Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Police confirm former British PM would have faced paedophile enquiry Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    "Wiltshire Police said seven historic claims spanning from 1956 to 1992 would have been sufficiently credible to justify interviewing the former Conservative Prime Minister under caution."
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7984256.html

    This has long been suspected and the evidence is strong, not just one or two incoherent cases, but a large number of credible allegations.

    The leader of the British Conservative Party and Prime Minister was sure to have been known by the security services to have been engaged in such ghastly and criminal behaviour. They would have reported it to leading Tories of the day, who evidently were happy to overlook it.

    There can't be much doubt that it was knowledge that also circulated in the Establishment generally. Those were strange times.


    Name:  Former-Prime-Minister-Edward-Heath-and-Jimmy-Savile.jpg
Views: 49
Size:  46.8 KB
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    The articles say he would have questioned. And he was a former Prime Minister. Your title is quite clickbaitey.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Can you not see the massive leap to this:

    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Now it's official - Ted Heath was an active paedophile
    A statement made by a police force under pressure to justify its enormous investigation into a long-dead person, from this:

    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    would have been sufficiently credible to justify interviewing
    By this standard you would appear to be happy to condemn any person who has ever been interviewed by the police, and I am quite sure you mean he should (if he weren't dead) lose his job over it.

    Do you apply these rules of evidence and proof to yourself? You have let yourself, and your credibility, down massively.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41503143

    No inference of guilt should be drawn from this, police stressed.

    It's very unfair to speak ill of the dead IMO. There is no proof for any rapes / sexual abuse, and as many articles are mentioning, these are just allegations - i.e. not facts. In my own view I think the guy should be left to rest in peace. He's dead for gods sake.

    Don't get me wrong, sexual abuse is terrible, but in a case where a) there are only allegations, no evidence b) the accused is now deceased it's pretty disrespectful and pointless for this to even be news, it can't simply can't progress without evidence and with key people in the investigation not being alive.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kvothe the Arcane)
    The articles say he would have questioned. And he was a former Prime Minister. Your title is quite clickbaitey.
    I do like a good title - but happy to admit that it might be a rather gross shortening. :blush: How about - "Police confirm former British PM would have faced paedophile enquiry"?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Now it's official - Ted Heath was an active paedophile (the police report) and abused boys as young as 11.

    "Wiltshire Police said seven historic claims spanning from 1956 to 1992 would have been sufficiently credible to justify interviewing the former Conservative Prime Minister under caution."
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7984256.html

    This has long been suspected and the evidence is strong, not just one or two incoherent cases, but a large number of credible allegations.

    The leader of the British Conservative Party and Prime Minister was sure to have been known by the security services to have been engaged in such ghastly and criminal behaviour. They would have reported it to leading Tories of the day, who evidently were happy to overlook it.

    There can't be much doubt that it was knowledge that also circulated in the Establishment generally. Those were strange times.


    Name:  Former-Prime-Minister-Edward-Heath-and-Jimmy-Savile.jpg
Views: 49
Size:  46.8 KB
    Congrats, you've only avoided libel laws because the subject of your thread is dead.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Can you not see the massive leap to this:

    A statement made by a police force under pressure to justify its enormous investigation into a long-dead person, from this:

    By this standard you would appear to be happy to condemn any person who has ever been interviewed by the police, and I am quite sure you mean he should (if he weren't dead) lose his job over it.

    Do you apply these rules of evidence and proof to yourself? You have let yourself, and your credibility, down massively.
    The actual facts are that the police have been bullied and intimidated by the establishment over this, but Wiltshire police stuck to their guns and have produced credible evidence, not just (as repeatedly stated by the media tools of Toryism) random attacks or untruths.

    My point as stated is that this must have been widely known and either it points to a wider paedophile conspiracy in the establishment of the day (not impossible, as we know such circles have existed in other major countries) or else he was 'left alone' as he was considered above the law. Either way, it is deeply sinister.

    This merits far more investigation - in particular, we need to know who covered this up and why.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    that's quite a leap in judgement, being questioned does not imply guilt.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Congrats, you've only avoided libel laws because the subject of your thread is dead.
    I am reporting on a major police report. That's hardly libel, as libel is by definition false. This isn't false.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    The actual facts are that the police have been bullied and intimidated by the establishment over this, but Wiltshire police stuck to their guns and have produced credible evidence, not just (as repeatedly stated by the media tools of Toryism) random attacks or untruths.

    My point as stated is that this must have been widely known and either it points to a wider paedophile conspiracy in the establishment of the day (not impossible, as we know such circles have existed in other major countries) or else he was 'left alone' as he was considered above the law. Either way, it is deeply sinister.

    This merits far more investigation - in particular, we need to know who covered this up and why.
    Again you are making assumptions and large, unjustified leaps. How can there have been a cover-up of something that has not been shown to have happened? How can something that may not have happened been widely known about?

    Are you familiar with the witch trials of the seventeenth century? Simple accusation and claim were invariably believed with no rational examination and innocent people were tortured and killed.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    The actual facts are that the police have been bullied and intimidated by the establishment over this, but Wiltshire police stuck to their guns and have produced credible evidence, not just (as repeatedly stated by the media tools of Toryism) random attacks or untruths.

    My point as stated is that this must have been widely known and either it points to a wider paedophile conspiracy in the establishment of the day (not impossible, as we know such circles have existed in other major countries) or else he was 'left alone' as he was considered above the law. Either way, it is deeply sinister.

    This merits far more investigation - in particular, we need to know who covered this up and why.
    Sinister, sure. However to put a label on someone, which is known to have devastating consequences is not a small matter. It should be more obvious, as you pointed out, considering how government has approached the recent years' worth of claims against MPs - by quashing any investigation as party reputations would be destroyed.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I am reporting on a major police report. That's hardly libel, as libel is by definition false. This isn't false.
    That is the libeller's defence - truth. To make it stick you now simply need to prove Heath was a paedophile. So let's hear your incontrovertible evidence.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Again you are making assumptions and large, unjustified leaps. How can there have been a cover-up of something that has not been shown to have happened? How can something that may not have happened been widely known about?

    Are you familiar with the witch trials of the seventeenth century? Simple accusation and claim were invariably believed with no rational examination and innocent people were tortured and killed.
    Of course he would have merited a fair trial were he still alive. The sad fact is, he escaped justice. Answering as to why might be a nice gesture for the British Establishment to show that it actually wants to uphold justice and not serve as a protective layer for serial abusers.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I am reporting on a major police report. That's hardly libel, as libel is by definition false. This isn't false.
    You are declaring him a peadophile. That is libelous.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Of course he would have merited a fair trial were he still alive. The sad fact is, he escaped justice.
    Another leap. You cannot stop, it seems.

    The police have said he would have been interviewed. There is a huge gap between being interviewed and being charged, and another between the charge and conviction.

    An interview would have stopped instantly if he could have proved he was in a cabinet meeting at the time in question. Prime ministers' lives are very full and well documented by independent people, with little scope for nipping off down the back alley for some unwitnessed how's your father with a child.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    That is the libeller's defence - truth. To make it stick you now simply need to prove Heath was a paedophile. So let's hear your incontrovertible evidence.
    I believe the multiple cases that the police have stated to be credible are a good guide. Then we have decades of stories circulating about him and all those visits on his yacht to the children's home in Jersey that Jimmy Savile also enjoyed hanging out in.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Another leap. You cannot stop, it seems.

    The police have said he would have been interviewed. There is a huge gap between being interviewed and being charged, and another between the charge and conviction.

    An interview would have stopped instantly if he could have proved he was in a cabinet meeting at the time in question. Prime ministers' lives are very full and well documented by independent people, with little scope for nipping off down the back alley for some unwitnessed how's your father with a child.
    Please read the reports. The cases the police are stating to be credible are all before and after his period as Prime Minister. That doesn't change the fact that as he was clearly a paedophile abuser, he still was as PM. It doesn't stop when they take a particular job, any more than it did with Jimmy Savile. The issue will, as you say, have been about too many eyes on him.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I believe the multiple cases that the police have stated to be credible are a good guide. Then we have decades of stories circulating about him and all those visits on his yacht to the children's home in Jersey that Jimmy Savile also enjoyed hanging out in.
    Speculation.

    You're back pedaling because you know you've been a bit of a ****.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I believe the multiple cases that the police have stated to be credible are a good guide. Then we have decades of stories circulating about him and all those visits on his yacht to the children's home in Jersey that Jimmy Savile also enjoyed hanging out in.
    You won't stop, will you? They have not said that at all. They have said they would have wanted to ask him questions, and on that basis you have bundled him up against a wall and shot him.

    You have, rather disingenuously, changed your thread title without acknowledging that you have done so. This is totally intellectually dishonest.

    Stop digging - you are in a hole.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    You won't stop, will you? They have not said that at all. They have said they would have wanted to ask him questions, and on that basis you have bundled him up against a wall and shot him.

    You have, rather disingenuously, changed your thread title without acknowledging that you have done so. This is totally intellectually dishonest.

    Stop digging - you are in a hole.
    I did say that I was changing the thread title above in a response to the Mod who raised it and I also commented it - I can see the comment at the foot of the OP.

    I stand by the facts, which are:

    - the police believe the evidence in multiple cases was credible and coherent
    - senior Tories and a number of establishment figures have crowded around this case, harassing the police and attempting to intimidate them into ceasing the enquiries - not least, the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail
    - the police have bravely resisted this and clearly find the evidence compelling
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.