Friday Night Song
It would be welcome if a British newspaper did a similiarly honest analysis of the same situation in the UK during the 1970s and 1980s.
But for now here is an excellent article in Germany’s Spiegel Online International.
Many thanks to RB !
In the 1980s, gay rights groups in Germany formed an alliance with pedophiles who advocated the legalization of sex with minors. It’s a dark period few care to talk about now.
In July 1981, the gay interest magazine “Rosa Flieder” published an interview with Olaf Stüben. Stüben was one of the most infamous paedophiles in Germany at the time. As a writer for the leftist newspaper Die Tageszeitung, he openly advocated for people to accept paedophilia as healthy and moral.
In the magazine interview, Stüben is asked why it should be acceptable for adults to have sex with children and youths. He talks of quickies with young boys, and declares it backwards to maintain the taboo around inappropriately touching children. “Childlike innocence is an invention of the bourgeoisie of early capitalism,” Stüben says.
The interview in “Rosa Flieder” was not a one-off lapse. On the contrary — in the 1970s and 80s, numerous gay-oriented magazines brazenly promoted sex with children, even running pictures of naked boys. The magazine “Don” presented five sympathetic reports on the experiences of paedophilic men. The headline read, “We’re not child rapists!”
In recent months, many in Germany have been discussing the extent to which thein the 1980s allowed itself to be manipulated by paedophiles. The party came under such that it hired political scientist Franz Walter to look into its own history relating to the issue.
Yet it’s now clear that thein Germany must also come to terms with this chapter of its history. Anyone who searches through archives can find ample evidence of the alliance between gay rights organizations and pedophile activists. If pedophiles got into trouble with the law, they could rely on legal advice from a group called “Gay Lawyers.” Many politicians in the Green Party also made sure that calls for legalizing sex with children had an audience.
A Beneficial Alliance
Nowadays it seems puzzling whywould get themselves mixed up with people whose sexual obsessions were downright . The tolerance for pedophiles was fueled by several different sources. For one, many gays at the time knew all too well what it was like to be discriminated against by the state. Consensual sex between adult men was officially a criminal act up until the end of the . Only in 1969 did lawmakers in West Germany dismantle the infamous “Paragraph 175” of the German Criminal Code. At the same time, the sexual revolution was breaking out, and many men finally had the courage to come out of the closet.
Thus many gays didn’t want to be the ones to judge others for their deviant sexual inclinations. In a climate of general tolerance, the movement lost its moral compass. The gay movement did not distance itself from men who acted on their desire for children; rather, it took them under its wing.
Then there was the remarkable idea that underage boys should not be denied the chance to have sexual experiences with grown men. Even today, the Association of Lesbians and Gays in Germany (LSVD) claims on its website that in the 1980s, the only men who spoke up were those who had enjoyed sex with adults in their youth.
For the paedophiles, the alliance with the gay movement was nothing but beneficial. They had a platform from which they could formulate objectives.
The gay movement helped pedophiles in entirely practical ways. In the pamphlet “Justly gay. Legal advice for gays,” there is a one-and-a-half page “argumentation aid.” It’s an instruction on how men who are charged with child sexual abuse can best escape punishment.
More at Spiegel Online
The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (Northern Ireland) has released a unredacted copy of the 1985 Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Childrens Homes and Hostels by WH Hughes, WJ Patterson and H Whalley  and on wordpress [1a] in response to a Freedom of Information Request  on the Whatdotheyknow website. 
This is also known as the Hughes Report or the Report into Kincora (although there were several). It also includes inquiries into 9 other homes and concentrates on male homosexual abuse. The Inquiry was into Kincora Boys hostel 1960-1980; Valetta Park Hostel, Newtownards; Bawnmore Boys Home; Williamson House; Palmerston Reception and Assessment Centre; Nazareth Lodge Childrens Home; De La Salle Boys Home, Rubane House Kircubbin; Barnardos Sharonmore project; and Manor House Home.
I will try and make it clear in future when I post reports which places are involved and if anyone has…
View original post 125 more words
Rolf Harris charged with 13 counts in total.
Nine counts of indecent assault , Six offences of indecent assault relating to a girl aged between 15 and 16 from 1980 to 1981 and three offences of indecent assault relating to a girl aged 14, in 1986.
Also, four counts of making indecent images of a child from March/July last year
The Crown Prosecution Service has today authorised police to charge Rolf Harris with nine counts of indecent assault, contrary to section 14 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 and four counts of making indecent images of a child contrary to section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978.
Alison Saunders, Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS London, said:
“We have carefully considered the evidence gathered by the Metropolitan Police Service as part of Operation Yewtree in relation to Rolf Harris, who was initially arrested on 29 November 2012 over allegations of sexual offences. A file of evidence was passed to the CPS on 12 August 2013.
“Having completed our review, we have concluded that there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest for Mr Harris to be charged with nine counts of indecent assault and four of making indecent images of a child. The alleged indecent assaults date from 1980 to 1986 and relate to two complainants aged 14 and 15 at the time of the alleged offending.”
The charges are:
• Six offences of indecent assault relating to a girl aged between 15 and 16 from 1980 to 1981.
• Three offences of indecent assault relating to a girl aged 14, in 1986.
“Mr Harris will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 23 September 2013.
“May I remind all concerned that Mr Harris has a right to a fair trial. It is very important that nothing is said, or reported, which could prejudice that trial. For these reasons, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.”
Following Gojam’s recent posts on “Judge-mental”, I was struck by a link Martin posted. There has been much discussion lately about paedophile judges and paedophile-friendly judges. This is in response to widespread concern about paedophiles being freed or given ludicrous light sentences for offences most of us would consider to be heinous crimes. When we dare protest at this, we are dismissed as “online nutters”. We are told how important it is for judges to be “independent”. They are in possession of all the facts and we should leave sentencing to them! Really?! What about accountability to the public? But paedophile-friendly judges are nothing new. They have been doing this for decades. It is not just the British public who have been expressing concern at the lenient treatment of these evil people.
The link Martin provided was to an article in the Sidney Morning Herald, dated July 1st 1983. Under the headline, “It’s British Justice, but is it just”?, we find the story of Judge David Tudor Price of the Old Bailey. Just a couple of months after presiding over the trial of Carol and Harry Kazir, Judge Price allowed a convicted paedophile to walk free. He had been convicted of 300 (yes 300!) sexual offences against a 7 year old boy! He had 3 previous convictions for sexual offences against children.
So it has always been! Judges on the whole do seem NOT to consider such offences as serious – look at Ovenden, et al!!
On behalf of all us “online nutters” I say this has got to change. The horror and disgust of the overwhelming majority of the British people MUST be heard.
Maybe that great defender of children, Mr Kieth Vaz MP, chair of the Commons Home Affairs Committee, who said it was everyone’s duty to speak out against the abuse of children – Yes! – would be better concentrating the minds of his committee towards its duty as the law makers. How about some recommendations for MANDATORY prison sentences for those convicted of CSA offences? That is the only way most of us will be convinced that the law does treat these offences as serious and paedophile-friendly judges will no longer be able to abuse their power.
This week at the Old Bailey, Judge David Tudor Price let a man who admitted 300 charges of sexual molestation against a boy of seven go free, saying the prisoner had agreed to have medical treatment. The man, a 34-year-old porter, had been convicted three times previously of sex offences against children, but had never received a sentence.
After the hearing, the boy’s father said: The judge must be cracked. It’s him who wants medical treatment. Or else the British system of justice is up the spout.
It takes all sorts to fill the House of Commons, and while many backbenchers love the business of being a constituency MP, plenty of others toil in the hope they’ll soon be marked out for greater things by the whips, and picked for ministerial office.It seems to me, though, that too many backbenchers overlook the power that they have. In fact, if they’re determined, they can potentially get things done just as easily as many of their ministerial colleagues.Meet Nicola Blackwood, the MP vowing to tighten sex offenders law.The first ever elected female MP in Oxfordshire is launching a campaign to make it easier for the police to keep tabs on child sex offenders, after figures show only five of the 65,000 registered offenders are banned each year on average from travelling abroad. Cathy Newman reports.Photo: Paul Grover
One backbencher who’s realised this is the Conservative MP Nicola Blackwood. She’s a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, and as I reported on Monday night’s Channel 4 News, she’s launching a campaign this week to tighten the law on sex offenders. And there’s every chance she may succeed.
The crux of her “Childhood Lost” campaign is to reform the current panoply of orders which ban offenders from travelling abroad or, in this country, having contact with children – for example at school gates or playgrounds. Police and lawyers have been arguing for years that the orders are too difficult to apply. There are nearly 65,000 registered sex offenders in the UK, yet just five a year on average are banned from travelling overseas.
Ms Blackwood told me she’s going to amend the anti-social behaviour bill to make it far easier for the police to keep tabs on offenders. At the moment, the courts can impose one of three orders only if an offender has been convicted of sex offences. The crucial change is that a new “child sexual abuse prevention order” – replacing the existing orders – could be issued if the defendant hasn’t been convicted of anything, providing there is evidence of the danger they pose to children.
The Childhood Lost petition can be found at childhoodlost.co.uk
Vulnerable girl, 14, made pregnant by violent criminal, 24, sues council for ‘failing to protect her’ after social services claimed they had no power to stop sex abuse
- Married father-of-two Arshid Hussain allegedly groomed dozens of girls with the full knowledge of the authorities
- ‘Jessica’ was just one of around a dozen girls who believed he was their boyfriend
- Police found the teenager hiding, half-naked under Hussain’s bed but arrested her and let him go
- With permission of the authorities he was allowed to collect her from foster care and even attend doctor appointments with her
- Today Deputy Leader of the Council Jahngier Akhtar, who is related to Hussain, resigned over allegations that he helped the coverup
‘Jessica’, a girl of 14, claims that she was sexually abused by a violent criminal but the authorities did not intervene
The girl, known only as ‘Jessica’ claims she was abused daily by a 24-year-old man after social services failed to accept that she was a victim grooming.
On one ocassion married father-of-two Arshid Hussain was even caught with the half naked schoolgirl under his bed but shocking documents released today reveal that police arrested her and let him go.
Now ‘Jessica’ is one four women suing Rotherham council over ‘systematic failures’ to protect them from ‘sexual abuse by predatory men when they were children’ according to their lawyers.
South Yorkshire solicitors Switalskis said they are working on behalf of the women who want to take legal action against the council because of the abuse they suffered.
Today in a stunning development Rotherham Council confirmed that Deputy Leader of council and vice chair of the police and crime panel Councillor Jahngier Akhtar has stepped down over allegations that he knew about the relationship.
The Times alleges that at the time Mr Akhtar, who is related to Hussain, not only knew about his relationship with a child but also that he set up a ‘deal under which a violent offender (Hussain) agreed to hand a missing child to police after being assured that he would not be detained’.
I am sorry, in my efforts to try and clarify some of this for people, I seem to have sown confusion. Please accept my apologies, my head is so full of this stuff that it is sometimes difficult to remember what was written down and what is still in my memory.
There are only 3 of the documents that I wanted to put some context and clarification to. All the documents are here. The rest are exactly as they are and I stand by what I wrote back then. These are the 3 documents and my reasons for comments:
Document 6. It was drawn to my attention that some people though it was a list of abusers. I only want to clarify absolutely that this is a list of VICTIMS that should never have been made public. They are victims!!
Document 103. This is a list of police officers who carried out the raid. It again was drawn to my attention that some people thought these names were involved in abuse at Grafton or EGH. They were NOT. See my previous post.
Documents 104/6. This is a list of names I scribbled down from the registers, whilst the person I was with was talking to Carol. This was the very first time we had acess to them. They were just names and include by the way, victims! As you can see from later docs we did go on to identify many of the abusers and also the aliases that were used, not just for the Guest House but also the use of the “facilities”.
I hope this clarifies the position. I sought only to protect victims and eliminate innocent people! I stand totally by everything else. It is ONLY that last list I wanted people to be cautious of, everything else is okay.
Once again I appologise for any confusion caused.
A compilation of press-cuttings on Elm Guest House and Richmond can be found here
In the interests of accuracy, and to protect the reputations of innocent people, I would like to set the record straight about certain things contained in the “Mary Moss” files placed online last year.
These were mostly handwritten notes made on a daily basis concerning NAYPIC’s investigation into complaints from young people in the care of Richmond of abuse at Grafton Close Children’s Home, and elsewhere, including the Elm Guest House in Barnes from 1977 to 1982.
Unfortunately, being just notes, they have no real context. I will try to provide that. Amongst the documents is a list of boys names. These are VICTIMS not abusers. These were the names of young people who had complained to us, were strictly confidential and should never have been made public. Due to the unfortunate circumstances around the police raid on Mary Moss’s home, these were released online.
Also included was a list compiled by me of all the people who had stayed at the guest house in 1981/82. I know some people feel differently, but in the interest of fairness I will point out again, this is a list of guests NOT abusers. There is no evidence to support that – it was a preliminary list I compiled but I had not yet verified the identity of any alleged abusers.
Also, you may be aware of the claims made by both sides as to the nature of the raid on the guest house in 1982. The Kazirs, their legal team and supporters have always maintained the raid was carried out by Special Branch under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1976. However, the authorities, including the police have always maintained that the raid was carried out by local police in response to complaints by neighbours, under vice legislation. The only hard evidence was a “notice to detained persons” Carol said was given to her by the police. This was backed up by her solicitor. I gave this notice to the Coroner at the Inquest into Carol’s death.
In trying to ascertain the truth, I carried out some extensive research for NAYPIC and managed to identify about 20 police officers who had taken part in the raid. My hope was to find a friendly one who would come for a quiet drink and I could ask him, or her, what they had been told about the reasons for the raid at the briefing. Unfortunately, Carol died and as you can imagine no-one was willing to talk to us.
So in the documents is a list of police officers who carried out the raid. There is no suggestion at all that any of these officers were involved in any way with anything that had gone on at EGH or Grafton. They were just ordinary, mostly decent coppers doing their job. I hope this is clear.
The only two senior MPS officers who are alleged to have been involved at Elm are named in the documents. These are Commander Richard Tresstrail then head of the royal protection unit and Paul Henry, a senior officer in Special Branch.
I hope this provides some context to the “Mary Moss” documents and clears up some of the misunderstandings around them. I do think it is important to make absolutely clear that many innocent people have been unwittingly caught up in this as well as guilty ones. I hope this clarifies things.
Friday Night Song
Gojam’s post reminded me, at the heart of all this, there are victims. We must not forget them. It is important, yes, to bring people to account for their actions, no matter how high up in society they may be, but we cannot forget what victims want.
All my experience has taught me that mostly they just want their voice to be heard. It is not how some like to present it, as some sort of chase after compensation!
They seek an acknowledgement that what happened to them did happen and it was wrong. I am really grateful that Exaro have now opened up their website to all. To all who seek the truth I would urge them to look there and read the VICTIMS’ stories for themselves. This is not about politics, power or money – its about justice!!!
I believe that it is on the 4th of September that John Stingemore and Tony McSweeney are due to be arraigned.
The press will be out in force but it will not be because they expect that there will be new revelations arising from this mundane judicial procedure.
It will because they expect victims to turn up. They will corner anyone in the public gallery.
If you are a witness then I would sincerely suggest that you do not yield to temptation to look your abuser in the eye, watch him standing in the dock.
You will have future opportunities and if you value your anonymity you’ll keep clear of that lions den.
Friendly advice from someone on your side.
Make no mistake, Dave Lee Travis is an odious man but regardless of how much of a dickhead he is, no man deserves to be tarred with ‘Yewtree’ brush who has not abused children.
There are others too, Jim Davidson may be an unfunny arsehole but the allegations levelled against him were never to do with children, nor were the allegations that his friend faced.
I’m not defending DLT, I know what kind of man he is, I know that he had no respect for women and it could be said that he abused his position. He was a typical 1970s man.
For a long time I’ve been worried that these people have been laid out on the media sacrificial alter, big names, cheap headlines and real child abusers, and I’m talking about the abuse of 9 and 10 year olds, are overlooked.
Let’s be clear, there have been no arrests in connection with the Elm Guest House, not one, and what happened there was far in excess of anything DLT and Jim Davidson were accused of.
The Stingemore, McSweeney charges and the Harry Kasir arrest are not connected to Elm Guest House.
There have been no arrests in connection to Elm Guest House, mark that fact and mark it well.
Each ‘number’ represents a person who has given evidence to the police regarding abuse at Elm Guest House.
Evidence, not tittle tattle.
Although only 17 are listed, my understanding is that the total number of people is around 25.
Names have been redacted but I think it may be time to give you an idea of the scale of the evidence that the police have in regards to Elm Guest House, just in case they forget how ‘evidence’ is defined in a dictionary.
1. Grafton Close
2. Grafton Close
3. In care Surrey CC, Rodney Road
4. In care Surrey CC, Rodney Road
5. Ward of court, Grafton Close
6. Grafton Close
7. Teddington Park
8. In care East Sussex CC
9. Grafton Close
10. Grafton Close
11. Grafton Close
12. In care of Richmond, 12 years old, foster home
13. Grafton Close
14. Details redacted
15. Details redacted
16. Details redacted
17. Grafton Close
US Army Private Bradley Manning, sentenced to 35 years for leaking classified documents on Wednesday, announced that he would like to live out the rest of his life as a woman. The whistleblower has asked to refer to him by the name Chelsea Manning.
“As I transition into this next phase of my life, I want everyone to know the real me. I am Chelsea Manning. I am a female. Given the way that I feel, and have felt since childhood, I want to begin hormone therapy as soon as possible. I hope that you will support me in this transition. I also request that, starting today, you refer to me by my new name and use the feminine pronoun (except in official mail to the confinement facility). I look forward to receiving letters from supporters and having the opportunity to write back,”
Now that Exaro News is a free website, I’d like to suggest that readers of The Needle listen to the recorded conversation between Exaro journalist Mark Conrad and former Director of Social Services for Richmond Council, Louis Minster.
Louis Minster denies that he is Louis Minster and the incredulous Mark Conrad, who had spoken to him on a previous occasion, sounds like he’s about to laugh out loud at the strange direction the conversation keeps taking.
Does this sound like a man with something to hide ?
You decide, you can listen to the Louis Minster tape HERE
Arrests number 5 and 6.
It looks like the Operation Pallial police are doing their job, maybe Fernbridge and Fairbank should take note ?
Also, don’t be surprised that a women has been arrested, there are a few ‘in the frame’ in regards to North Wales.
Anyone with any information on how the Macur review is going?
Officers attached to Operation Pallial, the investigation being run by the National Crime Agency, have arrested a man and a woman from one address in Seaford, East Sussex.
The offences are alleged to have taken place on a boy between 1975 and 1976 when he was aged between 11 and 12.
The 63-year-old man and 60-year-old woman have been taken to a police station in Sussex, where they will be interviewed by officers from Operation Pallial.
Operation Pallial is led by Keith Bristow, director general of the National Crime Agency, into recent allegations of historical abuse in the care system in North Wales.
Today’s arrests are the sixth and seventh in the inquiry, and one person has been charged.
John Allen, 72, is charged with 22 offences of indecent assault, nine offences of buggery and one of inciting gross indecency with a child.
The alleged offences span around 20 years, from 1968 to 1989, and involve 14 boys and one girl, aged between seven and 15 at the time.
Allen is due to appear at Caernarfon Crown Court on October 28.
Comedian Jim Davidson will face no further action over alleged sexual offences in the UK, the CPS has said.
The 59-year-old was first arrested in January by detectives from Operation Yewtree, which was set up after the Jimmy Savile scandal – although his arrest was not linked to the late DJ.
He was re-arrested in March after further allegations emerged.
His solicitor, Henri Brandman, said that the comedian was “pleased” with the news.
Mr Davidson had consistently denied the allegations against him.
The CPS said it had considered 10 allegations against Mr Davidson but said there was “insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction in relation to all complaints”.
A second man arrested at the same time as Mr Davidson, a 53-year-old from Hampshire, will also face no further action, the CPS said.