Please remember all survivors who society has let down and who need help regardless of which VIP did what. That’s what this blog is saying https://bloggingjbloggs1917.wordpress.com/2015/01/22/leon-brittan-avoids-questions-over-child-sex-abuse/
Reblogged this on theneedleblog.
Tim Tate is objective, sincere, and informed.
And anyone who publicly exhibits those qualities should be taken seriously.
Very very seriously.
He is indeed informed, but he seems to be confused about certain details of Brittan’s career path. At the time of the Elm Guest House raid Brittan had not yet been appointed as home secretary (he was chief secretary to the Treasury until June 1983). And at the time of Brittan’s alleged encounter with Mr Solanki at Dover customs – apparently 1987-1988 – he was still an MP, albeit languishing on the back benches.
Listeners may also be misled into thinking that Tim Tate’s source, the senior Met officer, had interviewed Mr Solanki personally, when in fact it was two colleagues who conducted that interview and later told Tim Tate’s source about it. What this means, unfortunately, is that, striking and worthy of further investigation although the Dover incident obviously is, Tim Tate’s account of it is for now no more than hearsay of hearsay.
A somewhat nitpicky comment this, I appreciate, but I do feel that to have any chance of getting anywhere near an understanding of who did what to whom and when and who knew about it and covered it up, being clear and accurate about such details as these is going to be important if, as Gojam says, those who are acting objectively and sincerely are to be taken seriously as impartial authorities on the subject.
Brittan was not yet Home Secretary at the time of the Elm Guest House raid, but it is worth noting that he had already served as a Minister of State at the Home Office from May 1979 to January 1981.
The information is indeed hearsay for now, but that is why it is so important that both the senior Met officer (and the other colleagues) and Solanki are interviewed by the HASC and also the inquiry – especially urgent in the case of Solanki as he is old.
I agree. But what only those two detectives who interviewed Mr Solanki can tell us is but neither Tim Tate nor his source can is whether during that interview he was as hesitant, confused, forgetful and reluctant to elaborate about stopping and seizing the tape from Brittan as he was when he talked to James Fielding. If he was, how much credence should we give to this allegation if we’re supposed to dismiss the idea that Brittan had anything to do with the Tricker seizure?
The timeline of the Elm raid and Brittan’s promotion – first one, then a year later the other – is an area that merits more discussion and head-scratching, I think, because I find it hugely puzzling. His appointment after the raid had happened can mean only one of three things: (1) the Cabinet office (led by Sir Robert Armstrong at the time) had no idea that Brittan was impicated by at least one witness (and, according to some sources, up to 12) in the abuse at the guest house; (2) that they did no he was implicated but didn’t consider it to be of any importance; or (3) they not only knew about it but actually wanted someone so compromised to be appointed as home secretary.
Possibility 1 is unlikely, given what we know about Special Branch’s interest in the raid and Sir Robert’s close links to MI5 – if Brittan was seriously suspected of involvement in a child brothel, the Cabinet office would have known about it. Possibility 2 is unlikely and rather, alarming, given the huge security risk that appointing an allegedly active paedophile would pose. And possibility 3 is almost unthinkable, since it suggests that the purpose of positive vetting was not to weed such people out but to actively weed them *in*.
Reblogged this on What Can I Do About It?.
I remember this story being posted, and the disagreements that went on, all i want to know is, why is he Name mentioned Now? he is dead another one that will not be brought to Justice again. I am in know position to have the information that you all seem to have, they are all protected still.
Reblogged this on Britain Isn't Eating.
‘He’s all over the place’ apologies to Chas and Dave…
Exaro were never given a copy by the holders of our original Solanki tape of 4.2.14 until last Saturday the 24.1.15. It has now been circulated to various MP’s, a few journalists and child protection experts. Mr Solanki clearly indentifies Leon Brittan and a boy being featured in that tape he seized in 1982. In addition to that tape we have another upfront taped recorded interview, this time with Russell Howard Tricker, in which he confirms the Solanki seizure of the ‘LB’ tape from him at Dover in 1982 but Mr Tricker denies he knew what was in the package taken from him. The existance of our Solanki tape was disclosed to a senior MPS detective then investigating Leon Brittan and others. He was asked if he had seen the Sunday Express article (23/2/14). His response was yeh we have interviewed Solanki. He was then informed so have we and we have him on tape, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. The silence was deafening…That information was recently passed to Operation Trinity @ Stratford. This time the response was different.
Hi Ian thanks for keeping my post up of 27.1.15 it appears the needle did not like it has been removed from the three articles I attached it to on the needle. It just tells us we are making progress… Cheers GMB
Believe it or not Needle isn’t my life 24/7. If I don’t immediately let a comment up it generally means I’m doing something else in the real world.
[…] Leon Brittan – Interview with Tim Tate on BCFM, 23/1/15 (24/1/15) […]
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.