In a story in The Guardian written by Vikram Dodd (Let’s give him all the recognition he deserves) we learn that Operation Midland is set to announce that Harvey Proctor will not face any charges related to allegations made by their only witness Nick.
The article which can be found HERE is probably one of the most desperate examples of spin that you are ever likely to read.
The police have a legal obligation to inform the complainant of any important developments in the investigation within 5 working days. Nick would have been informed about the raid on Mr Proctor’s home, and his questioning under caution by the police. Similarly he will have needed to be told that the police are not going to charge Harvey Proctor. As on the other occasions this means that Nick will inform Exaro News.
But there is a problem. Who is going to seriously believe this crap if it is published on Exaro ?
Obviously nobody with even an ounce of common sense. So what they’ve done is feed the story to a friendly Guardian journalist. Vikram Dodd gets the scoop about Harvey Proctor and Exaro get to pre-empt the announcement with a final chance to try and persuade everyone to their deluded way of thinking because the next person to be officially told will be Harvey Proctor and he’s going to be in a rage when he’s told and he’s going to shout from the rooftops.
Taking one look at the shit sandwich which are the bullet points in the article and it should be clear that this is what has happened because I can tell you confidently that the Met would never brief any newspaper in a way that makes them look like imbecilic morons as this does.
Lets deconstruct the shit sandwich. Separate the bare facts in the bullet points from the Exaro spin.
First the bare facts:
No specific dates of alleged attacks have been established, nor has any direct evidence of murder been uncovered, or specific links to homicide victims.
The Crown Prosecution Service is unlikely to be asked to consider any charges by police
And now the unadulterated Exaro horseshit that the bullet points have been bulked out with, almost certainly included as a condition on publishing the Harvey Proctor scoop.
In one instance Nick correctly described the interior of a military premises in southern England, where he claimed abuse had taken place. The details he provided were not publicly available, and the premises itself is not open to the public, making it likely he had been there at some stage, police concluded.
Detectives have not been able to disprove Nick’s credibility, nor establish that his central claims could not have happened.
An informal review, conducted six months into the investigation by a senior officer with no previous connection to the team, concluded there was sufficient substance to continue the homicide and sexual abuse inquiries.
Most of the detectives drawn from the Met’s sexual abuse and homicide divisions believe Nick is credible.
The investigation has so far not uncovered enough evidence against a living person to reach the standard of reasonable suspicion necessary to make an arrest.
One final point if I may, technically police investigations never really close unless there is a conviction. There will be no arrests, no charges, and no convictions with regards Nick’s allegations but technically this investigation just like any other unresolved case will not close. So, don’t get too hung up on the terminology.
theneedleblog 
PROCTOR ISNT OFF THE HOOK YET!
libel cases can get very messy and regardless of the merit or not of the central issue.
it may be a potential litigant decides that even if they have been libelled a better course is to merely publicly say so and avoid legal proceedings which might open a lot of cupboards with “irrelevant” skeletons in them.
that course also avoids the risk of not being able to prove one was libelled even if one was which is a double blow to a reputation and can be very expensive financially as well as socially.
iirc genuine and seemingly well founded belief (even if that belief turned out to be mistaken) without malice is a defence to a charge of libel and it is likely that exaro would go down that route.
iirc proving malice and/or incompetence is central to uk libel law ,the latter might provide a good case in this matter.
libel actions are very much in the crossing the rubicon school of strategy.
I wonder if Proctor is gearing up for a defamation suit (against Nick and Exaro). He doesn’t appear well-resourced enough to pay for the costs but perhaps someone would take it on pro bono.
It just seems odd that no one but Proctor named Proctor as one of the people under investigation by Midland. But it makes sense for him to have named himself if he’s hoping to sue, as he would need to prove in a libel court that people knew the allegations were about him.
If there were a libel case, presumably Midland detectives would be called, and made to account for their belief that Nick was credible?
according to the msm bhh has “apologised” to leon’s widow .
whether that is for midland’s efforts in part or in full or if it is a wider apology seemed unclear.
“A lot is made by some of the fact that some Tories stumped up to fund his shop in Richmond but the main funders – Archer and Heseltine – had obvious reasons for feeling some sympathy for a a fellow Conservative whose sexual activities with consenting adults had been splashed all over the papers. Heseltine had a secret mistress as did Archer, Andrina Colquhoun.”
I wasn’t aware that Heseltine had a secret mistress, but you’re right, it probably does explain why he stumped up for Proctor’s shop. His personal politics were well to the left of Proctors. The amount involved, thought it probably meant a lot to Proctor, was chicken feed to Heseltine – he was the wealthiest MP in the HoC in his day.
Of course, it won’t stop the ranting of the conspiraloons on Twitter who think that all MP’s, particularly Tories, are involved in some vast sinister paedo network.
Proctor was always a minor figure, an unpleasant showboater willing to push populist far-right views for a few votes from his constituents, probably in part as some kind of over-compensation for the fact that many of those constituents may otherwise not have voted for him on homophobic grounds.
He was not protected by anyone when the tabloids got hold of the rent boys. He was prosecuted and his political career ended.
A lot is made by some of the fact that some Tories stumped up to fund his shop in Richmond but the main funders – Archer and Heseltine – had obvious reasons for feeling some sympathy for a a fellow Conservative whose sexual activities with consenting adults had been splashed all over the papers. Heseltine had a secret mistress as did Archer, Andrina Colquhoun.
This is because of evidence linking Harvey with others involved.
Pingback: Operation Midland To Announce No Charges For Harvey Proctor | Alternative News Network
I can hear Watts’s nails scraping the bottom of the barrell
the noise you hear might be scraping at the lid to get out in the midst of a burning career.i take no pleasure in that as much harm has been done to the victims of any offender/s and the search for truth about csa offenders be they vip or not .
although i think proctor a horrible chap regardless of his personality politics or even anything else he may or may not have done i do feel somewhat sorry for him being used as an aunt sally in such a way by exaro and the media outlets who accepted this and other stories which have also harmed witnesses,victims and the wrongly accused without checking the basis of them more thoroughly either through incompetence or intent.
it seems the midland team were tasked with leaving no stone unturned and they seem to have done/are doing that but they were led to a set of stones with either nothing under them or a few bones placed there from the fallen who lie elsewhere.
the most interesting stones are still to be turned including some related to this fiasco (or operation ,take your pick) but at least we know where some of them are.