Inquisition 21
 |
 |
|
|
| Log In
|
|
|
|
|
| Search Articles
|
|
|
|
|
| Comments
|
|
|
You don't have to,
but if you log in,
you can add comments.
|
| Page Referral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operation Ore News and evidence
|
|
|
|
The collapse of Operation Ore and its fallout
The complaints and allegations of corruption against the police.
The UK individual who has submitted the complaints and crime reports is known as Messenger for reasons of personal security. Two of the complaints below – against Jim Gamble and Trevor Pearce, have been registered (accepted) and the investigations are underway, with all the signs so far that they will eventually be buried unless either or both the media or politicians show interest. While the British police have failed to suppress media commentary about the Operation Ore corruption, they have so far managed to suppress media commentary on both the complaints and the investigations.
The January 2005 Sky News report about the former has made the suppression of the latter more difficult. It may be of vital importance that the media acknowledge these complaints and the investigations before the April 1 2005 establishment of SOCA and the greatly increased police powers; otherwise it may become impossible either to criticize the police or report on suspected police corruption . The criminal allegations below, which all relate to Operation Ore, were formally submitted by way of complaint in a process commencing 24/05/2005. The IPCC denied permission for these complaints to be submitted directly to them. A complaint against a police officer in SWP who attempted to obstruct submission of the complaints was submitted directly to the IPCC but is not reported on here, except to say SWP have refused to investigate themselves despite the complaint being upheld by the IPCC.
The complaints submitted to relate to senior police officers:
Jim Gamble (active)
initiated 29/05/2005
rejected 10/07/2005 by NCS Service Authority
upheld 31/08/2005 on appeal by IPCC
investigators appointed 07/11/2005 by NCS Service Authority
Trevor Pearce (active)
initiated 31/05/2005
rejected 10/07/2005 by NCS Service Authority
upheld 31/08/2005 on appeal by IPCC
investigators appointed 07/11/2005 by NCS Service Authority
Stuart Hyde (on appeal IPCC)
initiated 04/06/2005
rejected 08/09/2005 West Midlands Authority
appealed 09/09/2005 to IPCC
(no further communications from the IPCC at this time)
Bill Hughes (on appeal IPCC)
initiated 14/11/2005
rejected 25/11/2005 by NCS Service Authority
appealed 28/11/2005 to IPCC
(no further communications from the IPCC at this time)
Other compaints
Messenger has also complained to the NCS Service Authority for appointing the Metropolitan Police as the investigating authority, and has claimed that commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, is operating outside of the law. He has also alleged that Carole Howelett, formerly of MPS, is complicit in Operation Ore.
Interestingly, the MPS investigating authority was formerly called the 'ghost squad', but it was discredited for fitting up innocent police officers. It has since changed its name a couple of times.
Other complaints are sure to follow. These should include some of the so-called ‘expert witnesses’ employed by the prosecution. Before these complaints are dealt with, however, actions against these individuals may have reached the courts.
Complaint against Bill Hughes, Director General of SOCA
Background on SOCA
SOCA is the UK’s serious organised crime agency. It is a version of the FBI. Bill Hughes is the most senior policeman in the new British police state and SOCA reports to the government rather than to the Crown, and inherits the medieval laws of Customs and Excise. Bill Hughes was previously Director General of the National Crime Squad, while the NCS will now be the principle agency of SOCA.
SOCA is up and running but keeping a low profile, barely mentioned in the news as Tony Blair doesn't want it know about it until it has happened, as it is not due to be officially operative until 2006. Effectively, the plan is to amalgamate most police forces and to put them under SOCA which is under the Home Office. Thus completing the British police state.
The complaint against Bill Hughes
Several complaints against senior police officers concerning deceits and alleged corruption practiced in operation Ore have already been made to both the National Crime Squad and the Independent Police Complaints Authority, and the results of these are awaited.
Now however one of the researchers of the alleged crimes committed by the police under Operation Ore has unearthed an interesting article written by journalist Barbara Amiel for the Telegraph in 2003 titled "Paedophile hysteria is turning us into a brutish society" (opinion, Jan 20).
This was a balanced and thoughtful piece; however it was followed swiftly by a letter published by Bill Hughes, head of the National Crime Squad.
Now that letter and its attack on the article have become the subject of a serious complaint against Bill Hughes of the National Crime Squad. It will be interesting to see how both the NCS and the IPCC handle this one. Here is the letter of complaint.
Letter of complaint
Sir –
(Quoting Bill Hughes) “I am writing in response to the article headlined "Paedophile hysteria is turning us into a brutish society" (opinion, Jan 20). In reply I would ask ‘what could be more brutish than the systematic abuse of children to feed a deviant market?’"
There are currently two significant commercial markets for child pornography, credit card fraud and law enforcement agencies such as the National Crime Squad. As far as I am aware, not a single child was abused for Landslide Inc, and the proliferation of such material is substantially due to rogue law enforcement agencies in the United States, indeed they claimed at one time to be the sole reproducers and distributors of child pornography.
The first paragraph above is not only a misleading statement, as Operation Ore involved the aggressive targeting and fitting up of adult surfers, it is clearly designed to inflame and create the climate of a witch-hunt, leading to a breach of peace, indeed, statements of this exact kind incited murder by the public. A neutral article had been written, Bill Hughes clearly sought to destroy this and to mislead the public and fan the flames of the witch-hunt.
“To quote a colleague: ‘This is about children - children being horribly sexually abused, some no more than babies, having their childhood stolen from them and having the pictures of these shameful acts broadcast on the internet for all to see, forever, worldwide. As a society we must be ruthless about stopping this appalling crime’."
Ruthless? That is not a term that any civilised human being should use in the circumstances and especially not a police officer in relation to law enforcement. Landslide was primarily related to adult web sites and credit card fraud, facts that were readily available to the police from the outset.
A small number of illicit websites had been attached to the Landslide payment system as they had to a whole range of payment gateways. Included within the illegal sites were a small number that contained child abuse, which were used directly for credit card fraud.
To give an example, Nympho was such a site, and for some reason Sharon Girling testified in relation to this site at the circus of a trial of Thomas Reedy in America. This site contained real abuse, and as is normal for extreme material, it was at the centre of credit card fraud, as Sharon Girling should have known having sifted through the Landslide information personally at USPIS choosing what to bring back to the UK.
It is the standard Internet malice to incriminate the victim after stealing their money. Nympho earned a Webmaster income in March 1999 of $19.47, in April $95,428.94. The inference is clear, blatant and massive credit card fraud and this was a fact picked up by Thomas Reedy himself.
As substantial credit card fraud was apparent before Operation Ore started, and the police do not in general professionally investigate such crimes, and the malice with which innocent people were assaulted on mass in Operation Ore, means that the market for such material remains for the purposes of fraud.
If Bill Hughes was attempting to assert that he was to be ruthless about stopping child abuse, that is not achieved by Operation Ore, indeed that would encourage child abuse. Rather these appear to simply be opportunistic words used in order to elicit public money for the fraudulent operation that was ongoing at the time.
Clearly that statement was prejudicial and could be judged in contempt of court. It clearly misled the public, clearly it was likely to lead to a breach of the peace, clearly it was misleading in relation to Operation Ore.
“Your columnist equates ‘fringe sexual appetites’ and libertine kinkiness between consenting adults with real acts of abuse against children. She must be blissfully ignorant of the content of these websites - an ignorance that those of us involved with the investigation and prosecution of these offences cannot indulge. The impact on the welfare of even the most seasoned staff by exposure to these images and sounds cannot be overstated.”
Bill Hughes has presented an entirely misleading statement, in an attempt to inflame and provide propaganda against the preceding report, which was one of the few responsible articles to appear in the media.
A misleading statement again. Operation Ore involved the ruthless assault of adult surfers and victims of credit card fraud. The small numbers of people who intentionally downloaded such material on the Internet were not by inference child abusers. Child abuse can stem from repression of sexual exploration, exactly the environment that National Crime Squad was seeking to achieve by persecuting innocent adult surfers and victims of credit card fraud.
As the majority of people who were targeted were innocent, as the majority of websites were entirely legal, clearly Bill Hughes has attempted to mislead the public and pervert the course of justice.
The impact on the welfare of the officers involved was indeed considerable. Sharon Girling got an OBE, Jim Gamble was promoted to DDG NCS and is currently in charge of two new commercial ventures, VGT and the new Internet centre, Bill Hughes became DG SOCA. The welfare of such officers is clearly worthy of note.
“Barbara Amiel does not understand that abuse causes emotional, psychological and physical pain. One of the most striking features of her article is that she fails to grasp the fact that the purchase of child abuse images on the internet creates further demand. This is why British law criminalises what she described as a passive private activity.”
Bill Hughes is clearly claiming to understand child abuse; however, his comments on the topic are misleading. It is a complex subject, it rarely involves violence or force, and psychological trauma is very likely to follow if a big fuss is made of the issue. Barbara Amiel clearly does have an understanding of such issues and the conduct of the UK police, she has profiled both of them in her article with considerable accuracy. Bill Hughes has demonstrated both ignorance and dishonesty in producing misleading and false statements.
Out of the small number of UK citizens that did download contentious age imagery, as the kind of sites Bill Hughes was referring to were heavily involved in credit card fraud, and the imagery was old imagery; the market that he is accusing people of feeding did not exist. The use of child abuse in the context of Landslide was clearly intentional, clearly designed to create an emotive drive under which the illicit operation could prosper its architects by way of money and power.
Clearly Bill Hughes, Trevor Pearce, Bill Gamble and Stuart Hyde did prosper from this illicit operation.
As there is not a serious market for such material, as it was used for credit card fraud, Bill Hughes is misleading the public. The child abuse imagery was there to feed credit card fraud. The law as it stands in the UK, SOA 2003 was created by the vested interests, and as it operates against the HRA, it is actually illegal. It is worded in such a way to incriminate innocent people and to deny them the right of a fair trial.
The ‘creating the market’ was the FBI con trick. The FBI are major distributors of child pornography. This scam was undertaken before and LAPD even claimed to be the sole reproducers and distributors of child pornography. They said they had flooded the market to destroy it. All the Landslide imagery was public domain imagery, you did not have to pay to view it, and the proliferation then and now is largely the product of law enforcement activity.
As the abusive sites were heavily defrauding people’s credit cards, how is a victim of credit card fraud fuelling the market?
“The subsequent demand is met by the abuse of another child here or somewhere else in the world. The protection of children is our primary concern. This has underpinned the police response at every stage of Operation Ore. The police service is doing everything it can to protect children, anywhere in the world. To suggest that social or economic considerations in other countries should somehow remove a duty of care to children is unacceptable.”
The contentious age imagery connected with Landslide was old, in most cases scanned out of magazines, often distributed by US law enforcement agencies. The imagery was not produced for Landslide; it was collected from public domain imagery available without charge.
Protection of children is the opposite of what Operation Ore achieved, by design and by consequence. That is a misleading statement, and an uncountable number of children’s lives were damaged by Operation Ore and I can provide examples and direct evidence to substantiate this fact. There is no question, the conduct of the officers Bill Hughes, Trevor Pearce, Jim Gamble and Stuart Hyde are a direct threat to children.
Child protection is not a priority for the police; crimes such as child abuse, rape and murder had to take second place to Operation Ore. The inspector of constabulary’s report concurs with this assertion.
As Bill Hughes is suggesting children were being abused as a consequence of Landslide subscribers, that is criminal libel as well as utter nonsense. I have never at any time undertaken any action with a view to encouraging the abuse of children, and my actions to hold the perpetrators of this illegal operation to account are to protect society as a whole from the police, that includes children.
“I would like to reassure the public that the police approach has been to identify suspects and categorise them in respect of the potential risk that they pose to children. This has been a painstaking process, as we are aware that accurate reporting is vital, as incorrect allegations could ruin a person's life or damage the prospects of a fair trial.”
This statement is simply a lie. Firstly, the bulk of people hit by Operation Ore had never intentionally downloaded contentious age imagery. Out of those that did or didn’t, where is the risk to children assessed from? In a relaxed and open society, without draconian restrictions, there is clear evidence that this has a therapeutic affect against child abuse and other sexual crimes. As the National Crime Squad intentionally targeted innocent people, indeed most of the Landslide subscribers list; the term ‘painstaking process’ is clearly misleading.
If accurate reporting was vital, why did those I have named in this report take such care in providing false and misleading statements to the press? Why did Bill Hughes provide this misleading letter to the press?
Allegations of any kind should not have to ruin a person’s life where the police act responsibility, indeed they have a duty of care to the public, they are primarily paid to protect them, otherwise they have no useful purpose. Statements such as in this report acted so as to destroy the opportunity of a fair trial, that is exactly what happened in Operation Ore. This subversive letter to the press, acted so as to corrupt public morals, created an inquisition, and in some instances killed people or incited people to take it upon themselves to kill or assault people.
Such hysteria as it exists is being fuelled by ill-informed and speculative reporting among the less responsible sections of the media.
Inaccurate reporting in the media is misleading and that is exactly what Bill Hughes has provided. Police officers involved in Operation Ore intentionally presented false and misleading information to the media, and people are now dead as a direct consequence of such conduct, innocent people have been convicted or destroyed by such conduct, the criminal justice system is a farce as a result of such conduct. The letter by Bill Hughes to the Daily Telegraph served to pervert the course of justice and far worse.
Signed by (Name removed here)
Complaint refused
On November 25 2005, the Service Authority of the National Crime Squad wrote to Messenger saying that it would neither record nor investigate this complaint.
Messenger promptly appealed to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Operation Pin reported as a crime also
The Service Authority of the UK’s National Crime Squad has been served with another crime report, this one in connection with Operation Pin.
Here it is:
To: Andrew Mullholland
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: crime report update
Andrew Mulholland
Crime report concerning Operation Pin/sting
Operation Ore was principally a fit up, however, various sting operations are of direct relevance to the allegations made. Operation Pin and other sting operations, involve Bill Hughes, Stuart Hyde, Trevor Pearce and Jim Gamble. (All senior police officers)
A number of sting operations conducted by the police involve distribution of child pornography; however, the public story put out is that Pin sites are designed to look like the real thing.
Jim Gamble alleges you cannot get on these sites by accident. It should be noted that he said the same in relation to Landslide and that statement was utter nonsense, and part of a concerted attempt along with his colleagues to (words removed here). It is also entirely possible to accidentally land on Pin sites. Not so dissimilar from his (words removed here) of Orees by suggesting that one in five of them was a child abuser. Possession of what is deemed child pornography is common in the UK. The Daily Sport, the Sun, even the Windows documentation carried what is legally defined as child pornography, so that is rather a lot of child abusers on the loose. With a new Internet centre, VGT and the like, it was been one long fraudulent dash for cash, and now we even have the NSPCC using violent pornography as advertising material. It seems that certain police officers have created quite a market for child exploitation.
These laws and behaviour represent a serious threat to children, and that is the opinion of volumes of professional research in this field, which has been around since before these police officers came on the scene. Therefore, protecting children is the opposite of what Bill Hughes, Stuart Hyde, Trevor Pearce and Jim Gamble represent; indeed the net effect of Operation Ore was a direct threat to the wellbeing of children. That is supported by the bulk of both independent professional opinion and common sense.
Ignoring corrupting public morals on mass, there is a rather pertinent point in law when it comes to Operation Pin and various sting operations.
It has been a criminal offence since the Protection of Children Act 1978 section 1(1)(d), for a person to publish or cause to be published any advertisement likely to be understood as conveying that the advertiser distributes or shows such indecent photographs or intends to do so.
The preponderance of child pornography on the Internet is in part due to the behaviour of US law enforcement agencies; indeed at one time they claimed to be the sole reproducers and distributors of child pornography. That is America, but as it is an Internet issue, such imagery routinely hits computers here in the UK; indeed many false convictions in Operation Ore derived from that fact.
Operation Pin is by UK law illegal, and it matters not in which jurisdiction the sting websites are located. Whilst all those involved in Operation Ore are suspects in some of the most appalling crimes this nation has seen, the pattern of criminal behaviour is not isolated to Operation Ore: it does however centre on SOCA and the National Crime Squad. I am very much a victim of being a witness to this mass assault on the public, something the National Crime Squad will be well aware of, having monitored my postings on the Internet through time. As it happens, I am not just a victim, but a first hand witness, having received child pornography spam relating to ongoing NCS sting operations.
Sample quote:
In a report by Paul Lever of the NCS Service Authority, Bill Hughes said:
We have led on a number of highly successful and publicised operations. One example is Operation Pin, launched in December 2003 ...
... Operation Pin involves the construction of a website advertising child abuse images.
Further statements of relevance and by other officers named in the complaints are available on request.
Sincerely
(Signed – name removed here)
Editorial comment
These crime reports and complaints are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. The evidence (See above) is overwhelming that frauds were perpetuated in Operation Ore, resulting in the damaging or destruction of thousands of lives and many suicides.
The most recent complaint (See also above) can be tested by comparing the published words of top police officer Bill Hughes against those of a reputable journalist he took issue with.
This latest one now given here is clearly a case of a police sting breaking the law.
Details of the other complaints will follow
Operation Ore News and evidence
The original false evidence
We dispute the above and present the new evidence
Examples of fraud in Operation Ore
The dirty tricks campaign against the messengers
The complaints and allegations of corruption against the police.
 |
|
|
