Support NeoGAF

[SmokyDave]

Updated summary:

Nice work chap. Should be added to the OP.

 

[Clay Davis]

Nice work chap. Should be added to the OP.

I just updated the opening post.

and to echo smokydave, very nice work.

 

[DECK'ARD]

I'm just amazed none of our journalists or media are doing this for us. It's all out there, just in pieces. Without the big picture the scale of it and those involved or complicit is hidden.

Someone somewhere without a vested interest must want to rid our country of this surely, because if you don't drag it all into the light it will continue in the shadows.

Just the Sir Peter Morrison story alone goes right to the heart of Government and is huge. It was known, he was protected, and was raping boys in a state-run children's home at the same time as Savile. Where is the story! Go talk to Currie, Tebbit, talk to the victim who named him, go find others. You could do it for Savile, why not here.

For the public to get outraged they need to know how much has been covered up, because if it's been covered up before it can be again.

 

[Oxx]

Like with the phone-hacking stuff, things won't blow-up again until some celebrities or murdered children get involved.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Excellent, and very sad, article in the Independent.

The North Wales child abuse scandal: A damaged generation waits for justice 30 years on:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...on-waits-for-justice-30-years-on-8303901.html

Like with the phone-hacking stuff, things won't blow-up again until some celebrities or murdered children get involved.

Along these lines? From the above article:

For Adrian and Lee Johns, pictured here, it is already too late. Adrian was unlawfully killed in an arson attack in the Brighton area in 1992. He had been with other young people who had been abused at the Bryn Estyn children's home in North Wales when they were killed. His brother, Lee, died three years later of a drugs overdose.

Their brothers, Jay and Chris, have dropped off the radar. More than a decade ago, they were in hiding, fearing that their brothers had been the victims of foul play and that they were next.

Fucking hell.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Holy fuck at the arson attack in Brighton:

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/arson-cover-up-north-wales-child-abuse.html

Pete Sawyer wrote in 1997 and the article has stood the test of time:

Friends and relatives of the two victims, Adrian Johns, who died in the arson attack in April 1992, and Lee Homberg, who died of an apparent drugs overdose nearly three years later, are convinced that the two brothers were silenced because 'they knew too much' about the drugs and porn trade to which they had been introduced while in care.

Both Adrian and Lee had been abused at Bryn Alyn Community children's home, Wrexham. Lee later gave evidence against the head of Bryn Alyn, John Allen, sentenced to six years imprisonment in February 1995 for offences of indecent assault.

Although East Sussex police files on the incidents remain officially closed, it is understood that Brighton CID detectives have also been candidly re-assessing the case-files in the light of the possible connection with Bryn Alyn.

The arson attack on the elegant Regency converted townhouse in Palmeira Avenue, Hove, took place during the early hours of Easter Saturday, April 1992. The intended target was a third floor flat, where a small party was in progress.

Most people at the party were gay and the residents of the flat were well-known within the Brighton gay community. Because of this, few have wanted to come forward to talk to the police after the fire.

The only staircase in the building acted like a giant chimney flue. Flames and smoke rapidly spread up to and through the open door of the third floor flat, where the party was winding down.

Two people, AIDS counsellor Mabel Roberts, 48, and Andrew Manners, 29, died from multiple injuries trying to jump to safety. Seven people managed to escape by clambering down a drainpipe at the back of the building. One, Tim Sharpe, celebrating his 28th birthday, fell to his death after losing his grip.

Adrian Johns, 32, and another man, Paul 'Tony' Jones, 33, remained trapped in the flat and died of smoke inhalation. Their bodies were so badly charred that they had to be identified by dental records.

Later that morning Trevor Carrington, 41, one of the invited guests to the party, took the train to Wivelsfield, ten miles to the north of Brighton. He is thought to have buried his wallet, passport and a watch in nearby woods, perhaps as a symbolic gesture. He slashed his wrists and tried to overdose on a mixture of Paracetamol and alcohol. But at the last minute he staggered to a nearby phone box and called the emergency services.

In hospital in Haywards Heath Carrington confessed to his brother that he had started the fire as 'a prank'. He said that he had set light to a settee in the entrance hall with his lighter just as he was leaving the building with his partner.

Carrington walked out of the hospital soon afterwards. But within hours he was dead. He fell into the path of an oncoming lorry on a quiet country road. Police regarded it as suicide.

Carrington's confession to his brother enabled the police to close their files on the tragedy. It provided a simple and clean explanation. But although there is no suggestion that the fire was started by anyone other than Carrington, there remains the suspicion in the minds of Adrian's two surviving brothers and close family friends that Carrington may have been put up to the job by someone else.

Carrington was unemployed yet police allegedly told the family that he had maintained a bank account in the Isle of Man. Just before he died he allegedly told his brother that he wanted to go to the Isle of Man to get some money and then go on to Holland. A chequebook for the account was found after his death. Police told one of Adrian's brothers that some £20,000 was transferred into this account before the fire, but later they dismissed it as 'irrelevant' to the arson attack.

Carrington's simple confession also did not explain all of the facts of the fire itself.

Fire Brigade investigators found that two areas of the stairs had been so badly burnt that the fire-fighters' feet had gone straight through the floorboards. However floor areas closest to the settee - the supposed starting point of the fire - were relatively untouched. This led fire investigators to consider the possibility that the fire was started in three places and not one. Something highly combustible - perhaps petrol - may have been present at those points on the stairs where the fire-fighters' feet had gone through.

The Brigade directed the forensic team bought in by the Home Office to these 'suspect' spots as the fire brigade has no facilities to carry out forensic testing itself. Although the Home Office experts didn't disagree with the fire brigade's assertion that the spots were 'suspect', the leads were not followed up. Despite the forensic pointers this crucial piece of evidence, which suggested that the arson attack was not a mere prank and must have been planned in advance of the party, was ignored. The inference was, that Carrington's simple confession was not the whole truth: he must have bought something along to the party with which to fan the flames.

 

[Psychotext]

Fucking hell.

 

[Cosmonaut X]

Not entirely sure of the source - reading more just now - but this blog has been on the Rose angle:

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2012/11/14/steven-messham-is-not-just-a-child-abuse-victim-hes-a-hero/

...and this was interesting in light of the "police showed photos of the abuser"...

http://incubusblog.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/lord-mcalpines-paedophile-cousin/

 

[DECK'ARD]

This is getting difficult to get my head around now, it's fucking huge. Don't know whether to be angry or thoroughly depressed.

The bit about the drugs and porn trade in the article about the Brighton arson attack. In a pre-Internet age this would have been about supply and demand as well as the abuse of children. Money, from some of the richest people in the land.

I always wondered where Messham's book of photos of the abuse had come from and why they were made. We know they existed, and a court order was made to have them destroyed.

We possibly know why now, and it's fucking shameful.

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

An american journalist has been banned from the UK but only when she stated she wanted to investigate the abuse cover-up.

Leah McGrath Goodman - Banned from the UK.

Does she have a bad history or something?

edit: She was banned a year ago when looking into the abuse at Haut de la Garenne!

 

[DECK'ARD]

An american journalist has been banned from the UK but only when she stated she wanted to investigate the abuse cover-up.

Leah McGrath Goodman - Banned from the UK.

Does she have a bad history or something?

I could almost cry for our country at the moment, what the fuck is going on.

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

This stuff is blowing my mind. If you tried to make a film that involved a conspiracy of this potential magnitude, the audience would laugh at how absurd it would seem. Goddamn.

 

[DECK'ARD]

This stuff is blowing my mind. If you tried to make a film that involved a conspiracy of this potential magnitude, the audience would laugh at how absurd it would seem. Goddamn.

Tell me about it.

And as soon as one more bit comes to light that leads to something else. I'm really stunned by the arson in Brighton and its wider implications.

But when people are physically, sexually and emotionally abusing children for years they'd have no concern for their well-being. Merely their silence. I really don't like where this is going. I hope the media and the public have the stomach for it as well.

 

[phisheep]

Can't stink any more? It can:

http://m.politics.co.uk/news/2012/11/14/peers-want-probe-into-child-abuse-inquiry-dropped

I don't think that this is quite what it seems. I've been to the (uncorrected) Hansard transcript and, besides an opening slip of the tongue by Lord Lloyd of Berwick who got Lord McAlpine and Lord McNally muddled up, the main thrust of the (very short) argument seems to be over the terms of reference for the Macur inquiry and in particular whether the focus on "whether the Waterhouse Inquiry was properly constituted and did its job" is in effect setting up Waterhouse as yet another fall guy and diverting attention from enquiring into child abuse and instead into the constitution and function of yet another enquiry.

As is their custom, the Lords are way too polite to put it that way.

 

[DECK'ARD]

I don't think that this is quite what it seems. I've been to the (uncorrected) Hansard transcript and, besides an opening slip of the tongue by Lord Lloyd of Berwick who got Lord McAlpine and Lord McNally muddled up, the main thrust of the (very short) argument seems to be over the terms of reference for the Macur inquiry and in particular whether the focus on "whether the Waterhouse Inquiry was properly constituted and did its job" is in effect setting up Waterhouse as yet another fall guy and diverting attention from enquiring into child abuse and instead into the constitution and function of yet another enquiry.

As is their custom, the Lords are way too polite to put it that way.

Whatever is going on after the latest bits I have about zero expectations of any of this as it stands getting to grips with what has gone wrong here.

Unless something has the remit to look at absolutely everything, how do you even begin to do that with something this massive? It's all interlinked. And if not in public how will we ever know the same mistakes and cover-ups as before aren't being done again.

 

[Brera]

One thing I've learned from Conspiracy theories is that most have at least 80% of truth to them.

 

[DECK'ARD]

One thing I've learned from Conspiracy theories is that most have at least 80% of truth to them.

We are long past conspiracy theory and into facts.

There just seems a distinct unwillingness to pull those facts together and find where else it all goes. All 3 main political parties are now implicated as well.

 

[Brera]

This happens time and time again.

Politicians, journos, mainstream bloggers suddenly unable to join the dots. Happened with Iraq in 2003 and the dodgy dossier...in fact this is all playing out the same. BBC/Newsnight ruffles feathers, guns come out, BBC embarassed over something related, resignations, calls to have BBC reformed, story killed.

Depressing.

 

[syllogism]

One thing I've learned from Conspiracy theories is that most have at least 80% of truth to them.

Sure, if you ignore the overwhelmingly number of cases when they are wrong. Just about the most depressing and ridiculous claim I've seen in a while

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

I really don't want to don a tin-foil hat at this moment but it is getting more and more difficult not to consider looking at some plans for one as this scandal goes on.

 

[DECK'ARD]

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/category/paedophile-scandal-its-taken-30-years-to-open-up-a-cover-up/

And this is the roll of honour listed by MP Paul Flynn on his site recently…a list of respondent witnesses mentioned in the 2002 Enquiry Report…meant to be pulped in a cover-up, once copy survived and wound up at the Independent on Sunday:

R1: Fell to his death from a railway bridge. Former resident of Bryn Alyn Home.

R2: May, 1978, committed suicide aged 16 by taking an overdose of pain killing tablets. Former resident of Bryn Alyn.

R3: March 1985, was found dead in a flat in which he was living in poverty, aged 21. Former resident of Little Acton Assessment centre.

R4: April 1992, died in a fire aged 32 in premises in which he lived in Sussex. The inquest verdict – unlawful killing. Former resident of Bryn Alyn.

R5: June 1992, found dead aged 18 in a bed-sitter. Cause of death, acute respiratory failure due to solvent abuse. Former resident of Bryn Alyn.

R6: January, 1994, committed suicide by hanging, aged 27.

R7: April, 1994, died aged 27 from alcohol abuse. Allegations that he had been the subject of a serious sexual offence. Former Bryn Estyn resident.

R8: July 1994, found dead in a car, aged 18. Former foster child in Clwyd where he allegedly suffered from maltreatment.

R9: November, 1994, committed suicide aged 16 by hanging.

R10: February, 1995, died from and apparent heroin overdose aged 37. Former resident of Bryn Alyn where it was alleged he had been sexually abused.

R11: February, 1995, hanged himself aged 31. Allegations of sexual abuse against care workers.

R12: May, 1995, found hanging aged 27. Allegations that he had been sexually abused by a senior care worker. Former resident of Bryn Estyn.

I don't have any words left now.

Also:

British citizens have a right to know the full story. Stay tuned for Part Two of this Slog Special later today….as the speculation reaches higher and higher into the men around David Cameron.

I've been avoiding blogs for the summaries, but what comes out just keeps confirming them.

 

[Psychotext]

Good god. =/

 

[Steelrain]

Hooooooly fuck.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Part 2 is up, very long read but very interesting:

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/

More names mentioned, some recurring ones mentioned again, and also makes the very valid point that even those politicians not complicit in all this would want to keep a lid on it because no one knows where exactly it will all end. Also mentions a Royal but unnamed.

As I said I will keep all this out of the summaries until we have proper articles and sources, but yeah only a lot of public pressure and it being in the public domain is going to bring all this out.

It's all rotten.

 

[NinjaFridge]

What the shit...

 

[kitch9]

I could almost cry for our country at the moment, what the fuck is going on.

We do need to presume people are innocent until proven guilty.... There's enough people running around with pitchforks without foreigners stirring the pot.

Let's let the police investigate without prejudice, and try to find evidence so they can bring a conviction.

 

[DECK'ARD]

We do need to presume people are innocent until proven guilty.... There's enough people running around with pitchforks without foreigners stirring the pot.

Let's let the police investigate without prejudice, and try to find evidence so they can bring a conviction.

You mean like they haven't done for over 3 decades? With inquiries limited in remit and not allowed to look past it or necessarily even at each other? Despite nearly everything being interlinked and relevant to the other.

Are you keeping up to date with things, because we are into unlawful killing now as well.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

I didn't think it was possible but this thread gets even more depressing every time I check it. Good job with the updates though deck'ard.

 

[DECK'ARD]

I didn't think it was possible but this thread gets even more depressing every time I check it. Good job with the updates though deck'ard.

It got me very down earlier indeed, but I will keep on.

How we are feeling is nothing compared to the hundreds, probably thousands, of victims and families we have let down and continue to let down for decades. Justice has to be done, and the public have to demand answers.

 

[DECK'ARD]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...se-victims-step-forward-in-wales-8317070.html

More alleged child abuse victims step forward in Wales

Dozens more victims of alleged child abuse in North Wales care homes have come forward since the unfounded Newsnight allegations against Lord McAlpine.

Keith Towler, Children’s Commissioner for Wales is now handling 52 new cases including 35 relating to the original inquiry and a further 17 in connection with historic allegations elsewhere including two from England.

It is expected that some of those could be referred to the inquiry by the head of the National Crime Agency set up following the BBC report earlier this month.

The Independent has also learnt that a number of leading child abuse lawyers have been contacted in recent days by victims claiming their memories of abuse have been rekindled by the publicity.

Yesterday however senior peers said a judicial review of the four-year Waterhouse inquiry into the care home scandal ordered by the Prime Minister should now be scrapped following the retraction by abuse victim Steven Messham.

Lord Berwick, a former Appeal Court judge, said further inquiry by Mrs Justice Julia Macur was now irrelevant. He was backed by Lord Mackay of Clashfern, the former Conservative Lord Chancellor, and Baroness Butler-Sloss, also a retired judge.

“There is no longer any need for another high court judge to go over the work done by Sir Ronald Waterhouse and that on the contrary we should all be grateful for the impeccable nature of his inquiry and the thoroughness of his report,” Lord Lloyd said.

But Liberal Democrat Justice Minister Lord McNally, said the review would continue in light of accusations over alleged shortcomings.

Meanwhile Lancashire Police urged anyone who believed they were the victim of sexual abuse by the late Sir Cyril Smith to come forward. The former Rochdale MP was accused by Labour MP Simon Danczuk.

We can at least be thankful the way Messham was treated hasn't put more victims off coming forward.

 

[phisheep]

Whatever is going on after the latest bits I have about zero expectations of any of this as it stands getting to grips with what has gone wrong here.

Unless something has the remit to look at absolutely everything, how do you even begin to do that with something this massive? It's all interlinked. And if not in public how will we ever know the same mistakes and cover-ups as before aren't being done again.

I think there's a huge danger here that all these various enquiries will trip over each other and that they will put off potential witnesses from coming forward because there is no clear outcome.

For example, Dame Janet Smith has put out a call for witnesses in respect of abuse by Savile - but hers is an inquiry into the corporate practices of the BBC. I can't see that victims would want to put themselves through that for the sake of righting (or not righting) damn corporate practices.

On the other hand, a single overarching enquiry would take far too long and probably trip over itself.

In my mind, there probably ought to be two enquiries. One into actual child abuse, and give the damn enquiry the power to prosecute so that witnesses don't have to go through it all more than once, so that it cannot be interfered with by some combination of parliament/government/police/CPS/whoever. There's no reason an enquiry should not have that power (hell, even the RSPCA can prosecute). Such an enquiry could not be fully public though, for the protection of witnesses and evidence and of not damaging the course of the ensuing trials.

The second should be into the institutions, every last one of them. Parliament/police/CPS/Care homes/local authorities/churches/hospitals/schools/charities and whatever else is thrown up by the first one. It should be required to give interim reports and empowered to require actions and discovery of documents as well as questioning witnesses. Otherwise it'll never end because the whole thing is too big.

 

[Polari]

Lord Berwick, a former Appeal Court judge, said further inquiry by Mrs Justice Julia Macur was now irrelevant. He was backed by Lord Mackay of Clashfern, the former Conservative Lord Chancellor, and Baroness Butler-Sloss, also a retired judge.

“There is no longer any need for another high court judge to go over the work done by Sir Ronald Waterhouse and that on the contrary we should all be grateful for the impeccable nature of his inquiry and the thoroughness of his report,” Lord Lloyd said.

Something to hide?

Probably time to stop mucking about and bring in the big guns anyway:

 

[DECK'ARD]

I think there's a huge danger here that all these various enquiries will trip over each other and that they will put off potential witnesses from coming forward because there is no clear outcome.

For example, Dame Janet Smith has put out a call for witnesses in respect of abuse by Savile - but hers is an inquiry into the corporate practices of the BBC. I can't see that victims would want to put themselves through that for the sake of righting (or not righting) damn corporate practices.

On the other hand, a single overarching enquiry would take far too long and probably trip over itself.

In my mind, there probably ought to be two enquiries. One into actual child abuse, and give the damn enquiry the power to prosecute so that witnesses don't have to go through it all more than once, so that it cannot be interfered with by some combination of parliament/government/police/CPS/whoever. There's no reason an enquiry should not have that power (hell, even the RSPCA can prosecute). Such an enquiry could not be fully public though, for the protection of witnesses and evidence and of not damaging the course of the ensuing trials.

The second should be into the institutions, every last one of them. Parliament/police/CPS/Care homes/local authorities/churches/hospitals/schools/charities and whatever else is thrown up by the first one. It should be required to give interim reports and empowered to require actions and discovery of documents as well as questioning witnesses. Otherwise it'll never end because the whole thing is too big.

Thanks, very informative.

The inability to prosecute in all this to date has been the most baffling, and the most suspect.

 

[phisheep]

Thanks, very informative.

The inability to prosecute in all this to date has been the most baffling, and the most suspect.

I've no doubt there were at least some orchestrated cover-ups and a significant amount of blind-eye-turning. Maybe not where we'd expect though.

But I suspect that much of the failure to prosecute simply came down to the weight of evidence available to put before a court. You can almost hear the echoing tones of an expensive defence barrister now "my client, a man of previous good character ... you have heard many witnesses to his charitable works ... the witness, an unstable boy, a fantasist who has been in and out of care homes his whole life ..."

[Of course, we've heard all this before - in the trial of Timothy Evans for the murders done by Christie ("a man of good character, a special police constable") and the subsequent whitewash of the Scott-Henderson enquiry which was rushed through before Christie's execution].

There's a point, though, where the evidence becomes overwhelming, and it comes with numbers. I very much hope that victims will come forward now in sufficient numbers to bring successful prosecutions. Because it's pretty hard to argue against the weight of 20/40/100 independent witnesses. Pretty damn hard indeed.

Lord Berwick, a former Appeal Court judge, said further inquiry by Mrs Justice Julia Macur was now irrelevant. He was backed by Lord Mackay of Clashfern, the former Conservative Lord Chancellor, and Baroness Butler-Sloss, also a retired judge.

Now, that's not at all fair reporting. Not going to go back and read it all again, but Baroness Butler-Sloss said expressly that the remit of the enquiry should be extended, not that it should be stopped. He wasn't exactly backed by Lord MacKay either.

This is bad enough already, we ought not to use bad reporting to make it seem worse.

 

[DECK'ARD]

It's all beginning to come out now.

Images of the complete article from the now defunct Scallywag magazine that first made accusations in the 1990's of there being a paedophile ring at the heart of Government have now surfaced:

Looks like quite a read, open the images in a new tab to do so.

Edit: Holy fuck, only on the first page and not only does it clearly tie up with what we know now but it also gets even more insane.

Edit2: Refers to the porn ring mentioned in that Brighton arson attack article, and also to the repression of photographic evidence which we know to be true now.

 

[phisheep]

This McAlpine stuff is gonna be tricky to puzzle out. There seem at one stage in the early '80s to have been three Lord McAlpines around at the same time - all the same family, one hereditary and two life peers. No wonder it is confusing.

 

[DECK'ARD]

This is mind blowing, just at start of page 2 and this isn't conspiracy theories it's outlining it all in black and white.

 

[Oxx]

The first thing I saw was 'ruptured anus'.

I don't think I should read this before going to sleep.

 

[DECK'ARD]

It mentions Messham, says he was beaten up twice after the story bloke.

Another had chemicals sprayed in their eyes.

This is getting plain depressing again :/

Edit: What the fuck! A BBC journalist investigating it had an 'unexplained burglary'.

 

[timetokill]

Good god... my head is spinning just trying to make sense of this all. Thank you to DECK'ARD for his post, is there a good quick update on the most recent developments? I'm just jumping in now and this is hard to follow.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Good god... my head is spinning just trying to make sense of this all. Thank you to DECK'ARD for his post, is there a good quick update on the most recent developments? I'm just jumping in now and this is hard to follow.

The summary in the OP is up to date apart from the last couple of pages, the last couple of pages though are also the hardest to stomach or comprehend.

This really is all unbelievable, I'd recommend just reading the Scallywag article from the 1990's posted above. Everything seems to tie up so far, and a lot of stuff that hasn't come out yet.

Be warned though, it is thoroughly depressing.

 

[NinjaFridge]

I was having trouble opening the images in new tabs for some reason. Links incase anyone needs them.

http://i.imgur.com/ccFfC.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mXWi6.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/sEUuX.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/r6OXa.jpg

 

[Cosmonaut X]

Be interested to know if there was any legal action taken against Scallywag over that article - naming Laud, McAlpine and others like that would surely have caused some consternation on their part?

EDIT:

All I can find so far on Scallywag being sued for libel is over John Major suing it and other magazines in the early '90s re: Latimer...

 

[DECK'ARD]

Be interested to know if there was any legal action taken against Scallywag over that article - naming Laud, McAlpine and others like that would surely have caused some consternation on their part?

The Wikipedia page is impressively short, they were sued but not by them:

In 1993 it was sued under English libel law by the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, John Major, over reporting rumours that he had had an affair with a Downing Street caterer, even though it had said the allegations were false. By also suing the magazine's distributors, he received a settlement from them, and they passed the costs onto the magazine. Scallywag's financial position never recovered.

That would be the John Major who we now know was having an affair with Edwina Currie.

The Government effectively bankrupted them.

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

Be interested to know if there was any legal action taken against Scallywag over that article - naming Laud, McAlpine and others like that would surely have caused some consternation on their part?

According to Wikipedia, no. It says that John Major took them to court over an article saying he had an affair with a caterer and they lost. He sued their distributor who passed the bill to them and they never financially recovered and went under.

Or what DECK'ARD posted. Damn, he's quick

 

[DECK'ARD]

More on Scallywag, it just gets worse and another name crops up again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Regan

In 1989, Regan founded Scallywag magazine in South Dorset when the lure of journalism drew him back from his retirement in Butterfly World on Lodmoor Park, Weymouth. Initially Scallywag was a local magazine seeking to expose local issues. A recurrent theme was illegal tipping on the nearby Lodmoor refuse deport where he accused council staff of taking bribes to allow dangerous chemicals to be tipped. He also claimed widespread police corruption associated with Freemasonry in Dorset and claimed to have been beaten up by two off-duty policemen in College Lane, Weymouth. He also 'named and shamed' people he perceived as being paedophiles. However, like so many of his campaigns, no substantial legally acceptable evidence was ever produced.

Regan was inspired by the early years of Private Eye, but he felt that the Eye had become too cautious of libel actions and determined not to fall into the same trap. At one difficult time he sold Scallywag to a friend, who had no assets, which allowed Regan greater freedom to pursue stories. Scallywag started to attract a loyal readership, although the major newspaper distributors refused to handle it (a situation Regan regarded as tantamount to censorship). Nevertheless in 1991 Scallywag moved to London and became a national publication.

Scallywag became a news story in itself in 1993 when it stoked a rumour that John Major, then Prime Minister, was having an affair with Clare Latimer, who was a freelance cook who helped with state dinners at 10 Downing Street. A story in the New Statesman showed how the rumours had been covertly mentioned in mainstream papers. When Major heard of the New Statesman story he sued both them and Scallywag for libel; he also sued the distributors and printers of both papers, which contributed to nearly driving the New Statesman out of business.

Clare Latimer later claimed that "Mr Major used her as a "decoy" to prevent what would have been the more politically damaging exposure of the affair he had with Mrs Currie from 1984 to 1988."[8] New Statesman editor Peter Wilby said that, had Major's previous adultery been known at the time of the libel case, the outcome may have been different.

Out of business

Scallywag limped on but a 1994 story about Conservative politician Julian Lewis led to another series of libel actions which the magazine lost comprehensively. Scallywag disappeared from print and moved to a site on the World Wide Web instead. Lewis followed and won damages from Scallywag's internet service provider, closing the site down.

Regan responded by accusing Lewis of lying, and decided to attempt to sabotage Lewis' campaign in New Forest East where he was Conservative candidate for the 1997 election. Unfortunately for Regan, Lewis was aware of an obscure section of electoral law and when he obtained a taped confession from Regan that his aim was to cost Lewis votes, Lewis was able to get Regan convicted of spreading false statements about an election candidate.

 

[Cosmonaut X]

The Wikipedia page is impressively short, they were sued but not by them:

SNIP

That would be the John Major who we now know was having an affair with Edwina Currie.

The Government effectively bankrupted them.

Interesting to speculate whether going after them for that may have sunk them without having to publicly confront their allegations - all depends on timing though.

Regan, the now-deceased editor of the magazine, had this to say in a letter printed elsewhere online:

There was, to my certain knowledge, at least one resignation from the Conservative office in Smith Square once we had published our evidence and named names.

Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, Dr. Julian Lewis, now Conservative MP for New Forest (East) but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.

All of a sudden very private information, some of it even privileged between ourselves and our lawyer during the John Major libel action, was being published in selected, pro-Conservative sections of the media.

Subsequently, during a court case initiated by Lewis, I was able in my defence to seek discovery of documents and asked to see the seized files. The paedophile papers were missing. This is a very great shame, because Sir Ronald Waterhouse certainly should have been aware of them...

 

[DECK'ARD]

At the rate we're going we would need to try and blow up Parliament again to sort this out.

And again, Julian Lewis:

Cameron isn't too far from the doors that are being opened himself.

Everything from that October 5th blog is being confirmed so far:

http://www.ccs-rochford.co.uk/spivey/?p=6251

 

[Cosmonaut X]

...and Prince Charles keeps on coming up again, and again, and again.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Fucking hell at the stuff on page 2 of the Scallywag article. One of the rapists at the children's homes was a Police Superintendent, all 6 members of the police accused took early retirement. No prosecutions followed.

The Crown Prosecution Service said "It is not in the public's interest to prosecute these police officers".

I'm at a fucking loss with all this.