Operation Brancaster And Charles Napier

Yesterday the Met announced that a 67 year old man from Dorset had been arrested and questioned over historical child abuse allegations under Operation Brancaster, a strand of Operation Fairbank.

Today Exaro News named the arrested man on Twitter as Charles Napier.


Now, we’ve got a bit of a legal minefield here and I’m trusting that Exaro have got this right because Charles Napier has already been charged under Operation Cayacos, another Op Fairbank strand, and although it is a legal grey area whether the media can comment following an arrest, it is absolutely black and white on whether to publish something that might be prejudicial after a person has been charged.

So, I’m not going to speculate as it could be considered in contempt of court.

However, what I will do is remind readers of the original question Tom Watson MP asked at PMQs on 24th October 2012 and hope that anyone leaving a comment has relatively good judgement and refrains from speculation themselves.



Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

17 responses to “Operation Brancaster And Charles Napier

  1. Pingback: Operation Brancaster And Charles Napier | Alternative News Network

  2. Sabre

    The standard comment is that an individual having been charged is entitled to the presumption of innocence. The prospect of a fair trial shouldn’t be compromised by prejudicial comments, a fair trial being in the public interest as well as serving the rights and interests of the accused.

  3. Anon

    Does that mean if an individual is arrested for “Treading on the Cracks in the Pavement” then it is Contempt of Court to subsequently report that they have been arrested for Murder?

    • No because ‘treading on cracks in the pavement’ is hardly likely to prejudice a murder trial.

      I’m just trying to explain why speculation about this particular arrest might have legal consequences. I think it is right that Exaro should name him but it might be tricky to try and explain why he might have been arrested.

      Which is a great way of closing down debate especially given that this might be the most interesting arrest from Fairbank to date.

  4. Bishop Brightly

    Remind me as its so confusing now. Fairbank is the original investigation around the papers of Righton?

    • Yes, The original TW question was about a former PIE exec who boasted of links to a former number 10 aide who could smuggle child abuse images into the UK..

      I hope that is relatively clear.

      • gw

        https://theneedleblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/untitled23.png?w=585&h=572 – this seems correct to me.

        As we know Fairbank was prompted by Watson’s PMQ, however the investigation into PIE et all is Op Cayacos. Likewise allegations about EGH were passed to Fairbank and then once passed the criminal threshold became Fernbridge. I think I’m correct in saying that nobody has been arrested as part of Fairbank – only under the specific operations.

        So at the moment it looks a bit like (formatting might not work) this:

        / | \
        Cayacos | Fernbridge

      • Not quite. Cayacos is not about PIE et al. As far as I know it concerns specific abuse in/around a place/time. Fernbridge charges are not to do with EGH but Grafton. Brancaster is separate from Cayacos. Fairbank is like the umbrella/initial investigation.

        That is my best guess.

      • gw

        Interesting, thanks. Surprised to hear that Cayacos isn’t PIE related – Napier being the treasurer and the Alston/Righton/house share/New Barns connection and all. All roads lead to Rome I suppose

  5. dpack

    if as mentioned yesterday thames house papers relating to some of these matters have been located and made available to a police investigation there should be a number of leads for the investigating officers to follow.
    it is more than plausible that some of those leads will intersect at the nodes of this (and the nodes of other)investigations.

  6. Andy Barnett

    I just wish they’d hurry up and tell us the truth about all this. How long has it been since TW’s question? Two years? I remember watching it live on the Daily Politics: the uncharacteristic hush in the HoCs; Cameron’s apparent knowledge of how complex the case was; Andrew Neil falling over himself to warn his punters to watch what they said. THEY ALL KNEW. It wasn’t news to any of them.

  7. gw

    John Mann has tweeted some interesting things…

  8. GMB

    MI6 source ‘ we will not allow it to come out’

    • dpack

      if that is accurate “it” exists (as suspected)
      “it” may be referring to records of who did what, where,when and to who.
      “it”may be referring to records that show who knew what about who and what actions they took etc.
      “it”may be referring to a pattern of blackmail and reward in some of the darker corners of realpolitic.
      “it”may cover a wider scope than westminster regarding a variety of matters .
      “it”might be all of those and more but if “it”exists and the resistance to “it” becoming known to the citizens demonstrates “it” is important therefore “it” should be subject to public and legal scrutiny.

      (Hamlet, 1.4)

      • Sabre

        Heaven won’t be directing it though !

        The Security Services, the cabinet office and the those of great import will.

        “It” will be redacted,obscured,contextualised and transmogrified.

        You may one day see “it” , if you do it will be a totally different “it”

  9. GMB

    Again has anybody spoken to the good man Christopher Spence at the London Lighthouse?