Dodger Danczuk Doesn't Deliver!

by Les May

Last night, as predicted Simon Danczuk didn't deliver his evidence of historic child abuse to the meeting of the Greater Manchester Police Federation at the Renaissance Hotel as requested by Chief Inspector Ian Hanson chairman of the Joint Branch Board of the GMP Police Federation.  Instead Tony Lloyd, the Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner, turned up to explain to the serving police officers present what was going on as the disgraced Rochdale MP, Simon Danczuk, indulges himself in attacking the police for failing to dig-up enough evidence to satisfy the Crown Prosecution Service.  Below Les May questions Simon Danczuk's tactics in attacking the police. (Editor)

THE response by Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk to Chief Inspector Hanson’s challenge to him

'.... I will publicly call him out to deliver the firm evidence that he bases his criticism of GMP on to my office by 12 noon on Monday - and I will personally deliver it to the IPCC.’

at https://twitter.com/hashtag/knowlView?src=hash  and at http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/danczuk-ducks-out-of-debate.html  was entirely predictable.   

He is trying to use the same tactic which was so successful when he appeared before the Home Affairs Select Committee in July 2014, when instead of being questioned about his book ‘Smile for the Camera’  he managed to get the spotlight shifted onto Leon Brittan.  Now he wants to shift the spotlight from his inability to provide the evidence asked for, onto debating what he calls the ‘poor policing around Rochdale’. 

This is just a smoke screen to hide the fact that he does not have any evidence to back up his claims about Knowl View.  He knows perfectly well that Chief Inspector Hanson is speaking for the GMP members of the Police Federation who he feels have been very unfairly criticised by Danczuk.  Chief Inspector Hanson is not, and does not represent himself as, speaking for GMP.   

To put it bluntly Danczuk’s claims:

‘Everyone knows that child abuse took place on a frightening scale at Knowl View’ and ‘We've seen shocking reports documenting this...’ are bunkum.  ‘Everyone knows...’, isn’t evidence and Danczuk continually repeating it does not make it evidence. 

And no, we have not seen ‘shocking reports’ because the two reports which might throw some light on what was happening at Knowl View, the 1991 report of Philip Shepherd and the 1992 report of Valerie Mellor, have not been published by Rochdale Council and it shows no inclination to let us see them for ourselves.   

I have seen a copy of the Shepherd report and whilst it is certainly ‘shocking’, what it refers to is sexual activity between the boys at the school and to some boys who were visited Rochdale town centre accompanied by care staff, ‘cottaging’ at the Smith Street toilets.   

In other words what it reveals is poor supervision by some care staff.  Whether the responsibility for this being allowed to happen should lie with the care staff involved. the headteacher, the governors or the Director of Education is a subject for discussion after the reports have been published in full.   

As to what Danczuk means by his comment, ‘...ensure the public understand how the police reach decisions regarding serious crimes like child abuse’, I do not understand unless he is trying to blame Chief Inspector Hanson’s colleagues for the decision that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone, which was in fact taken by the CPS.   

I hope that Chief Inspector Hanson and his GMP colleagues in the Police Federation will keep the pressure on Danczuk to produce the ‘very specific information that backs up his comments’, not let him shift the debate onto things which suit his agenda of getting himself back in the limelight and will publicise as widely as possible his inability or unwillingness to ‘put his money where his mouth is.

If Danczuk wants to do something useful he could try putting pressure on his friends in Rochdale Council to publish the Shepherd and Mellor reports.  Until these have been published he should refrain from making any more inflammatory comments about Knowl View.

Tonight, Danczuk in the Lion's Den?

THE 'calling out' of Simon Danczuk by Chief Inspector Ian Hanson with it's implication that it is time for him to 'put up or shut up' is long overdue.  But it should not have been left for a serving police officer to do it.

It should have been done a long time ago by the reviewers of his book ‘Smile for the Camera’ who failed to notice the garbled chronology, the same stories being recounted two or even three times, the absence of any clear methodology, the second or third hand accounts being passed of as ‘evidence’ and the ‘flowery flannel’ which is used in the chapters which are supposed to be the authentic voices of the men who were indecently assaulted by Cyril Smith at Cambridge House.

It should have been done by the journalists who even today are still writing that the book ‘detailed’ allegations against Smith and Knowl View school.  Anyone who actually takes the time to read the book is struck by the grandiose claims yet complete lack of detail to back them up.

It should have been done by the Home Office Select Committee who asked Danczuk to give evidence in the summer of 2014.  In the preceding weeks Danczuk trailed that he was going to be questioned about his book.  A week or so before the meeting this changed to ‘he would name names if he was asked’. In the event the Committee did not question Danczuk about the book but allowed him to change the subject to the so called ‘Dicken’s dossier’.

As a result the press began to put the spotlight on Leon Brittan and Danczuk called for ‘an over-arching inquiry to investigate all allegations of historic abuse’.   http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/politicians-paedophile-ring-simon-danczuk-mp-calls-ex-home-secretary-leon-brittan-help-uncover-1454929.  Well he got it didn’t he!  It’s on its fourth chairman, is likely to cost more than the £100 millions originally predicted, is unlikely to report until at least 2023 and no-one seems to know what to do with it.  Well done Simon!

Even after Northants police investigated Danczuk's claim that Cyril Smith was found with a boot load of child pornography, taken into custody and subsequently released by the force without charge and found it to be entirely bogus, the media have continued to treat his other claims as entirely credible.  Instead of looking more closely at these claims journalists have regaled us with lurid stories about his private life.

On page 112 of his book Danczuk says: ‘Boys were beaten and raped continually by men as far away as Sheffield who had travelled to Rochdale to take part.'  and a few lines later he has his ‘witness’ say 'These boys were sold to paedophile gangs.'

These claims were not based upon interviews with men who told him this had happened to them. They were based upon what had appeared in a 1991 report sent to Rochdale Education and Social Service departments which said nothing of the sort and a statement attributed to his ‘witness’.  In Danczuk’s own words on page 109 we read:  'For many years he was oblivious to what was happening in the school – until he was promoted to head of care and began to realise that things weren't quite right.'  This was in 1994, when he read the 1991 report.

Any reputable journalist could have asked Rochdale MBC for a copy of this report and checked Danczuk’s claims against the facts.  No doubt the police did just that during Operation Jaguar.  I’d like to have been a fly on the wall when they asked him about his claims in the book!  We do know that the police did interview the ‘witness’ and presumably asked whether he made the statement about boys being ‘sold to paedophile gangs’ attributed to him by Danczuk.

I have discussed this and many other reasons for being sceptical about the book at http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/nv-review-of-smile-for-camera.html and at http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/our-long-running-crique-of-smile-for.html .

But let’s put aside my scepticism and give Danczuk the benefit of the doubt here. Let’s take his claim at face value. Let’s put the spotlight on what he did when he was approached by men claiming to have been sexually assaulted at Knowl View school.

Now we know the law firm Slater and Gordon were not backward in coming forward as soon as Danczuk’s book was published as can be seen at http://www.slatergordon.co.uk/media-centre/blog/2014/04/allegations-of-abuse-against-cyril-smith-victims-seek-answers/ .  What’s not clear is whether they were interested in helping the police investigate the claims in the book or just touting for business.

When an MP is informed of a crime having been committed his or her duty is the same as that of any other citizen; to encourage the complainant to speak to the police immediately.  I have been told, but cannot independently verify, that this was the policy of the late Jim Dobbin MP in cases where allegations of sexual abuse were reported to him.

There should be no conflict of interest such as might arise if a book was contemplated.  There should no prior discussion of the details of the complaint as this serves only to contaminate the evidence making it more difficult for the police to get at the truth.  The same problems will arise if the police have to conduct interviews with people who have already been interviewed for a TV programme. Too close involvement with the complainant, before the CPS have decided whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute, would not be the action of a responsible MP.

After the decision of the CPS that there was insufficient evidence to initiate  criminal proceedings against anyone about what had clearly been some unsavoury happenings at Knowl View, a period of silence from Mr Danczuk would have been welcome.  The major effect of his interventions in the investigation of abuse has been both negative and very expensive to the public purse.  

If tonight’s meeting ends with Mr Danczuk’s credibility severely dented then he has only himself to blame.  In my first review of Danczuk’s book I wrote:

‘The writing style adopted is to let the narrative drive the evidence not the evidence drive the narrative.’ https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/customer- reviews /R3A7XZP51EW0A6/ref=cm_cr_pr_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1849548757  

Police investigations have in the words of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Northampton to be ‘evidence led’. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-33716982

John Gummer’s comment in January 2015:

 ‘Anybody who doesn’t have real evidence should recognise that it is a wicked thing to do to make allegations about anybody, even if you don’t like their politics.’  could have been tailor made for Danczuk.  https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/23/lord-brittan-child-abuse-allegations-wicked

Reviewers, journalists and politicians may be taken in by a forceful and confident narrative.  The police require evidence. And tonight that could prove to be Mr Danczuk’s undoing.

'Inaccurate Journalism' from Baker & Danzuk?

by Les May

MEA culpa.  More inaccurate journalism I'm afraid.  In my article 'The martyrdom of Simon Danczuk', I suggested that Mr D's story of a man emerging from the shadows to warn him not to mention Leon Brittan at the Home Affairs Select Committee meeting of 1 July 2014, was produced whilst he was being questioned. 

I was wrong; it emerged a few days later.

I realised this as I was reading through the record of what Simon Danczuk said in response to the 31 questions put to him by the Committee.  As with the LBC interview with Ken Livingstone and David Mellor on 10 October none of the questions were particularly searching.  No one thought to ask him about how he had collected his evidence or about its reliability.  I gained the impression that no one had actually read his book 'Smile for the Camera' and it clearly did not occur to anyone on the Committee that one of their own might just be telling porkies.  Sorry, I meant of course 'being guilty of inaccurate journalism'. Or as one blogger put it 'wasting police time'.

Just as I conflated Danczuk's appearance before the Select Committee and his 'man in the shadows' story, Danczuk and Baker conflated two quite separate issues in their book.  The very real problems of just who knew about the high levels of sexual activity between the boys at Rochdale's Knowl View school in the years before it closed and the question of whether Cyril Smith was involved in abusing boys at the school.

Knowl View was a residential school which opened in 1969 and had a troubled history.  In the years following its closure in 1994 it was the subject of claims of a 'cover up' going back to an Independent on Sunday (IoS) article in 1995.  Strenuous attempts are made in 'Smile for the Camera' to associate Smith with sexual abuse of boys at the school.  But they largely rely upon the suppositions and opinions of a single individual, social worker Martin Digan, and it is difficult to find any independent evidence for them.  As is the norm for this book, there is no chronology. 

According to the authors Mr Digan started work at the school in the late 1970s.  In what must surely be one of the most remarkable statements in the book they tell us, 'For many years he was oblivious to what was happening in the school – until he was promoted to head of care and began to realise that things weren't quite right.' 

The authors don't think it necessary to tell us when this was.  But a Manchester Evening News (MEN) article from 2 December 2012 indicates Mr Digan became head of care in 1994.   

So what had  been happening in the school?  What no one disputes is that in 1991 an Aids worker, Philip Shepherd, spent a day in the school talking to staff and then wrote a report, (of which more later) which was sent to the Director of Education, Diana Cavanagh.  In response to what he wrote a clinical psychologist, Valerie Mellor, was commissioned in late 1991 to investigate the reported sexual activity involving the boys at the school.  Mellor's report presented in February 1992 confirmed and expanded upon the Shepherd report.  It included the comment, 'It is very difficult to believe that this behaviour had not come to the attention of at least some members of staff.'   Also in 1991, Rodney Hilton, who lived nearby was convicted of sexually abusing boys at the school.

Responding to a letter sent to her by the Knowl View staff in April 1992 Diana Cavanagh is reported to have been strongly critical of care staff.  With reference to boys aged 11 to 13 at one unit of the school being involved in homosexual activities at the Smith Street toilets in the centre of Rochdale, she is reported to have said, 'Those supervising the boys in the evenings appeared either not to notice that they were missing, or not to communicate their observations.'  and, 'There is insufficient evidence to prove culpable neglect, fraud or incompetence by any single member of staff.'

If, as the authors tell us, Mr Digan had been at the school since the late 1970s, this seems to be an awful lot for anyone to be oblivious of.  As for how Mr Digan had the scales lifted from his eyes you can choose between the prosaic versions from the MEN of 2 December 2012 and 30 November 2013, that he was given access to the reports when he became head of care or the melodramatic version from 'Smile for the Camera' in which he slipped into the headteacher's office at night, 'Then, just as he was leaving, he caught sight of a file of papers spread out on the desk under an adjustable lamp.'

I have a copy of the Shepherd report and the details can be checked in the IoS article from 1995. This is what Mr Shepherd had actually written in 1991:   

'One boy who is homosexual has contact with an adult outside the school. Several of the senior boys indulge in oral sex with one another.   

'Reputedly five of the junior boys have been or are involved in 'cottaging' in and around public toilets. Men as far away as Sheffield are believed to be aware of this activity and travel to Rochdale to take part. 

'One eight-year-old is thought to have been involved. The police are aware of the problem. What action has been taken is not known.

One rent boy has been removed from the school. The suggestion that he may return soon has angered the staff.

'Some boys have been 'forced' to have sex with others.'

and this is what Danczuk and Baker claim it says;

'In matter of fact language, the report described the extreme sexual abuse that young boys had been subjected to. Boys were beaten and raped continually by men as far away as Sheffield who had travelled to Rochdale to take part.'

No it didn't!

A few lines later they quote Mr Digan as saying, 'These boys were sold to paedophile gangs.' Of course neither they nor Mr Digan provide any evidence for this.

A page further on they imply that Cyril Smith's name appeared in the Shepherd report when it did not; 'This file was eventually made public by Digan but Cyril Smith and Harry Wild's names were not mentioned.'   This was the IoS article in 1995.

When the authors resort to misquoting documents in this way, presenting opinions as facts and implying that something is true when it isn't, then it casts doubt on much of their book. It goes well beyond being called 'inaccurate journalism'. 

In 1986 Jeremy Corbyn complained to the House of Commons about the activities of Geoffrey Dickens saying:

'The hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth chose, last Thursday, to make a statement to the Press Association, which appeared later in The London Standard. The effect was to make any inquiries difficult to follow, and the estate was besieged by the media, seeking salacious gossip and stories'. 

Making inquiries difficult to follow is precisely what Danczuk and Baker do in their book. Once an accusation is made, the police have to make inquiries. Their story about Smith and Knowl View simply contaminates any evidence which might exist about what really happened at the school. Anyone laying a false trail makes life even more difficult for the police. 

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-martyrdom-of-simon-danczuk.html  

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/i-was-warned-off-asking-brittan-what-he-knew-about-paedophile-dossier-says-labour-mp-simon-danczuk-9588134.html    

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/inquiries/parliament-2010/localised-grooming-follow-up/?type=Oral#pnlPublicationFilter  

http://www.lbc.co.uk/danczuk-we-ruled-out-action-on-abuse-allegations--117706 

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-humbug-of-simon-danczuk.html  

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/simon-danczuk-wasting-police-time.html  

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/rochdales-knowl-view-whistleblower-told-6356729 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/boys-in-special-school-were-at-risk-of-aids-1600318.html  

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1986/feb/17/conventions-of-the-house

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/98147/former-danczuk-spin-doctor-matt-baker-accused-of-vile-attack-and-smear-campaign  

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/10/08/exclusive-lib-lab-paedo-pact-alleged-in-rochdale/ 

 

Tom Watson & Simon Danczuk's 'Nifty Footwork'

by Les May

Tom Watson & Simon Danczuk

YOU'VE got to admire Simon Danczuk's nifty footwork in making sure that the opprobrium which is being heaped upon Tom Watson for his pursuit of Leon Brittan does not fall upon him.
Chris Fay, a former social worker, interviewed in the recent Panorama programme also passed allegations about Leon Brittan to Tom Watson.  But Simon wanted to make it clear that he was above that sort of thing and was reported in The Times a couple of days ago as saying Fay was 'wholly unbelievable and some sort of fantasist'.
Now I wonder when he came to that conclusion?  Quite recently I assume because earlier this year he was happy to share a speakers' platform with him as you'll see if you visit the eventbrite website. (Mr. Matthew Baker now living in Bristol and a former aide to the Rochdale MP, Simon Danczuk, has since denied that Mr Danczuk appeared on the same platform as Mr. Fay - see his comment below).
Or did Simon 'forget' just as he did when he enthusiastically applauded the unveiling of a 'Blue Plaque' to Cyril Smith.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4583057.ece
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/csa-inquiry-time-4-justice-action-meeting-tickets-14973173164
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5iL2dDSyl0

Maneuverings of Simon Danczuk & Tom Watson

by Les May

Tom Watson & Simon Danczuk

IN an LBC interview with Ken Livingstone and David Mellor last Saturday, Simon Danczuk said;

'I was in inundated with information about Leon Brittan’s personal life.  I didn’t think that there was enough information there that allowed me to reach a threshold of evidence that would give me some comfort in using parliamentary privilege to name him in any sort of way.
'I’d met some of these campaigners and my office had spoken to some of the victims and we’d ruled out acting on any of the information that they gave us.  We stepped away from it.'
LBC conveniently packaged this into 'The MP for Rochdale told Ken Livingstone and David Mellor that while he believes some notable figures were paedophiles, other allegations such as those made by Tom Watson about Leon Brittan, had insufficient evidence to follow up on.'

Now this looks to me like an attempt by Danczuk to make sure that the large piles of ordure being heaped upon Tom Watson by papers in the Daily Mail stable does not start to fall on him.  I phrase it like this because having studied Danczuk's book 'Smile for the Camera' which deals with the real and imaginary crimes of Cyril Smith, I can say with some certainty that his 'threshold for evidence' appears to be extremely low.
Now read that second paragraph of what Danczuk said very carefully.  Whilst Tom Watson well and truly overstepped the mark in repeating after Brittan's death what someone else had said about him, he did take to the police the claims made to him.  By contrast Danczuk, even though he refers to the complainants as 'victims', didn't. In his own words 'we stepped away from it.'
But in 'stepping away from it', he has dropped himself into some 'do-do' of his own making.  Check out his website and you will find he is calling for 'mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse'.
Oops!
It looks like Simon is saying 'Do as I say, not, do as I do.'
http://www.lbc.co.uk/danczuk-we-ruled-out-action-on-abuse-allegations--117706
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3267790/Witch-hunter-Tom-Watson-s-uncle-child-abuser-Scoutmaster-jailed-sex-attacks-nine-year-old-boy.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3265772/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-not-say-sorry-Mr-Watson.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3265730/Why-Nonce-Finder-General-Tom-Watson-won-t-say-sorry-unfit-high-political-office-bearded-Trot-Corbyn-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10/09/i-had-a-duty-to-pass-leon-brittain-allegations-to-authorities-says-tom-watson_n_8268722.html
http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-humbug-of-simon-danczuk.html
http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/simon-danczuk-wasting-police-time.html
http://www.simondanczuk.com/child_sex_abuse
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/83502/mp-backs-mandatory-reporting-of-child-abuse
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/rochdale-mp-calls-law-ensure-8458259

The Overactive Imagination of Simon Danczuk

by Les May

IF you want to know what 'The Establishment' really is and how it works, look no further than what has happened since allegations of sexual abuse of a twelve year old boy were made against the late Sir Edward Heath at the beginning of August.

On 3 August the Daily Mirror was running the story with the headline 'Sir Edward Heath child abuse claims: Alleged victim was raped by ex PM when he was just 12', complete with the obligatory photographs of Heath with Cyril Smith and Heath with Jimmy Savile.
Simon Danczuk was quoted as saying:
'These are very serious allegations and they need to be investigated as a matter of urgency.'

In another Mirror article, he is quoted as saying:
'There have been rumours and allegations out there for some time, and I don’t say that lightly.'
Now this is a bit of a porky because in his book he is happy to make statements about child abuse by Cyril Smith being part of a paedophile ring in the absence of evidence of any kind.  Two days after the book was published in April 2014, he told the Today program:
'Had he been prosecuted, then the house of cards would have fallen, in terms of that paedophile network, and it could have brought the government down.'
Again no evidence is produced.

In July of last year, he said with reference to Geoffrey Dickens:
'I have no doubt whatsoever that Dickens was on the right trail and he caused a lot of problems for the establishment. In the early 1980s he famously gave a dossier to the then Conservative Home Secretary, Leon Brittan, giving names of paedophiles operating at the top of the British establishment. Jimmy Savile and Cyril Smith were said to be named in the 40-page dossier.'
As Danczuk never saw the so called 'dossier' he cannot know what it contained or how many pages it had, and all this is just another figment of his over active imagination, with a bit of hearsay thrown in. (Incidentally on 5 July 2014 the Mirror said it was 50 pages!)

By 5th, August, The Telegraph was running a story which cast doubt on some aspects of the story and The Guardian's Simon Jenkins was writing:
'The case against Edward Heath looks flimsy, but already the gutter is being dredged for lurid, unsubstantiated claims'.  He also wrote that the past weeks assault on Heath's reputation 'has been driven by political antipathy to Heath, by latent homophobia and by a general suspicion of people who seem to lead abnormal lives.'

In late August, Harvey Proctor 'outed' himself as a suspect and made a detailed statement about the nature of the accusations which had been made against him. This may have had some influence in shifting perceptions as what had seemed 'lurid' allegations began to look like 'ludicrous' allegations.

Five weeks after the initial claims about Heath the Daily Mail, which had been eager to serialise Danczuk's book about Cyril Smith, was writing; 'Nick: Victim or fantasist?  Rape.  Torture.  Murders'.  These were the extraordinary claims made by one man against leading Establishment figures.  Police called his story 'credible and true' but there's not a shred of evidence to back his allegations'

Then last Tuesday, a BBC Panorama programme cast serious doubt on the claims of a paedophile ring using the facilities of the Elm Street guest house, which seems to have been operated as a homosexual brothel, and on the accusations against the late Sir Leon Brittan and others.

In recent days we have had demands for an apology from Tom Watson with regard to statements he made about Brittan.  As these demands have been prominently reported in the Daily Mail there is no doubt a bit of added spice in being able to attack the Deputy Leader of the Labour party.

So in just nine weeks our print and broadcast media have at last woken up to the fact that it might be a good idea to adopt a slightly more sceptical approach to reporting allegations of child abuse.  Or
at least they have when the accusations are levelled at Establishment figures.

When Danczuk was interviewed by LBC on 10 October the accusations against Establishment figures were described as 'ludicrous', but the claims in his book about Smith being a paedophile were taken for granted as being true by the interviewers, though I doubt that either of them have actually gone to the trouble of reading it. Remember also that on 3rd, August Danczuk was quoted as saying:
'These are very serious allegations and they need to be investigated as a matter of urgency'.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist so I don't think this reflects an attempt at an Establishment 'cover up' to protect people in high places because I too think they are 'ludicrous'.  But if we are going to be asked to re-evaluate the allegations against Heath, Brittan and sundry others of the 'great and the good', should we not also re-evaluate the allegations of paedophilia against Cyril Smith and especially the claims in the Danczuk book?

Whilst no one can possibly defend what Tom Watson repeated about Leon Brittan after his death nor his attempt to pressure the Director of Public Prosecution, at least he has had the good grace to apologise for what he did say and to make an effort to explain some of his actions saying, 'I had been told of multiple allegations about Leon Brittan and I had met some of the people making those allegations at their request. I did not and could not know if they were true but I did believe their claims should be fully investigated'.

In contrast to Danczuk, Watson recognises in that last sentence that just because he was told something, he should not just assume it was true. Yet Watson is being vilified by Richard Littlejohn who calls him the 'Nonce Finder General' in the Daily Mail, whilst Danczuk, who never misses the opportunity to repeat his claims about Cyril Smith as if they had been proven to be true, seems to be immune from criticism. Perhaps the reason is that the Daily Mail paid him to serialise the book. Or is it that they consider him their 'tame' Labour MP always ready to criticise his party?

As a BBC report from November 2012 makes clear Danczuk's original intervention was with regard to 'indecent assault' by Smith who had carried out fake medical examinations and spankings of young men (not 'young boys' as Danczuk claimed) at Cambridge House hostel in the 1960s.

Although Danczuk has been happy to be seen as the person who unearthed this sordid story, in fact it was revealed in the Rochdale Alternative Paper (RAP) in May 1979 by the co-editors David Bartlett and John Walker.  Whilst these two could support their story with affidavits from six of the men indecently assaulted by Smith, Danczuk can offer nothing but assertions, and second and third hand gossip about Smith's activities after the closure of Cambridge House in the 1960s.  At least one of his claims involving a car boot load of child pornography, and Northamptonshire police looking the other way has been shown to be without foundation.

Is it not strange that the BBC can so quickly research and produce a Panorama programme casting doubt on the truth of some of the claims made against some very prominent figures, yet the organisation has been happy to offer Danczuk an option on his book about Cyril Smith being turned into a television programme?

Is it not doubly strange that even though we now know that Danczuk's former aide Matthew Baker has been accused of attempting to smear a former Labour Leader of Rochdale council with having knowledge in the 1990s of abuse in a Rochdale School, no-one has thought to question the veracity of some of the claims about abuse by Cyril Smith made in the book he co-authored with Danczuk?

What Simon Jenkins had to say about Heath can equally well be applied to Smith. Danczuk has repeatedly used Smith's actions at Cambridge House and his claims based on gossip and hearsay
against Rochdale LibDems and Nick Clegg, Smith was a homosexual, and his size and devotion to his mother no doubt made his life seem 'abnormal' to some people.


http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/88102/letter-from-parliament-simon-danczuk-mp
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sir-edward-heath-child-abuse-6188388
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sir-edward-heath-child-abuse-6188663

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11786520/Sir-Edward-Heath-Sex-trial-was-not-dropped-to-cover-up-ex-PM-allegations-says-lawyer.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/05/convict-dead-defenceless-case-edward-heath
https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/25/full-statement-of-harvey-proctor/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3240661/Nick-Victim-fantasist-Rape-Torture-Murders-extraordinary-claims-one-man-against-leading-Establishment-figures-Police-called-story-credible-true-s-not-shred-evidence-allegations.html
http://www.lbc.co.uk/danczuk-we-ruled-out-action-on-abuse-allegations--117706
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34484611
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10/09/i-had-a-duty-to-pass-leon-brittain-allegations-to-authorities-says-tom-watson_n_8268722.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3265531/Lord-Brittan-treated-outrageously-police-gossiped-journalists-unfounded-rape-claims-against-brother-says.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3265772/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-not-say-sorry-Mr-Watson.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3265730/Why-Nonce-Finder-General-Tom-Watson-won-t-say-sorry-unfit-high-political-office-bearded-Trot-Corbyn-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20303606
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-33716982
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-34400387
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27047442

Harvey Proctor & Extra Judicial Tactics

NORTHERN Voices, ever since 2012, has been in the forefront of exposing issues surrounding Cyril Smith and child sex exploitation.  However, we are concerned about the recent practices of some politicians and certain media outlets with regard to their use of parliamentary privilege and the use of trial by media to potentially influence the process and administration of justice.

 

On Wednesday in the Daily Telegraph, Mathew Scott wrote:

'In a year's time Harvey Proctor's news conference will be seen either as a chilling display of hypocrisy or as the moment a brave man finally took on the combined might of a misguided Metropolitan Police and a small, nasty and highly influential section of the press and internet.'

Harvey Procter, is a former Conservative MP who was very publicly implicated in 1987, in what was then regarded as a 'gay sex' scandal, when he stood down from his parliamentary seat.   He left the House of Commons – after pleading guilty and being fined for gross indecency charges.  At present the campaign against certain so-called 'VIP paedophiles' , including Sir Edward Heath, Leon Brittain, and others, has been promoted by the online news organisation Exaro News.  Exaro's editor in chief is Mark Watts, a highly experienced journalist who, before setting up Exaro, had contributed stories to the Daily Telegraph.

Mathew Scott writes:
'In an internet trial there are no rules of evidence, no right to insist on answers to questions or even to know the identity of the accuser.  “Nick” is anonymous and as a result almost beyond criticism.  Why did he contact Exaro in the first place?  Did he seek them out, or did they go out and find him?  If the latter, why and how? Has he been paid for his story?  Exaro has not revealed.  Why did he wait until 2014 before contacting the police?  Why, for example, did he not do so in 1987 when Mr Proctor was very publicly implicated in what was then regarded as a “gay sex” scandal?  Why, as Mr Proctor asked, was a representative from Exaro permitted to be present when he was interviewed by the police?   Exaro, again, has not revealed.'

 
This short-circuiting of the legal process seems to be becoming all too common, in a letter in tomorrow's Rochdale Observer, a critic of the Rochdale MP, Simon Danczuk, Les May questions the politician's involvement with officers from the Leicester Police force who Mr. Danczuk in a speech to the House of Commons reported to be 'furious' at a decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) not to prosecute Lord Janner.  Mr. May who resides in the Rochdale area writes:
'On July 25, 2015, Mr Danczuk received a payment of £10,000 from the owners of The Sun for an article he had contributed to... [and] he declined to say which article the cash related to.'


Les May further points out that 'Mr Danczuk is MP for Rochdale, not a constituency that is within the Leicester Police area.' 
And he asks:
'Was the intention to use an extra judicial method of bring pressure on the DPP ...?'


In the case of Harvey Proctor last December the police officer leading the investigation, detective superintendent Kenny McDonald even announced on the BBC that he believed that the victim 'Nicks' allegations to be 'credible and true'. 


The journalist, Mathew Scott in the Telegraph, rightly questions this statement from a police officer:
'It was a disgraceful statement. McDonald's job is to investigate, not to judge and most certainly not to broadcast his opinion.  Expressing any opinion about the truthfulness of a witness would – as he knows perfectly well – be inadmissible and improper even in the controlled environment of a trial.  To announce on national television that you believe a suspect is guilty of multiple rape and murder, before a single body has been found, and months before speaking to Mr Proctor, suggests a mind-boggling level of prejudice and foolishness.'


While no laws may have been broken in either of these cases, and in the case of Mr Proctor there has been no technical breach because he has not been charged, but the spirit of fairness and justice is being damaged.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11823190/Harvey-Proctor-accuses-police-of-homosexual-witch-hunt-over-paedophile-ring-murder-claims.html  

Fiona Woolf quits abuse enquiry

FIONA Woolf resigned as Chair of the government's sex abuse enquiry last night.  She has been under attack for days about her links to former Home Secretary Leon Brittan.  Last night she said that perhaps the government will find 'a hermit' somewhere to lead the enquiry.

Today, the Daily Mail a critic of Fiona Woolf and her predecessor in the post Lady Butler-Sloss, offered its own suggestions as to who may be in line to lead the enquiry (see below):

WHO'S NEXT IN LINE? 

Following the resignations of two sex abuse inquiry chairman in just four months, several names were last night being mentioned as possible replacements. They include:

 Professor Alexis Jay, who carried out the recent inquiry into how the authorities ignored widespread sex abuse in Rotherham. She is already an adviser but could be bumped up to chairman. However, is not a lawyer.

 Michael Mansfield, the campaigning QC who has played a significant role in high profile inquests and court cases involving such controversial issues as Bloody Sunday and the death of Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, shot dead by the Met Police after being mistaken for a terrorist.

 Jim Gamble, the former senior police officer and exhead of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP). However, he fell out with Theresa May over bringing CEOP within the National Crime Agency.

 Esther Rantzen, the former presenter of That’s Life and Hearts of Gold, who founded and ran the child protection charity ChildLine. A long-standing campaigner on behalf of child abuse victims.

Our readers must decide who they fancy from this lot.

Home Affairs Select Committee & Mr. Danczuk

SIMON Danczuk MP for Rochdale, who had been called before a Home Affairs Select Committee on Tuesday, used the opportunity to demanded a 'overarching inquiry' into child sexual abuse.  During the Select Committee hearing he stopped short of naming a prominent paedophile member of parliament as he had threatened to do only last week.  This was perhaps because he had recieved criticism that had he done so it may have distracted from the possibility of an early inquiry.

Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, had responded to Mr Danczuk's call for an inquiry by saying that while he had not ruled out holding a full public inquiry into Jimmy Savile tha may reveal his links to others such as Cyril Smith he announced last week in parliament: 
'We have not ruled out anything, but we want first to draw together the lessons for the NHS and across government as quikly as possible.  One of the important benefits of the way in which we have proceeded so far is that, because it is an investigation and not a public inquiry, we can get to the truth relatively quickly.'

During this Tuesday's select committee hearing Mr Danczuk had claimed that the former Rochdale MP Cyril Smith was a serial child abuser who was sheltered from justice with the help of a paedophile network at th heart of government or 'part of a network of people protecting each other'.  Danczuk insisted:
'An overarching inquiry into child sexual abuse would help us to understand the political networks to which [Jimmy] Savile belonged.  By way of example, he [Savile] was friends with Cyril Smith and appeared in a Liberal party political broadcast in the 1970s and had friends in high places.'

Earlier in the hearing Mr Danczuk said that Cyril Smith escaped prosecution because he was 'part of a network of people protecting each other'.  He then tried to link the recent abuse of white working-class girls in Rochdale to the earlier abuse by Cyril Smith by saying that Smith's victims were 'poor, white, working class boys' in the same way that forty years later the victims of grooming in Rochdale were 'poor, white, working class girls.'

It is believed that the police have confirmed that Cyril Smith had been a visitor to Elm Guest House.  And Mr Danczuk has said he has spoken to a victim Smith had abused there and that  'other high profile figures are alleged to have attended there.'

Danczuk also said a dossier of allegations, compiled at the time by the former Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens, had been presented to Mr Leon Brittan.

The former Conservative Home Secretary Lord [Leon] Brittan issued a statement this morning after being challenged to reveal what he knew about a dossier of allegations of a paedophile ring 'operating in an around Westminster' in the 1980s.  Lord Brittan said this morning: 
'As I recall, he [Dickens] came to my room at the Home Office with a substantial bundle of papers. As is normal practice, my private secretary would have been present at the meeting. I told Mr Dickens that I would ensure that the papers were looked at carefully by the Home Office and acted on as necessary. Following the meeting, I asked my officials to look carefully at the material contained in the papers provided and report back to me if they considered that any action needed to be taken by the Home Office. In addition I asked my officials to consider a referral to another government department, such as the attorney general's department, if that was appropriate. This was the normal procedure for handing material presented to the Home Secretary. I do not recall being contacted further about these matters by Home Office officials or by Mr Dickens or by anyone else.'

This statement has been described as 'disappointing' by Simon Danczuk who asked Brittan to tell the public what he knew of the dossier prepared by the Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens.