Operation Enamel Seized Videos And Cine Film



I’ll update you if I get more information on this.

The CPS spent nine months reviewing evidence relating to alleged abuse between 1969 and 1988.

Furious Leicestershire Police chiefs yesterday revealed they had handed the CPS “credible evidence”, including videos and cine film.

Assistant Chief Constable Roger Bannister said the CPS’s decision was “the wrong one” and campaigners called it a “step backwards for justice”.

The Sun



Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

27 responses to “Operation Enamel Seized Videos And Cine Film

  1. Pingback: Operation Enamel Seized Videos And Cine Film | Alternative News Network

  2. Last of the Truffle Snorting Heroes

    Well done for keeping this going Gojam. It’s an outrage and one good point to come out of this (minor in a relative perspective obviously) is that people who I’ve not heard to be interested in the CSA debate so far have picked up on this story with dismay at the injustice & total insensitivity to those abused.

    The role of the head of the CPS in this needs greater scrutiny. She needs to resign immediately.

  3. Lets hope it’s a video tape marked “LB”.

    • Yes, that would be fantastic! That would bury all the nonsensical speculations and lies about Tricker’s seized videotapes, forever. If Tricker’s “LB” tape ever does surface, there won’t be a former cabinet minister depicted on it, because Solanki is a liar. Here’s how I know that Solanki is a liar;
      “Solanki has told friends that the former Conservative cabinet minister seen on the video. The retired Customs officer identified the former cabinet minister, but is so scared about the sensitive nature of the video that he refuses to say what the ex-minister is doing exactly”.
      “I cannot tell you more than that, because I am bound by my official secrets…”

      If Solanki was sincere about honoring the Official Secrets Act or any other workplace information privacy regulations he may have pledged himself to, he would never have gossiped to his friends about a former Conservative cabinet minister appearing on a seized video, in the first place. If Solanki was “so scared about the sensitive nature of the video”, he would never have gossiped to his friends about a former Conservative cabinet minister appearing on a seized video, in the first place. He’s lying about feeling bound by his pledges and he’s lying about being “scared to talk”. He’s obviously not too scared, to engage in self-aggrandizing, slanderous rumor-mongering and gossip about famous persons. If he’s lying about these things, then he is a liar and his whole story is an uncorroborated fantasy.

      Here are the possibilities;
      A former cabinet minister COULD have made a private child sex abuse images video of himself, for his own amusement. If it was PRIVATE, meaning he was the only person involved in making it and carefully hid the only copy somewhere, then neither you nor I nor Tricker nor anyone else would ever know that such a thing existed. Clearly, that cannot be the case since we allegedly ‘know’ about one.

      “A former cabinet minister COULD have had a personal child sex abuse images video of himself made, by another videographer. He could have had a colaborator who did the filming and any processing that might be necessary, (with videotape, nothing really). But if it was a personal video intended for him only, how/why would Tricker be receiving it? Wouldn’t THE ONLY COPY have been sent directly to the former cabinet minister?

      If it wasn’t a personal video, if it was intended for sharing with friends, or if multiple copies were sent by multiple routes to ensure delivery, (one route being Tricker as a Mule), then there could be many copies of this video floating around. In fact, there would be no reason why there shouldn’t be hundreds or even thousands of digital copies of it by now. But if that were the case, at least ONE copy would have surfaced through seizure of massive digital collections, and the NCMEC would surely have it.

      Therefore, such a video has never existed. Not because former cabinet ministers can’t be perverts, but because the story of its creation and discovery don’t make sense.

  4. Gary

    It’s disappointing that only yourself, as a blogger, covers the story in depth. This is of major importance to Britain both socially and politically.

    Despite four separate doctors having agreed on the state of his health I still feel its too convenient. My head tells me its right but my heart won’t agree. At the start of the investigation he was still working and I know that this defence was used successfully before eg The Guineas Trial, where doubts were expressed over its veracity.

    Again, though, another high profile politician has escaped justice. The decision means no one, even for new allegations, can pursue him through the criminal courts. I can only hope that if their appeals/reviews are unsuccessful they can at least successfully sue in a civil case. Hopefully this would be some semblance of justice.

  5. BarrieJ

    Is it correct that the police searched Janner’s London home in December 2013, but were unable/denied the opportunity to interview him on medical grounds, yet as late as October 2014, he was still using an office in the House of Lords and claiming his attendance allowance?
    This failure to prosecute him isn’t a historic one, it follows exactly the same profile as all the other alleged ‘failures’.
    This is an establishment cover up going on in real time before our very eyes.
    There needs to be an investigation and it needs to cover the arrest, trial and death of Frank Beck. Sadly, who would we trust to carry it out?

    This goes deeper than any Lewis Carroll rabbit hole.
    Truly, we are governed by criminals and voting for them simply perpetuates their hold over us.

  6. Becky

    I don’t mean to come across as prejudiced, but why do so many paedophiles seem to be white British males? Groups like Ukip are keen to scaremonger about foreigners, immigrants and people of other races yet wouldn’t families with children instead prefer not to live next door to the one group of people most likely to be paedophiles: i.e. the white British male?

    • Sabre

      You come across as exceptionally stupid. Given that the majority of the population of this country is still White British, the earnest efforts of our beloved liblabcon leaders notwithstanding, it stands to reason that assuming that all races and religions are mostly decent with a notable corrupt minority within each, the White British contingent being the largest would have the most paedophiles. Does it not?

      You have pushed at this door Becky, do you really want to explore the Relative and Comparative rates of offending by race, class,religion and sexual orientation?

      Tread warily lest you accidentally end up arguing against your own case !

      • Becky

        It’s a pity that you had to begin your post with an ad Hominem attack, just because my genuinely unprejudiced observation offended your evidently immovable mind-set of politically correct sensibilities. I was just being honest in admitting to what I saw (what we all see) in the news everyday; even if you take colour or race out of it – the majority of paedophiles are seeing are male. You say that most of them are also white purely because white people in the UK and USA are in the majority yet do you have any scientific evidence to back this up – e.g. that the equivalent rates of paedophilia amongst the white population and the black population are of equal percentage within each community? I’m just being honest when I admit that I don’t see, in particular, many males of afro-Caribbean heritage arrested and convicted as paedophiles in the newspapers. Could it be that white males have more a genetic pre-disposition towards paedophilia than black males? Or do white males have more of a psychological sense of inadequacy about their masculinity than black males?

      • Sabre


        One in four Admitted at Least one rape of a man woman or child !!!
        Genetic predisposition, the psychology of male inadequacy, what say you Becky?

        You did insist on opening this door !

      • Sabre


        ‘Playing with boys’ seems to be a folksy tradition in parts of Asia.

        Genetic predisposition ? Crisis of masculinity? Cultural norm? What say you Becky?

      • Becky

        Fair enough Sabre – you are a lot better informed than me on the subject. I do wonder though whether paedophilia is more prevalent in certain countries and cultures like Afghanistan and Britain for instance – than in others. I think I recall certain 18th century historical accounts by French visitors to Britain of the prevalence of paedophilia being of particular shock and surprise to them. Similarly, in English-Speaking north America in the mid-19th century, wasn’t there one very famous Confederate general who married a 13 year old girl? Then again, it was sadly the ‘norm’ to exploit kids in those days – it was still legal to send children to work down mines and up chimneys in this country until the relatively recent date of 1844 when the Factory Act was passed which forbade it – at least officially. It’s not too difficult to see how that mind-set of there being no such thing as a childhood for certain classes of people could morph into something that made more powerful adults assume they were ‘fair game’ for sexual exploitation too.

      • Sabre


        Ultra Orthodox Jews seem to have some questionable customs too.
        The Rabbi or Mohel uses his mouth to draw the blood of the infant boy post circumcision !!!

  7. Becky

    Tbh…I don’t see why a person with dementia cannot be questioned. Although dementia sufferers are confused, part of the condition means that they lose the ability to lie. In fact, they often become as totally honest as a new born babe.

    A bit of a long shot – but then again isn’t anything possible? This may not be so much about Lord Janner as other, more high profile names that he might mention when questioned. Has anyone ever wondered that the cause of Lord Janner’s decline in health might not be dementia, but because he was poisoned by other, more powerful people so that he is now mentally unable to give evidence on what he knows? There are claims that Vladimir Putin used a similar tactic when he was accused of being a paedophile by the guy they poisoned with polonium in London.

    • Sabre

      I don’t know what you’re on Becky but it seems to be powerful shit!

      • Becky

        However remote, it’s just one possibility Sabre. How can you be absolutely sure this is not the case when you can’t disprove otherwise?

  8. penguinface

    Isn’t being in possession of child pornography a pretty cut-and-dry crime?
    Well, assuming it was Mr Janner’s gaffe they were seized from anyway.

    In a simple case like that, the CPS’ “fitness to plead” argument would surely fall apart… As with any of the allegations against him, it’s fair to assume that his plea would be “not guilty” (if it wasn’t, there’d be no need for a trial obviously) but regarding contraband found in his possession, there’s surely no possible element of doubt.

    As an aside, it would certainly be interesting to know Alison Saunders’ views on dementia sufferers who are victims of care home abuse being allowed to press charges and testify…
    Does she think that’s not in the “public interest” too?
    Would she prefer that not be allowed?

    It certainly seems to set the stage for unscrupulous defence lawyers to argue that a victim and/or witness with dementia should not be heard in court.

    • Hence the necessity of getting clarification for the phrase “videos and cine film” in the context of “credible evidence” in this case. I can understand why, given the allegations that these videos and cine films are supposed to be credible evidence in support of, people would assume they are child sexual abuse images. That might not be the case. They could be non-sexual home video which depict Janner in the company of complainants, or which demonstrate that Janner was in a particular place on a particular date, or depict Janner associating with a co-accused person or convicted child abuser, or depict Janner in a specific residence, commercial building or institution where he was alleged to have met victims or performed criminal acts.

    • Sabre

      You don’t need to be fit to plead, the judge would direct that a not guilty plea be entered. On conviction it would be unjust of the judge to hold the failure of an early guilty plea against the convict when determining sentence.

      • Last of the Truffle Snorting Heroes

        Quite – either way, I’d prefer this case to be settled in a publicly transparent way in court rather than on the highly questionable whim of the DPP.

  9. Follower

    I seem to remember a crown court case involving sexual abuse of girls to go ahead ‘inabsenti’, I think the term is, even when the accused was suffering from advanced dementia. Am I correct about this please ? and if so surely that is precedence for trying Janner in the same way. ?

  10. Sabre

    A potential Applicant for Judicial Review would need to pass the ‘sufficient interest’ test. http://www.1cor.com/1158/?form_1155.replyids=145

  11. Sabre

    The “sufficient interest” test which informs judicial review proceedings is a relatively low hurdle for potential Claimants to overcome.

  12. “Operation Enamel Seized Videos And Cine Film”

    What was in those films and videos? We don’t know and the police and DPP aren’t saying. Jeremy Wright, the Attorney General has remained silent on the DPP’s decision and only he has the right to overturn the DPP.

    However if we’re talking of snuff videos, then it is irrefutably in the public interest to have, at the very least, a ‘Trial of the facts.’

    The rumours are gathering ground and frankly to say that trying Janner is not in the public interest, when presumably others were also caught on the same cine films and videos, is remarkably contemptuous of the public.

    I fear that the DPP, police, Conservative and Labour parties are trying desperately hard to kick this into the long grass once more because – ‘they’re all in it together.’

    This is an issue which should be an absolute red line in any election and no MP who voted against John Mann’s Private Members Bill (to suspend D notice signatures on the issue of child abuse) should be re-elected. Nor should those who abstained or failed to vote.

    Google Exaro News website to find the names who voted for and against this Bill.:

    Exaro news John Manns Bill voting list

    And bear in mind neither Keith Vaz nor Patricia Hewitt voted at all.