Cyril Smith - the revellations
Discussion
Foppo said:
How can a police officer be constrained from reporting a crime to do with children? I know in the real world people don't want to loose their pensions or their jobs.
But please some officers who knew about all of this show some courage.
Why did you become a police officer in the first place.?
There were those who, as you put it, showed courage. There was a major enquiry into the allegations against Smith and others. When officers posted a precis to a number of other officers around the country, the unit was disbanded, the evidence hidden, despite it going to the DPP, and the police were left with nothing to prove what they had seen.But please some officers who knew about all of this show some courage.
Why did you become a police officer in the first place.?
But then they could have gone to the press. That is those officers who did not go to the press could have gone to the press. The press could have printed the allegations. Many feel lawyers and judges were also involved in child abuse. Let's face it, it is highly unlikely none were.
One paper had to pay damages and costs running into six figures. Laws protect those at the top.
And in any case, look at who was in charge of many of the papers. Were they mates of those in authority?
If Smith was being protected by MI5 and SB, what could the individual officer do?
I tried to get in touch with the Rochdale enquiry team once and was told that they were uncontactable after being disbanded. I left my home number and someone who said they had been in the unit contacted me at home, not giving a name. Officers were frightened.
MI5 - they are powerful. They, many feel, protected the MPs and other powerful people. Would you have tried to face them down knowing that the papers would not back you up, apart from the Eye, and that was, like now, ignored.
The MPs like Thorpe could do what they wanted. The police were against a rock and a hard, very hard, MI5.
Foppo said:
How can a police officer be constrained from reporting a crime to do with children? I know in the real world people don't want to loose their pensions or their jobs.
But please some officers who knew about all of this show some courage.
Why did you become a police officer in the first place.?
Because they were threatened with the Official Secrets Act and therefore risked jail for "reporting" it. No press would have reported it as they would have been slapped with "D" notices. That is why this is so sinister.But please some officers who knew about all of this show some courage.
Why did you become a police officer in the first place.?
Derek Smith said:
There were those who, as you put it, showed courage. There was a major enquiry into the allegations against Smith and others. When officers posted a precis to a number of other officers around the country, the unit was disbanded, the evidence hidden, despite it going to the DPP, and the police were left with nothing to prove what they had seen.
But then they could have gone to the press. That is those officers who did not go to the press could have gone to the press. The press could have printed the allegations. Many feel lawyers and judges were also involved in child abuse. Let's face it, it is highly unlikely none were.
One paper had to pay damages and costs running into six figures. Laws protect those at the top.
And in any case, look at who was in charge of many of the papers. Were they mates of those in authority?
If Smith was being protected by MI5 and SB, what could the individual officer do?
I tried to get in touch with the Rochdale enquiry team once and was told that they were uncontactable after being disbanded. I left my home number and someone who said they had been in the unit contacted me at home, not giving a name. Officers were frightened.
MI5 - they are powerful. They, many feel, protected the MPs and other powerful people. Would you have tried to face them down knowing that the papers would not back you up, apart from the Eye, and that was, like now, ignored.
The MPs like Thorpe could do what they wanted. The police were against a rock and a hard, very hard, MI5.
makes you wonder abut the sorts employed by mi5 derek . they are either paedophile sympathisers or indeed paedophiles themselves .any mi5 employees reading,go get my ip, get my address and come to my house. will not be a defenceless child that answers the door. scum,utter scum.But then they could have gone to the press. That is those officers who did not go to the press could have gone to the press. The press could have printed the allegations. Many feel lawyers and judges were also involved in child abuse. Let's face it, it is highly unlikely none were.
One paper had to pay damages and costs running into six figures. Laws protect those at the top.
And in any case, look at who was in charge of many of the papers. Were they mates of those in authority?
If Smith was being protected by MI5 and SB, what could the individual officer do?
I tried to get in touch with the Rochdale enquiry team once and was told that they were uncontactable after being disbanded. I left my home number and someone who said they had been in the unit contacted me at home, not giving a name. Officers were frightened.
MI5 - they are powerful. They, many feel, protected the MPs and other powerful people. Would you have tried to face them down knowing that the papers would not back you up, apart from the Eye, and that was, like now, ignored.
The MPs like Thorpe could do what they wanted. The police were against a rock and a hard, very hard, MI5.
wc98 said:
Derek Smith said:
There were those who, as you put it, showed courage. There was a major enquiry into the allegations against Smith and others. When officers posted a precis to a number of other officers around the country, the unit was disbanded, the evidence hidden, despite it going to the DPP, and the police were left with nothing to prove what they had seen.
But then they could have gone to the press. That is those officers who did not go to the press could have gone to the press. The press could have printed the allegations. Many feel lawyers and judges were also involved in child abuse. Let's face it, it is highly unlikely none were.
One paper had to pay damages and costs running into six figures. Laws protect those at the top.
And in any case, look at who was in charge of many of the papers. Were they mates of those in authority?
If Smith was being protected by MI5 and SB, what could the individual officer do?
I tried to get in touch with the Rochdale enquiry team once and was told that they were uncontactable after being disbanded. I left my home number and someone who said they had been in the unit contacted me at home, not giving a name. Officers were frightened.
MI5 - they are powerful. They, many feel, protected the MPs and other powerful people. Would you have tried to face them down knowing that the papers would not back you up, apart from the Eye, and that was, like now, ignored.
The MPs like Thorpe could do what they wanted. The police were against a rock and a hard, very hard, MI5.
makes you wonder abut the sorts employed by mi5 derek . they are either paedophile sympathisers or indeed paedophiles themselves .any mi5 employees reading,go get my ip, get my address and come to my house. will not be a defenceless child that answers the door. scum,utter scum.But then they could have gone to the press. That is those officers who did not go to the press could have gone to the press. The press could have printed the allegations. Many feel lawyers and judges were also involved in child abuse. Let's face it, it is highly unlikely none were.
One paper had to pay damages and costs running into six figures. Laws protect those at the top.
And in any case, look at who was in charge of many of the papers. Were they mates of those in authority?
If Smith was being protected by MI5 and SB, what could the individual officer do?
I tried to get in touch with the Rochdale enquiry team once and was told that they were uncontactable after being disbanded. I left my home number and someone who said they had been in the unit contacted me at home, not giving a name. Officers were frightened.
MI5 - they are powerful. They, many feel, protected the MPs and other powerful people. Would you have tried to face them down knowing that the papers would not back you up, apart from the Eye, and that was, like now, ignored.
The MPs like Thorpe could do what they wanted. The police were against a rock and a hard, very hard, MI5.
Do you not think that there might be ex 5/SB officers around, perhaps even on this very forum, who had and still have the same utter contempt for these animals even after all these years. Also wanting to make a case but under the same pressures, potentially even worse ones, than the decent coppers were under.
I ask you to think about your broad brush condemnation of everyone however connected with those organisations past and present. Because it's the people with the absolute power to order control, deflect and destroy the efforts of the decent case officers in the police and other organisations who are the real guilty parties.
There is always a bigger picture .
my personal view is that the officers were warned off not because of Cyril Smith nor a couple of police officers being involved.
Someone very high up will have made a decision on the grounds of national security.
This was at the height of the Cold War and political instability at home .. It could, in the bigger picture have been deemed a threat to the stability and security of the state. Imagine generals diplomats royals people involved in the security of the nation being involved and you suddenly have a very different dynamic than a fat northern mp and a couple of senior bobbies.
I'm sure that when the cops who were doing their jobs were warned off, they would have been very frightened men, feeling that they were marked and probably being watched. A detective would not want to be deemed a national security risk.
There are people out there who make problems disappear. I would not want to be in their position for all the tea in China.
To be in possession of knowledge that the state deems to be a threat to the very fabric of the state could put your safety and well being at serious risk
So they walked away and got on with their lives. Probably looking over their shoulders for many years.
I for one do not blame them at all for that.
Even today Teresa May in parliament failed to give a clear and specific guarantee for the safety and security of the officers involved when asked directly by Keith Vaz.
If I were one of the officers I would not have been reassured by her performance.
Whether this has the legs to go the distance is not down to the IPCC or DPS.
my personal view is that the officers were warned off not because of Cyril Smith nor a couple of police officers being involved.
Someone very high up will have made a decision on the grounds of national security.
This was at the height of the Cold War and political instability at home .. It could, in the bigger picture have been deemed a threat to the stability and security of the state. Imagine generals diplomats royals people involved in the security of the nation being involved and you suddenly have a very different dynamic than a fat northern mp and a couple of senior bobbies.
I'm sure that when the cops who were doing their jobs were warned off, they would have been very frightened men, feeling that they were marked and probably being watched. A detective would not want to be deemed a national security risk.
There are people out there who make problems disappear. I would not want to be in their position for all the tea in China.
To be in possession of knowledge that the state deems to be a threat to the very fabric of the state could put your safety and well being at serious risk
So they walked away and got on with their lives. Probably looking over their shoulders for many years.
I for one do not blame them at all for that.
Even today Teresa May in parliament failed to give a clear and specific guarantee for the safety and security of the officers involved when asked directly by Keith Vaz.
If I were one of the officers I would not have been reassured by her performance.
Whether this has the legs to go the distance is not down to the IPCC or DPS.
FiF said:
I put it to you that whilst we recognise that the police brand, for want of a better term, is shown in very bad light, there were officers who were prepared to do and did do the job properly. They made the enquiries, did the surveillance, made the raids, the arrests and got the makings of a case together. Only to be ordered to drop it, ordered to hand over all evidence and warned of prosecution under the Act if they ever spoke about it.
Do you not think that there might be ex 5/SB officers around, perhaps even on this very forum, who had and still have the same utter contempt for these animals even after all these years. Also wanting to make a case but under the same pressures, potentially even worse ones, than the decent coppers were under.
I ask you to think about your broad brush condemnation of everyone however connected with those organisations past and present. Because it's the people with the absolute power to order control, deflect and destroy the efforts of the decent case officers in the police and other organisations who are the real guilty parties.
i understand what you mean, but sadly no can do. i will never ever be able to understand an adult male watching another adult enter an establishment where it is known children are present and likely to be abused,and i have a high suspicion this will have happened with mi5 personnel . anyone that places a career over doing all they can,physically if necessary, to halt physical abuse of other human beings, particularly children gets nothing but contempt from me.Do you not think that there might be ex 5/SB officers around, perhaps even on this very forum, who had and still have the same utter contempt for these animals even after all these years. Also wanting to make a case but under the same pressures, potentially even worse ones, than the decent coppers were under.
I ask you to think about your broad brush condemnation of everyone however connected with those organisations past and present. Because it's the people with the absolute power to order control, deflect and destroy the efforts of the decent case officers in the police and other organisations who are the real guilty parties.
as for ordinary police officers who did all they could by gathering evidence only to have it suppressed ,it is plain to see from dereks statement there really was little else they could do . mi5 is a whole different ball game, i am tarring all mi5 individuals with any knowledge of what went on with the paedo sympathiser brush,another bunch that thinks the means always justifies the end,and forgets who and what they work for and to preserve,no one else,certainly not the police officers who did do their job.
Earthdweller said:
There is always a bigger picture .
my personal view is that the officers were warned off not because of Cyril Smith nor a couple of police officers being involved.
Someone very high up will have made a decision on the grounds of national security.
This was at the height of the Cold War and political instability at home .. It could, in the bigger picture have been deemed a threat to the stability and security of the state. Imagine generals diplomats royals people involved in the security of the nation being involved and you suddenly have a very different dynamic than a fat northern mp and a couple of senior bobbies.
I'm sure that when the cops who were doing their jobs were warned off, they would have been very frightened men, feeling that they were marked and probably being watched. A detective would not want to be deemed a national security risk.
There are people out there who make problems disappear. I would not want to be in their position for all the tea in China.
To be in possession of knowledge that the state deems to be a threat to the very fabric of the state could put your safety and well being at serious risk
So they walked away and got on with their lives. Probably looking over their shoulders for many years.
I for one do not blame them at all for that.
Even today Teresa May in parliament failed to give a clear and specific guarantee for the safety and security of the officers involved when asked directly by Keith Vaz.
If I were one of the officers I would not have been reassured by her performance.
Whether this has the legs to go the distance is not down to the IPCC or DPS.
this is part of the problem, middle englanders brainwashed into believing the great and the good know best for us all and have to make these difficult decisions. let me tell you and everyone else with that outlook now, there is never,ever any excuse for facilitating abuse of a child. ever. my personal view is that the officers were warned off not because of Cyril Smith nor a couple of police officers being involved.
Someone very high up will have made a decision on the grounds of national security.
This was at the height of the Cold War and political instability at home .. It could, in the bigger picture have been deemed a threat to the stability and security of the state. Imagine generals diplomats royals people involved in the security of the nation being involved and you suddenly have a very different dynamic than a fat northern mp and a couple of senior bobbies.
I'm sure that when the cops who were doing their jobs were warned off, they would have been very frightened men, feeling that they were marked and probably being watched. A detective would not want to be deemed a national security risk.
There are people out there who make problems disappear. I would not want to be in their position for all the tea in China.
To be in possession of knowledge that the state deems to be a threat to the very fabric of the state could put your safety and well being at serious risk
So they walked away and got on with their lives. Probably looking over their shoulders for many years.
I for one do not blame them at all for that.
Even today Teresa May in parliament failed to give a clear and specific guarantee for the safety and security of the officers involved when asked directly by Keith Vaz.
If I were one of the officers I would not have been reassured by her performance.
Whether this has the legs to go the distance is not down to the IPCC or DPS.
who the f
k do these people think they are when they think any other individuals reputation is more important than the the life of a child . just because they have and can get way with it does not mean it should be allowed to remain so. i am quite happy for the various intelligence agencies to do whatever it takes to maintain the physical security of the uk, but am quite happy to state that maintaining the reputations or freedom of warped members of the establishment does not fall into the category of national security.if every single current politician, lord,senior civil servant etc died tomorrow it would make very little difference to the running of the country. in fact it would probably make it a better place.
ps, i would probably s
t myself if they turned up looking for me for any reason, would not change my outlook though or what i would tell them to their face.wc98 said:
i understand what you mean, but sadly no can do. i will never ever be able to understand an adult male watching another adult enter an establishment where it is known children are present and likely to be abused,and i have a high suspicion this will have happened with mi5 personnel . anyone that places a career over doing all they can,physically if necessary, to halt physical abuse of other human beings, particularly children gets nothing but contempt from me.
as for ordinary police officers who did all they could by gathering evidence only to have it suppressed ,it is plain to see from dereks statement there really was little else they could do . mi5 is a whole different ball game, i am tarring all mi5 individuals with any knowledge of what went on with the paedo sympathiser brush,another bunch that thinks the means always justifies the end,and forgets who and what they work for and to preserve,no one else,certainly not the police officers who did do their job.
Your argument is inconsistent. as for ordinary police officers who did all they could by gathering evidence only to have it suppressed ,it is plain to see from dereks statement there really was little else they could do . mi5 is a whole different ball game, i am tarring all mi5 individuals with any knowledge of what went on with the paedo sympathiser brush,another bunch that thinks the means always justifies the end,and forgets who and what they work for and to preserve,no one else,certainly not the police officers who did do their job.
On the one hand you are saying that police officers who were doing their job and wanted to bring these people to justice but ordered to desist but couldn't do anything about it.
Yet someone in an identical position in a 'sister' organisation is nothing but scum. Odd.
If you want to carry on with your strange and ill informed view of things that's up to you. But we will have to disagree.
Earthdweller said:
Even today Teresa May in parliament failed to give a clear and specific guarantee for the safety and security of the officers involved when asked directly by Keith Vaz.
If I were one of the officers I would not have been reassured by her performance.
I agree.If I were one of the officers I would not have been reassured by her performance.
The words sounded very deliberate along the lines of "I wouldn't expect anyone to be arrested".
I would want to hear "No-one will be arrested" before I put my head above the parapet.
FiF said:
Your argument is inconsistent.
On the one hand you are saying that police officers who were doing their job and wanted to bring these people to justice but ordered to desist but couldn't do anything about it.
Yet someone in an identical position in a 'sister' organisation is nothing but scum. Odd.
If you want to carry on with your strange and ill informed view of things that's up to you. But we will have to disagree.
it may well be, i will try and explain a bit better. intelligence services will be the people that have the physical evidence,would not surprise me if it is found they have film of politicians,judges,lawyers etc in the act as that is what they do,gather intelligence. those in charge of the intelligence services will think it is justifiable as they now "have something" on various individuals,whether to be used at a later date as leverage for increasing budgets,promotions etc.On the one hand you are saying that police officers who were doing their job and wanted to bring these people to justice but ordered to desist but couldn't do anything about it.
Yet someone in an identical position in a 'sister' organisation is nothing but scum. Odd.
If you want to carry on with your strange and ill informed view of things that's up to you. But we will have to disagree.
the police will have investigated complaints and when they started getting somewhere have been told to drop it with no other avenues available to them,senior officers may well be up to their necks in it as well though. the people in the intelligence services may well have been in a position to put a stop to what was going on,but allowed it to continue for the greater good,though what kind of warped mind could ever find a greater good by allowing abuse to be carried out on children is beyond me. yes this is speculation,but there is no way in the world senior establishment figures carried out these acts without the knowledge of the intelligence services.
apologies if this explanation of how i see the situation is not up to scratch,but it is the way i see it.
My better half was part of a small group from Liverpool put together by a senior policeman, they hunted down the gangs/groups/rings/families that used kids for sexual exploitation, including breeding children for groups/rings.
They compiled many reports and gathered brilliant evidence, on some occasions men with powerful badges would come in and bag it up, threaten with secrets act and leave, the amazing dedicated group could do nothing and had to live with it
They compiled many reports and gathered brilliant evidence, on some occasions men with powerful badges would come in and bag it up, threaten with secrets act and leave, the amazing dedicated group could do nothing and had to live with it
carinaman said:
She doesn't come across as reassured as she was when she stuck the boot into the police at the federation conference at Bournemouth in May.
Where do her 'hopes' sit with the delays caused by her appointing Baroness Butler-Closed-Shop and Dame Fiona Woolf?
She delayed it till after the election so achieved what the top politicians wanted. The longer it drags on the more chance there is that witnesses and those involved will die so the truth may never come out. Where do her 'hopes' sit with the delays caused by her appointing Baroness Butler-Closed-Shop and Dame Fiona Woolf?
I remember being appalled at the paedophile scandal in Belgium after the Dutroux affair but it appears that the UK is just as corrupt.
greygoose said:
carinaman said:
She doesn't come across as reassured as she was when she stuck the boot into the police at the federation conference at Bournemouth in May.
Where do her 'hopes' sit with the delays caused by her appointing Baroness Butler-Closed-Shop and Dame Fiona Woolf?
She delayed it till after the election so achieved what the top politicians wanted. The longer it drags on the more chance there is that witnesses and those involved will die so the truth may never come out. Where do her 'hopes' sit with the delays caused by her appointing Baroness Butler-Closed-Shop and Dame Fiona Woolf?
I remember being appalled at the paedophile scandal in Belgium after the Dutroux affair but it appears that the UK is just as corrupt.
The norm is that such officers fall into groups:
There are those who, through lack of knowledge of systems, do what they think is right. This is a supervisory problem.
There are those who panic because it becomes too difficult, or they have made an honest mistake, and try and hide the error. This is often the fault of immediate supervisors who are martinets.
There are those who become stressed and can’t cope with continual reports of people in dire circumstance. These often become adept at hiding their problems and it is very difficult to pick up the subtle symptoms (that’s my excuse for my failures anyway to notice this on those I supervised).
There are those who are bone idle and, as many of these are intelligent, they dedicate their lives to deflecting work, deflecting blame and often seem to be a repository of knowledge and experience.
Another group is those who are ordered to ‘forget’ offences and offenders. These have the option of creating a massive stir and getting slapped back into position. Or they could be subversive, informing others, including the press, of their position. These latter ones are wasting their time of course.
I can’t see any police officer sleeving a crime against a child because he or she is of the same mind as that would draw suspicion onto them.
We can see that those in authority look to their own needs first of all. Just before a general election is no time to hope for an open and energetic enquiry into the revelations.
As someone pointed out, the investigation against Smith was at a politically difficult time. One can, perhaps, see the reasoning behind not prosecuting a person who could bring massive scandal on MPs of all parties at what was a time of war.
OK, one might not agree with it but there is a certain logic and MI5 has a specific role and, no doubt, concentrated on it.
However, the offending continued. Kids were sacrificed. Lives were ruined whilst those whose job it was to police and protect looked on. There can be no justification, no excuses, for that. It is a despicable act, worse in many ways than what Smith and his fellow offenders did.
In the days when police used to hang around public toilets hoping to catch men performing illegal acts, we were warned off at least once by senior officers. This was because there was fear of who might be caught in the net knowing the alleged activities of local politicians.
As I said before the idea that SB and the Security Service were not aware of what was going on seems inconceivable to me.
As I said before the idea that SB and the Security Service were not aware of what was going on seems inconceivable to me.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff