Westminster Paedo Investigation #cancelled

[sponk]

I  recently spent a while browsing the original thread here, which had a lot of momentum for a while, but came to a grinding halt. Some users in that thread seemed to think Nick was an establishment stooge forced into the story to poison the well. If that's the case he's very dedicated to the establishment because he's currently on trial for perverting the course of justice and fraud.

The man known as Nick, who sparked Scotland Yard's £2 million Operation Midland into allegations of VIP paedophile abuse, was today seen for the first time fighting back tears in a police interview as he claimed his school friend had been killed in a hit-and-run.

Carl Beech, a father of one, is on trial accused of inventing the "most heinous" false claims of rape, torture and even child murder against dozens of senior public figures, a court heard on Tuesday.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/14/man-known-nick-invented-heinous-sex-abuse-allegations-against/

I find it hard to believe the Met's finest would be so easily duped by an allegedly baseless fantasy to the point where they'd spend millions investigating it with no corroborating evidence, so I can see why some people would think it was an intentional blunder. However it's equally inconceivable that they would intentionally waste millions of their budget and sabotage their own reputation in an act of altruism for the establishment. So what should I really think?

[Bennett Brauer]

Police thick and credulous, even more so in the wake of their Savile failures?

[Buelligan]

I find it hard to believe the Met's finest would be so easily duped by an allegedly baseless fantasy to the point where they'd spend millions investigating it with no corroborating evidence, so I can see why some people would think it was an intentional blunder. However it's equally inconceivable that they would intentionally waste millions of their budget and sabotage their own reputation in an act of altruism for the establishment. So what should I really think?

Whose budget?  Who "poisoned the well"?

[sponk]

Whose budget?  Who "poisoned the well"?

The police budget. And the poisoned well theory was put forward by posters in the previous thread. They thought Nick was an actor put in a position of prominence to make every allegation of Westminster noncery seem ridiculous by associating it with his apparent fabrications.

[Replies From View]

poisoned well

Better or worse than being poisoned badly?

[Buelligan]

No pussies in it either.  Allegedly.

The police budget. And the poisoned well theory was put forward by posters in the previous thread. They thought Nick was an actor put in a position of prominence to make every allegation of Westminster noncery seem ridiculous by associating it with his apparent fabrications.

Yes, I remember it well.  Why would the Met wish to discredit those allegations?  Do you think anyone else might have an interest in discrediting them?  If so, who?

[biggytitbo]

I'm not conspiratorially minded as you know but I can't help think with the total collapse of Nick's credibility and his allegations, and by association any allegations about Westminster paedophiles, everything has gone to plan.

[Gerald Fjord]

shocker

[Paul Calf]

I'm with Biggy here. At the very least, it seems that people intent on a cover-up chose to exploit a vulnerable person to help blow the credibility of the investigation.

[Buelligan]

Quite.

[Flouncer]

I can't help but draw parallels with the Franklin Scandal in America. Allegations were made that a paedophile ring involving prominent members of the Republican Party was sourcing victims from a children's home in Nebraska and flying them around to parties where they were drugged and abused - there were even claims that some of the children in question had been taken on late night tours of the White House. In the end the only person to be prosecuted was one of the complainants, who was given a hefty sentence for perjury. A Yorkshire Television documentary was made on the subject but was pulled before broadcast, though an almost finished cut is available online. It makes for interesting viewing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2uaaAHh1XI

[sponk]

I'm with Biggy here. At the very least, it seems that people intent on a cover-up chose to exploit a vulnerable person to help blow the credibility of the investigation.

The fact that it went the way they wanted doesn't mean they made it happen though.

[Flouncer]

The fact that it went the way they wanted doesn't mean they made it happen though.

This is true, but it's pretty odd that aside from Cyril Smith and Clement Freud being outed years after they died, the only people who have actually been sent down for this sort of thing are washed-up light entertainers. Something smells pretty dodgy to me.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I'm with Biggy here. At the very least, it seems that people intent on a cover-up chose to exploit a vulnerable person to help blow the credibility of the investigation.

Yep, think of the network. Think of how power worked with the hacking scandal. Think about how very famous people managed to brazenly rape children for decades unchecked. This is how people protect each other. A pact that means no one important can afford to risk each other falling.

[Quote]

The actual inquiry is still ongoing, sans Nick's untrustworthy allegations.

https://www.iicsa.org.uk

The site's not very user friendly unfortunately but if you can be bothered there's transcripts of all the hearings so far, including testimonies from secret service members, Don Hale's allegations and hearings into the Lord Janner, Peter Hayman and Peter Morrison allegations/investigations (or lack of). The list of areas to be discussed also includes allegations about Leon Brittan. It's a bit tiresome wading through all of it and personally I don't have the time.

God knows how long it'll roll on for. It's hard not to be cynical and imagine it'll just be another 'mistakes were made, lessons have been learnt but things were very different back then' type conclusion.

[Bingo Fury]

Some users in that thread seemed to think Nick was an establishment stooge forced into the story to poison the well. If that's the case he's very dedicated to the establishment because he's currently on trial for perverting the course of justice and fraud.

After binge-watching five seasons of Line of Duty in the space of a week, this seems perfectly reasonable.

[sponk]

http://pebpr.blogspot.com/1997/05/scallywag-magazine-article-by-angus.html?m=1

The infamous scallywag article about  this from the 90's

[Absorb the anus burn]

It would be good to see Elm Guest House discussed as part of a (non half-arsed) investigation into institutional child abuse.

[sponk]

It would be good to see Elm Guest House discussed as part of a (non half-arsed) investigation into institutional child abuse.

An interesting question would be what constitutes institutional child abuse.

[gib]

http://pebpr.blogspot.com/1997/05/scallywag-magazine-article-by-angus.html?m=1

The infamous scallywag article about  this from the 90's

Christ, never actually seen that before.

[garbed_attic]

It's good to know that only naff celebrities noone likes anymore are pedos and not any members of the establishment ostensibly employed to serve the public good!

[garbed_attic]

And it's pretty amazing that Jeffrey Epstein had so many members of our and America's political establishment and powerful elites in his address book but they all just knew him for business reasons and didn't ever even suspect he was pimping out abused children! What a close shave.

[justin_bennett]

http://pebpr.blogspot.com/1997/05/scallywag-magazine-article-by-angus.html?m=1

The infamous scallywag article about  this from the 90's

Derek Laud?  As in Big Brother 6?  Mental...

[Jittlebags]

Apparently his original pedo claim was just against his dad and Jimmy eurgh eurgh eurgh Saville.

[The Bumlord]

Ah...

https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/15/westminster-child-abuse-accuser-committed-manipulative-paedophile-9560879/

[Howj Begg]