WAS JIM GAMBLE A CORRUPT POLICE OFFICER IN NORTHERN IRELAND? – AND DID HE AUTHORISE OR COVER UP MURDERS?

WAS JIM GAMBLE A CORRUPT POLICE OFFICER IN NORTHERN IRELAND? – AND DID HE AUTHORISE OR COVER UP MURDERS?

A LOOK AT THE FINDINGS OF OPERATION BALLAST

First of all, a short biography

From Wikipedia:

“Earlier in his career he was Head of the Northern Ireland Anti-Terrorist Intelligence Unit in Belfast, then Deputy Director General (with the rank of Deputy Chief Constable) of the National Crime Squad, which, in April 2006, merged into the Serious Organised Crime Agency. He was also the Head of the Belfast Region of the Royal Ulster Constabulary’s Special Branch”.

Let there be no doubt whatsoever, then, that Jim Gamble, a long time ago - two to three decades ago, in fact - had, relatively early in his career, risen to one of the most senior roles in the country in the murky and sometimes sinister worlds of intelligence-gathering and Special Branch Operations. 

Those running the governments of the day and their intelligence and security operations must have had a very high degree of trust in him.

Here is an extract from an interview Jim Gamble gave to the Belfast Telegraph about his career:

“My father was in the RAF so I grew up with a service background. The natural progression was into the Army for me. I joined the military police. I was stationed in west Berlin…

"I joined the Royal Ulster Constabulary, then moved on to Special Branch.  When I came back to Northern Ireland it was initially with the bomb squad in a military police role and then I joined the Royal Ulster Constabulary, later  moving on to Special Branch. I went through the ranks to be head of Special Branch in Belfast. As peace was breaking out, I passed the Strategic Command Course and ended up as the Assistant Chief Constable in the National Crime Squad.

“I then became Deputy Director-General of the National Crime Squad. I was asked to build a new organisation called the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP). I resisted it at the beginning, I didn't think it was exactly what I wanted to do, and in the end it was one of the highlights of my career. What I will say is that I have been proud of many of the things I have done in my career and that pride is as strong as anywhere as regard that work we did in RUC Special Branch….every organisation will have bad apples, people who are motivated to do the wrong thing…”

++++++++++

Jim Gamble and Operation Ore

As we know, Jim Gamble was handed the job of leading one of the most controversial police operations ever to be run in this country: Operation Ore, an investigation into people in the UK accessing child sexual abuse images online.

Operation Ore began in 2002. 

Once again, what Wikipedia has to say on the subject:

“After 2003 Operation Ore came under closer scrutiny, with police forces in the UK being criticised for their handling of the operation. The most common criticism was that they failed to determine whether or not the owners of credit cards in Landslide's database actually accessed any sites containing child porn, unlike in the US where it was determined in advance whether or not credit card subscribers had purchased child porn. Investigative journalist Duncan Campbell exposed these flaws in a series of articles in 2005 and 2007.

“Many of the charges at the Landslide affiliated sites were made using stolen credit card information, and the police arrested the real owners of the credit cards, not the viewers. Thousands of credit card charges were made where there was no access to a site, or access only to a dummy site. When the police checked, seven years after Operation Ore commenced, they found 54,348 occurrences of stolen credit card information in the Landslide database. The British police failed to provide this information to the defendants, and in some cases implied that they had checked and found no evidence of credit card fraud when no such check had been done. Because of the nature of the charges, children were removed from homes immediately. In the two years it took the police to determine that thousands had been falsely accused, over 100 children had been removed from their homes and denied any unsupervised time with their fathers. The arrests also led to an estimated 33 suicides by 2007.

“One man was charged when the sole ‘suspicious’ image in his possession was of young-looking - but adult - actress Melissa Ashley. Also arrested were Massive Attack’s Robert Del Maja (later cleared) and The Who’s  guitarist, who was cautioned by the police after acknowledging a credit card access to the Landslide website. Duncan Campbell later stated in PC Pro  magazine that their credit card charges and IP addresses were traced through the Landslide site, and both were found to have accessed sites which had nothing to do with child pornography. The actor and writer Chris Langham was among those convicted.

“Independent investigators later obtained both the database records and video of the Landslide raid. When this information was presented in a UK court, Michael Mead of the United States Postal Service contradicted his US testimony under oath regarding several details relating to the investigation. As a result of the errors exposed in the cases, some people arrested in Operation Ore filed a group action lawsuit in 2006 against the detectives behind Operation Ore, alleging false arrest”.

I will add in here what Jim Gamble said to the Belfast Telegraph about how he came to lead - or rather, ‘review’ – Operation Ore, and become the Head of CEOP: 

"Almost by a quirk of fate one day I was asked to carry out a review of an operation called Operation Ore. Once I completed that review I recommended that because of the complexity of the technology involved, the weight of data coming in, that there needed to be an approach that was child-centred. Within a few days I was appointed as the lead for co-ordination of Operation Ore which for some was seen as contentious. I saw it as a huge success in that identified and located over 100 children and, over the years it unfolded, held more than 2,500 people to account. Having done that I was offered to take on the role setting up what was to become CEOP”.

And so it was that in April 2006, just one year before Madeleine McCann was reported missing, CEOP was formed. Once again, Jim Gamble was entrusted by the powers-that-be with running the entire CEOP operation.

++++++++++

Was Jim Gamble one of the police officers heavily criticised in the Operation Ballast report by Baroness O’Loan?

On 22 January 2007, Nuala O’Loan (now Baroness O’Loan), Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, reported on ‘Operation Ballast’, her investigation into alleged complicity by the police and security services in a series of murders between 1991 and 1997. Link here:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

AFAIK Jim Gamble was right at the heart of security and intelligence operations in Northern Ireland at this time. I believe that McCann Team investigator Dave Edgar was also employed in Northern Ireland at this time.

Topics covered by Baroness O’Loan’s enquiry were: 

1) two attempted murders in 1991.
2) the murder of Sharon McKenna on 17 January 1993.
3) the attempted bombing of the Sinn Fein office in Monaghan on 3 March 1997.
4) the blocking by Special Branch of searches during a pre-planned CID operation intended to disrupt the activities of the UVF.
5) the murder of John Harbinson on 18 May 1997.
6) the murder of Raymond McCord Junior on 9 November 1997.

I now quote from specific sections of Baroness O’Loan’s report. The whole report is an absolutely damning indictment of the activities of the Royal Ulster Constabulary but especially of the intelligence services and Special Branch, the areas for which Jim Gamble had prime responsibility. I could highlight in red the whole of these extracts from Baroness O’Loan’s report, but have just highlighted in red those areas that seem to relate particularly to Gamble’s role:
 
6. We examined Informant 1’s alleged involvement in drug-dealing between 1994 and 2003. 

8. Other issues emerged during the course of the investigation…
 
32.4.  In the absence of any justifiable reason why officers behaved as they did, the Police Ombudsman has identified from police documentation, records and interviews, collusion in the following areas: 

• The failure to arrest informants for crimes to which those informants had allegedly confessed, or to treat such informants as suspects for crime;
• By creating interview notes which were deliberately misleading; by failing to record and maintain original interview notes and by failing to record notes of meetings with informants;
• The failure to deal properly with information received from informants, so that informants were able to avoid investigation and detection for crime;
• By arresting informants suspected of murder then subjecting them to lengthy sham interviews by their own handlers at which they were not challenged and then releasing them on the authorisation of the handler;
• By not recording in investigation papers the fact that an informant was suspected of a crime despite the fact that he had been arrested and interviewed for that crime;
• By failing to take steps to hinder an attempted bombing by the establishment of an operation either to disrupt or arrest the alleged perpetrators whose names were known to Special Branch;
• By giving instructions to junior officers that records should not be completed, and that there should be no record of the incident concerned;
• By ensuring the absence of any official record linking a Special Branch informant to the possession of explosives which may, and were thought, according to private police records, to have been used in a particular crime;
• By withholding information from CID that the UVF had sanctioned an attack;
• By concealing from CID intelligence that named persons, including an informant or informants, had been involved in particular crimes;
• By withholding information about the location to which a group of murder suspects had allegedly fled after a murder;
• By the concealment on a number of occasions of intelligence indicating that up to three informants had been engaged together in murders and a particular crime or crimes;
• By routinely destroying all Tasking and Co-ordinating Group original documentary records so as to conceal an informant’s involvement in crime;
• By destroying or losing forensic exhibits such as metal bars and tape lifts;
• By not requiring appropriate forensic analysis to be carried out on items submitted to the Forensic Science Service Laboratory;
• By blocking the searches of a police informant’s home and of another location, including an alleged UVF arms dump;
• By not questioning informants about their activities and continuing to employ informants without risk assessing their continued use as informants;
• By finding munitions at an informant’s home and releasing him without charge;
• By not informing local police of an anticipated attack, and not taking any action to prevent the attack;
• By not using the available evidence and intelligence to detect a crime and to link the investigation of crimes in which an informant was a suspect;
• By some Special Branch officers deliberately disregarding a very significant amount of intelligence about informant involvement in drug dealing in Larne, and North Belfast and in punishment attacks linked to drug dealing from 1994 onwards;
• By continuing to employ as informants people suspected of involvement in the most serious crime without assessing the attendant risks or their suitability as informants;
• By not acting on witness and other evidence received in particular crimes when the suspect was an informant;
• By not considering or attempting to conduct identification processes when there was particular evidence from witnesses about a criminal’s appearance;
• By providing at least four misleading and inaccurate confidential documents for possible consideration by the court in relation to four separate incidents and the cases resulting from them, where those documents had the effect of protecting an informant;
• By not informing the Director of Public Prosecutions that an informant was a suspect in a crime in respect of which an investigation file was submitted to the Director;
• By their failure to maintain the record of intelligence which was the basis for applications for extensions of time in detention to the Secretary of State;
• By withholding intelligence from police colleagues including the names of alleged suspects which could have been used to attempt to prevent and to detect crime;
• By the practice of Special Branch not using and following the practice of authorisation of participating informants;
• By completing false and misleading authorisations and reviews of informants for the purposes of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act;
• By cancelling the wanted status of murder suspects “because of lack of resources” and doing nothing further about these suspects;
• This investigation has examined the activities of police officers responsible for informants over a period of twelve years. On only one occasion have PSNI provided any document indicative of consideration of the termination of the relationship which Special Branch had with any of these informants, despite the extent of the alleged involvement of these informants in the most serious of crimes.

32.5. Special Branch systems for information management, dissemination and retention were seriously defective. In effect handlers, and on occasion controllers, determined what information went into such systems as did exist. Those systems which did exist were not effective. 

33.6 There is evidence that information was withheld by handlers. Instructions were given that matters should not be recorded. The general absence of records has prevented senior officers, who clearly have significant responsibility for the failings, from being held to account. It is abundantly clear that this was not an oversight, but was a deliberate strategy and had the effect of avoiding proper accountability. The former ACC Crime Operations has described this situation as one of “plausible deniability”. 

33.8 Police officers at all levels working in Special Branch very often determined the future dissemination, if any, of intelligence held within Special Branch, to officers outside Special Branch. Had the necessary systems of accountability been in place the situation which is described in this Report should not have arisen. However the reality was that a Constable or a Sergeant could, and did, refuse to divulge information even to senior officers, and the mechanisms by which the decisions of individual Special Branch officers could be challenged were not used effectively by senior officers. The Special Branch liaison officer for any particular investigation, who was responsible for the verbal passing of information, was very often the handler of an informant who was a prime suspect for the particular crime. The Police Ombudsman also identified abuses of the existing controls for dissemination which often resulted in the failure to disseminate information at an appropriate time.

There was no documented record of the reasons for the decision making in this area.

8.3. In the course of the investigation the Police Ombudsman sought the cooperation of a number of retired RUC/PSNI senior officers. Officers who were being treated as witnesses were asked to provide an explanation of Special Branch and CID internal practices during this period. Investigators offered to meet retired officers at venues with which they would be comfortable and at times which would suit them. They were advised of the areas of questioning and provided with significant disclosure of information, at their request. The majority of them failed even to reply. This was despite the fact that witness details would be anonomised in any public statement. Amongst those who refused were two retired Assistant Chief Constable’s, seven Detective Chief Superintendent’s and two Detective Superintendent’s.

Some retired officers did assist the investigation, and were helpful...

8.5. Others, including some serving officers, gave evasive, contradictory, and on occasion farcical answers to questions. On occasion those answers indicated either a significant failure to understand the law, or contempt for the law. On other occasions the investigation demonstrated conclusively that what an officer had told the Police Ombudsman’s investigators was completely untrue.

8.6 The evidence indicates that there was a major failure to ensure to ensure the proper management of Informant 1 and other informants…

++++++++++

So was Jim Gamble instrumental in ordering or authorising people to be murdered? 

In the light of Baroness O’Loan’s report, the question must be asked.

We must also ask if Gamble was one of the police, intelligence and security service officers so severely condemned in this report. 

And as we consider those questions, we need to ask why Jim Gamble was given the task of heading up Operation Ore in 2002 and then entrusted with heading up the brand new government creation of CEOP in 2006. 

Gamble is on record, I believe, as denying that he is ‘named’ in Baroness O’Loan’s damning document. And he is quite right about that. He is not ‘named and shamed’.

But, surely, as the man at the heart of the corrupt, murderous, intelligence, security and Special Branch operations in Northern Ireland, Gamble is also condemned by Baroness O’Loan’s report?

My thesis is that, just like Clarence Mitchell, Jim Gamble is a man who is trusted by those at the very heart of our political establishment to do whatever is necessary.

Is that why both men were handed such key roles in influencing public perception about the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann?



FURTHER READING ON CMOMM: 'JOINED AT THE HIP: Starring the McCanns and Jim Gamble':
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Tony, I think I know where you are going with this.
You are a brave man, be careful, watch your back.

interestedobserver wrote:Tony, I think I know where you are going with this.
You are a brave man, be careful, watch your back.

The pursuit of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth can be a risky business, in a world in which so many powerful people tell so many big lies.

But I am merely raising some questions about Jim Gamble. He can provide the final answers. 

If he didn't either authorise or cover up murders in Northern Ireland, and if he was not one of those officers deliberately frustrating Baroness O'Loan's enquiry, he can register here and tell us so

Let's not forget to add that Jim Gamble, is  "a leading Northern Ireland social media expert" or at least was, according to this article:https: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Where does one start?:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jim Gamble, Peter Hain, Sir Ronnie Flanagan etc. Is it any wonder that we mortals are never going to get to the bottom of this. The whole lot will come crashing down if the truth is ever revealed.

I've been referred to this article on Jim Gamble in a journal called The IT Lawyer:

+++++++++++++++++++++

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Andrew Murray 6.Oct.2010

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


I realise I am going to be on very unsteady ground here but I'm usually a straight down the middle guy who doesn't rock the boat so I'm going out on a limb with a slightly controversial piece here.

In the few days since Jim Gamble announced his resignation from his role as Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and On-Line Protection Centre (CEOP) he has been accorded almost universal adulation by the British Media and has been followed out of the door by three other senior executives at CEOP. To believe the media Mr. Gamble was an irreplaceable hero who single-handedly protected our children from online harm. Here are a selection of stories from the last 48 hours.

"[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]" says The Sun;  

"[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]" says BBC News;  

"[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]"  says the Daily Mail 

and in this week's most tabloid friendly collision of stories

"[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]" says the Daily Mail natch.

Now I'm not denying Jim Gamble was/is a man with a mission and a very laudable one at that. His aim is to prevent the abuse of children. This is something which is unarguable and inalienable.

I though have met Mr. Gamble on more than one occasion (and more than two for the wags at the back) and there was something very undesirable about his methods and his message.

In a cry that echoed back to the radical feminist cry "All Men are Rapists", Mr. Gamble in public speeches seemed to suggest that all men were paedophiles. The role of CEOP was to protect children at all costs from these almost primeval urges. He also seemed to be suggesting that only CEOP could fulfil this role in the UK. The view of many in industry and the legal profession is he was an empire builder who had a particularly narrow and skewed view of society and in particular the relationship between adults and children.

I still have a marginal note I made at one of his speeches where I noted down "I am not a paedophile and I resent the implication I am because I happen to be a man."

[REST OF ARTICLE SNIPPED]

+++++++++++++++++++

Then there was this article:

Child protection chief in TV probe

The outgoing chief of Britain's child protection agency and the host of US TV show America's Most Wanted posed as paedophiles to investigate the sex trafficking of Cambodian youngsters.

PUBLISHED: 03:32, Sat, Nov 13, 2010 | UPDATED: 00:02, Sun, Nov 14, 2010

Jim Gamble took part in an investigation into the sex trafficking of Cambodian children for a US TV [PA].

Jim Gamble, ex-chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), and John Walsh said they were shocked when they went into a Cambodian bar where there were 50 to 60 girls.

Mr Walsh said: "Within two minutes a madam came up to us and said, 'What are you looking for?' and Mr Gamble said: 'We're looking for young girls.' She brought over three or four girls that were (about) 12 or 13 years old - very, very young."

Mr Gamble told her they wanted younger girls, Mr Walsh said. He said the woman replied: "What do you want? We have six and seven-year-old boys and girls. I can arrange that off premises."

Mr Walsh said the experience was "disgusting and heartbreaking".

He said Western paedophiles from the US, Britain and Germany travelled east to Cambodia as international sex tourists.

He said his show chose Cambodia because it is cheap to buy a sex slave there.

"I saw many Western men that had come there not to go to the Buddhist temples, not to come there to look at the beaches, not to do anything at all but to molest and have sex with children. It's wrong, it's illegal and it has to change," Mr Walsh said.

He said the episode would be a "tough show to watch, but it is important to expose the reality that children are sexually assaulted by predators.

Senior police officer Mr Gamble, the former head of Northern Ireland's anti-terror unit, resigned from Ceop in October over the Government's decision to make it part of the National Crime Agency.

++++++++++++

And this jaunt to Cambodia achieved precisely what?

"Mr. Gamble in public speeches seemed to suggest that all men were paedophiles"

In fairness to JG, it doesn't appear that he actually said those words. However, if he was IMPLYING that "all men are paedophiles" in what category does JG put himself?

All the below is snipped from this link:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sam Type Celt expert used by NCS / SOCA in court
Q. Right. So which files had been accessed or altered or modified?
A. I haven't got a specific list. Some were accessed, very few were modified. They were dotted all over the computer. There were various ones.



Here we have a contradiction. If very few files had been modified by US law enforcement, how could they be dotted all over the computer?



US - Robert C Adams (USPIS), Michael E Mead (USPIS), Ray Smith (USPIS), Steven A Nelson (Dallas PD), Bill Walsh (Dallas PD), John Ashcroft (US GOV), Mike Marshall (TX STATE/Microsoft), William Rector (TX STATE/SEC), Kenneth C Weaver (USPIS), Don Smiddy (USPIS), Frank Super (FBI).

UK - HMIC Sir Ronnie Flanagan, Bill Hughes (SOCA), Jim Gamble (SOCA), Trevor Pearce (SOCA), Stuart Hyde (WMP/SOCA), Paul Griffiths (GMP/SOCA), Andrew Mulholland (SOCA), Sir Stephen Lander (SOCA), DAC Alan Given (MPS), DS Peter Suggett (MPS),  HOPS DS John Levett (MPS), DCI Dave McDonald-Payne (MPS), DAC Rose Fitzpatrick (MPS), DS Tony Evans (MPS), Chief Constable Barbara Wilding (SWP), Chief Constable Carole Howlett (Norfolk Police), Adam Hinks (IPCC), Nick Hardwick (IPCC Chair), John Wadham (IPCC Deputy Chair), Mehmuda Mian-Pritchard (IPCC), David Petch (IPCC), John Carr (CHIS/GOV/IWF/NCH/SOCA), Tony Blair (GOV), Brian E Underhill (SOCA PE), Nicholas A Webber (SOCA PE), Dr Sam Type (SOCA PE), Dr Nick Sharples (SOCA PE), Dr Andrew Blyth (SWP PE), Paul Webb SWP, Chief Inspector Cheryl Jones (SWP), John Polychronakis (WMPA)

Exaro, a few months ago, featured comments from a 'private' web forum where former police officers discussed child abuse investigations within the context of political pressure.

He is the link:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Just over halfway down a former Met officer 'Frank' states that "Operation Ore had its wings clipped from the beginning. It's time to remove all political interference and take the gloves off".

JG has positioned himself as an expert in CSA and both Tom Watson and Simon Danzcuk obviously trust and admire his advice and strategies as they have provided links to articles and statements by JG. Jim has also attended at least one CSA Survivor meeting. Difficult to reconcile his Ore role with his current work!

NickE wrote:Tweet from Gamble yesterday:
"Knowledge is power,& knowledge abt secrets of powerful people is real power".


What does he mean?

It's the glue that holds this stinking, filthy, corrupt establishment together!

NickE wrote:Tweet from Gamble yesterday:
"Knowledge is power,& knowledge abt secrets of powerful people is real power".



What does he mean?

If it wasn't for "powerful people" being mentioned I would say it was a threat to those looking into him. I therefore guess he has dirt on people that gives him confidence of being untouchable?

Or he could just be playing silly buggers on Twa*ter.

NickE wrote:Tweet from Gamble yesterday:
"Knowledge is power,& knowledge abt secrets of powerful people is real power".



What does he mean?

I've just looked at Jim Gamble's tweets and I can't find the tweet you quote. Do you have a screenshot or a link?

I don't do Twitter but I'm able to read Twitter and this is the only Twitter account I know of Jim Gamble.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

@Nick E

I found the Tweet and here it is

[list="expanded-conversation expansion-container js-expansion-container js-navigable-stream"]
View photo 6 retweets 4 favorites

[*][list="expanded-conversation expansion-container js-expansion-container js-navigable-stream"]
[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
How can this NOT be a paedophile ring? Surely the definition is "where 2 or 3 (or more) are gathered together?" [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 9 retweets 7 favorites

[/list]




[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ridiculous. How many CSA perpetrators actually act alone? Organised crime networks which share images & information.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 4 retweets 3 favorites




[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] IME most act alone it's the nature of their crime. Rings/grps who support/hide one another represent huge threats
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 4 retweets 1 favorite




[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] yes - even the village idiots were powerful by the very fact that they colluded to hide & protect each other
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 4 retweets 3 favorites




[*]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] knowledge is power & knowledge abt the secrets of powerful people is real power
[/list]

Thank you
I didn't find this tweet direct from Gamble,someone else quoted his tweet on #mccann

When searching for info on JG, it`s noticeable how he doesn`t give dates on his CV or in interviews during his time in the RUC.  His Linkedin profile starts in 2000 and doesn`t mention the RUC.  We don`t even know how old he is.  In one interview the interviewer states JG has been in the police for 30 years - I assume that takes him up to starting at CEOP, so maybe he was born around 1956. If the 30 years takes him to when he left CEOP, he may have been born in 1961.

Whichever, it looks as if he could have been in the RUC in the 80s when the Stalker Inquiry took place (1984-1986).  John Stalker discovered some pretty damning stuff about the RUC but he was prevented from interviewing some witnesses (don`t know who by) and afterwards someone tried to blacken his name.  It seems it was a difficult time for John Stalker. 

Anyway, I found this youtube video about it for anyone that`s interested.

Richard IV wrote:When searching for info on JG, it`s noticeable how he doesn`t give dates on his CV or in interviews during his time in the RUC.  His Linkedin profile starts in 2000 and doesn`t mention the RUC.  We don`t even know how old he is.  In one interview the interviewer states JG has been in the police for 30 years - I assume that takes him up to starting at CEOP, so maybe he was born around 1956. If the 30 years takes him to when he left CEOP, he may have been born in 1961.

Whichever, it looks as if he could have been in the RUC in the 80s when the Stalker Inquiry took place (1984-1986).  John Stalker discovered some pretty damning stuff about the RUC but he was prevented from interviewing some witnesses (don`t know who by) and afterwards someone tried to blacken his name.  It seems it was a difficult time for John Stalker. 

Anyway, I found this youtube video about it for anyone that`s interested.

Jim Gamble is 56 years old, according to this article, which states he was 48 in 2007:

By Bonnie Malkin
8:31AM BST 01 Jun 2007

• [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  

With more than 25 years experience working in law enforcement, Jim Gamble, 48, is a true career policeman.
Before taking up his current job as the head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) Centre in 2006, he worked as a superintendent in the Police Service of Northern Ireland and, most recently, as acting chief constable and head of the National Crime Squad.
During his time in Northern Ireland he covered both uniform and detective roles before leading anti-terrorist responses in Britain and abroad.
At the National Crime Squad - which deals with serious and organised crime - he oversaw a complex portfolio ranging from firearm deployment to hi-tech crime and intelligence to professional standards and security.
He also set up the National Crime Squad's specialist response cell - the Paedophile Online Investigation Team - and was involved in the creation of the first international law enforcement partnership to combat child abuse online - the Virtual Global Taskforce.
Mr Gamble is married with three children and lives in London.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Cheers for finding that sallypelt.  So born abt 1959.  If he was in the military police initially, seems he would not have been in the RUC around the time of the Stalker Inquiry, or still quite young.

Cammerigal wrote:Special branch and MI5 used sexual deviance evidence to blackmail, coerce and turn terrorists in Northern Ireland to spy for them, both loyalist and republican. It was a dirty war and even the best operators could not break into their secure cell systems.

We of course don't know for certain Gamble's precise intelligence role at that time, but we do know that he did become head of CEOP

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Anyone see big Jim stating how as an ex Irish Police Officer that he would not have used an under cover operative to break down the child abuse ring in Newcastle,especially as the undercover operative was found guilty to a multitude of offences against Minors?
no mention of your Trip to Thailand and going undercover to"Break the Paedophile Network"Eh Big Jim,having problems with your memory syndrome?
The UK public must now doubt just what is the Police role in "Child Protection"when it has been unearthed of how long the Police forces within the UK have turned a "Blind Eye"to these ghastly offences?
But just as the "aangirfan" states,have they(Police) been involved right from the start along with MI5/6,along with the Krays and Lord Boothby,eh Sir Cliff,"The Young Ones shouldn't be afraid"?

Jim Gamble: 'I was under threat but was more fearful for my family'

Chris Kilpatrick talks to the former head of Special Branch in Belfast who applied to be PSNI chief constable and was chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] 1 1 Taking a stand: Jim Gamble has devoted much of his life to protecting children

May 19 2014

• 
  
  

Q. You spent three decades in policing, what attracted you to it?

A. My father was in the RAF so I grew up with a service background. The natural progression was into the Army for me, I joined the military police. Ironically it provided me with an insight into divided communities that was very symbolic and visible. I was stationed in west Berlin so you had a physical structure which divided communities and actually two communities who desperately wanted to be together.

Q. You join the RUC, moved on to Special Branch, and then to England.

A. When I came back to Northern Ireland it was initially with the bomb squad in a military police role and then I came out and joined the RUC. I went through the ranks to be head of Special Branch in Belfast. As peace was breaking out I passed the strategic command course and ended up as the assistant chief constable in the National Crime Squad.

I then became deputy director general of the National Crime Squad. I was asked to build a new organisation called the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP). I resisted it at the beginning, I didn't think it was exactly what I wanted to do, and in the end it was one of the highlights of my career.

Q. Heading up Special Branch in Belfast brings with it all sorts of huge challenges and pressures, what was that time like?

A. I look back on my time with Special Branch as having been a privilege. I know some people will read this and not like that. First of all I understand it depends on the geography of where you were born in Northern Ireland, what your view of a particular issue or particular group of individuals will be. What I will say on my own part is I have been proud of many of the things I have done in my career and that pride is as strong as anywhere as regard that work we did in RUC Special Branch. I worked with people who made extraordinary sacrifices, exposed themselves to horrific levels of danger to keep people safe. You hear all sorts. Every organisation will have bad apples, people who are motivated to do the wrong thing.

But in my experience the vast majority of people I worked with were good, decent people who got up in the morning to go and do a job that was about keeping people safe. It was a different time and a different place. There's no doubt the lessons learned and skill sets developed in that arena helped me in the latter part of my career.

Q. That pressure and the concern for your safety and that of your family, how did you live with that? Were you subjected to death threats?

A. At that time the key was you retained a low profile. You went about your job and did your job in an environment in which police were under constant threat and not by accident but by design as people set out to murder and maim police officers. So that was always in the back of your mind.

Q. How do you deal with that?

A. I think anybody who has worked in a job which is inherently dangerous tends to survive on the basis of 'it won't be me'. It will happen to someone else. There were times you would have a close shave and pause and think of the risks. But the camaraderie and spirit in work kept you going. You were much more fearful for your family. What you said, where you lived. On occasions when you had to move, rapidly– overnight on one occasion – from somewhere your children grew up to a completely different area.

Q. Can you tell me more about those close shaves? How close was it?

A. No. But I recognise when saying that other people from other areas with different backgrounds and views would have experienced their own trauma. I don't see myself as a victim of the Troubles. I don't see myself as a victim, I don't see combatants as victims.

I do see those who were going about their business and were gunned down or blown up, I see them as innocent victims. If I carry a bomb into a building and I kill innocent people, those innocent people are victims. If I carried the bomb I am not innocent. Likewise, if I stood on the periphery of a riot and shot an unarmed rioter, who represented no threat to me, I am not a victim either.

Q. You would have lost colleagues, close friends – how did you feel when some of the perpetrators were being set free from prison?

A. It's never easy to see someone on the street who has inflicted the most horrific injuries, who has brutalised and murdered other human beings, whether they are Catholic or Protestant. It's never easy to see them enjoy liberty those no longer with us cannot.

I couldn't have been the person to enthusiastically agree that. What I do see now are the benefits we did accrue from it to allow the peace process to be delivered at the particular time. My children grew up in a period that was really dominated by hope, the fact we were moving in a new direction. I began not having to worry so much about them being in Belfast shopping but worry about the normal things parents do when they have sons or daughters. It's about how we respect the sacrifice of others in the past by collaborating and building a more positive future together.

Q. You served with the police for around 30 years, you were a highly-commended officer and you applied for the job of Chief Constable. Why did you not get it? Were you perceived as being outspoken or perhaps because of your security and intelligence background?

A. I think I was a round peg in a round hole at CEOP. The only job that could have attracted me away from that was Chief Constable of the PSNI. At the time I could not resist applying for it. Many of my friends said I was wasting my time because of my background with Special Branch, that would perhaps would be an impediment. Being shortlisted was an honour. Why didn't I get it? Maybe I wasn't good enough on the day. What I do believe with the gift of hindsight was that I wasn't the right person for the job given where we are now. Had I been chief constable people would have been more concerned during these fragile moments because of the political issues, the specific issues we see at the minute. My background as a Special Branch officer would have been unhelpful and perhaps unhealthy for the service. I've no complaints about that.

Q. Who would your money be on this time round?

A. Leadership in the country is critically important and one of the key leadership roles in Northern Ireland is that of a chief constable. Communities and the context of their role, aspirations and engagement with one another, with the police service – it's really important this time round we have the opportunity to select someone who understands that. There are some real good applicants in for it.

Q. Who stands out among the candidates?

A. Cressida Dick from the Met comes with a lot of experience in the Met but Northern Ireland is very, very different from that Metropolitan Police environment which is layer upon layer of management regime.

I think it's time for a local person and my own view is they have a candidate who fits that criteria. It's about having that leadership that knows who we are, warts and all. The sensitivities and when to be sensitive, but also the time to be right down the line.

If you're not right down the line with everybody then you have people saying why did you not do with them what you did with us. It's no surprise that out of the candidates, the best I believe is George Hamilton.

Q. What does he bring to the job?

A. I would hope the board recognise that in him they have an individual with all the right skills, who will make the right decisions and be scrupulously fair. I think George is someone who recognises the need to respect diversity beyond the rhetoric of saying the right thing. Real leadership is about being seen and being seen to do the right thing.

Q. Matt Baggott came here as a champion of neighbourhood policing. Was it too soon for that approach or style of policing here?

A. I think everybody wanted to be heading in a direction that was going to be about even greater integration with the community through the police service that we delivered. Matt came with the perfect CV for that.

I think maybe had we a better barometer at the time, had we known there were going to be the problems that there ultimately would be, you could argue that maybe one of the other candidates – certainly not me – would have brought some other skills. But at the end of the day it's about a blend. Matt has come in, he's faced a difficult task.

Hugh Orde was an excellent chief constable. Real strength of leadership and, agree or disagree with him, he knew what he wanted to do and he was prepared to stand up and be counted and do that. Matt came in at a time when everybody thought things were now fine and suddenly there were bumps in the road, there were real issues and they weren't going to be resolved in the short term without default to some of the older skill-sets around public order, community unrest.

Everybody thought we had already arrived at peace when Matt took over. To be fair, the last couple of years have shown we're quite far from it.

Q. Have the politicians failed him?

A. It's easy to blame politicians and I do that myself, quite frequently. I blame politicians for things at Westminster and sometimes I look at politicians here and shake my head. I think they can make the chief constable's life more difficult but they should hold the chief constable to account. The appropriate place to do that of course is through the Policing Board which I think has done a remarkable job and put politics in the right place.

Politicians outside of that governance structure can sometimes create real difficulties by simply saying things that are hugely provocative or that are unnecessary or unhelpful. Policing is so difficult and in Northern Ireland you are policing within that political context where it is not about getting it right for the powers that be, it's about being seen to get it right.

Q. Has he been too appeasing at times? During the disorder round flags and parades say?

A. It's unfair of me to cast judgment on Matt because he's been in the hotseat, he's had to make the difficult decisions. He's had to make those decisions about flags and when to intercede. All I can say is that had I been in that seat the flags protest would have been dealt with much more robustly and at an earlier stage.

Q. How would you have done that?

A. That could have been the wrong way to go because that may have inflamed the situation. I think when you have a protest, whether it's green or orange or somewhere in the middle, you have to take firm and decisive action at the earliest possible opportunity to prevent it escalating. Then again Matt in his role – and I've a lot of respect for him – would have access to all of the intelligence. He will know things you and I can't possibly know. We'll second guess those decisions. He might know the consequences of doing one thing a day early could have led to a massive escalation. It's easy to be the chief constable from an armchair. He's had that job and during what has been a difficult time.

Q. As well as the disorder of the past couple of years, we saw an increase in so-called dissident republican activity. What's your assessment of the threat they pose?

A. I've no insight but I don't feel we are on the brink of going back to where we were or anywhere near that. It's always worrying. It's worrying from a personal security point of view, for retired colleagues and for those colleagues today living in areas I wouldn't possibly have done in the past. That puts them and the community in a difficult position and that's where you look to your political leaders.

Q. What did you make of the comments of Martin McGuinness recently when he referred to dark forces and a cabal within police?

A. The Deputy First Minister is entitled to his view. Ironically he's somebody I've watched over the past number of years with interest because I think he is someone who has developed as a political leader. I've seen him at times when others have said things I wish they wouldn't, he has been considered about his language.

I was therefore really disappointed when things escalated in the way they did when the police were simply doing the job they are employed to do.

Q. You now specialise in child safety. How did you go from Special Branch to heading up CEOP?

A. By accident as opposed to design. The move from Northern Ireland with the experience at Special Branch to National Crime Squad was a simple one which made sense.



As assistant chief constable for intelligence and operational support I worked in the fight against organised crime, from drug-dealing to human trafficking and financial crimes.



Almost by a quirk of fate one day I was asked to carry out a review of an operation called Operation Ore. Once I completed that review I recommended that because of the complexity of the technology involved, the weight of data coming in, that there needed to be an approach that was child-centred.

Within a few days I was appointed as the lead for co-ordination of Operation Ore which for some was seen as contentious. I saw it as a huge success in that identified and located over 100 children and over the years it unfolded held more than 2,500 people to account. Having done that I was offered to take on the role setting up what was to become CEOP.

Q. Have you had any doubts about doing this job?

A. I was on a trip to Cambodia and while I was there I saw square mile after square mile of rubbish, steaming rubbish. Dump trucks would come in and drop off more rubbish and children of three, four and five years of age would rummage through it. If they could fill a sack the same height if not higher than themselves they would get 25 cents.

You realise then the environment, that vulnerability. Then when you see Western men were visiting there and were buying those children for between seven and 12 dollars, taking them to their hotel and abusing them, you recognise suffering in a different way.

For me it was almost a road to Damascus-type of conversion. What an honour to have an opportunity to build something where you are part of a team of very special people. To build something which has actually made a difference in a young person's life.

Q. You invested a lot in CEOP, you built it up but then you walk away in 2010. Do you regret it?

A. I came to the point it was a matter of principle. For me it was the right thing. My fear was that it would be subsumed into a larger organisation. The Home Secretary said it would retain its identity, its profile and they would build on the success it had. Well, arrests have dropped in the last three years, the sign outside CEOP no longer says CEOP. It says National Crime Agency. Its profile has dropped. In NCA the C stands for crime. In CEOP the C always stood for children.

Q. One of the cases you have been involved in was the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Do you think her parents Kate and Gerry will ever get the answers they crave?



A. I think Gerry and Kate McCann will get closure in my lifetime. My heart goes out to them. I never cease to be appalled by some of the things people say.


A woman on the radio earlier was more fixated that Kate and Gerry left the kids and went for a meal.



You know what? Lots of people make mistakes. Few people pay this price. Sometimes people should just think before they speak.

Belfast Telegraph

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

One big happy family innit?

Hi Verdi,thanks for the post n Big Jim's career,doesn't mention anything about Kincora and his Special Branch connections,MI5/6?
Jim Gamble is wheeled out to "Sooth the public mood"on child based issues,Newcastle,Rochdale,South Yorkshire 1400 abused girls?
Is Big Jim another one of those"Special Expertise"Officers who seem to have problems with their "Cognitive Dissonance" procrastinating on what happened to Madeleine McCann,seems as though Jim,Martin B and sir Bernard Hogan Howe all felt to be ,"We'er All In This Together"moment on the Dossier handed to them from a Family friend of the McCann's involving the tragedy of Mrs Brenda Leyland,public persecuted via Sky News Corporation?
Did you have any involvement in the publishing of articles related to Madeleine's Wayback Machine dates,eh Jim,air Brooshing the dates of their origin?

willowthewisp wrote:Hi Verdi,thanks for the post n Big Jim's career,doesn't mention anything about Kincora and his Special Branch connections,MI5/6?

It wasn't intended to link to Kincora or any possible MI5/6 connection.  I don't decry drawing attention to anything that might throw further light on the progress of Gamble's dubious career but on this occasion, I'm more interested in his direct connection with the Metropolitan police, Leicester Police and the McCann affair - not forgetting his time as head of the CEOP.

It's on public record that Gamble was shorlisted for the position of Chief Constable for the Police Service of Northern Ireland, standing against, amongst others, Bernard Hogan-Howe and Matthew Baggott of Leicestershire Constabulary (the successful candidate) - both very vocal, if not heavily involved, in Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

NI's chief constable accused of obstructing Troubles' investigations


3rd June 2014

NI's chief constable is being taken to court over claims he obstructed Police Ombudsman investigations into allegations against the police in 60 murders.

The action has been brought by NI's Police Ombudsman Michael Maguire.

He is attempting to force the chief constable to hand over sensitive intelligence material.

The PSNI said it believed it had responded appropriately to each request on a case-by-case basis.

Mr Maguire said he had no option because he had received more than 100 refusals for information.

He said the material was needed for his investigators to do their jobs.

This is an unprecedented legal action by the police ombudsman (PONI).

Mr Maguire claimed Chief Constable Matt Baggott was making it impossible to investigate allegations of serious criminal activity and misconduct.

"At this point in time, the police have refused us access to 100 pieces of information involving investigations surrounding in the region of 60 murders," he told the BBC.

Read on..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
As I said recently, funny how Ireland features so prominently in this McCann saga  .

John Stalker who sits on the forum header above, was in 1983 a deputy chief constable in the Manchester police force, tasked with investigating allegations of a shoot to kill policy in Northern Ireland by the then RUC.
It was alleged if I remember correctly that the RUC had shot dead members of the IRA instead of arresting them.

Stalker claimed he knew of six deaths by shooting, five he had investigated and one which he believed MI5 had recorded and Stalker wanted it.

Stalker was removed from the inquiry and was investigated for being friendly with a criminal. Stalker thought there was a "Masonic connection" within the force which wanted him removed.

This of course is before Baggott and Gamble were around.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Lest you forget, there is an excellent comprehensive write-up about Jim Gamble here..

Rogue of the Day - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on page 5

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There is also a feature on Matt Baggott (I include as the two are intertwined) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on page 2

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hi Verdi,surely this cannot be the Mathew Baggot who declared that either one of Madeleine McCann's parents,knew more than they had allowed to be aired to the public on Madeleine's disappearance and of Not being entirely innocent?
Thanks for the link of Mr Michael Maguire being mislead by Matt Baggot,Northern Irelands Chief Constable looking into Deaths in Ireland?
They must have learned these techniques whilst serving beside Sir Bernard Hogan Howe on how to obfuscate(Bull sh*t)to the public whilst "Grinning"at the same time,masterpiece of Hendon Training Centre?
Perhaps all the Police Forces within the UK and held responsible for the Safety of the Public have colluded or allowed certain "Cronies"evade Justice in and around child abuse,as it is becoming clearer,they knew more than they stated to the public,isnt that"Misconduct in Public Office"?
now if you can put the abuses carried out in Jersey,Northern Ireland,Magic circle in Scotland,Bryn Alyn,Estyn in Wales,ad in Rochdale and the various London Boroughs,Islington,Richmond Park,Elm guest House and the "Care Homes scandal"anyone would think there was a massive problem of child abuse in the United Kingdom,wouldn't you?
Ah,but didn't Lord Hague investigate the Care Homes in and around Wales costing Millions of pounds,only to find their was No Paedophile rings working around the"Care Homes"?

willowthewisp wrote:Perhaps all the Police Forces within the UK and held responsible for the Safety of the Public have colluded or allowed certain "Cronies"evade Justice in and around child abuse,as it is becoming clearer,they knew more than they stated to the public,isnt that"Misconduct in Public Office"?

To be sure - to be sure - to be sure .

NB:  Never forget to include Lambeth in your list of accountable London Boroughs!

THE SNP has called on the UK Government to urgently clarify how many papers have been “lost” from the National Archives.

The Westminster Government was forced to admit yesterday that hundreds of papers have gone missing from the Archives, including documents relating to Northern Ireland’s Troubles, the Falklands War and British dealings with Palestine and Israel after the Second World War.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]