An open letter to Theresa May calling for Michael Mansfield QC to chair the Child Abuse Inquiry


Dear Theresa May

Re the proposed government inquiry into organised child abuse

As Butler-Sloss stated, the proposed government inquiry into organised child abuse needs to have the confidence of care and abuse survivors. It is for this reason that the view of many survivors and leading specialists in the area of child protection is that the most suitable candidate to chair the announced ‘Child Abuse Inquiry’ is Michael Mansfield QC.

The chair of this inquiry will need fearlessness, to be prepared to challenge the authorities and to ask and get answers to very difficult questions. This is a role that can only be undertaken by someone clearly seen as outside the establishment.

Mr Mansfield has shown with his work on the Stephen Lawrence inquiry and the current Hillsborough inquiry that he has the respect of survivors and professionals to undertake this inquiry.

In addition to the need to have the…

View original post 397 more words


Filed under Uncategorized

10 responses to “An open letter to Theresa May calling for Michael Mansfield QC to chair the Child Abuse Inquiry

  1. dpack

    im a bit lost re the mercs in 93 in south africa ,the only political violence stuff i seem to be able to find is an ill funded and less than half arsed botch job by the awb and some hired help,is that the event you refer to? could you point me to more info and the tutu inquiry report please ?
    there is a ref to EO in relation to the awb in 93 but as far as i am aware they were very afrocentric(even if a few personnel were ex uk forces)imho they would be unlikely to base an op from the uk ,i would not be surprised if sandline prepped an op in the uk but they do not get a mention in relation to mandela in 93 or have a reputation for needing( or receiving) uk gov facilities for training or logistics.
    mercs are supposed to be plausibly deniable especially if being used by a state (most jobs are business related with “turn a blind eye” covert approval from a state)so setting off like captain pugwash from your “sponsor nation” strikes me as odd .

  2. dpack

    re the possible training of uda/merc types in a british marine barracks .two post ww2 uk based examples i have come across are direct training assistance by 22 with emphasis on helicopter evasion and destruction to the mujahideen in scotland(not at a barracks)but mostly on a private estate and some of the far right being trained by ex and serving paras in the mid 1970’s (stirling might have been in the involved ,if he was involved it was probably gladio motivated)but chances are it was a personal thing by far right squadies and maybe gladio motivated (some arms did get “liberated” from stores etc) again it was not not based in a barracks although some members were in the TA .
    there is a body of evidence in various reports on collusion etc that indicate arms and intel have been provided by elements of the state but very little evidence about the provision of training and nowt about training in barracks.
    squadies are notoriously chatty so if something needs privacy(such as training domestic terrorists or mercs for international actions) a barracks is not a good venue.
    there are a few examples of useful terrorist assets being given sanctuary with serving personnel such as “steak knife”living in the uk with a senior fru officer who needed a “rest” as much as his asset did . training is usually done in places not owned by the mod or full of chatty bootnecks.
    there is some evidence and lots of gossip about irregular training abroad.
    the italians trained folk in a gladio b context in a barracks in sardinia but that is a badly kept secret,the brits seem more professional and either do it abroad or on a private estate

  3. dpack

    a complex set of statements is best assessed by separating them into parts and then by verifying each part separately before attempting to arrange the parts into patterns.
    a bit like several jigsaw puzzles mixed up in a sack with a few bits of lego and some biscuit crumbs added in .

  4. card2

    The email I sent privately for your information is a copy of questions to Michael Mansfield.

  5. card2

    I sent Michael Mansfield an email last week re Stephen Lawrence inquiry.

    The IPCC emailed me about 3 weeks ago asking for reasons why Kent Police were compromised to conduct Lawrence Inquiry for Jack Straw.

    Michael Mansfield has not replied. People should be aware that his involvement with Stephen Lawrence initial murder case officers was occurring at the time of the murder. They were police witnesses under his cross examination. The David Norris murder trial arising from Det sgt Leighton’s arrests of UDA hit men and drugs importers at their Margate base in 1992. Mansfield was a defence barrister at the ongoing murder trial while the Lawrence murder trial got under way.

    Leighton left Met and formed Mayfayre a private investigation company.

    in 1994 there was a South Africa Desmond Tutu commission of inquiry into a mercenary attack on Mandela regime in 1993.

    Was this attack launched from Thanet Kent ?

    This was just one question among many featuring in an August 1997 call for inquiry and report from Kent Police Authority. A time when Kent Police was conducting Lawrence inquiry.

    Kent Chief constable refused to make inquiries and report. Another area of questions was paramilitary collusion cases and history in Kent. Such as the arrests leading to David Norris murder trial 1993. What was the UDA and mercenary support network in the county ? Was it being protected as part of state collusion with loyalist paramilitaries ? Were the Norris murder case officers under a brief not to disclose any collusion related material ? Did such a brief affect decisions taken by those same Met Officers deployed to Lawrence murder inquiry ?

    Another question was the security history of Deal Royal Marines Barracks. Why was it left out of the Admiralty Board of Inquiry report to govt re the murder of 11 Royal Marines by terrorist bomb at the barracks 22.9.89.

    Was a paramilitary use of Deal Barracks connected with bodyguard work supplied to moonlighting Met detectives. Work for which Det sgt John Davidson was disciplined in 1995 while three of his colleagues chose to retire. Was the source of such bodyguard work employed by an associate of Clifford Norris. The late Charlie Kray ? Was another of that bodyguard fraternity working for Mayfayre ?

    In March 1999 Sir Ronnie Flanagan of RUC contacted Home Secretary to find out if he would compel the inquiries called for by Kent Police Authority.

    Straw elected to cover up. His refusal to compel inquiry seems to have triggered Kent Chief constable David Phillips abruptly leaving Rosemary Nelson murder inquiry which he was invigilating at the time.

    Interestingly British Irish Rights Watch (patron Michael Mansfield) decided not to mention their knowledge of Kent based paramilitary collusion, and unlawful missions to Ulster and Ireland by men guised as UDR, to the Rosemary Nelson tribunal.

    Michael Mansfield would not enjoy my confidence to conduct an inquiry.

    • Sabre

      I have no doubt that you would have more and better info than I re Norris, however, boxing and “related circles” in London had the impression that his father put himself on offer (being regarded as well overdue by the bill) in exchange for certain officers making evidence against his son “go away”.

    • Sabre

      Is there not a danger of interlinking so many conspiracies that the end result is permanent confusion and distraction?

    • Sabre

      Any suggestions out there re, Searchlight/SB/Security Service being aware of who was pulling Copeland’s strings?

    • Sabre

      Whoever was on the other end of Copeland’s strings played a blinder, they had the idiot set back what he saw as his own cause in favour of their own.
      Cui bono?

  6. godhelpus

    Maybe they will all be Exposed? when their DEAD that’s what happens still no JUSTICE, seems to be the Norm!!! they just have the upper hand because of who they are!!!., The VICTIMS must out number the PERV’S the public are aware now

    and asking question it’s not the Perv’s Secret anymore IS IT?????