Missing Dossier ! ?
Discussion
Elroy Blue said:
David Mellor, David Davis, Theresa May...you've all had big mouths for the last four years. Comment on this:
Tory Chief Whip said
So... in fairness to David Mellor he was on C4News last night and albeit I only caught the end of the interview I can report he sounded and looked completely ridicules and out of touch with the current situation, whereas Norman Tebbit was spot on in his interview the previous day.Tory Chief Whip said
BTW Mellor was trying to defend Leon Brittan from 'scurrilous rumours' and suggestion of failure in Office, me thinks that interview may come back to haunt David Mellor ;-)
IroningMan said:
tenpenceshort said:
Just being curious; at this stage, what action would the government have needed to propose to have satisfied you?
I'm keen to see this question receive a straight answer - I suspect I'll be waiting for a while, mind.May told MPs: "Our priority must be the prosecution of the people behind these disgusting crimes. That wherever possible – and consistent with the need to prosecute – we will adopt a presumption of maximum transparency. And that where there has been a failure to protect children from abuse, we will expose it and we will learn from it."
Just being curious, where do you suppose it might be impossible to presume maximum transparency?
I personaly beleive that this "Rape" accusation is a red Herring distraction. I posted a link on here a few pages back that is far more damning to LB than "Rape" before he was a MP. This is when he was HS & very very dark accusation (with apparently,pictures to back up claim
The claims are known as its was stated in 2013 but is being passed off as hyssterical & with no substance ...meaning they have not/cannot trace the small boy in the photo !
The claims are known as its was stated in 2013 but is being passed off as hyssterical & with no substance ...meaning they have not/cannot trace the small boy in the photo !
Butler-Schloss chosen to head the enquiry. Dangerous for them, I think.
She had a hand in the Children Act. I thought that was useful.
She was praised in the past, sometimes through gritted teeth, by all sides. It would be nice to think that this was advice to the powers that be chose her for the right reasons.
In the past we've had judges who've been mates of the appointer, others whose independence was suspect, and others whose competence was, to be nice, questionable.
Whilst Butler-Schloss in hardly unknown to those in power, I don't think this will affect the outcome.
Mind you, a lot depends on whom she appoints.
She had a hand in the Children Act. I thought that was useful.
She was praised in the past, sometimes through gritted teeth, by all sides. It would be nice to think that this was advice to the powers that be chose her for the right reasons.
In the past we've had judges who've been mates of the appointer, others whose independence was suspect, and others whose competence was, to be nice, questionable.
Whilst Butler-Schloss in hardly unknown to those in power, I don't think this will affect the outcome.
Mind you, a lot depends on whom she appoints.
Derek Smith said:
Butler-Schloss chosen to head the enquiry. Dangerous for them, I think.
She had a hand in the Children Act. I thought that was useful.
She was praised in the past, sometimes through gritted teeth, by all sides. It would be nice to think that this was advice to the powers that be chose her for the right reasons.
In the past we've had judges who've been mates of the appointer, others whose independence was suspect, and others whose competence was, to be nice, questionable.
Whilst Butler-Schloss in hardly unknown to those in power, I don't think this will affect the outcome.
Mind you, a lot depends on whom she appoints.
She must be knocking on now (or is that ageist?) She had a hand in the Children Act. I thought that was useful.
She was praised in the past, sometimes through gritted teeth, by all sides. It would be nice to think that this was advice to the powers that be chose her for the right reasons.
In the past we've had judges who've been mates of the appointer, others whose independence was suspect, and others whose competence was, to be nice, questionable.
Whilst Butler-Schloss in hardly unknown to those in power, I don't think this will affect the outcome.
Mind you, a lot depends on whom she appoints.
Wasn't she the judge in the Cleveland Child Abuse cases in the 80s? If it was her, she sided with Dr Marietta Higgs and that other doc who had lots of children removed from their families. I recall reading recently that some of the kids taken away - and subsequently returned - are still complaining of the traumatic effect it had upon their childhood.
Peter McKelvie, Former child protection manager claims abusers operated for 65 years
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2684262/Po...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2684262/Po...
Elroy Blue said:
David Mellor, David Davis, Theresa May...you've all had big mouths for the last four years. Comment on this:
Tory Chief Whip said
Yes indeed - accumulating a list of 'sTory Chief Whip said
t' against you provides leverage to ensure compliance with acts you would not wish to do.Are MP's not 'vetted'?
Although by current alleged acts of the establishment, even the most 'thorough vetting' may be called into question.
dandarez said:
She must be knocking on now (or is that ageist?)
Wasn't she the judge in the Cleveland Child Abuse cases in the 80s? If it was her, she sided with Dr Marietta Higgs and that other doc who had lots of children removed from their families. I recall reading recently that some of the kids taken away - and subsequently returned - are still complaining of the traumatic effect it had upon their childhood.
Yes, I think you are right. That is her. She judged on the evidence before her I think. There was a lot of support for her actions. It would appear that she was fed some duff (but sincere?) evidence.Wasn't she the judge in the Cleveland Child Abuse cases in the 80s? If it was her, she sided with Dr Marietta Higgs and that other doc who had lots of children removed from their families. I recall reading recently that some of the kids taken away - and subsequently returned - are still complaining of the traumatic effect it had upon their childhood.
I know she has a reputation for clear thought though. That said, I only know about her from reports so I could well be well wrong.
Derek Smith said:
dandarez said:
She must be knocking on now (or is that ageist?)
Wasn't she the judge in the Cleveland Child Abuse cases in the 80s? If it was her, she sided with Dr Marietta Higgs and that other doc who had lots of children removed from their families. I recall reading recently that some of the kids taken away - and subsequently returned - are still complaining of the traumatic effect it had upon their childhood.
Yes, I think you are right. That is her. She judged on the evidence before her I think. There was a lot of support for her actions. It would appear that she was fed some duff (but sincere?) evidence.Wasn't she the judge in the Cleveland Child Abuse cases in the 80s? If it was her, she sided with Dr Marietta Higgs and that other doc who had lots of children removed from their families. I recall reading recently that some of the kids taken away - and subsequently returned - are still complaining of the traumatic effect it had upon their childhood.
I know she has a reputation for clear thought though. That said, I only know about her from reports so I could well be well wrong.
IroningMan said:
tenpenceshort said:
Just being curious; at this stage, what action would the government have needed to propose to have satisfied you?
I'm keen to see this question receive a straight answer - I suspect I'll be waiting for a while, mind.They could also enquire as to whether a former home secretary has a tattoo on his inner thigh.
As an aside, Derek (Smith), what would you do?
Edited by Police State on Wednesday 9th July 05:24
Regarding the missing documents :
Let us assume that most are some form of statements from people, reporting of progress and
summation, then I would hazard a guess they can be 'replaced' or they weren't significant anyway.
I am less concerned about the documents, more the lack of action from CPS / Police, or should I say
the reasons holding back action. I feel shades of phone hacking, why is it always the Met !
Can I put something out there.....
Is there something about a concentration of power that is, by it's very nature, corrupting ?
Perhaps Media / Police / IS / Politicians all based in London, sometimes it feels like an integrated model ( in a bad way )
I'll put my Northern Tin Hat on
Let us assume that most are some form of statements from people, reporting of progress and
summation, then I would hazard a guess they can be 'replaced' or they weren't significant anyway.
I am less concerned about the documents, more the lack of action from CPS / Police, or should I say
the reasons holding back action. I feel shades of phone hacking, why is it always the Met !
Can I put something out there.....
Is there something about a concentration of power that is, by it's very nature, corrupting ?
Perhaps Media / Police / IS / Politicians all based in London, sometimes it feels like an integrated model ( in a bad way )
I'll put my Northern Tin Hat on
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28225043
Surely this was known prior to the appointment and the potential conflict of interest?
How on earth!?!?
Surely this was known prior to the appointment and the potential conflict of interest?
How on earth!?!?
Biscuit dunker said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28225043
Surely this was known prior to the appointment and the potential conflict of interest?
How on earth!?!?
Of course it was, and is!Surely this was known prior to the appointment and the potential conflict of interest?
How on earth!?!?
Simon Danczuk is on the ball though.
Biscuit dunker said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28225043
Surely this was known prior to the appointment and the potential conflict of interest?
How on earth!?!?
A quote from the article.Surely this was known prior to the appointment and the potential conflict of interest?
How on earth!?!?
Whatever the rights and wrongs of her appointment (it's difficult to know exactly who could be appointed who wouldn't be associated with someone negative), this quote seems to summarise the attitude of people within the "establishment"
"If people think I am not suitable then that's up to them."
From a statistical point of view we hear (or don't hear) about judges, police officers, bin men and the like committing acts against children, but not of MP's (or, not for a good while anyway), so are we to assume this act that knows no social bounds hasn't affected MP's?
Or, are they just good at covering things like this up?
Or, are they just good at covering things like this up?
Jasandjules said:
That is a shame, I thought more highly of her than that.
The automatic, unquestioning deference shown to butler-schloss even by those criticsing her appointment is sickening. "She was a highly respected judge - her family were highly respected - she is, of course, beyond any suspicion of impartiality" etc etc. No-one hints at the obvious suspicion of blatant nepotism in how she got to be a senior judge in the first place.But its exactly this unquestioning acceptance of these people's authority which allows the
s to get away with the worst st imaginable.The obvious choice to lead the enquiry into 5h1t like this - assuming you actually wanted it to be halfway effective - would be someone with a track record of taking on establishment dodginess - i.e. Michael Mansfield.
Unbelievable isn't it.
Trying to justify her appointment on Radio 4 earlier by saying that her brother died over 20 years ago, but that doesn't mean she has no interest in protecting his name, she is still part of the family and Aunt to his kids.
She couldn't be more part of the establishment.
Trying to justify her appointment on Radio 4 earlier by saying that her brother died over 20 years ago, but that doesn't mean she has no interest in protecting his name, she is still part of the family and Aunt to his kids.
She couldn't be more part of the establishment.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff