DICKENS DOSSIER #1, 20th August 1983 (approx)
“Geoffrey Dickens revealed that eight public figures were on his list of shame – and that one of them had been a personal friend. But Mr Dickens said he still planned to name the eight in the Commons unless the Home Secretary took action.
He said: “I’ve got eight names of big people, really important names, public figures. And I am going to expose them in Parliament. I have not enjoyed this crusade. It’s been horrible many times. One of those people among those eight has been a friend of mine.”
Mr Dickens’s own list of eight public figures involved in the sex scandal was handed to the Director earlier this week…together with the warning that he would name them in Parliament if necessary.
Two years ago, Mr Dickens defied leading figures in the Tory party by publicly exposing former diplomat and NATO adviser Sir Peter Hayman.
Hayman had not been named in a court case involving members of the Paedophile Information Exchange, but Mr Dickens decided it would be wrong to let him get away with it. It was case of ‘speak out or be damned’ and he spoke out.
Hayman resigned. Dickens, who initially came under attack from many of his colleagues in the Commons, received 8,000 letters from people who had tales to tell of others like Hayman.
Mr Dickens, 52, told as he relaxed wth a cup of tea how his wife, Norma, helped him sort out the letters.
He said: “We ruled out anyone who only had one or two accusations against him. The others we sifted until we were down to a couple of dozen on whom there appeared to be considerable evidence that they were unhealthy perverts. The security aspect concerned me greatly because of the names of several of the people who turned up in the files. I realised we were involved in a crusade – a crusade that has to be carried through to a proper conclusion”.
He used House of Commons researchers and enlisted local reporters, librarians and friends to help go through records, check files, even empty dustbins of some of the suspects. In the end there were just those eight men on the list of shame. Discussions with Scotland Yard followed.
“I suspect that their list is much bigger and I hope that this time there will be not attempt to head off charges as happened in the Sir Peter Hayman case.”
He urged: “The Home Secretary must act. The will of the country demands that action should be taken and penalties made more severe so that perverts who involve children in their practices should be jailed.””
Source: Daily Express, 25th August 1983
DICKENS DOSSIER #2, 23rd November 1983
“Mr Leon Brittan, the Home Secretary, was asked yesterday to investigate an MP’s file of cases involving paedophilia in Buckingham Palace and the diplomatic and civil services.”
“A homosexual link between Buckingham Palace and the sex with children group PIE was claimed yesterday in a massive dossier of evidence by Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens.”
DICKENS DOSSIER #3, 18th January 1984
Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens yesterday handed the Home Secretary a “sensational” 50-page dossier on the activities of the Paedophile Information Exchange. The file includes allegations of child abuse and sex assaults at a children’s home. Mr Dickens said last night that he had also named a top television executive.
SCOTLAND YARD FILE #1, 23rd August 1983 (approx, delivered to Leon Brittan the same week as Dickens Dossier #1 was delivered to DPP)
Two separate reports on the Paedophile Information Exchange…have been prepared for ministers after Scotland Yard’s third investigation into the organisation. The first report, prepared by the Yard and sent to Mr Leon Brittan, will be used by the Home Secretary when he returns from holiday next week and has to decide whether the organisation needs to be banned.
SCOTLAND YARD FILE #2, 25th August 1983 (delivered to DPP same week as Dickens Dossier #1)
The Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Thomas Hetherington, – today takes delivery of a file on paedophilia – the distasteful fruit of two years’ work by Scotland Yard’s Obscene Publications Squad. The squad’s thick file, containing the names of the famous, the wealthy, and hundreds of anonymous citizens, was sent from the Yard yesterday.
“Because it has technically left our hands, we can say nothing about the file’s contents as the matter is effectively sub judice”, a Scotland Yard spokesman said last night. “It is now up to the Director to decide what action should be taken. It is purely coincidental that the report has been concluded at the time investigations are under way.”