BY HOOK OR BY CROOK ….

I was sent a really interesting article earlier, written by a Mr. Simon Warr, who was arrested in 2012 after being falsely accused of sexual abuse at a Suffolk boarding school.

Mr Warr was subsequently charged and completely cleared at Ipswich Crown Court in 2014, effectively ending, what must have been an indescribable ordeal for him, and one which had hung over him like the sword of Damocles, for no less than 650 days.

He lost his home, his job and his friends after being maliciously and falsely accused of the offenses, which were alleged to have taken place at two boarding schools, and has written two books, one of which ‘Presumed Guilty’ examines our countries ‘deeply flawed justice system, and makes an impassioned plea for us to reconsider the way in which our police handle cases of historical child abuse, to protect innocent people against further false claims’.

In his article, Mr Warr has drawn attention to the police’s habit of ‘Trawling’ for complainants, in order to secure a conviction when either evidence is lacking, or the original complainant’s personal history is suspect, or cannot be relied upon on it’s own.

Two paragraphs appeared very familiar to me, inasmuch as their content is remarkably similar to something that Mr Warr may, or may not be aware of, and will show that Mr Warr’s story, although harrowing, and must rank among one of the worst things that can happen to an entirely innocent person – and is unfortunately, not even uncommon.

 

‘It was such a belief that was held by those who triggered the massive police inquiry into alleged abuse in North Wales which was launched in August 1991. Largely, as a result of this investigation and the extraordinary stories of wholesale abuse which emerged from it, the approach used by the North Wales Police was adopted by other police forces in neighbouring areas. Similar concerns were entertained by social workers and police officers, who, in 1994, launched an even larger investigation in Cheshire, just over the English border.

This investigation in turn spread to Merseyside. Instead of waiting for allegations to be made spontaneously, the police began actively to look for them. They did so through massive ‘Trawling’ operations in which they deliberately sought out former residents of care homes and invited them to make complaints – sometimes against specific workers. Thousands of young men and women were contacted.

Many of them were damaged and highly suggestible, and a significant proportion had criminal records which included offences of dishonesty and deception.

Although the vast majority had never made any complaint about their time in care, hundreds now made allegations of serious physical or sexual abuse, describing incidents which they said took place, ten, twenty or even thirty years beforehand.

By 1998, police trawling operations had been launched not only in North Wales, in Cheshire, and on Merseyside, but also in South Wales, in Manchester, in north-east England and a number of other regions.

By the end of 2000, these investigations had spread from police force to police force until almost a hundred were in progress, and practically the whole of Britain was covered by a police trawling net’

The other paragraph in Mr Warr’s article highlights examples of the ‘cross-contamination of evidence, and blatant collusion between individuals who as adults, claimed that they were sexually abused years earlier when they were children’.

‘This second statement was taken from [redacted] at the beginning of May. Three days later, the police visited [redacted] once again.

On this occasion they apparently asked him specifically whether he had been in contact with [redacted].

The history of the contact between [redacted] and [redacted] (or part of it) now emerged.

About three weeks after after he had his first police statement, [redacted], who had been drinking, came round to [redacted’s] flat with a bottle of sherry. They talked about Bryn Estyn and [redacted] says he asked [redacted] to tell him what happened there; ‘I tried to convince [redacted] that whatever his problem was he was not the only one and others had made complaints. [Redacted] told me that the police had asked him questions and [redacted] said “What do you want me to say, that he’s fucked my arse?” I then asked gentler questions about what happened.’

It would appear that [redacted] had actually discussed with [redacted] complaints which had been made by others, and that he felt that he was being put under pressure to go further than his original complaint and make an allegation of buggery.

The reason why [redacted’s] highly significant words had been preserved was that [redacted] had actually tape recorded part of the conversation: ‘[Redacted] also knew that I was taping the conversation. I did this because I wanted to play it back to [redacted] at a later date. if he should deny anything happened and also to assist the police in their investigation.’

The Grey-Haired man had not at this stage been identified. However [redacted] evidently met up with [redacted] again, and on this occasion he had showed [redacted] a photograph of [redacted]….’

The extracts I have published for comparison with the paragraphs in Mr Warr’s article, were taken from a book that was published in 2005 about the allegations of child abuse in and around North Wales, during the 1960s to the 1980s,  and lead to the deeply flawed Waterhouse Inquiry, which concluded and published it’s findings in 2000, at the cost to the British taxpayer, of an eye-watering £13.5 million.

Has anything really changed?

And can we really expect things to change any time soon, while essential evidence gathering ‘methods’ like police trawling, and obviously colluding, and dishonest complainants and witnesses continue to be used?


SOURCES:

‘Trawling and Trickery’ – Simon Warr (2018)

‘The Secret of Bryn Estyn’ – Richard Webster (2005)

19 Comments

  • tdf

    Can you explain why it is that you think the Waterhouse Inquiry was ‘deeply flawed’?

    Reply
    • Outlining the failings of Waterhouse would fill the pages of a large book, but there is plenty of stuff online if you are willing to get your hands dirty.

      There are a few articles on this site which may be of some use too.

      As with everything ‘Inquiry related’ you really need to familiarise yourself with the back story, which is not always the easiest undertaking.

      What I will say is, there are a few people still out there, who do not take kindly to people turning over rocks and asking too many questions.

      I am living testimony to that, as are others – I very much doubt that the truth will emerge in my lifetime at least, but I already know enough of what really went on, and have no desire to spend any more time wading through that fetid and toxic swamp.

      HOUSE OF LIES

      Reply
      • PETE'S SHINY SHOES

        *Comment deleted by Admin*

        Reply
      • tdf

        Ok. Thank you.

        Is this bloke telling the truth do you reckon? If you don’t wish to answer, don’t.

        YOUTUBE

        Reply
        • The one issue I have, is that it is my understanding that Bersham Hall closed for a short while in 1980, and was Re-opened a couple of years later as an all-female facility.

          Bryn Estyn closed in 1984, so if anything, staff would have migrated from Bersham Hall to Bryn Estyn and not the other way round.

          ‘Mike’s’ SkyNews testimony, however, was soundly attacked by the same people who attacked myself and a few others, so there must have been some truth in what he was saying.

          But that’s only my personal opinion, based on what I have experienced and what I have discovered since then.

          Reply
    • PETE'S SHINY SHOES

      *Comment deleted by Admin*

      Reply
  • Henrietta Sausage

    Love the title of this post. The police trawling tactics are the ‘hook’ & the mainly false allegations are the ‘crooks’— That is really quite clever you know. A good, observational insight too by the way

    Reply
  • Mildred

    I looked up those passages in Webster’s book last night. The similarities are striking when compared against the article you have highlighted. It is really sad though too, as it makes genuine child abuse victims look like liars and fantasists and the mainstream media don’t help in that either.

    Reply
  • Faith

    Reading through some blogs and squinting at Twitter until my brain shit down last night. My take is that the false accusers in the 1990’s are now attacking the latest lot of false accusers. & the 1990’s false accusers have teamed up with the anti-false CSA allegations mob. There are a few trolls with history among them too trying to worm their way in with whatever side is getting the most attention. It’s bloody hilarious and I have to go to the store now as I have run out of popcorn :))

    Reply
  • Trenton Williams

    Interesting comparisons & I can see what is going on a whole lot clearer now. Good post

    Reply
  • Zack

    Interesting comparison. I haven’t the foggiest what it’s about though lol

    Reply
  • Jane

    It is like some sick sideshow Battle for Supremacy of the false accuser. Question is, if everyone else can see it, why can’t those who are paid well over the odds for their expertise in such matters see it too?

    Maybe because either way they still get paid the same?

    Reply
  • HurdyGurdy Girl

    WOW!

    Reply
  • Facepalmageddon

    A lot is written about false accusers…

    But what about false whistleblowers?

    What about people who fuelled abusers fantasies by making pedotalk videos,sending emails asking for child pornography, signing off with lines like “child molesters till we die!”

    Flying overseas and organising urine drinking threesomes with transexuals and then openly boasting about it on a porn interview?

    Doing meth, cocaine and ecstacy with a paedophile, openly admitting that this paedophile is the only guy you let ejaculate inside you….

    Then even going as far as getting the perverts 4 initials tattooed.

    Then later claiming it was all an act to “gather evidence”

    In what warped world is this behaviour acceptable?

    Well in the world of the troofers…. it is perfectly acceptable and seen as heroic.

    Maybe Myra Hindley and Rose West would have escaped justice as well had they have had the troofer movement backing them.

    Myra could have claimed she only pressed record so she had evidence to back up the fact her lover murdered the little girl with a recording of her cries.

    Rose could have claimed she only helped Fred bury the bodies in the garden so she had evidence to show the police… and that of course she was just acting all along…. cos well, thats what escorts do…. they can “switch off” and just go along with it….

    The troofers certainly missed 2 good opportunities right there with those two heroes.

    Well… in fact Myra did have troofers backing her in tbe 70s/80s they were just not called that then.

    But oh how stupid they looked years later when that poor poor women they so adored later admitted to more murders.

    False whistleblowers….ones who just get caught out and try and cover their perverted tracks are just as bad as false accusers…. in fact they are worse…. much worse.

    This kind of behaviour must never be forgotten.

    Reply
    • Jane

      As if it could be forgotten? Some things unfortunately can’t be unseen & that thing is 1 of them.

      And how strange that the false accusers should be friends. Maybe it’s some kind of Rent a Fake Bogoff deal? Without them ever really Boggin’ off? 😀

      Reply

The Outlaw is a privately owned website, and reserves the right to ban any commentator at any time. Comments that contain unsafe links, advertising, threats of violence, or personal and abusive attacks on other users will not appear and result in a permanent ban.