This document below was written by the retired child protection expert who was the source of Tom Watson’s October 2012 PMQ about “a powerful political paedophile ring”.

It was written during the 1993 investigation into Peter Righton, a child care expert who was part of a network of paedophiles that had infiltrated children’s homes and schools across the UK. Sir William Utting, acting on behalf of the Department of Health, requested a report on the Righton case from the Director of Hereford & Worcester Social Services Department.

The report should have found its way to the Secretary of State for Health, Virginia Bottomley.

The document reproduced here: ‘A Personal Viewpoint’, gives recommendations for what should have happened to expose the national paedophile network that Righton was part of.

Instead, the investigation was shut down, Righton died a free man, and most of his fellow abusers were never exposed and brought to justice.

The Peter Righton Report

By murunbuch

November 29, 2013

Peter Righton

2 Comments

This report was requested by William Utting for the Department of Health during the 1993 investigation into the paedophile Peter Righton by the police and the Hereford & Worcester Social Services Department.

Virginia Bottomley was the Secretary of State for Health at the time and should have been aware of the report. It should have resulted into a national police investigation of Righton’s network that had infiltrated children’s homes and schools across the UK, but instead the investigation into Righton was stopped and he died a free man.

Did the British Government fund pro-paedophile propaganda?

By murunbuch

November 28, 2013

PIE (Paedophile Information Exchange)

14 Comments

Tom Watson recently revealed that the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), a group that wanted the age of consent lowered to 4 years old, were directly funded by the Home Office. (The Mirror 21/11/13)

PIE published propaganda material seeking to ‘normalise’ sex with children, and placed it in locations including public libraries and the Citizens Advice Bureau. (Daily Express 03/09/83)

The booklet shown below, ‘Paedophilia: Some Questions and Answers’ was published by PIE in 1978 and may have been paid for by the British Government. It peddles a huge number of lies about child sexual abuse starting on the very first page…“paedophiles are often a force for social good”.

Why would any government fund a sick publication like this?

And why haven’t any other British newspapers picked up on the huge story that the British Government directly funded the Paedophile Information Exchange?

The third Geoffrey Dickens dossier: List of ‘eight big names’ given to DPP

By murunbuch

November 27, 2013

Geoffrey Dickens, PIE (Paedophile Information Exchange), Westminster

8 Comments

It now appears that the Home Office have ‘lost’ the two child abuse dossiers that were given to former Home Secretary by the late Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens. New information also shows that the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), a group who wanted the age of consent lowered to four years old, were directly funded by the Home Office. (Daily Mirror 21.11.13)

The two dossiers were handed to Leon Brittan in November 1983 and January 1984, but a newly discovered press cutting (see below) shows that Geoffrey Dickens personally delivered a separate file to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Thomas Hetherington, in August 1983. The file contained details of eight prominent public figures who were paedophiles that Dickens had separated out from the later dossiers. The list was based on information supplied by the public in the wake of the Sir Peter Hayman scandal. Dickens ruled out any names that were only mentioned once or twice, and double checked information using a team of researchers.

“I’ve got eight names of big people, really important names, public figures. And I am going to expose them in Parliament.”

It could be that one of the eight names who Dickens said “has been a friend of mine” was Cyril Smith, as Dickens’ Huddersfield West constituency bordered Smith’s Rochdale constituency.

But if so, who were the other seven? My guess is that they were all politicians, which explains why the file was handed to the DPP, as opposed to the Home Secretary who received the other two dossiers. Or was there another reason why the file wasn’t given to Leon Brittan?

It made no difference in the end as it appears the file was never investigated. Dickens threatened to name the eight paedophiles in Parliament if no action was taken, but for some reason this never happened. In 1981, Dickens referred to the Establishment’s protection of paedophile diplomat and PIE member Sir Peter Hayman as “the cover-up of the century”. His comment may have been an exaggeration based on that case alone, but is sounding increasingly accurate as a description of the Establishment’s ongoing protection of powerful paedophiles.

As well as the Dickens file, the DPP was given several large files of evidence on PIE members by Scotland Yard between 1978 and 1983 but this resulted in a pitifully low number of arrests, and the leader of PIE was allowed to abscond to Holland. The DPP’s failure to act on this evidence is even more inexcusable when you consider the public outcry around the sickening ‘Brighton Beasts‘ case which was front page news throughout August 1983. This case also put pressure on Leon Brittan to ban the Paedophile Information Exchange, but he refused to do anything. Hopefully the reasons for this will become clear in time.

Daily Express, 25th August 1983 (click on image to enlarge)

Palace link in child sex scandal (25.11.83)