To write about suspected abusive behaviour when the alleged perpetrators are dead in a family chronicle?

[Mellowfruitfulness]

I am writing a family memoir and have recently been on a jaunt to dig up some old ancestors. While writing up my findings I have come across a dilemma. Three of my forebears might have committed crimes, but there is no proof of anything.

I would appreciate your thoughts on whether I should confide my suspicions to future generations, thus damaging the memory of these family members, or just whitewash it all out?

To make it a bit clearer: one great grandfather courted a girl of 13 when he was in his late twenties (19th century); another was openly very fond of little girls and his behaviour definitely went beyond the bounds of what would be acceptable nowadays, although he did not to my knowledge actually harm anyone. Finally, another grandfather went to Thailand where we think he had sex with a very young girl and died of AIDS shortly afterwards.

The children of the last two are still alive, but I don't need to show them the memoir as it is really for my grandchildren.

Please tell me what you think. (I don't want them to come back and haunt me, either!)

I quite like courted. After all, they did wait until she was of age. And most people on here seem to think (like me) that that grandfather at least is not guilty of anything!

What are your thoughts about the third grandfather? His doings are documented - I have seen what he wrote about his trip to Thailand. The only doubt is was it fantasy or truth? He did die of AIDS a few months later, so we do think it happened.

Should this be mentioned in our own chronicle? We all loved him dearly and were more shocked than I can say by what we read. But this is so horrible that I'm very tempted to bury it. He did so many other things in his life that were utterly commendable. But then there's this.

Another question: Does anyone know how to get hold of police records or newspapers from the past? I have the date and the place of the drowning, and would like to see what was written about it at the time. I have just spent an hour or so googling the names, place and date but with no result - apart from ancestry sites that you have to pay to join.

I would say that unfortunately what your GF did in Thailand wasn´t unusual.

If he died not long after, is it likely that the two events are connected?

Yes, we're pretty sure they are, and so was the hospital, I believe.

Would you include it in the chronicle? I have more or less decided (with the help of the posters on here) not to include any references to what JC and H may or may not have done re liking young girls.

However, I'm still not sure whether to raise the possibility of murder in people's minds (when I don't believe it myself). Btw, everyone from my generation up is well aware of the accusations at the time - I'm just not sure I want to pass them on in writing to future generations.

And what do I do about the Thailand incident??

Well, JC obviously met his wife when she was young, so that needs to go in.

But things can get changed over the years.

And for a long time a young girl with an older man wasn´t a big thing, was it?

Re Thailand-if he kept a diary, maybe he wanted people to know?

Or just record it in a factual way & mention that it might not be true?

Finally, another grandfather went to Thailand where we think he had sex with a very young girl and died of AIDS shortly afterwards

wtf???? we "think".....

I am just stunned at this 'story' and completely gobsmacked at people encouraging you to write down your frankly unbelieveable flights of fancy. Sorry to have to break this to you but a writer is what you are not I'm afraid. It doesn't flow properly and your choice of vocabulary is suspect in quite a few instances.

This whole project needs a total rethink. And on what do you base your assumption that the grandfather had sex with a very young girl?

In fact the age of consent for marriage was 12 for girls and 14 for boys until 1929 in the UK, when it was changed to 16. In Ireland it wasn't raised until the 1970s, I think.

BornInAfrica, I'm not a writer, just doing this for my family. They are used to my 'style', such as it is (or isn't).

The evidence is what he wrote down after the trip to Thailand, in a sort of diary. Yes, Diddl, we did wonder why he wrote it down, and if he wanted people to know, but we came to the conclusion that it was a sort of purging exercise that he was doing - and not for our eyes. The reason we think this is that he asked for his computer to be completely wiped, just before he died, which it was (not by me). We think he just overlooked this little book.

Well, Nutters, they didn't get married until she was 19, so no evidence of any law being broken there.

That's quite interesting about the age of consent, isn't it? So for boys it must have gone from 14 to 16 to 21 and back down to 16?

Sorry, Natters!

Tha age of consent matters less than the age gap, imo. Think about what you'd make of a 27-year-old man hitting on your 13-year-old daughter? If she married him at 19, he must have been at least 30. The parents clearly didn't see him as an ordinary suitor, they tried to distance her from him.

This stuff's so interesting! I feel it's a shame not to write it, OP, but it's your project not mine.

My Grandad had a secret second family! Actually, it turns out Granny knew about it, but neither of them breathed a word. I have an aunt whose name I don't know ... Nowt so queer as folks

It was not unusual back then for much older men to marry or pursue women/girls much younger than themselves. In fact it was very very common.

I am just reiterating that it's unfair to view the past from the perspective of the present. Many things were very different.

As for the age of consent for marriage, no, it went from 14 to 16 for boys - it is still 16 in the UK (leaving out the aspect of parental consent to keep it simple).

If you want to find contemporary newspaper reports, try the main libraries in the area where the incident happened. They may have archived local papers on microfilm.

Natters, I'm sure the age of consent was 21 for gay men. Wasn't it called Clause 28, or something like that, and didn't Peter Tatchell get involved to change it to 21? Is that a different age of consent, then? A bit confused, sorry.

Thanks for the advice about microfilm in libraries. The problem is that it is at least a nine-or ten-hour drive away from where I live! A project for another day, perhaps.

And I agree that it is unfair to view the past from our modern perspective.

Garlicbutter, can you find out who your aunt is?? Once you start looking (as I did) all sorts of things come up. The problem is that you can't really pick and choose!

The information I gave was regarding age of consent for marriage. I thought we were talking about the courting of young girls? I think you'll find homosexuality was actually illegal at the relevant time.

OK, thanks - of course it was ...

Do you know, Mellow, I hadn't even considered it until you posted your thread! I think I will make a few furtive enquiries. Thanks :)

How interesting, Maryz, about your ancestors! Your mother is very brave to risk incurring the wrath of the family, but she does have documentation at least, so she can back up her assertions. Did she get the graves exhumed?

We don't have anything except what people have said, about the second grandfather, and only the diary book for the third (which I just wouldn't include - and which is in a relative's attic, so I don't have access to it, although I could ask). So I think I will take the advice of most of the posters on here about the second one and just not put it in, rather than relay gossip, which is what it is if I am just repeating something someone has told me. Maybe I will look at it again in a few years and tweak the odd thing here and there. Still not at all sure what to do about the third, but might well end up suppressing it.

The drowning was in the papers, and there will be police records, but I think I will have to go to the place where it happened, so that will have to wait.

How extraordinary about the unidentified bodies in graves! A grandmother in my ex-husband's family was apparently caught burning her first baby in the grate by her sister, who never spoke to her again ... horrible! Who knows what really happened?

And I've often wondered, especially about remote places like the tip of Cornwall and the Scottish Isles - so many things must have gone on that the authorities had absolutely no knowledge of. If you can see a man approaching on horseback or in a coach or a boat from miles away, you have plenty of time to hide whatever you're doing, don't you? Or would it be easier to conceal your nefarious deeds in teeming population centres than very remote areas? After all, everyone would know your business in tiny villages, so they would all have to be in on it!

Anyway, I'm digressing. Thanks a lot for the comments on here - going to bed now.

Sorry to interrupt, but can I just ask something? The microfilms in libraries....do they hold old local newspapers?
I have looked everywhere on line for some info about my GD but nothing. I am pretty sure that, as it was really scandalous and he was sent to prison, it would be written down somewhere.

No, I don't think the AIDs thing would be to do with gay sex - not from his track record, or his writings, which would seem to show he was heterosexual - though he could obviously have caught it before going to Thailand. And yes, he could have given it to that poor girl, rather than the other way round . And I agree it was rather soon after the trip that he started having symptoms. Apparently, though, there are some very virulent strains that show up much earlier than the more common ones? Don't know, really.

Good luck with your enquiries, Garlicbutter.

Now I really am off to bed.