UNNATURAL SEX: New Propaganda Storm as Labour MPs capitalise on 'secret' Thatcher-Hayman letterSAFF research shows it's bunkum....Click Here for the true background.
WE TOLD YOU
SO! Dickens 'Westminster Dossier' was just another
collection of third-hand anecdotal tittle-tattle sent to him in letters
which didn't stand the test of law. Allegations against Leon
Brittan utterly false -
1981: March 12th; Trial of Tom O'Carroll, leader of Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE). sentenced for two years for 'corrupting public morals'
1981: March 17th: (Daily Star). I WON'T BE GAGGED: Dickens intends to name the diplomat whose name is involved in the PIE child-porn scandal 'this week'. "Dickens fears an establishment cover up". Crown Prosecution Service had before O'Carroll's trial decided there was no prospect of a conviction with 10 members of PIE (including the diplomat) under the law as it then stood, but Dickens says the diplomat was allowed to use his PIE pseudonym in court to hide his true identity. (true) Attorney general Sir Michael Havers said the diplomat was an ardent collector of pornography but was not involved in organising PIE and a prosecution would not be in the publics' interest.
(Ed: Note: A very important point here: When Dickens points to an 'establishment cover up' at this time he is in fact talking about the Old Boy network protecting one of its own, NOT an allegation that other people 'in high places' are involved in PIE which is how journalists today are angling it. )
1981: March 19th: Daily Express. I WILL NAME MORE NAMES: Geoffrey Dickens warned his critics that his campaign against sexual perversion in public life is only just beginning. Earlier he had named Sir Peter Hayman as the mystery diplomat. Dickens doesn't know the other names of people involved in the police inquiry but if he finds them out he will name them. "There are organisations funded by public money which have given the Paedophile Information Exchange a platform. I am gathering documentary evidence now and will name the organisations when I am ready. The taxpayer has a right to know what drain his money is going down. Inquiries he said were centreing on organisations which received grants from the Department of Health and the Home Office. Dickens said there had been an "Establishment cover-up" to prevent the diplomat's prosecution"
Sir Michael Havers denied there had been any suggestion of a cover-up. "Because there was no corruption to the public there was no prosecution" he explained.
(Ed: there is something not right with this report. The other members of PIE caught in the trawl along with Hayman were named using their actual names. Only Hayman was allowed a pseudonym. Dickens could have discovered the names of the other people by simply looking at the charge sheet.)
1981: March 20th: MEET MY NEW LOVE: (Daily Star) MP who exposed diplomat revealed last night "I've left my wife" Dickens made the shock announcement with his new love nurse Maureen Knight at his side. He told the assembled press "Don't all rush to the phone please lads I haven't had time to tell my wife yet".
1981: March 21st: (Daily Mail) I'VE NO SECOND SECRET LOVE: The MP in the child-porn controversy, Geoffrey Dickens, denied yesterday that there had been a third secret love in his life.
1981: March 21st (Daily Mail) WIFE; HE TOLD ME OF A SECOND WOMAN. Geoffrey Dickens wife revealed last night that her husband had told her of his friendship with another woman as well as his affair with Mrs Knight.
1981; March 21st (Guardian.) Mr Dickens yesterday admitted this relationship with a third women to the London Standard today which published a love poem from Dickens to the third woman. The diplomat affair rumbled on. Keith Wickenden MP tabled a motion callon on Mr Dickens to say who told him that sir |Peter's name had featured in the committal hearing against PIE. Did the information come from official sources - it is understood that the source was a member of the parliamentary journalists lobby.
1981: March 21st (Guardian) A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE. "Like a lot of self-made men, Dickens has an intense suspicion of the smooth well-bred kind of Tory who was born into privilege. This sense of an exclusive upper-class conspiracy combined with revulsion at Sir |Peter Hayman's sexual proclivities led Mr Dickens to name him this week. (Ed: note that the naming of Hayman was not to expose a group of Westminster paedophiles but to break the Old Boy network.
1981: March 22nd (News of World) Later he said: "I was in love with Pat Briggs at one stage" the affair lasted for nine months. Dickens lied about the affair with Pat Briggs at first.
1981: 22 March: (Sunday Mirror) The spurned woman in the life of MP Geoffrey Dickens yesterday spoke of the fun times and sexy romps. Naturally we were lovers, I don't know why he is trying to deny it. A married man only strays for one reason. "
Sunday Mirror Comment: "What a two-faced two-timer" Pat Briggs is quoted as saying "When we were alone he would sometimes say "If only my constituents could see me now. They might not be able to see him now but at least they now know what sort of a man he is."
Sir Peter Hayman was still in hiding yesterday - moving around the continent.
1981: March 22nd: (Sunday Telegraph:) SIR PETER: HOW THE STORY GOT OUT. How did Sir Peter Hayman's identity come to light? For the answer it is necessary to look not so much at the MP Geoffrey Dickens who took advantage of parliamentary privilege to make Sir Peter's role in the affair public, but at events surrounding the police action against the Paedophile Information Exchange, the group advocating the legalisation of sex with children of which Sir Peter was a member , which took place six months ago. It was in October last year that committal proceedings for the Old Bailey trial were held at London's Wells Street magistrates court. Sir Peter's role in circulating child pornography y among a group of PIE members was a prominent part of the evidence compiled by the Obscene Publications Squad at Scotland Yard and presented by the Director of public prosecutions at the hearing. Within weeks of the committal hearing the satirical magazine Private Eye published a detailed account of Sir Peter's activities, referring to his pseudonym, R Henderson, his tenancy of a flat in Notting Hill Gate, his membership of PIE, and his role in the legal proceedings. It is now clear that this information came from a police officer. In effect the police had taken matters into their own hands to expose Sir Peter to the public gaze, even before the trial proper had begun. The other nine members of the PIE ring were made to give their real names and were properly identified before the magistrates. This has been taken by some officers to be the beginnings of a cover up to protect the one distinguished man in the case. In the end it took Dickens misuse of parliamentary privilege to place Sir Peter's disgrace on the public record.
1981: March 23rd: (Daily Star: ) Dickens said he had been sent thousands of letters and telegrams of support. He thought when he had examined further material that has come into his possession he would have "further evidence against child pornographers which he would place in the hands of the Lord Chancellor"
1981 March 24th (Daily Star) Geoffrey Dickens vowed yesterday that he would never betray the source of his information about ex-diplomat Sir Peter Hayman. He revealed he was compiling a dossier on the sex scandal which he will hand directly to Lord Hailsham, the Lord Chancellor. He added that he still believed there had been a top-level cover-up of Sir Peter's alleged involvement with paedophiles. " I am determined to extract from my vast mailbag a lot of original documents which will provide further evidence of child pornography" (Ed; Here we have the first indication of a 'dossier' from Dickens. We are titling this dossier the Hayman Dossier for clarity. )
1981: March 24th (Guardian). Geoffrey Dickens yesterday said that he would go to prison rather than disclose the identity of the person , believed to be a police officer, who gave him information about Sir Peter Hayman's involvement with PIE. Dickens said he had received overwhelming public support "I would be very surprised if the mountain of mail which I have received does not include evidence about the involvement of others". (Ed: At this point Dickens has widened the scope of his 'dossier' to include other people supposedly involved in child pornography. Note that he is relying for evidence on accusations made in letters to him. )
1981 March 24th (Daily Mail) I DIDN'T WRECK MPs MARRIAGE: Mrs Knight said I would never want anybody to think I broke up his marriage. It was broken up before by Mrs Briggs. The couple plan to marry as soon as Mr Dickens and his wife Norma are divorced.
1981: March 25th (Daily Telegraph) Dickens quizzed by Yard. The police have already announced that Cdr Lampard is heading an inquiry requested by Sir Tony Hetherington, Director of Public Prosecutions into matters relating to the dissemination of information concerning Sir Peter Hayman.
1981 April 1st (Standard) ROMEO MP BACK WITH HIS WIFE: Two weeks ago Dickens announced he was leaving his wife after 25 years of marriage to live with 43 year old Mrs Maureen Knight. Next day the Standard revealed that Dickens had another skeleton, 41 year old Mrs Pat Briggs who had an affair with the MP for nine months. The MP planned to set up home with Mrs Knight, but yesterday he decided to clear up this private mess and go back to his wife. so he telephoned Mrs Knight and ended it. "I had to return to the woman I love" he now hoped to get the child- porn campaign back on the rails . "I will probably be naming names again"
1981: April 2nd (Standard) DICKENS AND THE SAD TALE OF THREE WOMEN. I would sooner present Mr Dickens MP and self-appointed public moralist with a magnum of tart vinegar which would leave the same sour taste in his mouth that his sordid affairs have left in mine. In the space of a few weeks 49 year old Dickens has inflicted enormous pain on three women and five children. First came the announcement that he was leaving his wife Norma to live with his mistress, Mrs Maureen Knight, an announcement delivered to a crowded press reception before he had the grace or courage to phone Mrs Dickens herself. The next day Mrs Pat Briggs 42, disclosed that she had had an affair with Mr Dickens for nine months. He sent her love poems and letters on house of commons notepaper. She said Dickens had promised to take her and her 7 year old son on holiday. He did not. He has shown not an ounce of discretion or sensitivity towards the women and children involved.
1981: April 5th (Sunday Mirror) BACK ON THE LINE TO LOVER. Geoffrey Dickens has been in touch with his mistress again - after returning to his wife Norma in a fanfare of publicity. On Friday Dickens called her from a phone box while I was interviewing her at her home . After he rang off, Mrs Knight told me: " That's cheered me up. Nothing's changed. We still feel the same way about each other. He will eventually come back to me". He had to go back home to his wife because of pressure from his constituency party.
1981 August 2nd (Sunday People) DICKENS STOOD ME UP SAYS LOVER; Heartbroken Maureen Knight claims she was stood up by Dickens on the eve of the Royal Wedding - Our relationship had continued despite reports that Geoffrey was back with his wife. On Tuesday just before the wedding he said he hoped we would be together for good within hours. I got out of his car outside my house and he suddenly wound up the window and drove off at high speed. I haven't seen him since.
1981 August 3 (Sun). HE'S A DICKENS OF A LIAR! Geoffrey Dickens stood her up as they were on the brink of a new life together. "I was seeing him regularly again. He told me he would move in with me before the end of July" Maureen Knight said yesterday. "He has been telling lies all along - to me, to his wife and to everybody else"
1982 : April 20th : (Daily Mail). Dickens goes on a crash diet to raise money for Huddersfield Sea Cadets.
1982: April 23rd (Daily Mail). MI5 HAS BURGLED MY FLAT: Dickens told MPs in the house "I believe it is possible that MI5 or some other agency may have been responsible for the clumsy break-ins at his London flat and the home of Timothy Raison. Mr Dickens believed that he and Mr Raison may have been singled out by MI5 because they have been active in dealing with the need for data protection. (Ed: Note that Dickens is not claiming underhandedness in connection with his child-porn campaign which has gone quiet, but not for long...)
1983 June 2nd. Dickens leaves Huddersfield and is parachuted into the election for the new electoral constituency of Littleborough and Saddleworth near Rochdale and Oldham.
1983: June 23rd: (Guardian) Tory MPs press for vote to restore hanging: Geoffrey Dickens tabled a motion calling for the death penalty for four categories of murder, terrorism, murder of police, prison officers, armed crime and the murder of children.
1983: August 25th (Daily Express) EIGHT TOP NAMES ON MY LIST OF SHAME. Dickens reveals that eight public figures were on his 'list of shame' and that one of them had been a personal friend but he is still planning to name them in the Commons unless the Home Secretary takes action. "I've got eight names of big people, really important names, public figures. and I am going to expose them in Parliament.
(Ed: Coincidentally (?) , on the same day The director of public prosecutions is given a file on paedophilia by police -)
the work of two years by Scotland Yard's Obscene publication squad who went through 24 issues of the house magazine of the Paedophile Information Exchange which blatantly advertises the perverted interests of its members.
The Squad's thick file containing the names of 'the famous the wealthy and hundreds of anonymous citizens' was sent from the Yard yesterday. Dickens' own list of eight public figures involved in that sex scandal was handed to the Director earlier this week.
His previous campaign to 'out' Sir Peter Hayman resulted in 8,000 letters from people who HAD TALES TO TELL of others like Hayman. Dickens said 'We ruled out anyone who had only one or two accusations against him. The others we sifted until we were down to a couple of dozen on whom there appeared to be considerable evidence that they were unhealthy perverts. Dickens used House of Commons researchers, enlisted local reporters, and friends to help go through records, check files, even empty dustbins of some of the suspects. Discussions with Scotland Yard followed. Dickens said the Yard had already been working on their own Case but I told them what I had. I suspect their list will be much bigger. Did he fear for his safety. I thought about that and the list is sealed and deposited. with orders for it only to be opened and disclosed should anything happen to me.
(Ed: Okay, Two important things here.
(1) Dickens' first dossier (the Hayman Dossier) was expanded to include others he suspected using the expediency of accusations in letters sent to him after his last bout of publicity. His 'dossier' actually duplicated detailed detective work which had already being professionally done by Scotland Yard since the PIE trial in 1981. Presumably Dickens was kept abreast of this by his police informant. To get publicity Dickens co-incided his presentation of his own '8 names' to Scotland Yard with the Police's file to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
(2) At this point both the Yard and Dickens were singing from the same hymn sheet and there was no suggestion o f a cover-up.
The question is: What did the DPP do with the Yard investigation?
1983: November 25th: (Daily Mail) VICE RING AT THE PALACE SAYS DICKENS. A dossier which claims that a homosexual vice ring is operating inside Buckingham Palace has been handed to the Home Secretary, Leon Brittan. by Geoffrey Dickens. Dickens said the Home Secretary had promised to investigate the allegations against ten men . Dickens said there was evidence that young male staff who entered the palace as footmen, servants and cooks were being dragged into a web of vice where wealthy old men paid for their favours. He drew attention to the case of a 16 year old boy who was given a kitchen job at the Palace after leaving catering college. After two years he was recommended for a new job as footman to a senior British diplomat known to be a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange. (Ed: presumably Hayman) The boy later left this post and according to Dickens became the plaything for millionaires in America.
(Ed: There is Crucial information in this report.
(1) Is the 'Palace Vice Ring Dossier' a new dossier, or are the 10 people included in the list he gave to the Met in August? We think it is the same list with the addition of a new informant (the young cook).
(2) It is vitally important to remember that homosexuality had only been made legal for over 21s in 1967 in England. However in Scotland and Ireland it wasn't made legal until 1980 and 1982 respectively, therefore die-hard homophobic like Dickens were still trying to stigmatise and obstruct gays. One way they often did that was to accuse them of having sex with under 21s. It is therefore quite possible that ALL of the people on Dickens' list were closet gays whom he had decided to victimise by outing them for moral reasons. To Dickens and his supporters sex between men was a dirty perversion whatever the law said.
1983: December 2nd: (D.Mail: ) SEX CRUSADE TORY MPs OFFICE RAIDED. police are investigating a break in at Dickens; office in Dean's Yard. "I wonder if they were after my files" None of his files were in the drawer".
1984: February 9th. MPS MYSTERY RAIDER; A desk belonging to anti-paedophile MP Geoffrey Dickens has been broken into but nothing was taken. "Dickens tells me The files are safe and says he is still collecting evidence on his controversial inquiry" (Ed: So four months after Dickens unveiled his 'Palace Vice Ring Dossier' (which is basically a gay-bashing extension of his Hayman Dossier) he states that HIS FILES ARE SAFE and that he is still collecting evidence for it. )
1984 October 16th (Daily Mail). Let the country vote to bring back the rope: Dickens demands an immediate referendum on the question of restoring capital punishment for terrorist murder. (Ed: Rent-a-quote is at it again. The IRA blew up the Grand Hotel in Brighton on October 12th)
1986 March 16th MP SLAMMED OVER RAPE CLAIM; Geoffrey Dickens was accused by a shadow minister yesterday of an irresponsible abuse of parliamentary privilege for disclosing in the Commons the name of a doctor alleged to have raped an 8 yr old girl. Dickens is unrepentant and threatens to use parliamentary immunity again tomorrow to name a vicar said to have sexually assaulted an 11 year old boy. There was insufficient evidence to convict the doctor but following his naming it may now be necessary to force a trial to conclude the matter.
1986:March 16th (Sunday Mirror) I'll Name a vicar next says Dickens: Dickens was accused yesterday by labour shadow minister of an irresponsible use of parliamentary privilege by naming a doctor as being suspected of the rape of an eight year old girl.
1986 March 17; MPS RAPE CLAIM A DISGRACE: Norman St John-Steva's MP plans to write to Mr Dickens today to officially complain about his conduct. Dickens, unrepentant says he plans to name a vicar in the commons this afternoon .
1986: March 18th: DICKENS ATTACKED OVER RAPE CLAIM: The Speaker of the House, Michael Clark, St John-Stevas, Kevin McNamara MP, Edward Leigh, MP, John Ryman MP, George Foulkes MP and others all stood in the House of Commons to criticise the actions of Dickens in naming a doctor who had been investigated over claims of rape but about which there was insufficient evidence for the police to prosecute. It was a breach of privilege. (Ed: Dickens' naming and shaming campaign is causing a lot of debate but the simple fact is that if Dickens felt strongly enough about it why didn't he name the doctor outside the House? The reason is that he would then be without protection from a libel suit! So Dickens self-righteousness doesn't extend to taking personal risks. He can't be that sure of the evidence, yet he is playing a game with other people's lives and reputations. This should be borne in mind when evaluating the accuracy and gravity of the allegations in his 'dossiers')
1986: March 18th: (Sun) MP GAGGED OVER VICAR. A Tory MP was banned from naming the vicar accused of sexually assaulting an 11 year old boy and claimed he had been 'gagged'. (Ed: Poppycock. MPs had only stopped Dickens misusing parliamentary privilege, there was nothing stopping him from naming the vicar outside the House, yet Dickens, and the British media continue to give the public the idea that there is a cover-up. Was Dickens a sniveling little liar who knew that he might lose everything in a writ for defamation and did not have the courage to name the man outside the House?)
1986 March 18th (Daily Star) DOCTOR'S WIFE HITS OUT AT BLUNDERS The wife of rape case doctor Colin B hit out yesterday at inaccurate facts in some newspapers.
I'VE BEEN GAGGED: (same page) MPs watched in astonishment as Dickens and Michael Clark MP exchanged angry words outside the chamber. The Attorney General explained in the House why he was not taking action. 'The file prepared by Essex Police was considered by the county prosecuting solicitor who advised the chief constable that the evidence was insufficient. Following an expression of intent by the mother of the child concerned to institute a private prosecution the county prosecuting solicitor sought a second opinion from the DPP. He was also of the view that the evidence was insufficient and I agree with him; "
(Ed: it is important to understand that Dickens tended to portray himself as a dragon slayer. He regularly acted as though he was being in some way 'gagged' so it is essential to point out that he was free to say what he wanted outside of the Houses of Parliament and was only stopped from breaching the Rules of The House. This should not be confused with the idea that the Establishment were engaged in a cover up. )
1986 March 18th: BUNTER: Yesterday Mr Dickens was the outcast of Westminster, shunned by fellow MPs for his behaviour . Many were outraged. If Dickens has real evidence he should go to the Attorney General with it, not hawk names around in public" said a senior Tory.
1986: March 18: MP REBUKED BY SPEAKER: The Speaker of the House condemned Geoffrey Dickens for perpetrating "a parliamentary lynch law" against a vicar and a doctor suspected of but not charged with child sex offences. MPs from all sides condemned Dickens. Dickens 'unreservedly apologised' and then went on to say he would like to advise Mr McNamara that he has a man in his constituency who is abusing children. MPs shouted 'come off it' when he talked of his crusade for 'little children' and another shouted 'You nasty man' when he said he would continue to name the vicar.
1986 March 18th: HAVERS REBUFFS TORY MP IN CHILD SEX ROW: The Attorney General rejected a call from Geoffrey Dickens MP to prosecute an
Essex doctor alleged to have raped an 8 year old girl. A person has been tried by the media and subjected to a form of parliamentary lynch law by Mr Dickens, said Kevin McNamara MP.
1986 March 19th (Daily Mail) FURY OF MPS WIFE; Wife of Geoffrey Dickens spoke about the thing that makes her really angry, it was when her husband was accused of campaigning against child sex abuse to gain publicity for himself. (Ed: The true meaning of everything always resides in its opposite)
1986: March 19th. MP SAYS VICAR TO FACE PROSECUTION; Geoffrey Dickens said that a private prosecution is to be brought against the vicar alleged to have sexually assaulted a boy aged ll. The prosecution is to be financed by the Campaign for Law and Order. Mr Dickens, a patron of the campaign, which has more than 1000 members said that he would not persist in his attempt to use parliamentary privilege to name the vicar (Ed: He still protects himself by not naming the vicar outside the House and getting Oxley's madcap group to do the dirty work for him. )
1986 March 21st (Guardian) DOCTOR DENOUNCES MP OVER RAPE ALLEGATIONS: The doctor named by Dickens in Parliament about the alleged rape of an 8 yr old girl said yesterday that he is completely innocent. "I have been interviewed by the police on two separate occasions and questioned for many hours. No charges have been brought against me . The prosecution file has been considered by officials and the DPP and the Attorney General and they all decided that no prosecution should be brought. Geoffrey Dickens has flouted these principles from his safe position in the House of Commons, |His action, which he knew would be reported in certain newspapers may have persuaded some of their readers that I am guilty of a charge which has never been brought against me. "
1986 March 23rd. (Sunday Tel) HABGOOD REBUKES MP; The Archbishop of York has strongly criticised Geoffrey Dickens and sections of the press for their part in unfairly publicising the case of the Humberside vicar .
1986 March 23rd. YOUR DAILY DICKENS People have struggled to characterise Geoffrey Dickens. Some have simply been insulting ; he was variously described as a clot, an imbecile and an ass. Others have remarked on the similarities between Dickens and Master Billy Bunter.
1986 March 30th: (Sunday People) DICKENS OF A NAME: "Labour members have taken to calling Dickens Biffo. Kilroy Silk says it really stands for that Bloody Idiot From Flipping Oldham.
1986: June 2nd MPs SECRET FILES HELP KILLER HUNT: Geoffrey Dickens has given a 'secret dossier of shame' to the police in the hope it will find the Killer of Sarah Harper. The file, locked in a House of Commons safe, contains hundreds of names of convicted and suspected child molesters. (Ed: This appears to be another 'dossier' The Secret Dossier of Shame sounds like a print out of police records on abuse suspects and probably came from Dickens' police informant. It does not appear to have anything to do with the Westminster Dossier nor the Hayman Dossier but these investigations by Dickens are so casual that he may very well have mixed up the contents of each for effect. Note: Sarah Harper was abducted on March 26th 1986 and her poor body found in the Trent near Nottingham late April 1986. )
1986 October, Father Jan Knos, vicar of St Michaels and all Angels is found dead in his cell at Hull prison. He was due to stand trial accused of 28 charges of sexual offences against children. Childwatch and Dickens claim credit for getting him prosecuted. Now we will never know if they were right.
1986: November 9th: (Mail) I AM FIGHTING A CRUSADE TO PROTECT LITTLE CHILDREN: Earlier this year Dickens named two suspected paedophiles under parliamentary privilege. (Ed: the vicar and the doctor) Also upset a fellow MP by making allegations of a child brothel operating on an Islington housing estate.
1986 November 26: MOORS HUNT CHIEF HITS BACK AT PEST MP. Police chief James Anderton yesterday defended the search for more victims of the Moors Murderers and hit back at Geoffrey Dickens who had earlier said there was 'no justification for the new search'. Anderson said: "Leave us to get on with our job!"
1986 December 13th: LEGAL DILEMMA IN SEX ABUSE CASES: The doctor accused by Dickens of raping an 8 year old girl is found NOT GUILTY at Chelmsford Crown Court in a week-long trial. Last night senior judges and lawyers were voicing their concern that the abortive prosecution of the doctor had been funded by The Sun newspaper'.
(Ed: thus a marriage of tabloid convenience between Dickens, the mother of the girl and the Sun forced the issue and destroyed the innocent doctor's life)
1986: December 13th; I WAS RIGHT Geoffrey Dickens used parliamentary privilege to name the doctor in the 8 year old rape case who was eventually found not guilty at trial. After Dickens identified him the doctor was named in some papers and heavily victimised but Dickens still thinks he was right to name him.
(Ed: This 'test' case is important because it illustrates that Dickens rushed to condemn on the flimsiest of evidence, ignored due process of law, persisted in sensational accusations and allegations without a shred of proper evidence. It is often thought that crusading MPs have an insider's knowledge but in this instance Dickens had NO knowledge just prejudice. This is the only time Dickens allegations have been tested in a court of law and they failed. Thus it more or less proves our contention that all the evidence in his 'dossiers' is likely to be similarly circumstantial gossip or rumour hyped as a publicity exercise to promote himself. )
1987: January 14th: Geoffrey Dickens tries to get a private members bill to bring back hanging for child murderers but it is thrown out.
1987 February 1st (Sunday People) MYRA MOOR HUNT COOL CON: Dickens says her desire to help find graves of the victims was 'a cynical attempt to improve her chances of parole. A Woman warder wrote to Dickens saying that Hindley was laughing about her deception.
(Ed: One could very well say the same about Dickens' repetitive sensational allegations which never produced any bodies either.)
1987 April 13th: MP THREATENS TO NAME SEX CASE VICARS; At least 10 vicars are being investigated by the Childwach organisation
(Ed: Dickens was Childwatch's parliamentary representative) .
"If any atttempt is made to sweep this under the carpet or if the police or the church fail to take action then I would be prepared to name names in the House."
(Ed: Dickens again uses the threadbare ploy of obtaining publicity by claiming a conspiracy is in the offing which never ever materialises. He's conspiracy mad. )
1987 April 13th: CHILD ABUSE DOSSIER FOR RUNCIE: Yet another 'dossier' from Dickens this time it is the 'Runcie Dossier' with the help of Childwatch Dickens has built a list of 10 vicars who he thinks are suspects; but note that only FIVE of these are suspected currently. The other five are historical cases. Core said that the church was 'covering up' the scandal.
1987 May 3rd: FURY AT VICAR OF FILTH; Dickens demanded the sacking of a vicar last night for selling 'Filth' in church. Dickens said the Rev Richard Kirker, secretary of the Gay Christian Movement had abused his position of trust. He called for the vicar's defrocking after a ChildWatch delegation visited St Botolphs Church in Aldgate London . "One book contained horribly explicit photographs of a gay couple making love"
1987 July 12th; (Mail) TATTOO THEIR WILLIES; Dickens demands that AIDS victims should have their penises tattooed as a warning signal. Dickens says there have been reports that some twisted aids victims spread the disease to get their revenge on society. ..They should be castrated if they don't tell their partners.
(Ed: A more blatant homophobic attack could not be exampled. The 'murder by AIDS' myth was a Christian invention. And he's not finished yet - see below )
1987 July 18th: TEA AND SYMPATHY: Dickens has given voluble backing this week to the Headmasters leader David Hart who says that morals should be taught in school. "I don't want to drag up the past but I will say that AIDS has put a very different perspective on the morality of sexual relationships. "
1987 August 27th (Daily Tel) MP NOT TO FIGHT MARGINAL SEAT. Dickens will stand down at the new boundary changes and said 'he intended to try to find a safer seat elsewhere'.
1988: April 15th WITCHCRAFT WARNING: Young people are in danger from the effects of witchcraft which is sweeping the country said Geoffrey Dickens in the Commons last night. In a call for a debate on witchcraft he said 'It was common knowledge that many people convicted of offences against children had been involved in witchcraft initiation ceremonies. ' His comments were met with laughter.
1988: April 16th: MP HAS FILE ON WITCHES; A Dossier on witchcraft is being presented to Home Secretary Douglas Hurd. Hurd is to be given the evidence by MP Geoffrey Dickens.
(Ed This is the third dossier Dickens invented. We shall identify it as the 'Satanic Ritual Abuse Dossier' It is the one which the SAFF has looked into in detail. It was a travesty of prejudice and contained no serious evidence or documents of any kind. Although Dickens claims to be sending it to the Home Secretary he never did - see above, next column)
1988 April 29th: (Independent) Dickens promises to delivery 'a Dossier' of cases to ministers at the Home Office. (Ed: note that in this report two weeks later Dickens says his dossier is going to ministers at the Home Office and not Douglas Hurd. )
1988 September 18th: SATAN VICTIMS STORM; Dickens infers that 15 year old Lee Boxell, who disappeared from his home on Sept 10th has been kidnapped and sacrificed by devil worshippers. Sergeant Carnt of the Surrey police slammed the MP's 'theories' He said Lee's parents were worried to death and if they read Mr Dickens nonsense it will not help them.
1988: September 19th: BABIES BEING SACRIFICED TO THE DEVIL; Children are lured into covens, drugged or brainwashed and then forced to take part in degrading sex acts. Mr Dickens says he is building up a dossier which he hope will provide concrete proof of the evils of Satanism.
(Ed: It appears that the Satanic Ritual Abuse Dossier has not yet been sent to the Home Secretary and is still being compiled)
1989 July (Gods Word Now) CHILDREN SACRIFICED TO SATAN SAYS TORY MP. These things have and are happening he told She magazine. I am building up a very comprehensive dossier on this dangerous area'
(Ed: So here we are again FIFTEEN MONTHS after Dickens first announced the Satanic Ritual Abuse Dossier and he still hasn't sent it to the Home Office. Dickens never did. This is a very important fact. He has repetitively said in public to the effect that he has firm evidence and he will be sending it but has not. It may very well be that his claim to have sent in other dossiers was also a lie to get media coverage and he had no intention of doing so. ' )
1991 July 6th: SATANIC ABUSE: END SPECULATION CALL; A top detective has appealed for an end to speculation that the unsolved murder of Christopher Lavrack was linked to Satanic Abuse. He said there was no evidence to back up such claims which could interfere with police inquiries. Controversial MP Geoffrey Dickens is to mention Christopher's Case when he speaks to Attorney General Sir Patrick Mayhew next week. An investigation by the Mail revealed police evidence indicating Childwatch founder Dianne Cores activities undermined the case against suspected abusers of the boys. Police did not find any evidence of Satanism. (Ed: Here is categoric proof that Dickens' 'evidence' is hearsay which is not worth a light. Obviously Christopher Lavrack's murder is down in Dickens' Dossier as a Satanic Murder. The police have now publicly said there is no evidence at all to suggest that. But Dickens still persists and in fact forced an official police inquiry into the Hull police over the issue. It took over a year to finalise and came to the exact same conclusion!)
1992 May 15th. MP FINDS BLACK MAGIC IN DRAWER: MP Bernard Jenkins takes over Dickens office and finds a cache of occult magazines. Dickens said 'I have been campaigning against the sort of people who produce this sort of material for years and I had a researcher in for a year to look into it. I had forgotten that all my stuff was in there.
(Ed: Was the 'stuff' in Dickens desk part of the Satanic Ritual Child Abuse Dossier? If it was why hadn't he sent it to the Home Secretary. If he stuck to his story that the original dossier had been 'lost' then why didn't he use this 'stuff' to recompile it? Because it's not proper evidence! )
1992 July 9th: DICKENS ABUSE DOSSIER HELPS POLICE INQUIRY: Geoffrey Dickens was today providing information to a police investigation into complaints about police handling of alleged cases of child abuse. They cover various cases which the MP has taken up with the Home office and the Attorney general..
(Ed: Another 'Dossier' We call this the Hull Police Dossier' because it was an attempt by Dickens to pull rank and overturn police decisions which, rightly, went against Childwatch when after the organisation had interfered with ongoing police investigations in such a way that the real suspects could not be brought to book. )
1992 August 13th: DICKENS ON CAMERA IN EURO WAR ON SATANISM. A Swedish television crew filmed Dickens for a documentary they were making on the global spread of Satanism , devil-worship and witchcraft. "They knew I had made an in-depth study and they wanted me to reveal on camera some of the mysteries surrounding the evil crafts." The Swedes also donated 1,000.00 to the child protection charity Childwatch to which Mr Dickens is a consultant.
(Ed: This film NO GREATER EVIL, was broadcast in 1993. You can see excerpts from it here:. As usual Dickens has no hard evidence and several of the other SRA hunters in this programme have since been discredited. )
1993: January 8th: (The Oldie) KIDNEY THIEVES; "Dickens has urged businessmen to be on a red alert for an international gang of kidney thieves operating in the Manchester area. Local businessmen are being lured to private addresses by siren maidens who give them drugged drinks When they wake up the following day the businessmen discover an unsightly stitched wound on their stomachs."
1994 February 25th: (Express). THE PALACE OF SEX; Dickens says he is going to finish a 'blockbuster novel based on the shenanigans of MPs in the House. It is even more raunchy than the sex-shocker that has earned former Health Minister Edwina Currie. Mr Dickens said he was not worried that Edwina Curries book which includes explicit scenes of oral sex. had stolen his thunder "My book will be much racier than hers...."
1994 April 1st: ORDER OF THE NOOSE: Sunday Sport publish full uncensored photograph of two Syrians hanged in public. Dickens says 'People must see what it is like to be hanged so if it is re-introduced here it would deter murderers" (see image on right)
1994: May 4th: (Rochdale Observer). SATANIC ABUSE CLAIMS A MYTH: La Fontaine's Government report on SRA is published but Geoffrey Dickens claims satanic and ritual abuse is still going on all over the country, "although he would not comment on the Rochdale Case. ".
Dickens public involvement with hyping the Satanic Ritual Abuse Myth tapered off after the government report and after a short illness he died in 1995 and his 'dossiers' were buried with him.
Our Unique Dossier Timeline Reveals The Truth About What Went Where and When.
HOW DICKENS EXAGGERATED FACTS TO SUIT HIMSELF: In the middle of the Satanic Abuse Myth parents began reporting to the police random visits from people claiming to be Social Workers who inspected their children. Some took the children's clothes off to check their bodies. But when they were challenged for ID by parents the Bogus Social Workers fled.
About 40 instances of this occurred and were capitalised upon by Dickens (as you can see from the cutting above). Thankfully before he could start another 'dossier' on it, the police investigation caught some of the Bogus Social Workers and it turned out that they were freelance do-gooders who, spurred on by Dickens' Satan Myth had taken the law into their own hands to check on children from families who were living New Age lifestyles!
Child charities, who were guilty of hyping the hysteria were told to tell their volunteers NOT to interfere. They did so and the Bogus Social Work Myth evaporated as quickly as it had appeared, but I will lay an even bet that Kiddie Monsters went into Dickens' dossier!
DICKENS and CHILDWATCHDickens was the parliamentary representative of the Childwatch charity run by Dianne Core in Hull. Most of the 'evidence' in Dickens' dossier about Satanic Abuse came through her. She was responsible for his Runcie Dossier as well and the abortive Hull Police dossier. She knew Dickens very well and was once feted by politicians and the media; yet none of today's children's champions have bothered to mention her. Why?
Well it is probably because she claimed publicly in connection with Dickens campaign that 4,000 children per year were sacrificed in Satanic Ceremonies in the U.K., that Satanists melted babies down to make black candles out of their fat and that after sacrificing children their finger bones were strung on necklaces worn by Satanic Hight Priests?
Diane Core stated "I am convinced that Satanic abuse not only exists but is a real danger to modern family life. About four thousand babies a year are born into covens to be used for sacrifices and cannibalism.
"Firstly, as you point out, according to press reports, Mr Geoffrey Dickens MP has sent the Home Secretary a dossier of child abuse cases allegedly connected with witchcraft. However, this has not been received and the Home Office has no other evidence that there is a problem of the kind Mr Dickens describes. "
A Peek Inside Dickens' SRA Dossier:
When challenged about this Dickens inferred that the 'dossier' must have been lost in the post.Yet we know it was possible, because on 15th May 1992, long after our challenges, Bernard Jenkins MP took over Dickens' office in Westminster and found a cache of occult magazines and documents there. What was Dickens' response? Well, surprisingly Geoffrey did not say: 'GREAT, I can now recompile part of my dossier and send the proof to the Home Secretary'. Instead he simply said that he'd forgotten they were there. Which obviously means he didn't value them , probably because he knew the evidence was dross, and that stunt had passed its sell-by date.
Of course we asked his duplicate copy was but Dickens claimed there wasn't any duplicates!
We said, on such an important document surely he would have taken copies of at least some documents?
Nope, there were no copies.
We challenged again - surely then he would be able to RECOMPILE the evidence in the dossier from his researchers' notes and original documents?
Apparently he could not.
We then asked why he did not recontact those people who had originally given him the evidence and ask them to give it again? We knew who they were and they were still contactable. There was apparently no chance of that either.
Even the Childwatch group in Hull for whom Dickens was the parliamentary representative and who had coached him in the intricacies of SRA couldn't apparently recover ANY documents to recompile Dickens' much vaunted SRA dossier!
ANOTHER PEEK INSIDE DICKENS' SRA DOSSIER
"A white witch has joined with anti-child abuse campaigners to compile a sensational black magic report to put before MPs. Disturbing revelations about the activities of Black Witches are made in a report by the Childwatch group run by Dianne Core. Now it is to be discussed during a commons debate called by MP Geoffrey Dickens. The report gives background information on details of occult contact magazines, shops, regalia and paraphernalia. Much of this information has been supplied by white-witch Beth Gurevitch who worked in Humberside recently performing three exorcisms. (Ed: shortly after this Gurevitch opened her own occult shop in Birmingham selling regalia and paraphernalia herself!)
Table of all Dossiers Claimed by Dickens since he became an MP in 1979
DOSSIER NUMBER 1,
DOSSIER NUMBER 2:
It is two years since Dickens
sent his Hayman Dossier to Hailsham. Today Dickens claims
that eight public figures were on his 'list of
shame' and that one of them had been a personal friend but he is still
planning to name them in the commons unless the Home Secretary took
DOSSIER NUMBER 3:
It is only four months since Dickens sent his Dossier of Shame (Dossier 2) to Hailsham. On November 25th 1983 he claims that a homosexual vice ring
is operating inside Buckingham palace and he has handed the dossier to
Secretary, Leon Brittan. Dickens said the
Secretary had promised to investigate the allegations against ten men
. This dossier seems an adjunct to the previous two but is still
a form of gay-bashing for Dickens. It
does not appear to directly concern PIE or paedophillary but
homosexuality. Dickens' informant appears to be a young man who
has kiss-and-tell stories about gay trystes at the Palace.
Dickens says his informant was 16 at the time (and
therefore would then have been under age) but this kind of activity
does not constitute a vice-ring. Did Brittan look into it?
Did the police Look into it? These are valid questions.
DOSSIER NUMBER 4:
On June 2nd 1986 Geoffrey
Dickens 'has given a 'secret dossier of shame' to the police in the hope
it will find the Killer of Sarah Harper. The file, locked in a
House of Commons safe, contains hundreds of names of convicted and
suspected child molesters. '
DOSSIER NUMBER 5.
Headline: CHILD ABUSE DOSSIER FOR RUNCIE: April 13th, 1987. Yet another
'dossier' from Dickens this time it is the 'Runcie Dossier' with
the help of Childwatch, Dickens has built a list of 10 vicars who
he thinks are suspects; but note that only FIVE of these are
suspected currently. The other five are historical cases.
Core said that the church was 'covering up' the
scandal. There is no suggestion that this Dossier is
connected with Dossiers 1, 2, 3 and 4. There is no Westminster
connection, it appears entirely separate, but the idea that the
church was 'covering it up' is a perennial complaint which may have
firmed-up other 'cover-up' allegations about Westminster in peoples'
minds. However this
dossier concerns the whitewashing of abusing vicars to protect the
reputation of the church and is not an attempt by people in high places
hide child abuse rings.
DOSSIER NUMBER 6.
It is now five years since Dickens' last allegations about people being
involved in vice-rings in high places ( Westminster / the Palace ) He
has not furthered the issue. There has been no other publicity about
his claims until:
DOSSIER NUMBER 7. The Hull Police Dossier July 9th 1992
|Ends at 7 Dossiers.
FULL READABLE TEXT IN THIS PANEL
Queen Anne's Gate, London SW1H 9AT
20 March 1984
Allegations of Paedohilia
You drew to my attention a number of allegations concering paedpohilia when you called here on 34 November and in subsequent letters.
I am now able to tell you that, in general terms, the view of the Director of Public Prosecutions is that two of the letters you forwarded could for a basis for enquiries by the police and they are now being passed to the appropriate authorities. In other cases there either seems to be inadequate evidence to pursue prosecution, for example the lady who wrote about PIE advertising but did not secure any example of the material complained of, or they have already been dealt with in some way by the courts or the police.
I need to respond in some more detail to the two cases which you raise with me initially and on which there has been some press comment.
The first case was reported as involving a civil servant. In fact the complaint came from an anonymous civil servant who, we have now established, works at Customs and Excise. It referred to a member of the public importing a number of photographs and slides of young boys, through the post from Holland.
I should explain that, whilst the importation of indecent or obscene articles is prohibited, a criminal offence only arises when there is a deliberate attempt to evade prohibition. Customs and Excise policy with regard to cases such as those involving indecent or obscene articles depicting children in sexual situations is to institute criminal proceedings where there is sufficient evidence. There have been at least six such prosecutions in 1983 all successful, some of which were against people in responsible positions. If, however, there is not sufficient evidence, they confine their actions to seizure of the articles concerned. That most often is the case with postal Importation; simply to be the addressee of a postal package is not evidence of an offence. This is what happened in the case referred to by your correspondent where customs seized and destroyed the photographs and slides but did not have the necessary evidence to prosecute. Beyond that, I do not think the Customs should supply to the police names and addresses of everyone receiving obscene or indecent articles, regardless of whether an offence has been established.
The second case on which there was some comment referred to a youth of 16 and his employment at Buckingham Palace some - BLANK -. His - BLANK -had written to you in very general terms to suggest that the young man had become a homosexual during his -BLANK - period of employment at Buckingham Palace and that he had alleged that homosexuality was prevalent there. The letter also said that the young man went to work in Canada, following the end of his employment in the Royal Household and that he subsequently worked in -BLANK-.
I can confirm that the young man in question was employed at Buckingham Palace between -BLANK- -BLANK-. I understand that one year was then a normal period for someone in his position. As far as is known, he went direct to another place of employment but not to Canada.
I have to say, however, that it is extremely difficult to comment on the accuracy of the allegations in the letter. The allegations are of a very general nature and a considerable time has elapsed since the events to which the letter refers. This puts substantial obstacles in the way of any more detailed investigations and, on the basis of this letter alone, it is difficult to conclude that it would be practicable to undertake such an investigation and to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.
Continuation: Page 2:
I need hardly assure you that the Royal Household is extremely concerned at these unsubstantiated allegations and it is , of course, their policy to take every step to avoid an occurrence of such as is alleged. There is nobody currently employed in the Royal Household who is under the age of 18.
I do understand, however, the distress expressed in the letter about the estrangement between the mother and her son and the reason for it and, as you know, I share your deep concerns that the law should give adequate protection to children and should be properly enforced. For reasons I have given, it is difficult to use the letter you gave me for this purpose but I am sure this will not deter you and others from continuing to present specific evidence, if it comes to your attention , to the proper authorities.
- Brittan listened to Dickens' 'evidence' and conferred with the Director o f Public Prosecutions at length about all the allegations. There was no attempt to cover-up or otherwise interfere with the course of justice.
- Two Letters containing allegations were passed to the police by Brittan to see if any action was necessary.
- Other evidence presented by Dickens was unworthy or so anecdotal as to be useless (e.g. a letter written to Dickens by a woman who said she saw a PIE advertisement but had no evidence of it and could not reproduce it. Or Dickens had presented 'evidence' which related to cases which had already been prosecuted or fully investigated.
- Brittan gives an in-depth analysis of two cases which Dickens had caused to appear in the press. He addresses the accusations directly and explains the background and why Customs and Excise were unable to bring a prosecution.
- The next case which had been the subject of much publicity following Dickens' grandstanding was the case of a 16 year old boy who, Dickens said, had been 'groomed' into homosexuality at Buckingham Palace. This turned out to be a historic complaint made to Dickens, not by the boy, but by his ESTRANGED mother. Reading between the lines it appears that the mother wrote to Dickens, who was actively anti-gay, claiming that the boy had been turned against her by his gay friends. As we pointed out in our piece on Dickens above, this was a period when the move to legalise homosexuality was being actively fought in devious ways by Christian activists like Dickens who were fundamentally religiously opposed to liberalisation of laws. Brittan points out that at the time Dickens made his allegations there was no one under the age of 18 employed at the palace. In other words any gay activity AT THE TIME DICKENS CLAIMED THERE WAS A GAY VICE RING AT THE PALACE, would have been entirely legal. Brittan concludes, rightly, that there was no chance of a successful investigation of the woman's claims considering the age of the allegations and the breach of trust between her and the son who had not apparently made any complaint.
- Lastly, rather than try to bury Dickens's allegations Brittan says that if he (Dickens) can find any weighty evidence to support his view then Brittan will expect him to deliver it to him. Thus Brittan actually challenges Dickens to get more evidence to prove his contentions. This Dickens was unable to do.
Therefore it is now clear that Dickens 'Westminster' Dossier is, like his dossier on Satanic Ritual Abuse, a wicked compilation of bigotry from his Christian evangelical friends who are willing to misuse the police and the democratic process to further their prejudice against minority religions and different sexual genders. It was seized upon in 2014 by the Child Scare Industry in an attempt to stampede parliament into enacting further laws to expand it's own remit and gain more funds for chasing phantom abusers using worked-up cases of Historical Sex Abuse. They thought you, the British public, would be dim enough not to notice what they were up to, but the SAFF has once again saved the day and brought you the unvarnished TRUTH.
UNNATURAL SEX: MPs join forces with the Child Scare Industry to ratchet up propaganda about the Westminster Paedo Myth.
The British public stood agape as Sky News lead with an 'exclusive' during January 2015 revealing with sensational panache the discovery of a secret letter from Margaret Thatcher's government which purportedly illustrated an attempt to cover up child abuse in Westminster.
Dutifully the bastions of Child Welfare jumped onto the Westminster-Paedo bandwagon, joining forces with The Three Stooges of the Child Abuse Industry, outspoken Labour MPs, salivating at the prospect of disgracing the Conservatives in the eyes of the electorate prior to the next election.
They claimed this was the 'smoking-gun' which the Sex Abuse Industry had been seeking for years. Proof positive of hysterical claims from conspiracy theorists countrywide that a coterie of child sex abusers ensconsed in positions of power in the Establishment .
Labour MP John 'Curly' Mann, who campaigns on the issue of child abuse, said: "All of these files that have been classified need to be opened up. "This one is of great importance. There could well be some very significant information in it and it needs to be looked at."But when looked at in the cold light of day the Unnatural Sex letter is actually proof of there NOT being a conspiracy to hide a Westminster Paedo ring. Look at the facts:
The de-classifying of the letter by the government following the discovery of it in the National Archives catalogues was relatively swift. It was originally spotted by Dr Chris Murphy, a lecturer at Salford University, who alerted Sky News.
The currrent government have been open and cooperative and the document will be uploaded for public view in the Kew National archives soon. The reason for this candid approach is simply that the conclusions in the letter (which Sky and almost every other observer, including the Three Stooges, have failed to address) is that the investigation said that Hayman had not been abusing children. The actual text stated:
Sir Peter Hayman kept "explicit records of his sexual activities and fantasies"(Ed: so presumably they were all checkable by the police and will be in some police evidence repository somewhere) ; and that ' Some fantasies related to children, but had not been acted on'.In their usual conspiratorial fashion the Three Stooges and their buddies in the Child Scare Industry have tried to infer that the Unnatural Sex letter was originally classified as secret to cover-up a paedophile ring in parliament, but the real reason is much more pragmatic. Hayman was a member of the diplomatic service and the investigation into him was done by the secret service to ensure that there was no threat to security through blackmail. It's findings were therefore naturally sub rosa.
The Whole Story:
Once you put the Unnatural Sex letter into perspective using the SAFF chronology (see left column) you can see that everything was undertaken accurately and professionally by the authorities.
During the lead up to the PIE trial (i.e. from when the police commenced investigations in 1978 to the trial in March 1981) Geoffrey Dickens learned of the involvement of diplomat Peter Hayman ( almost certainly from his contacts in the Metropolitan Police) and because the police had decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute Hayman, Dickens decided to publicly name him in the House of Commons under parliamentary privilege (parliamentary privilege enables any MP to make allegations and have them recorded in Hansard without running the risk of a writ for defamation).
Dickens, a ley preacher, was actively anti-gay and equated homosexuality with child-abuse. The term 'unnatural sexual proclivities' was a euphemism in those days for homosexuality. As we pointed out above, there is a wrongful inherent implication in accusations concerning the sexual abuse of children that it is a homosexual crime and some anti-child abuse campaigners use it as a cover for homosexual bigotry, including Dickens.
Geoffrey Dickens apparently first contacted leading members of his own party about his intentions to 'name names' whilst the Trial was making headlines. But Dickens pre-empted any official announcement by his party when, on 16th March 1981, he got press coverage by threatening to name a 'High Ranking Diplomat'.
In a written answer in the House of Commons a day later (on 17th March 1981, which Dickens must have known was coming), Douglas Hurd, then Home Secretary. stated:
The exact date of the 'Unnatural Sex' letter is as yet unknown but is catalogued as within the period 27th October 1980 to 20th March 1981, (see image right ) therefore it all appears to be a continuous process of proper and open investigation.
PIE was discovered, in 1978, investigated and it's leader brought to trial in 1981. Other people connected with PIE were also arrested but were not prosecuted due to insufficient evidence.
Harman was investigated by both police and intelligence services. They said they found no evidence to suggest he had harmed children. One must beware of judging the actions of officials retrospectively based on modern sentiment. At that time the law against the possession of child abuse images had not been enacted. One could only be prosecuted if one had actually abused a child and the police said there was no evidence that Harman had done so. The obsecene photographs were imported from overseas. There was no suggestion that any abuse actually took place in the U.K.
The only person who saw anything untoward or conspiratorial about this situation was the eponymous Rent-a-Quote Geoffrey Dickens who was basically working-up fears for the tabloid press. In fact, the 'Unnatural Sex' letter written by government aids for the cabinet and based on secret security insight actually had a list of "lines to take" for government officials if asked questions by the media about Hayman's 1978 arrest. One of the suggested 'lines' was that there had been "no cover-up", this was undoubtedly in response to Dickens' sensational allegations that there had been a cover-up. Obviously if there HAD been a cover-up the last thing intelligent diplomats would do is mention it!
Dickens opinion on the Westminster Paedo Ring must be tempered with the knowledge that he also said hundreds of children were being abused in satanic ceremonies and that has since been proved to be utterly false. All the scares come back to Dickens and his prejudiced view of the world.
The only unfairness we can see in the entire episode is that Tom O'Carrol was prosecuted and Peter Hayman was allowed to go free to protect his reputation and minimise any political fall-out for the Conservatives. This is reprehensible but no different to a chain of political expediences which have occurred since from all parties. As we mention elsewhere on this page the Lord Chancellor (then Lord Hailsham) answered Dickens question about why Hayman wasn't prosecuted on 23rd March 1981 by saying that the police said they had insufficient evidence to prosecute Hayman on the law as it then stood.
The 'Unnatural Sex' letter is yet another political propaganda coup for the Child Sexual Abuse Industry to increase it's stranglehold over the outcome of the governments' Child Sexual Abuse Inquiry as the various lobbies involved in it jockey for position to be able to influence the future of child-charities, child-care and social work through the imposition of radical feminist politics onto a dim-witted Conservative government which still doesn't understand the beast which is attacking them.
Criticisms or Corrections to SAFF files and publications?
Then please click here to go to our Feedback Forum - You can leave a message anonymously or just read what others have to say.