The CSA Inquiry, The BBC And The Strange Case of Patrick Rock

The Cat here argues that there’s a cover-up being attempted by the Tory media and the BBC to prevent the public being informed of the true extent of high-ranking paedophile abuse. This comes from the Tories’ demands that Tom Watson apologise for his accusations of paedophile abuse by various politicians, echoed by the Daily Mail. Even Harvey Proctor has emerged to deny that he was ever a child molester. As one commenter to the Cat’s post remarks, this is despite the fact that Proctor was convicted of gross indecency with youths under the then age of homosexual consent. This was 21 at the time, and the youngest of the rent boys involved in the case was 17. There has been a recent Panorama programme pouring cold water on the notion that there was ever a high-ranking paedophile ring. Finally, the government has shown itself very reluctant to release information on the case of Patrick Rock, the Downing Street aid found in possession of indecent images of children. The Cat reports that he was due to appear in court in the three days following his post about this issue. This has, however, very definitely not been reported in the press. Again, this is in marked contrast to previous high-profile sex scandals, where the press were positively queuing up to cover the cases and repeat just about all the lurid details they could.

Now it might simply be that the legal authorities have imposed a curtain of silence around the case for perfectly good and just reasons. There are very strict laws regarding the reporting of child abuse, not least of which is that the child’s identity must be protected. Furthermore, it could be argued that the sheer high profile of the accused means that any news reports about the trial could skew the decision of the jury and so cause a miscarriage of justice. This has been the argument made before in some particularly controversial and emotive court cases that have received very extensive coverage. The problem with this is that Rock, or de Bascombes as he should properly be known, has been simply accused of possession of indecent images of, but not the direct abuse of children, whose identity needs to be protected. The law doesn’t seem to apply in this case, and similarly cases in which people have been caught with images of the sexual abuse or simply indecent images of children have been regularly reported in the press.

The Cat has concluded that the paedophile inquiry is starting to get too close to home for the Tories. From the evidence presented here, he’s right. And a lot of people are similarly smelling the odour of rodents.

Guy Debord's Cat

In the last couple of weeks, the BBC and the Tory press have worked tirelessly to scupper the VIP child abuse story. In a recent edition of Panorama, the BBC poured cold water on the claims that the now deceased Leon Brittan was involved in child abuse or had raped a woman in 1967. Yesterday, Tory MP Nicholas Soames demanded that Tom Watson “apologise” for “traducing” Brittan’s good name. Watson rose to his feet in response and refused to issue an apology. Good for him. First, you can’t traduce or smear a dead person and second, Watson doesn’t need to apologise for anything.

The front page of today’s Daily Mail has this banner headline with the words “Labour’s child abuse witch hunt” in the opening paragraph. No agenda there. Right?

However, what is clear from these efforts is that the inquiry must be getting uncomfortably close to the Tories…

View original post 1,185 more words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: