Newsnight Fri 2 Nov please watch v Important you know who is running the country

[MrsjREwing]

Tom Watkins tweeted a seniour politician will be outed tonight and Max Clifford said on Daybreak shocking news will be released by the BBC today.

Yes there was tips

The jist was PS was irresponsible in what he did, and DC had reacted in a way that he couldn't really be criticised for, apart from of course linking homosexuality to paedophilia.

?While child abuse is horrific, so are false allegations and wrongful convictions. In fact these are more heinous , since these are an error of commission by the institutional (think he means institution ) of state, rather than omission." (my underline)

from

www.factuk.org/witchhunt-claims-against-bryn-estyn-false-say-care-workers/

Errr.... not sure about that.

Trouble is, I for one have now lost all faith in the integrity of the police to investigate a) impartially, b) without corruption, c) won't be silenced and their findings buried never to be brought to justice.

So t'net suddenly seems more important - although I do absolutely hate the thought of trial by vox popular and lynch mobs.

Think it's time we had some proper democracy - make use of technology and have some direct voting.

On channel 4 news earlier Sian griffiths who worked on the W. inquiry has copies of paperwork which prove what Steven Messham said, about those photographs that were destroyed.

www.channel4.com/news/child-abuse-north-wales-waterhouse-inquiry-sian-griffiths

Ohhh bravo her. Fair play to channel 4 aswell. Nothing yet on 5live. I am knackered as well

Well done Sian Griffiths - must have taken some real bloody courage to make public that she has reams of evidence stored in her house and is a witness to the Waterhouse inquiry cover-ups.

And she has publicly corroborated Steven Messham's account of the photos and high-ranking abusers still at large.

Paraic o Brien who interviwed her said they were doing the interview round her kitchen table in the middle of the night!

see it's not that complex really is it? it's that they completely let off the hook a lot of people who were named. we don't need more investigations we need those names that were protected and ignored to now be thoroughly investigated.

i suppose you do need to investigate and attribute blame regarding the cover up itself but the key thing is to do the proper criminal investigation without prejudice that was stifled in the first place.

and the, 'worse things happen at boarding school' comment is hardly reassuring, it is however indicative of one possible reason the upper classes are so into abusing children if it is a core part of their socialisation.

How lovely for those at the top. Within an hour of channel 4 announcing that the 60 photos Steve Messham handed in, which shows those guilty of abusing him and others have definitely been destroyed, the newspapers announce that it was mistaken identity and it was Lord McAlpines brother

thinking about it this pretending it's all terribly complex and needs special investigations etc is just subtefuge isn't it? the secrecy order needs removing and the declawing that happened through the conditions set needs reversing and what should have been done in the first place needs to be done.

all this smoke and mirrors rubbish is just that.

He has consistently said he was never there. It is not a new thing within an hour of the disclosure. You also have to put yourself in the place of people if falsely accused too.

One general issue is that the police get allegations all the time for all kinds of things. Let us take say domestic violence against adult women. They just cannot prosecute every case if the witnesses are not prepared to give evidence. What we have to distinguish here or find out is if people were protected because they were well known or if they were accused because they were easy targets and someone had a grudge etc.

Secrecy is difficult. Do we think teachers wrongly accused of something at school should have anonymity and those alleged to have engaged in rape given careers are destroyed even if nothing is ever proved? They are not simple issues at all.

What is good is that the fact many children carry mobiles with cameras on these days means it is harder to hide things whether it is evidence someone has swung a cat into a bin or otherwise

If there is a photograph which purportedly shows someone 12 years ago or whenever it was there are some very good experts these days who can help decide if that person was X or not X.

they quite clearly weren't easy targets though.

and nobody can identify anyone in those photos because they have been destroyed.

hardly easy targets when you can get evidence destroyed, have your name kept out of proceedings and a secrecy ban to prevent you being named for 100years.

Evidence being destroyed is worse than D notices or hiding names, corrupt collusion gone mad.

How can nobody be asking the most important question. Who ordered the photos to be destroyed? Why destroy photographs that could have proven Steve Meesham was mistaken and was blaming the wrong man. All of this speculation could have been prevented and Steve M could have had some closure.

Its simple, yet channel 4 didnt even ask the question or maybe they already know who ordered the destruction of evidence and why they ordered it.

I feel so sad for all the victims.

she had the paperwork in front of her on the channel 4 interview detailing the order so she would have known where it came from as would the reporter presumably. though i suspect it would be from a department rather than an individual naming themselves.

Lord McAlpine made a statement.

That interview with Sian Griffiths (still on C4 news website) is really important.

She was Head of Personnel at Clwyd Council, and ran the Council's secretariat to the Waterhouse enquiry. She kept files, and has either the original or a contemporary copy of the 'order to destroy the books and photographs'.

She talks of the evidence of Det Sup Peter Ackerley, who mentioned the name of 'somebody who has been high up in Government'. Waterhouse apparently then said, 'Stop, that's it.'

She also has documents confirming the abuse of Steven Meesham by at least one 'aristocratic' man, and also documents confirming the existence and ordered destruction of those photos (photos which were used to convict another 'lesser' man); so Steven Meesham seems like a credible witness to me.

Not looking great for Waterhouse.

Every department has someone at the top who gives the orders.

Just one name.

I just hope that justice in this country can be restored, i feel I have lost all faith in it now.

I was reading some articles in the internet regarding the scandalous goings on in the children home in wales Steven Messham's account on it. Why when men are in power they seem so untouchable to any punishments, there is so much corruption going on.

These men have to be brought to justice I'm not talking about any witch hunt, but properly punished.

I don't think it will ever happen the government will brush it under the carpet again and their secret society will continue.

Another thing - if the man was genuinely believed to have been M's brother, where is the evidence of a police investigation into him?

I must have missed something.

Great point linerunner i hadnt thought of that.

If they had photographic evidence of anyone abusing children why were they not arrested and charged.

Even with no pics he should have been questioned.

I`m afraid I agree with greenfern, I think very little will come out of any inquiry, I guenuinly believe that most of it will be covered up still. I have absolutely no faith whatsoever in any government allowing the full details to come out and hearing the reactions to what PS did yesterday I dont think the majority of the public want to know the full truth anyway.

Carole Walker of the BBC has her head up the governments arse, towing the line again today.

I think McAlpine's statement is very vert carefully worded.

He claims he hasn't been named in the press, he has in the Guardian.