Cyril Smith - the revellations

[Derek Smith]

carinaman said:

Thorodin said:

They are largely the only pre-requisites of high office - the last things wanted are integrity, honour and an independent spirit. That would never do, too many ghosts to keep hidden.

Derek Smith said:

How many join either to protect MPs, judges, senior police officers and those high up in the the City, all of whom have been implicated.

Keeping inconvenient secrets and playing with the truth isn't on the Oath Constables take is it? It mentions impartiality, honesty and integrity though.

Look at the police recruitment threads in SP&L and 'Ha, ha, they wouldn't accept you' retorts. It's not about brand protection or telling fibs is it?

Indeed it is not, yet we are not talking about police officers as such. Although chief constables are constables (the clue is in the name) they are far from operational. The head of the met is not a constable.

Don't forget that police officers tried to push the case against Smith but were thwarted. I doubt if CCs had sufficient influence to ignore revelations in the press. This goes much higher than them.

The problem with high level corruption is that it is tilting at windmills. Who can you attack? These are ephemeral. Cyril Smith did not pull the plug on the investigation. It was done for him.

Any group which has authority will have a tendency to misuse it, abuse it if you will. It is not necessarily a dishonest move. For instance, if you see the harm done by drugs for instance and you have a mid-level dealer, then is it so bad that your search premises making out that you saw him leaving them before you nicked him?

Police (sticking with what I know) are task oriented. If you see a major incident room at the start of an enquiry, everyone is buzzing. It is one hell of an experience to be part of it. My force had people whose job it was to ensure that officers did not overstretch themselves, not through concern I think but performance drops off if people become tired and exhausted. Many SIOs sleep in their office for the first few days or week. This is a positive of course. Everything to find the offender.

It breeds a feeling of doing important work - all the more difficult to throw off because it is right. So when there's an inconvenient regulation is it not right to ignore it, just this once? Or so the feeling goes. After all, police officers know how corrupt and self-serving politicians are. Break one regulation for reasons of convenience then you can break a law because someone who is important is being targeted.

The only thing that restricts the abuse of power is a discipline system, and a strong one. Despite the criticisms, there are few - few here meaning none of course - other systems in place in this country that are anywhere near so restrictive as the IPCC.

But only up to a certain rank. Beyond that level it is very difficult to complain.

Senior politicians suggest that the ballot box is their discipline but, as we all know, an MP in a safe constituency can get away with much, including fiddling expenses, and still continue to get voted in.

Judges are largely untouchable, for particular reasons. And is Murdoch appearing in court for the hacking? What restrictions are there on bankers and top business leaders? I know of a fraud investigation that ran into £millions and then was cut, despite (ha!) the ring leaders becoming apparent, due to the costs. That said, the costs were climbing and taking the department over budget, but we are talking about individuals with multiple £millions unaccounted for.

We won't get them. And these are the ones to moan about, not the lowly PC. If he/she should do something wrong then there is ample recourse.

[carinaman]

Derek Smith said:

My force had people whose job it was to ensure that officers did not overstretch themselves, not through concern I think but performance drops off if people become tired and exhausted. Many SIOs sleep in their office for the first few days or week. This is a positive of course. Everything to find the offender.

Resilience.

Derek Smith said:

It breeds a feeling of doing important work - all the more difficult to throw off because it is right.

Honesty, integrity and impartiality.

Derek Smith said:

The only thing that restricts the abuse of power is a discipline system, and a strong one.

Valid point, but it's a point that can be undermined by misuse just as some may see Winsor wearing ceremonial garb as devaluing the uniform.

I could go on.

But thank you. You, like Red 4 before has given my resilience cells a little boost.

How can we do Nigel Evans, DLT, William Roache et al but let the bigger fish go for bigger sins? The mesh in the net is the wrong size? That's not impartial is it? Doesn't fit with the Constable's Oath.

Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 23 April 22:26

[carinaman]

Derek Smith said:

What are the odds for this being a 10-minutes of fame and then Dacre moving on to something else to frighten the middle classes with? It has happened before of course.

Perhaps it's now or never?

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/apr/16/tony-...

Perhaps he thinks he'll never get another chance at it? If it's political who can blame him given the three in a bed romps with Blair, Cameron and whatever team Murdoch chooses to put out that day?

Perhaps it's about injustice? Perhaps it's about making a point about Press regulation? Those getting altitude sickness on the greasy pole are always more concerned about the foreign Free Press aren't they?

[Thorodin]

carinaman said:

How can we do Nigel Evans, DLT, William Roache et al but let the bigger fish go for bigger sins? The mesh in the net is the wrong size? That's not impartial is it? Doesn't fit with the Constable's Oath.

Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 23 April 22:26

The little fish have as bad an effect on their (unimportant in relative terms to those in shadow) targets as the bigger fish have on their much bigger targets. The purpose of catching the little fish is to give the impression that 'something is being done' and 'lessons are being learned', thereby lessening public outcry.
Oath? Does anyone keep an oath? Concepts like that are seen as New Year Resolutions - forgotten as soon as temptation rears.

[carinaman]

Thorodin said:

Oath? Does anyone keep an oath? Concepts like that are seen as New Year Resolutions - forgotten as soon as temptation rears.

I conclude from what Derek is saying the Oath that Constables say doesn't apply to Chief Constables or Judges. So why make Constables say it?

Part of the breaking and moulding is to make new recruits say something that Chief Constables and Judges can ignore if they like?

It breaks new police recruits, like the Cyril Smith and others broke those young boys at Knowle View. Rochdale?

[Derek Smith]

Thorodin said:

The little fish have as bad an effect on their (unimportant in relative terms to those in shadow) targets as the bigger fish have on their much bigger targets. The purpose of catching the little fish is to give the impression that 'something is being done' and 'lessons are being learned', thereby lessening public outcry.
Oath? Does anyone keep an oath? Concepts like that are seen as New Year Resolutions - forgotten as soon as temptation rears.

I think the oath, or rather the ethos of policing, is important. When I was a PC I was taken to task by a senior PC for arresting someone for a minor, but 'arrestable', offence. His point of view was that I was stepping over a line.

I've been 'corrected' by more officers of my own rank than supervisors. Maybe I've been lucky, but the vast majority of officers I've worked with have wanted to do a good job. That said, I used to work in a factory and the same sort of atmosphere applied. Most people want to do the best they can I think.

I think part of the problem is that if you are a specialist and lock yourself away from others then your job takes precedence over everything. They move from being focused to tunnel vision. It can happen to anyone. Indeed, major incident enquiries suffered from this on occasion and nowadays there are systems in place to avoid it.

It can happen with specialist units.

One wonders if those whose task it is to protect important people don't get out enough.

The newspapers and other media are being controlled by the government.

[carinaman]

I was once told that Chief Constables gave awards to officers that achieved 100 arrests. The officer that mentioned it to me didn't approve and related a colleague that was counting down the arrests until he got his award.

How many officers had Cyril Smith on their target list to hit 100 arrests? Perhaps such a target is really a good thing?

[carinaman]

Derek, I think Clegg wants your help and that of your colleagues that were around when you knew of it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2612630/Fi...

We may get to see you in front of some parliamentary committee with Keith Vaz.

I've Radio 4 on. Seems there's some event at the Vatican with two clerics getting promotions. They're discussing Popes and sexual abuse of minors.

[Derek Smith]

carinaman said:

Derek, I think Clegg wants your help and that of your colleagues that were around when you knew of it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2612630/Fi...

We may get to see you in front of some parliamentary committee with Keith Vaz.

I've Radio 4 on. Seems there's some event at the Vatican with two clerics getting promotions. They're discussing Popes and sexual abuse of minors.

The DM is suggesting that it was a libdem cover-up. I don't see that. They might well have been complicit and even expressed concern to those with the power to sideline the file, but in reality it has to be someone else. The government of the day, or at least a certain level of it, must have known.

If it is a police enquiry, they'll probably phone me, realise I have nothing of evidential value, and move on. The good thing though is that those who have, over the years, protested that they were victims will already get something from the latest revelations.

I saw a film once, black and white, where a kid was in a bed in a dorm and he heard the sound of footsteps coming up stairs. It frightened me at the time, although I wasn't fully aware of the implications. Now I am it is difficult to get the image out of my mind.

[carinaman]

Derek Smith said:

The DM is suggesting that it was a libdem cover-up. I don't see that.

That may explain your previous comment that you didn't think Dacre and the Daily Mail weren't going the right way on this.

Perhaps it's political in that they don't like the coalition and/or Cameron?

Derek Smith said:

They might well have been complicit and even expressed concern to those with the power to sideline the file, but in reality it has to be someone else. The government of the day, or at least a certain level of it, must have known.

Perhaps it'll help any inquiry taking the right direction, a helpful indicator like someone with Kenny Everett style big hands pointing a finger?



Not my image, it's available on many websites, inlcuding the Telegraph newspaper website.

They're pointing towards the doors that need to be pushed?

Derek Smith said:

If it is a police enquiry, they'll probably phone me, realise I have nothing of evidential value, and move on. The good thing though is that those who have, over the years, protested that they were victims will already get something from the latest revelations.

Indeed.

Perhaps with this ruling:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10667...

it may help some get compensation and/or an apology, but how much store do we put in apologies given what Cameron said about Hillsborough and then the Wikipedia alterations that look like they were done from Whitehall computers? I guess one benefit of sitting on that morsel of information to be used now is that it undermines Cameron's words on what's happened since Hillsborough just before an election?

Derek Smith said:

I saw a film once, black and white, where a kid was in a bed in a dorm and he heard the sound of footsteps coming up stairs. It frightened me at the time, although I wasn't fully aware of the implications. Now I am it is difficult to get the image out of my mind.

I used to get hassled by a funny (funny - peculiar) little bespectacled, grey mac wearing chap pushing religion at the bus stop on the way to school. Funny he seemed only interested in my salvation and not that of anyone else at the bus stop.

Perhaps he just had my own interests at heart?

Edited by carinaman on Sunday 27th April 09:51

[Foppo]

A Teacher at Tech School had a habit to put his hands on my shoulders for a little massage.I put my fist up to him I was fifteen at the time.Sad p r i c k.

[Los Endos]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27183369

Looks like you maybe getting a call from the GMP Derek.....
Interesting if this all reaches the conclusion we all seek - Justice for the victims of these aweful crimes !

[carinaman]

BBC News website as linked to in previous post by Los Endos said:

The BBC has also learned that Rochdale Council is to widen its own QC-led inquiry into the role played by council members and council staff in relation to Knowl View.

from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27183369

Does that mean the time period being examined by Warnock's inquiry is to be extended further back into the past?

Private Eye issue number 1364 of April 2014 said:

Horrific reports
Victims can be forgiven for not feeling reassured. GMP has now been looking at Knowl View for 20 years and has secured but a single conviction. Meanwhile Warnock’s review is confined to examining Knowl View’s history from “the late 1980s to the mid 1990s” which may mean vital truths about the preceding decades remain buried.

from: http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_...

[MrCarPark]

An unusual coincidence:

Private Eye said:

Another former pupil, Michael Seed (the Franciscan friar who would later persuade Tony Blair into the Catholic faith), describes a “well-organised contingent of rent-boys, selling their bodies to kerb-crawling paedophile homosexuals” in his memoirs.

[carinaman]

Danczuk MP, was just on Today. He makes a valid point about the investigation into cover up rather than other offenders that are still alive and possibly still offending.

It does seem like former DC Shirley Thompson having to go to Panorama as Devon and Cornwall police weren't following down leads and victims from their investigation into William Goad and his 'well connected' associates.

Danczuk mentioned police funds and how surely it should be better spent tracking down offenders that may still be at liberty than investigating the cover up. Comments by former DC Shirley Thompson mentioned that Plymouth was a forgotten seaside down that didn't get the funding required.

So the police and funding are mentioned in both cases? It could look like funding may be being used as an excuse to wheedle out what should be done?

[IroningMan]

Surely those who participated in any cover-up are themselves still at liberty and - unless they have since told all - still offending?

[carinaman]

I think Danczuk was saying spend the money going after those that indulged in sexual activity with minors rather than those that covered it up.

I don't get why there's a time limit on how far back Warnock is allowed to go. Why should there be some arbitary line in the sand in the timeline that can't be traversed.

It's hardly reassuring. I think Danczuk may be right saying this inquiry or investigation isn't independent.

'If you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.....' don't those that love Big Brother say? So again, why limit how far back Warnock can look?

[Thorodin]

I don't think the line in the sand is arbitrary. I think it's carefully chosen because the most sensitive names, and the associated activities, are known to the establishment. Minnows can be thrown away but bigger fish are worth keeping.

[Los Endos]

Interesting comment on the DailyPolitics today...
Ming Campbell in answer to a question 'where you aware of these rumours & accusations' says Jo Coburn, Ming 'No I wasn't, not until accusations of recent times' ( he coughs and blushes )
So a few things are clear - Ming doesn't read Private Eye, he has a cold and the studio lights are suddenly quiet warm.

He goes on to say..... blah blah blah deflection, blah blah let the police investigation proceed, blah blah fortunately his Party Chairman is a little more forthright !

[carinaman]

On WATO there was a Rochdale social worker that said he flagged it up in 1994. He said he has a big file, and the council have a bigger file. He was of the opinion that all of the information is there and this new police investigation by Sir Peter Fahey is playing for time. I don't know where that sits with this time limited Warnock Inquiry?

It's my experience that when you catch the police out they play for time and manipulate the rule book to try to excuse themselves.