Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

The journalist in question was in possession of classified Home Office documents. They had him bang to rights and there was nothing he could do. There's an interview with him out there somewhere...

AFAIK there are several, but a good long quote from him here, of which this is part:

After the visit from Cyril Smith came the visit from Special Branch. There was a knock on the door of the office at around 8:00 one morning. It was amazing. Three SB men with London accents came inside. Some of the uniformed men stayed outside. They all flashed warrant cards. They showed me two pieces of paper. One looked like a search warrant with a warning. They were a rough bunch.

One of them said, “I have a D-Notice here and a search warrant signed by a judge. This is in response to a call made to Leon Brittan’s department. That was how they put it. They didn’t say they came from the Home Office.

They pushed me into a corner and one of them said, “Let me assure you that this story is not in the public interest. It cannot be printed, as a matter of national security. We’re not here to argue, Are you going to hand over your papers?

“If you don’t comply with this notice, we will arrest you for perverting the course of justice. You will be liable for up to ten years in prison. We can arrest you straight away if we believe you are going to publish.”

They knew Barbara had been to see me. They knew Cyril Smith had been round. Most of the documents were together in one folder. So it didn’t take them long. They picked up my own typewriter saying: “We’re taking that in case you’ve been forging documents.”

There was nothing I could do to resist. I’d never seen a D-Notice in my career and I was on a very temporary contract keeping the seat warm for another editor.

My Bury police contact was utterly shocked. He knew nothing about it. A day or two later the local police told me: “It was a visit from the London mob. We were not briefed.”

When I told Barbara [Castle], she said, “I thought that might happen.”
 
A cold case unit is to investigate claims police released MP Cyril Smith after child pornography was found in the boot of his car.

It is understood the Liberal MP, who died in 2010, was stopped on the M1 in Northamptonshire during the 1980s.

But he was released from police custody after making a telephone call to an unidentified third party in London, it has been claimed... Labour MP Simon Danczuk first made the claim in his book about Smith, published last year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-31964255
 
The state of Janner-related matters:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-31961706

Last year it was reported that in 1989 a detective sergeant was told not to arrest Mr Janner or search his home.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission has said more investigation is needed into the claims.

Leicestershire Police said internal inquiries had been made before the matter was referred to the commission.

A force spokeswoman said: "The IPCC has since advised that the matter should receive local police investigation and further inquiries are now being undertaken by the force."

A file relating to the investigation of Lord Janner is being considered by the Crown Prosecution Service.

Greville Janner, who was Labour MP for Leicester North West and then Leicester West, has not been arrested.

Detectives executed a search warrant at a property in Barnet, north London, in December 2013.
 
I assume there is zero chance of the ICAI being streamed like the Leveson Inquiry, has there been any comment about it being streamed in the UK press?
 
I assume there is zero chance of the ICAI being streamed like the Leveson Inquiry, has there been any comment about it being streamed in the UK press?

Probably too early for that sort of thing. There is no date for when that process starts, nor has any decision been made public about how evidence will be taken (e.g. lawyer examination or not), and how exactly they will decide which evidence to hear publicly and which to hear privately.

Looking at their website I see they've been reasonably clever at trying to setup a new panel that won't be subject to the same flaws as the last one was. A small panel of 'professionals/experts', and then two tiers of victim stuff - a 'Victims and Survivors consultative panel' and a 'Victims and Survivors wider network'. Obviously there are ways this could still go wrong, but I guess I will judge it on how well it turns out these different parts end up working with each other, and whether any of it ends up being weak and merely paying lip-service to the idea of including victims.
 
Looking at their website I see they've been reasonably clever at trying to setup a new panel that won't be subject to the same flaws as the last one was. A small panel of 'professionals/experts', and then two tiers of victim stuff - a 'Victims and Survivors consultative panel' and a 'Victims and Survivors wider network'.

I am surprised that I've not heard some people complaining about not being at centre stage any more.

But it would seem to have a better chance of working without so much damage in the middle...
 
Establishment politicians are so much less likely to be known and 100% identifiable by children, other estsblishment types even less so. A victim is less likely still to come forward if they were murdered at the time.
 
Looks like a pure cuttings-job catchup to me... has anyone spotted anything new in it?

Its main claim is new as far as I know. Sure we have heard from former detectives etc before, and whispers about royalty and MPs are hardly new. But this is a specific example, and many other historical child-abuse stories in the media over the years are far broader when discussing royal connections, e.g. leaving plenty of room open for it to be a member of buckingham palace staff rather than a member of the family. In that sense, this one is different.

Likewise although we are well used to all manner of activities being conducted or hushed up in the name of national security, this is again a specific example where previously we didn't have as many examples of this language used as justification as you might guess.

I'm talking about the story as a whole containing new stuff, rather than a particular copy of it such as the Mail's being new. They love nicking stories off other papers, though do often at least reference the original.
 
mystery royal?

I wonder if the name involved will ever come out. Time frame is late 80s according to the mirror article, at least that's the time frame of the investigation being pulled.

Probably Mountbatten as I alluded to in #5223 - favourite Uncle and mentor of Prince Charles as supposedly was Laurens Van der Post another of his close acquaintances.

There is a good review of this over at Indymedia.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/11/518690.html
 
Probably Mountbatten as I alluded to in #5223 - favourite Uncle and mentor of Prince Charles as supposedly was Laurens Van der Post another of his close acquaintances.

There is a good review of this over at Indymedia.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/11/518690.html
I wondered that, but the timeframe doesn't really match given that he was killed in 1979, and these allegation relate to an investigation in the late 80s.
 
Back
Top Bottom