Originally Posted by stonks:
written in his autobiography, that the few days he spent alone with his deceased mother’s body during her laying out was the time of his life.
A little more background on today’s PMQ’s
October 24th, 2012 |
I cannot give much more detail until the police have been given more time to investigate whether evidence still exists from the mid-nineties, but here is what I can say.
Last week I was contacted by a former child protection specialist who for some years, had been concerned that a wider investigation regarding the activities of convicted paedophile, Peter Righton was not fully investigated.
He contacted me because he knew I had spoken out in the Murdoch scandal. Over the years, he had lost faith in the ability of politicians to get to the truth. The last time he contacted an MP was in 1994. The MP promised to follow up the case but nothing came of it.
The central allegation was that a large body of material seized in the raid on Righton’s home had not been fully investigated. Though Righton was the subject of a BBC profile in 1994 [I think this is the date] “The Secret Life of a Paedophile”, little had been done to follow up the leads from the case. A specialist unit in Scotland Yard had the material which supplemented a wider investigation into organised paedophile rings in children’s homes.
Over the last few days I have spoken to two other child protection specialists who share the concern of the gentleman who contacted me.
Within the material seized at Righton’s home were letters from known and convicted paedophiles. The contact, who has seen the letters, claimed that one paedophile in particular was of great concern. He said that the paedophile, who worked with children, boasted of a key aide to a former PM who could help get hold of indecent images of children. I am not naming the person for obvious reasons but for clarity it is not former MP, Peter Morrison. This afternoon my office has been bombarded with calls regarding Morrison, I think because he was named by Edwina Currie at the weekend as having inappropriate sexual relations with teenage boys.
I’ll say more when I can but this may not be for some time.
I should say that like with the hacking scandal, a number of people have contacted me this afternoon offering more information regarding the case. I am happy to talk to anyone who can help me – particularly those who came into contact with Righton and his contacts when they were young. I can understand how powerless they must have felt at the time – Righton’s net was cast wide.
One person also contacted me to suggest that the Met held a vast quantity of material suggesting Jimmy Savile was a predatory paedophile. I do not know whether this is true but I do know the source and she has been 100% accurate in the past.
One final thing I should say – I made the decision to ask a question of the PM late this morning and had not had time to write to the Met before speaking out. I have no doubt the Met will take this seriously and am sorry I didn’t have time to forewarn the commissioner of my intention to raise the matter.
I have written to him this afternoon with more details regarding the case. This will obviously remain confidential.
Re the post above ^^^^ I think Big Brother holds the key to that particular identity.
I think children must always be believed over adults, but I trust that experts would be able to find out the truth. Teachers, methinks, should be given back some leverage against unruly or uncooperative behaviour without worrying that they will be dragged off to the nearest clink.
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
I wondered where you were! 
Ha Ha, you noticed that I've been v quiet on this ?!
I really do need to catch up, I was going to watch the BBC thing the other night but it started at 10.35 on a school night!
PS had second thoughts about my earlier post and deleted!
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Read another article ( which I can;t find now) that linked Laud to the royal family and also says he was offered the post of Diana's private secretary but turned it down
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Right, however much I despise Thatcher, I do not believe that she would knowingly accommodate paedophiles, same goes for Brown and Blair, so I take that bit of blogging with a huge pinch of salt.
Originally Posted by cologne 1:
I think children must always be believed over adults, but I trust that experts would be able to find out the truth. Teachers, methinks, should be given back some leverage against unruly or uncooperative behaviour without worrying that they will be dragged off to the nearest clink.
With respect Col, that's bollocks and the currency that this gov't and the more unscrupulous unions are dealing in, the no of malicious allegations against teachers are nearly as rare as rocking horse shit if you look at the 'proper' figures
One last point........
I follow Tom Watson on twitter and he is IMO playing a very good game. His last link is particularly clever. (Either that or I have been reading too many rumours)
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by cologne 1:
I think children must always be believed over adults, but I trust that experts would be able to find out the truth. Teachers, methinks, should be given back some leverage against unruly or uncooperative behaviour without worrying that they will be dragged off to the nearest clink.
With respect Col, that's bollocks and the currency that this gov't and the more unscrupulous unions are dealing in, the no of malicious allegations against teachers are nearly as rare as rocking horse shit if you look at the 'proper' figures
Where's the bollocks? My teacher friends tell me that they are frustrated because they can't 'punish' pupils without worrying about the consequences. Get a grip please, you're not the only professional.
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
One last point........ I follow Tom Watson on twitter and he is IMO playing a very good game. His last link is particularly clever. (Either that or I have been reading too many rumours)
I listened to him today on 5live in the commons. He just slipped in this name (and the rest). Cameron literally stood there with his mouth open. What did he tweet?
Supes, hiya Good to have you back and thanks for that insight in to child protection.
Originally Posted by cologne 1:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Right, however much I despise Thatcher, I do not believe that she would knowingly accommodate paedophiles, same goes for Brown and Blair, so I take that bit of blogging with a huge pinch of salt.
I really don't. I have been Googling quite a bit since this came out ........................I know people buried their heads in the sand re JS - I know he was well protected but - there's one name that consistently rears it's very ugly head.
In this case (I may well be wrong) I think there is no smoke without fire.
I wonder which MP will dare use parliamentary privilege first?
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
One last point........ I follow Tom Watson on twitter and he is IMO playing a very good game. His last link is particularly clever. (Either that or I have been reading too many rumours)
The Independent's article on his questions is interesting too
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
(Wait till you try to send PMs)
I was going to send you a pic of some pomegranates from my iphone! Hey ho it's the thought that counts!
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by cologne 1:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Right, however much I despise Thatcher, I do not believe that she would knowingly accommodate paedophiles, same goes for Brown and Blair, so I take that bit of blogging with a huge pinch of salt.
I really don't. I have been Googling quite a bit since this came out ........................I know people buried their heads in the sand re JS - I know he was well protected but - there's one name that consistently rears it's very ugly head.
In this case (I may well be wrong) I think there is no smoke without fire.
There have been whispers for years, and yes the same names do keep being reeled out. Looks like Jim has fixed it for the powers to be to shit their pants.
Got to admit that all the blogs are frying my brain though. I'll wait for some more substantial evidence than a bunch of keyboard wariers' musings (even if the truth may lie somewhere among it all).
Originally Posted by suzybean:
Supes, hiya Good to have you back and thanks for that insight in to child protection.
It may be a brief visit
Originally Posted by suzybean:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by cologne 1:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Right, however much I despise Thatcher, I do not believe that she would knowingly accommodate paedophiles, same goes for Brown and Blair, so I take that bit of blogging with a huge pinch of salt.
I really don't. I have been Googling quite a bit since this came out ........................I know people buried their heads in the sand re JS - I know he was well protected but - there's one name that consistently rears it's very ugly head.
In this case (I may well be wrong) I think there is no smoke without fire.
There have been whispers for years, and yes the same names do keep being reeled out. Looks like Jim has fixed it for the powers to be to shit their pants.
Got to admit that all the blogs are frying my brain though. I'll wait for some more substantial evidence than a bunch of keyboard wariers' musings (even if the truth may lie somewhere among it all).
Are we really saying that Thatcher, Blair and Brown were in some cabal of abusing children. If I even contemplate believing that, I'll lose the will to live.
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by suzybean:
Supes, hiya Good to have you back and thanks for that insight in to child protection.
It may be a brief visit
My visiting time is over now as well, off to do some moo-cow!
Originally Posted by cologne 1:
Are we really saying that Thatcher, Blair and Brown were in some cabal of abusing children. If I even contemplate believing that, I'll lose the will to live.
I'm not saying that .........although I think they may have chosen not to hear or believe certain things - I am saying that people connected to them were involved in very unsavoury practices though.
Originally Posted by erinp:
I see Cowell paid 50k of bail money for King
Why does this not surprise me at all ?
On the subject of Savile... I think the most shocking aspect continues to be that he managed to evade exposure until now. Someone (beside his victims) must have known.
Like most of you perhaps I cannot help but wonder how many were/are implicated and will we ever know, or will it all be swept under the carpet ?
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
It used to be said that you couldn't get a LA job in Durham (Darlo) if you weren't a fully signed up and active member of the labour party!
Originally Posted by suzybean:
Got to admit that all the blogs are frying my brain though. I'll wait for some more substantial evidence than a bunch of keyboard wariers' musings (even if the truth may lie somewhere among it all).
Hi suzy.. that's pretty much where I am and what I was trying to say a couple of days ago - if anyone KNOWS (rather than suspects or heard rumours) anything at all about anyone living or dead - report it to the right people (OK, you have to hope the 'right people' haven't been knobbled) rather than plaster it all over t'interweb or media. I'm a bit fed with 'a certain person' said/did - probably because I can't usually work out who they're talking about.
Originally Posted by stonks:
Originally Posted by Aimee:
Im also surprised that so many people had heard things about him and said nothing, Philip Schofield said on this morning today that he hadn't heard the rumours about him and young children but he had heard rumours about him having sex with dead people (can't think of the correct word) at the hospitals he worked at 
Necrophilia....
Thanks 
Originally Posted by stonks:
written in his autobiography, that the few days he spent alone with his deceased mother’s body during her laying out was the time of his life.
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
It used to be said that you couldn't get a LA job in Durham (Darlo) if you weren't a fully signed up and active member of the labour party!
(I wish I had known that. I could have been a contender.
Meanwhile is it not also written that one could not progress through the ranks of the local chemical company unless one was a left-footer of Scottish extraction?
I'm still waiting for my photo of your pomegranates.)
For all of those who think that this is some sort of a modern internet sensation, pushed forward by bloggers and internet warriors, this isn't a new subject. I can remember an injunction being overturned by a journal in the very early seventies. The truth wasn't in the public interest then either.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Re the post above ^^^^ I think Big Brother holds the key to that particular identity.
"I'm loving my box already!"
LONDON |
LONDON (Reuters) - British police investigating alleged sexual abuse by one of the BBC's most celebrated TV stars said on Thursday some 300 victims had come forward and they were preparing to make arrests in a scandal that has thrown the broadcaster into disarray.
Originally Posted by erinp:
LONDON |
LONDON (Reuters) - British police investigating alleged sexual abuse by one of the BBC's most celebrated TV stars said on Thursday some 300 victims had come forward and they were preparing to make arrests in a scandal that has thrown the broadcaster into disarray.
Karma
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by Garage Joe:
It used to be said that you couldn't get a LA job in Durham (Darlo) if you weren't a fully signed up and active member of the labour party!
(I wish I had known that. I could have been a contender.
Meanwhile is it not also written that one could not progress through the ranks of the local chemical company unless one was a left-footer of Scottish extraction?
I'm still waiting for my photo of your pomegranates.)
For all of those who think that this is some sort of a modern internet sensation, pushed forward by bloggers and internet warriors, this isn't a new subject. I can remember an injunction being overturned by a journal in the very early seventies. The truth wasn't in the public interest then either.
One journal vs. a breeding ground for electronic tin hat wearers. I see.
Originally Posted by erinp:
LONDON |
LONDON (Reuters) - British police investigating alleged sexual abuse by one of the BBC's most celebrated TV stars said on Thursday some 300 victims had come forward and they were preparing to make arrests in a scandal that has thrown the broadcaster into disarray.
Oh dear! Christmas schedule could be in disarray.