• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Operation Yewtree & Other Historical Child-Abuse Allegations

I havent read every page of every thread regarding paedophile conspiracies and general noncery, so cant tell you whether its been mentioned before but Bill Maloney's pie n mash films has got an eye-opening take on specifically 'institutional' chid abuse. its shocking. you can find it on google, maybe also on Bing. After watching most of his stuff my take on 'Kitty' is that he went to the Elms guesthouse for trysts with his lover, but never got involved in the sordid noncing of other guests, such as Cyril Smith et al. Obviously, it could never emerge that he was just plain old gay, so this ridiculous celibate image was peddled, or maybe the stuff he heard and saw at The Elm turned him off acts of sexual congress altogether. Like i say, my gut reaction is that he's not a nonce, but was around alot of unsavoury, and worse, situations and has been living with the shadow of that for over three decades now.
Ask not for whom the plod finger.
 
It's all becoming a horrible mess. I myself have doubts about Harris's guilt, I'll be interested to see if any attempt is made at an appeal - or it maybe that at 84 he is just too old and can't be bothered to put up a fight (if he is in fact innocent). He may be doubting his own memory now - I'm 25 years younger and know I can't rely on mine for long-ago detail.

Even the way Savile has been dealt with still leaves us with far more questions that answers, though I have no doubt myself he was a deliberate serial offender. But the follow -up on who might have known, who were turning a blind eye, etc. etc. - well, that would lead us to the observation that while numerous celebrities have been hauled into the limelight and variously had careers shattered and been put under enormous personal pressure even when eventually found innocent still no effective action has been taken about the Elm House accusations or other issues that touch not on celebrities but on politicians.

The smell of something nasty under the floorboards is becoming unbearable.
 
garrick92 said:
Then again, perhaps I am in denial and perhaps this scandal will quite rightly engulf the British establishment in a cataclysmic manner and overturn many of our cherished assumptions about the powerful. But I doubt it.
Click to expand...

I think tha's the view that many right-thinking people would take, until you listen to Chris Fay, who really understands how these things work, talk about the casual way in which children in care - certainly in the 70s and possibly now - are picked by out by paedophiles within the care system:
Do the parents stay in any kind of contact? if yes - leave alone. If no, nonce away.
When children in care are unaccounted for(and do not have relatives that have stayed in contact) a report is made with the police, who then file the report without acting on it. If the child returns: no action taken. If the child does not return: no action taken. After a certain period, these reports are destroyed and the filing cabinets fill up again with fresh reports.
Historically at least, no figures were kept on juveniles in care reported as missing, so it begs the question re Hautes De Garenne etc: If no ones aware theyre missing then literally anything could have happened to them.

I hate to think it, but people like the odious David Hamilton Grant may well have had free rein to carry out any number of his twisted fantasies, with the collusion of many in the higher echelons of society, not just the Hayman's of this world, but Special Branch, The Met, directors of children's services in local councils and the like. The foxes really were (possibly are) in charge of the henhouse.
 
When children in care are unaccounted for(and do not have relatives that have stayed in contact) a report is made with the police, who then file the report without acting on it.

If the child returns: no action taken. If the child does not return: no action taken. After a certain period, these reports are destroyed and the filing cabinets fill up again with fresh reports.
Click to expand...

Yup, when I worked in care homes (mostly with troubled teenagers) some years ago this was certainly the case. The police would make an effort if the child was under about 14 but above that, they seemed to expect the kid to come back when they were ready.

Most did, but I can remember one or two whom we didn't see again. We'd hear vague reports about them going to live elsewhere or being spotted serving in a shoe shop in the next town. I wonder now what really happened.
My own children were the same age and I'd have been frantic with worry if one of them'd gone off like that.

What could the staff do? We didn't have the resources to go out looking ourselves. We expected the police to keep an eye open and perhaps bring the kid back if they could get them in the car. That was all we could do, apart from wait for the kid to get in touch. No mobile phones or internet back then.

When kids were taken into 'care' I'd think, if only their parents know what
care really means. Too much freedom to come and go, for a start. Not enough boundaries. :(
 
CF was one of Karin Kasir's friends, I think? Her of Elm Lodge fame?

There's a lot I could say to this last para, but I'll restrict myself to asking: Special Branch and the Met? Really?
Click to expand...

Categorically no. Fay considered Kasir a 'conniving bitch'. The fact he was at her inquest was purely as a result of the coverup being perpetrated by the establishment, and he wanted the record set straight. It never was, and a 'safe pair of hands' coroner closed the proceedings on the solitary word of a convicted paedohile M15 snitch.

As for 'really'? yes, really. Its not me saying it. watch the pie n mash films and then at least you have an informed opinion. lastly, i havent used wiki for any of this stuff, apart from as 'read around' material wrt people such as Geoffrey Dickens, Sidney Cooke, DCI Settle and others...
 
garrick92 said:
SameOldVardoger said:
What do they call Cliff fans? "Cliff Heads"
Click to expand...

Re: Rolf "Sexual Harrisment". I recently read this rather interesting article, and would be interested to know what others make of it.

NB: I don't share the author's political philosophy (Libertarianism) at all, but his outlook is not relevant to the questions he raises.
Click to expand...

There are, when you look, some very elaborate sites which obsessively chip away at the evidence on which the downfall of celebrities is based. Savile has inspired a massive and sometimes interesting Blog here: Jim Cannot Fix This Blog

The contents often spill over into more sweeping issues of mind manipulation and the curtailment of civil liberties but there are some worthwhile examinations of the quality of evidence on which men or their reputations have been convicted.

The pity is that the kind of energy required to dig into the mire is nowhere to be found in the mainstream press and media these days. :(
 
DLT has been in court today:

The prosecutor said: "The offences that you are going to consider vary in seriousness. They involved unwanted physical contact over and under clothing.

"He has a propensity towards laying his hands in a sexual manner on young women who are alone with him or in vulnerable positions. He is an opportunist."

Ms Moore added: "The defendant, according to these ladies, simply seemed to act as if he had a perfect right to touch their breasts or put his hands in their clothing to grope them."

She said the women felt "upset, embarrassed, shocked" and unsure what to do because Mr Travis was a celebrity.

The first alleged victim to give evidence was a journalist who claimed the DJ groped her breasts in his kitchen after she interviewed him at his home, leaving her feeling "exploited".
Click to expand...

So that his alleged victims would feel less intimidated, DLT was made to hold a sausage under his chin:
 
I have what I hope and believe to be an informed opinion,
Click to expand...
and yet your initial response was to claim karin (sic) kasir was 'friends' with Chris Fay who is a former advisor for NAYPIC and pretty much a lone voice in the wilderness over the wholescale exploitation of vulnerable children in the care system.

For a better understanding of what NAYPIC do, here's a link to one of their historical reports. it's strong stuff so be warned bit.ly/1wk5HdH

Collusion - from the latin colludere to have a secret agreement.
'A secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy in order to deceive others.'

This is a conspiracy forum, so here's a doozie. it's not mine, i was blissfully ignorant of pretty much all of this, until Bill Maloney's films came into my awareness.

Late 1970's special branch raid a B&B using terrorist powers and the official secrets act.
Early 1980's a report is finally produced regarding the activity of paedophile networks in state care homes and other locations, including the guest house mentioned above.
Early mid 1980's Tory MP names a senior civil servant as a paedophile, avoiding any potential legal repercussions by citing parliamentary priviledge.
Mid 1980's Tory MP hands over this report to a secretary of state for review and recommendations. MP states months later he was 'disappointed' by lack of action.
Early 2000s all police records state that raid on B&B in late 1970s was enacted under vice legislation, no special branch involvement or co-operation
Early / mid 2010's MPs request location and re-examination of original report into institutional child abuse. No report can be located, and all supporting documentation also missing, certain parliamentary personnel state this is 'troubling'.

So there's nothing to see, and nothing to be done, and no record of any previous investigations of this type, apart from standard vice cases.
Except Chris Fay was given Carole Kasir's original paperwork, by her before she died of 'natural causes', which relates to the official secrets act and special branch powers in use at that earlier time. Lots of other documentation as well, including her own personal guest register for the Elm Guest House.
so why has the official story changed? and more pertinantly if it wasnt for Fay's paperwork, there would be nothing to contradict the 'official' version of events.

And yes, i know Fay has done bird for money-laundering and i dont even think its a smear campaign, my take is he made an error of judgement, but that shouldnt undo all the good work he has put in on bringing these scumbags to account.

Do i think anything will come of it? No, unfortunately.. It's gone on 30 years already, and was going on for 30 before that. My personal view? There was a political figure around in the 1980's, loved by yuppies loathed by miners, and who read everything. i mean everything. there's political journalists and historical authors that will testify to that. So she reads the report, and she brings her secretary of state in, and she says 'im sickened and appalled, and this has to stop'. and it does stop, for him at least. And then she makes it all go away.

Thats the collusion im talking about, and that is a criminal conspiracy but of course nothing will ever come of it. How could it?
 
Although we had that interview with the whip (whose name has currently slipped my mind) in which he clearly stated - at least, as clearly as any politician ever would - that 'peccadilloes' like child abuse would not be reported to the police, but would be used to keep the offender supporting the party's policies etc.

That is more than an instinctive need to cover up. It's blackmail.
 
I don't know, would be the answer. I doubt that it is 'institutionally paedophiliac' - but on the other hand how widespread does a cover-up have to be before it taints a whole institution?

After all the blackmail described above only has to be used to swing a close vote to corrupt the fundamental legal fabric of the country. What if it was used to force through anti-Union or pro-EU legislation, for example? Or to support the war in Iraq? It need only involve a few dozen people.
 
We're effectively being asked to believe that just about every police force and local council in the country, to say nothing of MI5, is a criminal outfit, And that's a stretch too far.
Click to expand...

It's about the culture. Police forces, councils and MI5 are all conservative by nature. Preserving the status quo is the main aim, which means hanging on to power at any cost. Especially if the cost is to others, the less powerful and the vulnerable.

I have no trouble believing that. When we have police forces that we trust so little that they have to make their officers wear cameras to record everything they do, and we read about Whips taking note of MPs' illegal sexual habits not to stop them but to use to control them, and we've heard plenty about MI5 shenanigans, how can we not believe in corruption?
 
The point I'm making is that there's no need for a nationwide multi-agency paedo ring and automatic cover-up squad. Just the conservative and power-hungry culture of various influential organisations will manage all on its own, thank you very much.

We already know all this. It is folk knowledge. For example, look at the stereotypical TV/movie police hero. He (or occasionally she) is always a maverick, a lone wolf who plays by their own rules, etc, and doesn't take part in police culture. The writers know we wouldn't identify with regular detectives.
 
The problem is , Garrick, the obtaining of 'hard evidence' is not easy if the police force are disregarding it or refusing to use it.

As clearly happened in Rotherham and the Cyril Smith case.

I agree that the loss of trust involved in this is corrosive and harmful in its own way, but equally to pretend that there is not some sort of major disconnect now between what the public think of as acceptable behaviour by those in responsible positions and their actual behaviour is unrealistic. Whether we call that 'institutional' or not hardly matters - I bet even in the West Midlands Crime Squad there would be one or two trusting folk who didn't know what was going on.

The way to stop mob rule is to properly and openly investigate the accusations. The longer that fails to happen the more likely it is that mob violence - which I deprecate - will gain support.
 
The past is another country and they do things differently there. The 1970s, remember, were an age when institutes like PIE could openly campaign for the age of consent to be abolished, without pitchfork-wielding mobs descending on them.
Click to expand...

To some extent that is true but it's also important to remember that organisations like PIE were treated with revulsion by the vast majority of people in the UK. I'm pretty sure I've read that their meetings were often picketed by angry demonstrators. It was a very small minority of metropolitan liberals - the classic "polytechnic lecturer" types - who saw PIE as simply another part of the sexual liberation movement.

look at the way that police attitudes toward rape victims changed overnight in the late 70s/early 80s after the broadcast of that shocking TV documentary in which two policemen interviewing a rape victim openly belittled her, disbelieved her and blamed her. That caused such an uproar that nowadays that footage is almost unbelievable
Click to expand...

Except that it seems to have been precisely the way in which the Rotherham victims were treated. Police openly referred to them as "slappers" etc and in at least one case actually arrested the victim rather than her abuser. Perhaps we haven't moved as far as we might have liked to, especially when the victim is seen as unsympathetic in some way.

The exchange I was having with scargs was about obtaining hard evidence of institutional wrongdoing, rather than relying on 'folk knowledge' that 'they're all in it together'.
Click to expand...

Yes. "Folk knowledge", which is apparently based on cop show cliches about hard-drinking mavaricks vs career-focused bureaucrats doesn't really get us anywhere. I'm also a bit reluctant to set too much store by claims of "institutional" anything because the term is too often used as a cop out to explain away unsatisfactory outcomes when there is no actual evidence of any bias or wrongdoing.

These sort of sordid little cover-ups don't require complex conspiracies or "they're all in it together" cliches. They just require a reluctance on the part of those in authority to take action in particular cases. There can be all sorts of reasons for this: the victim is powerless and/or unsympathetic in some way; the alleged perpetrator has the potential to cause difficulty eg he is rich, influential politically or part of a larger group which is likely to make waves if challenged; or maybe the whole thing just looks too difficult to tackle. No need for conspiracies.
 
I was under the impression that the offences were historic (as in they dated from the 1970s or thereabouts) and so therefore my point about changing cultural attitudes affecting police behaviour seems relevant here too.
Click to expand...

Nope. Much more recent, late 1990s until present (there are apparently around 53 current cases in Rotherham).
 
Worth a mention that Paul Gambaccini will not be facing court now. A year of his life lost because someone was making up shit about him. Hope he manages to recover and get back to the radio.
 
I've just read in t'Guardian that Rolf Harris has some form of neck cancer. Good.
 
escargot said:
I've just read in t'Guardian that Rolf Harris has some form of neck cancer. Good.
Click to expand...
Apparently there was a “private ambulance” at his home last week. Gossip sites suggest he may already have died and the family are trying to avoid it hitting the news till after he’s been cremated and disposed of. Think the information about the private ambulance was in a couple of the papers.
 
Mrs Migs said:
Apparently there was a “private ambulance” at his home last week. Gossip sites suggest he may already have died and the family are trying to avoid it hitting the news till after he’s been cremated and disposed of. Think the information about the private ambulance was in a couple of the papers.
Click to expand...
Yup, the vans used by undertakers to collect and move the deceased are called private ambulances.
They are non-ceremonial hearses, designated as ambulances for tax/insurance reasons.
So I expect you're right and he's carked it.

If he'd been law-abiding and respectable there'd've been almost a State funeral. The sort we saw with that other national treasure, Jimmy Sav - oh yeah.

There's a new two-part TV documentary about Harris. Just what his poor family need. As if he hasn't shown them up enough.
 
escargot said:
Yup, the vans used by undertakers to collect and move the deceased are called private ambulances.
They are non-ceremonial hearses, designated as ambulances for tax/insurance reasons.
So I expect you're right and he's carked it.

If he'd been law-abiding and respectable there'd've been almost a State funeral. The sort we saw with that other national treasure, Jimmy Sav - oh yeah.

There's a new two-part TV documentary about Harris. Just what his poor family need. As if he hasn't shown them up enough.
Click to expand...
I look forward to dancing on his grave. Not that I wish him ill, or anything....


I saw an episode of The Inspector Lynley Mysteries recently, and the Sargent had just dropped off her mother in a nursing home, and one of the staff mentioned they were watching Rolf Harris Animal Hospital - that hasn't aged well!
 
Dinobot said:
I look forward to dancing on his grave. Not that I wish him ill, or anything....
Click to expand...
Well, neck cancer isn't fun. Most sufferers would deserve our sympathy. Not Rolf. :)

My minor gripe is that I've missed out on watching the documentary and cursing his name while he's alive. :omr:

As if that would make a blind bit of difference to him. :dunno:

Yup, it's all Me, Me, Me innit. :chuckle:
 
Dinobot said:
I saw an episode of The Inspector Lynley Mysteries recently, and the Sargent had just dropped off her mother in a nursing home, and one of the staff mentioned they were watching Rolf Harris Animal Hospital - that hasn't aged well!
Click to expand...
:rollingw:
 
Here's the Guardian's review of the 2-part ITVx documentary, Rolf Harris: Hiding in Plain Sight.

One of its themes is the collusion of other people in abuse committed by Harris and others.

Rolf Harris: Hiding in Plain Sight review – the awful truth behind the abuse that shocked a nation
That we have seen and heard it all before in recent documentaries about celebrities (several on Savile, R Kelly, Michael Jackson, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew) doesn’t lessen its power but gives it cumulative strength.

There are signs, too, that such documentaries are preparing to broaden their focus. The programmes about R Kelly have increasingly asked questions about his enablers – the people who helped him get the girls and keep them confined to his mansion, turning a blind eye to the obvious wrongdoing – and the many who colluded in Epstein’s horrors (beyond Ghislaine Maxwell).

Here, makeup artist Suzi Dent remembers Harris groping her whenever she had to powder his face but just as angrily recalls that not one of the men in the room stood up for her despite her repeated requests for him to leave her alone. “It was the green light to have fun with me.”

So many green lights everywhere, still. So many stories to come.
Click to expand...
 
escargot said:
Yup, the vans used by undertakers to collect and move the deceased are called private ambulances.
They are non-ceremonial hearses, designated as ambulances for tax/insurance reasons.
So I expect you're right and he's carked it.

If he'd been law-abiding and respectable there'd've been almost a State funeral. The sort we saw with that other national treasure, Jimmy Sav - oh yeah.

There's a new two-part TV documentary about Harris. Just what his poor family need. As if he hasn't shown them up enough.
Click to expand...
I've wondered whether Harris groomed his wife....and both seemed to want to deny things were as bad as they were. According to what I took from the 2 part documentary, Bindi's marriage collapsed partly because she couldn't accept her husband's concerns about Harris/abuse. Bindi also tried to deny some very important details about the family friend's abuse - maybe to try to help her father out legally, or because she was unable to accept how awful her father was.
 
Hell has a new resident
Rolf Harris: Serial abuser and ex-entertainer dies aged 93
Published
6 minutes ago

Share
Rolf Harris
IMAGE SOURCE,REUTERS
Disgraced former entertainer Rolf Harris, who was jailed for a series of indecent assaults on girls, has died aged 93, it has been confirmed.

Harris was found guilty of a string of indecent assaults between 1968 and 1986 following a trial in 2014 - and was jailed for five years and nine months.

He was released from prison in 2017 - but never apologised to his victims.

Before his crimes came to light, Harris had been a fixture of family entertainment in Britain.

His death was confirmed to the PA news agency by a registrar at Maidenhead
Click to expand...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60393842
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top