Child Sexual Abuse · Government · Greville Janner · Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse · Institutional Abuse · Investigations · Uncategorized

INDEPENDENT INQUIRY INTO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: ALLEGATIONS LINKED TO WESTMINSTER

INDEPENDENT INQUIRY INTO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

ALLEGATIONS OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE LINKED TO WESTMINSTER

Following the Preliminary Hearing on 31st January 2018, I am providing a brief overview of those who have been given core participant status in this Westminster strand element of the inquiry, as well as those who were refused.  You can find further details here.


WESTMINSTER STRAND: CORE PARTICIPANTS

Core participants, name of legal/representation and reason for application:

  • Crown Prosecution Service(CPS): Alastair Tidball: CPS has played a direct and significant role in relation to matters under investigation and/or has a significant interest in an important aspect of the matters under investigation and/or any other reason. The application is put on the basis that as part of the Westminster investigation, the Inquiry will investigate the responses of a wide range of institutions, including the CPS, and will also consider whether prosecuting authorities were aware of the involvement of people of public prominence associated with Westminster in the sexual abuse of children, and failed to take adequate steps to prevent any such abuse from occurring and/or took steps to prevent such abuse from being revealed.
  • Esther Baker: Ms Baker alleges that she was sexually assaulted by persons of public prominence associated with Westminster and that there were institutional failings in connection with that alleged abuse by police and law enforcement services. Ms Baker also alleges related failings by public officers and bodies.
  • Home Office: Sarah Townsend: The application is put on the basis that Whitehall has given consideration as to how best government departments might assist the Inquiry in the Westminster investigation and that if core participant status is granted, the Home Office will assume the role of the lead government department in coordinating the provision of material to the Inquiry.
  • IPCC (now IOPC): Rachel Taylor: The IPCC is currently managing a significant number of investigations into concerns that Police officers failed to adequately investigate allegations of child sexual abuse in relation to a number of people of public prominence associated with Westminster. The  Westminster investigation will investigate allegations that Ministers, party whips, political parties, the intelligence and/or security services, law enforcement agencies, and/or prosecuting authorities were aware of the involvement of people of public prominence associated with Westminster in the sexual abuse of children, and failed to take adequate steps to prevent any such abuse from occurring and/or took steps to prevent such abuse from being revealed.
  • Labour Party: Gerald Shamash: As the Labour Party is one of the main political parties at Westminster and has formed governments and the official opposition throughout the period likely to be under examination in this investigation.
  • Metropolitan Police Service: Sabrina Castiglione: The Commissioner, in her role as Chief Officer of Police of the Metropolis has a significant interest in the matters which the Inquiry will consider. The investigation will consider whether law enforcement agencies, and/or prosecuting authorities were aware of the involvement of people of public prominence associated with Westminster in the sexual abuse of children, and failed to take adequate steps to prevent any such abuse from occurring and/or took steps to prevent such abuse from being revealed. It is also stated that the Commissioner will have a direct and significant interest in ensuring that any recommendations which the Inquiry may make can be implemented, and also that the basis that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) may be subject to criticism in its handling of investigations into allegations of child sexual abuse.
  • RO-A1: Alleges that he was sexually assaulted by Cyril Smith in the early 1960s whilst he was a resident at Cambridge House.  He states that Smith pressured him to change the statement that he had made to police.  Possible failure of ‘Westminster’ institutions in connection with allegations made against Cyril Smith was raised by RO-A1 and others at the Rochdale hearings; those matters were outside the scope of the Rochdale investigation, but they are of relevance to the Westminster investigation.
  • RO-A2: As above.
  • RO-A4: Alleges that he was sexually assaulted by Cyril Smith in the early 1960s whilst he was a resident at Cambridge House.  He states that Smith pressured him to change the statement that he had made to police and allegation that the Government had served a D-notice to prevent publications of allegations concerning Cyril Smith.  Possible failure of ‘Westminster’ institutions in connection with allegations made against Cyril Smith was raised by RO-A4 and others at the Rochdale hearings; those matters were outside the scope of the Rochdale investigation, but they are of relevance to the Westminster investigation.
  • RO-A5: Alleges that he was sexually assaulted by Cyril Smith in the late 1980s whilst he was a resident at Knowl View.  Possible failure of ‘Westminster’ institutions in connection with allegations made against Cyril Smith was raised by RO-A5 and others at the Rochdale hearings; those matters were outside the scope of the Rochdale investigation, but they are of relevance to the Westminster investigation.
  • RO-A6: Alleges that he was sexually assaulted by Cyril Smith in the 1960s whilst he was a resident at Knowl View.  Possible failure of ‘Westminster’ institutions in connection with allegations made against Cyril Smith was raised by RO-A6 and others at the Rochdale hearings; those matters were outside the scope of the Rochdale investigation, but they are of relevance to the Westminster investigation.
  • RO-A7: Alleges that he was sexually assaulted by Cyril Smith in the early 1970s whilst he was a resident at Knowl View.  Possible failure of ‘Westminster’ institutions in connection with allegations made against Cyril Smith was raised by RO-A7 and others at the Rochdale hearings; those matters were outside the scope of the Rochdale investigation, but they are of relevance to the Westminster investigation.
  • RO-A8: Alleges that he was sexually assaulted by Cyril Smith after he became a resident at Knowl View in 1969.  Possible failure of ‘Westminster’ institutions in connection with allegations made against Cyril Smith was raised by RO-A8 and others at the Rochdale hearings; those matters were outside the scope of the Rochdale investigation, but they are of relevance to the Westminster investigation.
  • TIM HULBURT:  Played a significant part in revealing information relating to the possible funding of the Paedophile Information Exchange in the late 1970s by the Voluntary Services Unit based at the Home Office, where he was a consultant.
  • WILTSHIRE POLICE: May have a significant interest in an important aspect of the matters to which the Inquiry relates and that they may be subject to explicit or significant criticism during the Inquiry proceedings or in the report, or in any interim report. The Inquiry may wish to conduct a review of Operation Conifer (Edward Heath) as part of the Westminster investigation.

THOSE DENIED CP STATUS:

  • David Chalmers: Mr Chalmers states that he was formerly a high level Special Branch asset and a central component of a major phone trace and tap operation which was set up to counter a “black psychological operation” targeting the author of some contentious inquiries into child sexual abuse during the 1980s and 1990s.  Mr Chalmers believes this operation was being driven by high-level elements within the state apparatus. Mr Chalmers states that he acted with the authority of former Prime Minister John Major. Mr Chalmers states that the author’s identity was leaked and that the operation became subject to a D-notice. Mr Chalmers states that he can provide full details to the Inquiry.  I have concluded that, by reason of the information that he has provided and the allegations he has made, Mr Chalmers is best placed to assist the Inquiry as a
    witness rather than as a Core Participant.
  • Jonathan Brackenbury: The application is put on the basis that he alleges child sexual abuse as a military recruit serving in HM Forces over a period of eight years. He says that he has been pursuing the Ministry of Defence for an acknowledgment and that he has accumulated a large volume of correspondence associated with this. He also says that he has previously provided information to Operation Midland.  He subsequently wrote to the Inquiry on 14 January 2018 indicating that he wished to withdraw his application for designation in this investigation. He confirmed his willingness to be called as a witness regarding his experience of working as a Homeless Housing Worker in the West End / Earls Court area of London in the 1980s and information he supplied to Operation Midland as a result. He also confirmed his intention to file submissions in the future asking the Inquiry to open a separate investigation relating to child sexual abuse in the military.
  • Daniel Janner QC, Laura Janner-Klausner, Marion Janner: Greville Janner‘s children were denied core participant status due to the fact Janner has his own separate strand to the inquiry.  Mr Janner had a significant interest in an important aspect of the matters under the Janner Investigation, in which he had already been granted core participant status, it was not appropriate to grant Mr Janner core participant status additionally in the Westminster investigation.  (It’s also worth mentioning that Daniel Janner seemingly told Robert Mendick of his intention to ‘undermine the enquiry from within.’)
  • G-1:  Allegations and awareness of abuse at his school and by clergy of
    the English Benedictine Congregation while in attendance at Fort Augustus School.  He was approached by Exaro News, which he says asked him to amend his police statement to include claims of abuse involving Westminster.’ He believes that his own story of abuse by clergy of the English Benedictine Congregation was adopted and erroneously featured in the ‘Westminster story’.  This does not fall within the scope of the Westminster investigation.
  • WM-A1: States that he told a social worker at Kent County Council and his school headmaster about his allegations, but this was not followed up. He was involved in the ‘rent-boy’ scene in London in the 1960s, and aware of politicians other than Heath attending parties at which sexual behaviour occurred.  His experiences as part of the ‘rent-boy’ scene and his knowledge of the involvement of politicians, as set out in his application and submissions, may well make him a useful witness to this investigation.
  • WM-A4: Alleged that he was raped at Dolphin Square while under the care of Hackney Social Services by a person he believed to have been Lord Janner. He also alleged that he was abused at a care home in Haringey and that Hackney Social Services had been aware of this abuse.  WM-A4 states he was taken to the Apollo nightclub where a police officer took his details and to whom, it is said, it must have been obvious that WM-A4 was young and vulnerable. He also referred to photographs being taken and to WM-A4 being told that the photographs were in a pamphlet which was being shown at Westminster.  WM-A4 was advised to apply for CP status under the Janner strand instead.
  • JA-A10: While JA-A10 has a significant interest in an important aspect of the matters under investigation in the Janner investigation, in which JA-A10 has already been granted Core Participant status, it is not appropriate to grant him Core Participant status additionally in the Westminster investigation.
  • JA-A11: While JA-A11 has a significant interest in an important aspect of the matters under investigation in the Janner investigation, in which JA-A11 has already been granted Core Participant status, it is not appropriate to grant him Core Participant status additionally in the Westminster investigation.
  • JA-A13: As above.
  • JA-A17: As above.
  • JA-A2: As above.
  • JA-A20: As above.
  • JA-A22: As above.
  • JA-A23: As above.
  • JA-A24: As above.
  • JA-A25: As above.
  • JA-A26: As above.
  • JA-A27: As above.
  • JA-A3: As above.
  • JA-A5: As above.
  • JA-A9: As above.
  • SABINE MCNEIL:  Received information from others relevant to alleged child sexual abuse and the alleged existence of a cult in Hampstead, said to be connected with Hampstead Christchurch, and that she can provide information about the actions of a number of agencies, including councils and the police, in relation to these allegations. Ms McNeill expressly states that she is not aware of evidence relating to child sexual abuse by “Westminster personalities” but says that the harassment which she has experienced can only be explained by orders “from ‘high up’”.  This does not fall within the scope of the Westminster investigation.
  • SARAH MCDONAGH: provided evidence of a paedophile ring connected to the Sussex Western Bench on which Ms McDonagh sat as a Magistrate, evidence which she says was suppressed by a number of people.  Ms McDonagh also provides general information regarding Freemasonry in the Chichester area and its alleged influence on the courts, and comments on the reputation of Seaford College.

LIST OF THOSE WITH CORE PARTICIPANT STATUS FOR ALL IICSA:

The full list of all those granted core participant status can be found here.

 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “INDEPENDENT INQUIRY INTO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: ALLEGATIONS LINKED TO WESTMINSTER

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s