The first effect of broadcasting Nick’s detailed allegations is that anybody wishing to make a false allegation has now been given not just rumours, which in truth have been flying around on the internet for years, but a detailed and apparently first-hand description of exactly how another witness says the abuse took place. This, of course, flies in the face of good policing practice in which the account of one witness is never given to other potential witnesses precisely because of the danger of contamination. It is true that neither Exaro nor the BBC has actually given the names of the alleged abusers but 5 minutes on the internet would supply a selection of Tory MPs and cabinet ministers about whom rumours have swirled. Most of those who were cabinet ministers in Mrs Thatcher’s first administration are now dead, so the tidbit that the Minister in question is still alive narrows the field to about 10 suspects.
In any case involving multiple complainants the defence always strives hard to show that the complainants may have colluded with each other, or at least that later complainants knew of the substance of an earlier complaint, while the prosecution tries to show that such collusion or awareness is unlikely. Well, Exaro and the BBC together have comprehensively ensured that any future complainant will be aware of the detail of Nick’s complaint and his evidence will for that reason be devalued. In a nutshell, if a future witness relates similar details to Nick’s he will be accused of having learnt them from the BBC and Exaro interviews. It is on such issues that cases turn.
Food for thought?
Filed under Abuse, Fairbank, Fernbridge, News
31 responses to “Food for thought?”
The general location, approx date, approx age of the alleged hit and run victim?
You are all being taken for a ride:
it is rather strange and could be intended to expose or to conceal depending on what is true .
either way it is quite a development that such things are getting msm attention
Vishal Mehrotra murder, links to EGH and Westminster, being reported in the Telegraph, covered on BBC news. I feel like I’ve moved to a parallel universe.
gojam seen this,just out
I was very sceptical about the murder story but this seems to raise further questions about the establishment and the police’s lack of investigation
It stinks, the Mehrotra and Allen families are most unlikely to lie, more ‘missing files’, Clegg claiming that it is ‘grotesque’ to suggest a cover up.
The behaviour of Clegg’s friends and colleagues is grotesque, the suggestion of a cover up probably accurate.
Clegg obviously realises that this particular fire has the capacity to burn exceeding hot and exceeding close to his own arse, bearing in mind some of his former close colleagues.
This article appears to say what all the “conspiracy theorists” have been saying.
The journalists know all these claims are out there, it’s not new news to them so either someone’s grown a huge set of balls or there’s some proof.
Sorry to put this here but I could not find a place for my question arising from a Customs Officer going on the record.
Who would stop HM Customs & Excise with proceeding with prosecutions?
Customs & Excise have, I believe, always had their own prosecutors.
Law & procedure seem to have been in a fairly constant state of flux.
The RCPO seem to have merged with the CPS now.
I quickly remind that these are allegations. Nothing more.
I would think Exaro took significant legal advice before publishing. They always do. I recall that the Jane case was put to a QC and a solicitor-advocate before publication.
Of course lawyers will contest content. It is what we lawyers do. It doesn’t make them correct.
From what I can see, neither Exaro or others have published such detail of any incident that the police could not easily rule out hoaxers or contamination.
Beyond the sensationalist language in the tabloids, the details of the deaths are bare, and avoid the exact descriptions the police would seek from corroborative witnesses: exact locations, people, physical descriptions, objects etc.
Only defence counsel would contest a “problem” here. But it is indeed “food for thought”.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Nick gave his videoed interviews to Exaro and the BBC after taking his evidence to the Police. So there’s every chance that these videos were made with the full support of the Police investigators. Wouldn’t you think therefore that the Police would have thought about the legal and other risks involved and given Exaro and the BBC appropriate advice?
I’m no expert in such matters but even I can see ways that contamination of evidence can be avoided. Changing minor points of detail, for example, so that were someone to concoct a story based in Nick’s ‘evidence’ they would be soon found out.
I don’t think it’s fair to say that people will copy these stories for money. Most people are honest. That’s why most people are not in jail. Even fraudsters would probably draw the line at making up a child abuse story for money. It might seem easy, as they’d know they’d be believed, but it wouldn’t be ethical. If victims have records for fraud, it’s most likely because of the abuse. Charities, therapists and lawyers wouldn’t support liars either. They have too much integrity.
It is food for thought, but it left a bad taste in my mouth largely for reasons that have been laid out in other replies here.
I cannot speak for victims or survivors, but when I try to imagine what would constitute meaningful justice for them it goes way beyond the prosecution of living abusers for crimes in the 1980’s. It would surely mean the full exposure of the network together with assurance that the power structures that can conceal such crime are dismantled- only this would stand a realistic chance of preventing abuse in the present or future.
I write as a citizen concerned about the true nature of power and democracy within this country, and to my mind this issue cannot be addressed by the institutions of ‘the establishment’ – and that most definitely includes the criminal justice system. Perhaps only the collective power offered by the web can resolve what is being revealed.
It will only take on arrest, the arrest we all know should happen, for others to come forward and the floodgates to open. His arrest would be a point of no return that will lead to revelations for a decade.
Will the police arrest Mr Gaunt?
i am a bit confused bishop ,would your mr gaunt be the mr gaunt who is referenced in the first article here?
the very important point made by sabre regarding “the truth is out there” but that it is hidden among misunderstandings, half truths and blatant lies .
this can be dealt with in several ways including :
asking who wins ?if a “truth”is believed either long term or when it is shown to be false.(ref the macalpine defense).
comparing the “truth”to other often seemingly unrelated data that can be “proved” and that is unlikely to have been prepared in advance to conceal or confirm the “truth”being examined .(ref lost in care /the news reports of the pickford fire )
asking does the “truth”make sense based on knowledge of other matters ?.(ref where do i start ?dickie’s last boat ride is a big un but there are many to choose from).
there are other ways to examine “truth”.
cross examination and a jury has some merit.
an open and widespread peer review is the scientific way of turning a hypothesis into a theory and subsequently testing that theory by adding new data and then deciding if it still hold true and is supported by further evidence or if it is incomplete or if it turns out to be totally wrong based of the new data.
cameron referred to “conspiracy theorists” when he should have said “conspiracy hypothesists” if he wished attempt to deflect from some of what is being suggested as fact .the wording of his attempt at a smug denial was a little inexact for a chap with an expensive education.
theory stands as true until disproved by further evidence and i suspect theory will remain strong and be confirmed by further data in several matters .
ps spotting what appears to be panic is often a good indication of a valuable target hit.
Mr Gaunt is the false name used by a very senior politician when signing in at elm guest house.
thank you bishop that clears up my confusion
Victims of abuse have been conditioned over the years by the failure of the police to act and by the blocking of police investigations by Special Branch (instructed by MI5, in turn instructed by the politicians) acting in the interests of “national security”. It is hardly surprising therefore that they are seeking to bring the truth to the public’s attention through the media as they have lost all confidence in prosecutors. While your analysis of the risks of “contamination” of evidence from a technical legal point of view seem accurate, you’ve missed the elephant in the room, if you don’t mind me saying so. What is emerging about child abuse in our country point clearly to a breakdown of the Rule of Law, a threat to our entire system of democracy, where some are above the law, and others not guilty of crimes, protect them to avoid embarrassment by association and the prospect of becoming unelectable. Evidence collected by the police against abusers operating at Haut de la Garenne, Bryn Estyn, Elm Guest House and a long list of others – has been blocked from getting to court by the people we entrust with ensuring that all are equal under the law. Those in positions of influence (like barristers, perhaps) should join the brave MPs and others speaking out about this.
Interesting article. Basically says let the Guards guard the Guards because otherwise everyone else will jump on the bandwagon and start making similar allegations and will not be believed.
I think the major problem is the McAlpine Gambit and one is left wondering who and what to believe and what not be believe and who is pulling the strings.
Which is the result desired by the Establishment, It is often argued when considering controversial matters that conspiracies don’t exist because keeping them secret would be impossible. If you can’t guarantee secrecy you deliberately pump out as much info as you can, credible and incredible, truths, half truths and lies, respected sources, unknown sources and cranks. Heat it up, stir vigorously and relish the bemused and befuddled frowns.
The truth about everything from 9/11, 7/7, Kennedy and everything else has probably been published somewhere at sometime. I defy anyone to spot the ‘correct version’
It could be that that is exactly the point. If they can’t stop us all knowing what happened they might at least prevent themselves getting locked up for it, and maybe slap a few libel threats and injunctions about the place for good measure.
I am curious. why did you post this? in doing so it suggests you think it has some valid points? really a nobody blog, that because of you now has more coverage than it ever had.
its major point. any further witnesses might be torn down by the defense? really. this has been going on for decades and involves corruption at the political, legal and enforcement level. Do you think the police are now dedicated to bringing this house of cards down? so best nick does not say too much, so as to undermine validity of potential other witnesses? You know because any day now the police are going to start arresting these people. really? best that will ever happen is they feed a few to the public that is it. the legal system is beyond corrupt. have you been paying attention to the crimes in the financial industry, to name just one area, to see that justice will never come from the courts. heck if they hide and cover up monetary crimes what do you think they will do to hide child abuse crimes?
i doubt you will post my comment, but if you do, I would like to know why you gave attention to a nobody blogger and his opinion, which has no reality on how this world works. These people have used the system,which they own, and hid behind it for decades. I applaud Nick and Exaro for doing this. because only a fool would think that the police and or the legal system will bring justice to something that they have covered up.
One last thing, before you posted this I noticed how you had no tweets all day after the exaro story broke. found it strange, and then when you did tweet again, this is what you tweeted.
Its not a “nobody blog” by any stretch. Arguably he is more of a “body” then the author of this one (I mean that with the greatest of respect!) Its food for thought. If you only read what you want to read your vision, understanding and ultimately your conclusions will be clouded.
The concern raised is justified and has hallmarks of the police leak about the future raid on the home of Cliff Richards. My understanding is that the CPS/DPP is unlikely to agree to a prosecution however good a witness is unless other witnesses can corroborate the specific charges ie this happened on such a day by a specific individual. It could be argued that the publicity is designed to bring forward other witnesses. However the police do have a long established interviewing approach to eliminate those jumping on a bandwagon.
in Sunderland after survivors came to see me in 1997 ( The Court Order settlement was made in 1993 prior to subsequent and different criminal proceedings) the NSPCC ” accidentally” via a secretary sent to one survivor all the evidence statements other survivors had made for handing to the police and unfortunately before the error was discovered, one survivor had arranged for all the other survivors ( it was said to me) for all the statements for handing to the police to receive a copy I was told this and offered a copy of the information. I refused and no alternative but to advise the authorities so that in subsequent criminal proceedings this information had to be made available to solicitor defendants. At one point 1999 Northumbria police if could make the statements I had made 1992 but by then I had pro bono lawyers and Counsel’s opinions so referred the police to them. In the event there was a number of reported factors which prevented a second trial going ahead in 2000 but it was reported in the media that one factor was evidence contamination..
My judgement all along was that the first step was for documentation to be collated and kept secure ( I advised the Education Sec in January after being advised about the work being undertaken that same month) while the police undertook their inquiries and with the political pressure building up for a Hillsborough style look at documentation at events which were not current police investigations. Any form of Panel; as Leveson found cannot hear from people who had been actually charged so Leveson one was thought up as a second means of interviewing key suspect not charged especially as the Culture Committee was not getting anywhere. The focus of Leveson was not criminal proceedings but a solution to make things better in general. Leveson 2 is still outstanding and can only take place when all the prosecutions of been completed.
However the Mainstream media and social media plus individual politicians used the failure of the Butler Sloss appointment to press for the involvement of survivors in this part of the work which was not a good idea in my judgement) but would be needed at the later stage eg Hillsborough inquest (2) which took time to set up and will go on for a year. I thought an inquiry involving survivors especially those where no criminal proceedings had been possible could take place after current police inquiries ending especially since no every police force is looking carefully at everyone and everything where VIP people were involved and other specific situations… although against new historical claims made for the first time will be difficult to pursue unless there is corroborative evidence or an alleged perpetrator admits and pleads guilty.
The rejection of Wolf and complainst against individuals or the panel, need for a stutory, for a Judge to lead, to include Kincoa, Jersey Scotland Security service issues have all got in the way of an attempted Leveson Type of inquiry, panel with legal help to come up with any measures not already underway which could help preventing what has happened over the past 40-50 years in Lo al authority services in particular happening again. the call for overarching without specifying what was to overarched further doomed anything being reported before the GE whereas now getting it off the ground before the GE in a meaningful way apart from endless consultations appears to becoming reality.
The Cathy Fox site interest in the Lucy Gates case which commenced before I became aware of Cathy Fox together with recent developments led me to formally intervening and providing a note of what I believe are contemporary issues of interest together with my record of media and where I have 100 plus pages of published mainstream media to enable Bexley of they wish to formally issue under F0I or Cathy Fox leaving to the authority and Cathy Fox to sort out the question of republishing the two reports
Good policing practice would have seen Saville, Smith, Hayman and others arrested, charged and prosecuted promptly.
Assuming that Saville and Smith were guilty justice was denied to the victims and some victims may have been spared victimisation.
IF either Saville and/or Smith were innocent, relevant reputations have been trashed victimising the friends and families concerned.
Sorry, what a load of old cobblers. People have spent nearly 40 years trying to bring this to people’s attention. The written press, the TV have done umpteen so called “investigations” which, could just have easily be said to prejudice a case before it reaches court and yet, when it comes to this suddenly, barristers are blogging about it?
We know there are trolls and false claimants and we now know some at least, were either threatened or sweetened to make the complaints in public in order to try and cast doubt about similar activities. Strange that, the moment someone who, I suspect, makes not only a very credible witness rather, will be able to speak openly and eruditely in court about it, comes forward there’s a barrister sniping from the sidelines.
There’s untold graphic accounts of what happened in the Nazi death camps did anyone think …”Ooooooo can;t talk about it write about, in case it prejudices the trials of Himmler and his ilk. False witnesses might come forward, oh deary deary me”.,..
For the first time, the establishment has someone at their gates who not only has a battering ram they have the troops to storm the city as well and they are running scared for once. I don’t really give a monkey’s about these people being taken to court I want them exposed in the open and all those who sought to cover for them and society will do the rest. I’m not talking about revenge I’m talking about every last privilege they believe they are entitled to being stripped from them.
I’m personally,, so happy that, there are old and probably befuddled abusers and their apologists currently, dreading the phone ringing, the door knocking tonight and from now on,cos they know sooner or later it will be the press after their blood. . I make no apologies for hoping that, that slightly queasy feeling, that sickness they feel, are those very same sensations they meted out without a second thought, to people who could not defend themselves.
It is food for thought, I ,as you know. counselled as to your articles ‘naming the living’. I at that time hoped and believed, naively, that we lived in a basically decent Country, the system has its faults, people screw things up, but, basically we live in a decent just society.
Unfortunately, the majority of the population are basically honest and decent, the Establishment most definitely isn’t and power, contrary to popular belief, rests not with the people but with the Establishment.
The article may be cited as being an obstacle to a future trial, it may have been calculated to be, I respectfully contend that there is little to be lost !
The article may bring others forward that add greater deeper corroborative evidence forward, sub judice doesn’t even apply as yet, given that there is no indictment let alone trial. We live in the information age, this isn’t going to be the first or last issue that is going to suffer ‘potential contamination’, the law is going to have to develop accordingly.
The Establishment has ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of prosecuting.
If the evidence doesn’t exist, there is no grounds for prosecution.
If it does exist, it will be ruled to be ‘Not in the Public Interest’ to prosecute.
its always a danger in cases involving famous people..
Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.