Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Something I should have mentioned earlier in fairness to Geoffrey Dickens.

He's alleged to have given Leon Brittan "Dickens' Disappearing Dossier" in 1983.

The earliest reference to him jumping on the Satanic Panic bandwagon was pretty shortly after it arrived from the US in the form of fundie 'experts' eager to run seminars for 'investigators' and hand out 'activist packs', roughly late '87.

So it's just possible that his beliefs and standards of evidence had altered over that period and that he was less credulous back in the early 80's than he was in the late 80's.

After all, if you just had all your evidence vanished by a real conspiracy, it's potentially going to predispose you to be more open to imaginary ones and to the testimony of obviously batshit fundies claiming that "Satan Ate My Baby" etc.

Possible, but not likely IMO.
 
its also entirely possible that faced with the idea that the establishment are child abusing cunts who collude in if not partake in the covering up of said crimes, its easier for aman of his age and class to latch onto satanic ritual abuse. Evil satanists vs the so called arbiters of good and democracy
 
elbows said:
Or to put it another way, I'm most interested in prosecutions, and there hasn't been any good news in that regard for ages now. The political fallout and prospect of inquiries interests me too, but not as much as people actually being brought to justice.
Click to expand...

I agree prosecutions - particularly if they were successful, would be great and would at least go some way in securing justice for the survivors.

But I’m also interested in the role Leon Brittan is playing in all this.

The fact that news of his interview under police caution about an alleged rape has come out today cannot be a coincidence in light of the allegations about the missing dossier.

Tom Symonds, a BBC correspondent, today raised the question about the timing of the two events - whether they were linked in some way - but didn’t attempt to answer it. However, it was obvious he thought they were.

Leaving my tin-foil hat firmly locked in the cupboard, I’m not sure what the link is.

Is someone trying to discredit Brittan? Is it a veiled warning for him to keep his mouth shut? Is he being set up as some sort of fall guy to protect others?

Or is there something else that I’m missing entirely?
 
happie chappie said:
The fact that news of his interview under police caution about an alleged rape has come out today cannot be a coincidence in light of the allegations about the missing dossier.

Tom Symonds, a BBC correspondent, today raised the question about the timing of the two events - whether they were linked in some way - but didn’t attempt to answer it. However, it was obvious he thought they were.

Leaving my tin-foil hat firmly locked in the cupboard, I’m not sure what the link is.
Click to expand...

The media know the historical rumours, and are more than capable of reading whats been on the internet for quite some time. They are also well aware of the legal minefield they operate in here.

As for exactly why this week as opposed to, for example 6 or 12 months ago, there are a number of possibilities. Here are a bunch, with ones I consider slightly more significant featuring earlier on:

Probably there were strong rumours that Brittan had actually finally been questioned about the historical alleged rape, and they weren't happy that this hadn't been reported or confirmed. Because until this part of the story broke, much less reported but still 'proper media' Exaro pieces detailed how the then-unnamed person had not even been questioned, and how the likes of Tom Watson were pressuring the CPS etc over how this was handled, and how the alleged victim was being treated.

They might not have liked whats been reported in regards to Fernbridge not having made arrests of politicians in the last year+ and the prospects of it doing so in future.

They may see the campaigners & MPs gathering momentum in regards to an over-arching inquiry, and have their own, more lurid, ideas of how this stuff should proceed.

The biggest celebrity trials are done, along with Savile NHS reports, so time to take the story to new ground.

The summer slow news silly season (e.g. parliament going on holiday) looms.


And yes, you do seem to be missing some pieces of the jigsaw, but don't ask me to lay them out bluntly and plainly right now, for the media have not joined it altogether yet and I don't intend to push my luck at this point. Read some older Exaro stories.
 
The most interesting thing about the Daily Mail story about a Labour Peer is their suggestion that 12 victims have talked to police about it. Thats far more victims than we are aware have come forwards in any of the other politician cases, and would hopefully make it easier to go for a prosecution.
 
The thread is too long to go back over and read all of it so apologies if this has already been posted.
Last night on the radio Edwina Currie was saying that perhaps resources would be better spent finding the paedophiles of today rather than going back 30 years to bring those people to justice. :mad:
 
Betsy said:
The thread is too long to go back over and read all of it so apologies if this has already been posted.
Last night on the radio Edwina Currie was saying that perhaps resources would be better spent finding the paedophiles of today rather than going back 30 years to bring those people to justice. :mad:
Click to expand...

So presumably such an attitude would extend to all criminal offences that happened more than in the immediate past. Murder, arson, terrorism? An interesting argument she is putting forward there.
 
Barking_Mad said:
Should also mention that Kasir's death is suspicious, also talked about in the video. The inquest into her death was in 1990, so the information has been known about for a long time. If Faye is correct, we could have been having this conversation 24 years ago.
Click to expand...

Those who have looked through historical press clippings, and those that have seen the results of their efforts, know that there have been opportunities to have at least a fair chunk of this conversation at various points over the years. Leaving aside the recent post-Savile years, we can see various degrees of press interest in 1982 and 1990.

e.g. the various historical articles shown here:

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.c...edophile-network-was-covered-up-for-31-years/

Sadly that blog is iffy in places so I'd only really use it for the scans of old press articles.
 
back in 1990, i heard someone name a high profile politician as a paedo and said there'd been a d notice put on it. i bet the mp was feeling a bit sheepish when he had to confess all to mrs t.
 
Interesting below for the Geoffrey Dickens quote. These four knew Colin Peters (ex foreign office barrister who used Elm Tree to make videos and abuse boys)

exp4289.jpg



I spent some time previously trying to do some sort of chart to show the links between different people and groups etc.. I gave up because it is so widespread and there are so any links it is really hard to put together. What it did show me is the size of what is being dealt with.
 
elbows said:
Those who have looked through historical press clippings, and those that have seen the results of their efforts, know that there have been opportunities to have at least a fair chunk of this conversation at various points over the years. Leaving aside the recent post-Savile years, we can see various degrees of press interest in 1982 and 1990.

e.g. the various historical articles shown here:

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.c...edophile-network-was-covered-up-for-31-years/

Sadly that blog is iffy in places so I'd only really use it for the scans of old press articles.
Click to expand...

The scans of old press articles tell a reasonably coherent story in themselves, especially in the light of the Exaro stuff you mentioned earlier.

Edited to add: see what you mean about "iffy". Just found a page on that blog uncritically quoting Diane "4000 children a year sacrificed to Satan in the UK" Core of Childwatch.
 
Last edited:
Barking_Mad said:
Interesting below for the Geoffrey Dickens quote. These four knew Colin Peters (ex foreign office barrister who used Elm Tree to make videos and abuse boys)

exp4289.jpg



I spent some time previously trying to do some sort of chart to show the links between different people and groups etc.. I gave up because it is so widespread and there are so any links it is really hard to put together. What it did show me is the size of what is being dealt with.
Click to expand...
you can download a range of social network software without charge - see e.g. http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php
 
Barking_Mad said:
I spent some time previously trying to do some sort of chart to show the links between different people and groups etc.. I gave up because it is so widespread and there are so any links it is really hard to put together. What it did show me is the size of what is being dealt with.
Click to expand...

Looks like others have tried hard to do this for some years now. For example this webbrain: https://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/0FE31538-2121-8495-33A5-86073BE95DE1#-1

I think the main problem with attempting this is of a different nature though. The problem is not created by the number of cases, its the quality and number of links we can make using information presently in the public domain. Personally I've only seen a small number of potentially interesting links, and they aren't usually solid enough to shout about beyond what the likes of Exaro and the Sunday People have already done in recent years, without at least further info and investigations by law enforcement etc.
 
elbows said:
The most interesting thing about the Daily Mail story about a Labour Peer is their suggestion that 12 victims have talked to police about it. Thats far more victims than we are aware have come forwards in any of the other politician cases, and would hopefully make it easier to go for a prosecution.
Click to expand...
I think the problem with the politician cases is different: it is not how many people have to come forwards to make a case for looking at prosecution, so much as how many people can come forwards before NOT looking at prosecution begins to look extremely dodgy.

My guess is that we're somewhere between the two right now...

And that somewhere in government, it is someone's job to try and keep it that way.
 
elbows said:
The media know the historical rumours, and are more than capable of reading whats been on the internet for quite some time. They are also well aware of the legal minefield they operate in here.

As for exactly why this week as opposed to, for example 6 or 12 months ago, there are a number of possibilities. Here are a bunch, with ones I consider slightly more significant featuring earlier on:

Probably there were strong rumours that Brittan had actually finally been questioned about the historical alleged rape, and they weren't happy that this hadn't been reported or confirmed. Because until this part of the story broke, much less reported but still 'proper media' Exaro pieces detailed how the then-unnamed person had not even been questioned, and how the likes of Tom Watson were pressuring the CPS etc over how this was handled, and how the alleged victim was being treated.

They might not have liked whats been reported in regards to Fernbridge not having made arrests of politicians in the last year+ and the prospects of it doing so in future.

They may see the campaigners & MPs gathering momentum in regards to an over-arching inquiry, and have their own, more lurid, ideas of how this stuff should proceed.

The biggest celebrity trials are done, along with Savile NHS reports, so time to take the story to new ground.

The summer slow news silly season (e.g. parliament going on holiday) looms.


And yes, you do seem to be missing some pieces of the jigsaw, but don't ask me to lay them out bluntly and plainly right now, for the media have not joined it altogether yet and I don't intend to push my luck at this point. Read some older Exaro stories.
Click to expand...

I certainly wouldn’t ask you to reveal any more of the picture for me.

I’m just curious about the timing of events. So much has happened in the last 24 hours- let alone the last few years - alone that it’s hard to make sense of it all and my brain is starting to hurt.

I’ve read some of the Exaro articles, particularly in relation to the alleged rape of “Jane” and the allegations about the way she was treated by the police. I’ll try and read back further, time permitting.

I agree - I’m sure the name of the alleged rapist was widely known in the media and other circles and the press could have named him, provided they were prepared to run the significant risk of a libel action.

But what they couldn’t have done 6 or 12 months ago was say that Leon Brittan had been questioned under caution by the police regarding an allegation of rape (if indeed Leon Brittan is the person alluded to in today’s Independent on Sunday) as, according to the article, the questioning only happened last month.

That’s what makes me particularly suspicious about the timing.
 
Been catching up with a huge chunk (many pages) of this thread. Can I just thank elbows, and several others, for the extremely low level of out-and-out conspiracist stuff in various posts and links?

Almost all posts seem to be focussing on whatever credible, fact/evidence based, stuff they can find, and good on you all for that.
 
Last edited:
happie chappie said:
But what they couldn’t have done 6 or 12 months ago was say that Leon Brittan had been questioned under caution by the police regarding an allegation of rape (if indeed Leon Brittan is the person alluded to in today’s Independent on Sunday) as, according to the article, the questioning only happened last month.
Click to expand...
and...
 
elbows said:
They may see the campaigners & MPs gathering momentum in regards to an over-arching inquiry, and have their own, more lurid, ideas of how this stuff should proceed.
Click to expand...

With a slightly less cynical hat on, I should probably say that a good number of those in the press are probably in favour of the inquiry idea, rather than having an alternative in mind. Or the 'best of both worlds'.

Certainly a look at todays news suggests that the momentum for this stuff is reaching critical mass. I don't know if they've saved much 'new' stuff for the week ahead, but Tebbit's utterances are almost enough on their own, let alone everything else.
 
New stuff:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ns-Scotland-Yard-detectives-trace-victim.html

The Telegraph can disclose officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Fernbridge - launched in February last year to examine allegations of a paedophile ring involving prominent figures - have closely examined the case of the eight-year-old alleged victim.
Click to expand...

Police are understood to have sent a United States investigator to interview the victim of alleged abuse at Elm Guest House, in Barnes, south-west London, who is now a successful businessman in his early 40s in the east coast US.

A US law enforcement officer, who had recently returned home after concluding a secondment to the Fernbridge team, was asked to interview the man on Scotland Yard’s behalf earlier this year.

The alleged victim is understood to have named the senior figure. During his original interview in 1982 the child referred to his abuser working at “the big house”, which detectives believe was the Houses of Parliament.

The US officer reported back to Scotland Yard that the alleged victim was “ready to spill the beans” and advised them to travel to America immediately to conduct a formal interview.

But by the time travel plans had been arranged, the man had changed his mind for unknown reasons and refused to co-operate, The Daily Telegraph understands.
Click to expand...

Fernbridge detectives also interviewed a retired police officer who was involved in the original Elm Guest House investigation and who interviewed the alleged victim at the time.

This newspaper understands the retired detective was reluctant to go into detail about why information about the politician was not included into witness statements at the time or submitted into evidence as part of a potential prosecution.

His reluctance, which appears to reinforce the case for an amnesty, is understood to have stemmed from the policeman’s fear that he could face disciplinary action, or other legal implications, or lose his pension.
Click to expand...
 
Here's a reasonably good account of the origins of the Satanic Panic in the UK from the Independent (can't find it on the Indy site)

One Rochdale policeman involved in the case has a theory: "What I think is happening is there are some cranks among social workers. They are getting wind of these documents and they are trying to tie it up with routine abuse cases. If social workers came to us with allegations of this nature we have to investigate. I don't see how it can be stopped from happening again."
Click to expand...

http://www.skepticfiles.org/rumor/is160990.htm

So I'm just wondering. Suppose it's 1988 and you're a Chief Constable someplace where (hypothetically of course), say five or ten years or so ago, you or your predecessor covered up a bunch of awful stuff about Jimmy, Cyril and their privileged pals raping little kids from the local childrens' homes and you're a bit worried that the (hypothetical) D-Notices aren't going to be enough to keep it quiet.

Then one of your detectives comes to you and says:

"Boss, we've got some fundie social workers who've been on courses run by some self-appointed 'ritual abuse experts' from the US alleging all kinds of totally implausible shit about massive satanic child molester mind-control / 'bloodlines' conspiracies sacrificing hundreds of babies.It all seems to be based on fairy stories that they've gotten off these 'ritual abuse experts' and then coached kids who've been taken into care amid traumatic scenes and who are probably feeling really vulnerable, into playing back, but all we have any actual evidence for is maybe a regular, sordid, stupid, non-conspiratorial, non-Satanic, incest/abuse case or two. "

The accused are all ordinary, mostly working class people. They're not celebrity friends of Mrs Thatcher or Prince Charles, nor senior civil servants, lawyers or politicians or anyone else that Special Branch, MI5, or anyone like that might care about.

None of this stuff leads back to the actual child abuse by Cyril, Jimmy and other well-connected types, that you or your predecessor has (hypothetically) covered up.

Do you tell your cops to scupper all investigation into this obvious fundie horseshit for lack of evidence?

Or do you see an opportunity?
 
Last edited:
happie chappie said:
Sorry - cocked up Quote function again!

Meant to reply to Treelovers post 2736:

IF it's genuine that's a hell of a list.

For obvious reasons I'm not going to comment on anyone who is still alive but Colin Jordan - arguably Britain's foremost Nazi. Bloody hell!
Click to expand...

Wasn't Jordan the one who got done for stealing knickers?
 
The thing about that is that I believe there may have been several sets of rumours about him, which makes it rather hard to know what the rumours that were 'found to be untrue' were, and whether they relate to modern rumours.
 
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