Simon Callow on the paedophile exploits of André Gide, Oscar Wilde, Lord Alfred Douglas and others

Two quotes from this are especially relevant:

‘Later, by extraordinary coincidence, they [André Gide and Oscar Wilde] met in Algeria, where Gide had finally, but secretly, surrendered to his desire for very young men. Wilde and Bosie, like Halliwell and Orton 70 years later, were up to their necks in sexual tourism, and Wilde, again in Mephistophelean mode, sensing the string in the younger man, casually asked Gide whether he wanted the young musician to whom they were listening.’

‘Robert Ross, Alfred Douglas and Wilde passing round schoolboys between them on dirty weekends, Bosie and Gide having sex with 12- and 13-year old Arab boys, and all of them having compulsive and constant recourse to rent boys, match the worst excesses of the Paedophile Information Exchange.’

Nonetheless, Callow says that ‘it is in the treatment of their wives that both Wilde and Gide are simply indefensible’, as they lied to them and gave away presents. Clearly this to Callow must therefore be a worse crime than the rape of 12-year old boys.

Observer 180597 - Gide knew a lot about art

Here is another review of the same book. I note in particular the following passage:

Indeed, much of the material in Andre and Oscar challenges Wilde’s reputation among liberals as a gay icon. If Wilde and Douglas are seen as gay liberators, do their supporters also approve of the activities of child-sex tourists? Or an age of consent for homosexuality so low that it might as well not exist at all? Or the sort of flirtation with the sons of one’s married lovers Douglas was keen to indulge in? If the answers are no, such liberals need radically to examine their casual support for everything Wilde stood for. If it is yes, then why are they not challenging current laws against paedophiles?

The links between Wilde and Douglas (and many others) and the ‘Uranian’ movement (who have been described as a predecessor of the Paedophile Information Exchange), are something about which I intend to write in more detail at a later date. Johann Hari wrote a very good piece in 2009 following apologia for paedophilia by Alan Bennett, Gore Vidal, Stephen Fry and others (Hari, ‘Alan Bennett and the question of innocence’, The Independent, November 27th, 2009).

I hate the hysterical way in which any sorts of sexual offences against children (or adult sexual assaults of whatever degree) are used in order to completely dehumanise the perpetrators, leading to shrieks calling for permanent incarceration and sometimes torture and beyond, from some sections of the press and more than a few politicians (Labour as well as Conservative). I do not hate Savile, or Rolf Harris, or Max Clifford, or others – or Michael Brewer – I do actually pity them; what I hate is a system of values and range of institutions which legitimised what they did because of their power, charisma, artistry, or whatever. For now, I believe that only when people are prepared to view Wilde, Douglas, Gide, Joe Orton (whose diaries are a catalogue of anal rape of young Arab boys, which Alan Bennett conveniently omitted in his screenplay for Prick Up Your Ears), and various others, in a similar light to Savile or Harris, will some progress have been made. Those who idolise these former figures and make light of their activities might as well be consigning their own sons to be raped by them.

John R. Bradley, ‘Just Wilde about the boys. ANDRE AND OSCAR: Gide, Wilde and The Art of Gay Living by Jonathan Fryer, Constable pounds 20’, The Independent, May 25th, 1997.

IN Algiers in 1895, Oscar Wilde procured for Andre Gide a flute- playing Arab boy, primarily in order to amuse himself and his favourite, Lord Alfred Douglas. As Gide climbed into a carriage with the boy, fidgeting and procrastinating, Wilde looked on, triumphant. Gide, in fact, had already experienced his initiation with another Arab lad in the sand dunes of Sousse, Tunisia; but that was a fleeting, fumbling, private affair. The boy had initially marched off in despair at Gide’s seeming inability actually to do anything when push, as it were, came to shove. When Gide met Wilde, he was still pondering the implications.

Before then, the two writers had met only in the Parisian literary circles in which they were both establishing themselves during the 1880s. After Algiers, however, the Irishman became a permanent, looming intellectual presence in the French writer’s mind. Wilde appeared, faintly disguised, as a number of secondary characters in Gide’s early novels; the protagonists are drawn out through their reactions to the Wildean figures. Gide, meanwhile, began to chart his own real- life maturation against his various moral responses to Wilde’s decadent- aesthetic pronouncements.

Jonathan Fryer’s Andre and Oscar reveals previously unexplored similarities between the two. They both had powerful, slightly dotty mothers whose influence on them was decisive. They both came from established families, which hindered, at least in the beginning, the extent to which they could practise their unconventional philosophies. They both chose to marry, despite being homosexual, and both genuinely loved their respective wives, albeit with gay abandon. They both preferred young boys to grown men, when they had the choice – Wilde went in for the tough blond things who strutted their stuff around Piccadilly Circus, Gide for the lithe, charming Arab kids who, then as now, formed little groups around foreigners.

Fryer’s book is fashionably focused on this last area. Perhaps it is fashionable distaste for such matters that compelled him to write that Gide’s “paedophilia” seems “not to have taken on any physical dimension”. This is like saying that Casanova never really acted on his heterosexuality. And it is a little embarrassing to see Gide defended from what he himself considered to be the aspect of his character he should, above all else, be honest about. Fryer also states, somewhat paradoxically, that “nowadays” it would be cautious Gide, and not outrageous Wilde, who would find himself standing in the dock. That is incorrect, too, since Wilde lost his virginity to Robbie Ross when the latter was a year below the current age of consent, and the boys Wilde wined and dined were frequently younger than that – as when he became involved with a 16-year-old who had been smuggled into London from Bruges to be installed in the Albermarle Hotel. According to Oscar Browning, the pederastic Victorian public-school master, “on Saturday, the boy slept with Douglas; on Sunday he slept with Oscar. On Monday he slept with a woman at Douglas’s expense.”

Fryer also writes, as though it was not particularly controversial, of Douglas taking a boy-lover named Ali in Algeria, whom he cruelly whipped after the boy was said to have been sleeping with women. Gide informed his own mother, of all people, that even when that relationship ended, the child was not still in his teens. Ali has been written about before. But Fryer further claims, this time controversially, that Douglas told Gide he was looking forward to seducing Wilde’s nine-year-old son, Cyril, as soon as he got the opportunity. It is not suggested that Wilde raised any objection to this sort of talk; nor does Fryer himself raise any objections. Unlike most of Wilde’s friends, Douglas didn’t have to pretend to be decadent, and most readers will sigh with relief that the relationship between Wilde and Douglas ended, however terrible the circumstances, before little Cyril could face the potential consequences of the latter’s advances.

Indeed, much of the material in Andre and Oscar challenges Wilde’s reputation among liberals as a gay icon. If Wilde and Douglas are seen as gay liberators, do their supporters also approve of the activities of child-sex tourists? Or an age of consent for homosexuality so low that it might as well not exist at all? Or the sort of flirtation with the sons of one’s married lovers Douglas was keen to indulge in? If the answers are no, such liberals need radically to examine their casual support for everything Wilde stood for. If it is yes, then why are they not challenging current laws against paedophiles? Fryer does not grapple with these points.

The more conventional aspects of Gide and Wilde have, of course, already been documented in numerous biographies. Fryer tries to overcome this difficulty by focusing on the mutual fascination that existed between them, and on their mutual friends, in an attempt to offer new perspectives. When Wilde was in prison, Gide bombarded Douglas with letters demanding information, and eventually they met up in Italy. When Wilde later settled in Berneval, Gide made a point of travelling there unannounced to see his old friend.

The book also contains an absorbing and original subtext, considering the experiences of both writers’ wives . And it successfully and intriguingly recreates the vast network of homosexuals in countries like Italy and Algeria, where pederasty was known to flourish – what others have called the seduction of the Orient and the Mediterranean; what these days is referred to, rather less eloquently, as international sex tourism.

Islington Care Leavers Meeting

A new transcription of the audio tape of the interview with the customs officer – and some comments on the recording

[As Jim Kirkcaldy makes clear in his comments below, this transcription does not claim to be definitive, but hopefully represents a palpable step forward in terms of detail. But others with access to the tape may have good arguments for alternative ‘hearings’ of passages – I would invite them to present those in the comments section below]

Since Saturday. July 19th, 2014, there have been a large range of heated exchanges online (though not in the mainstream media), primarily between the Exaro online news agency and the Needle blog, in particular following interventions from the veteran journalist and film-maker Tim Tate, who has made various features relating to the abuse of children over a period of almost three decades. This has also spilled over into social media.

See these links for the recent Exaro article relating to the tape (David Hencke, Mark Conrad and Alex Varley-Winter, ‘Audio file set to blow lid off paedophile scandal at Westminster’, Exaro News, July 19th, 2014 (do note the extensive comments underneath)) and the following for the responses on the Needle blog (including from Tim Tate) and a first transcript of the tape (‘Exaro Audio Tape Story’, July 19th, 2014‘Tim Tate Comments on the Exaro ‘Audio Tape’ Story’, July 20th, 2014; ‘Transcript of Audio Tape’, July 21st, 2014; ‘Beware The Backlash: The Media And The Politics of Paedophilia’, July 21st, 2014; ‘Correction To Audio Tape Transcription’, July 22nd, 2014; ‘For The Record: A Final Word On The Audio Tape Story’, July 24th, 2014; and ‘Exposed! Gojam’s Source For The ‘Vital’ Inside Information From Op Fernbridge’, July 24th, 2014). A further response can be found on ‘Bishop Brightly’s blog (‘What the Ex Customs Officer Said’, July 23rd, 2014).

In this blog, I will give some background, and give a new transcription of the tape in question, painstakingly done by James Alistair Kirkcaldy ( ), whose blog, Life is not an error, you can view here.


In February 2014, an interview was conducted between James Fielding of the Sunday Express, which was the basis for an article published that month, reproduced here (James Fielding, ‘Cabinet minister in seized child porn’, Sunday Express, February 23rd, 2014).

Express 230214 - Cabinet minister in seized child porn

Soon after this article, a copy of a document to do with a 1982 Customs and Excise seizure began to be distributed online; this is printed here.

Customs and Excise Seizure 1982

The individual listed, Russell Tricker, is a former private school teacher convicted of child sex offences in the UK, who used his job as a coach drive to ferry boys from London to the Netherlands (see Nick Davies, ‘When sex abuse can lead to murder’, The Guardian, November 27th, 2000).

In two articles published a little over a month after that in the Sunday Express, Exaro claimed that this was the seizure in question, that Tricker denied knowing what was contained in the material, but that the video was passed to MI5. They also claimed that the customs officer had told friends that the former Conservative cabinet minister was on the video, and wanted to reveal this, but was constrained from so doing because of the Official Secrets Act (Mark Conrad and Mark Watts, ‘Customs seized video of child sex abuse and ex-cabinet minister’, Exaro News, March 29th, 2014, and ‘Man who tried to import video: ‘I did not know what was inside”, Exaro News, March 29th, 2014). Tim Tate asked several questions in the comments section of the first of this two articles, to do with what evidence existed to show (1) that the video referred to depicted child sexual abuse; (2) that the ex-cabinet minister is shown in the video; (3) that the individual referred to by Exaro was a Customs and Excise officer; (4) what work had been done to establish the credibility of the ‘friend’ of the customs officer referred to.

The Exaro story was also published in the Sunday People on the same day (Keir Mudie and Mark Conrad, ‘Ex-Tory minister ‘pictured in child sex abuse video’ confiscated by customs at Dover in 1982′, Sunday People, March 29th, 2014). This story, though widely discussed on social media (alongside others involving the same ex-cabinet minister) was not to my knowledge reported again in the press until a report in the Sunday Telegraph on July 4th gave a quite different version of events, which I reproduce below.

Gordon Rayner, Tim Tate, and Christopher Hope Senior, ‘Tory stopped with child sex videos ‘was reprieved’; More cases of sex abuse are uncovered by Home Office’, Sunday Telegraph, July 4th, 2014

A SENIOR Tory said to be part of a child sex ring was stopped by a customs officer with child pornography videos but got off scot-free, police have been told.

The former MP was driving back to Britain through Dover when a customs officer pulled him over because he was “acting suspiciously”.

The guard, now retired, has told detectives that when he searched the politician’s car he found videotapes of children “clearly under the age of 12” taking part in sex acts.

He passed the material on to his superiors but the MP was never arrested or charged. And, like a dossier of evidence compiled by the late Geoffrey Dickens MP, the tapes and paperwork relating to the seizure have since gone missing.

The latest disclosure will increase accusations of a cover-up, because no action was taken against the MP at the time the videos were seized.

The same MP is understood to have been named in the Dickens dossier, handed to Lord Brittan, who was then home secretary. The dossier has since been lost or destroyed.

The customs officer who stopped the MP in the 1980s has spoken to detectives from Operation Fernbridge, the Metropolitan Police investigation into allegations of child abuse by Cyril Smith and others at Elm Guest House in Barnes, south London. The guesthouse has since closed down.

A senior Tory politician has been accused of abusing a young boy at the guesthouse, but police are understood to have insufficient evidence to take action.

A source close to the investigation said the customs officer was originally approached over claims that a known paedophile had been stopped with a videotape showing the MP at a sex party with under-age boys.

The officer said the report was false but told police he had stopped the MP in question and seized child pornography videos from him.

The source said: “He viewed the tapes on a video recorder at the border control, and found them to contain pornography involving both under-age girls and boys together. He said the children were clearly under the age of 12.

“Unfortunately he can’t remember the exact date when it happened, but he had no doubt about the identity of the MP because he checked his passport.

“He said he had passed the details of the seizure up the chain of command and had no knowledge of what happened after that.

“The officers on the case have not been able to find the videotapes or any paperwork to corroborate his account.”

Tom Watson, the Labour MP who has once again posed questions about paedophiles within Westminster, last night called on Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecutions, to examine the evidence relating to the former MP.

He said: “I sincerely hope the DPP has been made aware of these allegations and will be considering it as part of her examination of other allegations.”

Lord Brittan has faced questions over his handling of a bundle of papers handed to him by the late Mr Dickens, which contained allegations against the same MP, and against several other prominent figures.

Some of the men named were part of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which campaigned for the lowering of the age of consent.

The Labour MP Simon Danczuk has suggested that the dossier was “destroyed to protect the people whose names were in it”.

Meanwhile, The Daily Telegraph has learnt that four more cases of historic sex abuse have been referred to the police by Home Office officials in recent months.

An internal review of hundreds of thousands of Home Office files found 13 previously undisclosed “items of alleged child abuse” last year.

The Home Office said nine of the 13 cases had previously been reported to the police – including four that involved the department’s officials.

However, the remaining four were overlooked by civil servants – and have now been reported to the Metropolitan Police.

The cases were unearthed by an internal review ordered in February last year.
Mr Danczuk questioned why the Home Office had not passed on the cases to the police earlier.

He said: “It was never the job of the Home Office to try to determine what constituted potential evidence, that’s the job of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

“The public will think that people in the Home Office were withholding information from the police which could have led to the successful prosecution of child sex abusers.”

A Home Office spokesman said: “The review concluded that the Home Office acted appropriately, referring information received during this period to the relevant authorities.”

To date, 120 MPs have supported a campaign for a public inquiry into allegations of child abuse made against politicians.

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, said yesterday it was time for “the truth” to be told.

He said: “I just want the truth to come out and justice to be done.
“When we’re dealing with allegations of such a serious criminal nature, I don’t think there’s any surrogate, really, for allowing the police to get to the bottom of what happened.”

The Tape

The tape was distributed to a range of people earlier this week, and I received a copy of it. In order to check in case the tape might have been doctored in any way, I sent it to an audio expert (who wishes to remain anonymous) with access to high-level software. The following were his responses to me:


I have had a quick listen, and there don’t seem to be any obvious edit points. The problem is that it is a very poor quality recording full of pops and hiss, so finding any edit ‘ins’ or ‘outs’ would be pretty difficult. Also, digital editing nowadays (as opposed to tape) is pretty much seamless, unless you have a clean, smooth, constantly changing, easily identifiable background ambient.

Conclusion – it could very easily have been doctored by anyone with access to readily available free software, but proving it would be very difficult, even with some of the hi-tech software we have here.

IP: I wasn’t thinking just of editing, also whether other things might have been tweaked or distorted – do the same comments apply for that possibility?

It depends on what you mean by tweaked or distorted. Could you be more specific? You can change pitch for instance, or EQ. Not sure how useful those things would be in making something actually mean something different though.

IP: I was wondering if it was possible to change something to make it sound like something it is not – to make a mumble into a ‘yeah’, or something like that?

Probably not, you have to have the sound there in the first place.

A much easier approach would be to use vowel/consonant sounds from somewhere else in the recording. In other words parts of a word could be put together or used on their own to make a new word. On this note, if you could find where a suspect word came from in the recording, you could possibly visually overlay the sound waves on top of each other and prove they were identical. Doing this would be like looking for the proverbial needle on the haystack though!

IP: One last question, coming from the person who is doing the transcript [Kirkcaldy]. He told me the following:

‘I forgot to mention this bit. I find the bit at 10:10 suspicious. I detect a change in the accent on the word mem-ber [drawn out] occurring during the crash or bang. Also the bit at 10:19 is, in my provisional opinion, not a naming of the MP and the syllables used are no where in the ball park of [redacted name]. Also, CO: 10:19 may’o’Cab’net, yeh [short, running together] fits more logically given the reporters staccato utterance Reporter: 10:1(6)7 [staccato] Cab’net!? just prior. I would also add that another voice, which is further away from the mic but could be the same reporter, can be picked up and can be heard as ‘there’u’are [10:16] . Again the switch in volumes is suspicious when considered with what I said about a slight change in accent and the fact that it is these hard to hear bits, that exaro and others are focusing on. I’ll know more on Sunday’

Would you be able to just have a check of the passage from 10’10 to around 10’19 and say if you think anything seems suspicious to you there?

The bang could be a bit suspicious in itself. Why did something like that have to happen exactly there, right at a crucial point, and nowhere else in the recording? Also, the ‘there’u’are’ bit leads straight off the bang, so it (the bang) could possibly have been used to cover up a rather clumsy edit. On second listen as well, something I can’t quite put my finger on, but the bang does sound tonally slightly out of kilter with the rest of the recording (too many lower range frequencies – rest of recording is very toppy). I can’t be 100% about this though.

Also, on a much closer listen, there is a very short section where the report says ‘so it was’ then the reply sounds like ‘henry bidemac yeh’. Immediately after this, there is a distorted peak leading into something which sounds like ‘I was part of the EC at the time’. To me, this possibly sounds like an edit, as there is a bit of customs guy’s voice, running straight into reporter’s voice.

I sent it to several other audio experts, studio composers and others, two of whom have responded. First, from Lester Barnes:

The one big thing that stuck out to me on this recording was the short section from 4:32 to 4:35 – the insertion of “[redacted name]” is very out of place both in timbre, volume and flow. The section after the name stumbles and doesn’t really connect – sounds more like the voice of the reporter. If you listen to how the Indian guy speaks throughout the interview, he is very guarded and reserved about revealing or confirming anything. It doesn’t add up to me, that he would suddenly shout ‘[redacted name]’ in the middle of an otherwise guarded dialogue. (unless, it was meant to be the reporter interjecting ?)
(Do note the comments at this point in the transcript itself as well, which echo these sentiments)

Also, from Richard Thomas:

I’ve had a listen through it and the quality of the recording makes it difficult to make any definite judgements (it’s almost definitely a recorder in the reporter’s pocket). Also I think the dictation machine’s on auto gain, which would explain changes to levels, especially background. Something I did check throughout the 10:15-10:30 section was whether the clock in the background was regular, although the crashing completely masks it, it seems to come back into place at the right time. The crashing does seem to contain low frequencies which aren’t present in the rest of the recording- I’d expect a voice recorder type thing to have filters to reduce low frequency noise from handling etc. An explanation could be that it’s something being put down on a table the recorder’s on and the sound’s transmitted through the table, a reason why it’s not muffled

Something I think is an edit, however is the addition of “Henry/Henrik Bissner”? at 10:21. It sounds like someone else’s voice and the “s” on the end sounds like it’s been faded down. The way the noise floor is faded in too, doesn’t sound like it should. In order to actually prove it’s someone else’s voice you’d probably need access to someone who works in audio forensics . In addition there’s no clock tick here and I’d expect to be able to hear one there

It’s really hard to demonstrate anything visually using the waveform, as it’s so noisy I’m afraid.


Preface by Jim Kirkcaldy:

The following transcript is a working document and like all things of this type it is open to correction and reinterpretation, as and when cleaner copies of the recording emerge and current copies investigated further using specialist software. There are bound to be mistakes in this transcript and I will endeavor to pick up on them as I produce a more thorough and in-depth piece. Your help is welcomed.

It is important to note that the spoken word, our utterances in conversation, are very rarely grammatically correct. It can sometimes be a mistake to listen to a recording and to try to put it directly into a grammatically correct and readable piece, straight away; where sounds of syllables, consonants and vowels, the phonetics, are forced into a word that seems most appropriate to them. I have opted to retain some of these phonetic qualities for now.

The transcript I have put together contains notes and coding for my own reference, with a view to using a more standard coding scheme on the most important bits of the recording. Other aspects, such as the pattern of breath of each speaker, the tonal qualities and intonations, the micro pauses and longer pauses, all reveal and indicate meaning. As you can see, some of my notes here are embedded in the transcript and the actual utterances and sounds made by participants, are marked in bold.

I have also come across what seems to me discontinuities in the recording that may indicate edits and the copying of bits from one part of the recording, to elsewhere in it. If I am right these could be attempts to conceal and mislead us and to promote certain interpretations over others. I stress that at this stage such a claim is nothing more than my suspicions and initial thoughts, prompted by my listening very carefully to the recording and those specific parts many, many times. More work needs to be done to get a definitive answer. I hope that my notes and my indicating these discrepancies will allow others, myself included, to investigate them more fully. It will come as little surprise that some of these suspected edits occur over parts that have been considered inaudible elsewhere.

On a final note I would add that I find the most revealing bits of this recording elsewhere than those bits already indicated by others. For example, such as the allusions to the nonverbal elements of this exchange and affirmations through body language use etc. Often a ‘mm-hm’ an ‘uh-huh’ or even a ‘yeah’, is accompanied by a nod of the head and this can sometimes be an unconscious act and considered ‘indexical leakage’.

There are other ways information and affirmation is given through the more verbal gestures and utterances, that point to some state of affairs. Whilst I think the authenticity of this recording needs to be questioned, there are genuinely other stories and narratives beyond the two presented to us in the Telegraph and Exaro pieces, to be further investigated. There is enough in these recordings to justify calling people to give evidence at a Parliamentary committee meeting. This would include the journalists making such recordings in the first place, as-well-as other Customs Officers and officials that would have been involved.

Reporter: 00:0(3)4 Ermm [pause 00:05] its to do with children, from Amsterdam [00:08]. Do you recall? 00:10

CO: 00:10(1) Err [micro-pause] maybe I might [00:12] you see, put some, er’ [00:13] just something I can’t really [00:15(6) interrupted by female voice] ,
Reporter: 00:12 [speaking over ‘might you see’]..what was contained on those videos [00:12(3)]

Female voice: 00:15 [interrupt and over ‘I can’t’, addressed to reporter] would you like a cup of coffee, tea, anything? [00:17]

Reporter: 00:17 er, I’m alright thank you, thank you though [00:18(9)]

CO: 00:19 Because this is an official-er [00:21 micro-pause 00:22] experience [00:23]

Reporter: 00:23 Yeah

CO: 00:23(4) I am bound by, er-secrets act [00:25(6) wavering on ‘er’ run into secrets]

Reporter: 00:2(6)7 OK

CO: 00:27 I am not supposed to-oo [00:28 dragged mico-pause] detail [00:29 emphasised DE][00:30] or spell out anything [00:31]

Reporter: [00:28] [interrupt over end of -oo, hushed near silent] talk to- [then interrupted by CO on emphasised DE]

Reporter 00:3(1)2 OK

CO: 00:3(2)3 Err, I think if you would like to know more about this [00:36 dropping tone on this] you’ll have to go to the right channel [00:37]

Reporter: 00:38 sure, but what I can do [00:39]

CO: 00:39 [interrupt on ‘can d-”] I’m retired now [00:40] and I can’t really [00:41(2) dragged]
Reporter 00:42 No, of course, and what I would do is-I wouldn’t name you [00:44], I wouldn’t put anything [00:45] to do with your identity bu-[00:4(5)6]

CO: 00:46 [interrupt and over bu-] {even that}, even that, I mean [00:4(7)8)]
Reporter: 00:48 [interrupt on ‘mean’] it’s just background information {as}{as}as t’ [00:49(50)] what-it- erm- [00:50]

CO: 00:50 [interrupt and over on ‘what-it-erm’] what sort of information [00:51(2)]

Reporter 00:51(2) [breath in] well what was contained [00:52(3)] on it [00:53] ’cause we think that there might of been [00:54], erm, [00:55 micro-pause 00:55(6)] pornography involving children [00:57(8) emphasised] that was involving also, er [00:59 micro-pause], maybe prominent people [01:00(1)] erm [01:02 micro-pause] at the time in terms of like MPes [01:04 dragged emphasised], if er that kind of thing [01:06]

CO: 010(6)7 Why don’t you approach the {d}department? [01:08]

Reporter: [01:0(8)9] We have, but it’s not th- {w}{w}which[01:11] department the- [01:12(3)]

CO: 01:13 [slight interrupt on ‘the-‘] Customs

Reporter: 01:13(4) [coupling with ‘customs’] Exercise. Well they-said-that-they, {tha}that they hadn’t got [01:15(6)0]

CO: 00:1(5)6 [interrupt on ‘got’] Did you go to, go to right channel like erm [01:18] er, the department er-in Dover? [01:22]

Reporter [01:22(3)] mm-hmm [acknowledgement]

CO: 01:23 errr, their the people [01:24] who have all the records [dragged 01:25(6)]

Repoter: 01:26 mm-hmm [acknowledgement]

CO: 01:2(6)7 erm, I’m bound [emphasised 01:27(8)] by the secrests act [01:29] not to [01:30(01) pause 01:30] not to-oo [dragged 01:32] disclose ..

Reporter: 01:33 mm-hmm [acknowledgment, go on]

CO: 01:34 ..any sort of information [dropping 01:35] in m-y [01:35(6) held] career [01:36]
Reporter: 01:37 mm-hmm

CO: 013(7)8 So I hope you understand what I’m trying [01:39(40] to tell you.

Reporter:01:40 [interrupt and over ‘you’] Of course, of course but I mean would you be able to just [01:42] sort of let me know {off}off [01:44] completely off the record record [01:45 pause 01:46] the material that was found on that coach [dropping 01:48 micro pause], involved videos of children and [01:50] it also involved children [breath taken in 01:52 micro-pause] with, er, a prominent MP [01:54]

[pause 01:54]

CO: 01:5(6)7 mm-huh [very hushed, closed mouth, nasal, low tone on mm low tone on huh but high than mm *consider likely non-verbal accompaniment(?)*]

Reporter: 01:57 you sure? er, that MP [01:58] was name-his name was [name redacted] [02:00 ]

CO: 02:01 yeah [higher on ah, guttural, possible question intonation]

Reporter: 02:0(1)2 Is that correct?


CO: 02:04(5) mm-huh [closed mouth, low tone on mm higher tone on huh, clearer tone distinction than 01:5(6)7, *consider likely non-verbal accompaniment–likely affirmation of reporters question(?)*]

Reporter: 02:05 Ermm [micro-pause 02:06] {did you}{ha}have you spoken to the police? [02:08]


CO: 02:09(10) Not recent

Reporter: 02:11 Did you speak to them at the time? [02:12]

CO: 02:13(14) Err, hah [02:15 nervous laughed ‘hah’], its a long time ago [02:16]

Reporter: 02:16 [over ago] mm-huh

CO: 02:17 and {er}I have, as you probably-know [slurred and lisping 02:19] we get lots of these things [02:20(1)]

Reporter: 02:01(2) mm-huh

CO: 02:(1)2 and I have been involved in quite a few [02:23 slurred and lisping] [0:23(4)]

Reporter: 02:24 mm-huh

CO: 02:2(4)5 Now I can’t pin point one [02:27] one par-tic-ular [02:27 dragged micro-pause 02:2(7)8] er [micro pause 02:28(9)] case.. [02:29] [pause]

Reporter 02:2(7)8 [during micro-pause 02:2(7)8 before ‘er’] mm-hm

CO: 02:31 ..All{all] [dragged {all} 02:32] records are kept at Dover [02:34]

Reporter 02:35 mm-huh

CO: 02:36 I think you got’a-go there [02:38]

Reporter: 02:38(9)OK, do you know where abouts in Dover? [02:40]

CO: 02:40(1) yeah [dropping] it’s er [02:41][micro-pause 02:42(3)] I’ll give you the address, one second [dropping to hush 02:43(4)]

Reporter 02:44 Yeah?

CO: 02:45 it’s er [hushed, low tone]

[pause of utterances, sound of activity, mic disturbed]

Reporter: 03:01 Did you yourself view the er [03:02(3)], any of the footage? [03:03(4)]

CO: 03:03(4) cO’duh’n’nuh [drop in volume, change in direction of address, not English (?) address to someone else (?) assess given reporter restates the question]

Reporter: 03:05 Did you have sit there and watch what was on the er [03:07(8) micro-pause] videos [dropping on -oes 03:08]

CO: 03:08 Oh yeah, I can’t just seize it [03:10] just like that [03:11]

Reporter: 03:10 [[over ‘just that’] Yeah

CO: 03:11(2) Er, you want to have the-address? [rising question intonation 03:13]

Reporter: 03:1(3)4 Yeah

CO: 03:14(5) er it’s er [03:15] H M Customs and Excise [rising intonation 03:16]

Reporter: 03:17 Yeah

CO: 03:19(20) Priory – Court [loud enunciated] P R I–O R Y [03:23]

Reporter: 03:23(4) Yeah

CO: 03:24 Court, [03:24(5)]

Reporter 03:2(4)5 Yeah

CO: 03:25 C O U R T [running together 03:26]

Reporter: 03:27 Yeah

CO: 03:2(7)8 Saint Johns Road [03:29] Saint [03:(29)30]

Reporter: 03:30 Yeah

CO: 03:30(1) Johns Road

Reporter: 03:31(2) yeah
CO: 03:32 Cer-[03:33] abrupt stop, self regulation] Dover [03:34]

Reporter: 03:35 mm-huh

CO: 03:36 CT 17 [03:37]

Reporter: 03:38 What was it, sorry?

CO: 03:39(40) {C!}C! T! [03:41]

Reporter: 03:4(1)2 one-seven [running]

CO: 03:42(3) one-seven, nine [03:43]

Reporter: 03:43 [over nine] yeah

CO: 03:44 S for sugar, H [03:46]

Reporter: 03:46(7) H, OK

CO: 03:47 yeah [dropping]

Reporter:03:4(8)9 Right [micro- pause] erm [03:50(1)] from what you remembered-though-of-it [03:52 running] was there actually abuse taking place [rising question intonation 03:54] by this MP ? [dropping 03:54(5)]?

CO: 03:5(5)6 Sorry?

Reporter 03:56 Was the MP [name redacted] actually [03:58 dragged micro-pause 03:59(04:00)] err [raised] abusing children on the video? [dropping 04:01]


CO: 04:03 Well I cant disclose anything [04:04(5)] sorry [04:05]

Reporter: 04:05 No but, I mean a- [04:05(6)]

CO: 04:06 [interrupt on a-] I can’t disclose any more [04:07]

Reporter: 04:07 [interrupt on -ore] Off the record you-mean-you’ve-said [04:08(9) running] you told me [04:09] that it was{hi-}[name redacted] [04:11] was..

CO: 04:11 [interrupt on ‘was’] {wha}What I can suggest is-erm..[04:13] dropping]

Reporter: 04:13 [over -erm] mm-huh

CO: 04:1(4)5) You can approach my department there.. [04:16(7)]

Reporter: 04:17 yeah

CO: 04:1(7)8 and ask for the details [04:19]

Reporter: 04:19(20) Yeah

CO: 04:20 Whatever the detail you want [04:21] they’re supposed to tell you [04:22(3)]

Reporter: 04:23 hm-huh

CO: 04:24 {but}{bu}but I’m not supposed to tell you anything [04:26]

Reporter: 04:26 No, but this-is-just-off-the-record [04:28 running], it’s for research really [04:29]

CO: 04:30 Well I can only//can’t say it [04:32 ‘can’t say it’ staccato out of place, tonal difference, suspicious possible beginning of edit or doctoring //= cut]

Reporter: 04:33 But [name redacted]// .[// indicates edit and last syllable of name runs straight in to CO’s accent on ‘is’. ‘But’ and ‘[name redacted]’ is near identical, in my opinion, to the latter citation of his name at 04:36 by the reporter. The drag on the last syllable is very telling at 04:36 when contrasted with 04:33]

CO: 04:34 //is a par-tic-ular//Logged of everything [//=cut, ‘Logged’ jumps in before -ar in ‘particular’ is complete and is at a higher volume; -ular the breath is ending then with the breath on ‘logged’ suddenly returning and allowing a greater voicing. There should be, bio-mechanically speaking, evidence of a breath being taken first before ‘log’ (?). Check verbalisation elsewhere in recording to identify where they could have been copied from] [inaudible]

Reporter: 04:36(7) But [name redacted] [dragging on last syllable] {was involved} [04:37] was in [pause 04:3(8)9] on [04:39] one of the videos [dropping, 04:40].

[Lester Barnes: The one big thing that stuck out to me on this recording was the short section from 4:32 to 4:35 – the insertion of “[redacted name]” is very out of place both in timbre, volume and flow. The section after the name stumbles and doesn’t really connect – sounds more like the voice of the reporter. If you listen to how the Indian guy speaks throughout the interview, he is very guarded and reserved about revealing or confirming anything. It doesn’t add up to me, that he would suddenly shout ‘[redacted name]’ in the middle of an otherwise guarded dialogue. (unless, it was meant to be the reporter interjecting ?)]

CO: 04:40 Ieeah’ I don’t understand er [04:42 pause] err [04:43(4)][long pause 04:46(7)] I’-honest-don’t, -it-was-a long time ago [running, lisping, dropping hushed 04:48 micro-pause [04:49(50)] it was-er [micro-pause [04:50(51)] some{b}-{jee}tail, or whatever-I-don’t-know [04:53 cognitive stress broken language function, running end to utterance]

Reporter: 04:53 uh-ha

CO: 04:53(54) But I think [emphasised ‘THInk’] your right approa’ is to-go-to Dover [dragged, emphasised Do{e}-{Va} 04:57]

Reporter: 04:57(58) uh-ha

CO: 04:58 and go to this place [04:59]

Reporter 04:59(05:00) yeah

CO: 05:00 They should have all my records [05:02] all the records of the event [05:03(04)]

Reporter: 05:04(05) hu-hm [micro-pause 05:05] OK

CO: 05:05(06) [interrupt of ‘so’] yu’know. So other than ask me whichever I might be [micro pause 05:09] tell you something or whichever [05:10(11) emphasis on ‘TEll’]

Reporter 05:11 [interrupt on ‘whichever’] Nono-{uh}-what-I’ll do is [05:12] I’ll go and check these dee- whatever you tell me now [05:13] I’ll go and check the details [05:15 dropping, micro-pause 05:16] er{this}this point, St John’s road, [05:17] HM Customs & Excise, Priory Court [05:19 breath in]. {wha}is that an archive system?

CO: 05:13 [interrupt on and over ‘now’] yeah [05:13]

CO: 05:21 Pardon?

Reporter: 05:21 Is that the archive? [05:22 pause 05:23(24)] THE archive [emphasised THE 05:24] er the Customs & exercise, this particular address here, is that [micro pause] THE archive where they have all the information wi.. [05:29]
CO: 05:29(30) [interrupt and over ‘wi..’] Yeah that’s {the-ee}our{a}, {uh}our{er} [05:32] {eh}{eh}HQ in Dover [05:34 cognitive distress on understanding the word ‘archive’, disrupted language function]

Reporter: 05:35 OK [05:36 pause 05:37] And just whe.. [05:38]

CO: 05:38 [interrupt on ‘just whe..’] {I}{I}as I said this was long time ago [05:40]

Reporter 05:40 mmm

CO: 05:40 (41) They might not ha-ve [dragged 05:42] all the{er} records {a}at there.. [emphasised ‘THere’ 05:44]

Reporter: 05:44(45) mm-hm

CO: 05:45 ..they might of [ 05:46 micro-pause ] forwarded it to London [05:47] office yu’know [05:48 tailing, dropping]

Reporter: 05:49 Sure

CO: 05:49 But{er} your best bet [05:50 emphasised ‘BEst-BEt’] is Dover [05:50(51)]

Reporter: 05:51 But you remember watching them [05:52 micro-pause] the videos, you-had-to (?) [dropping intonation 05:53, ‘you-had-to’ running]


CO: 05:55 Well as I said [05:56] you can’t just seize them without re{e}v’ing- them [05:58]

Reporter 05:56 [interrupt on and over and repeating CO ‘you can’t just..] yeah, you can’t jus’ seize them without ree.. [05:58 there is a change in volume levels for both the reporter’s and CO’s utterances and the background noise, review and check for edits here] and {was there}{wa}was this an attempt, this- was-an{er} [06:00 micro pause] tipped off from the{er} [06:01] Dutch intelligence [micro-pause 06:02] ermm [06:03 micro pause 06:04(05)] {thert}tipped off the{er} British police and the British Customs & Exercise that this coach [06:08 micro-pause 06:09(10)] had {conce}[micro-pause] did contain erm [06:11 micro-pause 06:12(13)] material involving children (?) [06:14]


CO: 06:16(17) [breath in] Sorry I can’t tell you anything [06:18]

Reporter: 06:18 {ar}alright, OK

CO: 06:19(20) I’m bound by the r{eh}ffcia{ence}..[06:21]

Reporter: 06:21 [interrupt over and at same time ‘the r{eh}’] No, of course {bu}{i}{its}its, it won’t come…[06:23]

CO: 06:22(23) [continued from 06:19(20) over and at same time as ‘it won’t’] and I think.. [hushed] ALL your details [[06:24] emphasised interrupting ‘ALL’] {a}All the details.. [06:25]

Reporter: 062:5(26) hmm

CO: 06:26 [breath in before ‘will’ at 06:26]..Will be kept[ micro-pause, saliva swallow, micro breath in 06:28] back at-{whe}//there//up there [06:30] [06:29 // indicates possible edit point. Breath in for greater voicing and emphasis on ‘WILL be kept’ ,then movement of lips, tongue and saliva inside mouth and on lips, followed by a short breath through nose to allow a greater voicing and emphasis on ‘BAck’. The fullness of the breath and voicing over ‘at-{where}//there// up there’ drops unnaturally at the // point and becomes fuller again on ‘up there’ at the second // point with no additional breath taken . *Take a closer graphical look to check*]

Reporter: 06:30 uh-hm

CO: 06:30(31) They should have all the information [06:32]

Reporter: 06:32(33) This, [dragged ‘is’ micro-pause] this, ’cause the only reason I asked about [name redacted] [06:35(36) dropping on surname, micro-pause 06:36], is’because [pause 06:37, movement of mic and reporter moving] it says under his name here, it says [initials redacted] [06:39(40)]. {a’vidi}one videocassette entitled [initials redacted] [06:43]

[long pause, sound of something being past and rustled, perhaps paper and what is referred to by ‘this’ and ‘here’. The reporter’s movements above and disturbing of the mic would also indicate something is passed to the CO to read. Longer pause as document is read (?)]

Reporter: 06:49(50) {an’i}{an}it’s, come to my attention that it might [06:52], {i}{i}it involves [06:53], so-I’ve-been-told, [06:54] it involves the MP [name redacted] [06:55 dropping on surname].

CO: 06:57(8) [slight cough and throat clear] {ah}[throat clear]{it’ch’a} could be [06:59] [the pattern of throat clears with broken syllables of speech is suspicious and needs to be looked at more closely] [pause 07:00(01)] as I say [gravelly voice] I mean {I}I can’t recollect-a-complete [07:04 stumbling syllables], complete err [07:05 micro-pause] case [emphasised ‘CAse’ 07:05(06)]

Reporter: 07:06(07) yeah

CO: 07:07 errr [07:08] it happened long time ago [07:10]

Reporter: 07:10(11) mm-hmm

CO: 07:11 and err [07:11(12) pause sound of clicking 07:15] {see}what happens every {wha}when [07:17] ever a case comes along.. [07:18(19)]

Reporter: 07:19 mm-hm

CO: 07:20 then passed on to the [07:21(22) pause 07:22(23)] head of headquarters [dropping [07:24(25)

Reporter: 07:25 mm-hm

CO: 07:25 and they’re the people who will [micro-pause [07:27] check {lench’ext door}//{all}all [07:28(29)] of the information [07:29(30) // possible edit where ‘-or’ bit in sound {lench’ext door}, ends abruptly and runs into the stammered ‘{all}all’. Give it a closer look ]

Reporter 07:30 mm-hmm
CO: 07:31 Because this something er [07:32] I don’t want to be involved [07:33 dropping]


Reporter: 07:34(35) [double click before ‘no’] No! Of course. Which is why you passed it on to me//which [07:37] is why you passed it on to//the police at the time in 1982 [07:40 The possible edit // on ‘me’ has the ‘ee’ sound uncompleted and abruptly ended. It is nowhere close to -ome as in ‘some’ as found in Tim Tate’s transcript, the sound is very much different. Further, at the start of the first run of ‘Which is why..’, the sound of a vehicle accelerating and /or the Doppler effect of its sound starts with a low tone and rises. This unnaturally cuts back to the low tone for the vehicle on the second run of ‘Which is why..’ . Second // indicates a possible second edit and a change in the background noise, where the tone of the vehicle does not reach its previous tonal high. Take a closer look to confirm with software] erm [07:42 pause 07:43] But they hadn’t spoken to you recently? [07:44]
CO: 07:45 Who?

Reporter: 07:45(46) The Police

CO: 07:47 What For?

Reporter: 07:47(48) Well [micro-pause], because they{wer}because of [07:50 micro-pause] who it might contain on the actual videos [07:53]


CO: 07:54(55) yeah [hushed grunt 07:55] A gentleman came yesterday..

Reporter: 07:57 uh-huh

CO: 07:57 …and you are the next one[07:59]

Reporter: 07:59 uh-huh

CO: 07:59 (08:00) Prior to this [micro-pause] {oer}I had no person [08:03] or {eh}{which}anybody [08:03(04) check for edits more closely]

Reporter: 08:04 was the {je}, {w}was the gentleman who came yesterday police [micro-pause] or a journalist ?

CO: 08:09 Journalist

Reporter: Do’ you know {when}[micro pause] was he from the Independent [08:12]

CO: 08:13 yeah [hushed whispered]

Reporter: 08:13 Paul

CO: 08:14 [interrupt on Paul] {Independ}Independent{er} newspaper [08:15(16)]

Reporter, 08:16 Paul, Paul his name was wasn’t it [08:17]

CO: 08:18 yeah

Reporter: 08:18(19) Paul Peachy, OK, erm [micro pause 08:21] and what did you say to Paul, did you tell him [08:23 mciro-pause] anything else about what happened [08:25]

CO: 08:25 [interrupt on ‘happened’] Exactly same thing [08:26]

Reporter: 08:26 uh-hm


CO: 08: 27(28) As I say I am bound by [micro-pause] O..[08:29]

Reporter 08:29(30 [interrupt on ‘o..’] Oh! Nono, {I}I completely understand [08:30(31)]

CO: 08:30(31) [interrupt and over ‘completely understand’] {I}{I}I can’t [08:31(32)] really, errr [08:33 micro-pause 08:34] I can’t point detail out [08:35 check use of ‘can’t’ here in possible copy back and edit at 04:30] for this par-tic-ular case [08:37 check use of ‘particular’ here in possible copy back and edit at 04:34]

Reporter: 08:38 uh-hm [micro-pause 08:39] nah, OK I understand that [08:40] but-I-mean-is-there- any [running then micro pause] {er}having come from London [08:41] I-{wanna}-really-want-to-sort of-get-a-few.. [08:43]

CO: 08:(43)44 No, I understand but I {err} [08:45 tailing on err into a chuckle /laugh]

Reporter: 08:45 But can you remem-, can you erm [micro-pause 08:47] remember {wha}{ca}can you tell me what you can remember about it that you can [emphasized Can 08:50] tell [micro pause] and which {I }{can} I can get [micro pause] checked [08:52] within this place in Dover? [08:54 mic disturbed on ‘within’]

CO 08:56 [disturbed mic, muffled speech, ‘move on’ clear] Move on, same as before [08:57 check ‘same as before’]

Reporter: 08:57 Well just{I}, I was wondering [08:58] whether I could just make a note of what you remember about this particular case [09:01], so I can get it checked with the Customs & Excise at St John’s Road in Dover ? [09:05 rising intonation on ‘-over’]

CO: 09:(06)07 You’ve got enough details there [dropping 09:07(08]

Reporter: 09:08 yeah

CO: 09:09 ..and if you contact-errr [09:10(11)] the Dover office..[09:12(13]

Reporter: 09:13 mm-hm

CO: 09:13(14) ..where the records are kept [09:14]

Reporter 09:14 mm-hm

CO: 09:15 They will [micro-pause] know err, to what to tell you [09:19]

Reporter: 09:19(20) uh-hm

CO: 09:20 And{er} yu’know{er}, you will get an idea what’you’re after [09:23(24) running ‘what’you’re’ check not they’re. ‘what’you’re’ sounds corrects and fits logically. Dropping tone on after]

Reporter: 09:24 OK [pause 09:25(26)] is it public record though, will they have to [09:27(28) some knock or bang similar to 10:10, cup on table? Micro-pause09:28(29)] err provide me’cause what I wanted to know [09:30] {n}which they might not tell me, which I was hoping that I might be able to get a [micro pause] just a, literally, {n}just a.. [09:34(35)]

CO: 09:(34)35 [interrupt on ‘just a..’ ] No{ah} you’ve got enough{a}-enough thing there, [09:36 dropping]
Reporter [09:36(37) hmm

CO: 09:37 Once you mention my name and the date and the case yu’know, [09:40 breath ending]

Reporter: 09:40 mm-hm

CO: 09:41 err, they’ll be able to tell you what happened [09:43]
Reporter: 09:43(44) OK

CO: 09:44 [mid breath out] and I’m er therefore you see where to go basically [09:47 dropping, breath ending, ‘basically’ barely completed. Recheck this line more closely ]

Reporter: 09.48 alright’ well what they might not be able to tell me is who was, er, on the video [09:51pause] are you able to er just sort of let me know [09:55] if I’m I {b}{b}barking up the wrong tree {b}by

CO: 09:5(7)8: [interrupt on {b}by]{s}sorry {d}{d}don’t don’t try to force me ’cause I can’t [10:00]

Reporter: 10:(0)01 [interrupt on can’t] {n}{na}{na}no [10:02] {is}{is}if you can’t tell me [10:05]

CO: 10:03 [interrupt slight on ‘me’] No(-ah)

Reporter: 10:04 {but}but {I’m}I’m not far wrong when I say certain members, certain MP[e]s at the time, were included in those videos [10:10]

CO: 10:10 [interrupt on os] Well`it`was, er, because, er, [sound of crash over and between*.* muffeled] *[10:14end] me-mber [drawn out] of ca[bnet][10:15]*

(other voice possibly same journalist but there is a distance to it; ‘there’u’are [10:16])

Reporter: 10:1(6)7 [staccato] Cab’net!?

CO: 10:19 may’o’Cab’net, yeh [short, running together]

10:20 so it was [name redacted] wasn’t it?

CO: 10:2(0)1 [interrupt first name of MP, cross talk over muffled, isolate later, possible name recite ‘Henry’] yeh [10:21 on exhale, tailing][moves to say something else interrupted 10:2(2)3]

Reporter: 10:2(2)3: [interrupt] ’cause he’s part of the EC at the time [10:24]

CO: 10:2(4)5: but as I say, I mean I can’t, {I}I can’t pin point everything

Reporter: 10:2(8)9: No but it was..

CO: 10:29: [interrupt on it was] {eh}{eh}in reality [10:31] my memory’s failing me as well [10:33]

[Richard Thomas: Something I did check throughout the 10:15-10:30 section was whether the clock in the background was regular, although the crashing completely masks it, it seems to come back into place at the right time. The crashing does seem to contain low frequencies which aren’t present in the rest of the recording- I’d expect a voice recorder type thing to have filters to reduce low frequency noise from handling etc. An explanation could be that it’s something being put down on a table the recorder’s on and the sound’s transmitted through the table, a reason why it’s not muffled.

Something I think is an edit, however is the addition of “Henry/Henrik Bissner”? at 10:21. It sounds like someone else’s voice and the “s” on the end sounds like it’s been faded down. The way the noise floor is faded in too, doesn’t sound like it should. In order to actually prove it’s someone else’s voice you’d probably need access to someone who works in audio forensics . In addition there’s no clock tick here and I’d expect to be able to hear one there.]

[Other anonymous audio expert: The bang could be a bit suspicious in itself. Why did something like that have to happen exactly there, right at a crucial point, and nowhere else in the recording? Also, the ‘there’u’are’ bit leads straight off the bang, so it (the bang) could possibly have been used to cover up a rather clumsy edit. On second listen as well, something I can’t quite put my finger on, but the bang does sound tonally slightly out of kilter with the rest of the recording (too many lower range frequencies – rest of recording is very toppy). I can’t be 100% about this though.

Also, on a much closer listen, there is a very short section where the report says ‘so it was’ then the reply sounds like ‘henry bidemac yeh’. Immediately after this, there is a distorted peak leading into something which sounds like ‘I was part of the EC at the time’. To me, this possibly sounds like an edit, as there is a bit of customs guy’s voice, running straight into reporter’s voice. ]

Reporter: 10:3(3)4: [interrupt cross talk] no, of course

CO: 10:34 [interrupt on rse] yu’know,

Reporter: 10:3(4)5: [same time] erm

CO: 10:35: [same time] but er [1036]

Reporter: 10:3(6)7: [fast, running, excitement] Do you-know-if{heah-er-was}-he-was-never, I don’t think [name redacted] was ever charged [pause] with anything? [10:41]

CO: 10:(2)43: [animal sound or squeak 10:42] roll-a (not English)

Reporter: 10:4(5) Erm

CO: 10:45 because if the case was passed onto, er-our headquarters and then what ever I don’t know [end of breath tailing].

Reporter: 10 :40/50 OK 10:51 erm, [pause till 10:5(4)5] and-do’you know, {wi}{with}{the}, when you say Europe, he was {in-th}the European Commissioner, the EC [10:59] [pause] 11:01 erm, do you know what ha-, what was happening on there, was it [11:04 short pause] abundantly clear that this member of the, er, cab’net [11:08] was abusing children or was just on a video [11:10]?

[silence long]
CO: 11:1(3)4 oh, I can’t [hushed] remember that

Reporter: 11:1(4)5 [interrupt] but just that you might of – he was on the video


CO: 11:18 Well [pronounced] that person was involved and er [11:20], that’s why we had to seal the video [11:2(2)3]

Reporter 11:23 OK

CO: 11:2(4)5 and then er the department they [micro pause] superiors took over and that’s the end of my *years [*talked over on last word, isolate later to confirm] [11:31]

Reporter 11:31 [interrupting] yeah [micro pause] OK 11:3(2)3 but you saw him on the video?

CO: 11:35 I [emphasised, dragging] can’t tell you that [tailing hushed] [11:36]

Reporter: 11:3(6)7 No, erm but [11:38 pause] OK, well-its [ first name redacted] here [11:41], {we}we -er, we haven’t gone [emphasised g] to [name redacted] [11:44] yet, {we}we’re tryin’ to-sort-of-er, he might be the next port of call, to-sort-of, he is up in [location redacted] now, to speak to him [11:51] erm, but {yu}you’ve certainly had no calls from the police [11:54] from Yewtree, you know the Yewtree that was set up after, {t}the Jimmy Savile sandal?

Co: (11:59)12:00 Yeah-I-know-them [fast running together]

Reporter: 12:00 They haven’t contacted you {a}at all about erm

CO 12:02 [interrupt on erm] Nonono, nothing actually [12:04] The last [emphasised] thing was the gentleman came yesterday and *you are the next one*[12:07-11:10 *isolate and check*] and that’s it.

Reporter 12:(09)10 Before that it was probably what, 80s? 1982 when you last spoke to the police ?

CO: 12:14 Er-I haven’t spoken since, to anybody

Reporter 12:18 OK [micro pause] erm,

CO: 12:19[interrupt on erm] As I say, I mean this is, er, this was m-y job and er [12:24] it happened and everything was then, er [12:28] sorted out then and-er [rising tone] the matter was [micro pause] closed [emphasis], as far as I’m [emphasised, aggressive] concerned [12:33]

Reporter 12:33 Are you surprised though that [name redacted 12:35] never

CO: 12:3(5)6 Pardon?

Reporter: 12:36 Are you surprised that [name redacted] never, erm, [micro pause] was facing any police investigation? [12:42]

CO: 12:43 Nah [low breath]

Reporter: 12:4(4)5 You weren’t surprised. Is that because {it} it was [micro pause] perhaps a cover-up? [12:48]

CO: 12:51 [breath drawn] It’s difficult to say really [ rising speech 12:53]

Reporter: 12:5(3)4 You can’t say ’cause of, er, [micro pause 1.5 secs], OK [micro pause 1.5 secs] erm, [pause], is there-er-is there any contact number I can get, your phone number? [13:02]

CO: 13:02 My phone number? [rising, surprise]

Reporter: 13:03 Yeah, it’s-just-a-it-was-er, [running 13:04(5)] it will only be to check things with you [13:06] {n}{n}nothing more

CO: 13:07(8) [interrupt on ore] OK [emphasised, extended]

Reporter 13:0(7)8 Yeah

[long pause]

CO: 13:10 Its, er, [dialing code location]

Reporter 13:11 and that’s (local dialing code), is that right? [13:13]

CO: 13:13(4) [dialing code]

Reporter: 13:14 Yeeahh [dragged]

CO: 131(4)5 [number] [pause 13:16] [number] [13:18]

Reporter 13:1(8)9 [number repeat]? [pause 13:20] OoK [13:21] [pause] Ermm [13:25] [pause]

CO: 13:29 Have you got yourr [dragged, rising, question intonation] card or some-thing? [13:31]

Reporter: 13:31 I can-I’ll check [emphasised ch-eck13:32 mic volume change] if I haven’t I’ll leave you with all my contact details [13:3(4)5] mic volume change] [micro pause] [13:36] I usually do [pause] [13:39] OK, s’none around with me but I’ve been [13:41 micro pause] I’ve-sort-of-had [running] a bit of a clean out in the wallet [13:43] errrrr [long dragged 13:45] not my own but-I-got-other [running] people’s [micro pause] business cards [13:47] but-what-I’ll-do-is [running] I’ll preven.. [self regulation word stop 13:49] I’ll write down all the, er, [micro pause 13:51] my contact de-tai–ls [tone dropping, dragged, begrudged 13:52]

[pause, rustling and microphone movement]

Reporter: 14:0(2)3 ermm [micro pause] do-it-on-this{s} [14:03 running, dropping, tailing]

[long pause, writing heard]

14:44 grunt or cough

[long pause, sound of clicking]

Reporter 15:0(4)5 erm, as I said [15:06] everything you’ve [pause 15:09] you’ve told me, {is}is off the re-cord [dragged, dropping, tailing 15:11] the fact that nad- [self break 12:12(3] {th}the nod towards [name redacted] [15:14] that’s off the record as well [15:15].

CO: 15:15(6) lovely [micro pause] thank you [slight drag, high(thank) to low(you), gratitude, relief 15:17] [pause] just in case, you know? [15:(19)20]

Reporter: 15:20 [slight interrupt on ow] nono I understand completely [15:2(1)2], er

CO : 15:22 [at same time -letley] ye-ah [dragged]

Reporter: 15:22 [same time and over ye-ah] I mean his name has come up [micro pause 15:2(2)3] a number of times, and, [15:24] we were told that {hi}his initials, [redacted][15:26] stood for [name redacted] [15:27(8)]

[female cough 15:27 at same time as end of cited surname, continues till 15:32, in another room]

Reporter 15:(29)30 ermm [pause 15:31] what we didn’t know what was on the videos [15:33] we’ther or not they contained any MPs [15:34 micro pause] or whether or not it was simply him [15:37 micro pause] and someone in Amsterdam [15:38] [pause 15:4(0)1] {wa-was it} was it footage [rising, excited] taken in Amsterdam [15:42 dropping] or was it [15:43 dropping] footage taken from-[1544]

[15:37 sneeze, female on ‘or’]

CO: 15:44 [interrupt on ‘taken from’, speaking over] I can’t remember that now

Reporter 15:45 No

CO: 15:4(5)6 nah [micro pause] I,-ee-ar you know [15:47] {I}{ I}{as’a}, as I say-ay [dragging extended, tired 15:49] thirty time-, long time ago [15:51 cognitive language error ‘time’ used for ‘years’ by CO]

Reporter: 15:51(2) mm-hm [acknowledgment]

CO: 15:53 and er, we-sh [dragged slurred lisping] could get all this for obsvlee, all the time [15:56 slurring and lisping on words, cognitive damage on language use]

Reporter:15:57 mm-hm [acknowledgment]

CO: 15:5(7)8 yu’know [micro-pause 15:59] er [mico-pause] Mr [surname redacted] [dragging on last syllable16:00] or what ever [micro pause 16:01] the name was [16:02 rising on ‘was’]..

Reporter 16:02(3) [on -as’ at same time] mm

CO: 16:03 ..err [dragging] this err [dragged ‘this’ 16:05] doesn’t ring me {any}any bells [16:08]..

Reporter: 16:09 mm-hmm

CO: 16:09 at the time

Reporter: 16:09(10) [on ‘time’] mm-hmm

CO: 16:10 yu’know [16:11] he was, so [micro pause] I will [micro pause] could be anybody [rising 16:15] yu’know [trialing breathless dropping 16:16]

Reporter: 16:1(6)7 mm-hm

CO: 16:17 but this is [micro-pause] normal thing, everything it keeps on coming by, yu’know [16:2(1)2 trailing breathless tone dropping] [pause 16:23] it was a job, an’my-job [16:24]

Reporter: 16:24(5) mm-hm [short dropping]

CO: 16:25 errm [1626] I never thought that this will have [micro pause] yu’know [16:29 pause 16:30] compromise this way [16:31 check ‘compromise’ accuracy]

Reporter 16:31(2) No, but{did you}did you, when you watched the video of him [breath taken, micro -pause 16:33] did you instantly recognise him as [16:35 pause 16:36(7)] the MP? [pause]

CO: 16:38[9] {I can’t}I can’t tell you that, I don’t know I can’t remember [16:42] off hand now [16:43 running slightly]

Reporter: 16:(3)44 When did you find out that it was [micro-pause][name redacted][dropping16:45]

CO: 16:47 Your best [emphasised] bet is er, to

Reporter 16:48 [interrupt on to] yeah

CO: 16:49 yu’know [dropping breathless, knowingly]

Reporter: 16:5(49)0 yeah, I-{kno}know {I}I’ll [rising 16:50(1)]

CO: 16:50(1) [interrupt on I’ll] {I}I [emphasised loudly] don’t think {I-will}I can go too much into that [16:53]

Reporter: 16:53(4) No, of course

CO: 16:55 [interrupt on rse] Its not fair really [dropping]

Reporter 16:56 [staccato] Nonono, er sorry-[hushed]-what-ever you-tell-me [running from sorry], its completely off the record [16:58] I’m not gunna [16:59], erm, [micro-pause 17:00] mention your name or anything at all [17:02] its all off record but-as-I-said [17:04] I{did}it was told to me [micro-pause] that it was [name redacted] and you’ve seen [micro-pause 17:06] the video of [name redacted] [17:07][pause 17:08(9)] {on that}, on the video {contained in}contained on that, erm [17:12] coach, erm [17:13(4) micro pause 17:14(5)] but, what we’ll do I’ll check that with [micro pause], to see if [micro pause] erm [micro pause 17:19] if there is any more details at the [micro pause] address that you gave me in Dover [17:22 pause 17:23] is that all the information, that you can’t give any more information? [17:25]

{CO: 16:59 [over reporter speech] yeah [dragged disbelief] 17:02 yeah [over reporter ‘all’ dragged disbelief]}

CO: 17:25 [interrupt on infor- spoken over reporter on -ation) no-{ah} [dragged, low breath], I can’t, honestly, I’m not supposed to give any.

Reporter: 17:29 No [mic knocked]

CO: 17:30 but er, you can understand my position

Reporter: 17:32 yeah, of course, of course, {did}did, erm, [17:34] Paul, who spoke to you yesterday, did he mention [micro pause] [redacted name] name? [17:39]


CO: 17:41 nee-chee-la-chee (not English addressed to someone else?)

Reporter: 17:4(2)3 Did you tell him as well that it was, him, did you mention to him… [17:45]

CO: 17:45 [interrupt on ‘him’] No {I}I told him exactly what I’m telling you [dropping, slight anger] [17:47]

Reporter: 17:47 aha

CO: 17:48 That I can’t [micro pause] say more than what I say already [17:50]

Reporter: 17:51 yeah

CO: 17:52 If he need more information, that’s the place in Dover, yu’know [ 17:56 pause 17:57]{they}they should have all the information down there [18:00] I’m sure they will be able to [micro-pause] tell you, {wha}whatever [18:04].

Reporter: 18:04 yeah, OK

Keith Joseph Blocked Inquiry 1972

In light of recent allegations concerning the late Keith Joseph, one of Margaret Thatcher’s most important mentors, this is important reading.


It wasn’t an email that was sent recently but a comment left on The Needle (copied below). No wonder I couldn’t find it. I thought I was going mad!

Keith Joseph pictured here with Margaret Thatcher. Keith Joseph pictured here with Margaret Thatcher.

Hansard links,

Hansard Nov 7 1972

Hansard Nov 9 1972

Hansard Nov 22 1972

Hansard Apr 3 1973

Left by Card2

What should happen now is a review of DHSS Minister Sir Keith Joseph’s refusal of inquiry 1972 re deaths of disabled children in Hackney Social Services care at the Beeches Ixworth Suffolk in the period 1966 to 1972.

The Commons requests for a public inquiry were from two Labour MPs Michael O’Halloran and Clinton Davis. It is possible that O’Halloran was influenced to ask his question by shadow minister Barbara Castle who had already been refused her request for a care inquiry into death and poor care standards at the Sue Ryder Home…

View original post 476 more words

Mrs Thatcher Warned About Sir Peter Morrison


It’s time for this senior police officer from Chester and local journalists to come clean about what they knew about Sir Peter Morrison.

Capture Paedophile and Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, Sir Peter Morrison

In an exclusive interview with The Sun on Sunday, ex-detective chief inspector Barry said he first heard rumours about Morrison from a senior Cheshire Police officer.

He knew Mrs T was considering appointing Morrison, the MP for Chester, as deputy party chairman to replace disgraced Jeffrey Archer — who had stepped down over prostitute allegations in 1986.

So he immediately dashed to Downing Street and had an evening meeting with the PM and her private secretary Archie Hamilton, who took notes of what was said.

Barry recalled: “A senior officer in Chester had told me there were rumours going around about underage boys – one aged 15 – attending sex parties at a house there…

View original post 170 more words

PIE: Charles Oxley Interview 1983

Further to the material I posted earlier this month on Charles Oxley, who infiltrated PIE, and was also close to both Geoffrey Dickens and Mary Whitehouse ( ) , see this from earlier this year on the Needle blog, featuring an interview with Oxley


Charles Oxley who infiltrated PIE Charles Oxley who infiltrated PIE

Asked how he, Charles Oxley, was sure that members of PIE actually abused children, he replies,

“Because I’ve heard them boast about their activities [at PIE committee meetings]. One of them boasted about an afternoon he spent with two boys on the river Thames.”

I wonder who he could be talking about ?

Extract of Charles Oxley interview begins 10 minutes in.

BBC Radio 4

View original post

Beware The Backlash: The Media And The Politics Of Paedophila

‘We have then done that old-fashioned thing: sought confirmatory evidence or – where appropriate – evidence which undermines or disproves what we have been told.’

This latter clause is a good principle of both journalism and scholarship – always try to test your thesis at its most vulnerable, and never cherry-pick evidence which suits an a priori conclusion. Sometimes this will mean the conclusions are more provisional or modest, but this is a better option than weakly founded conclusions.

A question I keep asking re Elm Guest House is whether some of those alleged to have visited there might have done so for discreet sexual liaisons with same sex partners, over the age of 16 (which would have been illegal at the time as there was a discriminatory age of consent, 16 for heterosexuals, 21 for homosexuals, but this law is little more just that then pre-1967 laws which criminalised homosexual acts altogether). Doing so might have left politicians open to blackmail or censure in considerably more homophobic times, but are nothing whatsoever to do with the abuse of children. Whether or not this was the case for some individuals I am not in a position to say, but I am concerned that people with no more evidence than I have do not want to countenance this as a possibility, as the result would be rather less spectacular than that which is anticipated/desired.


I won’t stoop to counter the slurs and smears cast upon Tim Tate in the last couple of days.

I’ll just give him a voice.

I can only hope that those with ears to listen pay heed. Certainly anyone who really cares about this issue should.


By Tim Tate


“We are at a vital crossroads.

The coming weeks and months will determine the course of how paedophilia is investigated and how children can be protected from those who seek sexually to abuse them.

For the first time in a generation the public is being relentlessly bombarded with stories alleging the existence of VIP paedophile rings, cover-ups (both governmental and institutional) and accounts of men and women of the abuse they suffered as children.

This very public pressure – both in the mainstream press and in social media – has forced…

View original post 917 more words

Transcript Of Audio Tape

There has been much exchange in the last few days about the exact contents of a tape of an interview with a customs officer mentioned by Exaro News, which has been disputed in particular by Tim Tate – (see the comments in particular). For two responses, see and the comments on both of these as well) . Do read this for yourself and see which interpretations you think can be drawn from it.



Any transcription as difficult to hear as this is going to be open to interpretation. It is completely understandable that others may have different interpretations. We respect that and do not suggest that a different interpretation is more valid than our own. Nor do we dispute that what we have labeled as [inaudible] might be heard by keener ears.

For example, Exaro have quoted a passage  “The person was involved and that is why we had to seal the video.  And then the department, the superiors took over.”

We have down;

Well, well that person was involved and, er, that’s why we had to seize the video


And then, er, the department superiors took over and that’s the end of my [inaudible]

Minor differences.

Before The Telegraph story HERE and the knowledge that the customs officer was aware of a different…

View original post 2,857 more words

William Malcolm, the murdered paedophile who may have been about to expose a VIP ring

Below are a series of articles following the murder of convicted paedophile William Malcolm, who was associated with Lesley Bailey and Sydney Cooke, in February 2000 (also a few pieces on subsequent vigilante killings). I draw people’s attention in particular to the piece from the Sunday Mirror, March 5th, 2000, where it is said that Malcolm ‘was about to expose a major child sex ring – including several influential figures – police believe’; a police source said “It looks like Malcolm was on the verge of exposing something big – it is thought some well-known people were involved,” and police were interviewing known paedophiles. Malcolm’s killers were never found, and I have not seen this aspect mentioned in any other articles. Also worth noting is the proclaimed intention by Martyn Jones, MP for Clwyd South from 1987 to 2010, to name suspects involved in the North Wales child abuse scandal, for which Jones claimed the Waterhouse report was a whitewash. This may or may not, however, be linked to Malcolm’s killing.

In light of the horrific acts and celebrations thereof given underneath, I wish to point out that I would never ever condone vigilante behaviour, no matter the circumstances, and believe all those cited below glorifying in Malcolm’s murder are no better than abusers themselves. I was also appalled by the gloating response by some to an article in various papers this weekend about a Florida father who beat to a pulp an 18-year old he found molesting his 12-year old son, and would not face charges for so doing. This is all too reminiscent of those calling into talk radio soon after 9/11 keen to tell how they would be the first to kill an Arab who had hijacked their plane. The solution to violence and abuse is not more violence and abuse.

A report in the Mirror from February 2013 claimed that the VIP ring, involving Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith, a former Tory cabinet minister and some judges was linked to Cooke, who provided them with children to abuse (Justin Penrose, ‘The net closes: Ex-Tory chief faces child sex arrest over claims girl was raped and boys were abused’, Daily Mirror, February 16th, 2013), whilst an article from earlier this year from Exaro also looks at how Cooke’s activities have become linked to this investigation (Mark Conrad, ‘Met’s ‘VIP paedophiles’ probe turns into murder investigation: Police on Operations ‘Fernbridge’ and ‘Fairbank’ examine sadistic killing of young boy’, Exaro News, January 11th, 2014). A 1989 report in the Express on the investigation into Cooke, Bailey and others makes clear that detectives had heard allegations that a former Cabinet Minister and other MPs were involved in child sex activities (John Twomey, ‘Jason sex ring face quiz over child murders’, Daily Express, May 13th, 1989; reproduced at the bottom of this post – with many thanks to Murun at Spotlight for first finding this article).

If these investigations are not red herrings, then there is every chance that Malcolm, as an accomplice of Cooke and Bailey, would have known about a VIP paedophile ring involving MPs. It remains paramount that new efforts are made to bring those who murdered Malcolm to justice (it is not clear how seriously this investigation was taken earlier, and certainly at least some police seem to have sympathised with the killers’ actions) – his killers might be able to shine some new light on what he knew about others involved in this sordid business. And the possibility that this was not simply a revenge vigilante attack, but a killing designed to silence Malcolm, should not be ruled out.

A wide range of important posts and videos on Operation Orchid, the investigation into Cooke’s gang, can be found on Spotlight. See also this article on the Needle blog on Operation Orchid and the convictions of Bailey and Cooke.

I would like to thank Martin Walkerdine for bringing to my attention the Sunday Mirror article which spoke of Malcolm’s apparent intention to name members of a major ring.

New articles are appearing on a daily basis with further claims to do with MPs allegedly involved in the VIP paedophile ring, of which I will post a summary at some point soon. But I would like to draw people’s attention to a piece in the Yorkshire Post today, saying that convicted paedophile Michael McAuliffe claims to be able to provide further information relating to child abuse in Westminster in the 1970s which has been covered up (‘Bradford paedophile ‘has information on Westminster child abuse’’, Yorkshire Post, July 21st, 2014). If McAuliffe’s claims are true, this may constitute a major step forward.

The Times
, February 19th, 2000
Oliver Wright, ‘Paedophile shot dead on doorstep’

A CONVICTED child molester who had links to one of Britain’s most notorious paedophile gangs has been shot dead by two men outside his flat, it emerged last night.

William Malcolm, 47, who had two convictions for indecently assaulting children, was killed by a single bullet in the head when he answered the door of his second-floor flat in Manor Park, East London. He was taken to the nearby Royal London Hospital but was pronounced dead on arrival.

He had been the subject of repeated threats and last night police were investigating whether his death was the work of vigilantes. However, they had not ruled out other motives.

Malcolm, an associate of the notorious paedophiles Leslie “Catweazle” Bailey and Sydney Cooke, was jailed in 1981 for a series of attacks on his six-year-old stepdaughter and nine-year-old stepson. Despite knowledge of the attacks social services allowed the paedophile to rejoin the children when he was released from prison two years later. The attacks continued and he was jailed again in 1984 after being convicted of having unlawful intercourse with the same stepdaughter. The police attempted to prosecute him in 1994 on 13 child abuse charges but he was released when an Old Bailey judge ruled that his previous conviction meant he could not get a fair trial. This was despite a psychiatric report which described Malcolm as a sexual psychopath and said that he had paedophile tendencies of a “strongly sadistic nature” .

After his release police continued to monitor Malcolm’s movements and he was questioned by detectives investigating the killings of Jason Swift, Mark Tilsley and Barry Lewis.

Last night neighbours expressed little sympathy. One said: “Nobody will feel sorry, except maybe his relatives. I was shocked when I heard someone had been shot on their doorstep like that but when I heard it was him I was relieved.”
Police are seeking two white men in connection with the attack on Thursday night.

The Sun
, February 19, 2000
Mike Sullivan and Andrea Busfield, ‘Gun Law’

Neighbours cheer as vigilantes kill a child sex monster on doorstep

JUBILANT families last night praised a vigilante hit squad for gunning down an evil paedophile on his doorstep.

As cops launched a hunt for the three men who blasted pervert William Malcolm, one mum said: “Now my child will be able to walk the streets and play in safety. We’re all relieved he is dead.”

Malcolm, 47 – a former pal of child-sex monster Sidney Cooke and his gang – was killed with a bullet in the head when he answered the door of his second-floor council flat overlooking a park.

A child protection cop said: “The timing of the shooting in the same week the inquiry report into the North Wales children’s homes was published may have been more than coincidence. The revulsion over the North Wales scandal could well have triggered it off.”

Residents at the flats where Malcolm lived in Manor Park, East London, heard a shot and rushed out to find him spreadeagled on the floor.

One woman said: “His body was lying in the hallway. He had been shot in the head and there was blood pouring from him. He was still breathing but in a terrible state.”

An ambulance was called but the beast was dead on arrival at hospital.


Malcolm was jailed TWICE in the 1980s for a series of horrific attacks on a girl of six and one of her brothers. The fiend, who lived with the children’s mum, was first convicted of unlawful sex with the girl in 1981.

He got just two years. Amazingly social workers let him go back to live with the family when he was released. The terrible abuse resumed. In 1984 he was caged for four more years.

Later the girl revealed Malcolm – dubbed the Nightmare Man – had first begun molesting her at the age of THREE. He was hauled back into court six years ago on 13 counts of abusing the girl, her two older sisters and two brothers.

But an Old Bailey judge sparked outrage by ruling Malcolm could not get a fair trial because his previous convictions would have to be revealed to the jury. The monster walked free – despite experts branding him a “sadistic paedophile.”

Malcolm was a pal of notorious child-sex fiend Leslie “Catweazle” Bailey.
While he was living with the five children, Malcolm would invite Bailey and other perverts to join in the abuse – as the kids lay tied to beds.

One of the boys later said: “He used to say he was not doing anything wrong and that if we told anyone he would take our mum away from us.” Malcolm also intimidated his victims by boasting he had been present at the killing of runaway rent boy Jason Swift. His friendship with Bailey linked him to the paedophile ring led by monsters Sidney Cooke and Lenny Smith.

The gang tortured and murdered at least nine young boys, including Jason, 14, Mark Tildesley, seven, and Barry Lewis, six.


Detectives hauled security guard Malcolm in to grill him about the killings.

Residents in Manor Park were furious when he moved there – setting up home with new lover Donna Robinson and her three young children. She was away from the flat when he was murdered on Thursday. Neighbour Lorraine Webber, 27, said: “There will be no tears for him. It could not have happened to a nicer person.”

Cuddling her daughter Chanynn May, aged two, the mum said: “He should never have been allowed to live here in the first place amongst children.”

Another neighbour Frank Lee, 77, added: “Killing Malcolm was the only cure for him. This area is full of vulnerable kids who play in the park opposite and in the streets. They will feel safer now.” A drinker at the nearby Blakesley Arms raised his glass and said: “We will be dancing holes in our shoes tonight to celebrate this news.

“This is the best thing that could have happened to a bastard like that.”

Former Detective Chief Supt Roger Stoodley, who led the operation Orchid Investigation which nailed Cook and Smith’s gang, said Malcolm should have been left to rot in jail.

The ex-cop insisted: “This would never have happened if Malcolm had been kept locked up in prison where he deserved to be.”

The Scotsman
, February 19th, 2000

A PAEDOPHILE with links to the gang that tortured and killed the runaway rent boy Jason Swift was murdered on his doorstep in a contract killing, it emerged last night.

Two men shot dead William Malcolm, 47, at his home in Forest Gate, east London, on Thursday night in what may be the first vigilante attack in the wake of this week’s report into the North Wales child abuse scandal.

Malcolm, who had several convictions for child abuse and was a friend of the notorious paedophile Sidney Cooke, escaped a further jail sentence after charges were dropped on a legal technicality.

A neighbour of the paedophile said: “Killing Malcolm was the only cure for him.”
Meanwhile, another major investigation into child abuse is under way with police trying to trace members of a possible nationwide paedophile ring.

Scotland Yard detectives said they wanted to interview a number of key suspects over allegations that more than 200 children were abused in care homes in London over a 20-year period.

Code-named Operation Middleton, the inquiry into children’s homes run by Lambeth Council was launched last year, when a former care worker was jailed for ten years for abusing 12 boys.

Police involved in the 14-month inquiry have so far arrested five men and two women. Eleven council employees have also been suspended because of alleged abuse or other improper behaviour.

Detectives said there were a number of other suspects, against whom allegations of child abuse had been made, whose whereabouts were unknown and attempts were being made to trace them.

The Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Hugh Orde, said: “We know who the people are we want to interview.” But he admitted: “We do not know where they all are.”

Daily Mail
, February 19th, 2000

A DANGEROUS paedophile has been shot dead in what police believe may be a revenge attack.

William Malcolm, 47, was blasted in the head at point-blank range after he answered the door at his home.

Detectives, who think at least two men were involved, are combing the victim’s sordid background to draw up a list of people who may have had a motive to kill him.

They said the shooting bore all the hallmarks of a professional ‘hit’.

Neighbours of Malcolm’s third-floor flat in Northeast London which overlooked a common where children play said they were shocked by the killing, but not surprised.

One said: ‘I won’t be sending any flowers or shedding any tears. don’t think anyone will.’ Malcolm was jailed twice in the 1980s for sexually abusing a young boy and girl who lived with him.

In 1994 he faced trial at the Old Bailey for a horrifying catalogue of crimes against children as young as three, including rape, attempted rape, indecent assault and cruelty.

But he was allowed to walk free after the judge said he could not have had a fair trial because revealing his past convictions was a key element of the prosecution case.

There were furious cries of ‘kill the pervert’ from the public gallery as Judge Kenneth Richardson delivered his ruling. The judge said it was with ‘considerable regret’ that he was forced to set Malcolm free. He described the offences as ‘unspeakable’.

Malcolm’s victims had gone to police after learning that he was still in contact with young children.

After he was freed, experts warned that he was still highly dangerous and likely to strike again.

A medical report said he had ‘aggressive and sadistic tendencies’ and still harboured paedophile fantasies.

Malcolm was also linked to one of Britain’s most notorious paedophiles, Leslie ‘Catweazle’ Bailey.

Bailey’s sadistic gang abused, tortured and butchered at least three young boys in orgies of appalling depravity. Malcolm was questioned about the killings.

Bailey was himself murdered in 1993, in top-security Whitemoor Prison, Cambridgeshire.

Four years ago it was revealed that Malcolm, a onetime Army deserter, was among 600 convicted paedophiles whose movements were not being monitored because they had served their sentences before the introduction of a compulsory register for sex offenders.

Parents expressed their alarm after it was discovered that he was working in a job opposite a cathedral school, having lied about his background when he applied for the post. Malcolm and his common law wife moved into their council flat in Forest Gate five years ago.

Neighbours said they had known of his convictions and believed his death was a revenge attack.

‘There was a lot of trouble when he first moved here, then things died down,’ said one man, who asked not to be named.

‘You can’t do what he did without creating an awful lot of enemies.’ You can’t take law into your own hands.

But another neighbour said: ‘It’s too extreme. Two wrongs don’t make a right.’ Malcolm and his wife recently tried to move to nearby Canning Town but residents there blocked the move after learning of his crimes.

Police forensic experts spent yesterday combing the scene of the shooting.

Detectives from the Area Major Investigations Team, based in West London, are looking into Malcolm’s background.

A police source said: ‘It was a classic hit a knock on the door and he was shot. A lot of people will say he had it coming to him for what he has done to children in the past, but people cannot be allowed to take the law into their own hands.’ The killing comes at the end of a week in which Britain has been shocked by the sickening detail of the Welsh child care scandal.

Some 650 children were victims of paedophiles, many of whom worked in the very homes in which the vulnerable youngsters were meant to be protected.

The Daily Mail revealed yesterday that another police investigation is taking place into indications that a nationwide network of paedophiles operated for over 20 years, on a scale which dwarfed the North Wales inquiry.

At least 100 paedophiles are thought to have been involved, and as many as 11,000 youngsters may have been abused.

Birmingham Evening Mail
, February 19th, 2000

A CONVICTED paedophile has been gunned down on his doorstep in what is believed to be a revenge attack set up by vigilantes.

Scotland Yard was today treating the murder in east London as a possible contract killing, but declined to comment on claims that the victim was a known pervert.

Some reports said the dead man was William Malcolm, a known paedophile with previous convictions for child abuse.

He is also said to have had other serious charges against him dropped on a legal technicality.

A post-mortem examination carried out yesterday found that the victim, who was white and in his 40s, was killed by a single gunshot wound to the head.

A Scotland Yard spokeswoman said the attack happened on the doorstep of the man’s home in Forest View Road, Forest Gate, on Thursday night.


There are believed to be two white male suspects.

“A contract killing is one area of inquiry police will be looking into, but it is too early to speculate now,” she added.

Police say while the identity of the victim is believed to be known, no formal identification has yet taken place and next of kin have still to be contacted.

The killing comes days after shocking details of Britain’s worst child abuse scandal in north Wales were released.

Malcolm, 47, was accused of a string of horrific attacks.

He was linked to the paedophile ring which murdered nine children including Jason Swift.

Families in Forest Gate were furious when Malcolm moved in there.

On Thursday a shot rang out and residents rushed out to fund him lying on the floor.

Neighbour Frank Lee, aged 77, said: “Killing Malcolm was the only cure for him.”

Sunday Express
, February 20th, 2000

FOR the deprived children of east London there is precious little green space in which they can play. Choked by the monotony of tower blocks, traffic and grime, they yearn for the freedom that so many of us take for granted.

Those living in the district of Manor Park are among the lucky ones. Here is an oasis of parkland on the southern reaches of Wanstead Flats where they can kick a ball, play hide-and-seek in the bushes and suck fresh air into their lungs.

But until last week there was a hidden menace. From his top-floor flat overlooking the vast expanse of green, bespectacled William Malcolm took an unusual interest in the youngsters’ frolics. They reminded him of the children he had defiled, whose innocence he had so cruelly and violently taken away.

Today Malcolm lies on a mortuary slab. His legacy for being one of Britain’s most detested paedophiles is a hole in his skull, caused by an executioner’s bullet.

At 9.30pm last Thursday, an assassin knocked on his door and shot him from close range, leaving him bleeding to death in the hallway. Police suspect a professional hit, perhaps arranged by one of his many victims.

For local mothers the fact that the 46-year-old is dead is welcome news. “Now my child will be able to walk the streets and play in safety,” said one. “We’re all relieved he is dead.”

I hunted Malcolm down in 1996 at a time when the Sunday Express was campaigning for a national register of child sex abusers – a campaign we subsequently won. He had an awful history but was a classic example of an offender able to hide within an unwary community.

Malcolm, a friend of the notorious paedophiles Sidney Cooke and Leslie “Catweazle” Bailey, had been jailed twice in the Eighties for a series of horrific attacks on a girl aged six and one of her brothers – both children of the women with whom he lived. He was first convicted of unlawful sex with the girl in 1981 and was jailed for two years, yet was allowed to return to the family upon his release. The abuse resumed and in 1984 he was imprisoned for four more years.

Then, six years ago, he was brought back to court on 13 counts of abusing the girl, her two older sisters and two brothers. Amazingly, he walked free because the judge ruled he could not receive a fair trial.

Malcolm was free again to mix with unsuspecting young families and to get a job. He was working as a security guard at an office next to the Westminster Cathedral Choir School for boys when I tracked him down. He had lied to his employers about his past, but after the Sunday Express exposed him he was dismissed instantly. During the course of my inquiries I persuaded Malcolm to allow me into his flat. Approached by three flights of cold, concrete stairs – those used by his killers to escape – his home was a mess. With one bedroom and separate, dimly-lit kitchen and bathroom, it had very little in the way of home comforts. Its only redeeming feature was the view over the parkland from which Malcolm took his own selfish delight.

He was cold and emotionless. He dressed scruffily – tatty patterned shirt, tracksuit bottoms and worn trainers – and had several days’ stubble. His eyes, behind wide-framed glasses, were small and weasle-like. Yet he spoke calmly and intelligently.

To my surprise he had a new partner, Donna, who was to become his common-law wife. She, too, had children but they did not live with them.

Had he remorse for his crimes? Yes. Had his sickening urges been repressed? No. “I am not a reformed character,” he told me. “But I have done my best and kept myself clean.”

He was, however, in favour of the introduction of the paedophile register.

Like many other sex offenders, Malcolm tried to find excuses for his behaviour. It was an affliction, something he had no control over at the time, he said. With trim, blonde hair, blue eyes and a bubbly personality, Donna could not have been more different to the detestable Malcolm. Yet she was so supportive. “Why won’t people leave him alone?” she asked me. “He has paid his debt and is not a threat to anyone now.”

But the memories of those living in the East End are long. The community would not leave him alone and as far as they were concerned he could never repay his debt. Until, that is, last Thursday night.

And the locals were happy with the result. “We will be dancing holes in our shoes tonight to celebrate this news,” one said. Builder Roy Mahadoo added it was for the best that Malcolm was now gone. “I have got a little girl of three myself,” he said.

“There are children running riot in the flats around here. There is the park right opposite where he lived where children play. I am quite happy that people like him are out of this community. I can understand quite clearly why someone would want to have him out of the way.”

Sam Okai, who owns a telephone shop yards away from the road on which Malcolm lived, said he had once come in to ask for a job. “I did not know he was a child abuser,” he said. “We used to greet each other quite regularly. I do not think it is right for anyone to take anyone’s life, but he was a child abuser and he should have been kept away from children.”

He added he understood that those who “felt they were haunted by him” would feel relieved that he was no longer a neighbour.

Police, who are treating the death as a contract killing, were yesterday hunting two white male suspects.Malcolm’s demise came within days of the report into the north Wales child abuse scandal. Perhaps it was that which reawakened memories of one of his victims to such a murderous extent.

The Independent
, February 20th, 2000

TIME IS running out for paedophiles. Not just because of the large- scale police inquiries into child abuse at care homes in Lambeth and Birmingham, or the search for the missing 28 suspects named in the Waterhouse report. No, the really frightening thing for sex offenders lying low this weekend must be the prospect that vigilantes will find them first.

William Malcolm answered a knock on the door at his flat in Manor Park, east London, on Thursday night, and ended up with a single bullet through the brain. “It was a classic hit,” said a policeman, using language more suited to The Godfather than a briefing by the Met.

The policemen’s words were, in fact, apt. Last year two paedophiles were gunned down in Mafia-style executions in Naples, after being released from prison pending appeals. Both were shot in the head, and the local priest said: “Everyone knew these men would be eliminated eventually. The settling of accounts is not over. People are rejoicing.”

Our cosy assumption that they do things differently in the land of the Cosa Nostra has now been challenged. Yesterday the Sun claimed that neighbours cheered when they heard that the “child-sex beast” in their midst had been shot. A drinker in the local pub had allegedly raised a glass in celebration and said: “This is the best thing that could have happened to a bastard like that.”

The Mirror was even more explicit in its endorsement of the murder. On Friday it had boasted about tracking down Albert Dyson, one of the 28 missing suspects named by Waterhouse. He had spent nearly 20 years in hiding after receiving an 18-month jail sentence for sexually abusing a teenage boy at the Bryn Estyn home in Flintshire.

“CAUGHT” was the headline over a piece describing Dyson as a “pervert” and a “menace”. Yesterday the Mirror ran an almost identical front page, under another single word “AVENGED”. This time a detailed story on the death of Bill Malcolm included a quote from a local mother, whose words also appeared elsewhere: “Whoever did this deserves a medal.”

The 46-year-old dead man had first been jailed in 1981, for abuse of and unlawful intercourse with an underage girl. Six years ago he appeared at the Old Bailey on charges of rape, indecent assault, and cruelty. A psychiatric report said he was a sexual psychopath, but a legal technicality meant the judge was obliged to let him go free.

After that Malcolm was threatened repeatedly. His death was the latest and most dramatic in a series of actions taken against paedophiles by vigilantes, councils and even Church leaders.

In 1998 an angry mob of 200 parents besieged a police station in east London as Sydney Cooke was about to be released into the community. Cooke had served time for his part in the murder of a 14-year-old boy called Jason Swift during a paedophilic orgy at a flat in Hackney.

Crowds continued to gather outside police stations and hostels as Cooke, 72, was moved around the west of England for his own protection. Police had to evacuate residents and staff from one hostel when it was surrounded by 400 protesters, even though his presence there was only a false rumour.

He lived in a suite of three cells at Yeovil police station, until admitting more sex offences dating back over two decades. He is now back in prison.

His accomplice Robert Oliver is at a secure unit in Buckinghamshire, and the cost of protecting him from revenge attacks over the years has been estimated at about pounds 120,000.

In 1997 Rhondda Cynon Taff Council in Wales banned convicted paedophiles from living in any of its flats or houses. In May 1998 officials at Sheffield Cathedral told a man with convictions for indecent assault against choirboys that he was not welcome to worship there or at any church in the diocese.

A year later, a mob of villagers near Kirkudbright in Dumfries and Galloway stoned the home of George Belmonte, who had served six prison sentences for sex offences against children. Protesters had already driven him out of two other places in Scotland. Belmonte, who was banned from talking to children or going into play parks, schools or swimming pools, said he was worried what might happen if people like him were persecuted.

“The police have the power to warn selected people about my presence in their area, and that spells trouble. The information soon gets out and in time vigilante groups are formed. They are allowed to take the law into their own hands and carry out vendettas against people like me.

“A frightened man is a desperate man and this could lead to trouble. I don’t want to be alarmist but I can foresee another Dunblane.”

There was little sympathy for the plight of such men from the Home Office yesterday. Asked where paedophiles could go in safety to rebuild their lives, a spokesman said: “Wherever they want. A spent conviction is time served, a debt paid. These people are free citizens.”

For some, freedom means having your windows smashed, being driven out of your home, having to hide in a police cell, or choosing to live in fear of the night when the doorbell rings and an avenger, as the tabloids would characterise him, is standing there with a gun.

There may be no hope of rehabilitation for serial offenders, but others, including some of those whose crimes in care homes are only just coming to light, will need a safe place to rebuild their lives once their punishment has been served.

Asked where they could go, now that the William Malcolm case seemed to announce the start of open season for paedophile-hunters, the man from the Home Office stressed that police had yet officially to confirm that the death was anything to do with his previous offences. “We would not want to prejudice that investigation, so there is nothing more we could say at the moment.”

The Sun
, February 21st, 2000
Mike Sullivan, ‘I’d like to buy child-sex fiend’s killers a big drink; Exclusive’

Says woman he raped when she was just 5

A WOMAN raped at the age of five by murdered paedophile William Malcolm said yesterday: “I just wish it was me who had shot him.”

The jubilant 27-year-old added: “I’d love to meet the people who did it to say thank you – and buy them the biggest drink in the world.”

She, her two older sisters and two brothers all suffered horrific abuse at the hands of the brute they dubbed The Animal.

Malcolm, 47, was killed by a bullet in the head as he answered the door to two stocky white hitmen on Thursday.


His woman victim, who is still undergoing psychiatric counselling, said: “I’ve been jumping up and down with joy.

“Hearing The Animal was dead is the happiest I’ve ever felt.”

Malcolm – twice jailed for abusing her – walked free on a legal technicality six years ago when she tried to get him locked up for a third time.

The woman, referred to in court as Susie, went to cops with her brothers and sisters to reveal further abuse after learning he had moved in with a mum and her three children. Security guard Malcolm was charged with 13 new attacks. But an Old Bailey judge let him walk free amid uproar. Malcolm was linked to the paedophile ring led by vile child-sex monster Sidney Cooke.

The gang tortured and murdered at least nine young boys including Jason Swift, 14, Mark Tildesley, seven, and Barry Lewis, six.

Susie still cannot bear to mention Malcolm’s name. She shuddered yesterday as she said: “He wrecked my life. My daughter aged four is in care because I was unable to look after her properly. I’m trying to overcome a drink problem. I blame it on him.”


Susie knows she is a suspect over the beast’s murder – as are her brothers and sisters. Detectives probing the shooting in Manor View, East London, have already contacted them to warn they will be interviewed.

But Susie insisted: “It was none of us. I wish it HAD been me who killed him.”

Her sister, now a mum of four aged 40, said: “Malcolm raped me when I was 14 and did unspeakable things to me.

“When he walked away from the Old Bailey on a technicality I shouted out, ‘I hope you drop dead you bastard.’

“I am worried my family are going to get blamed for his murder.”

Yesterday the man leading the murder hunt admitted: “I don’t know what the motive is.” Detective Chief Inspector David Shiperlee added: “We still need to delve into his background. His past history could be relevant. But it might be something completely different.”

The Scotsman
, February 21st, 2000

A LABOUR MP threatened yesterday to use parliamentary privilege to reveal the names of at least six more suspects linked with the north Wales child abuse scandal.

Martyn Jones, the MP for Clwyd South, has claimed that last week’s Waterhouse report was a whitewash and that there are still people identified by victims who have not been properly investigated.

He has vowed to seek a full investigation of all remaining people alleged to have committed sex crimes in the Welsh care homes and is threatening to name names in the Commons if he does not secure a fresh inquiry or action from the police.

The MP’s threat came as police continued the hunt for the “contract” killers who shot dead a convicted paedophile, William Malcolm, at his east London home last Thursday.

And there was little sympathy from Roger Stoodley, the former detective chief superintendent who uncovered Britain’s biggest paedophile ring in the 1980s. He said that Malcolm “deserved” to die because he was a convicted sex offender.

A number of suspects on Mr Jones’s list are believed still to be working in positions where they might come into contact with children. Mr Jones, chairman of the Commons Welsh Select Committee, made a similar threat to “out” alleged abusers in order to pressure the John Major administration to launch the Waterhouse inquiry into the abuse scandal.

He said: “I believe that there are other people who should have been named in the report, because Waterhouse took the view that he was not going to name people who were not convicted, whereas there are people who I know were named by victims who may potentially be abusers. Until these people are investigated, we don’t know whether they are abusers or have been maliciously identified.

“I know of at least six names of people who have not been investigated, and I believe there are more.”

Several of the names known to Mr Jones are mentioned in the Jillings report into the scandal, commissioned in the early 1990s by Clwyd County Council but suppressed on advice from their insurers.

But Mr Jones said he intended to meet victims, as well as Malcolm King, the former social services chairman at Clwyd, to seek further names. He said: “At the end of the day, I will name these people if necessary, but at the moment I am trying to work out whether they have been investigated or not. Once I have a definite list, I will seek to have them investigated.

“If that doesn’t work, it is a real possibility that I will read out a list of names or parts of the Jillings report in the House, possibly within weeks, but I am not going to jump the gun.”

The Waterhouse report mentioned 200 people as having been convicted of abuse, being alleged abusers or failing to protect children.

Scotland Yard confirmed that Malcolm died after being shot once in the head at his flat in Forest View Road, Manor Park, east London. It said that the suspects are thought to be in their 30s, of stocky build and wearing dark clothing. Officers are also investigating whether Malcolm had received any death threats.

The killing, which came two days after the Waterhouse report was published, left Malcolm’s neighbours “relieved” that a paedophile living in their midst was now “out of the way”.

Malcolm walked free from the Old Bailey six years ago when a judge decided “with considerable regret” that 13 charges, including rape, indecent assault and cruelty, could not be heard because of a legal technicality.

The judge said it would be impossible for him to receive a fair trial as the defence would be unable to question witnesses without their revealing his imprisonment. He was first jailed in 1981 for unlawful intercourse with an eight-year-old girl and a serious sexual offence against a boy, aged nine. He was jailed again in 1984 for four years for raping the same girl.

Leicester Mercury
, February 21, 2000
‘Agency: Agency’

Victim thanks rapist’s killers

A VICTIM of a convicted child rapist gunned down on his doorstep in a suspected contract killing today said she would like to thank the gunmen.

The 27-year-old woman, who says William Malcolm abused her, her two brothers and two sisters, said: ”I wish it was me who had shot him.

”I’d love to meet the people who did it to say thank you n and buy them the biggest drink in the world. Hearing The Animal was dead is the happiest I’ve ever felt.”

Malcolm, 44, who was twice jailed for abusing the unnamed woman, died after being shot once in the head on Thursday night at his flat in Forest View Road, Manor Park, east London.

He walked free from the Old Bailey six years ago when a judge decided ”with considerable regret” that 13 charges, including rape, indecent assault and cruelty, could not be heard because of a legal technicality.

The judge said it would be impossible for him to receive a fair trial as the defence would be unable to question witnesses without their revealing his history of imprisonment.

He was first jailed in 1981 for unlawful intercourse with an eight-year-old girl and a serious sexual offence against a boy, aged nine.

He was sent to prison again in 1984 for four years for raping the same girl.

The Express
, February 21st, 2000

AN MP is to “name and shame” child abusers who he claims were involved in the North Wales care homes scandal but never prosecuted.

Martyn Jones, Labour MP for Clwyd South, said yesterday that he will use parliamentary privilege to name the alleged offenders.

It is understood there could be at least another 50 suspected abusers and some could still be working with children.

Mr Jones said the identities of some abusers had been known since the early 1990s when Clwyd council ordered an investigation into reports of a scandal involving homes in its area.

He says the findings were kept secret by the council at the insistence of its insurers to avoid the prospect of huge compensation claims from the abuse victims.

The MP said that some of those accused of child abuse in the Clwyd findings are not mentioned in the long-awaited Waterhouse Report published last week, although victims gave evidence to the inquiry.

He said: “It appears that some of those named have not been investigated when they should have been. I know of at least six names of people who have not been investigated, and I believe there are more. The names I have, I have known since 1989.

“They are not simply malicious allegations on the back of the recent publicity.”

Mr Jones, chairman of the Commons Welsh Select Committee, made a similar threat to “out” alleged abusers in order to pressure John Major’s government into launching the Waterhouse inquiry.

The 420,000-word document on the physical and sexual abuse suffered by hundreds of youngsters in care in North Wales over a 20-year period caused shockwaves last week.

It listed 200 individuals, including those convicted of abuse, those alleged to have abused children and those it said had failed to protect the youngsters in care.

The report sparked an immediate hunt for 28 people who it said were unsuitable to work with children but whose whereabouts were not known. Mr Jones said he now intends to meet victims of abuse and will also see Malcolm King, the former social services chairman at Clwyd.

He will then draw up a list of all those care workers accused of abuse but not so far identified publicly.

Mr King, who was also instrumental in calling for the Waterhouse Report when at Clwyd, said: “It is obscene there are many more people who have not been investigated.”

Now chairman of the Police Authorities of Wales, Mr King added: “Whether it is incompetence or something more sinister the fact is child abusers are remaining unchecked and they will continue to run more children’s homes.” In a separate investigation, the police are conducting a major inquiry into allegations of child abuse at homes run by the authority in Lambeth, South London.

Birmingham and Liverpool police have also been involved in similar inquiries involving children’s care homes.

In a sinister development last week a convicted paedophile was blasted in the head by hitmen in an apparent revenge killing for his sex attacks. William Malcolm, 44, was shot dead on the doorstep of his flat in Manor Park, East London. Two men who were seen running from the scene are being hunted by police.

The Bristol Post
, February 21st, 2000
‘Thank-you to hitman’

A VICTIM of a convicted child rapist shot on his doorstep in a suspected contract killing today said she would like to buy the gunmen a drink.

The 27-year-old woman, who says William Malcolm abused her, her two brothers and two sisters, said: “I just wish it was me who had shot him. I’d love to meet the people who did it to say ‘thank you’ – and buy them the biggest drink in the world.”

Malcolm, 44, who was jailed for abusing the woman, died after being shot on Thursday in Manor Park, east London.

The Bristol Post
, February 21st, 2000
‘Handley brother speaks’

A CONVICTED child rapist shot dead on his doorstep was a neighbour of the teenage brother of Bristol paedophile victim Daniel Handley, it emerged today.
Edmoses Theophile, aged 18, lived for two years next to abuser William Malcolm, who was killed in a suspected contract hit, but was unaware of his criminal past.

Mr Theophile’s younger brother, Daniel, was kidnapped and murdered in 1994 by two paedophiles who buried his body in woods on the edge of Bradley Stoke.

Daniel, nine, was snatched from a street near his London home and strangled as the men drove along the M4.

Malcolm, 44, was shot in the head last Thursday by two men at his home in Manor Park, London.

Mr Theophile said: “I hope it’s the beginning of a long line of executions.

“I am a very good person in my heart and don’t normally say evil things like this, but these people don’t deserve any remorse or sympathy.”

Daniel’s killers, Brett Tyler and Timothy Morss, were jailed for life after the Old Bailey heard how they were acting out their sexual fantasies in murdering him.

Birmingham Evening Mail
, February 21st, 2000

A VICTIM of a convicted child rapist gunned down on his doorstep in a suspected contract killing today said she would like to buy the gunmen “the biggest drink in the world”.

The 27-year-old woman, who says William Malcolm abused her, her two brothers and two sisters, said: “I just wish it was me who had shot him.

“I’d love to meet the people who did it to say thank you – and buy them the biggest drink in the world. Hearing ‘The Animal’ was dead is the happiest I’ve ever felt.”

Malcolm, 44, who was twice jailed for abusing the unnamed woman, died after being shot once in the head on Thursday night at his flat in Manor Park, Forest Gate, east London.

He walked free from the Old Bailey six years ago when a judge decided “with considerable regret” that 13 charges, including rape, indecent assault and cruelty, could not be heard because of a legal technicality.

The judge said it would be impossible for him to receive a fair trial as the defence would be unable to question witnesses without their revealing his history of imprisonment.

He was first jailed in 1981 for unlawful intercourse with an eight-year-old girl and a serious sexual offence against a boy, aged nine. He was sent to prison again in 1984 for four years for raping the same girl.

The woman said: “He wrecked my life. My daughter, aged four, is in care because I was unable to look after her properly.

“I’m trying to overcome a drink problem. I blame it on him.”


Police are treating Malcolm’s shooting as a possible contract killing and are hunting for two white men who were seen running from the scene.

Officers are also trying to find a motive for the killing and are investigating Malcolm’s background to see whether he had received any death threats recently.

A police spokesman said the suspects are thought to be in their 30s and stocky.

Western Daily Press
, February 22nd, 2000
‘Brother glad at killing of pervert’

THE brother of a boy murdered and buried in Bristol by two paedophiles was unknowingly a neighbour of the convicted child rapist shot dead last week.

For two years, Edmoses Theophile lived next to abuser William Malcolm, who was killed in a suspected contract hit.

Theatre student Theophile, aged 18, whose younger brother Daniel Handley was kidnapped and murdered by two paedophiles, said: “I hope it’s the beginning of a long line of executions.

“I am a very good person in my heart and don’t normally say evil things like this but these people don’t deserve any remorse or sympathy.”

Daniel Handley, from a deprived family in east London, was snatched by child abusers Brett Tyler and Timothy Morss in 1994. They strangled him and buried him on wasteland in Bradley Stoke, near Bristol.

Malcolm, 44, who had nothing to do with that case, was shot dead at the door of his home in Manor Park, east London.

The Sun
, February 22nd, 2000

John Kay (London) and Mike Sullivan (Central France), ‘Shooting was best thing for my evil brother; Exclusive; Interview; Andy Malcolm’

‘Pervert was lower than rats in my barn’

THE brother of child-sex monster William Malcolm told The Sun last night: “I want to shake hands with his killers.”

Dad-of-four Andy Malcolm said: “He was vermin. I am glad he is dead.”

Retired roadsweeper Andy, 43, added in central France, where he now lives: “Through The Sun, our entire family want to say how glad we are that Bill is no longer on this earth.

“As far as I am concerned my brother was lower than the rats in my barn.”

Andy told how he wanted to break open champagne when one of his daughters phoned from England to say his paedophile brother had been shot dead on his doorstep.


He was also contacted by detectives hunting the two-man hit squad who struck on Thursday in Manor View, East London. Andy said:

At the end of the call the officer said: “Do you want to know anything if there are any developments?” I said: “Yes, when you catch the killers I want to come over there and shake their hands and say thank you very much.” That is the reaction of the whole family.

My mum loved him when she was alive and he was her son by some freak of nature. But as for the rest of us, it is good riddance. We are glad he is no longer on this earth.

If I’d had a bottle of champagne when my middle daughter phoned me with the news I would have opened it and celebrated. She said: “Have you heard – Bill got shot dead last night.” I said: “Great, brilliant. We really need good news – we don’t get much of it out here.”

His evil brother, 47, was linked with Britain’s most notorious paedophiles – including those who tortured and killed Jason Swift, 14, and eight other boys. He twice served jail terms for child-abuse – but walked free from court six years ago on a technicality.

Yesterday one of his victims – raped at the age of five – told how she wanted to buy the gunmen a drink.

Cops have vowed to work flat out to catch the killers.

The Sun
, February 22nd, 2000
Richard Littlejohn, ‘Oh, what a circus; Opinion’



THE child molester shot dead in East London deserved to die, according to the policeman who uncovered Britain’s biggest paedophile ring.

Former Det Chief Supt Roger Stoodley said: “I have no sympathy for him. How many times do we have to convict these people before something drastic happens?”

Needless to say, the bleeding heart brigade have been quick to condemn Mr Stoodley as endorsing vigilante action.

But they are the real reason William Malcolm took a bullet in the head on Friday.

He had twice been jailed for child abuse and twice released early to offend again. The hand-wringers care more about the rights of paedophiles than they do about the rights of children.

Malcolm was clearly a sick, evil man. He should have been locked up for life, not just for society’s protection but also for his own.

If he had been in a secure prison where he belonged he could not have been shot. Vigilantes only operate when the system fails to properly punish or deter criminals.

But increasingly the law resembles a conspiracy against the respectable, hard-working, law-abiding majority.

No wonder decent coppers like Roger Stoodley get frustrated and angry.

It wasn’t just the man who pulled the trigger who killed William Malcolm, it was the whole rotten bunch of lawyers and social workers who sent him back into society.

They are as sick and perverted as he was.

Birmingham Post
, February 22nd, 2000

The brother of a boy murdered by two paedophiles was a neighbour of the convicted child rapist gunned down on his doorstep last week.

For two years, the 18-year-old lived next to abuser William Malcolm, who was killed in a suspected contract hit, but was unaware of his criminal past.

But Edmoses Theophile, whose younger brother Daniel Handley was kidnapped and murdered by two paedophiles acting out their sexual fantasies, said: “I hope it’s the beginning of a long line of executions.” Mr Malcolm, aged 44, was shot once in the head at close range as he opened the door to two men at his home in Manor Park, East London, on Thursday night.

Mr Theophile said: “There’s one less and I’m content with that fact. But there are still more out there.

“Some people can’t sit back and wait for judgment day. Some people are going to make it themselves.”

He said he wanted the shooting to be seen as a “blatant warning” for every paedophile.

Daniel Handley, from a deprived family in East London, was snatched by child abusers Brett Tyler and Timothy Morss while he was riding his bicycle in 1994. They took him to a South London flat and videotaped each other abusing the nine-year-old boy.

They then strangled him as they drove along the M4 towards Bristol before dumping his body.

The two men were told by the trial judge that “life means life” but Mr Theophile said: “If I could, I would certainly kill them.”

One of Malcolm’s victims said yesterday she would like to buy the gunmen “the biggest drink in the world”.

The 27-year-old woman, who says Malcolm abused her, her two brothers and two sisters, said: “I just wish it was me who had shot him.”

Malcolm was twice jailed for abusing the unnamed woman but walked free from the Old Bailey six years ago when a judge decided that 13 charges, including rape, indecent assault and cruelty, could not be heard because of a legal technicality.

He was first jailed in 1981 for unlawful intercourse with an eight-year- old girl and a serious sexual offence against a boy, aged nine. He was sent to prison again in 1984 for four years for raping the same girl.

Scotland Yard confirmed yesterday that Mr Theophile had been spoken to as part of routine house-to-house inquiries.

The Sun
, February 23rd, 2000
‘We hated pervert but killers solved nothing; The big issue; Dear Sun; Letter’

EVIL paedophile William Malcolm was gunned down on his doorstep and police are hunting his killers. Here are your views.

NO one can justify the cold blooded murder of a human being – even an evil paedophile like William Malcolm.

But he had been allowed to escape justice through a legal technicality and the people living near him had every reason to fear for the safety of their children.

Our justice system keeps letting us down and until this changes I fear more people will feel the need to do what the courts don’t do.
NICK BARRETT, Bottisham, Cambridge

WHATEVER crimes William Malcolm may have committed, another wrong doesn’t make a right.

His murder solves nothing. Vigilantes are not welcome in today’s society. This kind of behaviour belongs in the Dark Ages.
M N BRETT, Dudley, West Midlands

I HOPE police inquiries into the death of William Malcolm will be conducted with the same ruthlessness as the investigation into the murder of Stephen Lawrence.
JOHN ROZIER, Worcester

THERE are a lot of complaints about the police not doing enough to solve crimes but I don’t think there will be any if they fail to find the killers of William Malcolm.

His murder will probably mean that more children will now be safe.
Mrs P MASON, Skipton, North Yorkshire

THE people who shot William Malcolm have done what the laws of this country failed to do, make our children’s lives safer. I am sick of the way these paedophiles keep getting away with it.

They say they cannot help themselves, so why don’t the judges and the Government listen to them and us, the public, and lock these evil monsters away for the rest of their lives. Until judges are elected, like in the U.S., they will never do what the public wish.
T F BROWN, Hornchurch, Essex

IT would be typical of our legal system if Malcolm’s killer got a tougher sentence than the victim.

William Malcolm may have been shot, but aren’t we really better off without him walking our streets?
LES ALLPORT, Stourbridge, West Midlands

WHILE I certainly didn’t shed any tears for evil William Malcolm, I hope this killing won’t spark off similar vigilante attacks. We may have become increasingly frustrated with our inadequate justice system but taking the law into our hands is the first step to anarchy. It is up to Jack Straw to sort out our system so these perverts serve life, rather than a few years.

THERE can be no punishment too severe for a paedophile and I don’t doubt Malcolm’s neighbours feel their children are safer now. But that does not justify his execution by vigilantes on his doorstep or the reported jubilation of his neighbours. This is no better than mob rule or a return to the Dark Ages. We must overhaul our judicial system so the absurd circumstances of this man’s court cases and the apparently ridiculous court rulings are never repeated.
SPENCER ARNOTT, Holmer Green, Bucks

I THINK the killing of convicted child rapist William Malcolm was a great pity.

It was a pity that it wasn’t done sooner, which may have saved one of his victims suffering mental scarring which will last a lifetime.

It was a pity someone had to do something the state should have done.
G McGOURAN, Bewdley, Worcs

THE vigilante killing of William Malcolm may be wrong, but it shows how much contempt law-abiding citizens have for our legal system, which seems to favour the criminal and not the public.

Legal technicalities are always being found to prevent criminals receiving the full sentence they deserve. In this sort of case there should be a procedure to over-rule technicalities like these.

Ironically, these technicalities led to Malcolm’s death. If he had gone to prison he would be alive.
Mr R VELL, Newquay, Cornwall

IF this type of killing were to continue there could be some who will use it as a licence to take revenge on others who have only been accused but are innocent. We tread a dangerous path with mob rule.
S LOCKE, Leicester

Sunday Mirror
, March 5th, 2000

A PAEDOPHILE was shot dead because he was about to expose a major child sex ring – including several influential figures – police believe.

Detectives hunting William Malcolm’s killers are now interviewing known paedophiles to confirm the motive.

“It looks like Malcolm was on the verge of exposing something big – it is thought some well-known people were involved,” a police source said.

Malcolm, 47, linked to notorious paedophiles Leslie “Catweazle” Bailey and Sidney Cooke, was killed two weeks ago with a bullet in the head at his flat in East London.

Originally, it was believed the killing was carried out by hitmen in a revenge attack. Two male suspects seen fleeing from the flat in Forest Row have yet to be traced.

After Malcolm’s death, a girl who had been abused by him at the age of five said: “I wish it was me who had shot him.”

New Statesman
, March 13th, 2000
Richard Webster, The New Statesman Special Report – ‘Can a whistle-blower be wrong?; Richard Webster on the reasons for scepticism about the North Wales tribunal’s conclusion that hundreds of young people were abused’

When, one evening in the middle of last month, William Malcolm opened the front door of his flat to two visitors, he was shot dead with a single bullet through his brain. According to newspaper reports, his neighbours cheered when they heard the news, and a local mother said ‘whoever did this deserves a medal’. In 1981, Malcolm had been convicted for unlawful intercourse with an under-age girl. Six years ago, he had appeared at the Old Bailey on charges of rape, indecent assault and cruelty, but the trial had been halted for legal reasons.

Some newspapers endorsed and even applauded Malcolm’s extra-judicial murder. The implication is that child sexual abuse is so repugnant a crime that we may be justified in abandoning the normal processes of law. This sets a disturbing and dangerous precedent and the examples go beyond the Malcolm case. Several MPs have said that they will use parliamentary privilege to name 50 alleged child abusers in north Wales. But the Tribunal of Inquiry into Child Abuse in North Wales Children’s Homes chaired by Sir Ronald Waterhouse, which reported last month, refrained from identifying these people precisely because there was insufficient evidence against them.

As Cleveland and the Orkneys should have taught us, it is possible for people to be wrongly accused of child sexual abuse. In the current climate, however, a mere allegation of abuse is widely treated as though it were proof of wrongdoing. And when MPs themselves trample on the very principles of justice, it places immense pressure on both judges and juries to convict even when the evidence points to a defendant’s innocence.

The North Wales tribunal, insofar as it has been criticised at all, has been accused of not apportioning enough blame, not naming enough names. Almost nobody, apart from BBC2’s Newsnight, has questioned its broad conclusions, which largely endorsed the horrifying allegations of sexual and physical abuse it was set up in July 1996 to investigate. According to the Daily Mail, the tribunal had uncovered ‘Britain’s worst-ever paedophile scandal’. The newspaper added that ’40 of the monsters are still at large’. Almost all newspapers featured the role of the whistle-blower Alison Taylor. ‘I nailed child sex perverts: Brave Alison exposed abuse scandal’ was the Sun headline. The Daily Telegraph carried a picture of Taylor under the headline ‘I had the proof but they wouldn’t listen’.

Confronted with alleged child abuse, the press abandons its critical faculties, rather as it did with the convictions of supposed IRA bombers in the 1970s. The comparison is a telling one. Just as those who campaigned then against miscarriages of justice were accused of sympathy for the IRA, those who now raise even the possibility of miscarriages of justice in child-abuse cases are suspected of condoning abuse, or denying its existence.

But no matter how heinous the alleged crime, suspects deserve the proper processes of law. And, in the case of north Wales, there must be reasonable doubt not only about the guilt of many of those accused but also about whether many of the alleged crimes took place at all.

The Sun
, March 18th, 2000
Mike Sullivan, ‘Cops quiz victim of fiend on shooting’

A WOMAN raped by paedophile William Malcolm when she was five has been arrested in connection with his murder.

Cops quizzed the 27-year-old, known only as Susie, after she told The Sun she wanted to buy Malcolm’s killers “the biggest drink in the world.”

Security guard Malcolm, 47, was shot last month by two hitmen at his home in Manor Park, East London.


Susie, her two sisters and two brothers all suffered horrific abuse at the hands of the brute they dubbed The Animal. And he was twice jailed.

Last night Susie, of Hackney, said: “When the police arrested me they asked whether I had got anyone to shoot Malcolm.

“I told them I wish it had been me who killed him, but it wasn’t. I am totally innocent.”

Now free on bail, she will learn if she will be charged on Wednesday.

The Independent
, April 6th, 2000

A SUCCESSION of vigilante attacks against paedophiles has sent a “wave of fear” through prisons, causing terror among sex offenders awaiting release.

Prison managers say the alarm sweeping through sex offender units has resulted in some paedophiles saying they would rather remain incarcerated than risk going home.

The panic follows the killing six weeks ago of William Malcolm, a child sex attacker shot in the head on his doorstep in north-east London. Other sex offenders have been hounded from homes and hostels by groups of vigilantes.

Despite government claims that dangerous paedophiles must remain in prison, child sex offenders are being released regularly and many reoffend. There are fears that vigilantism could drive them into hiding, making police surveillance even more difficult and increasing the chances that they will strike again.

Chief probation officers said yesterday that the Government would need more secure and highly supervised units for released paedophiles – such as the one inside Nottingham prison used to house the predatory offenders Robert Oliver and Lennie Smith.

In Grendon prison near Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, paedophiles being prepared for release have said they are fearful for their future. Andrew, 37, who served nearly five years for sex attacks on children, has asked to go to a hostel near London rather than return to his native Wales. “People say you are bound to be looking forward to it but time is flying by for the wrong reasons because I am shit scared of being allowed out,” he said. “I’m supposed to be looking forward to it but I’m not.”

Andrew said he was concerned at being cut off from the specialist treatment he receives at Grendon, where he is housed on a wing exclusively for sex offenders.

“In here people know what we have done and they accept it,” he said. “When I was at Dartmoor I was fearful of having jugs of hot water thrown at me. Those are the same fears I have now about getting out. What if someone is waiting for me when I get off the train or go to buy some fags in the morning?”

“Banter” among the jailed offenders focused on losing weight by running from gangs of vigilantes and spending money on paint thinners to clean abusive slogans from windows, he said.

Jenny Stead, a probation officer responsible for housing the released sex offenders, said they had become “the modern-day folk devils”.

Alan, a former schoolteacher serving 10 years for sex offences against boys and due to leave jail next year, said a recent dream that he was back home was a nightmare. “When I woke up I was relieved to find I was still in prison,” he said.

At Grendon, sex offenders undergo intensive group-based psychotherapy to uncover the deepest roots of their behaviour. Many have themselves been abused as children.

They are taught to recognise the early warning signals that they are about to carry out a new attack. Dr John Gordon, the wing therapist, admitted that, though the work at Grendon is known nationally for cutting recidivism, it is “only partially successful”.

Most paedophiles are released to hostels that should be well away from their past victims. They are staffed round-the-clock but are not secure.

Graham, 61, another former teacher, became aware of his full propensity for evil when he was told that another sex offender with whom he had shared a cell had kidnapped and murdered a boy aged 10. “The same seeds of that kind were there within me,” he said. “I don’t say they would germinate. I am not a violent man. But it was a shock within the system.”

Graham claims his cries for help were ignored after he served a 21-month sentence for abusing pupils.

He is now subject to a five-year sentence for an attack on a girl aged 13 and for molesting the girl’s mother 30 years earlier. He says his wife will stand by him when he leaves prison in two years.

The paedophiles, keen to be seen to be addressing their behaviour, say they “understand’ society’s backlash against the wickedness of their crimes. But they claim that if they are not given a chance to make a fresh start on release, their ostracism will increase their chances of carrying out more attacks.

“Unless society wants to drop all rapists and paedophiles on an island like some kind of leper colony it has got to realise that we have got to live,” Andrew said. “People have got to accept me for who I am, not who I was.”

The Express
, April 6th, 2000


Paedophile death quiz TWO men have been arrested by police investigating the murder of a paedophile shot dead at his door. Child molester William Malcolm was killed in February, the day after the exposure of the North Wales child abuse scandal.
Police believed it was a vigilante-style attack. Malcolm’s neighbours in Forest Gate, East London, refused to help the murder hunt. Even his brother, Andrew, said: “I’m glad he’s dead.” The arrested men, 28 and 31, were bailed to return to a London police station on May 17.


The Independent
, May 29th, 2000, Monday

INSIDE WILLIAM Malcolm’s scruffy flat, you can still see bloodstains on the floor where he was gunned down. His murderers shot him once in the head, but it took him several minutes to die.

He was a 47-year-old working man in a relationship with a woman, but in the street where he lived, no one cried for him. If anything, there were mild celebrations and a touch of satisfaction that he lived a while after being shot. Perhaps he even suffered a little.

Malcolm was murdered in February by two men who knocked on his door in Manor Park, east London. Yet, after three months of investigations, police are no nearer catching the killers. His is a murder no one wants solved, because he was a paedophile.

Since Malcolm’s death, not one person has called police to volunteer useful information, according to Detective Chief Inspector David Shipperlee, head of the central London serious crimes group.

“We haven’t had any calls with significant information,” said Det Ch Insp Shipperlee. “The inquiry is not becalmed. We are very active, but we have very little to go on.”

In Manor Park, Malcolm was a pariah. He moved into the area in 1995 after a trial against him on 13 charges of rape and indecent assault on children collapsed on a technicality. Those who saw his picture in the paper would point or call their children away from him.

He had been jailed in 1981 for sexually abusing the six-year-old daughter of a woman with whom he was living. After being released within a year, he returned to the home and began abusing the girl and her two brothers and sisters. In 1984, he was jailed again.

“He sexually abused us and he hit us – he had been in the Army and he would beat us with his Army belt,” said his six- year-old victim, now 27. “I couldn’t go to anyone because he threatened to kill my brothers and sisters if I did.

“Then one day my sister walked in and caught him with me and the police were called. But he was only in prison for a year. He came out when I was about nine and he was doing it until I was about 11, with me and my brothers and sisters.

“Eventually, when we couldn’t take it any more, we told and he was arrested again. That time, he was inside for about two and a half years. When he came out, our social worker told my mother that if she had him back in the house, I would have to go into care. She chose him, and I was in care from 11 to 18.

“Every day, he would hang around the care home, threatening me, and he would follow me to school. Eventually, the social workers had to take me to school. He was an animal and he ruined my life. I was receiving psychiatric help for years; I became an alcoholic and it was only recently that I stopped blaming myself. To me, being put into care at 11 was like going to prison. It was as if I had done something wrong.

“When I heard he had been killed, I went out and got drunk. It was the best news I’d had in years.”

The 1995 trial collapsed because Judge Kenneth Richardson ruled that Malcolm had no chance of a fair hearing, as those allegedly abused included previous victims. That meant his earlier conviction would inevitably be revealed to jurors.

At the time he made his decision, it is understood that Judge Richardson did not have access to a report written by Dr Jeremy Coid, a psychologist at Hackney Hospital. The report said: “(Malcolm) has marked paedophile tendencies of a strongly sadistic nature. For the foreseeable future, Mr Malcolm must be considered a real and immediate danger to any children to whom he might have access.”

For the past five years, Malcolm has lived in a one-bedroom, third-floor flat overlooking fields on the edge of Waltham Forest. It is understood that two children of his partner, Donna Robinson, were taken away by her family as a precaution against Malcolm. She declined to comment.

In his street, Forest View Road, news of his death was regarded as good news for people with children.

“It’s a relief,” said Robert Innes, 54. “I moved in after Malcolm, so I missed all the publicity when he arrived and I didn’t know about him. But I have three grandchildren, aged 11, nine and three, and they used to play on the fields outside his flat.

“I dread to think what could have happened. If I’d known about him, I’d have kicked his door down and warned him off,” he said.

In the local pub, the Blakesley Arms, the landlord Eddie O’Donnell said no one would help the police catch the killers, believed to have been two white men who were seen running from the scene.

“Everyone in here wants to buy them a big drink,” he said. “They’ve done a public service. This is the East End of London, where you don’t grass on someone who sorts out a child molester. It isn’t that people are being obstructive – they really don’t know anything – but if you want to call it a wall of silence, then yes. That’s what the police will find.”

Police know a lot about Malcolm until 1995, after whichthey have no reports of him offending. They know he regarded the murderer and paedophile Leslie Bailey as a friend. Bailey was jailed for abusing and murdering Jason Swift, 14, Mark Tildesley, seven, and Barry Lewis, six. He was murdered in prison in 1993.

Malcolm’s brother-in-law was married to Bailey’s sister and they had both worked at an east London taxi firm and a nearby toy factory. Malcolm admitted having Bailey round to his home as a guest. He is also thought to have associated with the notorious paedophile Sydney Cooke.

Since 1995, however, the police have drawn a blank. “We haven’t been able to track down a single person he may have associated with,” said Det Ch Insp Shipperlee. “But he had a job (as a security guard in the City of London), so someone must have at least gone for a drink with him from time to time. We need to find those people. They might not have known about his past, but they may be able to tell us something about his associates in the present.”

Early media claims of a professional killing are not taken seriously by police. It is not particularly professional to fire once, leaving your victim alive.

And, although they have interviewed all Malcolm’s victims, they have no evidence to suggest an “avenger” is at work. However, without help, evidence of any sort is in short supply.

In the final analysis, there are two points of view. One is best expressed by Malcolm’s brother, Andy, now living in France. “If you have a piece of dirt contaminating the street, you remove it. I loathed my brother and he got what he deserved. He was a nonce, he was contaminating the street and he was removed. Even if I knew who killed him, I wouldn’t tell the police. The killers are welcome in my home any time.”

And the other is voiced by Det Ch Insp Shipperlee: “I know it is difficult for people to sympathise with this man, but he was murdered. And in all conscience, whoever it is, you can’t let people get away with murder.”

The Guardian
, July 24, 2000
Vikram Dodd, ‘Paedophile row: Innocents suffer when law of the lynch mob takes hold’

Fears that the News of the World’s naming of paedophiles will lead to vigilante attacks are based on a string of violent incidents across Britain.

Action by mobs has killed and maimed the innocent and, in cases where those targeted were child-sex offenders, led to lynch mob rule.

Scotland Yard is still hunting the killers of William Malcolm, 47. In February he answered a knock at the door of his east London home and was shot in the head.

Malcolm had been convicted twice for attacks on a six-year-old girl and her brother. He served two years in jail for assaulting the girl, and on release, his abuse resumed.

Neighbours reportedly celebrated the murder of Malcolm, who was linked to a paedophile ring including the notorious child-killer Sidney Cooke.

In March a 24-year-old man was abducted by vigilantes in the Midlands. They beat and tortured him for a week.

The fury unleashed by the thought of paedophiles living in communities has repeatedly led to cases of innocent people suffering.

Francis Duffy, 67, was beaten and severely injured by vigilantes after being mistaken for a paedophile, Brynley Dummett, who had been named by the Manchester Evening News, the Guardian’s sister newspaper.

In the West Midlands, a 14-year-old girl was killed when her home was firebombed in an arson attack intended for a paedophile.

Some, such as Paul Webster, could not take the pressure of false accusation. An inquest heard that the 38-year-old unemployed musician from Ply mouth drank himself to death after neighbours accused him of being a child abuser.

Webster, who had been giving children guitar lessons, was threatened with a knife and harassed constantly for three weeks. “Beware nonce lives here” was sprayed on the door of his flat.

In some cases, offenders have been repeatedly driven out of the areas in which they try to settle. In one instance the home of a sex offender was burned down, leaving the children in the family – who had been his victims – homeless as well.

Frank Revill, 55, was one person targeted by vigilantes who falsely believed he was a paedophile.

Three years ago, word spread that a child abuser was due to move into his neighbourhood in Folkestone, Kent. Mr Revill was spotted moving things into a house belonging to his daughter. “The vigilantes saw me, put two and two together and got five,” he said.

Mr Revill was verbally abused, had windows smashed and received threatening phone calls.

Yesterday Mr Revill said: “The thought of paedophiles abhors me, but at the other extreme, vigilantes should be stopped from taking the law into their own hands.”

It seems that no action by the authorities is sufficient to prevent outbreaks of mob violence. In April 1998 protesters surrounded a police station in Bristol, believing it housed Sidney Cooke. A barrage of petrol bombs and bricks were thrown, leaving 46 police officers injured as they tried to contain the crowd.
Police said a peaceful protest had been hijacked, with the rioters including children as young as eight.

The Independent
, July 31st, 2000

WHAT REDUCED Jo Clarke to tears was not an encounter with a paedophile or an interview with a victim. It was a police statement in which a little boy described his ordeal at the hands of a sex attacker. “It was the vocabulary, the child using childish words to explain things he didn’t understand,” Ms Clarke said. “And that just got to me.”

She is the head of a Prison Service team that recruits psychologists to deal with paedophiles and sex offenders: she has hired 200 in the past 18 months alone. It is a job few would envy – coming into contact with society’s pariahs, the men who steal innocence, who abuse children and, in some cases, kill them.

Yesterday, as criticism mounted over the News of the World’s decision to continue “naming and shaming” paedophiles, Ms Clarke described the work of dealing with such men and why there is no shortage of professionals willing to try, often at the expense of their own health.

Recalling the day, early in her career, when she read intimate details of the boy’s ordeal, she said: “He used children’s words to describe what a man had done to him. His mother made the statement. She said she was sitting on the stairs at home with him when he started talking about it.

“It seemed so horrible to have that child’s vocabulary sullied by applying it to such a terrible purpose. He was very young. He had never heard the word ‘penis’. It just made me want to cry.”

Minutes later, however, she had to meet the paedophile.

“It was a shock,” she said. “He was an intelligent, articulate man in his forties; he recognised he had caused damage and that he had a problem, but he thought it was not solvable. That was in the early 1990s. We treated him and, to our knowledge, he hasn’t reoffended.” And that, said Ms Clarke, was why the small army of prison professionals, counsellors and psychologists dedicated themselves to treating sex offenders and paedophiles. Since the introduction of a sex offenders’ treatment programme a decade ago, reoffending had been reduced by 25 per cent, leading to 96 per cent of prison service staff who dealt with such men saying it was the most satisfying work they have ever undertaken.

“It means that for every 100 men you treat who would have reoffended, 25 now won’t because of the help we have given,” Ms Clarke said. “If you assume, conservatively, that paedophiles would have gone on to sexually abuse at least two more children, then that’s 50 children you have spared.

“That’s why we do this work, for those children.”

There are currently about 12,000 men on the Home Office’s register of convicted sex offenders. Since 1997, all sex offenders are recorded on the register. They must also lodge their name and address with local police within 14 days of being released from prison.

Each year, between 1,000 and 2,000 offenders voluntarily go on the treatment programme while in prison. Themost serious sex offenders – including child killers – usually end up at Brixton prison in south London, but regimes are in place at 25 other sites, including Albany on the Isle of Wight, Usk in Gwent, Whatton in Nottinghamshire and Channings Wood in Devon.

Offenders are assessed and given counselling by Prison Service staff, usually two or three counsellors dealing with groups of eight offenders. The group sessions typically last about two hours, during which offenders are persuaded to discuss their problems, fantasies and possible causes of their behaviour.
In extreme cases, one-on-one therapy is given and techniques such as aversive conditioning are administered, where an unpleasant experience – such as a noxious smell – is applied to an offender to make a fantasy or inappropriate arousal undesirable.

“We can’t ‘cure’ sex offenders; we don’t think in terms of cure, we think in terms of control,” Ms Clarke said. “Once you are a drinker or a smoker, you always will be even after you have given up. You have to find ways to keep you off them. That is what we try to achieve.”

Yet while the psychological problems of many offenders improves, the stress on the professionals who come into contact with them can take its toll. Problems include alcohol and drug abuse, inability to sleep and sexual problems because of “invasive” images – unwanted memories of things paedophiles have told them.

Penny Buller, spokeswoman on sex offenders for the Association of Chief Probation Officers, said: “You could say it is like feeling contaminated if you have sat for two hours with serious sex offenders, making them state what they have done without minimising it or using glib phrases. You come out feeling sullied, and switching that off is not easy. You have to find ways of making yourself feel whole again afterwards.”

For probation workers dealing with paedophiles, the pressure does not cease at the end of the working day. Because sex offenders are released on licence, with strict conditions attached, probation officers have the power to report suspicious or dubious behaviour to the Parole Board, which can have the suspect reimprisoned at any time.

Ms Buller said: “We do have more control than the public might think, but it means that probation officers working with these people can never relax. You can do your work thoroughly, look out for all the signs, but at midnight, when you’re in bed, you never know whether they could be reoffending. And if they do, the pressure increases – the officer has terrible feelings of guilt, of feeling responsible. And, of course, there is then an internal inquiry focusing on the offender and the probation officer.”

So is there a better way of controlling paedophiles? In the Sixties and Seventies in the former West Germany, hundreds of sex offenders were physically castrated; they had their testicles removed to dampen sexual desire.

But today an offender could be physically castrated one day and buy replacement hormone therapy on the black market the next, according to Dr Russell Reid, a consultant psychiatrist at the Hillingdon Hospital in west London.

Dr Reid is thought to be the only psychiatrist in the UK currently practising chemical castration, the administration of drugs to dampen libido. For the past 10 years, two of his patients have voluntarily accepted monthly injections of goserelin, trade-named Zoladex, an anti-testosterone agent normally used in the treatment of prostate cancer As a side-effect, goserelin also switches off sexual desire. One of his patients had been given the choice of taking the drug or going to prison for an extremely long term after barricading himself into a room and attempting to rape three boys.

“I am not evangelical about the treatment – there are other respected psychiatrists who are opposed to it – but it has worked for these men,” he said. “If you consider that sex offenders are mostly compulsorily driven because they are hypersexual – they may think constantly about sex and require some kind of sexual gratification 10 or more times a day – then they are driven by their penis to find a victim.

“This drug switches off that process completely. However, my patients requested it; full informed consent must be given. There must be offenders out there who would be happy to undergo this treatment, in conjunction with counselling, so they can live a normal life. But there will be others who do not want it, and you can’t force them.

“Psychotherapy simply doesn’t work for paedophiles. They have terrific powers of self justification and denial. They live in some bizarre fantasy world. Most paedophiles I have come across seem to have the same mental age as the children they abuse.”

Whichever argument wins the day, public loathing of paedophiles will continue. In February this year, William Malcolm, a notorious child abuser, was shot dead on his doorstep in Manor Park, east London. In the first four months of the inquiry, the police did not receive a single call from any member of the public offering information to help catch the killers, two men seen running away. If anything there were celebrations.

When The Independent told Malcolm’s brother, Andy, who lives in France, that no one was co-operating with the police, he was delighted. “The killers are welcome in my house any time,” he said.

UK Newsquest Regional Press – This is Local London
, November 28th, 2002
‘CCTV film may hold clue to murder’

TUBE travellers from Wanstead or Woodford may hold vital clues to the murder of a Manor Park man more than two years ago.

Police are appealing for witnesses whose memories might be jogged by CCTV footage of William Malcolm walking through Manor Park tube station just hours before his death.

Mr Malcolm, 44, died on February 17, 2000, after he was shot in the head. Police were called to Forest View Road where he was found on the doorstep of his top floor flat at just before 10pm. He was taken to the Royal London Hospital where he died half an hour later.

Police want a man seen walking behind Mr Malcolm to get in touch as he may hold vital information about the events leading to his murder.

Detective Inspector Ron Scott of the Serious Crime Group East said: “More than two and a half years have passed since Mr Malcolm was murdered and it may be that someone feels they can come forward in the strictest confidence now that time has passed.

“The man and anyone else who was in the area at the time may have seen something suspicious. Perhaps they saw someone following Mr Malcolm out of the station towards his home or a person acting oddly.

“We are anxious to trace anyone who might be able to help us solve this murder, including Wanstead or Woodford residents who may have been using the tube.”

Two white men were seen running from Forest View Road and are described as being in their 30s, of stocky build and wearing dark clothing.

Three people, two men and a woman, were arrested in connection with the inquiry shortly after the murder but no further action was taken against them.

Witnesses should call the Barking incident room on 8345 1594 or if you wish to remain anonymous contact Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

, October 11th, 2008
‘Pedophile strangled in Britain’

Investigators say a 73-year-old pedophile found strangled in a rural area in eastern England may have been killed by a vigilante.

Gordon Boon was sentenced in 2001 to six years in prison for molesting three young girls. Detectives would not say when he was released from prison, The Daily Mail reported.

His body was discovered Monday near a turkey farm in Great Witchingham, Norfolk. Police were unsure if the killing took place there.

Boon was last seen in a Norwich pub Friday. His son reported him missing Saturday.

In 2001, Boon pleaded guilty to assaults between 1975 and 1982. In one case, he gave a young girl liquor and got her to play strip poker.

Detectives were reportedly questioning some of his victims.

In 2000, William Malcolm, 47, a convicted pedophile who had charges dropped the last time he went to trial, was shot in his London apartment. No one was charged with the killing, which set off a string of vigilante attacks on pedophiles.

Daily Mail
, October 11, 2008, 1st Edition
David Williams and Ryan Kisiel, ‘Did a gang of vigilantes murder this paedophile in an act of vengeance?’

AN elderly paedophile found strangled in woodland may have been the victim of a vigilante revenge attack, police believe.

Gordon Boon, a registered sex offender, was killed while on licence from prison.
Detectives were last night investigating whether the 73- year-old was murdered because of his past crimes against a girl of eight and two aged 13.

One possibility under investigation is that Boon had again been seen with children and was confronted by a child’s relative.

The body of the former cider factory worker was found on Monday by a member of the public walking in a wooded area used by fly-tippers in Great Witchingham, Norfolk.

It had been partially covered by old fencing panels. A postmortem examination showed Boon had been strangled.

There was blood around his nose and one of his shoes was missing. It was unclear if he died at the spot, yards from the headquarters of the Bernard Matthews turkey farms, or whether he had been killed elsewhere and the body dumped.

Police are said to have spoken to some of his victims after fears that he had been killed because of his past life of paedophilia.

Detectives would not say yesterday exactly when Boon was released from jail after serving a six-year sentence imposed at Norwich Crown Court in December 2001 for indecent assaults on the three girls.

The offences were historical, some dating back to a period between 1975 and 1982, according to court documents.

The court heard how Boon, a father of four, plied one of the older girls with alcohol and then played strip poker with her. He also took photos of her and interfered with her.

In court, he admitted two offences of indecent assault and two serious sex offences against the girl, two assaults on the second girl and one on the third.
As well as being jailed, he was placed on the sex offenders register for life and ordered to serve an extended licence of five years on his release.

Boon’s killing raises fears that a vigilante seeking to avenge specific attacks may be on the loose.

It also has echoes of the killing eight years ago of notorious paedophile William Malcolm, 47, who was shot at his flat in North London. The killers were never caught in what was always suspected of being a revenge attack.

Six years earlier he had faced trial at the Old Bailey for a horrifying catalogue of crimes against children as young as three. But he was allowed to walk free after the judge said he could not have had a fair trial because revealing his past convictions was a key element of the prosecution case.

The Malcolm murder provoked a series of vigilante attacks on paedophiles. In Norfolk, police say that Boon was last seen alive in the Tombland area of Norwich, near the Maids Head Hotel, last Friday, October 3.

It is believed that his worried son alerted police last Saturday after he failed to meet him for a drink.

Boon is believed to have split from his wife Andrea shortly before his arrest. The couple, who had lived in Attleborough, Norfolk, for 25 years, have two sons and two daughters.

Mrs Boon, 69, is understood to be living with a daughter in a Norfolk village. A former neighbour of the couple in Attleborough said it had been a ‘real shock’ to learn the quiet man who lived next door was a paedophile.

‘He seemed to spend most of the time in his house,’ the neighbour said. ‘His wife was more friendly and always had time for a chat.’ Detective Chief Inspector Steve Strong, of Norfolk Police, said: ‘The investigation into the death continues and officers are following up a number of lines of inquiry.’

The Independent
, December 13th, 2008, First Edition

Cahal Milmo, ‘Police investigate ‘vigilante attack’ claim after murder of sex offender; Lorry driver had been convicted of unlawful sex with 15-year-old girl’

By his own admission, Andrew Cunningham led an unconventional life on the margins of society. For the past three years, his home had been a caravan parked on a grim south London industrial estate outside the repair shop where he worked as a haulier.

The 52-year-old father-of-five told friends he had taken the decision to drop out because of a “misunderstanding” which led to him being convicted eight years ago of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a 15-year-old girl.

Yesterday, detectives were investigating if Mr Cunningham’s past had caught up with him. On Wednesday morning, he was found dead in his dilapidated caravan on the Windmill Industrial Estate in Earlsfield, south-west London, with multiple stab wounds, including an apparent attempt to mutilate his genitals.

For some acquaintances of the dead man working and living in the streets around Mr Cunningham’s two-berth caravan, there was little doubt about the reason for the frenzied killing. One man drinking in the Corner Pin, a pub less than 50 metres from the murder scene, said: “Nonce. He was a nonce. Everybody around here knew it. I suppose there was some who felt he had it coming.” Police face the task of deciding whether Mr Cunningham’s conviction – and subsequent claims of paedophilia levelled against him – were the reason for his murder.

Officers distanced themselves from claims that the lorry driver, who was estranged from his family, had been set upon by a mob on Tuesday night intent on carrying out a vigilante attack. CCTV footage is understood to have shown no sign of a large group in the area around his caravan.

Mr Cunningham was placed on the sex offenders register for seven years following his release from a four-month prison sentence in 2001. His name was removed in March this year.

Detective Chief Inspector Nick Scola, the officer leading the investigation, said: “I think it is unlikely this is a vigilante attack that has been in the planning for eight years. This was a brutal attack. We are keeping an open mind. It is possible the wound to his groin area was inflicted to cause confusion about the motive for the attack.” It is understood that a dispute over a debt is also being investigated.

The haulier was found naked in a pool of blood on Wednesday morning after he failed to turn up for work. There was no sign of forced entry.

The haulier had been dogged for years by taunts. Lucy, the 15-year-old daughter of a friend of Mr Cunningham, said: “He moved out of his house after his relationship with the mother of his children broke up. He was very open about why he went to prison. He said it was a misunderstanding. He said he wanted to be left alone to get on with his life in his caravan.”

Mr Cunningham had been the subject of claims that he was being investigated for an alleged indecent assault on a two-year-old girl. Mr Scola said no such inquiry was being carried out and the lorry driver had not been investigated for any sexual offence since 2000.

Victims of mob law

* In February 2000, a convicted paedophile, William Malcolm, 44, was shot dead at his flat in east London.

* In July 2000, Iain Armstrong, an innocent man, was targeted by a mob in Manchester. It followed the News of the World “shaming” of 49 suspected sex offenders. Mr Armstrong had been wearing a neck brace, because of a spinal disorder, similar to one worn by a pictured paedophile.

* In August 2000, a paediatrician named Yvette Cloete was labelled a “paedo”. “I’m really a victim of ignorance,” said Dr Cloete, who moved house.

* In the same month, a mob targeted a man in his forties in an attack on a Portsmouth estate. He left under police protection.

* In October this year, a convicted paedophile, Gordon Boon, 73, was murdered in Norfolk.

Daily Mail
, December 13th, 2008, 1st Edition
Sam Greenhill, Colin Fernandez and Tamara Cohen, ‘Was this paedophile victim of a revenge murder?’

A PAEDOPHILE was hacked to death in a frenzied assault by a suspected mob of vigilantes.

Andrew Cunningham, 52, was found naked and soaked in blood at his caravan home after suffering multiple stab wounds to his head, neck and chest.

He served four months in jail for a sex attack on a 15-year-old girl in 2000 and was on the Sex Offenders’ Register until March this year.

But Cunningham may also have been targeted over accusations he molested a young girl.

Police are investigating if the attack in Wandsworth, South London, was an act of vengeance after his body was found on Wednesday.

A neighbour claimed: ‘I saw a group of about three or four kids hanging around that night. They were about 16 or 17 and they were shouting, “Come here, come here”.

They were being very aggressive.’ Detectives said Cunningham may have known his killer or killers as there was no damage to his door, which he usually kept locked.

Cunningham, a father-of-five separated from his partner, worked as a truck driver for the Riverside Haulage company and also kept his caravan on the site.

Recently, drinkers at a pub claimed he had assaulted another girl. This allegation was never reported to police but mobs reportedly drove past his caravan chanting: ‘Die, paedo, die.’ Cunningham moved there because vigilantes had set fire to a bag of rubbish outside his former house in Wandsworth in 2003.

It came after he was arrested and released without charge over allegations he was grooming children.

A police source said detectives were focusing on recent incidents rather than his earlier conviction.

He added: ‘Damage was caused to his genitals. He was loathed by a large number of people so we have a lot of potential suspects.’ Yesterday Wazir Zadran, 23, a worker at a nearby fish factory, said: ‘I heard it was a planned attack. Everyone knew he lived there and was a paedophile.’ Joe Hart, 46, a former neighbour, claimed: ‘He used to befriend young lads and invite them round.

He’d ask the boys to bring over girls and make passes at them.’ Cunningham’s body was found by his employer, known as Rodney, who said: ‘There was blood everywhere.

The bed was soaked and his head was lying in it.’ He added: ‘He was a lovely man, he couldn’t do enough for me.’ But yesterday there was little sympathy from motorists passing the scene, with one van driver shouting: ‘He deserved it.’ However, a bunch of flowers was laid by a 15-year-old called Lucy.

She said: ‘I used to go round his caravan instead of going to school.

He never laid a finger on me. He told me to go back to school.’ The teenager, who was accompanied by her father, later made a statement to police. A tag on her flowers read: ‘To Andy, the best man alive no matter what people say. Me and the family will miss you. May you rest in peace.’ Detective Chief Inspector Nick Scola, leading the investigation, said: ‘This was a vicious and brutal attack.’ He added that people in the area ‘knew about his history’.

Sara Payne, whose daughter Sarah was murdered by a paedophile in 2000, said the attack would set back her campaign for the names and addresses of sex offenders to be made public.

Two months ago, Gordon Boon, 73, was found dead in woodland in Norfolk after serving time for sexually abusing three girls.

Eight years ago, paedophile William Malcolm, 47, of North London, was shot dead in a suspected attack by vigilantes.

Sunday Mercury
, August 9th, 2009, First Edition
Jeanette Oldham, ‘SEX OFFENDER WAS’KILLED BY VIGILANTES’; Man died after being kicked and punched in his home: EXCLUSIVE’

A SEX offender who died after being beaten at his home may have been the target of vigilantes who had learned of his previous convictions.

Dennis Golding, 49, who had a string of offences for indecent exposure, was found covered in blood at his Birmingham flat in January.

He had suffered serious injuries to his body and head, consistent with having been repeatedly kicked and punched in a prolonged attack which police believe may have lasted up to two hours.

Serial flasher Golding, from Small Heath, died three weeks later.

Now it has emerged that he may have been targeted by vigilantes after rumours circulated locally that he had been spotted in the sex offenders’ wing of a Midland prison.

Police sources said it was “no secret” Golding was well-known in the community as a convicted sex offender. It is believed there had been a number of earlier incidents when his property may have been damaged.

Golding, who was unemployed, had a total of nine sex offence-related convictions stretching back five years and was on the Sex Offenders’ Register.

His first conviction was in 2004, when he was sentenced to a 24-month rehabilitation order after pleading guilty to indecent exposure. He was put on the Sex Offenders’ Register for five years.

In September 2005, Golding received a one-month prison sentence, suspended for two years, after admitting four new charges of flashing.

His name was also added to the register for a further seven years.

A month later he was convicted of a further four counts of indecent exposure and of breaching the terms of the register after failing to report a change of address to West Midlands Police. He received 12 weeks in prison.

In March 2006 Golding was sentenced to 18 months for an attempted robbery.

Then in July 2007 he was locked up for four months after again being convicted of breaching the register’s conditions by not telling police he had moved address.

Community sources revealed that middle-aged Golding was set upon in his flat in Mansel Road, Small Heath, on the evening of January 25 this year. He was found with serious head injuries and was bleeding profusely.

Golding was rushed to hospital at about 11.30pm but remained in a critical condition.

It is believed he never regained consciousness.

Two men, aged 22 and 29, and a 19-year-old woman have pleaded not guilty to murder and are due to stand trial in November.

There have been a succession of vigilante attacks against paedophiles in recent years.

William Malcolm, a child sex attacker, was shot in the head on his doorstep in north-east London in 2000. Others have been hounded from homes and hostels by groups of vigilantes.

Despite public campaigns that dangerous paedophiles must remain in prison, child sex offenders are released regularly and many reoffend.

Each attack reignites the debate over whether vigilantism could drive offenders into hiding, making police surveillance even more difficult and increasing the chances that they will strike again.

Daily Express
, May 13th, 1989

Express 130589 - Jason sex ring face quiz over child murders

Express 130589a - Jason sex ring face quiz over child murders

Express 130589b - Jason sex ring face quiz over child murders

Express 130589c - Jason sex ring face quiz over child murders

Express 130589d - Jason sex ring face quiz over child murders

1974 -1986: A Spotlight Chronology (work in progress/draft)

Remarkably detailed and invaluable chronological survey of Spotlight by the indefatigable Charlotte Russell.

Bits of Books, Mostly Biographies

What is perhaps most notable in placing a series of press reports on abuse scandals over any period of time is that there’s a lot of shock and outrage and not much action from anyone in a position of duty, responsibility or power to do anything except to apparently express more shock and outrage, this time on our behalf, before swiftly moving on. Something the collection of press reports at SpotlightOnAbuse ably demonstrate and which forms the spine of this chronology. This unfinished post is my ongoing response to an extremely powerful piece I’ve been digesting for a while now: What the Fluck! a blog post by Adam Curtis ( 5 December 2013) on his blog The Medium and The Message. A bit about Adam Curtis

“He says, “My favourite theme is power and how it works in society”, and his works explore areas of sociology, philosophy and political…

View original post 6,487 more words