BBC Radio 4: ‘David’s story’ Part 3

Becky Milligan investigates allegations of historical child abuse by prominent figures and hears David’s story

This is the third and final part of David’s Story from Radio 4’s World at One.

Explanation for burning diary here-



Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

23 responses to “BBC Radio 4: ‘David’s story’ Part 3

  1. Sabre

    Not really sure why the BBC featured this particular case.
    They nodded in the direction of objectivity, stressing allegations and the difficulty of acquiring proof at this remove while giving a sympathetic hearing to the victim and from what they said an attempt at ‘standing the story up’.

    The allegation is one of rape followed by blackmail to facilitate further rape, the law at the time deemed a 20 year old below the age of consent, however, liberal attitudes have probably relegated that to a technicality now.

    The two children aged 8 and 10 seem to be the most shocking aspect, however, untraceable unprovable etc etc

  2. Sabre

    Institutional schizophrenia, every institution is on the one hand positioning itself in the vanguard of the quest for truth and justice while maintaining a vigilant rearguard to secure it’s culpability.

  3. Anybody else find Becky’s line of questioning and ignorance of VIP abuse rings obnoxious?

    • Sabre

      I wasn’t sure what to make of it. She seemed to be walking down the middle of the road with a high vis jacket on and flashing hazard lights attached to her shoulders, perhaps that is the way it should always be done?
      Being cynical, I took the view that they want to be seen to be sitting at God’s feet while keeping a wary eye out for old Nick turning up and grassing on them.

  4. Sabre

    In retrospect I’m happy for the pun to stand!

  5. Anonymous upon request

    On balance, I think that Becky Milligan did a good job getting this through the BBC’s challenging broadcast criteria. She probably over-qualified the information, but she nonetheless managed to air something on the BBC which rarely gets coverage within that institution (sometimes for good reasons, sometimes not): the direct account of alleged victims.

    There are some good journalists within the BBC who are working hard to unearth genuine truths – Milligan, Batemen, Symonds etc.

    There are also some who would rather this all went away because – for a whole series of complex reasons – it is uncomfortable for the BBC.

    Milligan, and her editor, deserve credit for adding to the narrative in a way that is not likely to hinder. I thought that it was good, responsible journalism.

  6. Anonymous upon request

    And I’m pleased, GoJam, that you added the link relating to the burning incident.

  7. Sabre

    There was once a different BBC journalist called Milligan that died in bizarre and suspicious circumstances.

    • Last of the Truffle Snorting Heroes

      You have to admire a man who passes away with a wholesome piece of fruit in his mouth.

      • Last of the Truffle Snorting Heroes

        Why is it always an orange though? What’s wrong with a Granny Smith, a juicy pear or a ripe banana?

  8. dpack

    david’s story does seem to have a coherent narrative even though it seems important details are omitted,perhaps for good legal reasons.

    the other milligan’s untimely demise raises some very disturbing questions which might well deserve thread of their own as there seems to be a relevance of context ,if not necessarily of detail, between that and various matters under consideration.

  9. Two things –

    First, it was of great interest to me to hear that this man went on a quest to find historic images of his own youthful exploitation through pornography, and claims to have found some! This reinforces my belief that some high-profile persons caught accessing CSA images – at least, ONE very high profile person specifically – were likely searching for CSA images of themselves as children. The “need to know”, whether or not pictures of yourself being abused as a child or youth are circulating on the internet, could become a serious obsession for people who have not already made peace with this possibility. In the case of P.T., information that he has disclosed about his childhood combined with an informed understanding of historic exploitation of working class children in particular, immediately brough that possibility to mind for me when I read about his being caught using a credit card to access CSA images sites. Especially if the person isn’t found to have downloaded & collected such images, but seems only to have been scanning-scanning-scanning…(not me -next, not me – next, not me – next – ?). That’s NO EXCUSE, however, for seeking out and viewing CSA images. In fact, if you were exploited for child porn yourself you ought to have a heightened understanding that every image you scan through involves your re-victimizing of whomever is depicted in it! If you have such concerns, work with a policing agency or NCMEC. Give them pictures of yourself around the age of your abuse, a description of the gender & ages of anyone else likely to be depicted in the same materials with you, the setting, (school locker room, outdoors, a bedroom, etc), and the names of any perps who were involved that subsequently were convicted of such crimes.

  10. Second –
    There’s a subconscious narcissism in David’s narrative, and in similar narratives, that begs for an explanation. I’m not saying that his, or other historic abuse claimant’s stories, are deliberately self-aggrandizing. I’m choosing my words carefully here, not meaning to offend anyone.

    This is much more apparent in “Nick’s” narratives. He claims to have witnessed 3 child murders during his own childhood. That would make him a spectacular statistical anomaly, by itself. Even serial child killers like Leslie Bailey or Sidney Cooke may not have witnessed that many child murders, as adults! Despite being witness to so many horrific crimes, “Nick” was permitted to go on living himself, to eventually report his experiences to authorities. This implies that, as a child, “Nick” must have been of great importance to his abusers. If he really was just another piece of rape meat to them, why wouldn’t they have disposed of him (and, his knowledge of their crimes) – ? This scenario would be more understandable if “Nick” had been the special little catamite of one of these alleged abusers. If Leon Brittan had really been a child abuser, and “Nick” was his personal little “boyfriend” over the 10 years of his alleged abuse, then he might be “untouchable” to any others who wanted to dispose of him. But, “Nick’s” narrative is devoid of personal relationships between the child victims and their abusers. So, there has to be some other explanation for his apparent “special” status. What is it?

    There is a similar, though less spectacular, “specialness” implication in David’s narrative. Why did his abusers go to the trouble of raping him and taking pictures of the rape for the purpose of blackmailing his continued involvement with them? I haven’t seen pictures of him, but was he so spectacularly beautiful that they just “had to have him”? Because, there was certainly no shortage of beautiful young men & boys at that time, available to any pervert who wished to exploit them, for far less trouble. Not just male prostitutes – although, because of the baby boom and the prevalence of youth drug addiction (especially heroin) at that time, places like Piccadilly Circus were literally crowded with those. Many other young men & boys who were not “professionals” were also easily seduceable into occaisional sexual encounters or even occaisional porn-model jobs – lower income gay youths in particular. Not to mention teens & young many actively SEEKING to become the catamite of some wealthy old pervert or perhaps a CAREER as a porn actor. Why, with so many other options available to them, were his abusers that obsessed with using & abusing HIM in particular?

  11. A clarification about my previous comment in this thread (begins “Second-“)
    That comment is not intended to be a solicitation, by me, for either “Nick” or David to publicly explain anything at all about their narratives. Nor is that comment intended to ‘debunk’ anything about their narratives. Please do not read it that way.
    I was not expecting, nor am I asking for, answers to these questions:
    […there has to be some other explanation for “Nick’s” apparent “special” status. What is it?] and [Why, with so many other options available to them, were David’s abusers that obsessed with using & abusing HIM in particular?]

    The point of that comment was to illustrate a potentially problematic element, that might appear in any person’s abuse victimization narrative. My intention is to make people aware that such narratives can develop an unintended narcississtic perspective.We all have our own story, and because it is OUR story it is natural to place ourselves at the center of the events we are describing. Sometimes this may lead us to unconsciously exaggerate our personal involvement in, our knowledge of, or our being an eyewitness to, some BIGGER PICTURE of seemingly related events that we perceive our own experiences to have been a piece of.

    Just for an illustration – a person who suffered child sexual abuse during a time when an organized pedophile ring was known to have been operating in their community, might include in their personal narrative statements which implicate their own abuser to have been a key member of that pedophile ring – when in fact there is no documentation that their abuser was ever a member of that ring – and unintentionally exaggerate their personal knowledge of the ring by “writing themselves in” as an undocumented victim of that ring.
    Similarly, placing ourselves at the center of the events we are describing may lead us to unintentionally exaggerate our abuser’s obsession with and focus on us personally, when in reality we may only have been one of their dozens of victims and objectively of no greater importance to them than any of the other victimized persons.

    So, before “going public” with our own life history & abuse narrative, if we choose to do that, it might be a good idea to have someone else in our lives, (that we trust to hear our story), go through it with an eye for subconscious narcissistic elements.

  12. Sabre

    The only thing better than a wide range of differing viewpoints arguments and interpretations is an even wider range.
    You do seem to provide a counterbalance to some of the views opinions interpretations etc of some of the rest of us, myself included, present.
    I hope that you welcome the diversity as much as I do.
    We must, I hope you agree, feel free to challenge and argue with each other, bearing in mind of course that we are guests on Gojam’s blog.

    I can’t help but form the impression that you appear to minimise the account of ‘Nick’ insofar as we know it, to minimise the extent and or degree of the offending behaviour of for example Janner ‘loving relationship’ v Janner ‘violent rapist’. You appear to jump at the chance of downplaying some events. I fully realise that I could be accused of similar things in the opposite direction. Perhaps some of your arguments are made with the benefit of knowledge or enlightenment ?