Max Power Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 After several days into the announcement of police investigations into Ted Heath's alleged assaults on children, not a single substantiated claim has been made public! Jersey children's home residents claim that kids got off his yacht 'crying' but never mentioned any assault. Well, sailing isn't always a very pleasant experience and surely in the confines of a yacht, someone would have known something was happening? A Madam has refuted claims made by police that she ever said that Heath was a client! How on earth does a man who was followed everywhere by Special Branch officers find time to interfere in private with small children? It seems that it is Police officers who are making these claims and are appealing for victims to come forward, cue the bandwagon and claims for compensation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sm-iom Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Did you stick up for Savile as well? He's under investigation, happy to give them as many days as they need.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I don't know really as there must be some basis for it to hit the headlines. They've been sort of building up to this for a while now. I get what you say but you could say the same about Cyril Smith being surrounded by police officers and special branch etc and yet clearly he was most likely a wicked predatory paedophile who was not only allowed to abuse children with impunity but who had the power within the Establishment to cover it all up until long past his death. Too many with dirty secrets covering for each other. I think you forget how institutionalised the Establishment was back then. It was also stuffed full of well connected public school deviants like a big club. All covering for each other in case they got found out and with all the networks at their disposal to keep people who might blow the whistle in check. They would simply destroy anyone who threatened to expose them. As for Heath it's funny he sailed to Jersey a lot, same with Jimmy Saville who nipped in and out of there a lot as he travelled the UK, and all at the same time that widespread child abuse was happening in children's homes there. I'd say it's no different to today where the abusers link up through online groups and forums. They probably knew where the networks were. If you were in Jersey for a few days you probably knew who to call, or who ran what etc. If you were then up in the North the same would probably apply up there where Jimmy would sort you out on his home turf. it's therefore certainly plausible to me. It never ceases to amaze me just how two-faced and disgusting many of the people are who make it to the top of public life - and also how manipulative and controlling they can be in suppressing a lot of what they do. Even more so if you are the PM and you have the full instruments of state at your disposal. Many of whom are probably doing exactly the same thing and knowing that if they don't do a favour for you it will be them being exposed next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 Did you stick up for Savile as well? He's under investigation, happy to give them as many days as they need.. Don't recall sticking up for Savile? What I am questioning is the motivation for the investigation when there don't seem to have been any allegations from victims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Thought this was unworthy of comment until now because i thought heath was an even worse kept secret than jimmy saville .. reasonably sure it was in spycatcher that security services were convinced he was being blackmailed by USSR over pics with children.It was common knowledge but yet again nothing happens until he is dead and "investigating" police personnel retired.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 its the ultimate method of control over powerful figures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisenchuk Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Or the ultimate method of control over vulnerable children by powerful figures. Depends on which perspective you take really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 The only charge that can be brought against Heath atm is that he appeared to be asexual. Last time I looked that wasn't a crime... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thommo2010 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 At a time where some police forces in england are telling people that they won't investigate burglaries its good to know that 5 forces can look into 30/40 year old crimes against a man who can't defend himself and it will never ever go to trial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 The politics of policing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I don't know really as there must be some basis for it to hit the headlines. They've been sort of building up to this for a while now. I get what you say but you could say the same about Cyril Smith being surrounded by police officers and special branch etc and yet clearly he was most likely a wicked predatory paedophile who was not only allowed to abuse children with impunity but who had the power within the Establishment to cover it all up until long past his death. Too many with dirty secrets covering for each other. I think you forget how institutionalised the Establishment was back then. It was also stuffed full of well connected public school deviants like a big club. All covering for each other in case they got found out and with all the networks at their disposal to keep people who might blow the whistle in check. They would simply destroy anyone who threatened to expose them. As for Heath it's funny he sailed to Jersey a lot, same with Jimmy Saville who nipped in and out of there a lot as he travelled the UK, and all at the same time that widespread child abuse was happening in children's homes there. I'd say it's no different to today where the abusers link up through online groups and forums. They probably knew where the networks were. If you were in Jersey for a few days you probably knew who to call, or who ran what etc. If you were then up in the North the same would probably apply up there where Jimmy would sort you out on his home turf. it's therefore certainly plausible to me. It never ceases to amaze me just how two-faced and disgusting many of the people are who make it to the top of public life - and also how manipulative and controlling they can be in suppressing a lot of what they do. Even more so if you are the PM and you have the full instruments of state at your disposal. Many of whom are probably doing exactly the same thing and knowing that if they don't do a favour for you it will be them being exposed next. It never ceases to amaze me at the way children used to be treated. I just cannot get my head around it. Physical, mental and sexual abuse seems to have been borderline acceptable until about 30 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I too thought it unworthy of comment. No time for Heath as a politician who took the UK into the EU for one thing, but I am sick to death of seeing this stuff raked over long after people are dead. Say he is totally innocent of this. What a disgraceful carry on. There were a load of idiots sniggering about it in the pub the other night. Of course you can't slander the dead. Heath was a different case to Smith because he was a PM. Gobshites like Smith wouldn't have protection but Heath would have had a guard everywhere he went, 24/7. Police have asked victims to come forward and they have. Quelle surprise!! Still say if you didn't complain at the time, forget it 30 or 50 years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thommo2010 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I don't know really as there must be some basis for it to hit the headlines. They've been sort of building up to this for a while now. I get what you say but you could say the same about Cyril Smith being surrounded by police officers and special branch etc and yet clearly he was most likely a wicked predatory paedophile who was not only allowed to abuse children with impunity but who had the power within the Establishment to cover it all up until long past his death. Too many with dirty secrets covering for each other. I think you forget how institutionalised the Establishment was back then. It was also stuffed full of well connected public school deviants like a big club. All covering for each other in case they got found out and with all the networks at their disposal to keep people who might blow the whistle in check. They would simply destroy anyone who threatened to expose them. As for Heath it's funny he sailed to Jersey a lot, same with Jimmy Saville who nipped in and out of there a lot as he travelled the UK, and all at the same time that widespread child abuse was happening in children's homes there. I'd say it's no different to today where the abusers link up through online groups and forums. They probably knew where the networks were. If you were in Jersey for a few days you probably knew who to call, or who ran what etc. If you were then up in the North the same would probably apply up there where Jimmy would sort you out on his home turf. it's therefore certainly plausible to me. It never ceases to amaze me just how two-faced and disgusting many of the people are who make it to the top of public life - and also how manipulative and controlling they can be in suppressing a lot of what they do. Even more so if you are the PM and you have the full instruments of state at your disposal. Many of whom are probably doing exactly the same thing and knowing that if they don't do a favour for you it will be them being exposed next. It never ceases to amaze me at the way children used to be treated. I just cannot get my head around it. Physical, mental and sexual abuse seems to have been borderline acceptable until about 30 years ago. Gone a full 180 these days you can't even look in tge direction of a child without being called names Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 how has this morphed into investigating Heath when it started out investigating how the police dealt with an investigation ? it's as bad as how threads on here get derailed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 @thommo2010: Gone a full 180 these days you can't even look in tge direction of a child without being called names Isn't it sad? People are suspicious if you take a picture of a beach with children playing. You can't take a camera to a school play. Stranger danger signs all over the place. I've even heard a woman photographer interrogated by another woman on Douglas Prom. "Are you taking pictures of my children?" When I was a teenager I had a friend I met on a train. Old chap, pensioner, born in Edwardian times. We had a lot of common interests and used to meet up every couple of weeks and chat about all kinds of things. Fifty year gap in our ages. Great friendship and all totally innocent. If we'd been seen around today there would be all kinds of nods and winks. Sick, sick society we have created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.