The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as many of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Major inquiry opens into claims that MPs, civil servants, government aides and spies committed Westminster sexual abuse

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Major inquiry opens into claims that MPs, civil servants, government aides and spies committed Westminster sexual abuse

Post by NickE on 31.01.18 14:32

An inquiry in child abuse in Britain has today started examining allegations of paedophilia in Westminster.

The Independent Inquiry in Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) has so far examined alleged abuse in the church, in children's homes and in private schools.

Today, it began examining claims that MPs and civil servants may have been involved in or turned a blind eye to sex attacks on children.

An inquiry has begun to investigate claims of child abuse linked to top figures in Westiminster
Part of the inquiry's remit is to examine whether 'people of public prominence associated with Westminster were involved in a conspiracy sexually to abuse children'.

It will also examine whether there was 'within the highest levels of government, a culture of tolerance towards those suspected of child sexual abuse'.

The latest strand of the inquiry comes after a separate section heard disgraced politican Cyril Smith received a knighthood in 1988 despite knowledge 'at the very highest level of politics' about past allegations of his sexual abuse.
Police officer who 'kissed and groped a domestic abuse victim after sending her 'raunchy texts' groomed three others in a similar way'
Pedophile Glee actor Mark Salling¿s suicide robs his victims of $50,000 each that judge was going to order him to pay them at his sentencing as former co-stars pay tribute to him
It also emerged that MI5 provided the inquiry with records detailing allegations that prosecutors had lied about their role in deciding not to prosecute Smith in 1970.

Sir Norman Skelhorn, the DPP at the time, chose not to press charges despite a senior detective warning the 'sordid' accusations against Smith 'stood up', the inquiry previously heard.

The inquiry heard today that public concern over historical abuse in Westminster has dropped since retired judge Sir Richard Henriques delivered a scathing review of Operation Midland, a Met Police probe into paedophilia and homicide at the Dolphin Square housing development near Parliament.

Professor Alexis Jay is heading up the inquiry, which was beset with problems before it begun
Sir Richard criticised detectives for saying lurid claims of child murder and abuse from their key witness, a man known only as 'Nick', were 'credible and true'.

The report attacked the use of inaccurate information to obtain search warrants and the delay in concluding the case.

The £20million IICSA inquiry has been plagued with delays and is on its fourth chairwoman since it was set up by Theresa May in 2014.

The IICSA inquiry is attempting drawing together a staggering 13 different probes, including investigations into alleged abuse at Westminster, in children's homes, within the Anglican and Catholic churches.

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) explained
Why was it set up?

After the abuse of Sir Jimmy Savile was revealed, only fully after his death in 2011, hundreds came forward to claim they were abused. It would then emerge that these attacks were in NHS hospitals, schools, children's homes and also at the BBC - police and the CPS also made mistakes that let him abuse freely.

In 2014 Theresa May, then Home Secretary, set up the inquiry to 'expose those failures and learn the lessons'.

How does it work?

The inquiry is looking at 13 areas - and they will be covered in the first phase of the inquiry will last around 18 months. A final report on each area are expected to be completed in around five years.

It is being run by Professor Alexis Jay, who led the inquiry into abuse in Rotherham. She will earn £185,000. She will be helped by various experts and lawyers. Victims will also be represented by a panel.

Witnesses will give evidence under oath but the panel will only return with 'findings of fact' not the civil or criminal liability of named individuals or organisations.

Why has it been controversial?

The Inquiry is now on its fourth chairwoman.

Dame Lowell Goddard, who was handed a package worth £500,000 including relocation from New Zealand and a £360,000 annual salary, quit suddenly last year.

It later emerged she charged taxpayers almost £6,000 to fly treasured possessions including a vase 11,400 miles across the world from New Zealand.

Sources claimed Dame Lowell, appointed by then-Home Secretary Theresa May, had lost the confidence of senior staff and members of the inquiry panel.

New chairwoman Professor Alexis Jay has already had to call in an independent legal expert to examine an alleged cover-up of sexual assault and bullying claims at its headquarters.

Baroness Butler-Sloss and Dame Fiona Woolf both stepped down from the role in 2015 after concerns about their links to the establishment.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5335007/amp/Inquiry-opens-Westminster-paedophilia-claims.html

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".
avatar
NickE

Posts : 1147
Reputation : 404
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 43

View user profile

Back to top Go down

RE;Major Inquiry,iiCSA

Post by willowthewisp on 31.01.18 18:46

Mr Janner's family vehemently oppose the scope of the IICSA Inquiry,that they(Janner family) should have a special status,as it is their Fathers/Family name being connected to alleged child abuse carried out against a Minor,at the Family home(Wife absent at the time)and within the House of Common's,when Mr Janner(SNR)was an MP for Leicestershire at the time of the claim.
The accuser was quite able to give out descriptions to Police Officers of the abode he was taken to,picking out certain items from certain rooms!
Note,not withstanding,that the Police force Re-investigating the claim of the alleged case,were against a decision taken by Alison Saunders,Not to procedure to Prosecute for the original case,due to Mr Janners"Illness"he was excluded from appearing before a Court of Law!
Mr Janner(Snr),did manage to persuade Leicestershire Police force to investigate a Social Care Worker,who was assigned to look after the accuser?
The Social Care Worker was found guilty of using regression techniques(guilty),whilst appealing his case,The Social Care Worker died of a "Fatal Heart attack"aged 54,then the solicitor who was to represent him at the appeal hearing,died in a"Mysterious accident,Hit & run"with no assailants being found!?
Mr Janner,returned to the House of Commons,to rapturous applause from his fellow MP's,led by oily Keith,a bit like the Muskateers,"One for all,All for One"Washerman Vaz,whiter than white?  
Now do you notice how cases progress,the more"Power/influence you have,you can turn allegations against you into,these are the people that you aught to investigate, Officer?
Just imagine,that if the "alleged Abuser",was in fact found to have been the Guilty party after all,but had evaded justice of being found guilty for 20-30 yrs,where does this leave the UK justice system,that the manipulators can openly abuse the legal system in their favour!
Or because they are trained Legal representatives,they can abuse due processes of Law?

In 1991 it was found that the DPP were wrong not to charge MR J with assault and buggery.
The DPP concluded"The Police Investigation"was inadequate in 1991.
In 2002,allegations against Lord J, were not supplied by the Police to the CPS and accordingly-No prosecutions was possible,this merits investigation by the IPCC?
So there was evidence to charge persons from Twenty Seven yrs ago?
It does seem at least suspicious,that junior staff who worked with Lord J,then became Head of the department,that failed to even charge person's with an offence in 2015/16 and are still in that position today?

willowthewisp

Posts : 2040
Reputation : 834
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Major inquiry opens into claims that MPs, civil servants, government aides and spies committed Westminster sexual abuse

Post by Doug D on 31.01.18 22:42

Todays transcript. Haven't had a chance to plough through it yet:

[url=https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/3780/view/31 January 2018 Westminster Preliminary Hearing Transcript.pdf]https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/3780/view/31%20January%202018%20Westminster%20Preliminary%20Hearing%20Transcript.pdf[/url]

Doug D

Posts : 2540
Reputation : 898
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Major inquiry opens into claims that MPs, civil servants, government aides and spies committed Westminster sexual abuse

Post by Doug D on 04.02.18 21:05

Snips from the opening statement from lead councel for this investigation, Andrew O’Connor QC.


They do seem to be looking into a pretty full-house of the various allegations we have seen.


(Been trying to tidy the paragraphs up, but taking forever so posting it as it is)
 
P10
Turning to procedural matters, as you have stated, chair, it is intended that the inquiry will hold public hearings in this investigation in just over a year's time, in March 2019. Those hearings will last for three weeks. Our task is now to prepare for those hearings
P13
 
We have engaged with a number of organisations that hold potentially relevant material and we have received over 35,000 pages of documentation. To be more specific, we have made disclosure requests to MI5, MI6 and GCHQ. All three agencies have completed their initial searches and we are engaging with them as to the outcome of those searches. We have made similar disclosure requests to the police. To be more specific, requests have gone to the Metropolitan Police, to the Metropolitan Police Special Branch, and to all regional forces via
P14
Operation Hydrant. The search process is well under way and we are working with the police to ensure that these searches are comprehensive and proportionate. We have been working closely with the Independent Office for Police Conduct, formerly known as the Independent Police Complaints Commission, the IPCC. That organisation has conducted a number of  investigations that are relevant to this investigation,
and some of those investigations are still under way. They have disclosed some material already to us, and we  anticipate further material being disclosed in due  course. An extensive disclosure exercise has been set in  train at the Cabinet Office. That process is still  under way, but some documents are already available for  review and the inquiry legal team will commence that  process very shortly. We have liaised with both the Bodleian Library in  Oxford and Churchill College, Cambridge, which hold a number of sets of archives, including prime  ministerial archives, that are of potential relevance to  the investigation. No searches have yet been conducted in these archives, and we are of course mindful of the need to ensure that the disclosure process is undertaken in a way that is proportionate. We intend to
P15
keep under review the possibility of conducting searches -- probably targeted searches -- in these archives.  We have corresponded with the London School of Economics, which holds archives from the Liberal and  Liberal Democratic parties, and we will be commencing  a disclosure exercise in relation to that material in the near future. We have met with the Secretary of the Defence and  Security Media Advisory Committee, the body that  administers what is still commonly known as the D-Notice system. At our request, searches of relevant records have taken place and a witness statement from the secretary of the committee has been provided. We have made disclosure requests directly to political parties and have received a considerable volume of material in response. Finally, we have received a large number of  documents that have been sent to us by individuals with an interest in these matters. All documents received have been uploaded onto our computer systems and the process of reviewing these documents for relevance is under way.  The disclosure process will of course continue.
P19
The first strand relates to concern that police investigations into cases of possible child sexual abuse linked with Westminster may have been the subject of inappropriate interference.  A central theme of many cases in this category is the suggestion that the police may have been prevented  from investigating the conduct of senior politicians and other establishment figures. A number of retired police officers have claimed that they were indeed warned off investigating possible cases of child sexual abuse committed by senior politicians in the 1960s, '70s and '80s. Several of these cases are linked to the Elm Guest House affair, which was itself the subject of investigation by the Metropolitan Police in its Operations Fairbank and Fernbridge. The claims that
P20
have been made are claims of conspiracy and coverup and  we submit that they go to the heart of the inquiry's work in this investigation. I have mentioned the Metropolitan Police's investigations. In addition, some of the cases in this category have been investigated by the IPCC and/or its successor body, the Independent Office for Police Conduct. We are liaising with both the IOPC and the Met Police in this regard. Another case that raises questions as to inappropriate political influence over police conduct arises from the well-publicised account that the journalist Don Hale has given of his office being raided by Special Branch officers who served, or at least purported to serve, a D-Notice on him and seized  a dossier from him containing names of MPs said to be sympathetic to the Paedophile Information Exchange,  a dossier that had apparently been given to Mr Hale by Barbara Castle MP. This case has also been the subject of an investigation by the IPCC. We will consider the report and any other documents relating to these events that we obtain. We submit that this may well be an appropriate case to investigate further. Written evidence relating to D-Notices and the work of the D-Notice Committee was adduced in the Rochdale investigation, and it may well be that you will wish to
P21
hear oral evidence on that subject during the course of the hearings in this investigation. The second strand is related to the first. Have  there been cases in which prosecutorial decisions in  child sexual abuse cases have been the subject of  improper influence from within the Westminster establishment? Questions of this nature relating to Cyril Smith were raised in the Rochdale investigation.  We propose that you should pursue those questions in  this investigation. Similar issues also arise in relation to prosecution decisions taken in at least two other cases -- those of Peter Hayman and Victor Montagu. We submit that those cases also should be investigated, and it is possible that the disclosure exercise that we are currently undertaking will raise similar questions in relation to other cases. The third strand that we propose should be investigated relates to the way in which political parties, and in particular the leadership of those parties, have reacted to allegations of child sexual abuse made about individuals within their own parties. What, for example, did the leadership of the Liberal Party know about the allegations against Cyril Smith? Did they take those allegations seriously? Did they react appropriately? Similar questions have been raised
P22

  1. about the way in which allegations relating to
  2. 2  Peter Morrison were dealt with within the Conservative
  3. 3  Party. And how did the Westminster establishment
  4. 4  generally react to efforts made to shine a light on
  5. 5  child sexual abuse and associated institutional
  6. 6  failings? I have already mentioned the well-known
  7. 7  allegations relating to the Elm Guest House. They
  8. 8  clearly touch on these issues. We also anticipate that
  9. 9  the investigation will hear evidence in this regard
  10. 10  about the so-called Dickens dossier, and possibly also
  11. 11  about the allegations that have been made by
  12. 12  Anthony Gilberthorpe.
  13. 13  In this context, it may also be helpful for the
  14. 14  investigation to explore more general questions as to
  15. 15  how the Westminster establishment operated 30 years ago
  16. 16  and how open it was to pursuing allegations of even very
  17. 17  serious wrongdoing made against those who were members
  18. 18  of that establishment. In a BBC interview with
  19. 19  Andrew Marr in 2014, Norman Tebbit said that he thought
  20. 20  that "there may well have been" what he described as
  21. 21  a "big political coverup" relating to child sexual abuse
  22. 22  in the 1980s. He added that "things looked different in
  23. 23  those days". He described an atmosphere within
  24. 24  Westminster where, as he put it, "most people would have
  25. 25  thought that the establishment -- the system -- was to

P23

  1. be protected. And if a few things had gone wrong here
  2. 2  and there, that it was more important to protect the
  3. 3  system than to delve too far into them". Chair,
  4. 4  Lord Tebbit's words beg a number of questions that, we
  5. 5  submit, can and should be explored within the scope of
  6. 6  this investigation.
  7. 7  The fourth strand concerns the activities of
  8. 8  the Whips' Offices of the various parties in parliament.
  9. 9  Is it possible that on occasions in the past the Whips
  10. 10  may have received allegations of child sexual abuse made
  11. 11  against politicians in their own party and then failed
  12. 12  to report those allegations or to take any other
  13. 13  appropriate steps? Is it possible, indeed, that the
  14. 14  Whips may have taken active steps to conceal such
  15. 15  allegations, in part to avoid embarrassing publicity and
  16. 16  in part to gain a hold over the politician in question?
  17. 17  In a notorious BBC interview in 1995, Tim Fortescue, who
  18. 18  is now dead but who in the early 1970s was
  19. 19  a Conservative MP and government Whip, suggested that
  20. 20  this was so. In describing the work of the Whips'
  21. 21  Office, he made the following comments:
  22. 22  "For anyone with any sense, who was in trouble,
  23. 23  would come to the Whips and tell them the truth, and say
  24. 24  'Now, I'm in a jam, can you help?' It might be debt, it
  25. 25  might be ... a scandal involving small boys, or any kind

P24

  1. of scandal in which, er, a member seemed likely to be
  2. 2  mixed up in. They'd come and ask if we could help and,
  3. 3  if we could, we did. And we would do everything we can
  4. 4  because we would store up Brownie points ... and if
  5. 5  I mean, that sounds a pretty, pretty nasty reason, but
  6. 6  it's one of the reasons, because if we could get a chap
  7. 7  out of trouble, then he will do as we ask for evermore."
  8. 8  Did the Whips' Offices in fact assist in covering up
  9. 9  "scandals involving small boys" to gain what
  10. 10  Mr Fortescue described as "Brownie points"? We submit
  11. 11  that that is an issue that this inquiry should
  12. 12  investigate.
  13. 13  The fifth issue relates to the honours system,
  14. 14  a system operated on behalf of the Crown by senior
  15. 15  politicians and civil servants within the Westminster
  16. 16  establishment. Concerns have been expressed publicly
  17. 17  about honours granted to individuals who had been
  18. 18  accused of child sexual abuse or where allegations of
  19. 19  this nature were made after the honour had been granted.
  20. 20  Prominent amongst the cases that have raised concerns
  21. 21  are the knighthoods that were awarded to Cyril Smith and
  22. 22  to Jimmy Savile. We submit that the inquiry should
  23. 23  examine these matters. We propose to investigate what
  24. 24  policies have been, and are, followed in cases where
  25. 25  candidates for honours have been the subject of

P25

  1. allegations of this nature. We will look at all
  2. 2  relevant records, including those relating to Smith and
  3. 3  Savile. Some documents relating to those two cases have
  4. 4  already been put into the public domain. We submit that
  5. 5  the inquiry should seek to publish any further documents
  6. 6  it finds that are relevant to these and any other
  7. 7  similar cases. Document searches are already under way
  8. 8  in the Honours and Appointments Secretariat within the
  9. 9  Cabinet Office.
  10. 10  The sixth issue that we propose should be
  11. 11  investigated relates to the Paedophile Information
  12. 12  Exchange, commonly known as PIE. The key issues of
  13. 13  public concern in relation to PIE are its membership,
  14. 14  which appears to have included senior members of
  15. 15  the Westminster establishment, and the suggestion that
  16. 16  the organisation may have been funded by the government.
  17. 17  These matters have already been the subject of a review
  18. 18  commissioned by the Home Office and by a further
  19. 19  independent review of that work by Peter Wanless and
  20. 20  Richard Whittam QC. The original review found no
  21. 21  evidence that PIE was funded by the Home Office's
  22. 22  Voluntary Service Unit, VSU, and Wanless and Whittam
  23. 23  subsequently found nothing in registered files or in
  24. 24  testimony offered by contemporaries in and around the
  25. 25  VSU that funding of PIE might have taken place with the

P26

  1. knowledge of the police or security services as part of
  2. 2  an effort to infiltrate PIE. But Wanless and Whittam
  3. 3  were not able to dismiss the latter suggestion entirely
  4. 4  and we submit that this investigation should explore
  5. 5  public concern about the alleged position and influence
  6. 6  of PIE members within Westminster whilst mindful of
  7. 7  the reviews which have already taken place into these
  8. 8  matters.
  9. 9  Chair, those are the six themes relating to
  10. 10  historical institutional failings that we suggest should
  11. 11  be the subject of investigation. As I have said, you
  12. 12  will no doubt wish to receive submissions on scope from
  13. 13  core participants. Ultimately, of course, it will be
  14. 14  for you and the members of the panel to decide what
  15. 15  matters should be selected for investigation, given the
  16. 16  time and resources available, and the judgments you make
  17. 17  about the value to be obtained from any particular line
  18. 18  of enquiry in assisting you to fulfil the inquiry's
  19. 19  terms of reference.

P28

  1. First, we submit that it will be neither necessary
  2. 2  nor proportionate for this investigation to involve
  3. 3  itself in attempting to investigate, far less in
  4. 4  attempting to make findings, as to whether individual
  5. 5  allegations of child sexual abuse are true or false. In
  6. 6  general terms, at least, those are matters for the
  7. 7  police and for the courts. Moreover, the focus of this
  8. 8  investigation, and indeed of the inquiry more generally,
  9. 9  is on the conduct of institutions, not that of
  10. 10  individuals. And we submit that questions as to
  11. 11  possible institutional failings in this field can,
  12. 12  generally speaking, be perfectly properly investigated
  13. 13  without undertaking the time-consuming and
  14. 14  resource-intensive process of making findings on the
  15. 15  underlying allegations. To be clear, therefore, we do
  16. 16  not anticipate that this investigation will be making
  17. 17  any findings as to whether, for example, high-profile
  18. 18  politicians such as Edward Heath or Cyril Smith did or
  19. 19  did not commit acts of child sexual abuse of which they
  20. 20  have been accused. Our focus, rather, will be on the
  21. 21  way in which Westminster institutions dealt with and
  22. 22  responded to allegations of this nature.
  23. 23  Second, we do not propose that this investigation
  24. 24  should conduct any detailed review of the merits or
  25. 25  otherwise of recent high-profile police investigations

P29

  1. into historic allegations of child sexual abuse
  2. 2  connected with Westminster. There has, of course, been
  3. 3  much public debate about investigations such as
  4. 4  Operation Midland and Operation Conifer. There are
  5. 5  three reasons why, in our submission, reviewing these
  6. 6  recent police investigations is not a role for this
  7. 7  investigation.

P34

  1. There have, of
  2. 16  course, been numerous such previous investigations and
  3. 17  inquiries. Apart from the police and IPCC
  4. 18  investigations, there have been statutory and
  5. 19  non-statutory inquiries, such as the Wanless/Whittam
  6. 20  inquiry into issues around the Paedophile Information
  7. 21  Exchange, the review conducted by Lady Justice Macur
  8. 22  into the work of the Waterhouse Inquiry, which had
  9. 23  itself focused on the abuse of children in care in
  10. 24  North Wales, and the recent Hart Inquiry into
  11. 25  allegations relating to the Kincora Children's Home in

P35

  1. Northern Ireland. We submit that, as a matter of
  2. 2  general principle, this investigation should aim to
  3. 3  bring together the findings of these various inquiries.
  4. 4  That exercise of aggregation is a valuable task in
  5. 5  itself, and it will also provide a foundation for the
  6. 6  further work of this investigation. We are aware, of
  7. 7  course, that criticism has been made of some of
  8. 8  the findings of some of these inquiries, and of related
  9. 9  suggestions that such findings should be re-opened and
  10. 10  re-examined by this investigation. Whilst it would be
  11. 11  wrong to rule that out, certainly at this early stage,
  12. 12  we do submit that you would need to think most carefully
  13. 13  about issues of proportionality before taking that step.



Core Witness Appeals



  1. The first application,
  2. 3  then, is the application made on behalf of WM-A4.
  3. 4  Chair, WM-A4 alleges that, as a boy, he was raped at
  4. 5  Dolphin Square by a man he believed was Greville Janner.
  5. 6  He also alleges he was abused at a care home in Haringey
  6. 7  and that Hackney Social Services were aware of this
  7. 8  abuse.

 

  1. WM-A1 alleges that he was
  2. 10  raped as a child by Edward Heath. His allegation was
  3. 11  one of those investigated by the Wiltshire Police under
  4. 12  Operation Conifer.

P47

  1. A1 is not "Nick" of Operation Midland, but he has
  2. 13  been let down on all levels. He describes being close
  3. 14  to a group of politicians that were using rent boys in
  4. 15  the 1960s, and he was neither investigated himself -- he
  5. 16  was not prosecuted -- nor was he protected. This all
  6. 17  raises the issue of blackmail and scrutiny by security
  7. 18  services of politicians, or powerful figures, at least,
  8. 19  at the time, and A1's evidence needs to be looked at for
  9. 20  evidence of this scrutiny where it may lead the inquiry
  10. 21  into significant findings.


P48

  1. the applications for
  2. 12  core participant status by Daniel Janner QC,
  3. 13  Marion Janner and Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner were made
  4. 14  on the basis of their interest in an investigation
  5. 15  dealing with allegations and/or responses to allegations
  6. 16  made about their late father. You have, of course,
  7. 17  already recognised that they have such an interest in
  8. 18  granting their applications for core participant status
  9. 19  in the inquiry's other investigation into institutional
  10. 20  responses to allegations of child sexual abuse made
  11. 21  against the late Lord Janner.


P52
 
Daniel Janner:



  1. 'There were no paedophile rings in Westminster, save in warped imaginations.'


P62

  1. 13  Application by MR GARSDEN
  2. 14  MR GARSDEN: I act on behalf of Esther Baker, who is sitting
  3. 15  to my left and is one of the individuals who has been
  4. 16  heavily criticised in the media and been called
  5. 17  a fantasist. I think she was the person who was being
  6. 18  referred to. I think she told me in the break that the
  7. 19  word "fantasist" had been used seven times already
  8. 20  today. She takes great offence to that, denies it and
  9. 21  it upsets her greatly.
  10. 22  Esther Baker is a very fragile individual. She has
  11. 23  been serially and consistently abused from the age of 6
  12. 24  to 19, firstly by her father, who abused her on
  13. 25  a regular basis, and then her father introduced her to

P63

  1. 1  various individuals who are the persons this inquiry is
  2. 2  interested in. She was taken to various houses in the
  3. 3  Birmingham area and to a wood where she and other girls
  4. 4  were abused by various individuals, one of whom has been
  5. 5  publicly named, another of whom hasn't, who are either
  6. 6  MPs or former MPs, and that's why she is relevant to
  7. 7  this inquiry.
  8. 8  She was very reluctant to make disclosures. She
  9. 9  mentioned it to a number of authorities. She didn't
  10. 10  want to go to the police, but eventually did. Her
  11. 11  allegations are being investigated now by Staffordshire
  12. 12  Police.
  13. 13  One of those inquiries has not resulted in
  14. 14  a prosecution, and that refusal to charge has been
  15. 15  turned into a criticism of her, which I will come on to
  16. 16  later.
  17. 17  She only approached a lawyer two weeks ago, and
  18. 18  I have only been instructed in this matter for two
  19. 19  weeks. She has been ably assisted by other individuals
  20. 20  who suggested that she make public disclosure of her
  21. 21  allegations, which she did in 2015, principally as
  22. 22  a method of protecting her from what she deemed to be
  23. 23  a threat of violence or worse than that. She thought
  24. 24  that if she disclosed her identity there was more chance
  25. 25  of her staying alive because she was making allegations

P64

  1. against celebrities, or, should I say, well-known
  2. 2  individuals who were known to the public.
  3. 3  Since then, there has been an orchestrated campaign
  4. 4  made against her to vilify her and call her a liar.
  5. 5  This has been done in other modules, as you well know.
  6. 6  There is a curious sense of logic creeping in. I have
  7. 7  been dealing with -- specialising in child abuse cases
  8. 8  for the last 24 years, and I have seen the media
  9. 9  pendulum swing between claimant and falsely accused
  10. 10  allegations at least three times, and we are now
  11. 11  unfortunately in the alleged falsely accused section,
  12. 12  and what the media are interested in now is anybody who
  13. 13  says that they have been falsely accused. My client
  14. 14  takes great exception to that.
  15. 15  The effect upon her -- I asked her to draw up
  16. 16  a table of the effects of these allegations that she's
  17. 17  not telling the truth, because the one thing that really
  18. 18  hurts victims of abuse is their credibility being
  19. 19  questioned, because abuse is about imbalance of power,
  20. 20  it is the powerful over the powerless, and the victims
  21. 21  are the powerless. When they are accused of telling
  22. 22  untruths and they say they are telling the truth, it is
  23. 23  deeply hurtful, and it replicates the imbalance of power
  24. 24  when the abuse took place, and that is what is happening
  25. 25  at the moment, and it has to stop and it has to stop

P65

  1. now.
  2. 2  I have asked her to say what the effects of these
  3. 3  newspaper articles and publicity are upon her. I have
  4. 4  worked out that, since 2015, when she went public with
  5. 5  her allegations and waived her anonymity, most bravely,
  6. 6  she has taken 12 overdoses, 12 attempts to commit
  7. 7  suicide, by the excessive ingestion of tablets,
  8. 8  prescription drugs, because it is not surprising that
  9. 9  she, like many other victims of abuse, are on a quite
  10. 10  high dose of medication to help with depression and
  11. 11  beta-blockers and some antipsychotic tablets.
  12. 12  12 attempts at suicide between 2015 and now, the
  13. 13  most recent of which was 25 January 2018, because of
  14. 14  the publication of this article in the Sunday Times by
  15. 15  James Gillespie on 21 January, the headline for which is
  16. 16  "Child rape fantasist Esther Baker given key role in
  17. 17  abuse inquiry". She's being criticised for being given
  18. 18  core participant status and called a fantasist. The
  19. 19  source of the briefing is her alleged abuser, the former
  20. 20  MP John Hemming.
  21. 21  I just noticed one of the comments which goes:
  22. 22  "My concern is whether it is morally right for the
  23. 23  Times to blame somebody, who is a potential victim, as
  24. 24  a fantasist. It does not seem very balanced and in my
  25. 25  view could discourage people who have been abused from

P66

  1. coming forward."
  2. 2  He's summarised it very well. She's very bravely
  3. 3  maintained her presence here, but that particular
  4. 4  article, another one in the Daily Mail, resulted in her
  5. 5  taking an overdose and being admitted to hospital in
  6. 6  Liverpool for 12 hours.
  7. 7  I have worked out that, of the 12 attempts at
  8. 8  suicide and the overdoses that she's taken, they have
  9. 9  resulted in 17 and a half days in hospital at
  10. 10  Liverpool Royal, which is a tragedy. So I want to send
  11. 11  out a message to those who write these articles and
  12. 12  particularly Mr Janner, who mentioned the word
  13. 13  "fantasist" seven times in his address this morning,
  14. 14  what the effect is on victims of abuse who read this
  15. 15  type of thing.
  16. 16  My client deserves the protection of this inquiry
  17. 17  and I call upon this inquiry to protect her. She has
  18. 18  reported Mr Hemming and his, if I can call them,
  19. 19  trolls -- they are other survivors who engage in
  20. 20  scurrilous and insulting comments in social media,
  21. 21  which, unfortunately, she reads -- to the Staffordshire
  22. 22  Police under I think it is the Criminal Justice and
  23. 23  Public Order Act 1994 which prohibits witness
  24. 24  intimidation and it is a criminal offence, but there is
  25. 25  another Act of Parliament specifically related to public

P67

  1. inquiries called the Witnesses (Public Inquiries)
  2. 2  Protection Act 1892. Under section 2, every person who
  3. 3  "threatens or in any way punishes, damnifies [I think
  4. 4  that's the word] or injures or attempts to punish,
  5. 5  damnify or injure, any person for having giving evidence
  6. 6  upon any inquiry, or an account of the evidence which he
  7. 7  has given upon any such inquiry, shall, unless evidence
  8. 8  has been given in bad faith, be guilty of a misdemeanour
  9. 9  and be liable on conviction to a maximum penalty of £100
  10. 10  and maximum imprisonment of three months."
  11. 11  So it would be open to this inquiry to institute
  12. 12  through the police an investigation into what has been
  13. 13  done to Esther Baker which has brought her to take
  14. 14  overdoses and suffer psychologically and
  15. 15  psychiatrically.
  16. 16  I think that's the only way this is going to stop,
  17. 17  because the curious logic is, a victim makes an
  18. 18  allegation, the abuser finds out, the abuser briefs the
  19. 19  media that the victim is a fantasist on the basis of
  20. 20  the denials, and the victim is psychologically injured,
  21. 21  as in this case.
  22. 22  Why people who make allegations of abuse are called
  23. 23  fantasists, I really don't know. It is a word that has
  24. 24  crept into the media, and it should stop, and it should
  25. 25  stop now. It is all very well to say under the right of

P68

  1. free speech that somebody denies allegations, but to
  2. 2  turn that into a criticism of a victim is wrong and
  3. 3  pernicious and I have advised my client to seek advice
  4. 4  from defamation lawyers and to make a complaint to the
  5. 5  Press Complaints Commission, because it is clearly
  6. 6  serious if somebody suffers the way she has.
  7. 7  Unfortunately, victims of abuse have very low
  8. 8  self-esteem. They are abused in childhood, and in my
  9. 9  client's case over many years. They consider themselves
  10. 10  worthless, and my client's motivation in joining this
  11. 11  inquiry is to help others, not herself. She regards
  12. 12  herself very poorly and doesn't consider herself worthy
  13. 13  of anything. That's why she injures herself and
  14. 14  attempts to commit suicide.
  15. 15  So I am putting out a plea that this fantasist
  16. 16  nonsense should stop. It has happened in other
  17. 17  inquiries. It has happened to all my clients in the
  18. 18  Janner module. They have also been called fantasists.
  19. 19  They are also -- we have got to deal with the
  20. 20  after-effects of that, as legal representatives. Not
  21. 21  only have they been called by names, but myself,
  22. 22  Mr Scorer and Mr Greenwood have also been criticised in
  23. 23  social media by the trolls that I was referring to. We
  24. 24  are big enough, we can stand up for ourselves, but
  25. 25  victims can't, and they don't.

P69

  1. 1  I have no doubt that, as has been mentioned, all the
  2. 2  members of this module will be asked to sign
  3. 3  confidentiality agreements, which means that she can't
  4. 4  speak out against her abusers. I have been approached
  5. 5  by the media leading up to this inquiry to see what my
  6. 6  client says. I have refused any attempts to backlash in
  7. 7  a tit-for-tat manner and will remain in a dignified
  8. 8  silence. However, I don't think there's much further
  9. 9  that I can add, save to say that one of the reasons my
  10. 10  client has been criticised is because the other
  11. 11  individuals who were abused in Cannock Wood have not
  12. 12  come forward. I think one of them has. I haven't
  13. 13  spoken to the police officer yet, but the remainder
  14. 14  haven't. My client tells me there were at least
  15. 15  15 girls who were raped in those woods. I would like to
  16. 16  put out a public plea for them to come forward.
  17. 17  The aggressive and threatening manner in which those
  18. 18  accused behave towards her is no doubt why the others
  19. 19  have not come forward, but they should, and I urge them
  20. 20  to do so. That is all I wish to say.

Doug D

Posts : 2540
Reputation : 898
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Major inquiry opens into claims that MPs, civil servants, government aides and spies committed Westminster sexual abuse

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 08.02.18 12:45

From PeterMac:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5359841/Fantasist-lies-police-BBC-Labour-lapped-up.html




Fantasist who had police, BBC and Labour's deputy lapping up lies
www.dailymail.co.uk
While not one person has been charged following Nick's claims, the reputations of several public figures, including Lord Brittain, pictured, have been left trashed.
Where once there was open acceptance and discussion of Nick's claims – not least by the man who was at the time the most senior police officer in the country, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, whose reputation never recovered as a result – now there was official silence.


Didn't HH get taken in by another set of fantasists as well ?
P
avatar
Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 11246
Reputation : 5508
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

operation fernbridge

Post by willowthewisp on 08.02.18 15:21

@Get'emGonçalo wrote:From PeterMac:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5359841/Fantasist-lies-police-BBC-Labour-lapped-up.html






Fantasist who had police, BBC and Labour's deputy lapping up lies
www.dailymail.co.uk
While not one person has been charged following Nick's claims, the reputations of several public figures, including Lord Brittain, pictured, have been left trashed.
Where once there was open acceptance and discussion of Nick's claims – not least by the man who was at the time the most senior police officer in the country, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, whose reputation never recovered as a result – now there was official silence.


Didn't HH get taken in by another set of fantasists as well ?
P
Hi GogetemGoncalo,seems as though our Bernard has played the Long ball game for many a year now,especially when he was"Head Of Personell" in regard to the Officers to protect the King/Queen of England,when the Royal Police Officers lined their own pockets with FED Officers funds,but sweet F/A was done to properly investigate,there the Police aren't they,NO IPCC for them?
All the Former Police Commissioners must be angellic "Choir Boys" singing  serenely away in reitrement,I bet Jenny Jones cannot wait to for Sir Bernard in the House of Lords,tapping her phone,eh oily Bernard?

Now in the News,that Scotland Yard or Metropolitan Police Officers have lost Evidence that"Nick" had given them as part of Operation Midland,that cost the Tax payer over 3 Million pounds,plus the compensation hasn't been fractured in yet as one of the former accused is seeking One million for his claim,if proven!
Best get yer shirt sleeves rolled up Bernard and search for the missing evidence,as we wouldn't wish for the trail to collapse,as the Prosecution failed to divulge all its evidence to the Defendants Legal representatives would we,just as we have seen in the recent rape trails crisis?
Seems like the Sea bass is back on the menu,"Nicks" case been known to only certain parties,held in secret behind closed doors,is this a case of"National Security"?
They hid "Nick's" identity when being used as a Witness for Police intended Prosecutions,now they are'hiding his Identity when he is to be Prosecuted by the CPS/DPP for"Indecent Images",as big Jim Gamble has stated,in his opinion,images are Not the worst Offences,aka Nigel Nessling?

willowthewisp

Posts : 2040
Reputation : 834
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Major Inquiry

Post by willowthewisp on 10.02.18 23:00

Hi Polyenne,I joined the Daily Mail site to voice the other side of the Fantasist claims,stating evidence produced by various News Paper Editors,who were threatened with imprisonment by serving Police Officers,MI5 cohorts.
then raised points of certain London Gangster Family,who helped to supply vulnerable Males to elite Men from higher echelons of society.
I have repeated the same scenario at least Five times now and they have never printed the facts,that these events had taken place.  I also informed the Daily Mail as the fact, that Members of PIE were in fact cohercing with MP's,Lords from the house Of common's wishing to have the age of consent as to Ten years of age!?
Needless to say, they have refused to furnish these details on their website and I can only conclude,it is at least biased in printing details on its website.

willowthewisp

Posts : 2040
Reputation : 834
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum