Letter to The Guardian warning of powerful paedophile networks

This letter to the Guardian from June 1996 was in response to Jon Snow’s excellent article ‘True scandal of the child abusers’. A social care consultant warns that “paedophiles are able to walk away from justice because of their power and influence” and asks “Why is the press unwilling to tell what it knows about successful people in politics and business?

And why are the Guardian still unwilling to cover the Peter Righton investigation into “a powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and No. 10”, despite being in possession of all the evidence that was passed to the police?

G12696

Advertisements
10 comments
  1. i have posted publications connected to Peter Righton ..the ones related to his time with social work the titles of which are deeply ironic now…

  2. coming on the back of the story of the guy who infiltrated P.I.E. it was said that one member of P.I.E worked at the home office..now that is very odd as I came across a P.I.E report on criminal law with regard to children which was prepared for Home Office committee…

    • chess said:

      That H O security guard was the chairman of PIE, I believe. He used H O headed notepaper and their phone number to organise his meetings. (I can imagine the higher ups faces when they learned that, I am SO tempted to write more here but will hold myself back!)
      He used 2 or 3 names, Stephen Smith, Stephen Adrian Smith. There’s loads on line about him.

      http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2013/01/the-life-of-paedophile-information-exchange-pie-2448186.html

      Interesting also to see the wikipedia entry about Nat Council for Civil Liberty’s affiliation with PIE. I hadn’t read before that they (NCCL) wanted to decriminalise incest.

      The entry refers also to NCCL’s 1976 submission to the Criminal Law Revision Committee.

      ‘Affiliation to the NCCL

      By 1978 PIE and Paedophile Action for Liberation had become affiliated to the National Council for Civil Liberties, now known as Liberty, with members attending meetings. The organisation campaigned against newspapers’ treatment of the Paedophile activist groups. Whilst affiliated with NCCL, PIE also campaigned to reduce the age of consent and oppose the proposed banning of child pornography. In 1976, in a submission to the Criminal Law Revision Committee, the NCCL asserted that “childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage” and that the Protection of Children Bill would lead to “damaging and absurd prosecutions”. Whilst PIE was affiliated with it, the organisation argued for incest to be decriminalised and argued that sexually explicit photographs of children should be legal unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered harm or that the an inference to that effect or to the effect that harm might have been caused could reasonably be drawn from the images themselves, with Harriet Harman (later deputy leader of the Labour Party) arguing that it would “increase censorship”.[3] NCCL had excluded PIE by 1983.[4]’

      • @chess thanks for that, there were two versions of the PIE document..one internal the other for the HO…I posted about smith stuff i found in PAN ..the newspaers persued him and he went to Holland where he tried to defend himself..in that copy of PAN it was alleged that the newspaper tried to pin the story of the killing of six year old Thea Puymbroeck on him, she was actually killed by her parents, however spartacus didnt do themselves any favours when they reported this crime. they put it down the child having ”horrible sex”

      • chess said:

        Thanks Bob, that’s something else that’s new to me about 2 PIEversions!

      • @CHESS both PIE docs had same name except the other one had the Home Office criminal law committee added

        going onto to what you said about Steven Smith , it seems his bosses at Home Office knew he was a PIE member.
        This is from P.A.N No 13 October 1982

        “LONDON, ENGLAND The gutter dreadfuls
        were after PIE again this summer.
        First, in mid-August, The News of the
        World discovered that PIE Executive
        Committee member Steven Smith was
        employed by a firm under contract to the
        Home Office and actually worked in the
        basement of a Home Office building on
        its computerized heating and lighting
        system (and that his bosses knew about
        Steven Smith’s connection with PIE). The
        News of the World then demanded that
        Steven Smith’s employers fire him,
        which they immediately did.

        A week later the Daily Star began a
        new “Monsters who prey on our
        children” series. Under the headline
        SECRETS OF THE PIE MEN, it printed
        photos of David Joy (“Neighbours speak
        of ‘evil’ man upstairs”), Steven Smith
        (“Wierdo in a ‘horror’ mansion”) and
        Peter Bremner (“The face at the window”).
        As always, addresses of the men
        they attacked were printed, with the
        result that rocks were thrown through
        Steven Smith’s windows and local ruffians
        beat up one of his visitors.

        Some 15 months ago the Daily Star
        decided to “infiltrate” PIE and induced a
        certain Charles Oxley into becoming an
        undercover agent. Oxley joined PIE but
        his “revelations” of PIE activities, as
        printed by the Star, were pretty tame,
        actually; Oxley’s photo appears along
        with his story. Oxley is principal of two
        independent schools, the 400-pupil
        Tower College at Rainhill, Merseyside
        and the 700-pupil Scarsibrick Hall,

        Southport, Lancashire. His “cooperation”
        with the Star raises many questions.
        It seems odd that a totally straight
        provincial headmaster, no matter how
        strongly he might feel that paedophilia
        was bad, would cooperate spontaneously
        with one of London’s seamiest yellow
        journals, attend meeting after meeting of
        PIE people, attempt to make social contacts
        with the kind of men he was supposed
        to despise. Is he a naive off on a
        James Bond ego trip? Is he a guilt-ridden
        boy-lover satisfying both his prurience
        and his need to punish? Is he a
        paedophile who got caught in the act and
        was blackmailed by the authorities, the
        newspaper, his fellow teachers? If someone
        out there knows the true story we
        would like to hear about it — and so, we
        are sure, would PIE.”

  3. chess said:

    I tweeted earlier, having copied this paragraph from an article by Nick Davies in 1998.

    ‘Beyond the inherent difficulty of detecting and preventing this most secret crime, beyond the obstacle course of concealment erected by the collusion of clever paedophiles, the child victims of sexual abuse are betrayed by organisations who repeatedly prefer to avoid embarrassment by concealing awkward allegations and by a system of protection which simply does not work.’

    http://www.nickdavies.net/1998/04/01/the-sheer-scale-of-child-sexual-abuse-in-britain/

    I suspect the same would nave been reported had the article been written in 1958.

    Certainly he could use the same words in 2013.

  4. @CHESS , Here are the two PIE documents I mentioned to you.

    Evidence on the law relating to and penalties for certain sexual offences involving children: For the Home Office
    Criminal Law Revision Committee
    London PIE 1975

    The other document had same name but without ‘for the home office criminal law revision committee’ added.

  5. steven smith, joy, PIE docs to Home Office , and ‘chess’ replies. Steven Smith worked as heating engineer at Home Office, he used their letterheaded paper to arrange meetings, his bosses knew he was a PIE member, they sacked him much later when NOTW exposed him. In 1975 PIE produced two docs with similar name..except one was meant for Home Office Criminal Law Revision Committee it was called ‘evidence on the law relating to and penalties for certain sexual offences involving children” So a PIE member known by his bosses at Home Office as a member, of which that same organisation produces a document meant for Home Office which is about criminal law offences involving children…think that lot through..
    .

%d bloggers like this: