His letter to his MP:
Ben Wallace, MP.
Member for Wyre & Preston North,
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Palace of Westminster, SW1A 0AA. 25th January 2015
Dear Mr Wallace,
CALL FOR A ROYAL COMMISSION INTO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE – ITS ORIGINS & SOCIAL EFFECTS IN THE UK
Further to my letter of January 11th I am now writing to advise you that my inquiries have progressed further since I last wrote to you. I can now state that there is sufficient prima facie evidence to suggest that the Prime Minister, Mr Cameron, is acting corruptly in the matter of the proposed Inquiry into child sexual abuse. There is also evidence which is in the public domain which states that he has a personal relationship with Mr Derek Laud. There are allegations in the public domain that Mr Laud was connected paedophilia. I have spoken to sources connected to the security services who allege that Mr Laud was connected to the child brothel known as the Elm Street Guest House. I have also received information from sources connected to the security services which allege that a known killer was also connected to Elm Street Guest House. The same source alleges that the premises were operated as a “honey trap” by MI5. The objective was, allegedly, to compromise and blackmail politicians and others of influence.
These allegations are now so serious that I must insist that you raise them in the House of Commons and demand that they are fully investigated. I have said to you that Mr Cameron treated my correspondence to him with total contempt. I have also stated that his actions seem to be, from my perspective, deliberately designed to cover up this issue and subvert the police whilst enhancing the powers of the security services. Mr Cameron is, in the words of your fellow MP, Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg, taking “…the way of tyranny,”(1,1a) He seems determined to thwart any moves to have the issue of child sexual abuse linked to politicians and the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) properly examined by any form of Inquiry that can be considered to have the powers required to properly, and independently, examine the issue.
I believe there is now sufficient prima facie evidence to suggest that Mr Cameron is operating, covertly and overtly, to a PRO-PAEDOPHILE agenda. The government is quietly implementing policies which seem specifically designed to promote paedophilia and further shift public opinion towards the acceptance of the sexualisation of children.
I also advise that I am preparing a statement which will be sent to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, Commissioner, Metropolitan Police. The statement will detail allegations of political corruption that came my way when I was investigating allegations of political corruption during the 1980’s. These allegations include:
- That a bribe of £1,000,000 was paid to the Conservative party in exchange for a change in government policy. The money came from sources known by the police to be linked to the drugs trade. The bribe was accepted by Lord McAlpine and he was aware of the source from which the money originated. I was also advised that criminal funds were being channelled into the Labour Party.
- I have details of two interventions which stopped the police and the Inland Revenue from investigating, and prosecuting, the criminal activities of a high profile Labour politician. The interventions came from 10 Downing Street and the Office of the Attorney General. I spoke directly to the source.
- I have details of an intervention by the Attorney General/Home Office which prevented the criminal prosecution of a Labour politician whom the Police wanted to prosecute on charges of bribery. The information was confirmed by a senior office of Lancashire police.
The allegations concerning Mr Laud centre on an article published in the now defunct magazine, Scallywag. “The magazine covered events at Bryn Alyn (North Wales childrens home) in detail, some years ago. The magazine alleged that the peer referred to in the article is Lord McAlpine, at the time of the offences treasurer of the governing Conservative Party. Another regular participant in the activities at Bryn Clwyd was alleged by Scallywag to be Derek Laud, for years a leading mover and shaker in successive Conservative administrations. Derek Laud, now standing for parliament, (against Bernie Grant in North London) ran a Pimlico PR agency called Ludgate Communications for a number of years which supplied young boys for selected parliamentarians from children’s homes now being investigated in North Wales. Ludgate Communications was at the very hub of our investigation into the “boys for questions” allegations. At his Pimlico flat, and selected addresses in Dolphin Square nearby, Laud threw paedophile parties and we have one sworn affidavit from a former boy (presently giving evidence in Wales) who claims he was seriously molested (among many others) by Lord McAlpine who was at the time the Tory party’s clandestine fund raiser.”(2,2a)
In an open letter written during February 2000by the founder of Scallywag Magazine, Simon Regan,(3) it is claimed
“There was a consistent lack of initiative on the part of the local Clwyd CC in the face of overwhelming evidence of consistent child abuse at Bryn Estyn, ostensibly because the council insurers advised against any action. This in itself insults democracy in a way that borders on the criminal. By a policy of non-action, both the police and the council became embroiled in a blatant cover-up.
Anyone who has even vaguely become acquainted with paedophilia knows very well that they will go to the ends of the earth to keep their activities absolutely secret. They are professional experts in covering their tracks.
In the early nineties, in the now defunct Scallywag magazine, which I founded, we interviewed in some depth twelve former inmates at Bryn Estyn who had all been involved in the Wrexham paedophile ring, which the tribunal acknowledges existed. Most of these interviews were extremely harrowing and disturbing, but were gently and sensitively conducted over pub lunches where the victim could relax. We subsequently persuaded ten of them to make sworn affidavits which we proposed to use as back up to half a dozen paedophile stories we later published.
Two of these young men, who had been 14-years-old at the time, swore they had been not only introduced to the paedophile ring operating in the Crest Hotel in Wrexham but had later been escorted on three or four occasions to an address in Pimlico where they were further abused.
We took them separately to Pimlico and asked them to point out the building where this had taken place. They were both positive in their identification. It turned out to be the private flat of a well known, and since highly discredited lobbyist who later went into obscurity in some disgrace because of his involvement with Mohammed al-Fayed and the ‘cash for questions’ scandal. At the time we ran a story entitled ‘Boys for Questions’ and named several prominent members of the then Thatcher government. These allegations went to the very top of the Tory party, yet there was a curious and almost ominous lack of writs.
The lobbyist was a notorious ‘queen’ who specialised in gay parties with a ‘political mix’ in the Pimlico area – most convenient to the Commons – and which included selected flats in Dolphin Square. The two young men were able to give us very graphic descriptions of just what went on, including acts of buggery, and alleged that they were only two of many from children’s homes other than North Wales.
There was, to my certain knowledge, at least one resignation from the Conservative office in Smith Square once we had published our evidence and named names.
Subsequently, over a rent dispute which is still a matter of litigation, Dr. Julian Lewis, now Conservative MP for New Forest (East) but then deputy head of research at Conservative Central Office in Smith Square, managed to purchase the contents of our offices, which included all our files. It had been alleged that we owed rent, which we disputed, but under a court order the landlords were able to change the locks and seize our assets which included all our files, including those we had made on paedophiles. It was apparently quite legal, but it was most certainly a dirty trick.
I believe that the secrecy the Establishment wraps around itself easily equals that of the paedophiles. They really do look after each other and quite professionally cover their tracks.
It was all very well for us to take statements from former victims in the cosy atmosphere of a pub lunch, but put them up against an agile and eminent QC whose sole task is to discredit them, and they quickly crumble, even break down in tears. Many former victims now have criminal records of some kind, owing almost exclusively to the abuse itself, and the barrister will brutally exploit this as evidence that the witness is unreliable and tainted. Faced with the choice of a clearly neurotic young man who quickly falls down in the witness-box, and a smooth, experienced, erudite and often highly respected culprit, juries tend to give the accused the benefit of the doubt.”
The reference to Council insurers stepping in to curtail investigations into child sexual abuse is supported by sources I have spoken to. The source stated “The abuse that took place (in Leicestershire) was covered up and colluded with by some major institutions in this country. The influence (was) exerted in a number of child abuse Inquiries by some Insurance companies. In Leicestershire we tried to set up an Inquiry into alleged abuse in one of our children’s homes. The councils insurance company initially tried to influence the terms of reference of the Inquiry in order to minimize their liability. Then they told the council that it must under no circumstances accept liability for what had happened or for anything that had gone wrong. They stated that ‘the council must under no circumstances apologise to victims.” The insurance company concerned was Zurich Insurance. Whilst it might be considered legitimate for an insurance company to advise that no liability should be accepted it cannot be considered legitimate for Zurich to have sought to have rigged the terms of reference of the Inquiry to limit its own liability.
In North Wales it was The Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Group who sought to avoid their liability. They “spent £750,000 pounds in legal fees to prevent paying out £200,000 to the victims of the abuse despite knowing that the claims were true. Six victims of sex abuse at the Bryn Alyn children’s homes in North Wales have been told they will receive little of the compensation awarded to them. The victims were awarded £200,000 damages between them in 2001, but did not receive the money because the company that owned the homes went bust.”
I now put to you this question: What pressure is being applied to the government by insurance companies to rig the proposed Inquiry so as to limit their potential liability for compensation claims by victims? I look forward to your response to that in due course.
It is being claimed that William Hague sought to initiate a cover-up in North Wales. On 27th October 2012 the Daily Mail reported that (4) “Last night, sources close to Mr Hague said that he had never come across any information implicating Sir Peter Morrison. His spokesman said: “Mr Hague established the North Wales Child Abuse Inquiry precisely because of the serious and widespread reports of abuse. It was set up to be as thorough as possible and its terms of reference were widely supported in Parliament.” The article went on to state that “the former Tory Minister Edwina Currie claimed that Morrison had sex with 16-year-old boys when the age of consent was 21 and that he had been protected by a ‘culture of sniggering’. In her diaries, she called him ‘a noted pederast’, with a liking for young boys.” There is a clear discrepancy here. If Sir Peter Morrison was known to be “a noted pederast” then it seems implausible that Mr Hague was ignorant of this fact. If Mr Hague was aware of Sir Peter’s reputation then he lied. If he lied then he almost certainly also sought to interfere with the North Wales Inquiry to protect Conservative party interests. Is he doing that now?
On November 4th 2014 the Daily Telegraph(5) reported that “Schools are being told that children should be able to have consensual sex at the age of 13 as part of government-backed guidance, it emerged today. The guidelines – which can be used as part of sex education lessons – say that having sexual relationships when children reach their teens represents a ‘safe and healthy’ part of growing up. For 13- to 17-year-olds, normal behaviour includes taking an interest in pornography, having sexually explicit conversations, using the internet to chat online and consenting to oral or penetrative sex with the same or opposite gender….. It is supported by Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, and Lord Nash, the Schools Minister.” It was pointed out by Sarah Carter, trustee of the Family Education Trust, that “The law states that young person should wait until they are 16 at least. That’s awfully unlawful behaviour, and so quite often what’s taught in [sex education] isn’t always lawful,” she said. “The government is blatantly flouting the law and promoting unlawful behaviour.” In doing so the government is implementing a PRO-PAEDOPHILE agenda designed to shift public opinion to the point where they can reduce the age of consent. This is the same objective that was pursued by The Paedophile Information Exchange and its supporters.
Within the past week I have spoken with a source connected to the security services, the following is an account of that meeting:
Source. “The big stuff is never ever going to come out because it is too big.”
- “You are talking about the ministers?”
Source. “No. They are a mere speck of dust. We (The security services) won’t allow it to come out.”
- “Is it international?”
Source “Oh yes. A few weeks ago we identified a Brazilian banker who worked for UBS as being involved in paedophilia.”
- “Where would you say the epi-centre of this (Child Sexual Abuse involving Politicians and the social elite) is?
Source. “Elm Guest House. It was the centre of the (paedophile) world. Its tentacles go everywhere. Including the ILEA (Inner London Education Authority). The VIP paedophile rings are still active. We know they are active. The South African intelligence service had an interest in the Elm Guest House as did The Americans. They monitored it.”
- “What happened when Elm Guest house was raided?”
Source. “There were neighbours there who saw what was going on. They told a totally different story about the raid to what went out officially. Two transit vans of children taken away that night. A policeman was crying on the doorstep. He said “I can’t take this home to my wife. I have never seen anything like this in my career. We took a three year old girl into custody – we believe she had been raped.” Half the cabinet used to go here.”
- “Do the security services maintain files on politicians involved in paedophilia?
Source. “Oh yes. It’s all about blackmail and keeping them under control. There is a file on the MP, XX XX. We know he is involved in terrorism, arms dealing, corruption, contracts – the usual stuff. He is a typical psychopath. There is evidence he raped a child in a children’s home during the 1990’s. There are files on loads of MP’s.”
- “What would happen if the Chair of the proposed Inquiry were to ask for those files?”
Source. “They would get what we decide to give them.”
- “That sounds like a state within a state?”
Source. “Yes, exactly.”
A prominent and highly respected activist who campaigns for children’s rights states that “the institutions that are supposed to protect children have been infiltrated by abusers. There is a vast global industry of organised crime against children. The stakes are extremely high for those wanting to protect those financial interests and networks. The powerful of this country have relied on harm to children for blackmail and to control one another’s activities. Very sadly this has been the foundation of this society. We have no national police team to investigate child abuse and there is no multi agency approach.”
“Statutory legal guidance for all work to protect children came in during 1991. Detailed guidance as to how to investigate organised sexual abuse. During 2013 a revised version of this document came out which eliminated all means of investigating organised child sexual abuse. Every member of PIE should be monitored. The 2003 sexual offences act is not retrospective before 1997. Convictions before 1997 are not monitored under the act. When I was in Islington I bore witness to many crimes against children, murders, abductions, sexual assaults. Some in the context of cults and ritual abuse. But every one of my efforts to expose them was suppressed. All the 14 Inquiries that were held in Islington were cover-ups. We are challenging the establishment and how it operates through the orchestrated abuse of children. There is disinformation, there are front organisations trying to infiltrate the campaigns. There are academics proposing theories which support paedophilia. There are those who try to set us up and destroy our reputations.”
Another activist states that “21 years ago I was in this building with a serving Chief Superintendent of the Metropolitan police and two investigative journalist, one from the BBC and one from ITV. The reason we were meeting a senior member of the opposition at the time was to say that our investigation had uncovered a significant ring of paedophiles that had links to No 10 and to the House of Commons. The investigation being closed down before we even got started. I was promised a great deal but nothing happened.”
Finally I have spoken to a number of sources concerning the alleged activities of Lord Brittan. The sources is connected to the security services and states that there were photographs obtained during the raid on the Elm Street guest house. The photographs are alleged to have depicted “Leon Britten dressed in a French maids costume surrounded by little boys. One of the boys was giving him oral sex.” When I asked what had happened to the photographs I was told “the instruction to destroy the Elm House photos came from No10 / the Home office. I think they were destroyed under John Major’s government.” I have also been advised that a customs officer is on record as confirming that Leon Brittan featured in pornographic video tapes which were confiscated by the Customs authorities.
I have a one hour recorded interview with a child abuse victim. He states that at the age of 7 he was, under tragic circumstances, put into local authority care. He witnessed two girls, one aged 12, 6the other 13 or 14, being held down by two care workers. Whilst they were restrained the deputy manager of the home raped them. At the age of 8 he states that he was driven to Wales and taken to a place where he was laid, face down, and tied to the floor. There were eight people present. He was anally raped by one of them. He names his attacker as Leon Brittan.
The matters raised above could not be more serious. I do expect a response to this letter and my previous letter of January 11th. A copy of this correspondence has been sent to the Speaker of the House of Commons.
Michael .H. Murrin