Where did the accusations of a Tory child sex abuser come from? Who is the paedophile supposed to be? What happened in the care homes of north Wales? Why did the Waterhouse inquiry not get the answers?
This is all getting a bit out of order. In the US look how they deal with this type of issue. Over here there still debating and having cat fights in board rooms.
Look, unless you do secure a criminal conviction it is unlawful to name names. Northamptonshire County Council needs to learn from this. I know of a case and contact with a Mr X could be made to tell him to sue the butt off you all for disclosing his name within your documentation and placing the paperwork before the Civil Court. Oh you shredded it?
It is scanned. Check mate!
Does contaminating evidence ring a bell?
Anyway,back to the main article. I am not sure why all this is being done right now. Maybe to distract the general public from some hot political issue government is attempting to bury.?
Whatever the reason, it is so wrong naming a paedophile in a public domain without securing a criminal conviction first. The general public need to steer away from such debates. Unless it is the Jimmy Savile story. The man is dead, he cannot sue or be convicted. So what a waste of time all that was?
No, hello BBC!
Even the title of the article is misleading ‘Tory Paedophile Scandal’. What about all the other political parties?
See on www.politics.co.uk
- Everything you need to know about the Tory paedophile scandal in five minutes (andypaulphillips.wordpress.com)
- Portillo calls for fresh inquiry into Tory paedophile scandal (theweek.co.uk)
- Tory paedophile scandal: will MPs use privilege to name X? (theweek.co.uk)
- Who is on the Tory Paedophile list? (carolinewilde.com)
- Paedophile inquiry ‘whitewash’: Judge said Tory child sex abuse claims were “best forgotten”, claims former government lawyer (mirror.co.uk)