I don't think that's what the people want to hear at the moment, Mr Cameron.
I agree that we shouldn't turn this into a witch-hunt, but he's completely off the mark if he thinks that the anger is at the gay aspect. It's not.
I don't think that's what the people want to hear at the moment, Mr Cameron.
David Cameron said:"There is a danger, if we're not careful, that this could turn into a sort of witch-hunt, particularly against people who are gay...
obviously at some level paedophiles and gays are somehow linked..Seriously? Why would investigating high-profile alleged paedophiles turn into a gay witch-hunt?
obviously at some level paedophiles and gays are somehow linked..
Seriously? Why would investigating high-profile alleged paedophiles turn into a gay witch-hunt?
What sort of stunt is that though - handing him a list of names and asking will he be talking to any of them? Leave the investigations to the police, don't get the PM directly involved ahead of time!
Because in Britain not that long ago (certainly my parents' generation), being gay was seen by a lot of people as being somewhat synonymous with being a paedophile. It took a great deal of effort by campaigners to divorce these two things in the tabloid press and their readership's minds.
You can see these prejudices re-surging on the Internet today with already people dragging names out of politicians who "don't seem to be married", or "aren't interested in women" or seem "a bit odd" with that being proof enough to accuse them of being child molesters.
David Cameron is, in this regard, completely right to be cautious.
In no way, shape or form is it appropriate for Philip Schofield to be passing lists of suspected paedophiles about live on This Morning. It was a stupid response from Cameron, but who the hell thought it was necessary for the list to be passed on live on air?
I'm getting a sense of Mr. Tickell's NHS Numbers about the whole thing, frankly.
Bingo. Though, it has to be said, I think Cameron's use of it is a bit more self-serving than cautious...
The Daily Fail have taken to this with absolute relish:
http://www.*****************/news/a...eld-accidentally-showed-millions-viewers.html
Essentially accusing Philip Schofield of masterminding a witch hunt against Thatcher's glorious Conservative party.
In no way, shape or form is it appropriate for Philip Schofield to be passing lists of suspected paedophiles about live on This Morning. It was a stupid response from Cameron, but who the hell thought it was necessary for the list to be passed on live on air?
I'm getting a sense of Mr. Tickell's NHS Numbers about the whole thing, frankly.
CHEEZMO™;44122329 said:
CHEEZMO™;44122329 said:
Last time I read about it there were allegations about some MP sex ring which supposedly involved sex with boys who were 16+, which was only illegal at the time due to inequality in the law between heterosexual and homosexual relationships.Seriously? Why would investigating high-profile alleged paedophiles turn into a gay witch-hunt?
When did the daily fail get *********ed out?
And why are we calling it the Daily Fail rather than it's true fake-name the Daily (Sieg) Heil?
CHEEZMO;44122329 said:
I can't work out if the Grauniad are clearing McAlpine's name or pulling some sort of trick in terms of naming him in a way that they can't be legally challenged about.
That was my first thought. But they have pretty much destroyed Messham in the article as well.
CHEEZMO;44122329 said:
So, did any ITV viewers actually get to read the names on the card when it was passed to Cameron, as BBC news is now claiming?
So, did any ITV viewers actually get to read the names on the card when it was passed to Cameron, as BBC news is now claiming?
http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op...ken-identity-tory-abuse-claim&cat=top-stories
I guess we can cross off other people alleged to be the subject of the Newsnight report merely for not being sufficiently heterosexual in the eyes of the public now?
Already posted mate.
A man who was abused in North Wales care homes has told how he was routinely taken to London and forced to take part in sex parties.
He alleges he was regularly abused as a 12-year-old boy by members of the establishment in a smart London flat.
Michael was 10 when he was first taken into care at the former children's home called Bersham Hall near Wrexham, north Wales.
He quickly became drawn into the abusive regime at the home.
But he says it was when staff from another home called Bryn Estyn in Wrexham moved to Bersham Hall that the abuse became worse.
Now 44, Michael was one of a number of boys who would be taken down on a minibus that belonged to the home to London on a Friday evening.
He told Sky News: "I'm going to be blunt, we were taken to sex parties and we'd be traded off and displayed and we would be picked out one by one."
He claims he was so institutionalised by his time in care that he saw the trips to London as a privilege.
He said: "To us it was great, we could drink, we could smoke we could be naughty we were in the adult world - fantastic.
"Then uncle 'whoever' would pat his knee and call you over and he'd give you another drink and he'd talk to you.
"A lot of them were quite old men, 50s or 60s, very posh. They would take us away to separate bedrooms where we were abused.
"It was how compliant you were, how nice you were towards them and looking back it was all about what they could get away with."
He has now reported allegations of rape at the parties to his local police force.
Wales child abuse: Councils could publish Jillings report
Councils would publish a shelved report into north Wales care home child abuse claims in the 70s and 80s if legal advice allows, says a chief executive.
Flintshire's Colin Everett says legal approval would be needed if a copy of the 1996 Jillings report is found.
He says a north Wales council is likely to have the report, which was never made public because of legal concerns.
He spoke before Conservative peer Lord McAlpine called allegations linking him to historical abuse "wholly false".
If a copy of the report is located, Mr Everett said the council would have to take similar legal advice to the now disbanded Clwyd County Council to see how much of it could be disclosed.
"Our position as a council will be, as with the other councils, that we want to act in the spirit of that legislation [Freedom of Information] and, providing the legal advice allows us, we will be supporting a form of public disclosure," he said.
The scandal re-emerged last week after victim Steve Messham called for a new investigation claiming a subsequent report by Sir Ronald Waterhouse in 2000 had not uncovered the full scale of the abuse.
Mr Jillings said his report never saw the light of day because the council's insurers felt it could result in individual children suing for compensation in a way that could have been costly.
The insurers have now said that after taking legal advice, it was considered that the report was not suitable for publication.
Mr Everett said if a copy of the report existed, Flintshire council would take legal advice as to how much of the report it could disclose.
"We have all the north Wales councils working through their secure archives to establish who holds what," he said.
"It's very probable that one or more of the councils holds a copy.
If all those statements were taken and contained, I believe, as appendices in the Jillings report, then the report ought to be made public”
"At the same time, we're taking legal advice on whether the report, depending on its contents which many of us have never read because of its age, can be disclosed in the public domain and we will be doing that urgently."
The council, in support of the new police inquiry into abuse allegations, is also establishing what records are held across the region.
MP Ann Clwyd said she would welcome publication of the Jillings report and would like a copy sent to her.
"In 1991, when North Wales Police began the investigation into these allegations and obtained just under 2,600 statements from individuals, those only resulted in eight prosecutions and seven convictions and they were all former care workers," she said.
"But of course people have continued to say the abuse was on a much greater scale than those convictions suggest.
"If all those statements were taken and contained I believe as appendices in the Jillings report, then the report ought to be made public. I think it's absolutely crucial."
On Friday morning, Lord McAlpine said allegations linking him to alleged historical child abuse were "wholly false and seriously defamatory".
Claims of alleged abuse were highlighted by the BBC's Newsnight programme last Friday when Mr Messham said the Waterhouse inquiry had uncovered only a fraction of the abuse.
Mr Messham also said he had been repeatedly abused by a senior political figure who served during the Thatcher-era.
Lord McAlpine, former party treasurer, has now released a statement saying he had visited Wrexham "only once" and that he had been in the company of an agent from Conservative Central Office.
He said he had "never" been to the children's home linked to the claims.
He said he wanted to "publicly tackle these slurs and set the record straight".
New claims have also made by Sian Griffiths, who worked for the former Clwyd County Council, about how the Waterhouse inquiry was carried out.
Ms Griffiths, who ran the council's office administration for the Waterhouse inquiry, claimed on Channel 4 News that during the inquiry Det Supt Peter Ackerley was asked to list the names of people the police had investigated and referred to the Crown Prosecution Service.
But Ms Griffiths said that Mr Ackerley was made to stop by Sir Ronald Waterhouse when a high profile government name was mentioned.
Photographic evidence of men abusing boys in care homes 'deliberately destroyed'
Photographs of men abusing boys in the North Wales paedophile scandal were deliberately destroyed by the authorities, it was revealed today.
Sian Griffiths worked for Clwyd Council in the inquiry office on the 1994 Jillings and six years later on the Waterhouse inquiry which looked into the systematic abuse at the children’s homes. She told ITV News that victim Steve Messham’s photos of alleged abuse were ordered to be destroyed.
Mr Messham says photos captured lots of men raping boys, including a prominent Conservative figure he accuses of abusing him.
He says he could see men’s faces clearly, but the police said they could not identify them from the pictures.
Ms Griffiths was asked: “Messham talked about photos that he had of abuse taking place. Do you know what happened to them?”
“We were supplied with copies of court documents…there was an order made for the book of photos to be destroyed.
“So Messham’s photos of alleged abuse…were destroyed?
“They were. Well that’s what’s in court papers – official documents.”
That could have been vital evidence?
“It could. Yes.”
She added there were people mentioned in the Waterhouse Inquiry in 2000 who probably got away with the abuse.
She said: “I think probably there were. On the basis that the allegations were historical and there was nobody to corroborate what the complainants were saying or files or registers to back up what they were saying.
"I imagine yes there are people who weren’t convicted for their offences.”
Meanwhile, Labour MP Ann Clwyd today revealed she had read the 1994 report by John Jillings into the abuse before it was pulped and called for it to be published.
She said: “It shows rape and torture... the effects on those young boys cannot be underestimated.”
The report was trashed on the insistence of Clwyd Council’s insurers, who feared a wave of writs from victims.
...The report was trashed on the insistence of Clwyd Councils insurers, who feared a wave of writs from victims.
...
......
...I.......
Yup. Fuck justice, fuck the fact that people were going to get away with fucking children, if it meant a payout and the Council's coffers being hammered, well better hush it all up, ey? I mean, as the great Max Clifford would say, interfering with those kids was just a "slightly serious thing"...
Photographic evidence of men abusing boys in care homes 'deliberately destroyed'
'UK paedophilia scandal'. Something short and nondescript until the full extent is revealed (assuming it ever is). It needs to be about more than just Savile though.Thread title definitely needs a change, but I don't even know how you'd summarise the extent of all this.