The extraordinary revelations at the weekend by my Exaro colleague Mark Conrad and the Sunday People should finally dispel fears that the police have no intention of investigating the VIP paedophiles and now possible murderers in the Westminster paedophile scandal.
I could tell until this weekend many in the mainstream media were sceptical ( and some still are) that such horrendous acts involving MPs could ever have taken place in the 1970s and 1980s without the Westminster lobby knowing. Some, including one of my long-standing former colleagues on the Guardian, emphatically told me no MP could possibly be involved in the murder of a young boy.I’ll spare his blushes until there is an arrest.
However the disclosure at the weekend that two former police detectives are now corroborating that they had heard about a murders and were aware of a paedophile ring in Westminster but couldn’t investigate.
As the Exaro article says :A source close to the investigation said that the two former police officers alleged: “There was a significant paedophile group in Parliament who were untouchable to the police.”
They provided new information on Sir Cyril Smith, the former Liberal MP, and Sir Jimmy Savile, the BBC star, who were exposed as paedophiles after their deaths. They have also provided potentially important information on former MPs and living perpetrators of child sex abuse.”
The key thing about the police coming forward is that the story by the brave survivor called ” Nick” has now a possible chance of being collaborated by other sources. This will be essential if they are to be prosecutions.
Also in the same week I learnt that in Durham where 900 people have come forward alleging sexual and physical abuse at the now closed Medomsley young offenders institution arrests are likely before Christmas and Operation Pallial in North Wales is also expected to lead to more arrests shortly. Even the home secretary, Theresa May, has indicated that she believes it is only ” the tip of the iceberg” so far..
Altogether the chances of this far too long running historic scandal being dead and buried again are becoming much slimmer. The police now have to throw everything at it to get at the truth.
Reblogged this on sdbast.
Reblogged this on L8in.
Reblogged this on justiceforkevinandjenveybaylis.
Pingback: Child Sex Abuse: Will the police finally catch the perpetrators? – David Hencke | Vox Political
Reblogged this on How can I help you today? and commented:
Police and CPS prefer soft targets.
Hope this wasn’t a Freudian slip! Blame it on the spell-checker…
“However the disclosure at the weekend that two former police detectives are now COLLABORATING that they had heard about a murders and were aware of a paedophile ring in Westminster but couldn’t investigate.”
Regarding Cyril Smith & Elm I have a question: the police have “confirmed” that he was a visitor, as reported by Exaro & other outlets. On what basis was this confirmation made (if known, and if it can be made public without problems)?
As there have been claims of stake-outs, photographs & the like, the fact that the police are reportedly certain of his attendence there makes me curious as to why not even the conspiraloons have thought to ask: “Why?” If it is based on solid evidence then that evidence might be useful in dispelling a few untruths/backing up more credible claims (dates/names/etc.).
(For those who place much faith in The Express – not I! – Elm-owner Harry Kasir was reported to have stated recently that: “There were never any politicians or any parties.”)
A slip should be corroborating. Of course Kasir would say there were no parties if he is running such a guest house.
I was in no way suggesting anyone should believe Kasir, by the way.
(If those words were ever even spoken, that is: they have ‘previous’ at the Express when it comes to putting words into people’s mouths…)
The reported assertion from the police just seemed so devoid of their usual careful language that it seemed odd that no one apparently pressed them further.
No “we believe”, “sources suggest”, “strong evidence that”, etc. Just a plain statement of fact that Smith DID attend.
The article in question didn’t even point out that the police had already made it clear that at least one politician absolutely DID attend, which it should have done in my opinion. Even better though would have been the police statement backed-up with the proof – nothing like catching out a liar with irrefutable facts: they often start jabbering when the corner into which they have painted themselves is clearly pointed out to them!
I was told last week (29/11) that the EGH photos were seized by Special Branch in 1990 and latterly destroyed after instructions came down from the political level. This was done as the photos were so damning and ‘Plod did what Plod was told to do.’ I asked if 5 had murdered Carole Kasir. The reply was not what I expected. Source said (and I do this from memory) in normal circumstances no but bearing in mind what was at stake ‘I cannot rule it out’. We (6) did but 5 did not normally to do that but what we had at the Elm Guest House was extraordinary. Even we (6) would have destoyed those photos amd believe me we would have normally kept such photos, especially photos of British MP’s but they were so damaging they had to be destroyed.
So in response to your question a big no, well not through the Elm. Places like that would lead to to bigger people and a bigger crime. Something much neater is required by the establishment. Its there. Sometimes justice needs compromises, that’s the real world.