Noncegate Serious Thread-Butler-Sloss Right Person to Head Inquiry?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0495llv

Radio 4 Nine AM This morning. Time-stamp 10 Minutes into the Broadcast.

Geoffrey Dickens on the PM program in 1981 calling for the then Attorney General's resignation in what he would describe as the cover-up of the century.

Verbatim.

"I am very astounded and very disappointed. I think it it is an absolute whitewash and I think we could describe it as the cover-up of the century - I would have thought the Attorney General has let down every parent and grandparent and indeed the children of this country"

"I am sure I shall get the whip again from my colleagues, but I have called for the resignation of the Attorney General"
The late Michael Havers is of course the brother of Judge Butler-Sloss appointed by Downing Street to head up this enquiry.

Is the electorate being screwed over again?

Ageing celebrities are hung out to dry using the CPS's pretty lame prosecution strategy of "there's no smoke without fire", and yet they ignore the towering inferno that is Westminster...!

This country is so very, very sick.

Incidentally, one of the guests on Broadcasting House said that Downing St probably either didn't know or didn't remember that Butler-Sloss was Michael Havers' sister - and sadly I can very well believe that level of ineptitude.
 
Last edited:
I've said on another thread that this smacks of the establishment looking after their own just as Rome has done. It stinks to high heaven. There are posters on here prepared to make excuses though and I don't doubt they will be along.

There was a time when the rightly outraged populace would take to the streets, now we rely on a section of the press to fight our battles. I hope they have the stamina.
 
The talking heads have been thrust onto Sunday morning TV to 'defuse' the issue.

David Mellor on Andrew Marr show again shooting down any notion of paedophiles in Westminster. He made the same defence on channel 4 news last week.

No counter argument or guest invited to question David Mellor, just nodding heads.
 
The talking heads have been thrust onto Sunday morning TV to 'defuse' the issue.

David Mellor on Andrew Marr show again shooting down any notion of paedophiles in Westminster. He made the same defence on channel 4 news last week.

No counter argument or guest invited to question David Mellor, just nodding heads.
Hopefully just giving them enough rope...
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
RIP
It is also reported in the media that Dame BS has herself covered up C of E abuse to protect that organisation at the expense of its child victims.
 
Just out of interest. I know there's a storm of "Allegations" including some weasel with form for fitting people up but has ANYTHING actually been proven in a Court of Law ? Or is this enquiry pre-empting Court action, thereby either proving a complete waste of money as no one will say anything without a deal or making Court action impossible as everyone who might be affected has stitched a deal up protecting them from Court action
 
Just out of interest. I know there's a storm of "Allegations" including some weasel with form for fitting people up but has ANYTHING actually been proven in a Court of Law ? Or is this enquiry pre-empting Court action, thereby either proving a complete waste of money as no one will say anything without a deal or making Court action impossible as everyone who might be affected has stitched a deal up protecting them from Court action
Nothing would surprise me less than your scenario.
 

DannyDiehard

War Hero
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Smith_(judge)

And Dame Janet. Stage 3 of Shipman Inquiry (To examine weaknesses in death registration process) backed off from examining Hackney Social Services child care deaths and backed off from death registration malpractice in Sue Ryder and Leonard Cheshire Homes. Both of these matters having been refused public inquiries requested in the Commons 1972.

Dame Janet now in charge of Jimmy Savile Inquiry at BBC and obviously a question will arise about his abuse in the 1970s at a Sue Ryder child hospice ? And Dame Janet immediately puts her hand up "I backed off from this aspect of things in my duties heading up Shipman Inquiry in spite of all that effort from Bury St Edmunds HM Coroner tracking through records relating to Hackney Social Services residential child care in the county. . Oh what a silly Judgie Poo I was. Still never mind. Now the question of why Panorama backed off in 1975. Oh let's ignore that as well eh ?"

Bloody Sunday Inquiries, Iraq Inquiry, Lawrence Inquiry (now admitting it didn't do its job properly BTW), Dr Kelly Inquiry, Rosemary Nelson Inquiry. Judicial Inquiries hold no trust from the public anyway. The only difference with Judge BS is that a simple family relationship can act as an early vehicle to express that lack of trust.

Judge led inquiries enjoy the same lack of public trust as police inquiries and police evidence. A sad fact. Country is in the gutter.
 
This Anthony Gilberthorpe who has sold the latest revelations to the Sundays wouldn't be the same Anthony Gilberthorpe who, according to google and the Independent, set up his 'friend' and ex-employer Piers Merchant and got a reputed £25,000 for it from the Sunday Mirror ?

From the Independent October 1997
How did the Sunday Mirror get this? It was arranged through Anthony Gilberthorpe, and filmed at his York home, the apparatus being set up by a surveillance expert.
It is understood that Mr Gilberthorpe, who had worked for Mr Merchant in the mid 80s when he was MP for Newcastle Central and subsequently kept in touch, took the story to the Sunday Mirror at the end of last week. A figure of around pounds 25,000 was negotiated. Mr Gilberthorpe has not been available for comment since.
This is from 1997, I would think that this time around, Mr Gilberthorpe would get at least £100,000 from the Sunday Mirror. With that sort of money on offer, there might well be an incentive to embroider the story with a few high-profile names.
I would take his story with a large bag of salt.

And as for the claim of sending a 40 page dossier to Mrs Thatcher, who would be able to refute it?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/anatomy-of-a-sting-how-an-mp-was-trapped-1236130.html
 
No, I don't think she is. I'm not making any comments on her capabilities or that MPs are questioning Cameron's choice. Everyone is paying lip service to the victims saying they need to be listened to. Well, they have spoken via their lawyer and they are not happy with her. They don't want her. If she/the government had any integrity then she would withdraw. The arrogance in persevering despite the victims' objection is staggering.
 

alib

LE
Well they wanted a senior judge and preferably a woman. That's a very small pool of very, very well connected people. Likely none will have entirely clean hands.

Here's an idea, ask the ICC or Septics for a body to air Blightiy's very dirty linen.
 

S0I

LE
I'm sure she will perform her duties admirably and find that Westminster was cleaner than Snow Whites bum.
 
Who would be acceptable?

Is there anyone capable of conducting such an investigation who is either not part of the establishment or involved in some other capacity?

We appear to have reached a situation where no one is trusted to carry out an impartial investigation, do we now have a situation where all judges are called into question as to their impartiality.
 
According to the Telegraph this morning Dame BS has in some ways been sympathetic to paedophiles.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10964530/Baroness-Butler-Sloss-was-behind-controversial-paedophile-ruling.html

Baroness Butler-Sloss, the retired judge appointed to investigate claims of an establishment child sex abuse cover-up, was responsible for a controversial ruling which prevented warnings being issued about dangerous paedophiles.

Senior social workers attacked her decision - made when she was an Appeal Court judge - and warned that it would have “major ramifications”.

As the Government faced growing pressure to review its decision to appoint Lady Butler-Sloss to the major new inquiry, one child protection expert said the peer’s involvement in the ruling had the unintended consequence of allowing paedophiles to get away with their crimes.
More fuel for the 'not the right person' camp although it appears the Government may be softening and appoint a second judge with equal powers and responsibility. Sort of gets them out of their hole I suppose.
 
I reckon that most of the dullards currently in office didn't quite associate her name 'Butler Sloss' with that of 'Havers'. That simple really.
I'll bet that there's a passed over civil servant with a grin wider than the German football squad watching last week's harrumping around No10 as the proverbial coin dropped.
 
Who would be acceptable?

Is there anyone capable of conducting such an investigation who is either not part of the establishment or involved in some other capacity?

We appear to have reached a situation where no one is trusted to carry out an impartial investigation, do we now have a situation where all judges are called into question as to their impartiality.
No not yet, but senior judges yes.
As with politicions even if they start out decent they will be corrupted by the system if they want to get on.
 
Bloody hell that was quick..... How to make a thread title redundant in one easy move ;-)
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top