CHILD BUGGERY, LEAKING, & THE EVASION OF JUSTICE
For some eighteen months now, I have been increasingly disenchanted with the entire ‘sex crime’ topic. But while there are many aspects of it I find distasteful and abhorrent (the act of paedophilia itself, the mob-rule approach of the tabloids, the mind-boggling ignorance and confusion of legal and sexual definitions and so forth) there are two areas of the phenomenon that still make me angry enough to post about it.
These are, in no order of importance, the continuing ability of the political Establishment – from all corners of both houses – to hide, cover up, ignore or pervert evidence pointing strongly at the commission of very serious crimes by its members; and the quite extraordinary desire of the odd sociopathic moron here and there to earn a living by exacerbating the level of confusion, in order to allege that showbiz males from a bygone age were also committing equally serious crimes.
As with phone hacking – once the Right-leaning media started to cover it, Murdoch was in big trouble – the same syndrome can be seen in that those media are now gradually taking Westminster’s involvement in organised child molestation and trafficking seriously. Sadly, they’re also yelling their heads off about the celeb-groping sector too, but let’s leave that for a few paragraphs and stick with the real McCoy.
I stumbled upon damning evidence of an active (and clearly protected) paedophile/trafficking ring in Plymouth some time towards the end of 2007. Two years later, I encountered the same thing in Stafford. The MO was identical in both places: a variously weighted phalanx of psychiatrists, social workers, local politicians and judiciary feeding off the familial breakdown that has always been a key feature of Britain’s burgeoning Underclass. Children were being, literally, snatched from broken families and put into a systemically corrupted care sector for paedophilic purposes.
It was another two years before I really became properly aware of the long-running Elm House/Rocks Lane scandal, but on researching it, I was once more struck by the identical approach: poverty-stricken flesh being peddled by social care workers and councillors for money – and largely for the benefit of the extremely powerful in our culture. When one examines the history of this gross perversion of the due process of law, it becomes clear that a conspiracy theory is necessary to reach the conclusion that the whole thing was the invention of fevered obsessives holding the view that all men are evil. There are plenty of those around; and the problem is, their bonkers theories and lynch-mob accusations allow the real guilty parties to escape by effortlessly rubbishing their daft paranoia.
But two things have now firmly cemented in my brain the opinion that Elm House was and remains a cover-up of dastardly deeds. The first is the constant placing of Leon Brittan at the scene, and the second the way in which we have seen seven media leaks over fifteen months talking of imminent arrests….only to find they are mirages as Boris Johnson’s involvement in the “investigation” continues to ensure it circles in ever-decreasing backwards steps.
The Brittan point is key for me, because my awareness of accusations against him goes back some thirty years to a time when, as an advertising professional, I was from time to time privy to Westminster gossip. Two names were always mentioned together: Peter Righton, and the later ennobled Lord Brittan. The Peter Righton proclivity seems now to be proven beyond reasonable doubt (once people are dead, it usually is) although the evidence today is no stronger than it was then: it’s just that the Establishment has owned up to it.
Already forced to leave his teaching job following complaints of child sex abuse, Righton somehow managed to avoid screening and play a central role in researching childrens’ care homes.This gave him access to hundreds of children whom he interviewed in private. The outstanding question has to be how on earth did this bloke, given his track record, manage to avoid detection. And the same conclusion must be reached as that applying to the Soham murderer Ian Huntley: that senior politicians erased or hid any damning information from the authorities. Peter Righton went on to be a founding member of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).
For some of this period, Leon Brittan was ideally placed to help damning information remain covert: he was a senior Cabinet Minister who eventually wound up in the role of Home Secretary. The Disappearing Dickens Dossier has yet to be found (although I am reliably informed that a copy exists in Wrexham) and this file – which included allegations about Elm House – was given to Brittan at the time. A year ago, his Lordship told a journalist he had no memory of any dossier; but once the issue seeped further into the mass media – and the pressure grew on him to make a statement – Brittan had a sudden rejuvenation of his cranial cells: yes, he now recalled, he had been given a dossier by Geoff Dickens, and then given it to his senior civil servants. SFX, the washing of hands.
The one profoundly ridiculous dimension of the Elm House saga is the constant repetition over the years of accusations about Sir Cliff Richard’s alleged attendance at Rocks Lane. The sole and only basis for this idea is that somebody once signed himself in there as Cliff Richard. So obviously, Mickey Mouse was also a serial paedophile. The idea that a national treasure would reveal his identity in such a manner is beyond ridiculous.
I can also offer further refutation of theories about Cliff’s alleged preferences. During the 1970s, I worked extensively on the launch of EMI’s EMTV Twenty Golden Greats tv-advertised compilations, and quite quickly a Cliff TGG album came over the horizon. During that launch, I met a former associate and close friend of Richard briefly. He told me emphatically that, following a traumatic sexual experience with an older woman in his late teens, the singer had become more committed to Christianity, and thereafter taken a vow of celibacy.
In fact, the Cliff Richard explosion of Trial By Media in recent weeks offers a neat segue into the second blot on the sex-crime landscape: the growing evidence that Newscorp, the police, and a regular leaker have been working together to ensure that trumped-up charges are brought against celebs (especially BBC celebs) to distract from the hard-core paedophile trafficking industry. (Here again, I must reiterate what the most reliable data suggest: that this ‘hard core’ is miniscule compared to the 83% of instances where paedophile molestation of children is perpetrated by another male member of the family. But that doesn’t involve any fame, so the tabloids don’t GAF about it, and the police have, for centuries, ignored it).
Today I read in the mainstream Daily Telegraph that the BBC director-general and the chief constable of South Yorkshire Police are to be summoned before MPs to explain how the corporation knew in advance that Sir Cliff Richard’s home was to be searched. Lord Hall and Chief Constable David Crompton have been told to prepare themselves to give evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee when Parliament returns from recess at the start of next month.
This is unlikely, I think, to take us any further forward as to the identity of the leaker in this case, because both the cops and the Beeb will plead the Fifth, saying they cannot possibly give the source of their information. But out of interest, this is what Paedophile Investigative Supremo Mark Williams-Thomas had to say on Twitter two days ago:
Perhaps some media reports (when based on leaks) are more misleading than others. But we see here that Mr Williams-Thomas denies any leaking to the media on the subject of Sir Cliff Richard. Any reports suggesting otherwise, he claims, have been put in the hands of his solicitors. But as The Slog reported last week, direct accusations of irresponsible leaking to The Sun were made against Mark by the entirely innocent Jim Davidson in his book No Further Action earlier this year. And interestingly, MW-T didn’t place that one in the hands of his solicitors.
The Sun is of course a Murdoch newspaper. The Sun also has a track-record of corrupt dealings with Surrey police. Alan Tierney, who was a constable with the Surrey force, pled guilty in March 2013 to two counts of misconduct in public office. His crime was to have sold information to The Sun newspaper about the arrests of footballer John Terry’s mother and Rolling Stones guitarist Ronnie Wood.
Mark Williams-Thomas worked as a detective and family liaison officer with Surrey Police from 1989 to 2000. Last year he admitted in a Guardian interview that, while a serving police officer with Surrey Police, he had passed information to local journalists ‘if he believed its disclosure was in the public interest’. At times perhaps, Williams-Thomas has what one might generously call a naive grasp of the public interest. Either way, under the British Constitution, the public interest is not a matter for policemen: it is a question for elected representatives, crown prosecutors, judges, and juries.
But then, Mr Williams-Thomas is not a policeman any more. He left the force in 2000 and set up an independent child protection firm, WT Associates, in 2005. He has been a regular pundit on Sky News (also owned by Rupert Murdoch) as well as commenting on high-profile criminal investigations such as the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Not that I would ever cast slurs before swine, but we need to recognise that Mark’s uncovering evidence of salacious sexual deviancy isn’t just his philanthropic metier: his income depends on doing so. Many people would call that a conflict of interest. It is up to each individual citizen to draw his or her own conclusions about the matter.
Some readers might, for example, join up some of these dots and wonder about the nature of MW-T’s professionalism. If they did so, then such conclusion-jumping would be no better or worse than the circumstantial drivel that led to investigations into Jimmy Tarbuck, Jim Davidson, Dave Lee Travis, Bill Roache, and now Sir Cliff Richard.
Equally, one or two theorists out there might be wondering how come all those celebrities being harassed by the Met et al have – in almost every case – a common experience: having been accused of stuff by Murdoch newspapers…and then told Newscorp to f**k off. But I couldn’t possibly comment upon such roots of coincidence.
The Slog 