Month: April 2015

Passing the buck on Lord Janner?

Perceptive analysis of language well worth reading and remembering…

nigeldudley

Another weekend – and yet more evasion and obfuscation from most of those who could/should have been involved in bringing Lord Janner to trial on charges of child sex abuse.

I have already examined the language used by Alison Saunders, who is in charge of the English and Welsh prosecution service (CPS) https://deceivingus.wordpress.com/2015/04/18/the-evasive-language-of-alison-saunders/

https://deceivingus.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/the-evasions-of-alison-saunders-continued/

But now more people are coming out of the woodwork; and the language used by those involved is revealing – this doesn’t of course prove who is telling the truth but it is interesting that some involved are keen to speak clearly while others are not.

I am grateful to The Sunday Times, which spoke to three crown prosecutors who were among those accused of missing chances to bring Janner to court.

Kate Carty said: “I have no knowledge of it… I am not able to comment further.” Martin Howard was “aware” of an investigation into…

View original post 332 more words

Advertisements

1972: How Lord Longford, his Pornography Inquiry and P.I. sidekick Major Matthew Oliver brought down Soho’s Dirty Squad

Screen Shot 2015-04-24 at 00.00.35

IMDB listing Secret History, Season 6 Episode 2

In May 1998 Channel 4’s Secret History documentary series broadcast : The Porn King, the Stripper and the Bent Coppers (Season 6, Episode 2) looking at the story of Jim Humphreys and the corruption scandal of the Soho police administration featuring Major Matt Oliver, Private Investigator as himself. Sadly the episode isn’t available to view online but London history blog Nickel In the Machine covers the whole episode in a 2008 post ‘Soho and the fall of the dirty squad’

On 21 April 1971 Lord Longford had announced his motion in the House of Lords to form a Committee to inquire into Pornography. I’ve often wondered over the past two or so years what his purpose was in doing so. It may be that the Soho police clean-up was not just the unintended, almost ancillary, benefit Longford in his autobiography tries to pass it off as. What motivated the celebrities and public figures volunteering to join his inquiry into Porn?

“Our committee, if over-large included many notable figures. The Archbishop of Canterbury regretfully told me that he was unsympathetic. He thought we were calling undue attention to a secondary issue. But the Archbishop of York, Dr Coggan, later Archbishop of Canterbury, joined us on his own initiative. So did one of the leading law lords. So did TV stars like Cliff Richard and Jimmy Savile. So did Kingsley Amis and his then wife Elizabeth Jane Howard, though they attached their own reservations to he report. Most valuable of all, perhaps, was Professor Norman Anderson, equally eminent in legal and theological studies. My great friend Malcolm Muggeridge joined us, partly, I think, as a kindness to me. He detested pornography but he detested government interference, censorship, just as much. He produced a sub-committee report which tried to reconcile his two detestations.”[p.153, ‘Avowed Intent’ Lord Longford’s autobiography]

However much Muggeridge ‘detested pornography’, his mask of puritanical indignance slipped frequently, often targeting the wives, and in one case the child, of his friends:

Then there was the 1963 dinner party at Boulestin, the famous Covent Garden French restaurant.

Kitty was laid up in St Bartholomew’s hospital and, after visiting her there, Malcolm went on to Boulestin to join up with an old journalistic colleague, post-war foreign correspondent Rene MacColl, who was there with his wife Hermione and their two children.

Richard Ingrams records: ‘Malcolm became very drunk and began fumbling under the table, not only with Mrs MacColl but with her daughter as well, ‘Such behaviour on Malcolm’s part was by no means unusual at the time, but Rene MacColl was outraged, got to his feet, slapped Malcolm’s face and stormed out of the restaurant along with his family.’ [The BBC ‘saint’ who pounced on any woman in reach: New book exposes unholy truth about moralist Malcolm Muggeridge, Daily Mail, 27 February 2015]

During April 1971 dark clouds were gathering over Savile’s head. On 29th March Clair Ufland, a 15 year old Top of the Pops dancer had committed suicide leaving behind a diary, quickly lost by the investigating authorities. The Payola inquiry into the BBC had begun with Brian Neill QC leading it. Savile had ridiculed a solicitor who’d dared to ask him questions. Bluff and arrogance would get him quite far but a more daring smokescreen was necessary.

Savile’s volunteering for Longford’s porn report was a useful piece of legerdemain. Others were in need of a convincing smokescreen too. In May 1973 the Prime Minister’s Chief Reporter of Public Inquiries David Anderson MP (b. 1916 – d.1995) who’d also been Heath’s Solicitor General for Scotland was convicted for asking two under-age girls to walk on him in stilettos, a request David Steel’s wife would recognise years later watching a play based on Anderson’s trial. Playland Amusement Arcade in Piccadilly Circus was already under surveillance with a prosecution in March 1972 – Playland Trial No 1 – taking place.

photo 1-50

The Outcasts’ Outcast – Peter Sanford (year?) p.330

Longford wrote:

“I must not forget to mention one unlooked-for benefit that followed our inquiry. The best friend that I have made since the war – Major Matthew Oliver, war hero – joined us as an investigator of the criminal aspects of pornography. He uncovered a distressing amount of corruption in the police who were supposed to be prosecuting pornography. Some of them paid a penalty. Matthew and his wife Vivienne have entertained me many times since at St Leonard’s. I have described Matt as the most severe critic of my books.” [p.155 Avowed Intent]

Was it unlooked-for as Longford stated? Or was there a more pressing need to free the Obscene Publications’ Squad’s grip over the Soho porn shops?

“Later development did, however, show that he was not quite so wrong or out of touch as was suggested at the time. The first direct result of the inquiry came quite soon after publication. Part of the investigation had focused on the organisation of the trade in pornography which was carried out, Frank began to suspect, with the connivance of senior figures in the police. At about the same time as he was going to Copenhagen, Frank employed the same private investigator, Major Matt Oliver, who had helped him with gathering information to clear Michael Davies of the Clapham Common murder back in the 1950s. Oliver compiled a dossier revealing malpractice by the police. Frank was unsure about how to proceed. When he consulted his committee they made it plain that it was not within the remit of the inquiry to tackle police corruption. Frank could not let the matter rest and he decided, in a private capacity, to hand over the information to Sir John Waldron, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, who promised to investigate. Frank also encouraged Oliver to take his dossier to the Sunday People, which put a team of undercover reporters on the case. In February of the following year the paper ran an expose on police corruption and the pornography trade which in the summer of 1973 resulted in eighteen senior officers being tried and sentence to a total of 116 years in jail. Although the history of the pornography inquiry was largely one of journalists working against Frank, in this instance a successful partnership was forged.” [Peter Sanford’s biography The Outcast’s Outcast p.331 below]

photo 2-49

The Outcast’s Outcast, p.331

Earl Longford speaking on the HOME OFFICE REPORT ON MURDER HL Deb 09 November 1961 vol 235 cc435-502

Earl Longford speaking on the HOME OFFICE REPORT ON MURDER HL Deb 09 November 1961 vol 235 cc435-502

It was in 1954 that Longford had first employed the services of Major Matthew Oliver to investigate the case of Michael Davies, a 21 year old sentenced to death for murder of a 17 year old on Clapham Common, involving a gang of Teddy Boys.

Screen Shot 2015-04-23 at 23.04.43

Piers Morgan – The Insider

Screen Shot 2015-04-23 at 23.10.01

Daily Mail, 20 September 2014

Piers Morgan ‘Humbled by Heroes’ Daily Mail, 20 September 2014

Gabrielle, Piers’ mother was one of four children of Major Matt Oliver

Gambling in the interests of national security/prestige?

In September 1952, the military assistant to three British Commandants in Berlin, a 34 year old Major Matthew Oliver, also with four children, had been demoted to Captain having been sentenced to four years in prison in Hanover, Germany. Six months before prosecution commenced in May 1952 Oliver had gone AWOL to London because ‘he intended to report personally to the War Office. He though it would be better if he was in Britain ‘when the storm broke’. According to the prosecuting officer Lieutenant-Colonel Andrew Campbell ‘the storm’ involved: – 28 charges of fraudulent conversion (approx £5175 – in today’s money approx £145k) and 1 charge of Absence Without Leave

Oliver, in his role of trust had access to a top secret intelligence fund in Berlin with a turnover of approx £8,330 (£234k in today’s money). Acting in his own defence, he quoted letters from Major-General G Bourne (his 2nd boss British Commandant West Berlin 23.01.1949- 24.10.1951, later honoured with the role of Aide-de-Campe General to the Queen in 1959 – 1960) which stated:

“80% of secret and confidential matters in Berlin were shared with Oliver”

and praised Oliver’s help in incidents involving the Russians in Berlin. Oliver’s mitigation was a curious case of self-delusion and menace arguing his gambling had only been embarked upon in the interests of national ‘prestige’:

“To make this sum good and to preserve British prestige in Berlin and not to bring it up into the limelight I entered on a system of gambling.”

He said he then entered the ‘monetary vortex’ (sounds painful) of Berlin attending the “trotting tracks and casinos which abound in West Berlin.”

He said that he had spent the money not for any personal benefit but purely for the sake of his country. Life in Berlin was very expensive and he received no grant for the entertainment of the “trail of general, Prime Ministers, their entourages and secretaries with whom I had to deal.”

The 4 year sentence and demotion to Captain, and being cashiered from the army, demonstrated the credulity with which the court greeted his mitigation plea.

The combined knowledge of Major Matthew 80% Oliver the Berlin intelligence funds gambler and Major Matthew Oliver Lord Longford’s Soho Dirty Squad P.I. would have been quite something when you think about how much power secrets can confer especially secrets about powerful people.

Screen Shot 2015-04-23 at 11.17.57

The Glasgow Herald, 11 September 1952

Screen Shot 2015-04-24 at 02.52.20

The Times 10 September 1952

Screen Shot 2015-04-24 at 02.54.01

The Times 10 September 1952

1994: What Lord Longford’s autobiography has to say on MI6 boaster Frank Beck & his ‘honest eyes’

In 1994 Lord Longford published his autobiography ‘Avowed Intent’ in which his chapter on ‘Penal Reform’ talks of his friendships with Dennis Nilsen, Myra Hindley (very much of interest with regard to Savile’s strange comment ‘I AM the Myra Hindley story – see below) and Frank Beck – the now notorious head of 3 children’s homes in Leicester during whose trial in 1991 Greville Janner MP (Lab: Leics NW) was accused of abusing a boy in Beck’s care.

David Hare on Dan Davies' Jimmy Savile: biography of the man who 'groomed a nation' [The Guardian Wed 9 July 2014]

David Hare on Dan Davies’ Jimmy Savile: biography of the man who ‘groomed a nation’ [The Guardian Wed 9 July 2014]

Lord Longford (Frank Pakenham) had worked for Sir Joseph Ball in the Conservative Research Department, meeting Moseley at a dinner party at Cliveden in May 1930 [1]. According to papers in archives seen by the author of Churchill’s Secret Enemy, Sir Ball attended Frank’s marriage to Elizabeth Packenham in 1931.[2] Fiercely pro-appeasement, Ball would later form LONHRO the Rhodesian mining company which ex Hitler youth Tiny Rowlands headed up and where Sir Angus Ogilvy would fall foul of Ted Heath’s comments about the company and Ogilvy’s breach of sanctions (Ogilvy was the President to whom Jimmy Savile played Vice at the National Association of Youth Clubs and, as it happens, the husband of the woman, Princess Alexandra, who introduced him to Duncrofts Approved School as Savile writes in his autobiography)

Sir Joseph Ball: http://churchillssecretenemy.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/sir-joseph-ball-1885-1961-churchills.html

In 1930 he was promoted to the post of Director of the Conservative Research Department. Over the next 15 years he developed the strategy of using dirty tricks and black propaganda. This included operating secret agents in the Labour Party and Liberal Party. One historian has claimed that Ball was Britain’s first spin-doctor.

It was during his time working for Sir Joseph Ball that Frank decided to join the Labour Party in 1936.

For a detailed timeline of Frank Beck’s career, trial, conviction and subsequent inquiries please see https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/child-abuse-in-leicestershire-working-document-frank-beck/ 

Longford having visited Dennis Nilsen [“an excellent sense of humour”] and Brian Balderstone, both in prison at Whitemore, Cambridgeshire already in one day, then waited to see the third prisoner on his list due for a visit – Frank Beck.

Writing as at 17 September 1993 Longford said:

“The third prisoner I visited on that occasion was Frank Beck, who was convicted of a whole series of offences in the children’s homes he was in charge of under Leicestershire County Council for thirteen years. On the face of it his is a dreadful story. He is, however, appealing against the convictions, although I gather the appeal will not be heard possibly until later in 1994. I am now, after several visits, personally convinced of his total innocence. He made an excellent first impression on me, and again impressed me the second time I visited, when he had two solicitors present so that we had a very detailed discussion. On this second occasion he reminded me that I had told the press he had honest eyes; certainly I would confirm that assessment.”

Why would having two solicitors [n.b. in an earlier version of this blog post I wrongly transcribed solicitors as soldiers] present have any bearing on the ability to conduct ‘a very detailed discussion’? Was Lord Longford aware that adult male social workers who had worked with Beck had made allegations of sexual assault against him, not “just” children? Or that Beck was keen to make the court aware that after leaving the Marines MI6 had wanted to employ him as a “secret agent” but he’d decided to go and qualify as a social worker, leaving the question of whether he’d declined or accepted this job offer open and his role of controlling children’s homes merely a cover for a security services role? Fortunately, while the MI6 claim went unreported in other press reports of Beck’s case, Social Work Today didn’t receive the memo: Beck boasted MI6 link says witness [Social Work Today, 24 October 1991] photo 1-49 Despite being avowedly intent upon the rehabilitation of prisoners who have committed and been convicted of serious offences however little remorse they show for abusing children for example, as in the case of Mormon preacher Brian Balderstone…

“As far as Brian Balderstone is concerned, I wish he were out of prison by the time these words are published. He has difficulties with remorse. At the time of his offences he was a Mormon priest; now he receives much consolation from the pentecostals. He and his wife used to have one of his granddaughters in bed with them, and he was convicted of serious offences against his granddaughter. He does not admit to rape, but recognises he behaved improperly. When he is released he hopes to live in a Christian hostel. I promised to write to his former employer about his future.”

Longford’s christian compassion for convicts and ex-convicts doesn’t extend to the child victims of Beck and he is extremely hopeful that it will be possible to undermine their evidence against Beck by using any police records possible to discredit them

“One of the solicitors handling the appeal told me that where they had been able to obtain the police records of Frank Beck’s accusers, these were enough to discredit them. They had not been able to obtain the records at the time of the trial of those whose evidence was accepted by the jury. Since then, however, this information has been extracted from the police. At the time of writing, the former chairman of the Bar Council, Mr Scrimegeour, is leading the appal, which suggests that the scare of Frank Beck possesses no little strength.”

Sadly the entire chapter on ‘Penal reform’ only seems to cut one way for Longford, to the benefit of rapists and killers, many of whose victims were children, for their forgiveness regardless of their lack of remorse and most dangerously, for their release. Why does British romanticism for the (often, but not always) upper-class ‘eccentric’ blind us so frequently to deeply unpleasant undercurrents in such personalities? photo 2-48 photo 3-31 Although Longford sent flowers to Beck’s funeral [reference cited as Catholic Herald 17 June 1994] it doesn’t appear he attended himself and as the book was almost through the publication process Beck’s death prompted Longford to add an epilogue:

“Still later, at an advanced stage in the book’s production, I heard with great sorrow that Frank Beck had died suddenly. After his death I received a letter, written shortly before, which I shall always treasure, and the poem from which I can only quote four lines below. His appeal has obviously had to be dropped and I shall continue to hope that the efforts to clear his name will be successful.

Then to die, by someone’s evil streak.

A flickering light, always cold,

A light no more, now by God’s grace,

Free for sure.”

The contents of Longford’s final and treasured letter from Beck and Beck’s poem in its entirety would likely make for elucidating reading. I would be grateful for any further information on Brian Balderstone’s trial and conviction. It appears Longford may have had an agenda around which certain prisoners received his compassionate campaigning fervour and others did not. photo 4-23

[1] Fn.45 Churchill’s Secret Enemy

[2] Fn. 45 Churchill’s Secret Enemy

1974: Grey lunches with Sir Keith Joseph & invites Mrs Charles Morrison to become Albany Trust Chair

Sir Peter Morrison’s sister-in-law, Sara was married to his elder brother Charles a Conservative MP for Devizes and a confirmed Heathite.

Mass Conservatism: The Conservatives and the Public Since the 1880s  By Stuart Ball, Ian Holliday

On Sir Charles Morrison’s election from ‘Mass Conservatism: The Conservatives and the Public Since the 1880s’ By Stuart Ball, Ian Holliday

Between 1971 – 1975 Sara Morrison held the position of Vice-Chairman of the Conservative Party. Heath’s defeat in February 1974 and in October losing to Wilson with a slim majority, exacerbated Sara Morrison and Michael Wolff (Executive Chair of Party) efforts to reinvigorate with major reforms through the Community Affairs Department. Party membership was t an all time low and fund-raising capacity was badly impaired.

On 9 December 1974 she wrote to Antony Grey primarily to decline his offer of the Chairmanship of the Albany Trust.

She was also delighted to hear Grey had lunched with Keith Joseph, “Do let me know if there is anything I can do to help” and invites Grey to lunch on 23 January 1975.

This is particularly interesting in the context of a later appeal Grey will make (c. April 1975? in a few months time) to Sir Keith Joseph’s cousin and co-controlling family of Bovis, the construction company that Joseph’s family had interests in and was in sharp financial decline.

photo 1-48

Grey had however suffered an attack of appendicitis prior to Christmas and in the new year, David Barnard, the Albany Trust Secretary to Grey’s Director role, wrote to Mrs Morrison to cancel the lunch for the 23rd January

“I do know Mr Grey was keen to discuss various matters with you, and that he’ll be in touch with you as soon as he is well enough. Meanwhile if there are any matters on which the Trust can be of assistance, perhaps you will contact me.”

Albany Trust was in the process of moving to 31/33 Clapham Road.

photo 3-30

Andrew Rowe would later become an MP for Mid-Kent in 1983, becoming Heath’s PPS for his first 3 years in Parliament and sitting on the Council for Save the Children

He, too, was the Tory MP who said sadly: “Sometimes I wonder whether the British really like children.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/nov/26/conservatives-houseofcommons ]

Rowe had been working in the Voluntary Services Unit as Director of Community Affairs. His new role was to act as a conduit for voluntary bodies to feed their specialist knowledge and ideas into the Conservative party.

photo 2-47

photo 4-22

December 1970: Stamford asks De La Noy to appear as defence witness in Spartacus obscenity prosecution

A few days before the launch of Stamford’s Mayfair Cinema Club which he will be attending, De La Noy decides Stamford’s publication Spartacus could be used to insert 1,000 mail shot letters from Lord Beaumont (the Trust’s Chairman at the time) asking for funds for Albany Trust. Interestingly out of 5,000 letters, 1k are reserved to go to homes in Chelsea and 1k to Nottingham – why target these two areas in particular? Chelsea’s wealthy and influential residents are an obvious target for scooping up money and clout for the Albany Trust but why did the Albany Trust feel particularly assured of a good return of Deeds of Covenant from Nottingham? A further 1k are going out on ‘a very specialised mailing list’ held by the Trust.

 

photo 1-46

 

 

photo 5-15

 

 

Quite possibly De La Noy’s letter of 16th December and Stamford’s response above crossed in the post, but it quickly becomes clear that taking any offer of help from Stamford comes at a cost.

“I have three court cases in Brighton on Tuesday 5th January at 10.30am and if you are free on that day, I would appreciate your presence, as I am thinking of building this up to a show-case for the benefit of the national press and television, and I am also hoping to have an interview with ‘Day By Day’ on Southern Television, and possibly with Late Night Line-Up on the same day, and I have hopes of this case being dismissed. Perhaps you could let me know in due course if you will be able to attend, and, if necessary, to give evidence on our behalf by way of an opinion, on the obscenity of Issues 13, 14 and 15 of Spartacus: these issues being the subject of the three cases.

I look forward to hearing from you soon, and to seeing you at the opening of the Cinema.”

 

photo 4-20

 

 

De La Noy entertains the idea of appearing for the defence and it appears that Stamford had enclosed the 3 Spartacus issues with the completed £10 p.a. (in today’s money approx £150) Deed of Covenant (see above 4 encl.) for his assessment. The next day, a Thursday, was the opening of the Mayfair Cinema Club so Stamford and De La Noy would be meeting in any event.

“I made a note in my diary about your court case on January 5. If you would be kind enough to let me have precise details of the charges I will give serious consideration to appearing for the defence. I would like to know whether this is a police or private prosecution and the section of whichever law it is under which you are being prosecuted. If you have a summary of the evidence the prosecution intend bringing this would help, and I would also be interested to know who else has agreed to appear for the defence. The sooner you could let me have this information the better.

Again, very many thanks for the Deed of Covenant; no doubt by the time you receive this letter we shall at least have had a word at the opening of the cinema.”

 

 

photo 2-44

 

Stamford still can’t help his imperious tone and directs De La Noy to contact his solicitor directly and ask him for the details of the case, “I should be most grateful of your help at this case, as it could be a most important event in homosexual equality.”

“I am able to cope with the cost of the case apparent at the moment, although if it drags on into High Court, and becomes terribly expensive, I may need to launch an emergency appeal from my subscribers, and other interested parties.

Incidentally, Roger Baker has also offered to appear as a defence witness, and I have also sent a subscription and donation to the Defence of Literature and the Arts Society, and in passing briefly mentioned these forthcoming cases. I think they may also be interested to attend and provide witnesses.”

See further blog post on the DLAS and their 1978 approach to PIE for an article on how pedophiles’ freedom of speech was being curbed, all orchestrated by Antony Grey:

[https://bitsofbooksblog.wordpress.com/2015/03/14/pieantonygrey/ ]

“An extensive press coverage seems inevitable with these cases now that my name has become a news item, I feel that it is wise to use this publicity to the best advantage. I therefore propose, after the cases, to hold a Press Conference in Brighton and to aim for some television appearances, possibly on Day By Day by Southern I.T.V. and Late Night Line Up on BBC2. I feel also that if Frost is operating again by then he may be a useful source of publicity. I understand from my grapevine that he is sympathetic.”

Stamford, aside from casting aspersions on Frost without any further details (for example he doesn’t say he’s a Spartacus subscriber which would be in the realm of his direct knowledge so it’s difficult to assess how far his grandiose self-image blurs his vision as to those he considers ‘supporters’) then refuses to listen to De La Noy over the amount of fund-raising letters available for insertion in Spartacus and requests more than a 1,000. How many subscribers does Spartacus have if “one thousand would not go very far amongst our subscribers.”

“I think you will find that they are a fairly generous crowd, and that a substantial amount of support will be forthcoming”

“The police visited Mr Colin Campbell Young at his home in Edinburgh on an entirely different matter, not concerning us. Whilst they were there, they asked him if he had anything which he considered to be obscene. He told them that the only thing he had were copies of Spartacus, which he did not consider to be obscene. The police asked if they could see them, and he produced issues 13, 14 and 15, together with the envelopes in which they arrived. They asked him if they could borrow the copies, and he agreed to this. They took them away. He heard nothing from then, and the next he knew about it was when I telephoned him and told him of the summonses. I have asked him to appear in court on my behalf and he hopes to be able to do so. I think it might be an important point to note that all these postal packets had reached their destination, and had been opened by the addressee long before the police knew of their existence. They were also ordered and paid for in advance by Mr Young, although his subscription form has almost certainly been destroyed by now , as we do not keep these old records. All further details will have to be obtained from Peter Moore, and I shall let him know you will contact him.”

Note that Stamford is not De La Noy’s obedient servant in his sign-off, reserved it seems for letters to Lord Beaumont alone.

 

photo 3-27

 

 

In reply on 28th December 1970 De La Noy tries to reiterate to Stamford that he wishes Stamford’s solicitor  to contact him with further information and a request to be a witness for his defence and also repeats himself as to the limited number of 5,000 printed fundraising letters from Lord Beaumont, but relents to give Stamford an additional 1k to insert meaning the remaining 2,000 Albany Trust fundraising letters were distributed to Spartacus subscribers.

photo 1-45

 

 

Would be interesting to find out if ITV and BBC2 have any footage of Stamford being interviewed in January 1971 (that is if the case does progress to court and Stamford doesn’t plead guilty which will become clearer as I process more documents and post here). One wonders what happened to the Mayfair Cinema Club and how long it remained open for, and also whether it was actually located in Mayfair? And how long had Stamford been operating Spartacus for by 1970 to become so incredibly wealthy when he’d previously been a minister?

December 1970: Lord Beaumont ignores Grey’s Spartacus warning & urges De La Noy to use Stamford’s money

John D Stamford, self-styled Leader of the 1960s British Homophile community and beyond is not best pleased with Lord Beaumont’s reply requiring him to fill out an application form and doesn’t reply for over a month, although he remains Lord B’s ‘obedient servant’ if somewhat disgruntled when he does reply:

“I am returning your application form as the details required were given in my previous letter, and a person in my position should not be asked to fill in an application which one fills in for a post as a junior clerk. I did say in my original letter that no form of salary would be required by me, should this offer still stand, and should you still wish to interview me.”

Screen Shot 2015-09-30 at 15.54.11

Church Times, Friday 27 November 1970, p2

Church Times Friday 18 December 1970, p12

Church Times Friday 18 December 1970, p12

Church Times, 24 December 1970

Church Times, 24 December 1970

Church Times 8 January 1971

Church Times 8 January 1971

The Albany Trust has by this point employed Michael De La Noy as Director and Lord Beaumont replies to inform Stamford of this, although he hopes that Michael and the Trust “will be able to take advantage of your kind offer” presumably in monetary terms.

However by the time Lord Beaumont (Tim to Michael seeing as Michael was formerly his assistant editing Prism from 1965, a radical church publication and they are well known to one another) writes an informal memo to De La Noy on 7th December  stating,

“Antony says that this man is bad news, but if you look at his original application he appears to be swimming in money and therefore I suggest it may be well worth your while getting in contact with him fairly soon,”

Michael has already seized the initiative and

(1) been for a ‘delightful dinner’ with Stamford and his Spartacus colleagues the Tuesday before and the very  next day writes a letter to Stamford thanking him and applying for membership of the new Mayfair Film Cinema Club which Stamford and others will be opening on 17th December. De La Noy also invites Stamford to an Albany Trust fundraiser at the crypt of St Martins in the Fields to be held on 22 January, telling Stamford

“I very much appreciate your concern about the Albany Trust and your obvious desire to help me. I do hope we shall find many ways of working closely together.”

(2) Met up with Roger Baker on Friday 4 December, a Spartacus journalist, in Shepherd’s Bush for a ‘programme that went quite well’ and arranged to be interviewed by him on the work of the Albany Trust for Spartacus

photo 5-13

photo 4-18

photo-27

photo 3-26 photo 2-43

October 1970: John D Stamford of Spartacus applied to Lord Beaumont for Director of Albany Trust, no salary required!

Following Antony Grey’s resignation as Director of the Albany Trust in September 1970, John D Stamford of Spartacus [1st Floor, 46 Preston Street, Brighton, BN1 2HP] wrote to Lord Beaumont of Whitley to apply for his job, no salary required!

Spartacus, which during the 1980s was being run as an international paedophile network, has already been linked with Elm Guest House.

For further context of who John D Stamford and Spartacus are please see: https://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/category/spartacus/

“Further to the resignation of Mr Antony Grey from the Directorship of the Albany Trust, I write to apply for his post. I feel that I am well qualified to undertake the responsibilities which this post carries.

I am Editor and proprietor of ‘Spartacus’ magazine which is a genuine and responsible homosexual publication with aims very similar to those of the Albany Trust. In this respect I am already regarded by many thousands of homosexuals in the United Kingdom, and indeed in many overseas countries, as the leader of the homosexual community in Britain.”

As a self-appointed ‘Leader of the homosexual community in Britain’ Stamford’s 1970 claim would within a decade be rejected in a letter to The Observer pointing out that ‘Mr Stamford’s publication is known to only a minority within a minority, and is of use or of interest to only a few of them” and criticising The Observer for giving Stamford more space than coverage of an Employment Tribunal of interest to homosexual people as opposed to a sub-set of jet-setting pederasts.

Observer 27 April 1980 [click on above to link to spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com]

Observer 27 April 1980 [click on above to link to spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com]

photo 1-43 photo 2-42 photo 3-25

 

“I do not wish to accept any form of salary from the Albany trust should I be offered the position of Director, and would be willing to provide my services free of charge. The only expenses which would be incurred would be those directly related to my work. I already travel extensively on behalf of my own organisation and by continuing my existing work in the British homophile movement with the work of the Albany trust I feel that I could save the trust a considerable amount of money, and I would probably be prepared to donate sizeable amounts of money to the work from ‘Spartacus’ funds. I am no longer in the position where I depend upon my work to produce an income, and I am sure you will realise the great advantages to the Trust of combining my existing activities with the activities of the Albany Trust and Sexual Law Reform Society.”

Where did Stamford build up such resources and wealth to be able to propose subsidising Albany Trust out of the proceeds of Spartacus? Purely from the number of subscriptions to Spartacus by 1970? Or was he receiving funding from elsewhere? One gets a sense of Stamford’s personality in both his grandiose characterisation of himself and also his obsequy with his sign off

“I look forward to hearing from you, and remain, Your obedient servant”

Had Stamford and Lord Beaumont been in contact previously as suggested by, “and remain” ?

Lord Beaumont of Whitley replies within 48 hours enclosing an application form and job specification, pointing out the Trust had decided to broaden its coverage to the whole sexual field not just homosexuality