Napier is an evil,calculating, manipulative paedophile
The charges he was found guilty on today were the tip of the iceberg for the scale of abuse he carried out over 40 years
After been found guilty of abuse as early as 1972, Napier was placed on List 99 with the Department of Education and so should not have been allowed to teach again
However Peter Righton, an equally devious and prolific abuser, intervened
As Director of Education at the National Institute for Social Work, Righton had become a prestigious and respected social work professional.
( The National Institute for Social Work – NISW – was a provider of services aimed at achieving excellence in practice and management in social work and social care in the UK and past employees include Sir Peter Barclay – Author with Righton of the Barclay Report – Sir Williiam Utting – Author of the Utting Report – Daphne Statham – Director – Dame Denise Platt – Chair of the Commission for Social Care Inspection – Barbara Hearn OBE Panel member on Independent Inquiry 2014 )
Righton on headed NISW paper wrote to the Department of Education claiming he was a counsellor of convicted paedophiles ( in reality they were his close knit PIE friends ) and that he had counselled Napier to the point he was no longer a risk to children and could return to teaching.
He added in his letter to the D of Ed that to be doubly certain he ( Righton ) had sought a second opinion from a well known child psychiatrist who concurred with his expert opinion
The psychiatrist in question was Dr.Morris Fraser, another convicted paedophile and PIE member who wrote a supporting report on Great Ormond St headed note paper
This allowed Napier to embark on a new teaching career abroad employed by the British Council, founded by the UK Government in 1934
He was able ( by his own admission in a number of letters to Righton over many years ) to abuse countless number of boys in Sweden and Egypt over many years in the late 70’s through the 80’s until 1992 when the arrest of Righton and the discovery of these letters led to his ( Napier’s) immediate dismissal
Napier and Righton ” shared ” a large number of victims, and offences,including rape, during the 80’s but never faced charges on any of the most serious cases of abuse
Many questions remain unanswered including who were Napier’s referees for his employment with the British Council
Why was Righton allowed to reach the very top of the social work profession ( with posts at NISW and the National Children’s Bureau as stepping stones to positions as a Home Office/ Government “expert” on major reports ) despite being caught red handed abusing boys on a large scale in the 1950’s and writing quite openly in NISW and NCB journals, articles etc from 1971 onwards about his views that adult and child sexual relationships were not necessarily harmful
In 1993 I spoke to 3 victims who refused to give evidence
One told me very convincingly that Napier took him to parties ” where he was introduced to the rich and famous ” and that Righton was involved in all these activities as well
In court today Napier’ s Counsel stated that Napier was now full of remorse
I don’t believe he has shown one iota of remorse in an adulthood dedicated to the ruthless pursuit of vulnerable children purely to abuse sexually
As a true test of his new found “remorse ” he can now share with the Police all the names of the ” rich and famous ” who attended the parties his victims referred to
As Treasurer of the Paedophile Information Exchange in its peak period of membership in the mid 70’s Napier holds the key to the identity of hundreds of dangerous abusers who continued to abuse thousands of children over many decades
He can now pass all this information to the Police as testament to his newly found regret and remorse
 EWCA Crim J1208-8
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Friday 8th December 1995
Before: Lord Justice Russell Mr Justice Rougier and His Honour Judge Rhys Davies QC (Sitting as a Judge of the Court of Appeal)
Charles Scott Napier
MISS Z SMITH appeared on behalf of the Appellant
MR B KELLY appeared on behalf of the Crown
(Computer Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of John Larking, Chancery House, Chancery Lane, London WC2 Telephone No: 071 404 7464 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
(As Approved by the Court)
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 2
Friday 8th December 1995
MR JUSTICE ROUGIER: On 14th August 1995 at Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court, the applicant was convicted on two counts of indecent assault upon a male person, and was sentenced to 9 months’ imprisonment concurrent on each.
His application for leave to appeal against that conviction has been referred to the Full Court by the learned Single Judge.
The principal ground of proposed appeal centres around a television programme which was made on the subject of paedophiles in general, and a man called Righton in particular, sometime before the trial of the applicant. It is necessary to set out the dates in some detail. At some stage, we are not told exactly when, but it is in all probability in 1994, the police raided the house of Righton, and they discovered a whole lot of photographs of naked boys, together with letters written by the applicant, which indicated that he too shared Righton’s proclivities and therefore he came under suspicion. At about the same time a documentary was being made by the BBC on the subject of Righton and child abuse, called “Children at Risk”.
The complainant in the applicant’s case, whom we shall refer to as D, made a statement under the Criminal Justice Act implicating the applicant in March 1994. The film was shown on relatively prime time at 8.00 p.m. on 1st June 1994, but it was not until 10th January 1995 that the applicant was arrested and, as already stated, his trial took place in August.
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 3
By the first two grounds of proposed appeal the complaint is made, baldly, that in the light of that television film a fair trial was not possible, it had been gravely prejudiced, and that the learned judge was wrong in failing to stay the proceedings on the grounds that publicity had rendered a fair trial impossible, all the more so because the prosecution, in the form of the police, had assisted in the adverse publicity. That reference was to the fact that while the film was being made and researches were being done, the Hereford, Worcester and West Midlands police co-operated by passing relevant information to the maker of the film.
In relation to that the learned judge was faced with a problem of some difficulty. There undoubtedly had been a film which had identified the applicant on three occasions. This Court has had the benefit of seeing the relevant extracts. They occupy approximately 9 minutes in all, in a transmission totalling some 55 minutes and undoubtedly the applicant is portrayed as a paedophile. He is indeed referred to as somebody who had been convicted of a paedophilic offence, if there is such a word, which was quite true. There also were photographs of him in the company of young boys in Sweden and there are some extracts from letters which he had written to Righton, describing with almost gloating pederasty the physical appearance and availability of young boys either under his charge or within his influence.
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 4
The learned judge, in a very careful ruling, marshalled the pros and cons, and having referred to the relevant authorities he noted that the prosecution were not seeking, as part of their case, to adduce evidence concerning the applicant’s involvement in paedophile organisations, it having been alleged in the transmission that at some time he was the treasurer of something called the Paedophile Information Exchange. He noted, as we too have been able to note, that D did not appear on the television programme, he was not named and he made no specific allegation of indecent assault against the applicant. The learned judge correctly squared up to the problem in these words:
“The question I have to resolve is whether there is a real prospect that one or more jurors may have seen and remembered the television programme so far as it relates to the defendant and if so whether, in those circumstances, the defendant could possibly receive a fair trial.”
He noted that it was unsatisfactory that publicity adverse to the defendant was made at a time when there were reasonable grounds to believe that a prosecution was pending or contemplated but that, as my Lord has pointed out, is a disciplinary matter and had nothing to do with the problem which the learned judge had to resolve. He went on to say this:
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 5
“I have to bear in mind also that the television programme and reports took place some fourteen months ago. I have to consider the likelihood of whether they were seen or remembered by members of the jury and I also have to consider what safeguards or precautions might usefully be taken in respect of the jury.
At the end of the day I have come to the conclusion that, provided jurors confirm that they neither have any knowledge of this defendant nor any other prosecution witness and provided they are given an appropriate warning in the summing-up in accordance with the state of the evidence as it develops to the effect that they must consider only the evidence heard in Court and nothing extraneous should be taken into consideration, then in my view a fair trial of this defendant is possible and it follows that I am therefore not persuaded, as matters stand, that he cannot have a fair trialâ€¦”
He thereupon rejected the submission.
As a matter of later history, it should be said that no possible criticism could be or has been made as to the way in which the learned judge dealt with the matter in his summing-up.
It is a strongly held, which has been the subject of a good deal of research notably from the Legal Faculty of Sheffield University, that the capacity for retaining material either heard on the wireless or seen on the television, on the part of the avid viewer, is remarkably short. The jury were asked the appropriate questions and all denied any recollection or knowledge of the matters which had so worried Miss Smith, acting for the applicant. They were duly empannelled.
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 6
We think that it is very difficult to see that the learned judge could have done other than he did, and we cannot see that any possible criticism can be levelled at the decision to which he came.
There is no conceivable suspicion that he failed to take into account all the relevant matters and, in particular, possibly the most telling feature supporting his decision was the fact that the transmission had taken place no fewer than 14 months before the trial. If it is to be said that whenever, during a subject of great public concern, an investigative team of journalists of one sort or another do make public matters which certainly indicate that serious crimes have been committed, that they are thereby insulating the perpetrators of those crimes from prosecution, that is not something with which this Court can possibly agree. Accordingly we find there is no substance in those first two grounds.
The third ground is really an adjunct of the first two, because after the complainant had completed his evidence, it was noted that there had been a number of occasions when he had been referred to as being interviewed by a television producer and it is feared that that might have reminded any member of the jury who had seen the programme and had forgotten about it about the adverse publicity. By the same token, we are of the view that it is extremely unlikely that this would have had any effect, and the learned judge cannot be criticised at that stage for thinking that the trial could still be conducted fairly and that any possible prejudice could be cured by an accurate summing-up.
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 7
Finally, Miss Smith relies on part of a letter which was written by the defendant to a friend of his called Bloomfield when these matters were being investigated. There is a reference to ‘witch hunting’ in the letter and an Evening Standard article. It is complained that by reason of the fact that the learned judge allowed that letter to be exhibited, the defendant had been effectively precluded from giving evidence in his own defence because he would have to explain what the witch hunt was all about and thereby again remind the jury of the previous highly adverse television programme.
The prosecution in seeking to adduce that part of the letter submitted to the learned judge that it was capable of being an admission relating to the very crimes which were alleged in the case, and the learned judge took the view that it was entirely a matter for the jury to consider whether it did amount to some sort of admission or whether, on the other hand, they took the view that it did not, in which case they would disregard it. In our judgment, he was perfectly correct in that ruling, and since the prosecution had already announced that they did not intend to rely on any of this applicant’s paedophile associations as part of their case, the fear that he would have to explain what was meant by “witch hunt” seems to us more imaginary than real.
Transcript  EWCA Crim J1208-8 8
In those circumstances we think that the learned judge’s ruling was perfectly correct. There is no merit in this application and it must be refused.
Daily Mail, 1st June 1994
A STAFF member of the British Council has been named as a key suspect by police investigating a nationwide paedophile network.
Charles Napier was in hiding last night after being suspended from his post as assistant manager of the council’s centre in the Egyptian capital Cairo.
Scotland Yard’s Obscene Publications Squad, which believes up to 11 people are involved in the network, is also probing allegations that diplomatic bags were used to smuggle child pornography into Britain.
The Government-funded council, which promotes Britain’s cultural interests abroad, is holding its own inquiry into how Napier came to be employed despite previous convictions for child sex offences.
A spokesman said he would have been involved mainly with adult students, but could not rule out the possibility that he had worked with children at summer camps.
Napier, half-brother of Lady Thatcher’s former private secretary, Tory MP John Whittingdale, is a one-time treasurer of the Paedophile Information Exchange, which has advocated the legalisation of sex with children.
Detectives have uncovered evidence that Napier is linked with former child care expert Peter Righton, who was also a leading PIE member. Righton, exposed in the Daily Mail nearly two years ago, is alleged to have been involved in a child-sex ring which operated at the very heart of Britain’s residential care and education system.
Napier, a former public schoolboy with an English degree, was convicted more than 20 years ago of indecently assaulting pupils while teaching at a school in Surrey. Despite his record, he has three times been able to get posts giving him access to children.
The affair again throws the spotlight on the vetting of those likely to be involved with children
18th-25th January 1975: Letters regarding the Albany Trust’s links with PIE (The Times)
26th August 1975: Child-lovers win fight for role in Gay Lib (The Guardian)
26th August 1975: Legalise child sex – call (Sheffield Morning Telegraph)
28th August-15th September 1975: Guardian ‘London Letter’ column on PIE and related correspondence (The Guardian)
22nd January 1976: Who really wants a change in the age of consent? (The Times)
Spring 1976: ‘Paedophile Politics’ (Gay Left)
19th May 1977: Adults only (The Guardian)
4th February 1977: Blackmail after man applied to join paedophile organization (The Times)
24th August 1977: Mirror comment – For adults only (Daily Mirror)
27th August 1977: Conference ban puts paedophile group further into cold (The Guardian)
28th August 1977: Dutch MP backs child sex (The Guardian)
30th August 1977: Paedophile talks backed by homosexuals (The Times)
1st September 1977: Paedophile conference plans ‘age of consent’ meeting (The Guardian)
4th September 1977: Britain ‘intolerant’ on child sex (The Observer)
9th September 1977: Priest’s child sex views repudiated (The Guardian)
20th September 1977: Fury of the mothers (Daily Mirror)
24th September 1977: Gays join PIE fight (The Guardian)
16th December 1977: Row over cash for paedophiles (Daily Mirror)
16th December 1977: Grants ‘help child sex group’ (The Guardian)
20th December 1977: Guardian praised despite erring (The Guardian)
25th January 1978: Musician jailed on charges over pornography (Daily Mail)
1st April 1978: Judge slams child sex ring (Daily Express)
1st April 1978: ‘Sinister’ sex group rapped (Daily Mirror)
11th June 1978: They just don’t give a damn (News of the World)
18th June 1978: Child sex leaders raided (Sunday Express)
25th June 1978: Why a school sacked the nastiest man in Britain (News of the World)
11th July 1978: Dishonoured: the shame of a viscount’s son who turned from porn books to child sex (Daily Express)
7th November 1978: Reporter held (Daily Mail)
24th June 1979: Poisonous PIEmen are at it again (News of the World)
18th November 1979: We trapped little boy’s evil friend (News of the World)
November 1980: The Beast of Berlin (Private Eye)
21st January 1981: Child sex group ‘is a force for evil’ (Daily Mail)
25th January 1981: Police swooped over our story on the PIE men (News of the World)
27th January 1981: Paedophile book earns lecturer’s praise (The Guardian)
February 1981: The Beast of Berlin (2) (Private Eye)
1st February 1981: PIE men retrial (Daily Mirror)
1st March 1981: PIE men face sex charge (News of the World)
7th March 1981: ‘Child porn exchanged’ (The Guardian)
14th March 1981: Why the DPP resurrected an ancient law to deal with paedophiles (The Guardian)
15th March 1981: Whitelaw quiz on envoy’s links with the child sex men (News of the World)
16th March 1981: Why we did not prosecute (Daily Mail)
16th March 1981: ‘Don’t name porn envoy’ (The New Standard)
16th March 1981: Tory MP threatens to name ex-diplomat mentioned in sex trial (The Times)
17th March 1981: Child-sex diary of a diplomat (Daily Mail)
17th March 1981: MP determined to name diplomat over child pornography case (The Guardian)
17th March 1981: MP is defiant over naming diplomat (The Times)
17th March 1981: Paedophile case diplomat would have faced purge (The Times)
18th March 1981: MP names man in child sex case (Daily Mail)
18th March 1981: I will name the porn case envoy today (Daily Express)
18th March 1981: MP defies porn case plea (Daily Mirror)
18th March 1981: Shame of the ‘porn’ envoy (The New Standard)
18th March 1981: Diplomat referred to in sex trial named today (The Times)
19th March 1981: I will name more names (Daily Express)
19th March 1981: MP in porn name storm (Daily Mail)
19th March 1981: Rap for MP who named envoy (Daily Mirror)
19th March 1981: Secret shame of Mr Perfect (Daily Mirror)
19th March 1981: ‘Porn’ envoy: Havers replies (The New Standard)
19th March 1981: MP’s questions anger Hayman solicitor (The Times)
19th March 1981: Mr Steel says naming diplomat may be abuse of privilege (The Times)
20th March 1981: How Sir Peter was kept out of the PIE trial (The Guardian)
20th March 1981: Havers defends non-prosecution (The Guardian)
20th March 1981: Text of MP’s questions on envoy and replies by Ministers (The Guardian)
20th March 1981: Law chief tells of ‘an obsession with child-torture’ (The Sun)
20th March 1981: My flat’s been bugged, he says (The Sun)
20th March 1981: Sir Peter ‘not in blackmail plot’ (The Sun)
20th March 1981: Attorney General’s full answer to question on Sir Peter Hayman (The Times)
20th March 1981: Ex-diplomat was not blackmailed or pressurized, solicitor says (The Times)
20th March 1981: Sir Peter and Mr Henderson (The Times)
21st March 1981: The double life of Sir Peter Hayman (The Times)
22nd March 1981: Child sex ring goes back into business (News of the World)
22nd March 1981: Filth behind a box number (News of the World)
22nd March 1981: This dreadful web of child corruption (News of the World)
22nd March 1981: Conspiracy, morals and lynch law (The Observer)
22nd March 1981: John Junor – Current Events (Sunday Express)
22nd March 1981: How PIE gets a cut of public money (Sunday People)
22nd March 1981: Scandalous: The cover-up in high places (Sunday People)
22nd March 1981: Top people escape child porn scandal (Sunday People)
23rd March 1981: Child sex sect gets new boss (Daily Mirror)
24th March 1981: MP ‘ready for gaol’ to protect source (The Guardian)
24th March 1981: Hayman MP defiant over source (The Times)
25th March 1981: Paedophile ban call (The Guardian)
26th March 1981: The questions unanswered in the Hayman case (The Times)
29th March 1981: MP’s fury at child porn for patients (News of the World)
7th April 1981: Havers denies special treatment for Hayman (The Guardian)
7th April 1981: Why Sir Peter Hayman was not named (The Times)
9th April: Letter regarding mental health charity MIND’s links with PIE (The Times)
20th April 1981: Village split as Sir Peter returns (Sunday Express)
25th July 1981: Teacher’s sex case ‘tragedy’ (Daily Mail)
25th July 1981: Teacher convicted of sex offences ‘can still teach’ (The Guardian)
20th September 1981: Classroom corrupters (News of the World)
20th December 1981: Vice link-up of the child sex beasts (News of the World)
20th March 1982: Clifford Hindley retires (Community Care)
18th July 1982: Police killer in sex spy probe (News of the World)
21st July 1982: Computer men to probe spy ‘leak’ (Daily Mail)
21st July 1982: Thatcher’s guarded security statement (The Times)
23rd July 1982: Tom O’Carroll released after 16 months in jail (Capital Gay)
15th August 1982: Child-sex boss in Whitehall shock (News of the World)
21st August 1982: Child sex spy tells all (Daily Star)
21st August 1982: Secrets of the PIE men (Daily Star)
23rd August 1982: Ban the PIE men (Daily Star)
3rd September 1982: College principal tells how he spied on PIE (The Guardian)
24th September 1982: Letter – A lust too gross to allow (The Guardian)
12th November 1982: Prime had links with child sex group (Daily Mail)
16th November 1982: MPs continue to press for debate on Prime affair (The Guardian)
27th November 1982: Another mystery death (Daily Express)
16th December 1982: MPs foiled on Prime debate (Daily Mail)
1982/1983: Sir Michael Havers complains to the Press Council about the Sun’s Geoffrey Prime allegations (Press Council)
1983: Interview with Steven Smith and Peter Bremner (BBC)
9th January 1983: Scare over sex-club spy (News of the World)
16th January 1983: Five get a rocket over Prime spy files (News of the World)
6th February 1983: PIE men are slammed (News of the World)
27th February 1983: Evil menace to children (Sunday People)
19th June 1983: Twisted lusts of TV stars (News of the World)
22nd June 1983: Scoutmaster quits (Daily Mail)
24th June 1983: Church man in sex row (Daily Mirror)
20th August 1983: Outlaw evil child-sex peddlers (Daily Mail)
22nd August 1983: God help our little children (Daily Express)
22nd August 1983: The Sun and Sir Michael (The Sun)
22nd August 1983: The Sun has to withdraw its allegations about Geoffrey Prime (The Times)
23rd August 1983: Child sex: MP ready to expose famous names (Daily Express)
23rd August 1983: ‘Ban PIE’ call (Daily Telegraph)
23rd August 1983: Dickens’ threat to reveal names (Huddersfield Daily Examiner)
23rd August 1983: Ban child sex cult urges angry MP (The Sun)
23rd August 1983: MP seeks to ban child sex group (The Times)
24th August 1983: Child sex: Yard set to hand over names (Daily Express)
24th August 1983: Sex with children: DPP gets names (Daily Mail)
24th August 1983: No stopping men of evil (Daily Star)
24th August 1983: Why evil group won’t be banned (Daily Star)
24th August 1983: ‘Why the Yard acted on PIE’ (The Standard)
24th August 1983: Telephone caller says he knows one of the men who assaulted boy (The Times)
25th August 1983: Eight top names on my list of shame (Daily Express)
25th August 1983: Sir Peter is unscathed by scandal (Daily Express)
25th August 1983: 15 men named in child sex report (Daily Mail)
25th August 1983: Peril of a child sex club ban (Daily Mirror)
25th August 1983: Brittan wants paedophile report (Daily Telegraph)
25th August 1983: Public figures named in files on sex offenders in Britain (The Globe and Mail, Canada)
25th August 1983: Scotland Yard sends two new reports on PIE to ministers (The Guardian)
25th August 1983: Confessions of the ‘child sex’ men (The Standard)
26th August 1983: The shocking truth about PIE (Daily Express)
26th August 1983: The men who want to make sex with children legal (Daily Mail)
26th August 1983: Yard sends child sex file to DPP (Daily Mirror)
26th August 1983: Kinky child cult wins new recruits (The Sun)
26th August 1983: You scum! (The Sun)
27th August 1983: Ministry in child sex link (Daily Star)
28th August 1983: The nasty nine (News of the World)
28th August 1983: They even snare kids of four (News of the World)
28th August 1983: Child sex and a VIP (Sunday Mirror)
28th August 1983: ‘Curb child sex’ bid (Sunday Mirror)
28th August 1983: Top people shield the child sex VIPs (Sunday People)
28th August 1983: What we exposed and they ignored (Sunday People)
29th August 1983: Law boss pledges war on child sex (Daily Star)
29th August 1983: PIE has right to speak, say gays (The Guardian)
30th August 1983: Public anger after attack on 6-year-old boy – Child-sex group’s leaders step out of the shadows (The Canberra Times)
30th August 1983: MPs named in child sex smear bid (Daily Mail)
30th August 1983: Envoys in child sex quiz (Daily Star)
31st August 1983: Brittan studies child-sex report (Daily Express)
31st August 1983: Child sex report studied (Daily Telegraph)
31st August 1983: Government ‘apathy’ on PIE criticized (The Times)
1st September 1983: The men of evil (Daily Star)
2nd September 1983: Child sex fiends face new purge – but Brittan goes one step at a time (Daily Express)
2nd September 1983: A whimper from Brittan (Daily Express)
2nd September 1983: Child abuse: Brittan orders police review (Daily Mail)
2nd September 1983: PIE’s views defended (Daily Mail)
2nd September 1983: Brittan is ready to tame the perverts (Daily Star)
2nd September 1983: PIE links with rights group (Daily Star)
2nd September 1983: Brittan seeks expertise on child assault cases (The Guardian)
2nd September 1983: Minister condemns paedophile views (The Times)
3rd September 1983: MPs on ‘child sex mailing list’ (Daily Express)
4th September 1983: PIE account closed (The Observer)
5th September 1983: Child-sex purge ‘scares top men’ (Daily Express)
9th September 1983: Child sex men charged (Daily Mirror)
10th September 1983: ‘Bastards’ fury at a child sex court case (Daily Mirror)
10th September 1983: 3 charged with sex offences (The Guardian)
30th September 1983: CHE steps up support for PIE (Capital Gay)
3rd November 1983: Police guarding home of Tory MP (The Guardian)
4th November 1983: Stalls are down on PIE (Islington Gazette)
24th November 1983: MP alleges paedophilia at palace (The Times)
25th November 1983: Two year cover-up on dirty pictures (Daily Express)
25th November 1983: Palace link in child sex scandal (Daily Express)
25th November 1983: Vice ring at the palace, says MP (Daily Mail)
2nd December 1983: Sex crusade Tory MP’s office raided (Daily Mail)
9th December 1983: Home Office orders police visit (Capital Gay)
16th December 1983: PIE-probe police visit another activist (Capital Gay)
15th January 1984: Row over Palace vice ‘cover-up’ (News of the World)
19th January 1984: MP hands over shock report on child sex (Daily Mirror)
19th January: Dickens’ Dossier (Huddersfield Daily Examiner)
20th January 1984: TV chief is named in child sex probe (Daily Express)
25th March 1984: Evil secret of a Scots address (Sunday Mail)
15th June 1984: ‘Child sex link’ man sues for £20,000 (Capital Gay)
28th June 1984: Resistance at top – MP (The Guardian)
28th June 1984: Bill to curb sexual abuse of children (The Times)
24th August 1984: Two years’ jail for paedophile (The Times)
16th September 1984: Child sex trial man flees (The People)
18th September 1984: Catch the PIE man! (Daily Star)
17th October 1984: PIE man: legal move (The Guardian)
19th October 1984: Paedophile group disbands (Capital Gay)
19th October 1984: PIE extradition (The Times)
November 1984: Guilty men who back child sex (Daily Star)
7th November 1984: Master spy head ‘traps men in child sex group (Daily Express)
7th November 1984: Child sex ring’s ‘Home Office link’ (Evening Standard)
7th November 1984: Leader of child sex group misses trial (The Guardian)
8th November 1984: Home Office phone link alleged in child sex case (The Guardian)
14th November 1984: Paedophile leaders cleared of child sex offence incitement (The Guardian)
14th November 1984: Fury over verdicts on child sex trio (Daily Express)
14th November 1984: Child sex boss escapes trial (Daily Mirror)
14th November 1984: Paedophile chiefs are cleared of main charges (Daily Telegraph)
14th November 1984: Jail fear of child sex men (Evening Standard)
14th November 1984: Child-sex pair cleared as MP slams law (The Sun)
15th November 1984: All-male jury is rapped (Daily Express)
15th November 1984: Child-sex men fear jail revenge (Daily Express)
15th November 1984: Child sex men face jail fury (Daily Mirror)
15th November 1984: ‘Tough time’ ahead in jail for paedophile chiefs (Daily Telegraph)
15th November 1984: Leaders of paedophile group are sent to jail (The Times)
17th November 1984: PIE man on child porn charges (The Guardian)
19th November 1984: Child sex group ‘has folded’ (The Guardian)
25th November 1984: Dutch delay decision on Briton’s extradition (Daily Telegraph)
28th November 1984: PIE extradition ruling delayed by Dutch (The Times)
5th December 1984: Alan Rusbridger’s diary (The Guardian)
January 1985: Extradition move on child sex man dropped (Daily Telegraph)
7th July 1985: Evil PIE boss in a child care scandal (News of the World)
29th December 1987: Porn group tries to link up with child charity (The Sunday Times)
25th January 1990: Two face child porn charges (Islington Gazette)
1st August 1990: ‘Snuff’ video outrage…but nothing stops the monsters (Daily Star)
16th December 1991: Child porn man who fled is jailed seven years later (Evening Standard)
17th December 1991: Pervert jailed (Daily Mirror)
23rd April 1992: ‘Wicked’ doctor took dirty pictures of young boys (Islington Gazette)
17th September 1992: Child care expert fined over photos of naked boys (The Independent)
6th May 1993: Country house hideaway of disgraced care chief (Evening Standard)
21st February 1994: Parents call for public inquiry over sex abuse skipper (Press Association)
24th February 1994: An abuse of trust (Daily Mail)
3rd March 1994: Social work team claims to have found nationwide paedophile ring (Care Weekly)
27th May 1994: Silence that cloaked child sex conspiracy (Evening Standard)
1st June 1994: Shadow of the attic (The Guardian)
9th September 1994: Police arrest child care chief (Daily Mail)
10th November 1994: Lecturer held (The Independent)
9th March 1997: These men are the child sex abusers (The Observer)
6th July 1997: Paedophile list set up by gay rights leader (The Sunday Times)
2nd June 1998: The epidemic in our midst that went unnoticed (The Guardian)
8th October 2000: Home truths (The Independent on Sunday)
28th October 2000: The web of pure evil (Daily Mail)
9th September 2001: Inquiry into researcher’s links with paedophiles (Mail on Sunday)
10th September 2001: University investigates PhD student’s internet links with paedophiles (The Scotsman)
15th September 2002: Scandal of pervert on top legal panel (Sunday Express)
10th February 2003: Under cover in suburbia, the master spy living off the state he betrayed (Daily Mail)
17th March 2004: The police child porn expert…exposed as a paedophile (Daily Mirror)
17th March 2004: Child porn ‘expert’ jailed for abusing young girls (The Guardian)
21st December 2006: The porn vault (Daily Mirror)
17th August 2007: ‘I hate him for what he did to my girl. He’s evil’ (Leicester Mercury)
2010/2011: Annual report (Campaign for Homosexual Equality)
19th April 2013: Tom Watson’s letter to Theresa May
28th March 2014: Boys punished for telling of abuse by teacher (The Times)
A recently discovered press cutting shows that Peter Righton was questioned about indecent assaults on children by the Obscene Publications Squad in November 1994 – several months after the Hereford & Worcester investigation had been shut down, and after the BBC documentary Secret Life of a Paedophile had been broadcast. It can be assumed by the absence of any further news reports that he was never charged with an offence, despite clear evidence from his diaries including names and ages of victims, along with the name of the institution where he abused them. The November 1994 arrest took place in Eye, Suffolk – presumably at Lord Henniker’s estate, where he had been living since his 1992 arrest.
The Independent, 10th November 1994
A former lecturer on child social work is being questioned about indecent assaults on children. Scotland Yard’s Obsene Publications Squad arrested Peter Righton, 68, in Eye, Suffolk.
Peter McKelvie ( former Hereford & Worcester team manager) gives some background to the case:
“One of the many reasons I contacted Tom Watson MP in October 2012 was my anger and frustration that Peter Righton had been allowed to die with just one minor conviction for possession of indecent images of children when I knew how evil a web he had spun in full sight of leading social work agencies such as the National Children’s Bureau and the National Institute of Social Work not to mention the high regard he was obviously held in at the Department of Health
Much has been made of Savile being given the keys to Broadmoor
Righton didn’t need the keys, he could walk in to any children’s home or local authority boarding school in the UK on ” official business ”
My Director David Tombs retired in 1994 and my team was closed down and disbanded virtually immediately afterwards.”
Red Hill School was a special boarding school in Maidstone, Kent. It was where Peter Righton started his career in 1957 and where he went on to sexually abuse a number of vulnerable young boys. This was reported in the BBC Inside Story documentary, The Secret Life of a Paedophile. Peter Howarth also worked there, and was later jailed for child sex offences that took place at the Bryn Estyn home in Wrexham.
A recently discovered news report shows that a convicted child sex offender worked as a helper at Red Hill School in 1978/79. James Russell applied for the job using the false name of James Stewart, and lied about his background to disguise his criminal record. He had “three convictions for offences against young boys, and had spent most of the last eight years in jail”.
Two friends gave him references, and were both fined £200 after admitting “helping Russell by not disclosing his name and mis-stating his character”. One of the friends was Nicholas Douglass of Muntham House School.
Muntham House was a special boarding school 50 miles away from Maidstone in Horsham, West Sussex. In 1998, Nicholas Douglass was jailed for 16 years for his part in a paedophile ring that abused young boys at Muntham House in the late 1970s. (The Argus 25.08.98)
News of the World, 1st July 1979
The Sunday Times, 25th August 1996
By Stephen Grey
SCOTLAND YARD detectives are investigating allegations of a paedophile network involving teachers from some of Britain’s top public schools.
The paedophile and child pornography unit is inquiring into a ring of private school staff who allegedly exchange information, boast of abusing youngsters and travel abroad together on “sex tours”. At least six teachers have been questioned and their homes raided as inquiries continue into the ring that has links to some of the most notorious paedophiles in Britain.
The paedophile unit has been assisted by detectives from forces around the country as well as social workers.
The inquiry began after a former teacher at Abberley Hall preparatory school in Herefordshire allegedly confessed to a colleague to being part of a huge network of paedophiles. Abberley Hall, which charges Pounds 2,500 a term for boarders, confirmed last week that both teachers were no longer on staff.
The former teacher claimed that he had had sex with “hundreds and hundreds” of boys and named teachers at six other leading establishments. There was no suggestion that any abuse took place at the schools.
Trips for the teachers to indulge in child abuse with “rent boys” have allegedly been organised to countries including the Philippines, Czech Republic, Romania, Albania, Thailand and even Bosnia.
“These people decided a few years ago it was no longer safe to talk openly of abusing kids in this country, but decided they were perfectly safe abroad. At home they content themselves with sick pictures of child abuse,” said one source.
Although full details cannot be revealed for legal reasons, the investigation has involved a series of police raids, including one at the home of a head of department at a prominent London public school, where pornography was removed.
Another raid took place at Hurstpierpoint College in Sussex. Last week Stephen Meek, headmaster of the Pounds 3,500-a-term school, confirmed that two staff had been dismissed after a police caution for the possession of indecent material. “It was nothing to do with pupils at the school,” he said.
Other teachers also named include three masters at another leading public school, two masters at two famous preparatory schools in the home counties, and a choir school teacher.
The teachers were said to exchange paedophile videos. When they feared police raids, they allegedly worked together to conceal material.
“Many of these teachers will be secure in the knowledge that they will never be prosecuted,” said one police source.
Also named as allegedly linked to the network are Peter Righton, the former childcare expert exposed as a paedophile, and Charles Napier, a former treasurer of the Paedophile Information Exchange and a former staff member of the British Council in Cairo who was jailed last year for sex assaults on youngsters in London.
In 1993, Hereford & Worcester social services department produced a report about paedophile ‘child care expert’ Peter Righton and his connections with other child sex abusers who were working in schools and children’s homes across the UK.
The report (dated 13.05.93) was sent to Virginia Bottomley’s Department of Health via Sir William Utting. It clearly stated that the abuse networks were still active and that children in care were at risk, yet the Department of Health – who have overall responsibility for children in care – did nothing to stop the abuse from continuing.
The report stated:
“The infiltration of the social work profession by paedophiles appears to be an extensive and serious problem. It has become apparent that there may be a co-ordinated network of professionals at every level who are involved in the abuse of childen.”
“Amongst the men who have been identified from information in Righton’s home as paedophiles or likely paedophiles are a Bishop, current social services and education staff, and civil servants. A number of these individuals have criminal records for the sexual abuse of young boys, and, in the case of teachers, are on the D.E.S.’s List 99
“It is also clear that Righton has used his professional roles and/or contacts to meet and subsequently abuse a significant number of children either in care or known to Social Services Departments in various parts of the country.”
The report went on to give recommendations of how the Department of Health should deal with the problem, including a national investigation by a small team of experienced social workers and police. It was recommended that the investigation should be jointly funded by the Department of Health and the Home Office.
Until now I thought there was actual no evidence to prove that the Department of Health had received the report. But a Daily Mail article from February 1994 written by Peter Rose clearly states that the Department of Health did receive the report.
“A child sex ring has been operating at the very heart of the system set up to protect youngsters in care, claims a secret report.
The paedophile network included two bishops, child care experts and academics, according to the document compiled after a joint inquiry by social workers and police.
The Government was last night facing demands for a full public inquiry in to the claims, which were made as a result of an investigation into disgraced former child care consultant Peter Righton.
The report calls for a national unit to be set up to investigate allegations against care staff, which are usually dealt with in isolation by local authorities. The Department of Health confirmed that the matter was raised with them last year and earlier this week claimed that they had passed the information on to the Home Office. But yesterday a spokesman admitted: ‘The letter was not passed on as originally thought because it was felt that a unit already exists, namely the Obscene Publications Squad, albeit that they cover the Met.
‘We are not prepared to release the letter because it raises sensitive issues particularly about striking a balance between protecting children and civil liberties’ “
It appears that the report was suppressed by Virginia Bottomley’s Department of Health, who refused to even pass on the information on to the Home Office. The police investigation in to Peter Righton was shut down shortly afterwards.
Hopefully the current Operation Fernbridge/Fairbank investigation will finally reveal who gave the orders that led to the protection of well-connected paedophiles and the continuing abuse of vulnerable children.
Daily Mail, 24th February 1994
Hereford & Worcester Social Services Department report, 13th May 1993