cgksheff   44 #61 Posted August 17, 2014 Rightly or wrongly, the Police reasoning is that by publicly naming the suspect, more victims are likely to come forward. Without many more allegations involved, the CPS is unlikely to take anything forward on just one victim's allegation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
buddysbuddy   12 #62 Posted August 17, 2014 According to South Yorks police they were not the source of the original leak to the press re the raid.  but they have admitted that they were approached by the journalist about this and he agreed to hold back the story in return for being informed when the raid was to take place. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jim Hardie   527 #63 Posted August 17, 2014 Even Norman Tebbit admitted on TV that there are paedophiles in Westminster.  That's a huge leap from what he actually said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B   1,414 #64 Posted August 17, 2014 That's a huge leap from what he actually said.  Not really, though I admit the ultra-casual way in which he said it was designed to difuse the impact.  ---------- Post added 17-08-2014 at 14:32 ----------  None of that proves your argument that by naming celebs as being under suspicion the establishment is covering up for its own. In fact as you yourself admit there are investigations going on into MPs' supposed offences. If the police and CPS think there is enough evidence to convict then those MPs will be named in the press in exactly the same way Richard is being named now. You're also forgetting that the biggest know culprit to get away so far is Jimmy Savile, a celeb and not a MP.  Then why name CR on the strength of a single 30 year old unproved allegation? Similar allegations regarding Establishment figures abound yet they haven't been named.  Jimmy Savile is the link. He associated with both celebs, politicians and royalty in extraordinary ways. That's why they tried to keep a lid on it for so long. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Intake Too   10 #65 Posted August 17, 2014 That's a huge leap from what he actually said.  And i bet Saviles lie that he had 'selective dyslexia' and then his admission that 'the 'rules dont apply if he cant read them' was just a harmless jape? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Emily Moore   10 #66 Posted August 17, 2014 Even Norman Tebbit admitted on TV that there are paedophiles in Westminster.   Westminster is a large district. I have no doubt there are some in Tower Hamlets as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Flexo   10 #67 Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) Chris Fay of the now defunct National Association of Young People in Care (NAYPIC) did with filmmaker Bill Maloney about the Elm Guest House. I have watched the whole of this interview and recommend you do too - Chris is very credible and the revelations about the paedo network right to the top echelons of power has stunned me. Elm Guest House started as a gay guesthouse but became a paedophile guest house. Boys were taken from a nearby care home and abused there. Chris took many statements from boys who had been abused. Special branch tried to stop him.  Geoffrey Dickens MP became concerned about the place and went to see the home secretary, Leon Brittan. He took with him a big dossier of evidence but nothing ever happened. Leon Brittan recently denied ever receiving the dossier then later said he did, but it has never been found.  Guests at the guest house include a cabinet minister, MPs, celebrities and several convicted paedophiles.  Chris says that he is not aware of any evidence that Cliff Richard is a paedophile (43:35 in the interview). Cliff stayed at Elm Guest House more than once, accompanied by his boyfriend Norman. Gays had to hide away in those days and perhaps they were innocent guests who wanted somewhere they could stay in secret.  Last month, Chris went to Parliament to see Simon Danzcuk MP (for Rochdale) who wrote the recent book about Cyril Smith ( ). The aim is to get Leon Brittan named in Parliament in connection with Elm Guest House. Tom Watson MP is also on Leon Brittan's case about the missing dossier. Already shadowy forces at Parliament have tried to scare Simon Danzcuk from naming Leon Brittan in connection with the horrors at Elm Guest House.  My guess is that they want to ask Cliff Richard what he knows about Elm Guest House and found a way to get him to come back to the country. Edited August 17, 2014 by Flexo Removed reference to the VIP Guest List because ISTR that police got that from elsewhere and this post is about Chris Fay's interviews. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B   1,414 #68 Posted August 17, 2014 Chris Fay of the now defunct National Association of Young People in Care (NAYPIC) did with filmmaker Bill Maloney about the Elm Guest House. I have watched the whole of this interview and recommend you do too - Chris is very credible and the revelations about the paedo network right to the top echelons of power has stunned me. Elm Guest House started as a gay guesthouse but became a paedophile guest house. Boys were taken from a nearby care home and abused there. Chris took many statements from boys who had been abused. Special branch tried to stop him.  Geoffrey Dickens MP became concerned about the place and went to see the home secretary, Leon Brittan. He took with him a big dossier of evidence but nothing ever happened. Leon Brittan recently denied ever receiving the dossier then later said he did, but it has never been found.  Chris Fay got a VIP guest list from the owner of the Elm Guest House. Names on the guest list include Cliff Richard, Leon Brittan (Home Secretary at the time), Cyril Smith (convicted peadophile), Harvey Proctor (convicted peadophile), Chris Denning (convicted peadophile). Colin Peters (convicted peadophile) and the attorney general at the time.  In his interview, Chris Fay says some sickening things about what he understands that Leon Brittan did at Elm Guest House.  Chris says that he is not aware of any evidence that Cliff Richard is a paedophile (43:35 in the interview). Cliff stayed at Elm Guest House more than once, accompanied by his boyfriend Norman. Gays had to hide away in those days and perhaps they were innocent guests who wanted somewhere they could stay in secret.  Last month, Chris went to Parliament to see Simon Danzcuk MP (for Rochdale) who wrote the recent book about Cyril Smith ( ). The aim is to get Leon Brittan named in Parliament in connection with Elm Guest House. Tom Watson MP is also on Leon Brittan's case about the missing dossier. Already shadowy forces at Parliament have tried to scare Simon Danzcuk from naming Leon Brittan in connection with the horrors at Elm Guest House.  My guess is that they want to ask Cliff Richard what he knows about Elm Guest House and found a way to get him to come back to the country.  It's not just the paedophiles in the Establishment that bothers me, but the lengths that the 'shadowy forces' that are at work trying to suppress the truth at any cost will go to. I'm reminded of the Queen telling Paul Burrows that 'dark forces' were at work when they tried to smear his reputation by having him arrested before the Princess Diana enquiry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
LeMaquis   10 #69 Posted August 17, 2014 Then why name CR on the strength of a single 30 year old unproved allegation? Similar allegations regarding Establishment figures abound yet they haven't been named.  Jimmy Savile is the link. He associated with both celebs, politicians and royalty in extraordinary ways. That's why they tried to keep a lid on it for so long.  Cliff Richard has been named because the police carried out a search on his home. They could hardly search it and not say anything publicly.  When and if the police carry out searches on homes of MPs or former MPs then they'll be named. However we know evidence has been got rid of back in the 80s. The police will need to get complaints from people still alive and then they can do the establishment figures what they're doing to Cliff Richard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B   1,414 #70 Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) Cliff Richard has been named because the police carried out a search on his home. They could hardly search it and not say anything publicly. When and if the police carry out searches on homes of MPs or former MPs then they'll be named. However we know evidence has been got rid of back in the 80s. The police will need to get complaints from people still alive and then they can do the establishment figures what they're doing to Cliff Richard.  Of course they've had complaints from people still alive.  About people still alive.  I take it you haven't looked at any of the links provided by Flexo. All you have to do is click on the blue underlined words, it couldn't be easier.  The hour long interview between between Bill Maloney and Chris Fay is shocking. Anyone watching that will be in no doubt how serious this is and why it is so difficult for the truth to come out. Chris Fay is one very brave man.  Thank God for the internet. A game changer, and hopefully Chris's insurance. Edited August 17, 2014 by Anna B Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jim Hardie   527 #71 Posted August 17, 2014 Not really, though I admit the ultra-casual way in which he said it was designed to difuse the impact.  But he didn't say it. He said something quite different.  ---------- Post added 17-08-2014 at 19:00 ----------  And i bet Saviles lie that he had 'selective dyslexia' and then his admission that 'the 'rules dont apply if he cant read them' was just a harmless jape?  What on earth has that got to do with the post you quoted? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B   1,414 #72 Posted August 17, 2014 But he didn't say it. He said something quite different. ---------- Post added 17-08-2014 at 19:00 ----------   What on earth has that got to do with the post you quoted?  Norman Tebbit admitted there had been a cover up regarding paedophiles in the establishment. How much clearer does it have to be?  But I ask you to start reading some of Flexo's links, (and check them out with a bit of cross referencing if you're still doubtful) I promise you it all starts to fit into place. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...