Bishop of Stepney

Jan 1970: Righton’s lack of attendance as a counsellor to Royal St Katherine’s, Stepney

For context please see blog post 1968-1970: Peter Righton, Antony Grey, Ian Greer, Raymond Clarke & The 1970 York Conference

During the spring and summer of 1970 analysis of the responses to the Social Needs questionnaire was undertaken. A weekend residential conference entitled ‘Social Needs’ and sponsored by the Albany Trust and the Yorkshire Council of Social Service’s Raymond Clarke (a protege of Sir Keith Joseph) was scheduled to take place at York University in July 1970 to discuss the results of the survey and implications for future work and Grey was keen to have the results of the survey to present at the conference.

In January 1970 Antony Grey wrote to Peter Righton to ask for his help in analysing the ‘Social Needs’ questionnaire.

photo 1-16

photo 2-15

photo 3-13In the meantime Righton’s busy schedule meant that his Albany Trust nomination as one of the five volunteers to provide counselling at St Katherine’s gay group based in Limehouse (under the auspices of Bishop of Stepney, Father Trevor Huddleston and the Community of the Resurrection, Mirfield) was causing problems due to his non-attendance, leaving others such as Rev Malcolm Johnson to cover gaps in the rota.

photo 4-10 photo 5-7

Advertisements

s.8 Sexual Offences Act 1967: Sir Norman Skelhorn’s Consent to Prosecute v. Police Powers of Prosecution

While police retained powers of arrest, custody and bail over people suspected of having committed offences (a) and/or (b) below only the Director of Public Prosecutions (‘DPP’) could either lay charges or give consent to charging/prosecuting:

(a) buggery/ gross indecency or attempted between man over 21 and a male under 21

(b) procuring or commanding buggery/gross indecency between man over 21 and a male under 21 Screen Shot 2015-05-09 at 06.55.53In 1972 s.48 of the Criminal Justice Act disapplied requirement of DPP consent to prosecute where charges had been made under the Indecency with Children Act 1960. However since the ICA 1960 only defines ‘children’ as those under 14 it would still have meant that while police had powers to prosecute where children had been abused, abuse of male children over the aged of 14 could still only be prosecuted with consent of the DPP even after the tempering of s.48.Screen Shot 2015-05-09 at 11.17.30 The current CPS guidance is here: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/soa_2003_and_soa_1956/ Screen Shot 2015-05-09 at 07.04.48But I couldn’t find an equivalent restriction on prosecution /consent to prosecute for heterosexual offences where one person is under the age of consent. Why?

Screen Shot 2015-05-09 at 12.55.13 Screen Shot 2015-05-09 at 12.55.03 Screen Shot 2015-05-09 at 12.54.51

Recently the Needle Blog put me out of my misery by publishing an answer as to why s.8 came to exist backed up with the illuminating find of a press report on how an early 1968 case [ R v Angel] with representation from solicitors’ firm Kingsley, Napley & Co, a case which served to drive home the message to police of the consequences of prosecuting sexual offences with boys without DPP consent. The court had no choice but to quash the conviction of a 58 year old man for raping a 9 year old boy, declaring the trial and committal proceedings null and void with the defendant being released from prison immediately.

It turns out Leo Abse MP had introduced the s.8 amendment at close to 4 in the morning of 4th July [ HC Deb 03 July 1967 vol 749 cc1491-525 ]

“The only amendments to be carried were those moved by Mr Abse to meet concern expressed by some members that the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions would not be required to prosecute where there was a long-standing relationship between a homosexual over 21 years and one under 21; or where an older man had been seduced or blackmailed into a homosexual act by a man under 21.”

“The Bill, unamended, said Mr Abse would leave the police free to prosecute the older man, even though this might not do justice between the offenders. Under the amendment, where the parties to the alleged offence were an adult and a minor, the case would be referred to the director to be looked at as a whole.” [Needle Blog, The Times 4 July 1967]

In July last year allegations surfaced that Abse’s good friend, Welsh Labour MP George Thomas (Speaker of the House of Commons and later raised to the House of Lords as Viscount Tonypandy in 1983 under Thatcher) had raped a 9 year old boy, the son of Labour party activists he was friendly with, and who currently resides in Australia. The blog Liberal England brings press reports of those allegations together here quoting from Abse’s book as per below (read the post to appreciate the point about timing and difference between the American and English editions of Abse’s book) and raises an important point about Australia being the location of choice to which George Thomas liked to consider dispatching potential ‘scandals’.

But there were times when my advice had gone unheeded. While still a backbench MP, he asked me for a loan. The specificity and size of the loan, £800, aroused my suspicions.

He poured out the story. I urged him to let me deal with this extortioner. But to no avail. That sum – the ticket and resettlement money which was to take the man to Australia – would, George insisted, mark the end of the affair.

I had profound misgivings but I could see George was near breaking point. I gave him the money. [Liberal England, Leo Abse, ‘Tony Blair: The Man Behind the Smile]

The date of the allegation of rape of a 9 year old would be closer to 1968 and the passage of the Sexual Offences Bill through Parliament which Abse so ably steered, as evidenced by his early morning amendment to Clause 8, particularly concerned as he was with protecting men over 21 from seduction and ‘blackmail’ by those under 21.

Abse does say that this incident took place when Thomas was still a backbencher, whereas the supposed rape seems to have taken place in the late 1960s or early 1970s, which makes the dates hard to reconcile. [Liberal England, Viscount Tonypandy & Leo Abse ]

Without s.8 the police would have retained power of prosecution, and if for example, there was corruption within a force (as was discovered in the Flying Squad/ Obscene Publications force with the help of Lord Longford and Piers Morgan’s grandfather Major Matt Oliver in 1971-72) the police would have effectively held the reigns of blackmail if faced with decisions whether to prosecute prominent public figures.

Oz trial lifted lid on porn squad bribery

Secret home office papers show how prosecution of hippy magazine helped unearth a web of corruption that landed Yard men in jail

Alan Travis, Home Affairs Editor, The Guardian
Saturday November 13, 1999

The outcry over the 1971 Schoolkids Oz censorship trial sparked a major corruption inquiry in Whitehall which ended in the jailing of the senior officer responsible for the magazine’s prosecution, newly released confidential Whitehall documents reveal.

The secret home office papers published today show the public backlash to the savage sentencing of Richard Neville and the editors of the hippie magazine helped precipitate Scotland Yard’s biggest ever anti-corruption drive in which 400 officers, including a deputy assistant commissioner, were imprisoned or left the force.

The head of the Metropolitan police’s obscene publications squad, who targeted the capital’s burgeoning samizdat, also ended up behind bars as had Neville and the magazine’s other two editors, Felix Dennis and Jim Anderson.

The papers were not due to be made public until 2003 but have been released early under the open government initiative. They show that the then home secretary, Reginald Maudling, was so stung by the accusation that the police were singling out hippie publications such as Oz and the Little Red Schoolbook for prosecution while Soho pornographers were being let off the hook that he ordered a major inquiry.

Detective Chief Inspector George Fenwick, then in charge of the “dirty” squad, told Mr Maudling that pornography could not be stamped out because it had existed for centuries, and justified his targeting of Oz and the Little Red Schoolbook as indecent publications which were aimed at children and advocated “the alternative society”.

Fenwick disputed the home office’s claim that the Soho bookshops were operating with impunity. “I would rather question the assertion that pornography was on ‘open sale’ in Soho or indeed anywhere else in London on a large scale. I would, however, agree that it can be found in various bookshops when it is particularly asked for.”

Home office civil servants said this weasel explanation “left a good deal to be desired”.

Detailed allegations were made of police corruption soon after the Oz inquiry. Fenwick was eventually jailed for 10 years as the “chief architect” of the biggest ever Met corruption ring in which the Soho porn merchants had some of the most senior police officers in Britain on their weekly payroll.

The Oz case at the Old Bailey was the longest obscenity trial in British legal history. The original sentences of up to 15 months for Neville and the others sparked a wave of protest from Beatle John Lennon, a young John Birt and many others.

The convictions were quashed on appeal only after, it is alleged by Geoffrey Robertson, one of the defence counsels, the lord chief justice, Lord Widgery, sent his clerk, a former merchant seaman, to Soho one lunchtime to buy £20 worth of the hardest porn he could find. The contents of Oz paled in comparison.

After the trial Fenwick had to explain to Maudling why he had targeted Oz. In his confidential report dated August 13, 1971, he said: “In this country at the minute there are somewhere in the region of 80 publications which advocate what in the current idiom is called the alternative society. Of these about 25 can be termed ‘underground’ press and a number of them contain articles which can be described as indecent.

“However, by far the worst of these are Oz, Frendz and IT, in that order. These in fact are the only ones against whom action has been taken or indeed contemplated in the last 12 months.”

He said that alongside these “underground” publications so-called sex instructional literature had emerged, including the Little Red Schoolbook, Curious, In Depth, New Directions and Forum – later to feature articles by Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s press secretary. “All have been the subjects of inquiry or prosecution by this department during the past year. It is an unfortunate fact of life that pornography has existed for centuries and it is unlikely that it can ever be stamped out.”

He disputed that pornography was on open sale and complained that the way the law was drafted made his task impossible: “The police cannot act as ‘buyers’ and so lay themselves open to allegations of ‘agent provocateur’. It must therefore be left to the purveyors of filth to make a mistake or the odd genuine complaint to come to hand.”

Fenwick blamed the director of public prosecutions for lack of action and the press for giving massive publicity to the hippie cases and leaving the impression the police were doing nothing about Soho.

Fenwick’s explanation set alarm bells ringing in the home office. Anxieties were reinforced when an anonymous “senior Yard man” was quoted in the London Evening News saying the Oz trial would not herald a new crackdown on porn as it would take too much manpower: “One can go into Soho today and see far worse pornography than was in the Oz magazines. Any child can buy it.”

So when Matthew Oliver, an investigator for Lord Longford’s unofficial inquiry into pornography, later that year produced allegations against seven named porn merchants who were bribing police officers, the home secretary demanded a full report.

The inquiries initially came up against a wall of silence.

But in February 1972 the head of the Scotland Yard flying squad, Commander Kenneth Drury, was revealed to have just spent a two-week holiday in Cyprus with James Humphreys, one of seven named porn barons. Drury claimed they were looking for Ronnie Biggs, the escaped train robber.

But investigations ordered by the new Met commissioner, Robert Mark, finally unveiled the systemic corruption at the heart of the police. Four years later Mr Justice Mars-Jones named Fenwick as the “chief architect” and sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment.

Those members of the Flying Squad who might have known names of high profile clientele buying under the counter stock of child abuse images from shops across the backstreets of Piccadilly Circus were already facing prosecution themselves by the time the s.48 Criminal Justice Act 1972 amendment came into force, unable to use s.48 to reassert police powers of prosecution where boys under the age of 14 were involved, without the consent of DPP Sir Norman Skelhorn.

“In theory, if the ‘right’ man had the job, the DPP could become the paedophile’s gatekeeper.” [ Needle Blog – The Consequence of Leo Abse MP’s amendment to the Sexual Offences Act 1967 ]

March 1970: Decision Not to Prosecute Cyril Smith (not yet even an MP but wishing to stand in election)

In March 1970, prior to Cyril Smith becoming an MP in 1972, a file of evidence was submitted to the then DPP’s Office – Sir Norman Skelhorn.

The file, from Lancashire Constabulary, contained allegations made by eight men that they had been subjected to indecent assaults by Cyril Smith as teenagers. The allegations were very similar in nature, and were allegedly conducted on the pretexts of either a medical examination or punishment for misbehaviour. All the boys were either living at Cambridge House Children’s Home in Rochdale (six of them), or were dependent on Cyril Smith for either employment, financial support or some sort of guardianship. It is noted that 80 pages of evidence was supplied to the then DPP’s office with a covering note dated 11 March 1970.[ CPS Statement in relation to Cyril Smith]

Taking just over a week to reply the DPP’s response was as follows:

“I have considered your file and I observe that eight young men, whose ages range from nineteen to twenty-four years, allege that between 1961 and 1966 Smith subjected them to various forms of indecency and I also observe that Smith denies their allegations. Any charges of indecent assault founded on these allegations, as well as being somewhat stale, would be, in my view, completely without corroboration. Further, the characters of some of these young men would be likely to render their evidence suspect.

“In the circumstances, I do not consider that if proceedings for indecent assault were to be taken against Smith, there would be a reasonable prospect of a conviction. I do not, therefore, advise his prosecution.”

Dec 1970 – 26 June 1972: Prichodsky, O’Neill and the ‘missing’ Indecency with Children charges that Mr J Clarke wished to sentence for

Times 11th Aug 1971- Andrew Prichodsky and Kenneth Edward O’Neill in Court

Please click above to read full report on http://www.cathyfox.wordpress.com

On 14 October 1970 two police officers with a search warrant went to Elm Court, Harrowby Street, in the West End, where Mr Prichodsky had a room.

On a table they found a blue envelope containing obscene photographs of a 14-year-old boy. Mr Prichodsky said: ” Yes, I took them. You may think it funny, but I like pictures of young boys and there are a lot of influential people of the same mind. You would be surprised if I told you some of their names.”

In total police found 1,800 photos and 13 cans of 35mm black and white film of boys, “some of whom were extremely young” in 3 searches of different locations related to Andrew Prichodsky and Kenneth O’Neill.

  • 14 October 1970: Police search flat at 19 Elm Court Harrowby Street & seized a number of films and other articles – search warrant under the Obscene Publications Act 1959
  • 9 December 1970: Second search, this time of a flat in Ealing occupied at the time by Prichodsky and O’Neill, one found in bed with a boy of 14 – search warrant executed for stolen goods
  • 20 January 1971: A third search ‘not necessary to allude in detail.’ as per Lord Justice Roskill in Court of Appeal judgment

Prosecuting counsel was Mr Kenneth Richardson and defence counsel for Prichodsky was Mr McHale. What became clear during McHale’s plea in mitigation for his client was that Mr Justice Clarke couldn’t understand why the two defendants had only been charged with a single offence each of [       ]. No charges were laid in relation to the 6 sacks of material the police had seized as outlined above.

Prichodsky and O’Neill were sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment each. An appeal was lodged which took just over 10 months to reach the Court of Appeal.

In the transcript of the Court of Appeal judgment [click below for full report] Lord Justice Roskill

“When one looks at page 25 of the transcript, one finds that at D the learned Judge said:

“When he was taking pictures of boys between the ages of 9 and 16, are you saying that your client did not appreciate that that was a wrong thing to do, that he was doing it not realising that it was wrong?”

to which counsel replied: “My Lord, I have obviously failed to convey that which I was attempting to convey. I sought to draw a distinction between the photographs which were taken at the flat which were intended to be marketed, and those which were seized at an earlier date, and are, therefore, not eligible for consideration for the offence which was committed in December. Your Lordship may think it is undesirable that such photographs should be taken, but they are not the subject matter of photographs which were in his possession on the date in question in this charge, for the purpose of publication“.

The learned Judge then went on: “Is this not right: that on the 8th of December, 9th of December 1970, were not photographs found in his possession of boys between the ages of 9 and 16, which he had taken himself?” to which Counsel replied: “Yes, my Lord, there were some such photographs”.

It is right to say that from beginning to end of the case there was never any evidence that any boy involved was of such tender years as 9 years of age; one boy was of the age of about 14. The learned Judge went on: “That is all I am concerned with here. That is what I have to deal with, and the evidence of the other photographs is evidence which shows that he has been doing the same thing on previous occasions”, to which counsel replied “Not marketing”. The learned Judge then said “But having for the purpose possibly, in the future, of gain, and that is a habit that he has been doing”.”

COURT OF APPEAL 26th June 1972 Kenneth Edward O’Neill and Andrew Michael Joseph Prichodsky

At p. 6 of the Court of Appeal judgment Lord Justice Roskill couldn’t say explicitly why prosecutions of indecency with children hadn’t been made against Prichodsky and O’Neill only that they hadn’t and Mr Kenneth Richardson “has given the reason”. Richardson had also appeared as prosecuting counsel in first trial and was of assistance to the appeal court due to the loss of the first transcript.

Although Lord Justice Roskill does say ‘the prosecution may have felt that that evidence though available was not sufficiently reliable to justify the making of such charges’ which on the face of reading the committal papers and statements Mr Justice Clarke had clearly felt strongly were made out by the evidence contained within.

This starts to present a clearer view of why Mr Justice Clarke persisted in his incredulous questioning of Prichodsky’s defence counsel McHale at the initial trial ten months or so previously. On the basis of what Mr Justice Clarke had read in the committal papers he was obviously not of the same opinion as Sir Norman Skelhorn DPP who under s.8 SOA 1967 (and note timing of this appeal is a few months before the s.48 amendment of CJA 1972 allowing for police to prosecute sexual abuse of children under 14 as offences under the Indecency with Children Act 1960 which raises the question of who pushed for s.48 amendment in Hansard?) at this point retained sole control over whether to prosecute for the sexual abuse of children.

“It is right to say that there were in the committal papers a number of statements of young men who had been allegedly involved in unlawful homosexual acts with one or other or both of the Appellants.

There was also evidence how at least one if not two boys had been persuaded, to use a neutral word, to go to the flat where these photographs were taken.

It is also right to say on that material there was evidence on which charges might have been laid either of indecent assault or procuring acts of gross indecency or of acts of gross indecency or possibly even of buggery or attempted buggery.

There was also evidence which might have been the subject of charges of incitement to unlawful homosexual offences.

But not a single charge of that kind was made.

Mr. Richardson has given the reason and one can readily understand the prosecution may have felt that that evidence though available was not sufficiently reliable to justify the making of such charges.”

Nov 1972: Decision Not to Prosecute – Victor Montagu MP

In November 1972 Sir Skelhorn’s office declined to prosecute Victor Montagu MP (who like Tony Benn had disclaimed his peerage as 10th Earl of Sandwich in 1964 to remain in the House of Commons as Tory MP for Dorset) for the abuse of a boy for 2 years, instead giving a caution.

Montagu’s youngest son had been abused by him between the ages of 7 – 11, while his father was Conservative MP for South Dorset approximately between the years 1956 – 1961. The allegation ten years later was that Montagu had been abusing the another boy during a two year period from December 1970 – November 1972.

The files show the boy was interviewed on 10 November 1972 after rumours that he was being sexually abused. Two officers visited Montagu at his home in Mapperton, Dorset, and interviewed him under caution. He was later charged by police with two counts of indecently assaulting a male under 16 on a number of occasions between 31 December 1970 and January 1972 and of indecently assaulted the same boy between 31 December 1971 and November 1972. He was remanded to appear at Bridport magistrates court.

But when the then chief constable of Dorset and Bournemouth, Arthur Hambleton, wrote to Skelhorn for advice on the case, prosecutors chose to give Montagu a caution instead of proceeding with a criminal trial in public.

A note, from the DPP’s office endorsing the decision, said the case was “borderline” but because Montagu was of “previous good character” and there was “no fear of repetition with this boy … we could caution”. [Tory MP Victor Montagu escaped child sex abuse trial in 1970s, Sandra Laville, The Guardian, 15 May 2015]

April 1974: Decision not to Prosecute – Bishop of Stepney

BBC’s Tom Bateman has posted the police papers from an April 1974 decision by the department of the Director of Public Prosecutions in the case of Suffragan Bishop of Stepney, Father Trevor Huddleston [see below]. Despite 4 charges made out under s.1(1) of the Indecency with Children Act 1960 (and therefore not requiring consent under s.8?) the DPP’s office is asked for their opinion and it is given by Assistant DPP Michael Evelyn (also known as prolific crime writer Michael Underwood – wonder what he did during the war having just been called to the Bar?) Evelyn had been on the staff of the Office of the DPP since 1946 (aged 30) and in 1969 had been promoted to Assistant DPP before retiring in 1976.

More on Father Trevor Huddleston and Labour’s Attorney-General Sam Silkin’s disclosures in 1979

Screen Shot 2015-05-15 at 20.45.10

Another DES funded ‘Youth Experiment Project’, Henniker-Major & a WWII Military Intelligence Analyst

Within 2 months of the MIND/PIE/Albany Trust Workshop…[See before reading below: 1972 – 1976: The Art of Pervasion – Playland, Paedophiles, Power and Politics  – [Sir] Harold Haywood meets PIE hosted by MIND with other Albany Trustees – all six write to The Guardian to plead the case for vulnerable ‘bisexual’ married men indulging in a spot of extra-marital pederasty and beg the question ‘Who is exploiting whom?’ – Albany Trust, PIE & PAL begin co-drafting Paedophilia: Some Questions & Answers which a year later is used by PIE to drop in MPs pigeon-holes at Westminster during the passage of the Protection of Children Bill March/April 1978]

 

On 27 November 1975 Mr A Prosser, Department of Education & Science, agreed to provide a grant to Albany Trust specifically towards the support of a full-time Youth Officer.[i] Briefly during this early period 1974-1976 when Grey and Haywood move towards successfully securing government funds to extend the work of the Albany Trust, two Ministers of State for Education & Science in quick succession were Reginald Prentice MP (5 March 1974 – 10 June 1975) and Fred Mulley MP[Lab: Sheffield Park 1953-1980] (DES: 10 June 1975 – 10 September 1976) appointed under Harold Wilson’s second term as Prime Minister. Prentice was to later cross the floor and become a Conservative MP, given a peerage under Thatcher.

“The Albany Trust/DES Youth and Sexuality Project which ran from the summer of 1976 when the first Youth officer, Ric Rogers, was appointed, until October 1979 when his successor, Alan Smith, presented his final report. Whereas Rogers had concentrated his out-of-London activities in two main areas – the East Midlands and the North East – Alan Smith followed a more general itinerary, going wherever he found that a local authority or youth organization training programme wanted him to offer a training event.” [grey / footnotes]

The Youth and Sexuality Project report did not find much favour with W.H.Miller of DES when it was finally received by the department in late 1979. By then the DES came under Mark Carlisle MP who was to last [ ] months under Thatcher’s first term before [Sir] Keith Joseph took over for the next 5 years. Miller wrote to make clear that despite funding the ‘Experimental Project’ for 3 years the Department did not want their name attached to the report.

“This is of course a report by the Albany Trust and publication is primarily a matter for the Trust. It would not be proper for the Department to oppose publication, although I should emphasis that this does not mean that the Department supports the views expressed. If you do decide to publish, you will no doubt wish to correct the typographical errors and make it clear that this is an Albany Trust project which the Department agreed to support in 1976, as an experimental project (rather than a project funded by the Department through the Trust).”[ii]

In contrast Grey was either somehow unaware that the DES under Thatcher had expressed a cool distance between the Youth Worker ‘Youth and Sexuality’ Experimental Project or its resulting report (along with a sneer at the typos) and instead in Quest for Justice signposted the report as residing somewhere within the DES

“The Albany Trust’s existence during its final years of activity is amply justified by this impressive report. Doubtless it is now mouldering forgotten in some dusty pigeonhole at the Department of Education. It should be resurrected, studied afresh, and acted upon.”[iii]

 

[i] Referenced in a letter from Rodney Bennet England to John Leigh (DES) dated 13th February 1978

[ii] Letter from WH Miller (DES) to Rodney Bennett-England (Albany Trust) dated 18th January 1980, DES Ref: YO21/30/206 [for finding other files residing in DES, YO presumably stands for Youth Officer or Youth Office?]

[iii] Grey Loc 3960/6001

Shortly before [Sir] Harold Haywood departed the Trust for the Prince’s Trust for Young People, Ric Rogers resigned as Albany’s Youth Worker to move to the National Youth Bureau. Alan Smith replaced him and in mid September 1978 wrote the following outline of the Experiment for submission as one of the charities being funded by DES as ‘youth experiment projects’.

photo-16

From details of other charitable projects being supported by the DES as Youth Experimental Projects running parallel and receiving DES experimental government funding was Inter-Action’s Make-It-Yourself project – which sounds like quite a fun proto Junior Apprentice business production project or ‘community education experiment’.

 

photo-14

The history of Inter-Action and Kentish Town City Farm – a year after this document Prince Charles is filmed giving a speech and visiting the Kentish Town City Farm – an associate of Righton’s, Sir John Henniker-Major was a city farm adviser to the charity presumably for his establishment of the Islington-Suffolk Project.

Trustees

ED Berman’s theatre group the Ambiance ended up on Rupert Street in 1971 – equidistant between the Albany Trust at 32 Shaftesbury Avenue and Playland the amusement arcade on Coventry Street. Laurence Collinson who Antony Grey would later study Transactional Analysis with put on a play here during Gay Play season of 1975.

Clive Barker’s Theatre Games of 1977

Pamela Rose and her husband EJB Rose who as it happens was a noted military intelligence analyst during WWII – New York Times obituary 1999

“The advance knowledge of German plans, so laboriously deciphered at Bletchley Park, helped Britain when it was fighting alone against the Nazis, and Mr. Rose was head of the section that determined the military importance of the information they received.”

[Sir] Christopher Chataway (Former Conservative MP for Lewisham North – 1966 and then Chichester 1969-1974) Privy Councillor

American Names Association Timeline of Lloyd’s re-insurance market and asbestosis claims

Ian Hay Davison – became the Deputy Chairman and Chief Executive of Lloyd’s re-insurance market in the 1990s and became Chairman

In 1988 Ian Hay Davison wrote A View of the Room: Lloyd’s Change & Disclosure

British watchdogs sacked by Dubai over their advice

 

Screen Shot 2015-02-28 at 10.47.15

 

How to rescue a bank: be firm, be quick, be quiet, Ian Hay Davison draws lessons for the handling of the Northern Rock crisis from his experience as chairman of National Mortgage Bank after its collapse in 1992

David Kingsley: (1929 – 2014) Guardian Obituary Labour’s first spin doctor who was one of the 3 men advising Wilson during 1966-1970, fell out of favour after surprise loss of Wilson to Heath in 1970. Only went back into politics for Social Democrats in 1981.

 

 

 

Familiar names amongst the City Farm Advisers:

Sir John Henniker-Major (1916-2004)

British Council Director, Ambassador to Jordan and Denmark during the 1960s until retirement in 1972, Henniker-Major had also worked in Argentina for 7 years after Burgess revelations. While Peter Righton was being investigated by the police in 1993, the Islington-Suffolk project on Baron Henniker’s estate gave him sanctuary . Henniker-Major was Chairman of Suffolk County Council and a former Liberal parliamentary candidate. Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten (Duke of Edinburgh before he married the Queen) had attended Sir John’s eldest son’s christening, named as his godfather in November 1947.

Country house hideaway of disgraced care chief (6.5.93) [Evening Standard, Eileen Fairweather & Stewart]

“Recent scandals in residential childcare have led experts to believe that paedophile staff may be ‘networking’ nationally to exchange children and pornography – even protection. But only now are moves afoot to address this problem with investigators planning to meet Mr Herbert Laming, chief inspector of the Social Services Inspectorate, to request a co-ordinated nationwide team.

In the meantime it was left for officers investigating Righton to contact their counterparts in Suffolk to establish why he had gone to live there.

The Henniker estate has been the family home since 1756, a rambling mansion house set in farmland and woods. Day-to-day running of the estate has passed to the Lord’s son and heir Mark, 45, and his wife.”

In 2005, Baron Henniker-Major’s grandson Freddy, the 4th youngest of Lesley and Mark’s children committed suicide aged 21. [Inquest into death of Peer’s Son, Ipswich Star, 11 July 2007]  Born in 1983, Freddy was aged 10/11 when Peter Righton arrived at a cottage on his father’s estate.

“As the extent of his alleged activities emerged, police discovered that Righton had moved to the Henniker estate. Suffolk social workers were alerted to establish the circumstances in which he was living.

Lord Henniker, 77, told the Standard he did not know Righton and was not responsible for him living on the estate. ‘The estate belongs to my son.’

His son’s wife, Mrs Lesley Henniker-Major, said: ‘Mr Righton is a tenant. He came to us through an estate agent with impeccable references.’

She said she was not aware of the current investigation but had been told of his previous conviction for possessing indecent material by police and social workers. ‘I was very upset. But I have discussed this with Mr Righton and he tells me this material was unsolicited. I am a mother of five and I am very careful. I am not at all worried. He is innocent until proven guilty.’”

 

– The Rt Rev. Trevor Huddleston (Bishop of Stepney)

Bishop of Stepney who was being whisked away to Mauritius in 1978 due to the mounting allegations against him in the East End of London. See further for John Junor’s frustrated attempts to report and Attorney General Sam Silkin’s admissions to the BBC at Famous Mr X and the Rule of Law

1971: Bishop of Stepney’s promise of patronage  for Peter Righton’s ACCESS along with Jack Profumo

Screen Shot 2015-03-01 at 15.05.22– The Rt. Hon Charles Morrison M.P.

Brother of Sir Peter Morrison, a ‘noted pederast’ who was Thatcher’s PPS. Lord Margadale, Charles and Peter’s father had Thatcher & Denis to holiday on his whisky producing Islay estate in the summer of 1977 and 1978. Lord Margadale had previously entertained two other of Savile’s favourites: Princess Alexandra (whose husband Sir Angus Ogilvy he’d been Vice-President to his Presidency of the National Association of Youth Clubs while Sir Harold Haywood reigned) and Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath.

Screen Shot 2015-03-01 at 15.01.51

Screen Shot 2015-03-01 at 15.06.29

Glasgow Herald, 16 August 1979

It was Lord Margadale who had declared in 1976/1977 at his family home that Thatcher would be the next Prime Minister: Did Maggie know her closest aide was preying on under-age boys? [Daily Mail, Sue Reid, 16 July 2014]. By May 1979 she’d won the election and Peter Morrison began his slippery ascent.

 

 

 

– Tony Smythe (former MIND Director, Albany Trustee, NCCL)

Smythe had organised the Sexual Minorities Workshop, chaired by Peter Righton, where Haywood was introduced to PIE members Keith Hose (Chairman & NCCL) and Nettie Pollard (NCCL Gay Rights Worker)and reportedly had resolved that the Albany Trust had a moral duty to argue for the acceptance of pedophiles in society to ensure they could live a useful life, often by dedicating themselves to youth work.

-Lt. Col Satterthwaite Screen Shot 2015-02-28 at 09.58.24

Bob was the Director of the National Association of Playing Fields

 

Screen Shot 2015-02-28 at 09.56.04

 

 

Dec 1971/January 1972: Father Trevor Huddleston’s patronage & Righton’s ‘enforced’ resignation

photo 1-11

ACCESS Minutes, 8 December 1971, PSY/WOL/4/1 p1.

 

photo 2-13

ACCESS Minutes, 8 December 1971, PSY/WOL/4/1 p2

photo 3-9

ACCESS Minutes, 8 December 1971, PSY/WOL/4/1 p3

 

 

 

Within 9 months of starting ACCESS Righton’s ‘enforced withdrawal’ from Chairmanship takes place due to potential adverse publicity  – just after The Times announces him as Director-Designate heading up a two-man team at the National Children’s Bureau. [ https://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/the-national-childrens-bureau-12-05-93/

On 8th December ACCESS met at the National Institute of Social Work with only 5 attendees: Peter Righton (Chair), Doreen Cordell (Secretary), Rev. Malcolm Johnson, David Allen (Honorary treasurer, formerly in same role for Albany Trust but left due to Michael De La Noy), and Dr Theo Schlict. Looking at the minutes, it may be that Righton had already wished to make the announcement that he had been forced to step down as Chairman at the 8th December meeting but due to the poor attendance held back his news on being ‘forced’ to step down along with Claire Raynor’s resignation.

“In spite of there being so few members present it was agreed to proceed with the business of the meeting owing to the urgency of the situation and as there was no defined quorum at this stage.”…

Item 4. The Chairman’s opening remarks were brief, the main content of what he had wished to say being deferred to the next meeting at which it was hoped more members would be present.”

On taking advice from their honorary solicitor (Ambrose Appelbe – also Hon. Solicitor for the Albany Trust) regarding redrafting their application for charitable status with a more medical emphasis, all due to a disappointing reply from the Charity Commission, Peter Righton suggests seeking the patronage of Father Trevor Huddleston, Bishop of Stepney for Vice President “or some other honorary office”.

Father Trevor Huddleston (Bishop of Stepney) shows an interest in Peter Righton’s new counselling outfit via Canon Eric James

[see Blog Post: Trevor Huddleston & Others: Famous Mr X and the Rule of Law 25/11/2014]

Screen Shot 2015-02-08 at 21.20.48

Anti-apartheid campaigning Huddleston was the subject of headlines planned and then spiked by John Junor of the Sunday Express during mid 1974, (less than two and a half years after Righton’s suggestion to seek his patronage for ACCESS on Total Sexuality). When accused of ‘sexually harassing’ two school age boys by their mother, both the Bishop of London and the prebendary of Fleet Street’s St Brides got together to quash John Junor’s threat to publish an article.

Huddleston’s obituary for the Independent, written by former Albany Director Michael De La Noy (who gives the impression of a man intent on blackmailing Lord Beaumont and Archbishop of Canterbury, Michael Ramsey), stated Trevor was moved from Stepney to the Indian Ocean of Mauritius in 1978 to ‘hush up a scandal which will raise a few eyebrows today.” De La Noy appears to have been someone who never shied away from an opportunity to point to what he knew about Anglican prelates’ sexual proclivities in print.

All the South African intelligence service BOSS’s files on Trevor had been shredded according to Canon Eric James who searched for them when writing his biography of Huddleston during the 1990s.

“5. Charitable Status: Discussion ensued on such other help as could be obtained and the Chairman suggested arranging an appointment with the Bishop of Stepney, who had already shown interest in ACCESS through Canon Eric James, with a view to inviting him to become associated with ACCESS. The Chairman’s suggestion was approved and discussion ensued on the possibility and advisability of inviting the Bishop to become a Patron or Vice President or some other honorary office…

5b. An approach to be made to the Bishop of Stepney and Professor Lafitte in the first instance to become associated with ACCESS on the lines indicated above.”

Jack Profumo secures Righton’s Counselling Group rooms at Toynbee Hall

“6. Toynbee Hall: ” It was reported that a letter had been received from the Resident Director of Attlee House, Mr Richard Pentney, dated 23rd November 1971, on behalf of the Warden of Toynbee Hall and himself.”

The Warden of Toynbee Hall was Jack profumo, who Doreen and Righton had met during October/November [insert link to post on Lord Beaumont’s Letter(s) & Peter Righton meets Jack Profumo). Remarkable to think of Macmillan’s former Secretary of War sorting premises for where MI5 blocked Dr Robert Chartham/Ronald Seth and Peter Righton sought to take over the Albany Trust’s counselling case files, all as part of his atoning ‘good deeds’.

What Profumo did next (The Telegraph, 17 November 2003)

 January 1972: ACCESS needs a new Chairman

By Monday 24th January 1972, Doreen Cordell was looking for nominations for a new Chairman for ACCESS.

“I would refer to my note about Mr Righton’s enforced withdrawal from the Chairmanship of ACCESS and our request that nominations should be received by me prior to the next meeting, at which Dr Theo Schlict has agreed to take the chair.”

Dr Chartham/Ronald Seth, although unable to attend because Wednesday was his clinic day (where?), appeared keen to take the reins but wasn’t available until July and wanted Dr Theo Schlict while on sabbatical (from Royal Northern Hospital, Holloway Road?) to take temporary charge

photo-8

 

In a letter to (later to be Albany Trustee) Dr Charlotte Wolff, Doreen writes also on 24 January 1972:
“I am hoping that Peter will retain the Chairmanship of the Counselling & Training sub committee (which does not necessitate public identification and is essentially his special sphere) because this is very important and it is vital that we get a training scheme off the ground and that we establish a reliable roster of vetted people to help at Toynbee.” [My emphasis]
No trace of irony from Doreen using the term vetted in the same sentence as Righton and his ‘enforced’ resignation.

“At the January meeting Dr Schlict agreed to take the Chair, at least for the time being. We did not proceed to electing Robert into the Deputy Chair because we only had a small number and it was felt that this should be done, if at all, with a more representative group. I also explained how you felt about things, which was understood. Claire Raynor insisted to Peter that her resignation went forward so we accepted that.”

Screen Shot 2015-02-07 at 16.54.55

Doreen Cordell writing to Dr Charlotte Wolff, 1 February 1972 [Wellcome PSY/WOL/4/1]

Screen Shot 2015-02-07 at 16.59.03
“Peter has retained the Chair of the Counselling & Training Sub Committee, thank goodness, and as, you know, it only comprised Theo, Michael Butler and Peter…”
On 26th January 1972 Dr Theo Schlict took over as Chair of ACCESS and David Allen, Peter Righton, Rev Malcolm Johnson and Mrs Doreen Cordell all attended. Claire Raynor’s resignation was finally announced having been given to Righton before the 8th December meeting, and one room at Toynbee Hall was ready with the telephone connected as promised, radio

“i. Mr Righton outlined the situation which had arisen in connection with his new appointment which precipitated his enforced resignation as Chairman. He re-affirmed that this did not imply any loss of interest or confidence in ACCESS or the cause it sought to promote and he was willing, subject to the concurrence of the members, to remain on the committee to give such service as he could as an ordinary member. He expressed thanks to Dr Schlict for agreeing to preside in the emergency.”

ii. Nominations for the Office of Chairman Members had been circulated as to the situation and nominations had been called for.

A letter was read from Dr Chartham nominating Dr Schlict and it was reported that others had made this suggestion. Dr Chartham expressed the hope that Dr Schlict would consider taking Office permanently but if he did not, he offered himself for the position as from next July, subject to the approval of the committee, suggesting that Dr Schlict might consider taking Office in the interim.”

Righton’s step down appears to be related to the need to stress that membership of ACCESS was done ‘on a personal basis rather than on a representative basis of any other organisation’. How had his new appointment at the National Children’s Bureau precipitated his resignation? Had  this been requested as a condition of his appointment at the National Children’s Bureau? And if so, how and whose decision at the NCB had it been to ask Righton to step down?

Another consequence of Righton’s step down was that he’d not been able to approach the Bishop of Stepney and it was therefore decided Rev. Malcolm Johnson would do this.

photo 1-13

ACCESS minutes 26 January 1972, p.1

photo 2-15

ACCESS minutes, 26 January 1972 p.2

 

Meanwhile back at the Albany Trust, Edgar Wright (Antony Grey) was firmly back in control and Dr John Robinson, former Bishop of Woolwich and Dean of Trinity College, Cambridge was putting the case for the age of consent to be lowered to 14

The Times, July 6th, 1972 Basil Gingell, ‘Dr Robinson puts case for age of consent to be 14′ – Dr John Robinson, Bishop of Woolwich, Dean of Trinity College, Cambridge