For The Attention Of Alison Saunders

Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions

Alison Saunders, Director of Public Prosecutions.

Dear Ms. Saunders

I am forwarding you an email I sent to the Right Reverend Bishop Paul Butler following his appearance on this week’s BBC Panorama programme alongside your predecessor, Keir Starmer.

The changes which have taken place in policy, procedure and attitude to child sexual abuse allegations under Mr.Starmer’s leadership are most welcome indeed and if carried out throughout our judicial system over the next few years will justify Mr.Starmer’s claim that ” the Final Guidance document on the prosecution of cases invoving child sexual abuse in England and Wales represented the biggest shift in attitude across the criminal justice system  for a generation “.

The statement by the Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS Wales, Ed Beltrami  – ” We are now very clear that the focus must be on the overrall credibility of an allegation, rather than the perceived  weakness  of the person making it ”  –  truly does represent a watershed moment and will provide long overdue encouragement for more victims to come forward.

I would be extremely grateful if you would personally agree to oversee that the alleged ” evidence ” of the Right Reverend Dominic Walker, recently retired Bishop of Monmouth, does now get in to the hands of the relevant Police team particularly as it is suggested that an MP was involved.

Mr.Starmer stated in the Panorama programme that professionals such as teachers and health workers who stay silent in child abuse claims ” should be prosecuted ” and ” go to jail “.

Unfortunately he failed to include politicians who stayed silent in the cases of Peter Morrison, Cyril Smith and many more and one wonders whether such guidance will be applied to all people in our society or just a scapegoated few in certain professions. What guarantee will you give under your leadership that the Establishment will no longer protect the Establishment in cases of child sexual abuse hiding under the phrase ” not in the public interest ” which the public well know means ” not in the Establishment’s interest “.

Past decisions by the Attorney General and DPP particularly in the cases of the late High Commisioner to Canada, Sir Peter Hayman, and Sir Cyril Smith that prosecutions were ” not in the public interest ” were absolutely disgraceful when it was known that both men were career paedophiles. Sir Peter Morrison went on to be promoted by his political party despite it being well known amongst the leadership that in Edwina Currie’s words he was a pederast. Should Edwina Currie be prosecuted alongside all other politicians who covered up these heinous crimes ( are you aware of Michael Cockerell’s 1995 BBC Documentary ” Westminster’s Secret Service ” in which he revealed the truth about the Whip’s Dirt Books which contained details of the MP’s who had been involved in paedophile activity and how they were protected ) and also should all the members of the security services who played their part in these high level cover ups now be brought to justice in line with Keir Starmer’s thinking ?

The suspicion by the public, and particularly the  victims of abuse by powerful individuals, will remain that there will always be a law for one and a law for the other regardless of bold policy statements unless these are translated in to visible,transparent action right across the board regardless of that person’s status in society.

Yours respectfully

[Gojam Edit:From a man Tom Watson MP described as a “noble retired child protection officer”]


Filed under Abuse, Fairbank, Fernbridge, News

10 responses to “For The Attention Of Alison Saunders

  1. Pingback: For The Attention Of Alison Saunders | justiceforkevinandjenveybaylis

  2. Reblogged this on cathyfox and commented:
    cathyfox still cannot blog due to the local library filtering out the dashboard and all functioning of the blog, as well as pictures on and pictures especially vital on Discussions are slow but ongoing about the nature and the reasons for this unwarranted censorship. At least I can reblog until I can blog some important reports including one very prominent one.

  3. EM

    Could this apply to someone who knows they are falsely accused of child abuse but doesn’t respond for nearly 20 years – after which the real abuser is long gone?

  4. green

    [From a man Tom Watson MP described as a “noble retired child protection officer”]
    Hmm, who could that be…. If it’s Mr X again, surely all roads don’t lead back to him. Too good to be true, all eggs in one basket, etc.

  5. chess

    I will be very interested in her reply, thanks fo posting this.

  6. After reading this article, I am still clapping. Absolutely ‘hits the nail on the head’. ‘Powers that be’ now know that it is all ‘Out in the open’ and the Great British Public aren’t going to stand for these ‘cover ups’ any more. Every person that has been involved in ‘cover ups’ for these VIP monsters, should be THOROUGHLY ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES and they are morally accountable for any new victims from these monsters being protected. I would put ‘YOU ARE A COWARD’ on their graves.

    • chess

      I agree with Starmer and would want it to apply to anyone who turns a blind eye or colludes or ignores or covers up child sexual abuse….that might put me in the same ‘madness’ bracket that Luke Gittos refers to in his article. I suspect there are hundreds of thousands that feel the same way as I do. We’re all ‘mad’ then, mad as hell more like. And determined to bring about change so that monsters and their protectors will eventually be brought to account.