As the mainstream media circus is getting into full swing with what would appear to be a massive distraction campaign from the essence and core issues surrounding the child abuse allegations against both establishment and public figures, and a wider abuse network of which they appear to have been a part, now is an opportune time to introduce some simple and clear questions, all of which remain hitherto unaddressed and unaswered.
No allegations, no speculation, simply unanswered questions that, in light of the level and extent of criminal abuse involved, urgently need to be addressed:
- What is the status of the inquiry into Paul Pelham ‘Peter’ Righton’s evidence file which “contains clear intelligence of a widespread paedophile ring“, as referred to by Labour MP Tom Watson during Prime Minister’s Question Time on 24 October, 2012?
- Who are the 30-or-so names redacted from the Waterhouse Report, allegations against whom were never investigated further, and why were the allegations against the accused during the inquiry never investigated?
- Who is the senior Conservative, known to be still alive, that was accused of abuse? (Note that the senior Tory, from information provided again by MP Tom Watson, is not Sir Peter Morrison. Nor is it another senior Tory who today placed himself in the public spotlight today, via the Guardian, despite never being accused publicly by any of the abuse survivors).
- What was the process behind, and who ordered, the destruction of abuse survivor Steve Messham’s photographic evidence of abuse that he handed to the police?
- Why was Sir Peter Morrison never arrested and charged for his links to the North Wales abuse?
- Given that not just anyone is allowed free access to members of the royal family and other establishment figures, what information is, or was, held by the intelligence services on Jimmy Savile and all the named individuals accused of abuse, including those publicly named and those whose names were redacted from the Waterhouse report?
- What is the status of the notes and videos that were kept as evidence by Lee Johns, also known as Lee Homberg, and which were removed by police in a raid on his home after his alleged ‘suicide’?
- The Johns family have demanded a new inquest into the death of Adrian Johns in a suspicious fire at a Brighton flat acquired for him by John Allen, who headed the Bryn Alyn ‘care’ home at the centre of the abuse scandal and was sentenced for six years imprisonment for indecent assault offences. A fire investigator stated that the fire in which Johns died was seated in three separate locations, strongly suggesting that Johns did not die accidentally but as part of a deliberate arson attack. What plans are there for any of the 10 or so inquiries announced by various bodies to examine the suspicious circumstances surrounding the arson attack in which five people died and which led to the apparent suicides of two others, following allegations of links between the deaths and the fact that two of the victims had been residents at a Welsh children’s home? The inquest, once again in a manner contrary to the function of an inquest, accepted another party-goer, Trevor Carrington, started the blaze as a prank. Carrington was run down and killed by a truck three days later in what was said to be suicide. His death was never investigated further. Given the suspicious circumstances of the fire and the curious method by which the alleged guilty party was indicted, why was no further investigation carried out and how was Carrington’s intent to commit suicide proven by the inquests?
- What is the status of the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Yewtree Jimmy Savile abuse investigation and where has it led, seeing as there have been no arrests beyond two of Savile’s associates, apparently on unrelated matters, and the only related arrests being those of Gary Glitter and Freddie Starr?
- What part has the establishment and the power it commands played in the shutting down of allegations, investigations and the pursuit of justice against those accused of heinous crimes of abuse?
This list is by no means complete, but it is certainly an uncontroversial starting point for further investigation, as would be the publication of the pulped Jillings Report, and some explanation from the mainstream media journalists that have interviewed Steve Messham as to why they never bothered to show Messham a photograph of the man against whom he had made allegations.
A Telegraph article, Victim apologises to Lord McAlpine after admitting abuse claims were a case of mistaken identity, states:
Steve Messham, who appeared on Newsnight to make the allegations about the anonymous Tory, said that it came to his attention that a photograph handed to him in the 1990s, which he was told was of Lord McAlpine, was in fact not the former treasurer.
Elsewhere, a Guardian article corroborates the 1990s identification by North Wales Police:
“After seeing a picture in the past hour of the individual concerned, this [is] not the person I identified by photograph presented to me by the police in the early 1990s, who told me the man in the photograph was Lord McAlpine,” he said.
This raises a number of supplementary questions:
- Who showed Messham the photograph?
- Who named the person in the photograph to Messham?
- Who was it instead in the “photograph handed to him” that Messham “was told was of Lord McAlpine“?
- The identification process was described by another abuse survivor who claimed they were shown photos and asked if the individuals in the photographs were recognised abusers; yes, or no. How and why were particular individuals and photographs of them chosen for showing to abuse survivors by North Wales Police (the original and ultimate source of the ‘confusion’)?
And so we enter a bizarre world where a victim becomes further victimised.
The danger now, as a combination of Tory MPs and peers calls for even greater press regulation following the phone-hacking scandal and the Leveson inquiry, is that what little investigative journalism remains in media generally is brought to an abrupt halt — as has happened with the ceasing of further Newsnight investigations — and that even less light is shed on the murky and sinister world in which the abuse of vulnerable children takes place. Remember that the original investigation into Jimmy Savile’s crimes was cancelled in 2011, when the Director General was Mark Thompson, not George Entwistle who is now in the firing line.
Another danger is that, instead of setting about efforts to understand how a wrongful implied allegation came to be and determine who was actually being accused, a battle now is being waged for one man’s reputation against the ability of the media and Internet users to speak freely, with status and wealth trumping the rights of abuse survivors to seek justice by speaking out.
The tragic irony of these developments is that, if the rumours and speculation about Jimmy Savile had made it onto the Internet and been widely circulated among the general public through the media a long time ago, Savile’s repeated instances of sexual abuse would have been brought to an end a long time before his death, thereby giving his countless victims the opportunity to see him face justice for his crimes.
If that irony alone isn’t great or tragic enough, McAlpine is using threats of libel action against media establishments and the Internet generally, the same threats of libel action used by Jimmy Savile to prevent his own sexual abuse antics from being exposed, to effectively shut down any further inquiries into what are incredibly serious and disturbing allegations made by survivors of abuse.
The law should not be a tool for the powerful to silence the weak. And this is all about power: men over women, celebrity over the unknown, rich over poor.
Lost in Care