The Lord Chief Justice compared images of child abuse with ‘collecting cigarette cards’

Oliver Brooke was the Head of Paediatric Medicine at St. George’s Hospital, Tooting. He was jailed for a collection of thousands of images of child abuse which he kept in a cupboard in his office at the hospital. He admitted offences involving the procurement, collection and distribution of indecent images of children mostly aged 12-14, some posing with adults, and some as young as eight.”

Duplicates of the photographs were passed on to ‘three or four’ other paedophiles. Brooke was spending £800 a year on indecent images. He was directly responsible for the sexual abuse of children, and made notes such as “Very nice, but not quite enough crotch” so his contacts could produce ‘better’ photographs for him.

Brooke appealed his conviction, and the appeal was heard by Lord Lane, the Lord Chief Justice, who was the second highest judge in Britain, second only to the Lord Chancellor.

Lord Lane cut Brooke’s sentence to six months, which meant he was immediately freed from jail, having already served a few months of his sentence. Lord Lane said:

It is not inappropriate, perhaps, in view of the puerility of this type of behaviour, to compare it rather to a schoolboy collecting cigarette cards in olden times, because the duplicates were handed on to other adults, three of four of them only, who were likewise minded to indulge in this sort of puerility. To that extent the distribution was by no means of the most vicious sort.

It is perfectly plain from those, (the testimonials read out about Brooke) that we are dealing here with someone who, apart from these offences, was an unusually fine man.’

The sentencing took into account

It appears that no effort was made to track down the other members of Brooke’s paedophile ring, and no effort was made to trace the children who Brooke had commissioned to be sexually abused. Lord Lane was more concerned about the ‘humiliation’ Brooke had suffered through having his sick ‘hobby’ exposed.

UPDATE: Oliver Brooke and Lord Lane: The full story

Daily Express, 29th June 1987

Exp29687aExp29687b

34 comments
  1. As part of our 1987 Cook Report on child pornography we investigated the Oliver Brooke case. What was most disturbing (aside from the child pornography he had collected) was that the hospital refused to release Brooke’s diary to the police. Officers from what was then the Obscene Publications Squad were convinced the diary would contain vital details of Brooke’s contacts.

    • 33hertz said:

      Brooke would become very irate when we wouldn’t allow him to take our very young twin daughters into another room alone……….every time we took them to St.Georges. No doubt we are in that diary, noted for our obstinacy. Thanks for your information.

      • murunbuch said:

        It seems possible that Brooke was using his job as a paediatrician to produce images of child abuse – this may explain the hospital’s refusal to release his diary.

    • murunbuch said:

      Thanks for this – very interesting. Can you remember whether the Obscene Publications Squad found that any of the images were produced on hospital property? See comment below from 33hertz about Brooke wanting to examine children without their parents present.

  2. chess said:

    Bloody stomach turning corruption.

  3. 33hertz said:

    Great post!

  4. Would this be the right time to say ‘freemason’? ..BTW was the info I provided with regard about.that guy who had a court case about him and got up a petition and you thinking it was dropped and instead his case fell apart because of a tape where he bragged he had molested a 14
    yr old boy…

  5. Principle5000 said:

    An Evil Disgrace

  6. Fuller details of the Brooke case – including the police evidence that he was not just collecting child pornography but distributing it internationally, was supplying other UK paedophiles AND had commissioned a photographer to take indecent photos of children – are outlined on Pages 257 – 261 of my book, Child Pornography – An Investigation.

    Murun – since you’ve been able to post other excerpts from the book, would you want to do likewise with those pages ?

    TIM TATE

    • murunbuch said:

      Thanks for pointing that out Tim, I’ll post the extract tomorrow

  7. Apologies if it seemed a little self-regarding to suggest it. But the sheer magnitude of what Brooke was doing is hard to overstate.

    TIM TATE

    • murunbuch said:

      No, not at all, thanks for the tip. I’m a bit annoyed with myself for missing it and not adding it to the original post. I knew I’d seen something else about the Brooke case but couldn’t remember where I’d read it.

      • I apologise for remaining anonymous for the time being .I am the source of Tom Watson's PMQ on 24th Oct said:

        This is yet another staggering example of how entrenched the protection of eminent people in this country has been
        Tim – tomorrow morning your account of the full extent of Brooke’s activities should be headline news as the Dirt Book entries should be a national scandal
        We know it won’t be
        This must change

    • 33hertz said:

      I, for one, would be very interested in seeing the excerpts from your book Tim.

  8. @Murun I hope you dont mind me posting this here but after watching most
    Of this lenghty series i felt so moved I felt
    I had to mention it.

    To everyone . I would urge anyone who feels strongly about CSA to watch this remarkable and revealing 3 parter

    The Hunt for Britains Paedophiles

    Part two is perhaps the most difficult

    The courage and bravery and pain

    of these victims is very moving.
    Below is link to part one.

    http://m.youtube.com/?reload=3&rdm=mn40vj26e#/watch?v=Vq8zqDPmQxE

  9. Very odd stance taken by Lord Lane don’t you think? Wonder what was hidden in his closet.

    • murunbuch said:

      Yes, a deeply sinister ruling, especially when you hear the extent to which Brooke was involved with paedophile networks. See extract from Tim Tate’s book which I’ve just posted.

    • chess said:

      Exactly what I’m thinking…..

  10. bonny said:

    jail the judge it looks like they are all part of the same perverted gang this is discrasfull shame on this perverted professor to me it looks like the judge is complisiete in the act of child porn

  11. tom watson's source said:

    The more you look in to the sewer the deeper it gets.
    We can add the Lord Chief Justice to the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions ( as in the cases of Sir Peter Hayman,Cyril Smith etc ) to the list of our most senior judicial figures who are party to Establishment cover-ups at worst and the making of appalling decisions totally out of sinct with public opinion at best.
    Members of the judiciary who make comments such as possessing and distributing indecent images of children is like collecting cigarette cards, raping a 7 year old is something that could happen to anyone of us, to stop someone teaching because he has sexually abused children would be a serious loss to the teaching profession should not only be immediately removed from the Bar but should have their own backgrounds looked in to. The path for a victim to get justice is so difficult even before they come face to face with judges holding theses views

    It never ceases to amaze me how far the Establishment will go to protect itself, even brazenly right in the glare of the public spotlight
    Where are the investigations and Inquiries in to the role of politicians etc in the cover ups over child sexual abuse

    Immediately after the Newsnight debacle John Whittingdale was so fast out of the traps to demand the head of the BBC’s Director General that he was in danger of tripping over all the mikes that were in front of him when he decided to be interviewed by every media oulet he could possibly get hold of. David Cameron immediately followed this up when the Savile story broke by stating that “every institution” must look at themselves and fully investigate why no-one reported/exposed such staggering levels of abuse. EVERY institution includes Parliament, Government, Attorney General, DPP.

    John Whittingdale and David Cameron are remarkably silent on this now.

    I would like to suggest where they could start and there are numerous historic situations which are not subject to current Police investigations and therefore there is no conflict of interests

    The BBC and the NHS will no doubt be severely censured over Savile further down the line.

    At least these institutions did not have a formal policy to protect paedophiles

    I would suggest that Parliament and indeed Government did

    How else are we to interpret Chief Whip, Tim Fortescue’s statement on national TV ( ref. Michael Cockerell’s BBC Documentary ) that rather than refer to the Police when an MP is caught sexually abusing a child it is just kept as a matter of record in the Dirt Book to be used as a vehicle of control in the voting lobby at a later date !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    How else do we interpret Edwina Currie’s statement, in her attempt to sell as many copies of a book as she could, that everyone at the top of the Thatcher Government knew Peter Morrison was a “PEDEREST” – his reward promotion to be Deputy Chairman of the Tory Party, a Minister, Thatcher’s PPS and in charge of her 1990 election campaign

    How else do we interpret Gyles Brandeth’s statements that everone in his constituency knew that Peter Morrison was a ” filthy pervert”

    How else do we interpret the cover ups at the highest level manifested in statements from puppet Attorney Generals and DPP’s re. Peter Hayman, Cyril Smith, MP’s allegedly caught up in various Police/US Customs sting operations etc etc

    How else do we interpret the treatment of Geoffrey Dickens at the hands of Parliament at the time and the convenient loss of his ” Dossier” since.

    When and in what form will David Cameron be true to his word and order an investigation in to the role of Government, Parliament, the main political parties, the security services in at best a failure to expose child abuse from within their ranks and at worst a highly sophisticated cover up over the generations

    We will not accept silence on this any longer

%d bloggers like this: