Hold page 17! Get through coverage of the Budget and you might find the odd reference to the fact that a trio of Scotland Yard officers in the vanguard of the infamous Operation Midland have all been cleared over their handling of the investigation into a nonexistent ‘VIP Paedophile Ring’ seen in visions by a deluded (though mysteriously unprosecuted) fantasist whom we must still refer to as ‘Nick’. Well, fancy that! That august body the Independent Police Complaints Commission has come to an utterly unexpected conclusion. Who could have seen that coming, eh?

Twelve months on from the closure of Operation Midland without a single arrest, charge or conviction, this breathtaking squandering of taxpayers’ money achieved nothing other than ruining both the reputations and financial security of those targeted by a bunch of blundering Bobbies whose instructions from on-high to believe the accuser at all costs resulted in the most high-profile case of what has become standard police practice. So standard, in fact, that the current series of hit ITV drama ‘Broadchurch’ apparently promotes this in-built belief that the accused is guilty and the accuser is innocent long before such an investigation even gets anywhere near a courtroom.

The three who were surprisingly exonerated by the IPCC included Detective Superintendent Kenny McDonald, the dolt who preempted any possibility of a fair trial should it have come to that by declaring the accusations of ‘Nick’ were ‘credible and true’. DS McDonald evidently believes his role is not much different from that of Judge Dredd, futuristic super-cop who acts as judge, jury and executioner; and his belief has not been trashed by this judgement. Although the IPCC hearing, chaired by retired judge Sir Richard Henriques, identified 43 serious failings in the Operation Midland investigation – including stating the bleedin’ obvious, that too much faith had been placed in the word of ‘Nick’ – it still declared the operation was ‘extensive and carried out diligently’.

Five Met officers were referred to the IPCC, yet the clearing of three of them suggests the other two haven’t got much to worry about. ‘There is no evidence to indicate bad faith, malice or dishonesty’, says the report, adding ‘and no indication any of the officers may have behaved in a manner which would justify disciplinary proceedings’. One other area that gave the IPCC cause for concern was in regards to the detectives involved failing to present all relevant information to the district judge who gave the green light to the search warrants enabling them to kick down the doors of those named by ‘Nick’. That three of those whose homes were searched were named and shamed by the media during the investigation is apparently not thought shameful in itself.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Rodhouse was also cleared of his part in a separate investigation into the involvement of the dying Leon Brittan in the same Paedo Ring, so that draws a line under a parallel farce. Even if the conclusions of the IPCC were utterly predictable and understandably regarded as a whitewash by those who suffered at the hands of the investigation (such as ex-MP Harvey Proctor), in a way one cannot hold the investigating officers wholly responsible for the disaster that was Operation Midland if the instructions they received vindicated the approach they took.

The ‘maverick cop’, that staple of British TV police dramas from Barlow in ‘Z-Cars’ and ‘Softly Softly’ through to Regan in ‘The Sweeney’ and Tennyson in ‘Prime Suspect’, no longer exists in the real world. If the police force in this country is inherently bent, it’s the natural outcome of the way in which that force is organised from the top on down rather than a Gene Hunt-style rogue cop making up his own rules. The politicised changes in procedure that declare an accused man (and, let’s face it, they’re basically always men) is guilty till proven innocent means the police have already been trained into making their minds up before an investigation even begins. Should it really come as a great surprise that the likes of Harvey Proctor are engulfed in smoke that couldn’t exist without any initial fire in the public perception when the rules have been rewritten to such a damaging degree where ancient British Law is concerned?

I’ll be perfectly honest with you. I’m absolutely bloody sick of this subject and part of me resents the fact I feel compelled to pen yet another post on it when so many others online put the work in and do it a hell of a lot better as a consequence. But it continues to represent so much of what has gone wrong with this country over the last fifteen-twenty years that any blog pertaining to deal with the great issues of the day cannot ignore it, however hard the temptation to do so truly is.

The fact is that the small army of bloggers and tweeters who follow the topic with a dedication that is admirable are in the minority. Most people don’t even give it much of a thought unless they themselves are on the receiving end of a false allegation and then a door is opened to them that had previously been barely ajar. And these are the people that are denied the platform to air their grievances that Harvey Proctor or Paul Gambaccini can call upon – the genuine silent majority who suffer the most when the finger of suspicion is aimed at them and they are at the mercy of a police force that has been politically remodelled to fit an agenda the police force was not created for. Peel must be turning in his grave.

© The Editor

14 thoughts on “WHITEWASH AND GO

  1. Behind the headline celebrity cases must be many innocent school-teachers, choir-masters and scout-masters whose lives have been wrecked by vexatious claims and who lack the resources of the famous to defend tjhemselves against over-credulous cops.
    As with the celebrities, I’m sure some of the allegations will be true, but until the authorities return to objective investigation, we can have no confidence in any of the outcomes.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Well said Petunia. I can only say that I agree with every word. As a sometime member of FACT (Falsely Accused Carers and teachers) I can say that I have met many decent men (and women) whose lives have been blighted by bogus accusations.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. “…it continues to represent so much of what has gone wrong with this country over the last fifteen-twenty years…”

    Yes indeed. There were signs of things going wrong much earlier. At Suez in 1956 our own political leadership, or some of it, behaved with shocking duplicity from which our international reputation has never fully recovered.

    And yesterday we have the Chancellor deliberately breaking a promise to the public.


    1. @Mr Pooter

      No offense, but if you truly think that this is the first occasion that a British Chancellor has broken a promise, I can only surmise that you are naive, forgetful or are in hock to an idea of a romantic past that never really existed.


      1. No tdf I certainly don’t think so. Who would, these days? A romantic past? As it happens, I do persist in believing that this nation was more honourable, at all levels, in the forties (a period I remember well) than it is now. The rot set in at Suez when it became clear that our own government had deceived us. What an example that set!

        Liked by 1 person

  4. “I’ll be perfectly honest with you. I’m absolutely bloody sick of this subject and part of me resents the fact I feel compelled to pen yet another post on it when so many others online put the work in and do it a hell of a lot better as a consequence.”

    Well, I sympathise. And actually I’m extremely annoyed at the manner I’ve been led up the garden path by promoters of false or dubious allegations.

    Back in 2012, a senior cop publicly claimed that while false allegations do exist, the level is extremely low – under 1% of the total, he opined – and at the time I believed him, not knowing any better. Now I see a recent article alleging that the % of false allegations may be as high as 75%.

    How in the sweet holy heck is the general public supposed to make sense of all of this if the experts disagree so diametrically?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It’s interesting to speculate on what the level of allegations would have been if the avaricious no-win-no-fee lawyers weren’t around to stimulate the situation. I suspect that a degree of normality would have prevailed.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. My sense is that ‘no-win-no-fee’ lawyers and dodgy therapy are both significant factors in regards to dubious and false CSA allegations.

    I’m providing below links to two recent blog-posts from two different bloggers. Both blog-posts relate, broadly speaking, to allegations around ‘VIP’ abuse networks and the truth or otherwise that might be in those allegations.

    Note, I have no connection to either of the bloggers, but both posts are worth a read in my view.




  6. @tdf Do you recall where you saw the 75% figure?

    Norfolk Chief Constable Simon Bailey insisted to Sir Richard Henriques that only 0.1% of all complaints were false.


      1. Thanks for that, tdf. Yes. Some care needed, as ever. Reported child neglect on Malta. Still, it’s quite interesting in itself that so many reports of neglect could turn out to be nothing.


  7. Mudplugger wrote:
    “As with the celebrities, I’m sure some of the allegations will be true”

    I very much doubt that any of the historic allegations about celebrities without previous convictions (and perhaps even those about celebrities with previous convictions) produced in the wake of the Jimmy Savile allegations were true and would not be surprised if the vast majority of the historic allegations about non-celebrities made since that time were fraudulent. I’m not convinced that adults popping up out of nowhere with historic difficult-to-disprove allegations that they can make anonymously and in exchange for possible payouts worth tens of thousands of pounds, or make publicly, whether in disguise or not, in exchange for praise for their bravery and possible payouts worth tens of thousands of pounds are likely to be genuine victims of crime. “Jimmy Savile, hmm… that reminds me, I once knew this other old bloke off the telly/radio/this old teacher/football coach, etc. who destroyed my life. Now pay me compensation”. I believe that the Savile claims gave the green light to opportunists to commit fraud by false allegation (monkey see, monkey do) and it’s scandalous that any public investigation of the Savile claims has been prohibited by law. As long as they are set in stone, no-one is safe, or as Mark Williams-Thomas would say “everybody is fair game” (@4mins https://audioboom.com/posts/2867220-mark-williams-thomas-on-bbc-radio-5-live-gary-glitter-csa-inquiry).


  8. My partner and myself, two elderly homosexual retired men had such entirely false allegations along with other knowingly untrue allegations made against us and we were arrested in November 2015. We were bailed for a full fifty weeks even though within weeks all allegations had been proven entirely false. Seven CID officers turned our home inside out and took our 4 hard drives. We had to successfully sue Dorset Police in August 2016 to get them back after no paedophile material was found either in our home or on our hard drives. The knowing false allegations were made by a Janette Scharenborg a welsh woman living in Holland who runs an international supertroll gang now currently under investigation.

    We discovered sometime into the investigation that we had been under surveillance long before we were arrested. Dorset police also alleged that we owned, ran, operated and uploaded content to http://www.dorsetpolice.tv an activist website we proved was owned, ran, operated by and uploaded to by a very nasty, evil, violent and dangerous man Gerald Simon Coulter who lives in Cambridgeshire. He refused to prove to the police that he owned the websites despite public evidence that he did. The stress and anxiety and severe depression caused to both of us made us very ill. Ten days after CPS NFA’d and did not charge us a Dorset police officer who was pretending to investigate Scharenborg and our gang after we provided him with a huge dossier of the supertroll gangs abuse of us, telephoned us with what he said was ‘CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION’ . He told us that the homophobic officer who arrested us one D.C Mark Holmes 2600 of Dorset police had hoped we were charged. We asked Inspector Matthew Baxter 1047 why? He said it had been Holmes plan to use a charge against us to lure Scharenborg out of her troll centre in Holland to attend what would have been our trial and it was his intention to then arrest her! It turned out he had been using us pawns to get her! this news sent my partner into sheer psycho9logical turmoil and severe depression that only hours later caused him to have a massive heart attack and he died in my arms. Baxter reported himself to PSD but Holmes carried on as usual.

    Dorset police are well known for their institutional HOMOPHOBIA, the leading gay activist Peter Tatchell proved this in a FOI request, and we obtained Dorset police incident logs under a court order that refered to us as she and her and his wife etc.

    Our GP has told the Dorset police he had treated my partner for his acute depression over this malicious homophobic arrest and that there was no doubt in his mind whatsoever that my partner of the last 37 years died as a result of all the depression, stress and anxiety put on him by our false accusers and Dorset police. Dorset PSD have entirely failed to deal with my complaints.

    The troll gang have not stopped and are now trying to kill myself and the parrots we so adore. I have lost the love of my life, my reason for living and getting out of bed each morning and society and the authorities do not give a damn. The cyber supertrolling has continued 24/7 since my partners death and my life is now over.

    This gang has connections to the Dorset police and crime commissioner Martyn Underhill who himself joined in the abuse of us along with his good friend the creep Mark Williams-Thomas who sold Cliff Richard and others down the river. THEY ARE ALL HIDING SOMETHING.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.