Cyril Smith - the revellations
Discussion
carinaman said:
Police launch probe into sensational new cover-up claims Daily Mail website 6 Dec. 2014 said:
Detectives are investigating claims that former Conservative Home Secretary William Whitelaw ordered police to drop an investigation into a VIP paedophile ring.
Whitelaw allegedly told a senior Metropolitan Police boss to quash a year-long investigation into a gang accused of abusing 40 children, the youngest of whom was six.
The alleged intervention came in 1980 after a newspaper revealed the country’s chief prosecutor was considering 350 offences against the gang, including allegations it ‘obtained young boys for politicians, prominent lawyers and film stars’.
from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863814/Wi...Whitelaw allegedly told a senior Metropolitan Police boss to quash a year-long investigation into a gang accused of abusing 40 children, the youngest of whom was six.
The alleged intervention came in 1980 after a newspaper revealed the country’s chief prosecutor was considering 350 offences against the gang, including allegations it ‘obtained young boys for politicians, prominent lawyers and film stars’.
It seems the Journalist was threatened with the Official Secrets Act.
Didn't the police use the OSA on Damian Green MP for leaking politically embarrassing immigration figures when he was in opposition?
'Because if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide do you?'
And now Theresa May that's peddling the Snooper's Charter for our own good has sat on five reports from Immigration Inspector John Vine QPM. Odd that.
Based partly on investigations Tom Mangold conducted years ago, that were also sat on, "for legal reasons"! The level of dishonesty and culpability - including in potential attempted murders - is staggering. And most got away with it... dead or largely forgotten now, but full on troughers at the time.
D notices used to cover up?:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/22/med...
Or was it a fake D notice purchased from the Internet?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/22/med...
Or was it a fake D notice purchased from the Internet?
Edited by carinaman on Monday 8th December 04:22
Interesting. The fake D Notice would be a perfect vehicle for shutting people up quietly.
"I'm here to inform you that a D Notice has been issued on this matter"
"Who are you?"
"I'm afraid that's an official secret, Sir, and I'm not allowed to divulge that information"
"To whom do I speak in order to confirm the authority of this D Notice?"
"I'm afraid that's also an official secret, Sir, I'm not allowed to divulge that information. I'm here purely to issue the D notice."
etc etc...
"I'm here to inform you that a D Notice has been issued on this matter"
"Who are you?"
"I'm afraid that's an official secret, Sir, and I'm not allowed to divulge that information"
"To whom do I speak in order to confirm the authority of this D Notice?"
"I'm afraid that's also an official secret, Sir, I'm not allowed to divulge that information. I'm here purely to issue the D notice."
etc etc...
BillPeart said:
If anyone doubts what those in authority can and are prepared to do to protect their ilk, listen to the download of the radio 4 programme "Jeremy Thorpe - the silent conspiracy" aired this evening.
Based partly on investigations Tom Mangold conducted years ago, that were also sat on, "for legal reasons"! The level of dishonesty and culpability - including in potential attempted murders - is staggering. And most got away with it... dead or largely forgotten now, but full on troughers at the time.
The police and government prosecutions department of the time are criticised, quite rightly, for doing nothing. The excuse seems to be that they would be taken to task for going after someone as well regarded as Thorpe.Based partly on investigations Tom Mangold conducted years ago, that were also sat on, "for legal reasons"! The level of dishonesty and culpability - including in potential attempted murders - is staggering. And most got away with it... dead or largely forgotten now, but full on troughers at the time.
Fast forward to 2014 and the police are severely criticised for going against a singer because he's well regarded.
There are also lots of allegations against the CPS for, apparently, using the same prosecutions limits for disc jockeys and the like as they do for the hoi poloi.
The conclusion that there was no conspiracy because it was always done that way is rather frightening because, in essence, nothing has changed.
Those in authority have specialist units there to protect them. The fear is that these units see their role as extending to protection against all challenges. Again there is no specific conspiracy in the main, although the withdrawal of charges, evidence and files needs some form of illegal act. It is just the way things are done.
With media outlets mostly hand in glove with the government and those outside the closed cells largely ignored (read Private Eye for four issues and then wonder why nothing is done against the corrupt officials and procedures exposed, as evidenced in the Thorpe programme), there are few checks as such.
The various estates are either part of the establishment or beholden to it.
We do have the BBC, the ultra left-wing outlet that continuously ignores its requirement to be fair to all, at least according to the PH massive. However, Murdoch attacks it and has its constraint as part of its requirement for its outlets to support a particular party and various governments are only too happily to oblige, but for their own reasons. They too are beholden to the government for everything, including their bloke in charge.
In my early years in the police I saw similar conspiracies in actions. Corrupt officers would produce a defendant at court. They would have corrupt lawyers defending them and they would be before corrupt magistrates and stipendiaries.
The terrible thing about the days of Challenor is that he was the only one with a reason for his behaviour. Everyone else in the system, including judges, were complicit but did nothing. The old joke about a stipe telling him: 'I do not wish to see this half brick yet again.' was always said in the expectation of a supporting laugh.
The systems change, the methods change, but those at the top will still protect themselves.
We see Vaz produced time and again to pontificate on actions of people who have not done their job properly yet a quick Wiki shows exactly what type of person he is. The old comments about: would you want your daughter to marry him, is modern nowadays as it has nothing to do with racialism. It is about conduct and character.
May said that the police should be concerned with regard to their approval rating. The irony is tragic.
I have no tinfoil hat but I know to a limited extent what goes on and I know that I don't know 1% of it all.
said:rovermorris999 said:
That's very depressing Derek.
I've been ill. I haven't eaten in 3 days. Whilst having my head stuck in the toilet bowl I hurt my back, pulling a muscle, retching with nothing more to come. So you can appreciate that I'm more than a little tetchy and the milk of human kindness is strangely absent. Not that I could stomach milk of any sort, kind or not. However, what I posted is true. Those with power and authority will use it to protect themselves and their own. As you say, it is depressing. My wife is keeping sharp implements in locked drawers.
I doubt we've moved on with regards to corruption at the top in any way. If you go back a few years to the days of the Profumo affair we find a man who resigned about as early as anyone wanted him to. Despite his conduct he was a man on honour. Indeed, his subsequent behaviour was quite remarkable and admirable. So let us compare that to our more recent MPs and other officials whose behaviour after being exposed has proved lamentable.
Even when they have been caught with their hands in the till so to speak, obstructed parliamentary enquiries and lied, they return, like a bad back, to inflict pain and obstruct work.
When you are feeling a bit negative, the fact that they pose, pontificate, patronise and preen makes it so much worse. They know that as a group they have little to be proud of. Graft is the norm. There are those that (appear to be at least) above it, but they remain backbenchers, in the same way honest PCs were blocked from being in CID at one time.
dudleybloke said:
The quotes with the article, including from people seemingly involved, appear quite telling.dudleybloke said:
I'm always wary when I see low key outlets persisting with a story that few others seem to want to cover in any great detail, but reading up on Exaro, they appear to be a superb organisation and have engineered great things with their persistence. Hopefully they can do the same with this.Derek Smith said:
BillPeart said:
If anyone doubts what those in authority can and are prepared to do to protect their ilk, listen to the download of the radio 4 programme "Jeremy Thorpe - the silent conspiracy" aired this evening.
Based partly on investigations Tom Mangold conducted years ago, that were also sat on, "for legal reasons"! The level of dishonesty and culpability - including in potential attempted murders - is staggering. And most got away with it... dead or largely forgotten now, but full on troughers at the time.
The police and government prosecutions department of the time are criticised, quite rightly, for doing nothing. The excuse seems to be that they would be taken to task for going after someone as well regarded as Thorpe.Based partly on investigations Tom Mangold conducted years ago, that were also sat on, "for legal reasons"! The level of dishonesty and culpability - including in potential attempted murders - is staggering. And most got away with it... dead or largely forgotten now, but full on troughers at the time.
Fast forward to 2014 and the police are severely criticised for going against a singer because he's well regarded.
There are also lots of allegations against the CPS for, apparently, using the same prosecutions limits for disc jockeys and the like as they do for the hoi poloi.
The conclusion that there was no conspiracy because it was always done that way is rather frightening because, in essence, nothing has changed.
Those in authority have specialist units there to protect them. The fear is that these units see their role as extending to protection against all challenges. Again there is no specific conspiracy in the main, although the withdrawal of charges, evidence and files needs some form of illegal act. It is just the way things are done.
With media outlets mostly hand in glove with the government and those outside the closed cells largely ignored (read Private Eye for four issues and then wonder why nothing is done against the corrupt officials and procedures exposed, as evidenced in the Thorpe programme), there are few checks as such.
The various estates are either part of the establishment or beholden to it.
We do have the BBC, the ultra left-wing outlet that continuously ignores its requirement to be fair to all, at least according to the PH massive. However, Murdoch attacks it and has its constraint as part of its requirement for its outlets to support a particular party and various governments are only too happily to oblige, but for their own reasons. They too are beholden to the government for everything, including their bloke in charge.
In my early years in the police I saw similar conspiracies in actions. Corrupt officers would produce a defendant at court. They would have corrupt lawyers defending them and they would be before corrupt magistrates and stipendiaries.
The terrible thing about the days of Challenor is that he was the only one with a reason for his behaviour. Everyone else in the system, including judges, were complicit but did nothing. The old joke about a stipe telling him: 'I do not wish to see this half brick yet again.' was always said in the expectation of a supporting laugh.
The systems change, the methods change, but those at the top will still protect themselves.
We see Vaz produced time and again to pontificate on actions of people who have not done their job properly yet a quick Wiki shows exactly what type of person he is. The old comments about: would you want your daughter to marry him, is modern nowadays as it has nothing to do with racialism. It is about conduct and character.
May said that the police should be concerned with regard to their approval rating. The irony is tragic.
I have no tinfoil hat but I know to a limited extent what goes on and I know that I don't know 1% of it all.
BillPeart said:
What gets me, and as an ex police officer you might be able to cast some light on this, Derek, is how politicians, senior police officers and, even, security services, have the wherewithal - let alone the motivation and mal-morals - to be able to lean on investigators, lower ranks, the press et al, to the point that enquiries get stopped or squashed. How the hell do they manage that?
Those in authority have power and we all know what power does to you.I can't comment on any specific case apart from the one I was involved in, and even in that case, I only just made it to the periphery. However, after 10 years in a force that was corrupt from top to bottom, with senior officers, almost at the top, taking bungs off east end organised gangs, then the MO becomes clear.
It is just a case of people being afraid to put their heads above the parapet.
Then, as now, there is an elite at the top. Those with similar ideas, interests, desires and tastes clump together and their desires take precedence.
Those in the security services are told day after day that the end of the western way of life is under threat and only they, and they other services, can stop it being destroyed by [put any one or more of the currently fashionable threats in here]. So when Smith and his high level cohorts were under threat it is easy enough to believe that, with the PIRA threat being so very real and a civil war continuing in the UK, with support from a major ally, any attack on the government would have disastrous consequences. So shutting down the enquiry, and - as my experience would suggest - shutting up those who know what they are on about and are influential - is not only seen as essential but as patriotic.
Further, as we know, the desire to abuse pre-pubescent children is not restricted to chavs. If, for instance, a high ranking police officer indulges his offensive behaviour in company with, for instance, a judge, both are compromised. Further, in those days judges came from the same stock and went to the same schools and fraternised. The situation changed a bit a few years ago but, from what I can see, has reverted. So they shared one-another's secrets.
Newspapers were run in those days by individuals who were establishment figures and would see themselves as the friends of the high and mighty. So reports of such behaviour might not reach the press and if they did, they would soon be sidelined.
So a file appears on the desk of a senior officer who wants to go further. Even in those days certain files had to go before the 'DPP', an office in fact, rather similar to the CPS in some ways. A junior lawyer who wants to go further is informed that the file should be binned. The chap can go against the advice, knowing full well that it would then go higher and be binned there, and the only result would be his career in tatters, or bin it himself, despite knowing full well that the rules stated it should be proceeded with.
He'd have no evidence of corruption. So he bins is. If his backbone is later more apparent, a quick reminder that there is a, or probably more than one, skeleton in his cupboard, and all is smiles.
The norm was for senior officers to be 'assisted' into position by a patron. So we got grey porridge. Now it appears that there were other qualifications for upper rank for some.
There is no logical justification for believing that similar circumstances do not exist now.
The was a major enquiring into corruption in the City. It went into multi millions. In value it was the biggest ever discovered. After a number of underlings were hit, the plug was pulled as the enquiry was 'too costly'.
BillPeart said:
What gets me, and as an ex police officer you might be able to cast some light on this, Derek, is how politicians, senior police officers and, even, security services, have the wherewithal - let alone the motivation and mal-morals - to be able to lean on investigators, lower ranks, the press et al, to the point that enquiries get stopped or squashed. How the hell do they manage that?
I am not Derek, but your question made me think of this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sa8rRp_tYSU
Watch from 19 minutes in about Melanie Shaw who was abused while in care in Notts. and sentenced on Thursday last week.
Another reason for mentioning that is that Janet Street Porter had a dig at Mrs Karen Danczuk on ITV's Loose Women. Janet Street Porter and PCC Paddy Tipping are both Big Cheeses in the Rambler's Association. PCC Paddy Tipping before becoming a PCC was involved in Social Services and Child social work in Notts.
A point I could be making is that it's one against the many, the many may have many links to others in other organisations.
BillPeart said:
What gets me, and as an ex police officer you might be able to cast some light on this, Derek, is how politicians, senior police officers and, even, security services, have the wherewithal - let alone the motivation and mal-morals - to be able to lean on investigators, lower ranks, the press et al, to the point that enquiries get stopped or squashed. How the hell do they manage that?
the establishment always closes ranks - it happens almost instinctively. This excellent article from the Mail sums it up perfectly, and frighteninglyhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2872344/Fr...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff