Do Any Of The New IPCC Allegations Relate To Sir Peter Morrison ?

October 1987: British minister of state Peter Morrison at the Conservative Party Conference. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

Disclaimer: This is just pure speculation.

Of all the new IPCC allegations that have been listed HERE the one that is the most intriguing for me is number 4.

4) Allegation that an MP was only charged with specimen charges for child sex offences and not more numerous or serious offences.

The key word is ‘charged’. An MP was charged with child sexual offences.  If an MP has been charged then there is no reason why the media couldn’t have reported it but I don’t know of a sitting MP that was reported to have been charged with a child sexual abuse offence. Perhaps I’m missing something obvious, in which case please inform me but I can’t think of one.

Even if the IPCC find that the allegation can not be proven, it is still remarkable that an MP can be arrested AND charged and there not be a peep about it in the media. Somebody must know something !

Anyway, this is just a guess but I wonder if allegation number 4 and perhaps allegation number 5 also;

5) Allegation that paperwork and evidence relating to child sex offences involving an MP disappeared and the MP was released without charge.

Might they relate to this reminiscence from Jonathan Aitken;

I knew Peter Morrison as well as anyone in the House. We had been school friends. He was the best man at my wedding in St Margaret’s, Westminster. We shared many private and political confidences. So I knew the immense pressures he was facing at the time when he was suddenly overwhelmed with the greatest new burden imaginable – running the Prime Minister’s election campaign.

Sixteen years in the House of Commons had treated Peter badly. His health had deteriorated. He had an alcohol problem that made him ill, overweight and prone to take long afternoon naps. In the autumn of 1990 he became embroiled in a police investigation into aspects of his personal life. The allegations against him were never substantiated, and the inquiry was subsequently dropped. But at the time of the leadership election, Peter was worried, distracted and unable to concentrate. (Aitken,Margaret Thatcher, pp. 625-626).

Desiring Progress

Is it possible that Sir Peter Morrison had actually been arrested and then “only charged with specimen charges for child sex offences and not more numerous or serious offences” ?

And is it possible that the ‘paperwork and evidence relating to child sex offences involving [Sir Peter Morrison] disappeared and that he was released without charge ?’

Or as Jonathan Aitken prefers to put it “The allegations against him were never substantiated, and the inquiry was subsequently dropped”.

Is this a plausible explanation for the IPCC allegations numbered 4 and 5 ?

Update: I’ve just spoken to Jonathan Aitken and he has no recollection that Sir Peter Morrison had been charged but he was good enough to suggest who I might ask. I’m grateful for his help.

Advertisements

31 Comments

Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

31 responses to “Do Any Of The New IPCC Allegations Relate To Sir Peter Morrison ?

  1. DR Laverty

    Reblogged this on DR Laverty and commented:
    One can see why he was chosen. Easy fodder, dead and unable to refute Channel 4’s lies. “James”, the witness who allegedly seen him at Bryn Estyn a minimum of five times was coached to say what he said. The bigger picture is yet to be uncovered I think. Go to 54 sec in. http://www.channel4.com/news/exclusive-eyewitness-saw-thatcher-aide-take-boys-to-abuse

    • JS2

      You forget one very important thing here, James when cornered about his obvious lies, said he did not say he had seen him at Bryn Estyn, that Channel 4 had made it look like that for their own agenda, they also wanted him to give the name of ………… but he wouldnt, I am sure one of us has kept the tweets where James said this. Maybe thats why he has been arrested this time?

  2. A specimen charge could relate to a single person being attacked on multiple occasions however, because of their age, mental state, the exact dates and locations might not be totally clear whilst, there is sill substantial evidence to support a prosecution.

    Interestingly enough, it could also relate to someone being found with many thousands of indecent images and they are collated under a single charge.

    The one that springs to mind for me, is the tale of the “Brothel” in the run down block of flats on the “Southbank”. Wasn’t there a police raid in which, a sitting MP was busted and nothing more was ever heard of it and there’s a connection to Cyril Smith in some way?

  3. Bandini

    “An MP was charged with child sexual offences. The only MP that I know of that faced such charges was Nigel Evans only recently…”

    When did Nigel Evans face such charges?

  4. Andy Barnett

    Doesn’t 17 +13 = 30 ?

  5. chrisb

    It is not clear what month the ‘autumn of 1990’ refers to. Thatcher was finally ousted in November 1990.

    ‘But at the time of the leadership election, Peter was worried, distracted and unable to concentrate’. Even without a police investigation hanging over him, Morrison was an odd choice to lead Thatcher’s team. He was not energetic or charismatic, an unlikely choice to rouse the troops and organise the resistance. Would Thatcher have chosen him, had she known about the police investigation? Or had he already been chosen by Thatcher and the police investigation was started in order to destabilise Thatcher’s defence of her Prime Ministership? If so, by whom and with whose cooperation in the police?

    David Waddington was Home Secretary at the time of Thatcher’s resignation but left the post soon afterwards to become a Member of the House of Lords and to disappear into obscurity. He was not a major beneficiary from Thatcher’s demise, but he could have been acting for others or in the interest of the Conservative Party as Thatcher was seen as leading the Tories to election defeat.

  6. dpack

    there are several candidates if the charges and the evidence were “lost”

    charged with minor to hide major is a different list

    re morrison ,i wonder who his handler was? chances are he was rumbled fairly early in his career,he had few friends and became rich in influence which are often a good markers for a tool.

    was he owned domestically? (or by moscow?)or perhaps was he angelton’s direct asset?

  7. Pingback: Do Any Of The New IPCC Allegations Relate To Sir Peter Morrison ? | Armor Of God Foundation

  8. Technically, the allegation #4 could apply to Harvey Proctor, although it might be a stretch to consider the minors whom Proctor “spanked” as children, since the youngest one was 17 if I remember correctly.

    Perhaps the police were aware of Harvey Proctor being involved with younger children, but only charged him with the relatively minor “spanking” offences?

    I’m just speculating.

    It’s also been reported that Leon Brittan was detained at Elm Guest House and elsewhere by the police, but released after intervention by Special Branch (acting, no doubt, on Thatcher’s orders).

    It could be possible that Leon was brought down to the police station and charged, but the police were ordered to drop the charges.

    In light on what we now know about how Thatcher covered up the child sex offenses of Jimmy Savile, Leon Brittan, Peter Morrison, Cyril Smith, Nicholas Fairbairn, Michael Havers, Keith Joseph, Rhodes Boyson, Alistair Smith, and tried to cover up for Peter Hayman.

    A serious investigation is needed into Thatcher’s role in protecting VIP child abusers.

    Moreover, it’s unclear from the text of the IPCC allegation #4 and #5 whether the MP in question was (at the time of being “charged”) a former or current MP. That muddies the waters even further.

  9. Meanwhile the schizophrenic Daily Mail can’t make up its mind. On one hand the Mail alleges that Operation Midland is “on the verge of collapse” while on the other hand announcing that Special Branch “derailed” investigations of child sex abuse.

    Key sentences from the articles:

    “Special Branch officers from Scotland Yard, who dealt with matters of national security, are accused of being part of an alleged conspiracy to protect VIP paedophiles in the 1970s and 1980s.”

    “‘High-ranking officers’ have also been accused of closing cases ‘prematurely’ and stealing and destroying crucial evidence taken from inside police stations.”

    “The Met has never named the MPs it is probing, but it has been widely claimed to include Cyril Smith, former prime minister Ted Heath, and former home secretary Leon Brittan,”

    “Today’s IPCC announcement came after it emerged Cyril Smith avoided prosecution because other establishment paedophiles feared he would spill their secrets in court.”

    “It came as it emerged today that Smith was arrested at a sex party with teenage boys but police were told to cover it up and threatened with prosecution under the Official Secrets Act, according to an investigation.”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3237634/Now-VIP-abuse-murder-probe-brink-collapse-Scotland-Yard-won-t-say-believes-key-witness-s-claims.html

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3238208/Watchdog-launches-probe-claims-Special-Branch-tried-derail-1970s-probe-MP-involved-child-sex-offences.html

    It may be relevant that in the second article, the Mail refers to “at least two MPs.”

    How can the Mail claim that Operation Midland is “on the verge of collapse” when in their own newspaper, on the same day, they make the above statements about Special Branch covering up VIP child sex abuse?

    • The media generally but the Mail in particular have a continuing role in the whole sorry saga. It is of course possible that Midland is on the point of collapse, despite the lack of the ‘imminent’ on the record statement to that effect, they have to print today’s press release re the IPCC ‘investigations’ which cover a range of cases, it won’t stop them minimising the role of the establishment and with inside help positively corrupting the whole process.

    • The first part of your final paragraph may be a direct consequence of the second part thereby indicating the continuing obstruction of justice by the Special Branch, perhaps the Daily Mail are accidentally telling the truth for once!

    • The two stories are unrelated, that’s how. The story on Midland is about the total abscence of evidence supporting Nick’s allegations, including investigator’s inability to verify that the boys Nick claims to have witnessed the deaths of, ever existed at all. That story has nothing to do with Special Branch interfering in investigations. The second story is about allegations that Special Branch may have shut down investigations about Cyril Smith being involved in child abuse. These allegations are still unproven, that’s why IPCC will be investigating them.
      You’re not trying to imply that if Special Branch “took over” Jack Tasker’s investigation of Smith and then never acted on it, letting it “die” – that would somehow be proof that Harvey Proctor murdered boys in front of “Nick” as a child? Or that, if there was irrefutable evidence that Cyril Smith was guilty of sexually abusing boys, (I think it’s likely that he was), that would somehow make Edward Heath and Leon Brittan guilty of raping boys in a flat at Dolphin Square?

      That is a false logic common to tabloid journalism and paranoid conspiracy theories – claiming that evidence against “A” somehow proves all allegations against “B”, “C” and “D”.

      • trish

        The way I see it is – the mail etc one day use the opportunity that a victim maybe wrong, lying etc, to paint the whole thing as a witch hunt etc. The next, have to write about obvious police cover uo and collusion, but don’t at least question how that contradicts with it all being a witchhunt.

      • Sabre

        I hadn’t realised that you were privy to the evidence gathered, or not, by Midland. Have you cultivated an ‘informed source close to the investigation’ ? Are you one of the investigating officers? A CPS brief, perhaps?

    • chrisb

      Operation Midland is one of many operations investigating a specific set of allegations. It is quite possible for one operation to be closed, while the police pursue other investigations under different names.

  10. ‘ I’ve just spoken to Jonathan Aitken and he has no recollection that Sir Peter Morrison had been charged but he was good enough to suggest who I might ask. I’m grateful for his help.’

    Do keep us posted on this.

  11. Nick: Victim or fantasist? Rape. Torture. Murders. These were the extraordinary claims made by one man against leading Establishment figures. Police called his story ‘credible and true’ but there’s not a shred of evidence to back his allegations.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3240661/Nick-Victim-fantasist-Rape-Torture-Murders-extraordinary-claims-one-man-against-leading-Establishment-figures-Police-called-story-credible-true-s-not-shred-evidence-allegations.html

  12. Aardvark

    Meanwhile, in The Sun – ‘VIP paedo cover-upEXCLUSIVE: Highly sensitive cop files go missing’. You would think it would be headlines in all the other papers!
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6647764/Historic-VIP-child-sex-abuse-cop-files-go-missing.html