Northern Ireland child abuse covered up?


This video from Ireland says about itself:

Ian Paisley involved in Kincora Boy’s Home cover-up scandal

7 December 2012

Ian Paisley admits he knew of the abuse at Kincora Boy’s home in Belfast and did nothing.

By Paddy McGuffin:

Kincora child abuse allegations: Amnesty demands Official Secrets Act suspension to allow ex-spies to give evidence

Saturday 2nd August 2014

Ex-soldier claims he was ordered to shelve investigation into Northern Ireland boys’ home

Amnesty International called for the suspension of the Official Secrets Act yesterday to enable former intelligence officers to give evidence during the government’s child abuse inquiry.

The call follows claims by an ex-soldier involved in military intelligence that he was told to shelve an investigation into sexual abuse at a boys’ home in Northern Ireland in the 1970s.

Home Secretary Theresa May has faced widespread calls from politicians and lobbyists to include the Kincora Boys’ Home in the child abuse inquiry following revelations about serial sex offenders including Jimmy Savile.

The inquiry was set up to examine how public bodies handled their duty of care to protect children from predatory paedophiles.

Brian Gemmell said he was ordered to halt his probe into Kincora by a senior MI5 officer in 1975 after presenting a report on the allegations.

Mr Gemmell said he found out about the abuse through two sources, including an agent called Royal Flush, while he was gathering information about loyalist paramilitaries.

“I was summoned to go and see him (the MI5 officer). I went up thinking he was going to be pleased with me,” he said.

“He bawled me out. He was rude and offensive and hostile. He told me not just to stop any investigation into Kincora, but to drop Royal Flush.”

Another former army officer Colin Wallace has previously said any new investigation of Kincora must have access to information from intelligence agencies.

In 1981 three senior care staff at the east Belfast boys’ home were jailed for abusing 11 children and it has been claimed that people of the “highest profile” were connected.

Amnesty International Northern Ireland director Patrick Corrigan said: “The focus must be the protection of children, rather than officials and their dirty secrets.”

Mr Corrigan added: “The Home Secretary must announce the inclusion of Kincora in the inquiry and an exemption so that army officers and others bound by the Official Secrets Act can finally speak freely.”

A public inquiry in Northern Ireland into institutional child abuse between 1922 and 1995, which is sitting in Banbridge, faced possible suspension last month due to a lack of funds.

The Kincora scandal: ‘MI5 tried to blackmail Belfast homosexual,’ says whistleblower: here.

Margaret Thatcher ‘knew about child abuse accusations, did nothing’


This video from Britain says about itself:

Pretty Chilling: Jimmy Savile And His “Love” For Margaret Thatcher

29 December 2012

Jimmy Savile‘s hold over Downing Street in the 80s is revealed in a series of letters in which he declares his “love” for Margaret Thatcher, according to newly released records.

Very disturbing: Jimmy, UKs posthumous “worse than Jack the Ripper“, telling the Prime Minister about his jealous “girl patients”…

From daily The Independent in Britain:

Margaret Thatcher ‘was warned of Tory child sex party claims’

Thatcher’s personal bodyguard and former detective chief inspector said he warned PM about Peter Morrison

Loulla-Mae Eleftheriou-Smith

Sunday 27 July 2014

Margaret Thatcher’s personal bodyguard Barry Strevens has told of how he warned the Prime Minister of allegations that one of her top aides was involved in sex parties with under-age boys.

Mr Strevens, a former detective chief inspector, told the Sun on Sunday that he passed on allegations about her loyal confidant Peter Morrison before he was promoted to the position of deputy chairman of the Conservative Party in the 1980s.

Mr Morrison, who died of a heart attack in 1995 aged 51, has since been linked to claims of sex abuse at children’s homes in north Wales.

At the time, Mr Strevens was informed of the allegations by a senior Cheshire police officer. Mr Strevens knew Mrs Thatcher was considering appointing Mr Morrison to the position of deputy chairman after Jeffrey Archer had stepped down over prostitution claims, and he requested an immediate meeting with Mrs Thatcher and her private secretary Archie Hamilton, who reportedly took notes of what was said.

“I wouldn’t say she was naïve but I would say she would not have thought people around her would be like that,” he said. “I am sure he would have given her assurances about the rumours, as otherwise she wouldn’t have given him the job.”

Explaining the nature of the rumours he had been told, Mr Strevens said: “A senior officer in Chester had told me there were rumours going around about underage boys – one aged 15 – attending sex parties at a house there belonging to Peter Morrison.

“After we returned to Number 10 I asked to go and see her immediately. It was unusual for me to do that so they would have known it was something serious. When I went in Archie Hamilton was there. I told them exactly what had been said about Peter. Archie took notes and they thanked me for coming.

“There was no proof but the officer I spoke to was certain and said local press knew a lot more. This was just after the Jeffrey Archer scandal and I knew she needed to know about it because they were deciding on the appointment of the next deputy chairman.

“I always told her things straight, as I saw them. She listened and thanked me. I assumed Archie Hamilton would have spoken to Peter Morrison following that.

“When he was appointed I assumed there had been nothing to the claims – as there was no way on Earth she would have given him the job otherwise,” he said.

Responding to the claims, Archie Hamilton told the paper that Mr Strevens had gone to Number 10 for a meeting but that he could not recall the mention of underage boys.

He said: “I remember Barry Strevens coming in and what he actually said at the time was that there were parties at Peter Morrison’s home in Cheshire and there were only men who were there.

“I don’t remember him saying they were underage. There may have been but the point he was making to her was that there were only men involved in the party.

“She listened to what he said and that was it. It was merely a party and men were there,” he said.

Home Secretary Theresa May has already announced a full-scale investigation into historical claims of child abuse at Westminster, and of an alleged paedophile ring.

Lord Tebbit has said he confronted Mr Morrison over rumours about him and young boys and that he received a flat denial, while former Tory MP Edwina Currie had previously called him a “notable pederast”.

Elite London school accused of failings over paedophile teacher William Vahey: here.

British government’s child abuse inquirer resigns


This video from Britain says about itself:

Former Home Secretary faces new questions over paedophiles in Westminster in the [19]80s

2 July 2014

One of the most senior ministers in Margaret Thatcher’s government has admitted that he was given a dossier, which contained allegations about a paedophile ring in Westminster in the 1980s.

From daily The Guardian in Britain:

Child abuse inquiry: Theresa May under fire over Lady Butler-Sloss

Home secretary accused of failing to do her homework after resignation of woman appointed to chair child-abuse inquiry

Nicholas Watt, chief political correspondent

Monday 14 July 2014 14.43 BST

Theresa May has come under fire from MPs on both sides of the House of Commons after Lady Butler-Sloss announced that she would resign as chair of the child-abuse panel after admitting that she had failed to take into account a family conflict of interest.

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, criticised May for placing Butler-Sloss in an unfair position after “the last-minute nature” of her decision to appoint the panel last week.

The Tory backbencher Zac Goldsmith echoed Cooper’s criticisms as he said the home secretary had taken too long to set up the panel and then appointed Butler-Sloss too quickly.

Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Commons home affairs select committee who raised concerns about Butler-Sloss’s appointment last week, said the inquiry was becoming “shambolic”.

The MPs spoke out after Butler-Sloss resigned after admitting that she had failed to take into account the fact that her brother, the late Sir Michael Havers, served as attorney general in the 1980s when reports of child abuse were allegedly not examined properly.

Butler-Sloss said she had been honoured to be invited to chair the inquiry. But she added: “It has become apparent over the last few days, however, that there is a widespread perception, particularly among victim and survivor groups, that I am not the right person to chair the inquiry. It has also become clear to me that I did not sufficiently consider whether my background and the fact my brother had been attorney general would cause difficulties.”

Hours before her announcement, the former solicitor general Vera Baird had called on Butler-Sloss to stand down because her brother was attorney general between 1979 and 1987 – the period due be examined by the panel.

Butler-Sloss informed May of her decision over the weekend. May, who appointed Butler-Sloss last week, had strongly defended her as the criticism mounted.

Butler-Sloss added in her statement: “This is a victim-orientated inquiry and those who wish to be heard must have confidence that the members of the panel will pay proper regard to their concerns and give appropriate advice to government.

“Nor should media attention be allowed to be diverted from the extremely important issues at stake, namely whether enough has been done to protect children from sexual abuse and hold to account those who commit these appalling crimes.

“Having listened to the concerns of victim and survivor groups and the criticisms of MPs and the media, I have come to the conclusion that I should not chair this inquiry and have so informed the home secretary.

Butler-Sloss’s decision to stand down is a blow to the government, which appeared to have rushed into appointing her. On Sunday last week Michael Gove said there would be no public inquiry. Within 24 hours the home secretary announced a wide-ranging inquiry that will examine how public institutions responded to allegations of child abuse.

There were suggestions that the Home Office overlooked Butler-Sloss’s family links. Government sources insisted last week that it was well known that Butler-Sloss was the sister of Havers.

Cooper criticised the home secretary for rushing the appointment of Butler-Sloss after stalling on holding an inquiry. The shadow home secretary said: “We have called for this inquiry for over 18 months. It is very unfortunate that the last-minute nature of the home secretary’s response means that proper consideration was not given to the perception of conflict of interest and Lady Butler-Sloss was placed in an unfair position by the Home Office.

Goldsmith, the Conservative MP for Richmond Park who organised a letter by 140 MPs calling for an inquiry, told The World at One on BBC Radio 4: “The Home Office spent too long thinking about whether or not the inquiry should happen. We were battering the Home Office to make this thing happen. They took a snap decision, it was the right decision, to do this inquiry – a Hillsborough-style all-encompassing enquiry. But then, having taken too long, they went too fast and I think the simply failed to do their homework [on appointing Butler-Sloss].”

Vaz, who raised concerns about the appointment with the Home Office permanent secretary, Mark Sedwill, last week, said: “I am not surprised by this decision; it is the right one. As I pointed out to Mr Sedwill the public would be concerned that a member of parliament, no matter how distinguished, had been appointed to head this important panel. The whole inquiry process is becoming shambolic: missing files, ministers refusing to read reports and now the chair resigning before the inquiry is has even commenced.”

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP who has been campaigning to highlight historical cases of child abuse, praised Butler-Sloss as an “outstanding judge” but said it was right for her to stand down. He called for her to be replaced with a figure from outside the judiciary.

Danczuk told The World at One: “It doesn’t have to be somebody from the judiciary. It can be somebody from the third sector. The bishop of Liverpool chaired the Hillsborough inquiry very effectively. I am sure it is not beyond the wit of man to find somebody more appropriate to do this job.”

Downing Street indicated that the government would take its time to appoint a new chair.

Alison Millar, a solicitor for victims of child abuse, welcomed Butler-Sloss’s announcement. Millar said: “Our clients are pleased and we are relieved that Lady Butler-Sloss has taken this decision to stand down. This was the only sensible decision to ensure that survivors and the public could feel confident that the inquiry was not going to be jeopardised by accusations of bias.”

SURVIVORS of alleged sexual abuse expressed “relief” yesterday after tainted Baroness Butler-Sloss resigned as chairwoman of the probe into claims of an Establishment paedophilia cover-up: here.

UK government sets up “overarching” inquiries into child sex abuse: here.

After the resignation of the judge leading the government’s paedophile inquiry, it is clear that the Establishment is rattled. STEVEN WALKER reports on the investigations that could bring high-level child abusers to justice: here.

‘Some cardinals abuse children’, Pope Francis I quoted


Demonstration against clerical sexual abuse, photo by Associated Press

From Al Jazeera:

Pope Francis: 1 in 50 clergy are pedophiles

In an interview, the pontiff also hinted that ban against marriage for priests may one day be lifted

July 13, 2014 9:21AM ET

One in 50 clerics are pedophiles, Pope Francis said in an interview published Sunday, in which he also hinted that the mandate of priestly celibacy may one day be lifted.

Francis condemned child sex abuse as a “leprosy” in the Church and cited his aides as saying that “the level of pedophilia in the Church is at two percent.” That figure includes priests “and even bishops and cardinals,” Italy’s La Repubblica daily quoted Francis as saying.

The figure represents around 8,000 priests out of a global number of about 414,000, according to the latest statistics from the Vatican.

I have doubts on how exact these statistics are.

Child abusers usually hide their acts, often successfully.

Often, when a priest abuses a child, only the perpetrator and the victim may know about it, as the child may be too scared to talk. Eg, after Dutch Bishop Jo Gijsen had abused a child, he threatened the child with eternal damnation in hellfire if it would talk to anyone about the abuse.

Sometimes, children’s parents may know, but not talk about it, being scared of a conflict with the church hierarchy.

Sometimes, the predatory priest’s bishop may know, but may cover up the abuse, warning neither police nor the pope, as he does not want bad public relations for the church. Etc.

Pope Francis also promised “solutions” to the issue of priestly celibacy, the Italian publication reported, raising the possibility that the Catholic Church may eventually lift a ban on married priests.

Asked by the paper whether priests might one day be permitted to marry, Francis noted that celibacy was instituted “900 years after Our Lord’s death” and that clerics can marry in some Eastern Churches under Vatican tutelage.

“There definitely is a problem but it is not a major one. This needs time but there are solutions and I will find them,” Francis said, without giving further details.

But Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said the quotations in the newspaper on the existence of pedophile cardinals and the possible reform of priestly celibacy did not correspond to what the pope actually said.

The BBC writes about this:

The BBC’s David Willey in Rome says there is often a studied ambiguity in Pope Francis’ off-the-cuff statements.

He wants to show a more compassionate attitude towards Church teaching than his predecessors, but this can sometimes cause consternation among his media advisers, our correspondent adds.

Analysis: David Willey, BBC News, Rome

When is a papal interview not an interview? Sunday’s edition of La Repubblica devotes its first three pages to an account of a conversation between Pope Francis and editor Eugenio Scalfari, which took place last Thursday. Papal spokesman Federico Lombardi said in a sharp note that it was not an interview in the normal sense of the word, although he admitted it conveyed the “sense and the spirit” of the conversation.

Mr Scalfari does not use a digital recorder, and Father Lombardi said Pope Francis never checked the accuracy of the interview.

Until now, the Vatican has declined to quantify the extent of clerical sexual abuse scandals in the worldwide Church. Statistics are usually available only for countries in the developed world. In the developing world, information is usually only sketchy.

Did Pope Francis really say 2% of priests are paedophiles? Vatican disputes accuracy of Italian journalist’s conversation with pope but child abuse support group claims true rate is far higher: here.

Pope Francis puts himself in danger by tackling pedophilia cover-ups: here.

British government’s child abuse inquirer accused of cover-up


This video from Britain is called Pretty Chilling: [child abuser] Jimmy Savile And His “Love” For Margaret Thatcher.

From daily The Guardian in Britain:

Home Office defends Butler-Sloss amid claims of abuse cover-up

Reports claim retired judge excluded victim’s account of alleged abuse by bishop in review because she ‘cared about the Church’

Shane Hickey and agencies

Saturday 12 July 2014 12.35 BST

The Home Office has again been forced to defend the appointment of Lady Butler-Sloss to run the inquiry into allegations of historical child abuse amid claims she refused to go public about a bishop implicated in a scandal.

The retired high court judge is reported to have told a victim of alleged abuse that she did not want to include some of his allegations in a review of how the Church of England dealt with two paedophile priests because she “cared about the Church” and “the press would love a bishop“.

The peer allegedly made the remarks to Phil Johnson, who was abused by priests when he was a choirboy, during a private meeting in the House of Lords in 2011, according to the Times.

The Home Office has again insisted it stands by the crossbench peer’s appointment “unreservedly”. Earlier this week it was forced to defend the appointment when critics pointed out that her late brother, Sir Michael Havers, was attorney general from 1979 to 1987 when some of the controversy over the failure to prosecute child abuse cases could have arisen.

Butler-Sloss insisted in a statement that she had never put the reputation of an institution ahead of justice for victims.

“Throughout many years of public service I have always striven to be fair and compassionate, mindful of the very real suffering of those who have been victims of crime or other injustice. I have never put the reputation of any institution, including the Church of England, above the pursuit of justice for victims,” the statement said.

The Times reports that her comments came during a meeting with Johnson when she was in charge of an investigation into how the church handled allegations of abuse. He made allegations against Peter Ball, the former bishop of Lewes and bishop of Gloucester, who was subsequently charged with two counts of indecent assault and one of misconduct in a public office. A trial is expected to take place in November.

She said she would “prefer not to refer to him”, according to the report, but would bring up the allegations in private correspondence to the archbishop of Canterbury. Johnson accepts she passed on his allegation.

The inquiry into paedophile allegations in Parliament has been designed to hide the truth, says STEVEN WALKER: here.

Questions over Labour peer’s letters to care home boy.’I miss you,’ Labour MP wrote to teenager who alleges he was abused in 1970s: here.

British governmental child abuse inquiry or cover-up?


This video from Britain says about itself:

A political cover up of child abuse in the 1980s

7 July 2014

Lord Tebbit, who served in a series of ministerial posts under Margaret Thatcher, said the instinct of people at the time was to protect “the system” and not to delve too deeply into uncomfortable allegations.

The former Conservative cabinet minister Lord Tebbit has said he believes there “may well” have been a political cover-up over child abuse in the 1980s. Lord Tebbit, who served in a series of ministerial posts under Margaret Thatcher, said the instinct of people at the time was to protect “the system” and not to delve too deeply into uncomfortable allegations.

His comment came as the Home Office announced a fresh review into what happened to a file alleging paedophile activity at Westminster which was handed to the then home secretary Leon (now Lord) Brittan by the Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens. Appearing on BBC1’s The Andrew Marr Show, Lord Tebbit said: “At that time I think most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected and if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system than to delve too far into it. That view, I think, was wrong then and it is spectacularly shown to be wrong because the abuses have grown.”

Asked if he thought there had been a “big political cover-up” at the time, he said: “I think there may well have been. But it was almost unconscious. It was the thing that people did at that time.” Labour MP Margaret Hodge, who chairs the Public Accounts Committee, said there had been a “veil of secrecy” over the establishment for far too long. Appearing on the Sky News Murnaghan programme, she added: “Thank God it is coming out into the open. I think the really interesting thing about it is there has been a veil of secrecy over the establishment for far too long. Now the establishment who thought they were always protected…find actually they are subject to the same rigours of the law and that’s right. What we really need to get right as well is how children are cared for today. Let’s learn from the historic abuse, let’s actually give victims the right to have their voice on that, but let’s actually also focus on the present.”

The previous review concluded that all the relevant information in the file had been passed to the police and the remaining material had been destroyed in line with the policies of the time.

The Home Office has also disclosed that 100 official files relating to historic abuse allegations have gone missing.

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale at the forefront of the campaign to investigate the alleged paedophile ring in Westminster told Channel 4 News there was an attempt to lean on him by a Conservative MP not to name any names just before giving evidence to the Home Affairs committee last week.

He said: “He stopped me outside the chamber and had a word in my ear in terms of what I would and wouldn’t say at the select committee.

“I was quite riled by his approach, I said I’d listen to what he’d say, i’d consider what he’d said and leave it at that.”

By Peter Frost in Britain:

Tories warm up for the cover-up

Thursday 10th July 2014

PETER FROST is sceptical about the two new inquiries into the way the Home Office lost 114 files related to an Establishment paedophile ring

So Home Secretary Theresa May has announced, not just one, but two reviews of how her department, the Home Office, lost or destroyed 114 documents listing all kinds of important people including MPs, ministers and senior civil servants as paedophiles and worse.

May has promised total transparency, today’s number one buzzword it seems, for what often actually turns into the usual smoke and mirrors.

When questioned in the House as to whether the reviews would have access to the secret services and the police she hesitated before giving a reluctant answer in the affirmative. We shall see.

It didn’t take long for Tory ex-home office minister David Mellor to start mixing the whitewash for Cameron and May to carry out a typical Tory cover-up — this time no doubt with Nick Clegg holding the bucket.

Mellor, better remembered perhaps for adulterous hanky-panky in a football shirt than for anything he did in office, told Guardian readers “his only reservation would concern the frankly rather emptily populist decision to put the chief executive of the NSPCC in charge of the inquiry into how the Home Office handled abuse allegations.

“Far more sensible but, I admit, not so sexy publicity-wise, would be to invite a boring lawyer to review what were, after all, legal or quasi-legal decisions, not social worker stuff.”

Which translates to: “Better to pick one of those compliant judges we usually use for public enquiries — they usually come up with exactly what we want to hear.”

Mellor went on to say: “The government needed to act decisively, because the rush to judgement among certain politicians and sections of the press was becoming unbearable.”

Nothing then to do with actually uncovering the truth.

Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens was an interesting man. He was abandoned by his parents and was fostered. He suffered from polio, but he turned heavyweight boxer and later became a Tory MP. He died nearly 20 years ago aged 63.

Dickens was no leftwinger. He campaigned strongly in favour of hanging but he was also a vociferous opponent of child abuse and the cover-ups of the paedophilia he discovered all around him in the Establishment and in government.

In 1981 he used parliamentary privilege to name the deputy head of Britain’s military spying service Sir Peter Hayman as a paedophile.

The Establishment rallied round Hayman. Ted Heath had made the senior diplomat a knight in 1971 for his work in the Home Office and the diplomatic corps. Secretly Hayman had also held very senior positions in military intelligence. He was the long-time deputy director of MI6.

Despite all their best efforts at a whitewash Hayman was so blatant and so arrogant he was jailed in 1984 for sex crimes. With the help of some powerful allies he had got away with it for a long time.

In October 1978, Hayman left a package of paedophilia-related pornography on a London bus. The police traced it to a Notting Hill apartment where, under the pseudonym Peter Henderson, Hayman had huge amounts of pornography including 45 diaries describing sex with children and other obscene literature and photographs.

Hayman was investigated by police but telephone calls were made and favours called in. That old whitewash again. Hayman, under his alias, walked away with an anonymous police warning.

Dickens then named Hayman in Parliament. Thatcher and her ministers were furious.

Hayman waffled that he had received pornographic material through the post but it was not of an extreme nature, was non-commercial and in a sealed envelope, so did not warrant prosecution. So that was all right then and Hayman walked free.

Dickens complained in the House of Commons that he had suffered real harassment over the Hayman affair.

“The noose around my neck grew tighter after I named a former high-flying British diplomat on the floor of the House.

“First, I received threatening telephone calls followed by two burglaries at my London home.” Dickens even believed he had been put on a murder hit list. The Establishment and the media ridiculed it as paranoia.

Thatcher’s attorney general was Sir Michael Havers. He will be remembered both as a loyal Conservative politician, encourager of police and the courts against striking miners as well as the lawyer who prosecuted both the innocent Guilford Four and the Maguire Seven, all jailed and then later found not guilty and released.

What isn’t perhaps so well known is that Havers was the brother of Baroness Butler-Sloss who May has just appointed to head her other, more in depth, inquiry into the lost papers. No clash of interests there I am sure.

Dickens paid dearly for his brave whistleblowing. Thatcher never forgave him that some of those named in the dossier were very close indeed.

Meanwhile Hayman didn’t behave himself. Perhaps he felt he didn’t need to. In 1984 he was convicted for an act of gross indecency in a public lavatory. He died in 1992.

Dicken’s brave but unpopular campaign wasn’t over. In November 1983 he delivered a thick dossier to the then home secretary and the senior minister in Thatcher’s Cabinet, Leon Brittan.

It contained allegations of paedophilia in Buckingham Palace, the government, the diplomatic and Civil Service and who knows where else.

This is the dossier that Sir Leon Brittan says he cannot remember and the Home Office has either lost or destroyed.

The top civil servant at the Home Office Mark Sedwill told the home affairs select committee on Tuesday that he had not even asked to see a list detailing what the 114 missing documents related to.

He told MPs he presumed they had all been destroyed, the destruction had not been logged or recorded, but despite that they should not assume that anything sinister was at work. So much for May’s transparency.

Dickens also personally delivered a separate file to another member of the Establishment, the director of public prosecutions, Sir Thomas Hetherington, in August 1983. Amazingly that copy too has been conveniently lost or destroyed.

Dickens’s files and dossier contained details of at least eight prominent public figures who were paedophiles.

Dickens said at the time: “I’ve got eight names of big people, really important names, public figures. And I am going to expose them in Parliament.”

He never did. Pressure, threats, or some other reason kept him quiet. The dossiers and files were lost and a lot of very important people, with very dark secrets, breathed again.

So will those important names become public this time round? Or will the establishment and the Con-Dem cabinet manage to sweep it all under their capacious carpet with all the other sleazy secrets?

I don’t know, but if I were you I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Peter Frost blogs at frostysramblings.wordpress.com.

A FORMER headmaster of London Mayor Boris Johnson has been arrested on suspicion of historic sex assaults: here.

British Downing Street child abuse inquiry


This video says about itself:

Cameron and Downing Street Cover Up Scandal Over Child Porn Investigation

6 March 2014

Downing Street is in hot water over allegations that it attempted to sweep under the rug the arrest of a close aide of the Prime Minister, over a child pornography probe. The official, part of whose role was to advise on online porn filters, was reportedly warned that police were investigating him, hours before he was detained.

By Rory MacKinnon in Britain:

Baroness Butler-Sloss to head sex abuse inquiry

Wednesday 9th July 2014

A PANICKED Home Office has drafted a retired High Court judge for an independent inquiry over its handling of child sex abuse allegations.

Home Secretary Theresa May said yesterday her Permanent Secretary Mark Sedwill had appointed cross-bench peer Baroness Butler-Sloss to investigate her department’s missing files and mounting questions stemming from an eyes-only report filed last year.

Baroness Butler-Sloss, a former president of the High Court’s family division and chairwoman of the Cleveland child abuse inquiry, will join chief executive Mark Wanless of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children in scrutinising the Home Office’s papertrail.

Mr Sedwill is to appear before MPs on the home affairs select committee in order to defend the initial review and his department’s response.

The 2013 report, commissioned after a string of recently deceased high-profile figures including TV presenter Jimmy Savile and Lib Dem MP Cyril Smith were outed as serial child abusers, has not been released to the public.

But it is understood the HMRC officer charged with the investigation found around 114 relevant files missing, presumed “destroyed, missing or not found.”

The missing papers are said to span a period of 20 years and include a dossier from the late MP Geoffrey Dickens said to name the high-profile individuals of an paedophile ring active in alleged abuse at south-west London’s Elm Guest House.

THE two inquiries into child sex abuse announced by the Home Secretary are already raising more questions than they are likely to answer. Without having to doubt Theresa May’s sincerity or the integrity of Home Office officials or investigators, her statement to MPs reflected some of the complacency that has been one of the hallmarks of the Establishment’s approach to these matters over decades: here.