchen at night. We always felt sorry for that boy." None were charged with failing in their duty of care.

Husband was sentenced to eight years in prison. In 2005, this was increased to 10 years after new victims came forward and he admitted to attacks on four more boys. The police knew that there were many more cases but decided it was not in the public interest to pursue them. In 2009, Husband was released from prison after serving just over half his sentence. A year later, he died. Yet the fallout from his decades of abuse continues.

Young had a breakdown and was left homeless and "Steve" became a paranoid alcoholic and surrounded himself with CCTV cameras..

So how did the government react to news of Husband's conviction, and his victims' subsequent fight for compensation? When the Medomsley victims first sought redress, the Home Office used the statute of limitations to avoid payment. It defended that decision in a costly legal fight that went all the way to the House of Lords, but the Home Office lost.

At the end of the hearing of Young's case, in 2005, his lawyers asked the Home Office if it intended to carry out a review or investigation of Medomsley. They were told there were no plans to do so.

Earlier this year a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice told the Guardian: "In the late 1970s, several detainees held at Medomsley detention centre were physically and sexually abused by Neville Husband … At no stage has the Ministry of Justice attempted to defend the actions of Mr Husband. The prison service has come a long way since the 1980s, and significant efforts have been made to eliminate, so far as is possible, the mistreatment of prisoners."

Victims said they were appalled at the suggestion that only "several" detainees had been abused. Husband is thought to have abused hundreds if not thousands of teenage boys, and victims are still coming forward. None has been offered counselling or psychiatric help.

Perhaps the most shocking response came in 2010 from then home secretary, Jack Straw, when Stephen Byers, then local MP for one of the victims, wrote to him asking for a public apology. Straw replied: "The terms of the agreement did not include an apology."

That's right – Jack Straw, on behalf of the Labour government, said that victims, some of whom had been tied up and raped by an officer of the crown, did not deserve an apology.

Presumably, in light of the renewed vigour to pursue paedophiles and protect victims, those abused at Medomsley will eventually be deemed worth of an apology. Let's hope so. And let's hope that any inquiry into child abuse will examine how Husband was allowed to go on abusing for so many years unchecked. Then, and only then, will we be able to begin to right the wrongs done to these victims by abusers, the prison service, police and politicians.

This child abuse crackdown comes too late for too many | Simon Hattenstone and Eric Allison | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Click to expand...
 
Watchman said:
Hi BM..
Well, as it was common knowledge that Hoogstraten was involved, albeit from a safe distance, it was 'suggested' by sundry burly scallywags that something unfortunate may occur, should the coroner and families dig too deep. It is the general view that the coroner was 'got at' in some way but this would be difficult to prove.
If you've not already done so, check out Mr Hoogstraten and his connections. You may find it most interesting.
His attitudes to ramblers, or 'scum' as he referred to them, give a little insight.
Apologies if I'm reluctant to elaborate on some aspects of these matters for reasons mentioned previously, but I'm sure you'll understand...Plus I've become rather attached to my kneecaps!
Click to expand...

Hoogstraten is such a rancid shitsack that even Bob Mugabe couldn't stomach him when he was living in Zimbabwe. Oh how the people of the south coast wept as Mugabe expropriated Hoogie's Zimbabwe landholdings!
 
elbows said:
I've seen a front page story from the time where the footballer claimed to know stuff that may be of use to the Milligan death investigation. But it was then reported that the police were unimpressed when they questioned him, they said he knew nothing and was wasting their time. The reputation of the footballer was then sullied in the press, suggesting he was originally touting stories about gay MPs to the press simply because he was interested in making lots of money.

This leaves us none the wiser, as its impossible for me to judge whether this was a dodgy smear, or whether the footballer was indeed just after money, or a combination of all of the above. Either way the footballer is dead.
Click to expand...

By a similar method to Milligan too, IIRC, minus the womens underwear and the orange.


Cameron wasnt wrong to mention the gay witchhunt aspect, but this too can also be used to bury other stuff.
Click to expand...

Yup.
 
elbows said:
All the same I cant eliminate this aspect from some of the original stories, especially as Scallywag spent a fair amount of time making puerile jokes about a few closeted gay tories at the time.
Click to expand...

TBF, that was at a time when some closeted gay Tories (closeted to the public, not to the Westminster bubble) were still giving it large about "traditional family values". Highlighting hypocrisy isn't a crime, even if how you do it is childish.

This doesnt mean I write off any leads on this basis. But everything from press interest to coverups to legitimate concerns about underage rentboy activities and intelligence service & organised crime blackmail etc, public school culture and so on are part of the mix, and add layers of murk.
Click to expand...

Which is why the current upsurge of info is so interesting. We're seeing some linkages appear (or reappear) in a much more public manner than previously.
 
Kaka Tim said:
Everytime Cameron has been asked directly about this - by tom watson or by Phillip 'paxo' Schofield - he has the look of someone about to drink a bucket of sick.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it reminds him of his times as "chief toast-rack" at Eton?

Its also interesting that there has been no concerted effort by any part of the political establishment or the media to rubbish the claims of a padeo-ring involving senior people.
Click to expand...

That's because the nature of modern-day communications technology makes it impossible to stop effectively stop information dissemination.

Basically it makes me think that these cunts know exactly what the truth is and are frantically busy trying to find ways to limit the damage.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Damage limitation, buck-passing and (if they follow standard practice) the shifting of blame onto people who are conveniently dead. Then the rest will be "lessons have been learned" and all that old bollocks.
 
ViolentPanda said:
TBF, that was at a time when some closeted gay Tories (closeted to the public, not to the Westminster bubble) were still giving it large about "traditional family values". Highlighting hypocrisy isn't a crime, even if how you do it is childish.
Click to expand...

True, I'm just explaining why I dont want to get too carried away with some of the names that are being speculated over, based largely on those historical whispers. Some of it is a leap too far for me at this point.

I had rather hoped we'd have greater attention on names that have come out so far, such as Peter Morrison. Being dead and not the highest profile of names as far as the broader public are concerned seems to have relegated this one to the margins for now.
 
ViolentPanda said:
Absolutely. Damage limitation, buck-passing and (if they follow standard practice) the shifting of blame onto people who are conveniently dead.
Click to expand...

Although plenty of people are moaning about this already, it hasnt happened to the extent I was expecting. I expected more attention on Peter Morrison but its been a mere whimper so far. People on twitter and I suspect the press at large seem far more interested in the living. Which is quite understandable, but really the reputational damage to institutions, parties etc ought to still be great regardless of the person being dead. Given his close links to Thatcher I cant believe more is not being made of this.

Having said that I can see why the dead are less interesting to some people, and a safer bet for others, because dead men tell no tales.
 
ska invita said:
Im half keeping up with this thread, but has this "FOI (Freedom Of Information) request about alleged peadophiles past and present with connections to the Halls of power" been posted? Lots of names:

Its says its based on an FOI, but I cant see that verified. Seems legit.
Click to expand...

Plenty of the historical examples may well be accurate but that site starts ranting and drooling, I cant see what it has to do with FOI and if I click on a FOI link then it seems the person was banned from the relevant website for ranting and raving instead of using the system properly:

Despite previous warnings this account has been banned for repeatedly making requests and follow ups which are not requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act, but are other correspondence intended for the organisation in question.
Click to expand...
 
elbows said:
Plenty of the historical examples may well be accurate but that site starts ranting and drooling, I cant see what it has to do with FOI and if I click on a FOI link then it seems the person was banned from the relevant website for ranting and raving instead of using the system properly:
Click to expand...
Thanks elbows.....
 
ViolentPanda said:
By a similar method to Milligan too, IIRC, minus the womens underwear and the orange.
Click to expand...

Just worked out who this is now, thanks to that ^

Gosh.

That whole thing certainly could all be total bollocks, and of course we're all sensible folks here who are aware of this. Conspiracy theories often have one or two threads of verifiable truth running through them, which makes them all the more believable in the minds of the loonspuds*. But still.





*Incidentally, just looked up loonspud - first result: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=loonspud
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kid_Eternity
Is a revolution possible in the UK?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
195
Views
7K
A380
A380
Buddy Bradley
How long before we get a proper Tory-style sleaze gaffe from Labour?
Replies
0
Views
198
Buddy Bradley
Buddy Bradley
burtabraham
  • Poll
Should there be an elected second chamber, and how should it be elected?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
1K
Puddy_Tat
Puddy_Tat
B
The status of terms 'people of colour' and BIPOC in the UK
2 3 4 5
Replies
144
Views
7K
likesfish
likesfish
Humberto
Heroin Addiction in the UK
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
181
Views
6K
BristolEcho
BristolEcho
Back
Top Bottom