Archive | April 2014

THE CRIMES OF THE NONCE MATT CLIFFORD

Max Clifford – Guilty verdicts in historic sex cases

max clifford

Introduction

On  28th April 2014 Max Clifford was convicted on 8 counts of indecent assault, not guilty of 2 and the jury could not decide on the last count (it is likely that there will not be a retrial on this).
The jury retired on 16th April. After five days of deliberation (including the Easter break) a majority direction was given on 23rd April. There were only 10 jurors and so a verdict had to be 10-0 or 9-1.
This post will be edited as more information becomes available.

Charges

Mr Clifford faced the following charges :
  • Count 1 – Indecent Assault relating to a girl aged 14 in 1966 – No verdict
  •  Count 2 – Indecent Assault relating to woman aged 18, in 1974/75- NOT GUILTY
  •  Count 3,4,5,6 – Indecent Assault relating to a girl, aged 15, in 1977/78 – GUILTY on all counts
  •  Count 7 – Indecent Assault relating to a woman, aged 19, in 1978 – NOT GUILTY
  •  Count 8 – Indecent Assault relating to a girl, aged 19, in 1981/82 – GUILTY
  •  Count 9,10 – Indecent Assault relating to a girl, aged 16 or 17, in 1980′s – GUILTY on both
  •  Count 11 – Indecent Assault relating to a woman, aged 18, in 1984/85 – GUILTY

This means that Mr Clifford has been convicted of 8 offences relating to four victims, all young women aged between 15 and 19.
We have some more details of the offending courtesy of Mark Williams-Thomas (and from the Daily Mail) :
Counts 3-6 – “when she was alone with Clifford, he told her to take her top and bra off because he needed to see her breasts. He later forced her to perform sex acts while he assaulted her.” It seems that Count 3 was getting the victim to masturbate him, Count 4 was digital penetration, Count 5 penile penetration of the victim’s mouth and Count 6 was Mr Clifford giving the victim oral sex.
Count 8 – the victim (during a pseudo-audition) “posed for the photos, but when Clifford asked her to open her legs, she refused. He then tried to grab and kiss her and pushed her down on a sofa, but she fought him off, kicking him in the groin,”
Counts 9-10 – During another ‘interview’ the victim was asked to strip which she did. Mr Clifford’s wife then rang and Mr Clifford began to masturbate whilst talking to her and then “tried to force the girl to perform a sex act on him.” It seems that Count 9 involved Mr Clifford touching the victim’s breast and Count 10 an attempt by Mr Clifford to force penile penetration of her mouth. This was unsuccessful, but he ejaculated over her.

Count 11 – “Clifford allegedly approached an 18-year-old in a nightclub, after asking if she wanted a film role. It was claimed he made a call and handed the phone to the dancer; the man on the other end said she could have a screen test if she confirmed whether Clifford was circumcised. Clifford then went to a toilet cubicle with her and forced her to masturbate him, prosecutors claim.”

Sentencing

Mr Clifford falls to be sentenced for the 8 offences of which he was convicted of. The maximum sentence on all these offences is 2 years (this is due to the ages of the victims and the age of the offending.
We have a factsheet on sentencing for historic offences. The Sexual Offences Guidelines will apply (notwithstanding these are historic offences), at least they will be the starting point.
Sentence will be passed on Friday. It is inevitably going to be a custodial sentence for Mr Clifford but predicting the length is difficult, but the fact that he has been released on bail until then does not mean that he will not be going to prison – it is very common nowadays. Mr Clifford will clearly attend.
What will he get? It’s worth saying straightaway that the sentence he would get if he committed these acts is far, far higher than he will get. This is not to do with his celebrity, or anything to do with the Judge’s assessment of the case, but purely because of the fact that the maximum legal sentence for each of these is two years.
If these offences were committed today, then they would be charged as follows:
It can be seen straight away that this offending is in a different league from that suggested by the name of the offence (Indecent Assault). This is because at the time of the offending rape was limited to penile penetration of the vagina. Even where the name of the offence is similar, sexual assault for example, the maximum sentence is 10 years rather than 2.
Count 5 is the most serious. Looking at the Guidelines (page 10) this would be a Category 2 case with higher culpability (Culpability A as it is put). This is because she was under 16, vulnerable, there was a breach of trust and threats issued to her. The starting point would therefore be 10 years with a range of 9-13 years.
Counts 4 and 10 would have a similar, if slightly lower, range. Count 4 would have a starting point of 8 years, with the remaining counts being significantly lower (but all but possibly Counts 8 and 9 would merit custody in isolation).
For this offending nowadays we would expect a sentence, after a trial, of 10-12 years. This is slightly lower than the starting points identified above (when taken together), but would fairly reflect the offending and other factors.
This makes the Judge’s task a very difficult one. He has to respect the fact that Parliament at the time took these offences a lot less seriously than they do now. He can pass consecutive sentences, but cannot give anywhere close to 10 years in prison here.  It seems to me wrong in principle to pass consecutive sentences on one victim taking the sentence over the maximum (or, at least, too much over the maximum).
To my mind, a fair sentence would be 2 years on Counts 3-6, 6 months on Count 8 and Count 9, 18 months on Count 10 and 12 months on Count 11. Making these consecutive between victims gives a sentence of 5 years. This is too long given the sentencing at the time. Stuart Hall got 30 months for less serious offending (but, as we noted, this decision was far from satisfactory), but I would imagine that the ‘best’ the Judge can properly do is 3½ years. This can be achieved by making some sentences concurrent, or reducing some to allow for totality.
Whilst 3½ years is very low on the face of it, it is right at the top of what I think would be lawful (and if it wasn’t for some of the recent AG References, I would have thought 2-3 years would have been the most), given the law as it was in the 1970s and 1980s. One thing that I will safely predict is that whatever the sentence, there will be public outrage from some quarters and calls for an Attorney-General’s Reference.

 Further Reading

See here for the Stuart Hall AG Ref and the Graham Ovenden AG Ref where some of the sentencing issues are discussed.

How does this relate to the other cases?

By ‘other cases’ you mean Dave Lee Travis, Bill Roache, Nigel Evans, you know, celebrities (but presumably not Stuart Hall)?
Officially, nothing. As the Judge in the Max Clifford case said those are irrelevant. One might think that, if they were completely separate, there would be no need to mention that they weren’t connected. However, if the defence have raised the issue (as has featured in a number of celebrity historic sexual abuse trials) then the Judge may have felt he had to deal with it. Alternatively, even if the defence didn’t raise it, the Judge might have felt the issue needed dealing with as some members of the jury may need reminding that they are to try the case only on what they have heard in court and not any extraneous factors such as the ‘shadow’ of the Jimmy Savile abuse.

THE CYRIL SMITH POOL OF FILTH

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/archive.php?issue=1364

THE CYRIL SMITH POOL OF FILTH

Cyril Smith Archive
As the row ratchets up over claims of an establishment cover-up of child abuse involving the late Sir Cyril Smith, here are the original stories that ran in Private Eye 454 and in the Rochdale Alternative Press (RAP), in 1979.
From Eye 454, 11th May 1979 (click article to enlarge):

cyril smith
The original shocking RAP story (click each image to enlarge):

cyril smith
cyril smith
cyril smith

And their follow up (click to enlarge):

cyril smith

WELL BOO FUCKING HOO

EXCLUSIVE: April Jones’ killer Mark Bridger lives in fear of fellow inmates

KILLER Mark Bridger is fearing for his life after being told to drop his claim for injury ­compensation by fellow lags.
mark bridger, murderer, child abduction, april jones, killer, little girl, fear, prison, inmates, compensation, exclusiveMONSTER: Mark Bridger (left) was convicted of killing April Jones (right) [PA/WALES NEWS SERVICE]
Terrified Bridger did not pursue an appeal against his whole life sentence for the murder of April Jones, inset below, after he was threatened by lags.
And now he is under pressure to abandon a fight to get ­thousands of pounds from taxpayers after he was slashed with an improvised blade.
The lags’ rough justice came as it emerged that Levi Bellfield, serving life for killing schoolgirl Millie Dowler, 13, received £4,500 after he was assaulted.
Last night a source said: “Bridger has been told in no uncertain terms he should not carry on trying to get money for being attacked. He doesn’t deserve it.
“He knows what will happen if he carries on with this claim.”
Lags at Wakefield Prison, dubbed Monster Mansion because it is home to some of the nation’s most dangerous men, warned him he would be looking over his shoulder forever if he did not drop the legal fight to get a reduced sentence.
Our source added: “Bridger is an absolute wreck, mentally and physically.
“He just stays in his cell all the time.
“He is petrified he will be attacked again and every time someone goes past his cell they bang on the door or shout something.
“He’s done an horrific crime and he should spend the rest of his life in the prison”

April’s grandfather Dai Smith

“He was told if he continued his fight against the sentence he’d be got at again and again.
“So for an easy life he decided to drop the case and just do his time in relative peace.”
Bridger, 48, was caged for life in May last year after being found guilty of the abduction of April, five, from outside her home in mid-Wales in October 2012. Her body has never been found.
Just two months into the life sentence he was attacked by an inmate and he then launched an appeal against the whole life tariff.
But the Judicial Office confirmed Bridger had ­abandoned his attempt 11 days before a hearing was due to take place in January.
April’s grandfather Dai Smith said the news was a “weight off our minds”.
He said: “I don’t think he should have been allowed to appeal.
“He’s done an horrific crime and he should spend the rest of his life in the prison.”
The Prison Service declined to comment.

DISCLOSE TV

Pedophiles to be treated like terrorists in UK – Cameron

http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.1397165098.html#_=1398893092248&count=horizontal&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.disclose.tv%2Fforum%2Fpedophiles-to-be-treated-like-terrorists-in-uk-cameron-t93337.html&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.disclose.tv%2Fforum%2Fpedophiles-to-be-treated-like-terrorists-in-uk-cameron-t93337-10.html%23ixzz30P2Vvyh7&size=m&text=Pedophiles%20to%20be%20treated%20like%20terrorists%20in%20UK%20%E2%80%93%20Cameron%20%3A%20News%20%26%20World%20Events%20-%20Page%202%3A&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.disclose.tv%2Fforum%2Fpedophiles-to-be-treated-like-terrorists-in-uk-cameron-t93337.html%23.U2FqGzQRMII.twitter

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7721
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:08 am
Location: Next door
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 6:53 am » by Malogg

Middleman wrote:

Opalserpent wrote:
I see your argument middleman however it’s yet to be seen whether this is just rhetoric
or will actually clean up the organised pedo rings in england that are well rooted there.

Plus seriously, establishments knew about savilles sick tastes, People in high places
also knew about Epstiens Pedo Island, specially bill clinton, People knew about all
kinds of things but they don’t speak dare they rock the Cradle of Filth and luxury.

It came down to whistleblowers and victims to say something about it before
anyone would do something.
:look:

What will change really? I reckon it’s more about getting more
privileges to trawl the internet for information with the plausible deniability of
innocently searching for child porn on computers.

Nobody with any weight will get done, unless they step out of line. Even with the Saville revelations, what actually happened? Fuck all really. The public got served up some obvious tokens like Glitter and Rolf Harris, but nobody who matters.

It strikes me that these new pedo laws will allow them to get at people they couldn’t credibly accuse of terrorism. The rich and powerful will still be protected, but if you become an inconvenience, “oh look what we found on your computer, good luck defending yourself with no legal rights”.

Why should it strike you that pedophiles will be treated like terrorists but to put it another way > Ima absolutely appalled that pedophiles have not been subjected to a rope around their neck after been stomped apon for a lengthy period of time by the victims family and if the victim be an orphan the then public be given that option but better still let the pedophiles scream to HELL about their human rights that pedophilia is an illness yeap better still give them that choice so they can be lobotomized by Mr Magoo or Stevie Wonder and then sectioned indefinitely like all damn pedophiles within the system have tried to get done to anyone that exposes them for their most heinous of crimes

Any fucker that has child abuse porn or even view it on their or other folks CPU

they have no rights but one

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT

how can anyone have a problem with that?

:cheers:

Image
Blame the rock she has her faults

Initiate
Online
User avatar
Posts: 872
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:39 pm
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 8:06 am » by Middleman

Malogg wrote:
Any fucker that has child abuse porn or even view it on their or other folks CPU

they have no rights but one

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT

how can anyone have a problem with that?

:cheers:

Either you believe in the rule of law, or you don’t.

Either you believe in due process, or you don’t.

Cameron’s proposal here is that just being accused of certain crimes means an automatic loss of rights. The government doesn’t have to prove you dun it before they start punishing you, and making it (much) harder to defend yourself.

If you don’t have a problem with that, ask yourself how you’d like to be treated if you were ever accused of such a crime. If they’re treating you the same as a terrorist, they can lock you up for months on end, without charge, and impose gag orders making it illegal for anyone to even tell your family what has happened to you.

Does that sound fair?

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 12:35 am
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 1:53 pm » by missamandamanhattan

I will keep saying it – “They will start hunting each other.” This is what is happening. Arresting people who download how-to information is just the start. It is only lip service but all the people have to do is hold them to their word and ensure that the people who download the how-to stuff are actually arrested, charged and held in custody.

It isn’t much but at this stage it shows that the cabal/illuminati/whatever are paying attention and can see the need to take action – and public action at that.

When enough people keep up the pressure and keep at them – they have to be seen to be addressing the situation. Anyone who is not against Child Abuse – well …

Much Peace – Amanda

Initiate
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:04 am
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 2:28 pm » by iamanalien

this is just a front of taking rights away from normal people really ,first this then prison for just downloading an ebook , then it will be a free mp3 , as I say there just making sure they tie up every law just to use against you , there slowly screwing everyone and its happening around the world , cant print storys they get protection there taken away legal aid to the poor , everything they do is to screw the poor , and all this is because we caught them with there hands in the till its tit for tat and there win because they have the money , what do we get to have a go at them ohh yeah 1 shitty vote.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7721
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:08 am
Location: Next door
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 2:58 pm » by Malogg

Middleman wrote:

Malogg wrote:
Any fucker that has child abuse porn or even view it on their or other folks CPU

they have no rights but one

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT

how can anyone have a problem with that?

:cheers:

Either you believe in the rule of law, or you don’t.

Either you believe in due process, or you don’t.

Cameron’s proposal here is that just being accused of certain crimes means an automatic loss of rights. The government doesn’t have to prove you dun it before they start punishing you, and making it (much) harder to defend yourself.

If you don’t have a problem with that, ask yourself how you’d like to be treated if you were ever accused of such a crime. If they’re treating you the same as a terrorist, they can lock you up for months on end, without charge, and impose gag orders making it illegal for anyone to even tell your family what has happened to you.

Does that sound fair?

Aye you have NO clue infact Ima state that you sound like you are for the nonces

Letter from Robert Green
Posted on April 28,

Dear S

Thank you for your message [on Email a Prisoner https://emaplogin.prison-technology-ser … country=uk) . Yes I do have some medication now, which does help although I feel my health is deteriorating. Still, I receive the most wonderful support from around the world and remain, as usual, in good spirits.

The wing of the prison in which I am held is very old-fashioned and I am in solitary confinement, locked up, for around 19 hours each day. The food is basic but adequate. We do not eat together but collect our meals and eat in our cells. There is around one hour’s exercise in the yard provided every day, but few facilities beyond that. Virtually all the books I have are ones that have been sent in by kind supporters.

My cell door is of solid steel and the window is more of a sky-light. Medical attention is difficult to obtain and it took three weeks to be even provided with a change of underwear and socks, but with outside pressure exerted on the governors, this situation has been corrected satisfactorily, although I do worry about other prisoners who do not enjoy the support I have.

My fellow-prisoners are very helpful and not at all what the outside world might imagine. I have no doubt that 75% of them should not ever be here. Last week, one of the inmates had been imprisoned here for 6 weeks for stealing a cream cake!

It must be said that the officers are of very high calibre, performing their duties with compassion, patience and professionalism. Of course, it can be a very dangerous occupation and their work ought to be properly appreciated by the outside world.

I hope this helps with your research.

Best wishes

Robert

This ‘introductory’ letter to someone who has just started supporting Robert is a good one on which to hang some additional facts or points about his current situation.

WINDOW-MORE-OF-A-SKYLIGHT: Robert has missed another beautiful spring as we are all enjoying, being unable to view daily so much as a blade of grass, for the second time in 2 years, for standing up to protect children & the disabled, not to mention the still-united UK’s justice-system, this is the reality of Robert’s and all our situation, please think about this long and deeply;

LACK OF MEDICAL ATTENTION: Despite having suffered from a heart–related problem & high blood-pressure Robert’s blood pressure has not been taken again since the doctor visited him on Friday 4th April. His solicitor is still waiting to receive copies of his medical records corroborating his historic heart condition over 4 weeks from when they were first requested;

BOOKS: Thank goodness as we know Robert enjoys reading or life inside would be bleak in the extreme. One book in particular he has mentioned twice in more or less daily phone-calls which has obviously impressed him is called ‘Ultimate Price’ and is about Christians in Nazi Germany who stood up to Hitler and paid a bitter price for that, yet in Scotland in 2014 no one, Christian or otherwise seems to have the guts to stand up to Alex Salmond – Salmond apparently trumps Hitler!

75% PRISONERS “SHOULD NOT EVER BE HERE”: This is a very worrying indictment of the justice-system in Scotland although may not be confined to Scotland. Robert himself is certainly one who “should not ever be here,” as the evidence supporting the current charges against him must be flimsy to the point of being non-existent, relating as it presumably does to private correspondence taken from his computer after it was seized in the latest raid on his house on 13th February. And by now he certainly should have been released on bail, had not the judge been informed at the third/latest bail application hearing on 19th March, for which he was not produced as for sure he would have objected to what was being said about him, that he had been leafleting outside Aberdeen Sheriff Court! He has written twice? 3 times? to the Procurator Fiscal, Andrew Shanks asking whether it was he who had given this totally incorrect information to the judge, Lady Wise? (no, this is not a made-up name). Robert hasn’t been anywhere remotely near Aberdeen since leaving Craiginches prison on 17th May 2012 up until his return on 13th February 2014 in the back of a police car!

And having cited a certain Dame to be a witness at his trial at Stonehaven in January 2012 which didn’t happen, what confidence can Robert have that he will manage to get his two current targets, the present Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland and chief suspect in the Hollie Greig abuse-case, Hollie’s father Denis Mackie into the witness-box at his forthcoming trial, whenever that will be?

He wants Mulholland to clarify to whom he is referring as “independent counsel” in typical response to correspondence on the part of MPs incited by their constituents to enquire into whether a young disabled woman’s allegations of having been abused during her childhood by her father and a group of his relatives and friends have any substance? that the allegations have been “thoroughly investigated” including by “independent counsel.”

This is a very relevant and hot topic in the Scottish legal world as Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill is right now being hauled over the coals for his attempt to do away with the cherished Scottish principle of ‘corroboration’ regarding any crime committed including rape (at the same time controversial, as how can a rape-victim easily find another victim or witness to corroborate an act that usually takes place well behind the bushes and at dead of night?)

And as to Denis Mackie in the witness-box – in our dreams! Denis Mackie himself, arch-villain that he is, has been conspicuous by his absence throughout the whole drama being played out in N-E Scotland 2000-2014 – note he Mackie himself has never complained about being named which is why I continue to name him, in reasonable security by now that he of all people will not react our accusations, nor yet Hollie’s older brother Greg, schooled by Mackie into raping Hollie from a young age.

Please continue to sign the Petition to get Robert released asap http://www.change.org/petitions/andrew- … e%20Robert

Image
Blame the rock she has her faults

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7721
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:08 am
Location: Next door
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 3:02 pm » by Malogg

missamandamanhattan wrote:I will keep saying it – “They will start hunting each other.” This is what is happening. Arresting people who download how-to information is just the start. It is only lip service but all the people have to do is hold them to their word and ensure that the people who download the how-to stuff are actually arrested, charged and held in custody.

It isn’t much but at this stage it shows that the cabal/illuminati/whatever are paying attention and can see the need to take action – and public action at that.

When enough people keep up the pressure and keep at them – they have to be seen to be addressing the situation. Anyone who is not against Child Abuse – well …

Much Peace – Amanda

:hugging: Thankyou

Image
Blame the rock she has her faults

Conspirator
Posts: 1566
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:29 pm
Location: canada
PostMon Apr 28, 2014 3:44 pm » by Mydogma

Middleman wrote:

Malogg wrote:
Any fucker that has child abuse porn or even view it on their or other folks CPU

they have no rights but one

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT

how can anyone have a problem with that?

:cheers:

Either you believe in the rule of law, or you don’t.

Either you believe in due process, or you don’t.

Cameron’s proposal here is that just being accused of certain crimes means an automatic loss of rights. The government doesn’t have to prove you dun it before they start punishing you, and making it (much) harder to defend yourself.

If you don’t have a problem with that, ask yourself how you’d like to be treated if you were ever accused of such a crime. If they’re treating you the same as a terrorist, they can lock you up for months on end, without charge, and impose gag orders making it illegal for anyone to even tell your family what has happened to you.

Does that sound fair?

the fact that they have not arrested the pedo cabal yet is testament to your point, these new laws only always apply to the herd, not the masters…add to the fact these faux gov agencies can access all of our computers and dump all sorts of files…then boast that they caught a dtv pedo ring…its really that easy…so until they go and arrest the bbc crowd and above….I will not believe their good intention…

PETER TATCHELL

PETER TATCHELL WANTS TO REDUCE THE AGE OF CONSENT TO 14

WHATS UP PETER ARE THERE NO ENOUGH FCKING 16 YEAR OLDS FOR YOU FFS

GAY RIGHTS NAE PROB BUT LET KIDS BE KIDS EH!

‘Homosexual rights’ campaigner Peter Tatchell has repeated his call for the age of consent to be lowered to just 14.
His position has been strongly rebuffed in the past, with one commentator saying that sex is for people who can cope with the consequences, “In a word, adults.”
Mr Tatchell’s latest comments echo those made by him last year as well as in a controversial letter he sent to The Guardian in 1997, in which he talked about the “positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships” and even said he knew cases of nine-year-olds for whom sex with adults “gave them great joy”.

Choice

Mr Tatchell’s recent remarks feature on an American forum website, Big Think, during a month in which the site published debate articles about “dangerous ideas”.
The ‘gay rights’ activist claimed that: “Despite what the puritans and sex-haters say, underage sex is mostly consenting, safe, and fun”.
He believes that laws which put the age of consent at 16 are harmful to teenagers. “They signal that a young person is not capable of making a rational, moral choice about when to have sex”, he said.

Experiment

In an online article in 2009, Mr Tatchell wrote: “An age of consent of 14 might be more realistic and reasonable than 16.
“If sex at 14 is consensual, and no one is hurt or complains, is criminalisation in the public interest?”
He added: “Some teens, and even young children, innocently and spontaneously explore and experiment at an early age. In most cases this causes them no harm at all.”
But commentator David Lindsay, writing on The Daily Telegraph’s website, slammed these remarks saying “sex is for people who can cope with the consequences, physical and otherwise. In a word, adults”.

Condone

In an outspoken letter to The Guardian in 1997 Mr Tatchell went even further, saying several of his friends had had sex with adults when they were aged between nine and 13.
“None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy”, he said.
Mr Tatchell went on to say that while “it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful”.

The letter, dated 26 June 1997, is reproduced in full below

ROS Coward (Why Dares to Speak says nothing useful, June 23) thinks it is “shocking” that Gay Men’s Press has published a book, Dares To Speak, which challenges the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive. I think it is courageous.
The distinguished psychologists and anthropologists cited in this book deserve to be heard. Offering a rational, informed perspective on sexual relations between younger and older people, they document examples of societies where consenting inter-generational sex is considered normal, beneficial and enjoyable by old and young alike.
Prof Gilbert Herdt points to the Sambia tribe of Papua New Guinea, where all young boys have sex with older warriors as part of their initiation into manhood. Far from being harmed, Prof Herdt says the boys grow up to be happy, well-adjusted husbands and fathers.
The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.
While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.
Peter Tatchell.

DAVID STEELS LETTER TO PIE

LGBTHistoryScotland.org.uk > IDArc > GD467_5

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/hamamelis/RIP-ISPrivate/IDArc/GD467_5/GD467_5_1.htm

GD467/5/1: A large loose leaf folder with 4-5cms thick of letters, press cuttings relating to the International Gay Right Congress, Edinburgh, 1974.
Headed notepaper: Congress Organiser: Derek A. Ogg; Congress Secretary: Ian C. Dunn; Bankers: Bankers: Bank of Scotland; Solicitors: James Young & Co.
 
Letter from David Steel MP, on House of Commons headed notepaper;
Date 3 Sep 1974
To; Ian C Dunn, 8b Mayfield Gardens, Edinburgh.
Dear Ian, [handwritten]
Thank you for your letter enclosing a draft one to town councilors. I think the approach is right but may I query your sponsors? My father was talking to me on the phone just before he left for Africa. I think he will meet a deputation as you ask but he couldn’t do so in the 48 hours before he left. You cannot therefore even unintentionally convey to others that he is a sponsor. Likewise the Bishop of Edinburgh, who I heard, had not agreed. Is Robin Cook the only other M.P. Who has agreed? What about a Tory like Rifkind or Fletcher? And the SNP?
My second query is the title “Gay Rights”. I support both CHE and SMG, but have serious doubts about Gay Lib. Is this Congress intended to embrace then? (Double entendre unintentional).
[signed] ??? David Steel
 
Note sent to Jacon Pollock at London Broadcasting Company, 29 Aug 1974.:
Please book the Lindsay Kemp film “Circus” for the Congress for the following dates 19, 29, 21 Dec. 1974. Ian C Dunn.
  1. International Gay Rights Congress, Edinburgh, 1974

Congress Organises: Derek Ogg Secy: Ian C Dunn
24 October, 1974.
File copy of letter sent to:
Members of the Collective,
Gay Montreal Association,
3664 rue Ste. Famille,
Montreal H2X 3N4,
Canada
Dear Collective,
I am writing to ask a very special favour of you ­ a request which will involve some sacrifice, but a sacrifice for a worthy cause. Allow me to explain my request …
This International Congress is the first of its kind and therefore is experimental to some degree. We are aware( because we ­ Derek Ogg & myself, Ian Dunn ­ have traveled widely and have spoken with many gay individuals & groups in the U.S., Canada & Europe) of the great diversity and strengths and weaknesses of the various gay movements.
Now is the time for an international exchange of viatl information … a time to meet other gay ­ sisters and brothers ­ and to listen and learn from one another over a period of 4 days. I enclose an agenda to let you see what format our discussions will take.
[etc] But the crucial bit! ­ we are very short of ready money to finance the venture… [read about Gay Montreal’s ­ s great discos etc … asks for $600 … ]
In love and liberation, YS Ian Dunn.
Reply: Letter from Gay Montreal Association
Montréal le 11 octobre 74
Dear Ian,
personal letter explaining to Ian how to write his letter [of 24 Oct?] asking for $600