How The DPP Let Off Child Abusing Tory MP Victor Montagu In 1972


In this case from 1972 the then DPP, Sir Norman Skelhorn QC, decided that right wing Tory MP Victor Montagu who had admitted indecently assaulting a boy for two years was of “previous good character” and so he was let off.

He was nothing of the sort. He sexually abused his own son Robert Montagu between the ages of 7 and 11 years old and Robert knows of atleast 10 other young boys his father abused.

by Rex Coleman, for  Baron Studios, 5 x 4 inch film negative, 25 July 1962

A senior Conservative politician escaped prosecution for child abuse in the 1970s when he promised the authorities he would not see the victim again, according to files released by the National Archives.

Victor Montagu, a rightwing Tory MP and one-time political secretary to Stanley Baldwin, was let off with a caution by police and the director of public prosecutions in 1972 for indecently assaulting a boy for nearly two years.

The decision by the Dorset and Bournemouth police force and Sir Norman Skelhorn QC meant Montagu never stood trial and his paedophile activities were never exposed.

“The assaults, which are admitted, are not of themselves very serious, and if Mr Montagu is prepared to take the excellent advice given to him by Det Ch Insp [Jack] Newman and avoid any contact with the boy in the future I do not think that proceedings are called for,” a letter from prosecutors states.

Montagu was a leading figure in the establishment. He was an MP for South Dorset from 1941 to 1962 and became a member of the Monday Club, a rightwing political pressure group in the 60s. He inherited his father’s seat and became the 10th Earl of Sandwich in 1964, a title he renounced to stand for parliament again as an independent.

Montagu died in 1995 but the files on his case, which reveal that a prosecution against him for indecently assaulting a young boy was not pursued, have been kept secret for more than 40 years. They were released earlier this week after an application under the Freedom of Information Act.

The Guardian



Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

22 responses to “How The DPP Let Off Child Abusing Tory MP Victor Montagu In 1972

  1. David

    No surprises there, then !

  2. artmanjosephgrech

    The Chief Whip would have known as would the Party Chairman and Party Leader

  3. Pingback: How The DPP Let Off Child Abusing Tory MP Victor Montagu In 1972 | Alternative News Network

  4. Jack

    What a bunch of corrupt bastards.

  5. BarrieJ

    Are we really confident that these people are actually elected, and continue to be?
    Or is it that what we believe is democracy is simply an empty sham; a construct of the establishment and their lackeys in the security services, the police and the judiciary?
    Their contempt for us appears boundless.
    Their behaviour should disgust us.

    • Sabre

      Believe it or not we probably disgust them !
      Would you hold anyone in respect or esteem if they let you take the ultimate piss for decades on end?

      • BarrieJ

        You make a relevant point, I have in the past known two M.P.s, curiously very similar although from very different political backgrounds. What they shared, was a common contempt for their constituents, considering them stupid, troublesome and time wasting.
        Do you have any thoughts, short of pitchforks and firebrands on how we stop them from taking the piss?
        As far as I can see every instrument of state has been comprehensively corrupted, with ample evidence over the last fifty years to support that supposition.
        A miscellaneous cross section of that corruption can be read on the pages of this site and others like it.
        Who should we rely on to route out the piss takers?
        Other politicians?

      • Sabre

        Totally agree about the total corruption of the State.
        Answers, I wish that I had them.
        Some observations, for what they may be worth, the population or at least a much greater proportion of it must educate itself.

        We must seek to understand, nationally and globally, who the individuals and institutions are that benefit from the current arrangements, they of course must preserve the status quo for the benefits to continue.

        Question everything, then question the answers that you arrive at, constant questioning, care not when you are labelled ( denier, apologist, sympathiser, racist, commie, misogynist and of course anything ending in …phobic) the labels are calculated to bring you to heel.

        The truth is the truth why silence argument with DENIER ! Etc etc,
        Argument and evidence protects the truth it has no need of the assistance of lobbies,funded with dollars,bearing epithets.

        We are often sold policy x and policy y on the basis that they are beneficial to the economy they will throw in a line referring to per capita GDP, yet no one asks exactly what is the ‘economy’ how much of this precious commodity is owned by you or I, by our friends and families, by our communities. Why do the majority fail to take on board the fact that per capita GDP is the theoretical sharing of the national cake as opposed to the actual distribution.

        There isn’t a Nation on Earth ruled over by a ‘lone nutter’, next time the politicos and the press tell you about one that is remember that they are trying to start a war that our brothers and sons will kill and die in for the benefit of the sponsors of the war.

        You and I have one vote each, you may vote for tweedle dee while I may vote for tweedle dum, corporation x and corporation y have no votes at all and yet they each sponsor both tweedle dee and tweedle dum.
        Corporations x and y know the score, tweedle dee and tweedle dum know the score, until you and I wake up we deserve to have the piss taken out of us.

        Answers, I’ll try, wake every one up, encourage everyone to at least attempt to enlighten themselves in the ways of the world.

        Absolutely no funding of any individual or party standing for election to public office by any lobby or corporate entity, individual donations by individual voters and then within strict limits.

        Get rid of the pretence of constituency links to constituency MPs which preserves the big 2 constantly getting in and preventing change.

        Proportional representation by the greatest diversity of parties be they Jihadists even the Paedophile Liberation Party it is for the electorate, especially a well informed electorate, and the electorate alone to elect or banish parties.

        Parties, without the benefit of external funding, would be dependent on getting the maximal number from their list in office by their popular appeal alone.

        The Information Age in which we live should be utilised to the full, any potential candidate fearful of public debate with potential voters, unprotected by the filters and protection of MSM controlled extravaganzas would be destined to fail.

        When politicians really are protecting our interests and ours alone there will be no need to protect/blackmail them and their perverse and corrupt practices.

        There are of course many difficulties posed by the above should anyone else feel like jumping in please do.

      • Sabre

        Should we fail in our quest the pitchforks will do as a bloody last resort.

      • dpack

        Consuesse enim deos immortales, quo gravius homines ex commutatione rerum doleant, quos pro scelere eorum ulcisci velint, his secundiores interdum res et diuturniorem impunitatem concedere

        i wonder if the classicists are still squirming from the last appropriate reference to times gone by

      • Sabre

        That could be shortened to either ‘beware the ides of march’ or ‘jam tomorrow’ ;)

  6. l8in

    Reblogged this on L8in.

  7. Andy Barnett

    It’s one rule for them, one rule for the rest of us. How many more examples if this are going to come out, I wonder?

    The great irony is that these people truly think they are better than us ‘common folk’. In fact they are nothing but lying, cheating, child-abusing, law perverting, tax avoiding, evil little bastards who have the arrogance to think they have a God given right to rule over us.

  8. Buller Buller Buller! As the toffs sometimes chant

  9. There’s that characteristic delusional rationalization again:
    “The files show that Montagu had tried to downplay the possibility that he might be prosecuted for offences of indecent assault or indecency with children. He said: “That’s simply romping about with children either with clothes on or not doesn’t amount to that … there was no vice or criminality involved.” and
    “Montagu admitted almost everything. “I am not disputing anything the boy has told you. I know whatever he has said will be true … It all stems from romping.” He claimed there was no sex involved, because “at 66 I’m past sex”.
    [“…That’s simply romping about with children…there was no vice or criminality involved…It all stems from romping…there was no sex involved…”]

    This rationalization is so consistent among child sex abusers with similar patterns of behaviour, you could almost categorize them just as well on the basis of their delusions. That why I’m so confident that, based on the intial Janner victims witness statement, if you ever did get Janner to talk about it that’s what he would tell you: that they were just ‘fooling around’ [romping], “like boys do”, there was nothing sexual about it.

    But if you hooked them up to a plethesmograph and showed them slides of naked boys wrestling on a bed, the plethesmograph would demonstrate quite clearly that such activity IS sexual to them. Penile dilation tells no lies…

  10. Owen

    Monday Club, Monday Club, Monday Club …

  11. Another issue from this article. Sexual exploitation of the less powerful/ privileged/ advantaged, by the more powerful/ privileged/ advantaged, is an indisputable fact. This is not only true of UK society. I have no doubt that it happens in every society around the globe, and not just in modern times but throughout history from the days of the first villages, towns & cities. There may be less overt sexual slavery today than in ancient times, but it still happens i.e., ISIL, human trafficking rings.

    One of the most popular ideas about this exploitation, today, has been suspicion and rumor about secretive conspiracies of privileged pedophiles – (primarily, homosexually oriented pedophiles) – preying on the most vulnerable of UK children. This idea might date back to the Cleveland Street scandal, about which Wikipedia says: “The scandal fuelled the attitude that male homosexuality was an aristocratic vice that corrupted lower-class youths”. Perhaps we are seeing, and have recently seen, some evidence that such conspiracies of privileged predators really have been operating during our lifetimes.

    But, the idea of VIP pedophile rings is political dynamite of a magnitude far greater than pedophile rings run by members of various criminal undergrounds, or rings run by otherwise respectable professionals in various fields, could ever reach. There will inevitably be some persons among the chorus of concerned citizens, victim claimants, self-professed whistleblowers and victim advocates, hoping to fan the flames of public outrage about VIP pedophile ring allegations to advance a social-political agenda – an agenda of mindless hatred toward all members of various “social elites”, by the masses of “ordinary” citizens. You can almost hear them sharpening their guillotines behind the comments they post around the internet. I had a mental picture like that, the other day, reading about plans to mount anti-pedophile protests outside the residences of some perceived “elite” families – and there is clear evidence of such motivation among some of the Hampstead Hoax participants.

    So I hope that people won’t gloss over the reality exposed once again in this article about Montagu, that HIS OWN SON was one of his victims – from the ages of 7 to 11 years. No doubt, this son had a more privileged lifestyle upbring than many, and probably enjoys a more comfortable lifestyle today than many UK citizens. But all children are powerless and vulnerable in the hands of their parents, guardians or others with authority in their lives, even those born into “elite” families – and privileged pedophilic predators don’t victimize children from less fortunate families exclusively. In fact, there’s really no reason to believe that privileged predators don’t victimize children in their own social strata EQUALLY often. And that means, ANY member of an elite family could very well have been a sexually abused child themselves. Even an MP, or a MInister, or a Lord, or a corporate CEO, or an Archbishop or a General in the UK military. The very same persons that protestors are screaming death-threats against over their garden walls, could very well have been subjected to child sexual abuse every bit as horrific and traumatizing as that suffered by children raised in government care homes.

    “Well, if that is the case, they can ‘come out’ publicly like Victor Montagu’s son and join the movement”.

    But, no one has the right to make such a demand. An abuse victim’s right to privacy is paramount and absolute. If they choose not to disclose their abuse history to CSA campaigners or other members of “the public”, if they choose not to disclose it to their own families, if they choose never to disclose it to any other person at all – THAT IS THEIR RIGHT. They earned this right by the abuse that they suffered, and no one can justly criticize their silence, not even other victimized persons.

  12. Lord Janner

    Look, this poor chap is just like me. Entirely innocent of anything he might have done.

  13. dpack

    do we know who represented montagu in his police /dpp troubles and in any injunctions that might have been sought to prevent the matter becoming public.?

    the name i thought of was carman but i cant find any references to such arrangements.

    it seems likely he had legal representation at some stage of this.