PoppyMeze

Tuesday 18 November 2014

Secondary Education:

 To BBCRadio4 'You and Yours' 18 November 2014
.
Factory Fodder!

I was always in the 'A' stream in primary and junior schools.  Achieved high marks in English, maths, or arithmetic, as we called it then, one of my junior school teachers said I should go to grammar.  I think I was 'naturally' bright.  I failed the eleven plus primarily because the Head socialised with some of the better off parents (he even drove a Rolls Royce, where did he get the money for that?)  Anyway, he chose a group of children from these families, and with hindsight, regardless of their academic ability, spent hours grooming them, in the days when 'grooming' did not have paedophile connotations, though now we would also call him a paedophile due to his inappropriate 'touching'.  My father even spoke to him, in no uncertain terms, about his refusal to place me at the top of the class even though I achieved some of the highest marks in tests and exams. See my debut novel, 'Bed of Black Flowers: Diary of an Unwelcomed Child' - plug. http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/0992853206

However, I do object to the expression 'Factory Fodder' apparently given to children who attended a secondary modern. I had never heard the term until mentioned on 'You and Yours' today.  And as for your guest stating that, secondary schools were expected to supply the 'trades' - how insulting and patronising.  Even though I did not go to grammar school, and even though classes were large, I consider I had a very good all-round education.  Some of my very dedicated teachers may still be living and I can imagine how they would feel on hearing this harsh judgement being passed on them. I object to them being discredited in this way.  I never felt ashamed of attending secondary school though I was ashamed of living on the largest council estate in the country.

On leaving school at aged fifteen, I had a vast choice of employment opportunities.  I started working in C & A in Oxford Street as I wanted to train as a window dresser, but the long hours and travelling got me down so I went to work in an office in St Mary Axe.  There were dozens of decent office jobs for able secondary school leavers.

After I had raised my children, from around the 1980s I started my education again; qualifying as a counsellor, as such I had a contract with Essex police.  I have various qualifications in Personal Adviser in mental health, life coaching, business studies and team leading - gained a teaching certificate to teach sixteen plus; even trained as a Lay Reader for a while, though no longer believe in religion; have been accepted on an Open University course to study law.

I shall be seventy in January but still want and need to work, so I am attempting to start up my life coach and counselling businesses again.  Also trying to promote my novel which I self-published.

Well, I feel a little better having got that off my chest - and I do enjoy your programme.



 

Monday 10 November 2014

'At The Cenotaph' Siegfried Sassoon

I saw the Prince of Darkness, with his Staff,
Standing bare-headed by the Cenotaph:
Unostentatious and respectful, there
He stood, and offered up the following prayer.
'Make them forget, O Lord, what this Memorial
Means; their discredited ideas revive;
Breed new belief that War is purgatorial
Proof of the pride and power of being alive;
Men's biologic urge to readjust
The Map of Europe, Lord of Hosts, increase;
Lift up their hearts in large destructive lust;
And crown their heads with blind vindictive Peace.'
The Prince of Darkness to the Cenotaph
Bowed.
                    As he walked away I heard him laugh.                             

Thursday 30 October 2014

Jeremy Bamber Blog: Proving innocence...first steps

Jeremy Bamber: The Official Blogger.
 
http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/Copyright © Jeremy Bamber Campaign
"Imprisonment is nothing, but to live defeated and innocent is to die daily." Jeremy Bamber, 2012. 
 
Tuesday, 28 October 2014

Difficult First Steps Towards Proving Your Innocence ...

On the 29th Anniversary of Jeremy's conviction he talks about the difficulties in proving your innocence. 

Innocence Projects, the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), lawyers and MP’s as well as the media face that first hurdle of whether the case before them is a genuine Miscarriage of Justice or not. A cursory review is all that can be done in the first instance, which probably won’t reveal anything to help supporters get to the truth. My experience over twenty nine years of listening to fellow prisoners protest their innocence has left me with no special insight into how to sift out those who are trying it on, and those who are not. If I like the person then it plays a huge part on whether I believe them or not. My point being that if I cannot tell face to face, and with my years of experience, then the CCRC and Innocence Projects et all, have even more difficulty as they have to rely on a letter or two, and a quick review of the evidence upon which to make a decision. This has meant the cases chosen to be supported by these organizations are often ones where there isn’t much evidence to sustain the conviction. The CCRC does sometimes investigate complex cases but it is only a matter of time before they drown under the paperwork and bail out. At least, that’s how my experience has been. Other organizations don’t have the resources to take on those kinds of cases either.

The ‘cure,’ which was promised in the guise of the CCRC in 1997, has allowed the real problems to remain unaddressed.  Broadly speaking, the current court process, juries, poorly financed Legal Aid, an over stretched Crown Prosecution Service, combined with a results driven police force all play a part in Miscarriages of Justice happening in the first place.

A fixed, amended and overhauled system would prevent innocent people from being wrongly convicted, and both barristers and solicitors know what needs to be done but it’s as if tradition and protocol prevent those who know from speaking out, and the voice of high profile figures in this field would help. There is also a distinct reluctance for many organizations, and legal workers to embrace social resources and other forms of media, which could raise awareness of the cause. Miscarriages of Justice have a late 20th Century feel, with most of the population picturing the release of innocent people photographed in the 1980’s and 1990’s, but the problem is as real and persistent today as it ever was. Wrongful convictions continue to affect many young people from diverse cultural and social groupings, but they remain something that is considered a rarity, or a thing of the past.

I have my own ideas on how to improve the trial process, which is always weighted in favour of the prosecution from the outset; it is unlikely anything much will change for the foreseeable future. This means Innocence Projects, the CCRC and other Campaign Groups will be needed for many years to come. The trick will be to ensure that their finite resources are put to best use. Because of the lack of specialist legal help available to prisoners maintaining innocence, in the first instance, prisoners need to self prepare work. Many prisoners will have limited help from others on the outside who might lack any legal expertise, time, money, or access to evidence and resources themselves. Some people who are innocent inside have no one on the outside.

There are valuable voluntary organizations like Miscarriages Of Justice Organization (MOJO) who offer an unbiased platform to tell people about your innocence, but without having done the groundwork before contacting these people all you have is a pen and a piece of paper to say, “I’m innocent but I don’t have any evidence to prove I am.” Not many people will believe the word of someone convicted of a serious crime without any evidence to support their claim. It’s this first rung of the ladder which most wrongly convicted prisoners find difficult to get a foothold upon.

Jails have almost no facilities for use by prisoners and unless you have an appeal pending you cannot have access to a computer resource. It’s catch twenty-two because without facilities to get to appeal you can’t have access to many facilities to get you there. Law books in prison libraries are not allowed to be taken back to prisoners cells and can only be used during library times, which might be limited to two fifteen minute sessions each week or an hour pre booked once every three weeks. They are able to order books from non-specialist, local libraries which takes weeks and is simply not going to have the resources required. Similarly, prisoners cannot have books sent in to them. Prisoners can buy books from a specific resource, but law books often run into hundreds of pounds, which even law students on the outside have difficulty in financing.


If anyone reading this has ever done casework they will know all about the painstaking, meticulous number of hours that go into researching. No one will work harder than the innocent prisoner in this process. The range of books in the library is very limited; you won’t find the latest books by Michael Naughton, or guidance on preparing your casework. Computers should be available for legal work with printing facilities, as well as software packages, which allow prisoners to prepare case material. Access to a broad section of Internet resources, or databases listing forensic scientists, human rights lawyers and their case histories, should be made a priority.

Also, understanding how other prisoners campaign should be pooled into one resource, and updated at least every six months. On line resources in an intranet style should be allowed online so that various law schools, and law libraries can be accessed, enabling those who can help and those who need help to be joined together. All this needs policy change at head office, as it is not the fault of individual prisons, just the rules laid down by a higher force. As it stands today all prisoners are allowed is very limited quantities of our case papers, A4 paper and a biro. Facing the world with nothing but a pen and paper in the twenty-first century after all the lessons we should have learned is crushing for an innocent person.


There is no one readily accessible with experience to help or guide you on how to make a submission or plea for help other than written guidance from the CCRC if requested. You cannot make contact with anyone over the telephone without prior permission and this process can take a month and even then your clearance is to a specific person on one number. You can only telephone someone if they first agree to accept calls from you, therefore you cannot call around to find a lawyer speculatively.

In effect, there is no equality of arms. A prisoner who has been wrongly convicted and who cannot read or write has no possible way in which to seek help for a new appeal. In the high security prison system about 50% of prisoners have real difficulty reading or writing. So how does this group of prisoners obtain even a cursory review of their case? A structure needs to be put in place to help them. The adversarial system is still extraordinarily difficult for even the most resourceful, educated, experienced prisoners to obtain help to fight their case for innocence.

It is never going to be possible to unearth a Miscarriage of Justice without a case undergoing a really thorough investigation. If police corruption is the cause of a wrongful conviction (and it is frequently the cause), then it will be well covered up, and very hard to detect without meticulous and painstaking attention to case papers and evidence. Police officers know the system better than anyone, and are best placed to disguise any wrongdoing, and in the event of transparent mistakes, the errors are ignored and covered up by superiors to maintain public faith in the justice system as a whole. A scant review, which most cases initially receive, has no chance of uncovering these causes of Miscarriages of Justice.

Disclosure of all case material must happen pre-trial, and be given to the defendant personally, not simply made available for a solicitor to look through on a couple of afternoons at some random police station. If Public Interest Immunity has been used then the defendant should know it has been used and why. Obviously in some cases this couldn’t happen, but for most cases and for most of the time there is no excuse for this blanket secrecy and this should be changed.

There needs to be real help with sensible funding for the prison system to support those inmates maintaining innocence. Allow law schools entry to prisons and allow those maintaining innocence to use computers, and access to those who can help via telephone, skype and on line. Allow Innocence Projects and other advocates to come into prisons and give talks, interview prisoners and give advice directly.

Set up extensive law libraries on line or via a database to give access to up to date books, keeping the cost low, and a reduction in the physical space for books. Prisoners who are innocent could find out the latest legal rulings, and learn how to fight for themselves and these Miscarriage of Justice cases have a greater opportunity to present their position to the CCRC, Innocence Projects or even their own lawyers.

Changing Home Office policy to alter how prisons deal with prisoners maintaining innocence is going to be challenging but not beyond the abilities of highly skilled and experienced Prison Governors, who could advise and guide head office on finding the best way forward.  Until changes happen, many innocent people remain in the dark about how to help themselves in a system which does not afford lawyers to carry out thousands of hours work, and requires the prisoners to do most of it themselves.



 Jeremy

Monday 29 September 2014

'Captain of my soul...' Jeremy Bamber

Monday, 29 September 2014

Copyright©JeremyBamberCampaign:
 http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/the-29th-anniversary-of-jeremys.html

The 29th Anniversary of Jeremy's Wrongful Imprisonment

It’s always at this time of year I look back and consider my life, my freedom and what it means to me. People often ask how do I feel, or how can I cope? There are times, especially in the present day, when we all consider our freedom and other people’s suffering in the fight to protect it, especially in times of war.
 
Freedom comes in many different guises and release from physical pain and illness is freedom too. I might be physically incarcerated but my mind is always free to wander anywhere in the world, to the ancient pyramids, or down to the farmlands of Essex.
 
When I consider how I personally feel, I often read this poem by William Ernest Henley (1849–1903). Invictus, was written during a time when the author felt he too had lost a part of his freedom. For me this work sums up how I feel and I’m sure there are others who can relate to these words, which have a universal message about suffering. So as I enter my thirtieth year of wrongful imprisonment, let's all remember to cherish the freedom we have, even if it is limited to four walls.
 
Jeremy.
 
'Out of the night that covers me,

Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be

For my unconquerable soul.

 

In the fell clutch of circumstance

I have not winced nor cried aloud.

Under the bludgeoning’s of chance

My head is bloody, but unbowed.


 
Beyond this place of wrath and tears

Looms but the Horror of the shade,

And yet the menace of the years

Finds and shall find me unafraid.


It matters not how strait the gate,

How charged with punishments the scroll,

I am the master of my fate,

I am the captain of my soul.'

Monday 15 September 2014

HMIC PEEL Inspection: My Response

Emailed to: haveyoursay@hmic.gsi.gov.uk (edited)

I don't do forms and I have not answered specifics but would like to comment on the following and I do hope someone takes the time to read it.

I am all for any move towards transparency.  I have counselled police officers and staff of all levels, so I know something of what goes on.
 

Mostly I am satisfied with my local police officers, other than one complaint I made in 2009 because a female officer stopped me on my way to work.  Accused me of using my mobile phone whilst driving - said I had been spotted on camera, insisted I hand her my phone. She was showing off for the benefit of her a male trainee.  I knew her accusation was false and could prove it, which I did.

On the other side of the coin there are many positives, like the male officer who insisted on coming out in the early hours as I had reported a man knocking on my window and making threatening remarks; he was no doubt drunk and lost but still worrying when you live alone.  A female officer last year was also sympathetic as well as professional.  We get a significant amount of vandalism in this area, pubs' chucking out times mostly, and my window got broken during a street fight. This officer said that one of her main concerns was to know how I felt the local police could support me.  She also visited me twice more in the following weeks.


With regard to changes; I have three main points:

1) The ridiculous and virtually criminal procedure of allowing corrupt coppers to resign so that they do not have to face charges, must stop.
2) My personal experience of the IPCC is that they are not independent, so whether more power or resources would have any impact is debatable.
3) Decent, professional police officers need incentives. I am not saying the old days were better or using 'rose coloured specs' but the 'bobby on the beat' of my childhood, was happy to remain in that post, it was his 'calling' but he could have done with more in his pay packet; this fact still remains, they do not all want promotion, other than for the wage increase.


That said, my prime purpose for writing. Jeremy Bamber, an innocent man, has been in prison for nearly 29 years, and until any prosecutors and police officers who withheld information which would have helped his defence, plus any who falsified documents, altered statements and/or blatantly lied, are brought to justice, I feel nothing in our justice system can or will change for the better. 


http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/news/news-feed/hmic-asks-public-for-views-on-new-assessments-of-police-forces-in-england-and-wales/

Wednesday 3 September 2014

NHS Failings


The following is a personal example which highlights the lack of NHS staffing, inadequate implementing of procedures and blatant ignorance around how to best meet patients' needs, as well as a refusal to engage with patients families, in particular of those who are very seriously ill, frightened and in pain.

My sister died in Farleigh Hospice on 31 July 2013, after suffering unnecessarily agonising pain and bouts of what I feel was negligence, upon being diagnosed with cancer on April 2013 at Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford.

My sister, I’ll refer to her as ‘Janet’, whilst undergoing a common-place surgical operation was unexpectedly and shockingly diagnosed with cancer.

Janet was discharged from hospital - it was agreed that she would receive chemotherapy.  Several weeks passed with no sign of chemo starting.  In constant pain and not being able to keep any food down and literally wasting away before our eyes, on attendance at an assessment appointment at Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, on Wednesday 15 May, Janet took her overnight bag and insisted she be admitted.  She was placed on, the then recently opened, Danbury Ward.  Apparently her notes had either been mislaid or she had been overlooked, the reasons for which were not made clear to members of her family.

Sixty-four year old Janet was a positive person, intelligent, caring, humorous and a fighter - a business woman - socially engaging and until this illness was physically building an extension to her house.

I do not know whether this is typical of NHS hospitals but on a daily basis the level of care and treatment of patients on Danbury Ward, Broomfield Hospital, in my opinion, was deplorable.  A few examples:

 * Shortly after admission Janet was placed on a side-ward and we presumed that the intravenous drip, which had been set-up for her, included nutrients, owing to the fact that she could not eat due to pain and sickness.  She was hoping that in this way she would regain her strength thus making her physically more fit for surgery.  It was discovered by chance, that without any discussion with Janet, her partner ‘John’, or her family, the hospital had independently taken the decision to place Janet on what we now know as, ‘The Liverpool Care Plan’ (i.e. no food, nutrients or water by mouth or intravenously).  She and her immediate family were very upset and angry and after they complained, staff began providing food for her - though it was not suitable so her partner and children took more appropriately prepared food into the ward for her.

* Janet had various ‘tests’ and was told that as her cancer was not hormone related she would not have intravenous chemotherapy but would be prescribed medication in the form of a pill; this was impracticable as Janet could not eat due to her pain.  Her autopsy revealed that she did, in fact, have ovarian cancer - which is hormonal.

* Cancer patients on Danbury Ward were being left for over three hours with their medication drip-feeds empty, therefore without pain-killers.

* My sister, in great pain, ‘buzzed’ for a staff member several times but eventually had to struggle out of bed and look for a nurse in order to be given her med.

* This same nurse in the presence of other staff, on a doctor’s ward-round, accused Janet of ‘feeling a bit sorry for herself today’.

* A staff member attempted to take Janet’s blood pressure.  This auxiliary/nurse did not even know how to put the BP sleeve on my sister’s arm - Janet had to tell her it was upside down.  The ‘nurse’ then proceeded to take other patients’ BP but appeared to write nothing on their charts - finally walking away with the pulse monitor still attached to a patient’s finger - almost pulling her out of bed.

*In my presence, another patient, who had previously waited six hours for her pain-killers, asked a senior member of staff (do not know her title) if she would pass on that information to the relevant person so that something could be done about it.

This staff member replied, with words to the effect that, ‘it was nothing to do with her’.

* I made several attempts to speak to the ward sister via telephone but with no success.

* Janet had severe diarrhoea and although, again, had ‘buzzed’ repeatedly for help, finally had to get herself out of bed and to the toilet - could not make it in time, then slipped and fell in her own faeces.  A nurse, on finding her, scolded her for getting out of bed.

* John, very anxious and upset at the poor management of Janet’s pain, pointed out to a nurse that Janet needed her medication before meal times, to help her with the pain related to eating, and that she was not getting her med. until after her meal, so was unable to eat or even attempt to eat anything - plus Janet was becoming panicked by the inevitability of her pain.  John also suggested to the nurse that it would make more sense if priority was given to those in most need, as it was clear that some patients were more comfortable, they were watching TV or eating, so able to wait a little longer for their pain-killers.  The nurse ‘reported’ him to the ward sister, he was reprimanded and nothing changed.  It seems that only one male nurse, I cannot recall his name, he worked nights, used his initiative and prioritised patients.  Janet felt relieved each time she saw he was on duty.

* I telephoned PALS - they were helpful and gave some advice.

On my visit on Thursday 23 May 2013 it was clear that Janet was in excruciating pain, she asked that we did not visit again until her pain was managed.

I phoned Danbury Ward several times after that Thursday, to see how Janet was, also to arrange to see a doctor.  The phone was never answered.

* John, told me that on one occasion Janet phoned him in tears after a doctor said to her, ‘Does your family know how ill you are?’

How irresponsible.  Saying that to her without speaking to one of her family first so we could be there.  It made Janet feel hopeless, plus it implied that her family did not care or visit, which was not the case.

John decided to attend Danbury Ward from 9am and sit and wait until a doctor was available to speak with him about Janet’s care.  He sat and waited, until late afternoon, for two days and it was not until the third day that someone became available.

 Danbury Ward was clearly understaffed, and some staff were unprofessional, obviously not adequately trained and clearly had little respect or concern for the patients.  Examples:

*Staff Hand-Over conducted in public places such as corridors or reception desks.  Visitors and patients were able to overhear the personal details of others.

*I witnessed two female staff members, on the cancer ward, sitting virtually at the foot of my sister’s bed, laughing/flirting with a male member of staff who was standing several yards away, in the corridor.  They were discussing their planned evening out and the menu and how good the food was going to be - within easy earshot of patients.  I find this unprofessional attitude and lack of respect, outrageous.  For staff to be so lacking in empathy and so dismissive of patients’ needs usually means they are not being supported themselves, often due to poor management.

*In the few weeks Janet was in Broomfield she and her bed must have been moved at least five times.  Shunted around like a piece of luggage.

Janet’s family had repeatedly asked that something be done to help her and eventually she was operated on in the hope of relieving her inability to eat without vomiting or suffering pain and for a week or so she was able to take food and keep it down.

On speaking to a more approachable senior staff member, I discovered that staff did not know that Janet and her family had only been aware of her illness for a few weeks and were in a state of shock - let alone trying to come to terms with the fact she was dying.  Either this information is not included in patient’s notes or they are not fully read by staff.

One of my colleagues, who qualified in nursing over thirty years' ago, is infuriated at the decline in basic nursing ability and upset at the reputation this gives competent, professional NHS hospital staff.  She assures me that unqualified and auxiliary staff are being used in many hospitals as they are cheaper - also and quite controversially I imagine, she states that British born and trained staff do not want to work with foreign staff who have not received UK NHS training, many of whom cannot communicate clearly in English.

Whilst I was visiting Janet, a male member of staff - a doctor?  Stood at the end of her bed, trousers frayed at the ankles - shoes with the sole hanging off, attempting to tell her something.  His English pronunciation was so poor I could not understand him and Janet had to ask him several times to repeat it.  We finally understood, he was telling her they ‘could do nothing for her’.

What a way to tell someone they are dying.

The family contacted a private consultant with a view to referring Janet on and requested that a copy of her notes be forwarded to the consultant.  I did not hear this conversation but I am told that Janet’s family were refused copies of notes and informed by Broomfield staff that they would have to go through Broomfield Hospital lawyers.  One of Janet’s family mentioned contacting the media - that seemed to have resolved the p
Janet was discharged, it was clear she was dying, in severe pain and in no fit state to be at home.  Even her local GP was shocked when he saw her condition on discharge.  However, this same NHS GP refused to process a prescription, which the hospital had given Janet, for Paracetamol suppositories, as at twenty-five pound they were ‘too expensive’.  John had to drive all over Essex to find somewhere he could obtain them.  I found Paracetamol suppositories being sold on a medical provisions website for five pound.  On Janet’s discharge from Broomfield, as far as I am aware, no support was in place other than a MacMillan nurse.  No practical help was offered - her family bought her a purpose-built bed and John was her lone-carer until she was re-admitted to Broomfield, then finally discharged to the hospice
 
I do not think the answer lies simply in private care.  I have worked in hospitals as both medical secretary and  mental health therapist.  My experience leads me to the conclusion that whether private or NHS, all staff need a higher level of training, with regular, independent supervision (i.e not by their own line-manager).  All staff also must be able to communicate effectively in English.  But, as I wrote in my letter to Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, if the National Health Service continues to be less about patient care and more about saving money and box-ticking, then sadly, nothing will change.

Friday 25 July 2014

Paedophile VIPs Daily Mail

Chilling day Special Branch swooped to seize ANOTHER dossier on VIP abusers: 16 MPs' names mentioned in 1984 report on paedophile lobby's influence in Westminster

  • Police raided newspaper offices of Don Hale, editor of Bury Messenger
  • He'd recently been given sensitive files by Labour politician Barbara Castle 
  • Documents included typewritten minutes of meetings that had been held at Westminster in support of paedophile agenda
  • Included details of a host of Establishment figures who had apparently pledged support to their cause
  • Also mentioned multiple times was Tory minister Sir Rhodes Boyson, a well-known enthusiast for corporal punishment, and Education Secretary Sir Keith Joseph 

Barbara Castle: Worried about rising influence of paedophile lobby
Barbara Castle: Worried about rising influence of paedophile lobby
The knock on the door came early one day in the famously dry summer of 1984. It was just after 8 am, and Don Hale, the young editor of the Bury Messenger, was reading the daily papers at his desk as his reporters were beginning to arrive at the office.
As Hale, then 31, answered the door, a trio of plain-clothes detectives barged in, followed by a dozen police officers in uniform.
What happened next was, in Hale’s words, ‘like something out of totalitarian East Germany rather than Margaret Thatcher’s supposedly free Britain’.
The detectives identified themselves as Special Branch, the division of the police responsible for matters of national security.
‘They began to flash warrant cards and bark questions,’ says Hale. ‘It was as if they were interviewing a potential criminal rather than a law-abiding newspaper man.
‘The officers told me that I should abandon plans to print a story that was scheduled to run in our next edition. If I didn’t, they told me to expect a long jail sentence.’
Initially bewildered by their threatening tone, Hale soon worked out the purpose of the police visit.
The focus of their attention was an incendiary dossier he had been handed a few days earlier by long-serving Labour politician Barbara Castle. A powerful feminist and stalwart of the traditional Left, who served in Harold Wilson’s Cabinet, she was for years the MP for nearby Blackburn.
One of her lifelong interests, as a principled advocate for the vulnerable and powerless, was child protection. To that end, she had become concerned at the rising influence of the paedophile lobby, which was then infiltrating the political Establishment, developing links with senior public figures, including MPs, peers, civil servants and police officers.
Mrs Castle was particularly alarmed, Hale recalls, about the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which had become officially ‘affiliated’ with the influential National Council for Civil Liberties, run by future Labour frontbenchers Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt and Jack Dromey.
Scroll down for video
Journalist Don Hale, the young editor of the Bury Messenger in 1984,  was silenced by an official government order. Ms Castle had given him documents which included minutes of meetings held in Westminster in support of the paedophile agenda
Journalist Don Hale, the young editor of the Bury Messenger in 1984,  was silenced by an official government order. Ms Castle had given him documents which included minutes of meetings held in Westminster in support of the paedophile agenda
‘To her frustration, politicians seemed unwilling to discuss this important issue,’ says Hale. ‘So, being aware of my investigative work in the local media, she approached me and we agreed to a meeting.’
Over tea and a bun at a local cafe, Mrs Castle opened a battered briefcase and handed Hale a bundle of extraordinary documents. They included typewritten minutes of meetings that had been held at Westminster in support of the paedophile agenda, along with details of a host of Establishment figures who had apparently pledged support to their cause.
No fewer than 16 MPs were on that list, several of them household names. Also mentioned multiple times was Tory minister Sir Rhodes Boyson, a well-known enthusiast for corporal punishment, and Education Secretary Sir Keith Joseph.
‘I don’t suppose you’d be interested in writing a story on this,’ Mrs Castle asked in what Hale describes as a tone of weariness.
‘She perked up when I told her that yes, I would be interested,’ he says, ‘though I warned her that I would have to make inquiries with the authorities about some contents of the dossier.’
Accordingly, a few days later he put in a call to the Home Office.
‘I could detect the antagonism from officials as soon as they answered,’ he says. ‘The institution that should have been protecting vulnerable children seemed more interested in stopping the Press from prying too closely.’
It was the morning after Hale made his call to the Home Office that Special Branch officers turned up at the Bury Messenger.
Pushing him into a corner, they began barking orders.
‘Let me assure you that this story is not in the public interest,’ said a detective. ‘It cannot be printed, as a matter of national security.’
‘That can’t be right,’ Hale told him.
‘Look, we’re not here to argue,’ the detective responded. ‘Are you going to hand over your papers?’
‘No,’ Hale replied.
Sir Rhodes Boyson (left) was mentioned multiple times in Mrs Castle's dossier
Sir Keith Joseph (right) was also named in her files
Sir Rhodes Boyson (left) was mentioned multiple times in Mrs Castle's dossier; while Sir Keith Joseph (right) was also named in her files
At this point, the officer produced a document, signed by a judge. It showed that his previous remark about not printing the story had not been a request, but an order. The document handed to Hale was a D-notice — a relic of wartime censorship that could be served on newspaper editors, allowing the Government to block any story that threatened national security.
‘If you don’t comply with this notice, we will arrest you for perverting the course of justice,’ the detective barked. ‘You will be liable for up to ten years in prison.’
At this point, Hale’s resistance collapsed. He had been plunged into a situation for which he had little experience.
In his first editorship and married with two children, he says he couldn’t afford to casually put his family and career at risk.
The papers from Mrs Castle were swiftly confiscated, as were Hale’s notes and even his typewriter.
‘When I asked the reason for this strange act of expropriation, I was told it was being taken in case of allegations of fraud,’ he says.
‘You might have typed these statements yourself,’ said a detective, referring to minutes of paedophile campaign meetings. As the police left, Hale was warned never to write about the raid or tell anyone what had happened.
If you don’t comply with this notice, we will arrest you for perverting the course of justice
Officer to Mr Hale during raid at his newspaper office 
‘One point I found interesting was that they all spoke with London accents,’ says Hale. ‘Not a single man was from Lancashire. It was obvious this was a Metropolitan Police raid, planned in the capital.
‘This was confirmed when, disobeying Special Branch’s instructions, I phoned Bury police about the incident. They knew nothing of it and were astonished.’
Rather less shocked was Barbara Castle. When Hale saw her a few days later, she told him: ‘I thought this might happen.’
‘I wish you’d told me,’ he replied. ‘I was totally unprepared. If I’d known, I might have been more discreet in my inquiries to the Home Office or been able to hide some of the papers.’ Mrs Castle apologised. ‘Well, this certainly shows the extent of the cover-up,’ she said. ‘We are fighting a formidable foe.’
Sadly, it wasn’t a foe that Barbara Castle would live to see defeated. Thanks to the D-notice, Hale never made further inquiries or made public the contents of the dossier. Castle went to her grave in 2002 with its contents still secret.
She wasn’t the only one. In a scandal that has gripped Westminster, we recently learned that a similar dossier was handed to then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in 1983 by the late Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens.
Lord Brittan says he passed on that dossier to civil servants and prosecutors. But its contents seem never to have been properly acted on.
Last week, the Home Office was forced to admit it is one of no fewer than 114 files relating to the paedophile lobby and PIE that are ‘missing’, presumed destroyed.
Amid growing public disquiet, two public inquiries will now attempt to establish what happened. The first, by NSPCC head Peter Wanless, will focus on how the Home Office handled recent allegations of child abuse in the early Eighties. It will report in nine weeks.
Another investigation into the handling of child-abuse allegations by a range of public institutions, including schools, care homes and the Church, will last much longer. It is seeking a chairman, following this week’s resignation of the initial appointee, Baroness Butler-Sloss.
Against this backdrop, Hale’s decision to reveal what happened in his office in 1984 carries huge significance, on a number of levels.
Take, for example, his revelation about the role of Special Branch in shutting down his coverage of Establishment links to paedophiles.
It comes just a week after Tim Hulbert, a former Home Office employee, revealed that in 1979 he had been told to wave through the renewal of a £30,000 grant for PIE.
Hulbert says his boss Clifford Hindley — a suspected paedophile — claimed ‘PIE was being funded at the request of Special Branch, who found it politically useful to keep an eye on paedophiles.’ If that isn’t coincidence enough, take also Hale’s revelation that two prominent Tories, Sir Rhodes Boyson and Sir Keith Joseph, were named in Castle’s dossier.
This week, a former Tory activist called Anthony Gilberthorpe told a Sunday newspaper that he had been asked to procure under-age boys for drink and drug-fuelled ‘sex parties’ at political party conferences in the early Eighties.
And who were the two most senior figures Gilberthorpe named as being present at the debauched events? None other than Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson.
While neither man is alive to defend themselves, and should, of course, be considered innocent until comprehensively proven guilty, this does, at the very least, appear uncanny.
A third extraordinary coincidence concerns an event that occurred a few days after Hale’s visit from Special Branch.
When he first read Mrs Castle’s dossier, he had noticed that some of those named as parliamentary supporters of the paedophile lobby were Liberals. With this in mind, he’d contacted Jeremy Thorpe, the former party leader who, despite his retirement from front-line politics, remained a national figure.
‘Over the phone, Thorpe told me he would send someone from the party to discuss the matter with me in person at my Bury office,’ says Hale. And who should appear soon after but Cyril Smith, the apparently genial MP for Rochdale.
We now know, thanks to heroic investigations by the present Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, serialised by this newspaper, that Cyril Smith was a predatory paedophile who ruthlessly exploited his status to exploit vulnerable boys.
At the time, however, Hale was totally unaware of Smith’s sordid private life, and his name didn’t feature in Castle’s documents.
‘Perhaps my suspicions should have been raised by his dismissal of Barbara’s dossier when we met,’ he says. ‘It was all “poppycock”, Smith claimed, a result of Barbara “getting her knickers in a twist” because she was bored with her position as an MEP in Brussels.
‘Downplaying the whole business, Smith sought an assurance that I would not run any story about the dossier. When I refused, he left in a disappointed mood, and I continued my ill-fated investigation.’
We now know, of course, that Cyril Smith spent his life using friends within the Establishment to cover up paedophile activities.
And the organisation which, more than any other, presided over shoddy cover-ups on his behalf was, once again, Special Branch.
As Danczuk has revealed, a Lancashire police dossier on Smith containing credible allegations of abuse disappeared in the Seventies after being commandeered by Special Branch, who then demanded that local detectives stop investigating him.
Officers in Northamptonshire were instructed (via a phone call from shadowy officials in London) to release Smith from custody in the Eighties, after child porn was found in his car boot.
Meanwhile, policemen in London have revealed they were repeatedly told, by unnamed superiors (also believed to be Special Branch), to release the 23 stone MP after he was caught performing sex acts with young boys in public toilets in St James’s Park.
Don Hale, who is now 61, was in 2001 voted Journalist of the Year by What The Papers Say — an award normally reserved for reporters from the national media — for a brilliant campaign as editor of the Matlock Mercury in which he helped clear the name of a man who had wrongly been jailed for more than 20 years for a murder he did not commit.
He knows only too well how deep the tentacles of Smith and fellow paedophiles extended into the Establishment of the time.
A few years later, he was contacted by reporters from the News Of The World, who had somehow learned of Castle’s paedophile dossier and wanted to talk to him about it.
Soon after meeting them, Cyril Smith turned up unannounced in his office, claiming he ‘just happened to be in the area, ’ says Hale.
‘But the real reason was all too apparent: he had heard about the reappearance of the paedophile story and wanted to make sure that I would not pass on the information I had been given.’
In truth, however, there was no real chance of Castle’s dossier of information becoming public.
The News Of The World was also told to ‘spike’ (not publish) the story, for reasons of national security.
‘Their reporters were leant on just as heavily by Special Branch as I had been,’ says Hale, barely able to suppress his anger.
‘The Press is a key weapon in a just society to expose wrong-doing.
‘But this whole saga shows that, in the case of paedophilia in the Seventies and Eighties, the Establishment had a profoundly warped sense of morality, preferring cover-ups to crime fighting.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2697947/Chilling-day-Special-Branch-swooped-seize-ANOTHER-dossier-VIP-abusers-16-MPs-names-mentioned-1984-report-paedophile-lobby-s-influence-Westminster.html#ixzz38T8AEBle
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook