The Carl Beech verdict is a blow to child sex abuse investigations. After the trial and thorough investigation by Northumbria Police Beech he emerged as a prolific, manipulative and malicious paedophile who made false allegations against powerful people and sparked off a huge investigation by the Met Police.
Both myself and the reporter, Mark Conrad, who investigated Beech, part company with Exaro’s former editor in chief, Mark Watts, in deciding that the verdict was “unsafe” or that he didn’t get a fair trial. Beech chose not to call a single witness in his defence and when the net was closing he fled the country.
Now the question is asked should journalists have ignored him from day one and reported nothing taking the line that no one in “the great and good” has ever sexually molested a child and anybody alleging that is a fantasist.
Or should we try diligently to get to the truth of the matter given the limited tools journalists have compared to a police force or the powers and scope an inquiry can have to investigate a case?
The simple solution is to say allegations, particularly historic, of child sex abuse, are so problematic, so difficult to prove, that anybody coming to a journalist suggesting they are a survivor of sexual abuse should be turned away. That would a devastating to the many thousands of survivors themselves who would have no other recourse other than going to an overworked police force. It wouldn’t be just a case of not being believed but being ignored.
It was also play into the hands of any paedophile to do what he or she liked – knowing their victims would never be listened to and they could hide behind the new populism that most child sex abuse in the UK is just a string of false allegations.
The latter fact is wrong. If you look at recent convictions hardly a week goes by -without either individuals or paedophile gangs being convicted in the courts- and that includes historic cases.
While Operation Midland was going on the National Crime Agency successfully prosecuted people in North Wales – including a police superintendent – the late Gordon Angelsea- who had denied child sex abuse crimes for years and successfully sued Private Eye and the Observer. He was one of 11 people so far successfully prosecuted through Operation Pallial including John Allen, an owner of children’s home and gang of five paedophiles led by a former professional wrestler.
Gangs have been convicted in Rotherham, Hull, Stoke on Trent, Rochdale, Lichfield and Newcastle upon Tyne to name a few.
And the idea that there isn’t a single prominent person who indulges in child sex abuse has been proved untrue with the conviction of the late Bishop Peter Ball, Bishop of Lewes and Gloucester, who convinced people at the very top, including Prince Charles, for years that accusations against him were a pack of lies. And Sir Cyril Smith MP whose escaped crimes in Rochdale were exposed in a report by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.
The only way you can investigate child sex abuse is to look for any outside facts that might stand up the likelihood of the case, test the person’s knowledge of the places where it is alleged to have happened and do a thorough test to see if the “ victim” can identify his perpetrator. You also rely on other people – not sexually abused themselves – to act as whistleblowers or people in authority at the time who can stand up the circumstances of a story.
The problem with the Carl Beech investigation was the way he undermined any diligent reporting by meticulously researching details about his victims and their premises so the” right” answers would come out.
The other was the odd way Exaro was run. Unlike nearly all news organisations there were no internal news conferences where ideas could be swapped and challenged. Reporters were forbidden from discussing the individual child sex abuse case they were investigating with any other reporter.
As a result I did not know the true identity of Carl Beech until it was made public. I have never met him, never exchanged any emails or talked to him.
Perhaps he would have been exposed if a tech savvy reporter had seized his computer – but I doubt the public would support journalists seizing other people’s computers while they were conducting investigations.
There has been criticism of my colleague Mark Conrad for conducting a picture identity test after Beech had alleged 12 people had sexually abused him. He tells me that consisted of inserting the 12 into 42 different people and took place before the police started their investigation.
The reason why it was done was because of the disastrous episode on BBC Newsnight where the survivor Steve Messham was never shown a picture of the late Lord McAlpine who was wrongly alleged to have abused him – which would have prevented a false allegation circulating on social media..
Investigating historic child sex abuse is one of the most difficult areas to do in journalism. Carl Beech has made it even more so. One lesson is that people who say they were sexually abused will in future have to face more scrutiny by both the police and journalists investigating their claims. The law about anonymity for people being investigated for child sex abuse might have to be tightened up – though I would be careful in advocating this.
But what must not happen is that the default position should move from believing a survivor to taking the view that the accusation is false. That way would provide paedophiles – who are the most cunning and manipulative of all people – with a free market to abuse whoever they wish and get away scot free.
Westminster Confidential 
As I read this, I was listening to the report about the chief scout from Chelsea FC, Eddie Heath.
Having spent years counselling survivors of rape and sexual abuse and being a survivor myself, my heart sank when it became obvious that the police had not carried out their investigations to the standard required in the Beech case. That said, as you say David, we must never underestimate how devious, manipulative and patient these evil people are. They will ‘groom’ their intended victims for years if necessary.
Sexual abuse knows no boundaries, class, age, religion etc. Beech just made it far more difficult for survivors to come forward and receive the justice they deserve.
So please don’t give up the excellent forensic journalism you and your colleagues undertake. We need to expose these evil doers and the shortcomings of the judicial system.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for your comment. It is difficult area to report – but it is much worse if it was ignored.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely awful to read but your closing
paragraph is is so true.
The truth should always out.
LikeLike
“The truth should away out” is a tired cliche, the reporting and investigation seems to have been flawed for the start with the media happy to “out” innocent people and despite Beech being one of the very few people charged and prosecuted for lying the damage has been irreparable, hiding the identities, even when shown that the accusations are false, or often as the police claim, insufficient evidence to pursue a conviction gives no confidence in “innocent until proven guilty.”
We saw the media scrum over Sir Cliff who were more interested in a “scoop” than whether he was guilty or innocent. The media, Metropolitan Police and the likes of Beech have probably set back the belief that “victims” will be safe and believed and sadly were I juror I would probably find it difficult to believe the accuser
LikeLike
Hello David I have been giving some thought to the Carl Beech case. When X told me the outline of it before it was news I just felt some of the facts did not fit together all that well. But the real question to be asked is who put him up to it in the first place and who benefited. If you take the WHO BENEFITED, in my view it was the seemingly well organised paedophile network in which Jimmy Saville was at the centre or near the centre. I have been told of two cases in the North East in which Saville would turn up at organised events in Boarding schools. Oddly when a case was taking to court Saville was not mentioned attending these events in fact the events themselves where never mentioned only the staff who where charged with sexual misconduct. The press and others focussing on Nick’s stories led everyone away from the paedophile networks. So why did the police believe him? To be truthful I doubt if they wholeheartedly believed him. They just wanted to believe him for their own political purposes. The police wanted revenge for the coalition governments reducing police funding and here was a perfect opportunity to do it. Nick’s allegations may in the past have been considered with a high level of suspicion, but remember one other event played into their hands Rochdale. The police needed to check his claims after Rochdale however daft they sounded. So Rochdale and Savile give them an excuse to go further than they would off a few years ago. Of course it worked, as every paper covered seedy stories of Tory MP’s or ex Tory MP’s and the speculation of names involved reached a sort of the Salem Witch Trial, to which yours truly gleefully took part. In the end do we have to feel sorry for Nick as he was a pawn in the police game a fantasist who could not believe his luck that people where taking notice of him. After the police achieved what they wanted he was thrown to the wolves. John
LikeLike
I think Carl had child images and for that he should be jailed , as for the rest I know for fact that 5 independent witnesses said that Heath wore false hands before he abused them. Dr RAINS list Coleman passed this onto Robert Green who passed it onto Mike Veal .
This story hasnt ended…
18 years is overkill to silence all to protect WM and the peados within
LikeLike
And pray, how many LIES have you spread around the internet over the last few years? You, and your mates too? As to your ‘false hands’ allegation above…Oh, purleeeeeze!
LikeLike
Well that’s interesting Liz, as you are one of the 3.8 million facing a long wait for your pension you must believe that everything I have written and researched campaigning for BackTo60 is a pack of lies as well. You can’t have it both ways either I am a compulsive liar or a proper investigative journalist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
hahaha LOONY LIZZIE THINK ROLF HARRIS IS INNOCENT
LikeLike
David, I cannot reply directly to you, despite now being able to fully log in at last.. My post, above, was purely and only to the HollyGriegJustice page and their yet more insane utterances, this time about Heath, from whomsoever runs that page. This person and I have ‘crossed swords’ in the past due to yet more bizzare ramblings from him/her. Research the page, their site, etc…they’re all over the internet and have been for years….normally with all ‘the usual suspects’ who’ve also been spewing forth terrible rumours about whomsoever they choose.
LikeLike
I take your point but I wish you had made it clearer that it was a response to Holly Greig. Normally I do allow a wide range of comments on my site, whether it is pro or anti.
LikeLike
“18 years is overkill to silence all to protect WM and the peados within”
No, it’s due to the gravity of the offenses and in particular the calculated nature of the deception, including claiming compensation on false pretences, setting up fake email accounts, blaming his son (his own flesh-and-blood, ffs) for the abuse images, and similar behaviour. If it was 18 years just for possessing child abuse images I would agree, but it’s not.
LikeLike
The acccusations against Heath were blatantly impossible for many reasons and not mentioned in detail. One thing was his obsession with security and he was followed by police everywhere he went and there was neither the time or opportunity.
LikeLike
Great report David
LikeLike
Hencke, you’re a sad old man. A sad and crumbling figure of a former lobby hack. Your lies make you as guilty as Beech. You deserve to serve some time alongside him. You won’t publish this comment m sure. But from me to you-fuck off. When you get there fuck off again.
LikeLike
I hope you enjoyed your court enforced community service Darren. One fact you are wrong I am still a lobby journalist,none of this former nonsense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I believe you should be able to report and expose these so called people.to be able to put your excellent journalism skills to good use because who else are we going to put our trust in? Politicians dont seem to give a damn unless it concerns one of them.The police,god bless them all seem to have less and less power and criminals and peados get away with literally murder. We the normal everyday public need to know whats really going on so keep up your good work.
LikeLike
Personally, I think this was all part of an establishment plot. Maybe Beech did suffer something, or maybe nothing at all….but I think we was encouraged to embelish/ exaggerate at least. He was as much manipulated by other people….just so the powerful elites can do what they did. Change public perception and have a good excuse for not investigating these powerful people anymore.
But what if it was ‘nipped in the bud’ quickly? i.e. pigyobs chose to believe it was a malicious report….most he probably would get is a fine ‘for wasting pigyob time’….like that young lady did for reporting the threats from her stalker ex….who promptly went on to murder her. Unclear whether she actually paid the fine before getting murdered.
Similar thing done to Sabine McKneill, who I did know somewhat personally. She’s an intelligent woman and was never out to make money. They targeted her mainly because of her site which was publishing testimony from thousand of victims such as myself. That COST her a lot of money to run….she was simply a campaigner, manipulated/ tricked I think then fitted up. If her site was under their control it would have simply been ordered to be closed down. But it was hosted in Germany…so they basically tortured her to get the ‘keys’, destroyed it all….then renegged on their promise to release her…and fitted her up for 9 years!
Then there is the Rolf Harris thing…convicted purely on hearsay from one individual who was also shown to be telling lies TWICE…but still convicted. I question how it even got to Court on that basis anyway.
Then there are the thousands of us who get ‘sectioned’ to cover it up. I also had my identity stolen, don’t officially exist anymore…and forced to survive as a slave to pedophiles basically for over a decade now 😦
They are exceptionally good at destroying people/ victims and covering these things up. Which I think Beech was as much used here by these people to create the situation that they now have.
#FreeMelanieShaw
LikeLike
Pingback: David Hencke’s news, views, investigations and much more Carl Beech Verdict: A savage blow that does not mean we ignore all future child sex abuse investigations | HOLLIE GREIG JUSTICE
“Coming to a journalist suggesting they are a survivor of sexual abuse”. Why are these complainants coming to a journalist at all, when they should be going to the police, preferably ASAP after the assault not decades later.
LikeLike
You obviously don’t know much about child sex abuse. Kids who have been
sexually abused by adults are frightened, ashamed,don’t understand what has happened, and have to screw up a lot of courage to tell anyone let alone go to the police immediately after the event.
As to your other point people are free in a democratic society to come to a journalist with anything they want. As well as other cases of child sex abuse, people have come to me with info on local govt corruption, murder and fraud, tax avoidance, discrimination, hospital deaths. Journalists do have a role to scrutinise independently anything they wish to take up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David its HOLLIE Grieg she cant even get that right and Lizzie is a fantasist . Perhaps she can say when we have crossed swords, all I have done has pointed out her lies and the fact that she thinks Jonathan King and Rolf Harris, two convicted paedophiles are innocent. I am surprised you tolerated her nonsense
LikeLike
Pingback: DAVID HENCKE SCHOOLS THE FOOLS | HOLLIE GREIG JUSTICE
You state in your article above the following. “One lesson is that people who say they were sexually abused will in future have to face more scrutiny by both the police and journalists investigating their claims.”
I have to agree with a previous reply, such investigations should not be conducted by journalists at all. You are a journalist, you report stories, you do not have the resources the training or the appropriate mindset to investigate such crimes. Your job is to report on these crimes. Report, not investigate!!!!
Having lived in children’s homes my entire childhood and experiencing abuse first hand, I would urge anyone wishing to come forward about abuse, even historic abuse, go to the police, not a journalist. Please stick to reporting the stories, not investigating them.
LikeLike
I am afraid I don’t agree with you. What are we supposed to do if we are – and this has happened to me a large number of times – approached by someone who says they have been abused and asks us to investigate. tell them to pay for a lawyer or go to the police? Or over hospital deaths, the failure of the state pension scheme for people who have lost out, local government corruption, political corruption, dodgy business deals, tax avoidance. All these things I have investigated as well as reported. Passive reporting is one part of my trade, another is writing a story that is intelligible to ordinary people, a further is actually investigating something using all the skills I have learnt over 40 years. I am afraid not going to change my ways nowr would the people who approach me on a daily basis expect me to do so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
at which point pigyobs beat you up, rape you and lock you up in mental prisons to be chemically labotomised and tortured with electroshocks to the brain in a lot of cases. I’ve been kept a virtual prisoner by pedophiles as their slave for last 13 1/2 years…and this was AFTER the worse of it.
What you say amounts to that journalists should only report what they’re told as FACT, at which point they’re not journalists at all. Shame on you and your mindset.
LikeLike