The Inquiry is house-keeping - not house cleaning and nothing more.

From the Needleblog:

Quote:BY DAEDALUS | JULY 15, 2014 · 10:33 AM


Can you see what it is yet?'



Short video highlight from yesterday's Home Affairs Committee session where Home Secretary Theresa May 'clarified' to committee members exactly what the inquiry would, and would not, do. Finally, Chair Keith Vaz offers some advice to the Home Secretary.
This is part of the clarification, in Theresa May's own words;

There is a review about lessons learned and the protection of children;
There is a review which is looking into work that was done in the home office which resulted from this question of whether Geoffrey Dickens had passed information to a previous Home Secretary, and whether that had been properly dealt with, or whether that had been in some sense covered up. There was a review on that, but now we're having a further review to make sure that everything that was done by the Home Office was done absolutely correctly.'

The clip from the proceedings infers that Butler-Sloss would have led the first review, and Wanless-Whittam will lead the second review. I found it interesting that inquiry' and review' appear to have become interchangeable words.
It seems that the committee members were also somewhat confused by this Inquiry', but I'm sure they can see it clearly now…

This is a link to a larger extract of the same session, which firstly addresses the Baroness Butler-Sloss resignation, and then secondly the missing 114 Home Office files. Chair Keith Vaz clearly enjoyed the encounter.

It certainly does look like a purge or hiding the dirty laundry more than a reshuffle doesn't it? And I did note Hague and Clarke's movements in particular... Exaro has been doing a great job. Excellent even. I am beginning to wonder also if there is not a copy of that dossier some where in the safe hands of some one unknown as yet and that some pertinent leaks are perhaps putting the pressure on some people to recognise the dog whistle. Even if they don't know the song being whistled they know there is much to hide and much danger for 'them'. Things are different now. More connectivity. Multiple copies. More sharing. And more caring. It is instant too. No time delays. Many dots have been connected already. They will show themselves by their response and how they try to shut it down. I don't see why the inquiry cant be completely open. No restrictive terms of reference. Just an inquiry into current and historical child sexual abuse. Period. No limitations like care homes only or only until 1990. No restrictions. And they can sell a Trident or 1000 to pay for it all.

David Guyatt Wrote:The Inquiry is house-keeping - not house cleaning and nothing more.

From the Needleblog:

Quote:BY DAEDALUS | JULY 15, 2014 · 10:33 AM


Can you see what it is yet?'



Short video highlight from yesterday's Home Affairs Committee session where Home Secretary Theresa May 'clarified' to committee members exactly what the inquiry would, and would not, do. Finally, Chair Keith Vaz offers some advice to the Home Secretary.
This is part of the clarification, in Theresa May's own words;

There is a review about lessons learned and the protection of children;
There is a review which is looking into work that was done in the home office which resulted from this question of whether Geoffrey Dickens had passed information to a previous Home Secretary, and whether that had been properly dealt with, or whether that had been in some sense covered up. There was a review on that, but now we're having a further review to make sure that everything that was done by the Home Office was done absolutely correctly.'

The clip from the proceedings infers that Butler-Sloss would have led the first review, and Wanless-Whittam will lead the second review. I found it interesting that inquiry' and review' appear to have become interchangeable words.
It seems that the committee members were also somewhat confused by this Inquiry', but I'm sure they can see it clearly now…

This is a link to a larger extract of the same session, which firstly addresses the Baroness Butler-Sloss resignation, and then secondly the missing 114 Home Office files. Chair Keith Vaz clearly enjoyed the encounter.

Here is the terms of reference to the Australian Royal Commission into institutional child abuse. Just as a comparison.

There's no link Magda? I can't see one anyway. ::

Otherwise I agree entirely. The inquiry should be fulsome and open -- but it won't be. It's second nature to whitewash and cover-up these things and completely against the grain t let the public know how elite types really behave. But I suppose the real point is that once your pull the thread on this matter, so many others - even worse situations - are in danger of unravelling...

Sorry about that...here it is this time:
http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov...-reference

Tory MP: 'No knowledge' of half-brother's abuse claims

Last updated Tue 15 Jul 2014

• UK
  

The Conservative MP, who is the half-brother charged with alleged historic sex abuses, has said he had "no knowledge" of the claims.
Conservative MP John Whittingdale says he had "no knowledge" of the claims Credit: PA John Whittingdale added that he was "aware" Charles Napier had been charged with an offence alleged to have occurred over 35 years ago.
Mr Whittingdale said: "I have no knowledge of this, particularly as I had only just left school at that time.
"However, obviously I recognise that this is a serious matter and that the law must take its course."

From the Mirror 2 years ago.

Quote:

Abuse scandals probe widens: The man who may hold key to UK's biggest paedophile network ever

• Nov 11, 2012 09:11
  
• By Keir Mudie
  

Charles Napier could provide vital evidence for police investigating a child abuse scandal spanning three decades

Newspics

Inquiry: Charles Napier near his home on Friday In the picturesque Dorset town of Sherborne, Charles Napier is an upstanding member of the community.
He is known as a respected retired languages teacher, a playwright and theatre director.
Only last month he gave a lecture on William Shakespeare at the town's literary festival.
But Napier's sordid past threatens to drag him into the heart of new inquiries into a child abuse scandal spanning three decades.
Evidence now being examined by Metropolitan Police detectives links Napier to Peter Righton, one of Britain's most high-profile paedophiles.
Righton is now long dead. But Napier is not. Now 68 and living with his mother in the West Country, he could prove a vital witness to the unfolding police inquiry into child abuse on a massive scale in this country.
Both men were linked to a shadowy organisation called the Paedophile Information Exchange which campaigned in the 70s and 80s for what they called the age of "child love" to be reduced to four.
Righton was a founder of PIE, Napier its one-time treasurer. Righton, incredibly, was also one of Britain's leading child protection specialists.
But when police raided his house in Evesham, Worcs, in 1992 they found not only hard-core child abuse images from Amsterdam but a "quarter-century of correspondence" between paedophiles in Britain and around the world.
The probe led police to the kitchen of a flat in South London where they found a letter from 'Napier - who had a child assault conviction 20 years before - boasting of his life in Cairo as a"British Council teacher.
He bragged of easy access toyoung boys and how he could sendObscene images back to Britain indiplomatic bags.
The scandal erupted again when Labour MP Tom Watson raised the matter with David Cameron in the House of Commons last month suggesting a network of paedophiles working in the UK had links to high levels of Government.
He believes there was an Establishment cover-up of the Righton files and his claims are now being investigated by a Scotland Yard team.
Since Mr Watson's first dramatic announcement, dozens of victims have come forward with allegations of shocking abuse by paedophiles at care homes across Britain.
Several names of senior politicians have been put in the frame though, it has to be said, without any evidential corroboration. However, what is clear is that there are real concerns that more could and should have been done after Righton's 1992 arrest and subsequent caution for indecent assault of a boy 30 years before.
Even Michael Hames, then head of Scotland Yard's Obscene Publications Squad, who handled the Righton files expressed disappointment more was not done. Writing in 2000 of the Righton inquiry, he called for a national team to be set up to investigate paedophiles, adding: "I remain convinced that we have only touched the tip of a huge national and international problem."
The story of Charles Napier is an extraordinary one that shows how a paedophile was able to operate with impunity while holding down a thoroughly respectable lifestyle.
It illustrates how there was little or no safety net to prevent child abusers from returning to their sick ways. And it begins at Copthorne Preparatory School, West Sussex, in the late 60s.
This week, respected author and journalist Francis Wheen told the Sunday People how he was just 11 when Napier arrived at the school.
He says Napier, then in is 20s, charmed the youngsters with his sports car, dashing good looks and claims that he was a professional actor.
Mr Wheen said: "He recruited a few of us, saying 'spend more time in the gym' and appointed himself gym master. There was a room off the gym and that became his haunt.
"Four or five of us started regularly going down there, vaulting over horses and things like that, in our gym shorts in all our innocence.
"At the end of it he would take us into his room off the gym and give us beer and cigarettes - bottles of Mackeson's and Senior Service untipped.
"We thought this was terrifically exciting. Here we were, 11 years old, being given beer and fags - we were thinking he's on our side not like any of the other masters. cigarettes , nd king ot like asters.
"And of course this was for an ulterior purpose which very soon became clear when he stuck his hand down my gym shorts and I had to sort of fight him off."
Napier then revealed his terrifying technique for grooming the youngsters by trying to humiliate the 11-year-old Francis.
Mr Wheen said: "He said 'Don't be such a baby' and said I wasn't grown-up enough for that sort of thing. He would point to a couple of other boys, saying 'They let me do it. You just won't let me because you're so babyish.'
"I think he was hoping I'd say 'no I'm as grown up as them' and let him get on with it but I didn't. It meant I was excluded from his 'charmed circle' after that - but by then I knew where he kept his beer and cigarettes so I used to break into his room, steal them and go sit in the woods.
"I could enjoy them without being sexually abused."
Mr Wheen also described the culture of silence that grew up around the assaults, with youngsters reluctant to report the teacher, feeling they wouldn't be believed.
He added: "A year or two after I left, my younger brother - who was still at the school - came back from holidays and told me Mr Napier had been sacked.
"At long last one boy who had been sexually molested had been innocent enough to go to the headmaster and report him.
"There was a very hasty exit made by Napier. He had a flashy sp so up, speed and sports car and as soon as the game was up, he roared off at speed and pranged it on the school gates. I think I got away quite lightly - I can't pretend I've been scarred for life by it. But I'm sure there are children out there who have been badly damaged by Charles Napier."
In 1972, Napier was found to have indecently assaulted pupils at a Surrey school where he was working. After being banned from teaching, he left the country.
In 1978, he was working in Sweden where he taught at a junior school with pupils as young as 11 - and was visited by Righton.
Napier later surfaced in Egypt, where he worked as the assistant head of studies with the British Council in Cairo.
A letter from the time saw him boast to a friend that the city was "full of boys, 98 per cent of them available".
He also helped set up and run a school in Turkey. His picture appears on a website offering English as a Foreign Language, where he boasts: "Most of my posts have been in Europe, North Africa or the Middle East, and for the last eight years I've been in Istanbul, running my own school and writing a series of course books for Turkish students."
Back in England, Napier was jailed for nine months in 1995 for sexually abusing a 14-year-old boy he'd lured to his home in the 80s.
He befriended the lad, enticing him with lager and computer games - then abused him.
Prosecutors said: "It wasn't just a stranger grabbing a boy in the park. This was a slow insidious process. The boy was trapped - not forced."
Righton, a founder member of PIE, was at one time the UK's leading authority on the protection of children.
Yet he used his power to not only hide his paedophilia, but to help other child abusers - among them Napier.
The latter's ban on teaching meant he was added to List 99, a precursor of the Sex Offenders' Register.
And Righton - the subject of a 1994 documentary on paedophiles - used his influence to try to have Napier removed from the list so he could be allowed back into schools.
Risk Righton wrote to the Department of Education saying: "Mr Napier is a gifted teacher of both adults and children.
"I believe that during the years since his conviction he has acquired a knowledge and disciplined mastery of himself which would justify the conclusion he no longer constitutes a sexual risk to children in his charge.
"It would give me great pleasure - and cause me no anxiety - to hear the Secretary of State had reviewed his decision of October 24, 1972, in Mr Napier's favour."
In 1981, the ban was relaxed to allow Napier into colleges and universities. In 1990 he applied for the ban to be further relaxed - this time enlisting Dr Malcolm Fraser as his referee.
Dr Fraser was convicted in 1992 for possessing indecent photographs of children. His third conviction saw him struck off - and Napier remained on the banned list.
Mr Wheen thought he'd seen the last of his former teacher but their paths crossed again in 1977, when he was commissioned to write an article about PIE and its desire to lower the age of consent.
A senior group member told Mr Wheen: "You must speak to our treasurer.
He's very good. Very well informed about the issues."
And Mr Wheen was astonished to discover the expert he was being put in touch with was his former teacher - now PIE's treasurer - Charles Napier.
Mr Wheen added: "I didn't really want to speak to him. I couldn't believe what my old teacher had become."
Napier declined to comment yesterday.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pae...ld-1430365

With impeccable timing the attention is now shifted from the elite and BBC to the working class and the very very bad internet. Operation Notarise.

Yep, my exact thoughts on this too. Excellent timing to detract public attention away from the real story of power paedos. The lengths they will go to, simply to avoid the truth coming out and damning them all.

David Guyatt Wrote:Yep, my exact thoughts on this too. Excellent timing to detract public attention away from the real story of power paedos. The lengths they will go to, simply to avoid the truth coming out and damning them all.

After all it is 600 of them caught! 600! What's a couple of dead MP's hey? Nothing to worry about. It is all under control.

Good luck with getting that amnesty. So many police are paedophiles anyway, I just can't see it happening. Plus whoever is ultimately chosen to head the new cover-up-cum-whitewash-cum-lead-you-up-the-garden-path "inquiry", the last thing they're going to do is decree an amnesty. Goodness grief.

This is Blighty after all, where buggering young boys starts at public school and is institutionalized after that. By the time the soon to be leaders of the future get to university, boys bottoms are daily fare. It's all up hill from there.

Quote:Cyril Smith: 'evidence of sex abuse' was overruled CPS report shows

Detective told chief constable in 1970 there was prima facie evidence of guilt but DPP advised against prosecution

• Rajeev Syal
  
• theguardian.com, Wednesday 16 July 2014 20.53 BST
  

Newly released documents on Cyril Smith, above, indicate another cover-up, claims Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk. Photograph: Nils Jorgensen/Rex

A senior detective investigating sex abuse claims against Cyril Smith told the force there was prima facie evidence of the late MP's guilt in 1970 but this claim was overruled, newly released documents show.
The detective's report in 1970 to the chief constable of Lancashire said the Liberal MP would have been "at the mercy of a competent counsel".
The 14-page report also revealed "veiled threats" from a friend of Smith, thought to be a fellow senior Liberal. The director of public prosecution later advised against prosecuting. Smith died in 2010 aged 82.
The documents were released on Wednesday night by the Crown Prosecution Service following a ruling by the information rights tribunal.
Simon Danczuk, the Rochdale Labour MP, who first named Smith as a child abuser, said that the documents were another indication of the cover-up that had protected Smith from being disclosed as a paedophile.
"This shows that police officers were certain of his guilt," Danczuk said. "If they had been allowed to do their job they would have saved many more boys from being abused. We know that Cyril went on to abuse many more boys at Knowl View residential school, Elm guest house, and other places, during the 70s and 80s."
The detective, whose name has been redacted from the report, was investigating allegations of sex abuse from eight young boys, six of whom who had been at the privately run Cambridge House care home in Rochdale. The home closed in 1965.
Smith was interviewed by the detective superintendent, who reported to the former chief constable William Palfrey that it seemed "impossible to excuse [Smith's] conduct".
The officer wrote: "Over a considerable period of time, while sheltering beneath a veneer of responsibility, he has used his unique position to indulge in a series of indecent episodes with young boys towards whom he had a special responsibility."
He said Smith was "most unimpressive during my interview with him … he had difficulty in articulating and even the stock replies he proffered could only be obtained after repeated promptings from his solicitor".
He added: "Were he ever to be placed in the witness box, he would be at the mercy of any competent counsel … prima facie, he appears guilty of numerous offences of indecent assault."
The officer also interviewed a magistrate who told him that in his "personal opinion" he "sincerely hoped that this matter was not prosecuted before the court". The Guardian understands that the magistrate was a prominent Liberal. "In my opinion, as a justice of the peace, it is not court worthy," he told the officer.
Separately, it was claimed on Wednesday that former police officers should be given amnesty to allow them to speak without fear about what they knew of paedophile networks operating in Westminster 30 years ago,
Chris Hobbs, a special branch officer who spent 32 years with the Metropolitan police, said retired colleagues should be given protection to encourage them to reveal what they had learned, and that many would be carefully considering the consequences of speaking out on what they knew of the allegations.
Hobbs told Sky News it was clear that quite a few officers, from the rank of commissioner and chief constable to detective level, would know something about allegations of child abuse among politicians three decades ago. An amnesty would be the only way to encourage former officers to come forward and speak out, he said.
Hobbs said: "I think it would help it would help set officers' minds at rest if there was some form of protection there for them, that they weren't suddenly going to subject to the criminal investigations for possibly just doing what they were told.
"I suspect there will be a substantial number of police officers, not huge numbers, but a substantial number, that will know something and will be thinking to themselves, 'shall I come forward, dare I risk it, or, if I keep my head down, will the storm pass me by?'"