Paedo-Ring-a-Roses.
The Sunday Express has disinterred Mike Hames this morning – the ex-head of the old ‘Obscene Publication Squad’ before it became the keyword friendly and up-to-the-minute ‘Paedophile Information Section’.
They brought him out of retirement to comment on their astounding discovery of a ‘snuff movie’ – his specialist subject. His delight was tangible – he described the seizure of the “snuff” video as “incredibly important” because it appeared to verify long held suspicions such material existed. Long held – by Mike Hames that is. A theory successfully transferred to the a-gog and cheerfully gullible media over many years of backstage briefings.
Unfortunately it is still a theory – although there must now be thousands of readers of the main stream media who are under the impression that snuff movies do exist and that many a policeman is condemned to spend his days watching such material. The truth is that despite the Paedophile Information Section spending many a long day watching porn movies, and viewing images – not one of them has yet confirmed that they have ever found a ‘snuff movie’ in their stash.
The latest case is no exception. A 22 year old Latvian man, Andreas Bauminis, was charged with possession of a deeply unpleasant video depicting the rape of a girl which purported to show her being strangled and dragged from the room wrapped in plastic. Simulated rape, murder and disposing of bodies are standard fare on TV these days, even before the ‘watershed’, but one has to assume that this video didn’t discretely conceal sexual organs from display so comes under the heading of pornographic and would have offended Ofcom even more than the playing of the original 40 year old recording of ‘The Sun Has Got His Hat on’.
The information that led to Andreas Bauminis being jailed came from Russia – they had monitored the upload of suspicious material that was traced to his computer. On the computer was found a quantity of Japanese cartoons, commonly known as Manga, which depict the sexual abuse of children and animals – amongst other subjects. The Coroners and Justice Act of April 2009 brought in by the Labour government after pressure from the NSPCC made possession of such cartoons illegal. Like electronic cigarettes, they are said to persuade onlookers to try the ‘real thing’.
However, amongst the cartoons was a film, which ‘appeared’ to show a teenage girl, and ‘appeared’ to show her being murdered. Nobody knows whether she was teenaged, nor even murdered, because nobody knows who she was. She ‘appeared’ to be American, but nobody knows where the film was made, so not necessarily in America.
All those ‘appeared’ to be factors were sufficient for the detective in charge to say: “If it was acting, it was better than an Oscar-winning performance: her eyes didn’t blink or move at all.”
This in turn led the Judge to say: while it was difficult to be certain that the girl had died on camera “all the evidence points to the fact that she almost certainly did”.
Which led Tom Watson MP to say: “If the view of the judge and the police in this case is true, then Britain’s police have sat on evidence of a child murder for over a year’. (At least he qualified his statement.)
Tom Watson’s appearance in the story brought Mike Hames out of his 20 year retirement as a ‘police officer specialising in child protection’, (the year he left the Obscene Publication Squad was the year it was disbanded and denuded of its ability to chase homosexuals round the west end of London demanding they cease nailing their nipples to bread boards and that its 17 officers concentrate on child porn – a strange time to have retired for a child protection expert) and go on to pursue a career making ‘documentaries about child abuse‘ and commentating on the McCann case for Sky (he was Martin Brunt’s preferred successor to take over in Pria da Luz when Mark Williams Thomas departed) criticising the Portuguese Police as incompetent, and setting up a series of companies carrying out background checks on potential employees for child protection purposes.
Why would Tom Watson have any connection with Mike Hames? That would be because Mike Hames was the metropolitan police officer involved in a ‘raid on a gay brothel’ where ‘one of those interviewed’, when asked who he was, replied ‘I’m a Cabinet Minister’. He passed this information onto Tom Watson…
Mike Hames tenure as head of the Obscene Publications Squad marked an increase in pursuit of illegal homosexual activity from 5 investigations a year to nearer 40. By 1990 the new unit was requesting an average of one new search warrant every week. Paedophilia at that time seemed to mean homosexual activity with an ‘under-age child’ – which meant a man below the age of 21.
An early example of media manipulation is Operation Spanner, which Hames was in charge of, which originally spoke of the ‘Child Protection Act’ (Times, September 16 1989) and listed an array of charges that made it seem as though the 16 men from different countries ‘arrested as a result of a two year investigation’ were part of the fabled ‘paedophile rings’ – but Operation Spanner ended as R v Brown – the afore mentioned four men and a bread board. No children involved, just four consenting homosexual sadomasochists – the only mention of children was in connection with a few indecent images found at one of the premises.
Hames was at one point married to Jackie Hames*, who left the police force to take on the lead role in ‘Crimewatch UK’ – one of the first programmes to use crime as light entertainment by presenting ‘fictionmentaries’. She later went on to figure largely in the ‘Hacked Off’ campaign against phone hacking, complaining that her phone was hacked, a subject close to Tom Watson’s heart.
Hames was to go on to make ‘The Hunt for Britain’s Paedophiles’ – at the end of the first episode, the audience was gravely informed that ‘the Scotland Yard Paedophile Unit had received further information’ as a result of the programme which had ‘led to the discovery of a body’ – the audience were kept on the edge of their seats throughout this subsequent episode by a detective commenting that the flat they were searching (on camera) of a ‘known child sex offender’ had a strange smell, like ‘that of a dead body’. Was a child’s abused body about to be discovered? No. As the credit’s rolled and the nation’s kettles were set to boil, it was revealed that the dead body which had earlier been discovered was that of the ‘prior offender’ who had committed suicide on discovering that he was to be featured in this new ‘crime/fiction/reality show’.
Mike Hames left the Obscene Publication Squad in 1994, just as it was turned into the Paedophile Information Section in 1994 to follow a familiar media career path for ex-policemen. Even 20 years later.
*Mike Hames then went on to marry Caroline Bullen, an actress who interrupted the tedious hours of viewing on line porn by turning up “at Harrow Road as a Polish interpreter, wearing hotpants and thigh-length boots.” (No, I am positively not going there…..)
*Has anybody yet discovered how that ageing ledger from the ‘Paedophile Investigation Unit’ 1961/1981 made its way to the NSPCC and Operation Yewtree?
- rabbitaway
May 11, 2014 at 11:28 am -
Funny you should ask how things such as Police ledgers make ‘their way’ to certain people. Jimmy Savile’s anonymous alleged ‘victims’ have somehow found their way to Dan Davies, according to Liz Dux the lawyer whose client’s claims have YET TO BE put to scrutiny. How does Ms Dux know alleged ‘victims’ have spoken to the author of a book due to be published shortly ?
https://twitter.com/LizDuxLawyer/status/465276130862596096
- Moor Larkin
May 11, 2014 at 11:34 am -
Dan Davies is a complete prat. I hope he sues me for libel.
I have the evidence and I won’t need no stinkin’ lawyers with badges on.http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/21st-century-schizoid-man.html
&
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/dan-man.html- rabbitaway
May 11, 2014 at 12:20 pm -
Ditto – won’t be seeing ya in court, not on this one anyways !
- rabbitaway
- Moor Larkin
- Ed P
May 11, 2014 at 4:41 pm -
With that title, are they taking the P.I.S.?
- Ian B
May 11, 2014 at 5:23 pm -
This is the same Daily Express that ran with the Jimmy Savile Satanic Ritual Abuse claims, isn’t it?
So anyway, this is the problem with a regime in which it is inherently a crime to view the material used as evidence. We have no idea for ourselves what it is, and have to believe in the lurid reports by others, who themselves are devout “believers” in various narratives. And assessments of acting ability by shocked Plod. What we can say from the description is that the “asks for money to go to cheerleading camp” part must mean that the said (looks 14, hmm, they’re always everso good at judging age from visual appearance) “victim” was acting at the start of the video, so either she was acting all the way through or there ought to be some point at which the acting stops.
I bet you if they released the video, even some non-pornographic stills from it, internet “crowd sourced” investigation would identify it in a day or two.
I’ve also thought for a long time that one element of this whole “Baptists And Bootleggers” coalition stoking the Paedohysteria is the former Pretty Police and Vice Squads who, in the wake of liberalisation of attitude to both gays and porn, were in danger of being out of a job. As late as around 1990ish, I remember a gay couple being arrested for gross indecency (kissing) outside the gay venue opposite my place of work, so the transition from Saving Us From Homos to Saving Us From Paedos is pretty much consistent.
I’d bet my bottom dollar this is pure tinfoil hattery.
- strawbrick
May 11, 2014 at 7:31 pm -
I know this is slightly off-piste, but I could not think of any other way of contacting you.
I have spent a few happy hours today on the web listening to various versions of “The Sun Has Got His Hat On”. Some have the original lyrics, others not. One of the “correct” ones is by Jonathan King (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIwMppB3ZNQ). A series of old photos / new cartoons is played on the screen as the song is sung. At 32 seconds there is a picture of a pop idol in a light coloured convertible Rolls Royce with a young lady by his side …
- Moor Larkin
May 11, 2014 at 8:14 pm -
Jonathan’s 1971 version clearly sings, Negroes……..
This 1932 original says Niggers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDIpkz6DOi8Amazing that I have lived all these years and never realised this cheery little song had contained this historically awkward reference.
Is it my imagination or is the driver in your vid sporting a shaggy blond hairdo? Not David Smith surely?- Ian B
May 11, 2014 at 8:56 pm -
I worked on the Wet End production of Me And My Girl. Act II opens with it. I don’t remember what lyrics they sang, but I’m pretty sure that there were no niggers or negroes in them. The DJ probably never realised the original lyrics, having heard the bowdlerised version since, and just stuck the record on without checking it. Who would?
- Ian B
- Moor Larkin
- johnS
May 11, 2014 at 8:29 pm -
Ah the old Snuff Movie favourite!
It began as the idea that there might be a tiny part of the film industry which might be making horror films for commercial purposes which included real murders. The notion was absurd given a millisecond’s thought and an an infinitesimal knowledge of film making at the time but of course that didn’t stop this absurdity lingering.
It’s yet another of those terms which have had the original definition broadened to mean anything useful for scaremongering.- Ian B
May 11, 2014 at 9:01 pm -
It actually began with a real movie called Snuff, a cheap rubbish “biker girl” movie that was so bad, even the bargain basement producer realised it wasn’t fit to sell to Drive Ins. So, he went with a notoriety attempt to market it, and filmed a faked murder and tacked that on the end, and said it was real. Radical Feminist groups saw a chance to protest- which to be fair was precisely what the producer wanted, for publicity- and then it became the urban myth of the “snuff movie”.
The incredible thing about living in a society where people prefer to base their perceptions on lurid storytelling is that they don’t engage their brains for a second. If you want to make a movie featuring a murder, what do you do? Get somebody to act like a murder victim, or actually kill them?. The latter gets you life in jail, and you can’t sell the movie legitimately, and so on. Or, you can just get somebody to gargle a bit while they pretend to be (in this case) strangled, then pay them a few quid.
The idea that anyone would actually make a “snuff movie” is absurd beyond belief.
- Margaret Jervis
May 12, 2014 at 3:19 pm -
I think it was the late Judianne Densen-Gerber who rallied the troops with wildly inflated figures and scares in the 70s on this. Like so many other moral crusaders she later became unstuck re the misuse of public funds and retired from the fray. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/14/nyregion/dr-judianne-densen-gerber-is-dead-at-68-founded-odyssey-house-group-drug-program.html
- Margaret Jervis
- Ian B
- Jim Bates
May 12, 2014 at 8:25 am -
In well over twenty years investigating this stuff (mainly for the police) I saw some pretty stomach churning pictures. Something less than 1% were images which were undoubtedly underage. Probably another 1% were *possibly* underage. In all that time I came across only one which apparently depicted a body (or at least – a decapitated head). From the luxurious moustache, plod deduced that it was an adult male and they were therefore not interested. Some years later I was told that it had been a stunt by medical students in the U.S.
If I was still “helping the police with their enquiries” I might suggest that they circulate a picture of the person concerned around the various missing person bureaux around the world (they’re good at circulating stuff internationally – see the beginnings of Operation ORE). Alternatively pass a copy to Abbie Schuto at NCIS and get her to user the facial recognition software which often features in the program.
Incidentally, although I’ve shed a few tears, I’ve never had nightmares about any of the pictures that I’ve seen. If an investigator needs counselling then perhaps he/she should be doing a different job.
From my experiences it’s all just snuff and nonsense.
- Fat Steve
May 12, 2014 at 8:51 am -
@Anna Raccoon — ‘one of the first programmes to use crime as light entertainment’ —this observation goes to the heart of the issue of Savile and much else besides. If it entertains for whatever reason (alleged celebrity misdemeanour being the current favourite ) its important, if it doesn’t entertain (the vast majority of serious day to day crime —abuse sexual or otherwise within a family from which the child has no choice and has little or no prospect of escape) then its not. Its this distorting confabulation of the ‘values’ of crimes that I suggest is so destructive to the legal system. If a crime or a criminal does not entertain is it any less important ? If it or the criminal does entertain is it more important? Leave aside the elements of fact and fiction about the Savile allegations isn’t the importance Savile and not the crimes in the eyes of the public?
- Ms Mildred
May 12, 2014 at 9:31 am -
Surely the biggest ‘snuff movie’ of all time was 9/11. Many of us were glued as the bodies plunged out of high windows and went to ground zero. That did not stop the whole scenario being played over and over to the world! Planes plunging into a crowded building and the passengers killed. It might have happened to children, it might be a myth….but we know it happened to over 3000 humans in front of our eyes.
- Moor Larkin
May 12, 2014 at 9:40 am -
I recall a few years ago, colleagues of mine excitedly squealing about having found footage of some poor infidevil having his head sawn off of youtube or summat similar. If death is what you’re after, you have no need to go “underground”, the media is full of it, in gory detail. Years ago I recall a Science Fiction tale and the basic idea was that sex had been banned and eliminated by science. The people were entertained by a media diet of extreme violence and slaughter. I guess I must have read it in the 1970’s – probably some soppy notions about making love not war were involved. Thank God the truth about that disgusting decade has now been revealed…..
- John Galt
May 12, 2014 at 10:59 am -
Yup. The execution of Daniel Pearl is still available for those that want to see a murder up close and horrible, even his wife has allegedly seen it.
….and that’s not a snuff video because…?
- John Galt
- Duncan Disorderly
May 12, 2014 at 10:52 am -
I watched 9/11 unfold for some of the day, and I honestly don’t remember seeing people jump out of the buildings. It happened of course, but I don’t recall watching it happen on the day.
Regarding footage of people being killed, I have no doubt it exists, but it is more done to terrorise rival organisations than to titillate perverts. There was apparently brief Youtube footage of a man being beheaded with a chainsaw by a Mexican drug cartel. I also understand there were a number of killings in Iraq recorded on mobile phones by rival Sunni-Shiite paramilitaries showing people being killed with power drills and such like. No doubt the same is happening in Syria now.
- Moor Larkin
- Moor Larkin
May 12, 2014 at 10:52 am -
Spindler was in charge of seeing dodgy coppers departing the force quietly for a few years. Join the dots.
“With police conduct under ‘unprecedented’ scrutiny, Commander Peter Spindler, the Metropolitan Police’s discipline chief, insisted he was not letting corrupt officers off the hook. But Mr Spindler, head of the force’s directorate of professional standards, said in many cases ‘it’s actually more pragmatic to let them resign’”
http://jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/were-coming-for-you.html
Good to see he’s always applied high principles of historical justice……Yesterday I got the Sunday Times and there was a piece about that chap who pushed the newspaper seller over to such awful effect. It turned out he’d been allowed to quietly resign from the Force. Then he was re-employed as a civilian and then became a Met officer again again joining up with Surrey (I think it was). He was already taking a pension….. Unbelievable what goes on. If I hadn’t read it in the Sunday Times, I might have imagined the press was making it all up….
- Mr Wray
May 12, 2014 at 1:21 pm -
Tom Watson should be seen as the litmus test for any story. If his fat paw prints are any where near it then beware. If it is not exactly a lie then it is a gross distortion of the truth.
- Henry the Horse
May 12, 2014 at 4:41 pm -
A pedant writes: the original recording is 82 years old not 40 (as the page you link to makes clear).
- Daisy Ray
May 12, 2014 at 5:20 pm -
Well,you can’t blame the Express for being taken in when even the classy Independent once fell for a fake snuff movie (see the two Indy articles here). http://www.bfms.org.uk/site_pages/previous_news_2001.htm But I dig this up mainly to show that Hames isn’t the only imaginative copper – the culprit here was one Clive Driscoll. Last name checked in the Mirror’s recent story about yet another paedophile politician and a children’s home, a story taken with rapturous seriousness by even the shrewd Fleet Street Fox. I owe knowledge of his Sinason connection to the admirable Margaret Jervis’s tweets but I didn’t realise quite how worthless a source he was.
- Margaret Jervis
May 12, 2014 at 9:45 pm -
Thanks Daisy. Yes, Driscoll was a true believer – as with so many others of his ilk he loves high profile ’causes’ and eventually found succour with being the favourite cop of Baroness Lawrence but was nevertheless sacked or taken off the case. Seems some ‘ring’ involving a labour politico in south London he divined has recently been revived. It’s hard to trust the judgment of someone like Driscoll.
- Margaret Jervis
- Oliver Long
May 13, 2014 at 1:56 am -
Michael Hames was demolished in around 60 glorious seconds during the Brass Eye ‘Paedogeddon’ special in 2001, when he was invited to comment on the legality of some absurd artworks created by Chris Morris (e.g. a child’s head crudely stuck onto the body of a dog with a huge penis) as part of a fake “art exhibition”. It was truly delicious to see Hames writhing around as he was pressured to fire off “yes/no” answers to the question “is that indecent?” – one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen on TV.
- Daisy Ray
May 13, 2014 at 3:30 pm -
The problem is that anyone who’s a serving or ex-cop looks like an authoritative source. My suspicions about how reliable they really are was confirmed by these memorable lines in The Pembrokeshire Murders, written by DCS Steve Wilkins. On his investigation into a quadruple murder, he says ‘It was important that we were able to determine fact from fiction. Experience has taught me that important and serious crime investigations attract legend and myth, and cops are the worst for exaggerating. Some of this myth and legend can attach itself to investigations and influence decision-making.’
- TIM TATE
November 10, 2015 at 11:44 am -
Someone has just drawn – somewhat belatedly – this absurd post to my notice (via Twitter).
Since I wrote the Sunday Express story perhaps I can help Ms. Racoon.
1. You haven’t seen the Bauminis video and neither have I. I have though interviewed at length those who have. Absent any contradictory evidence you can provide, their view that the film depicted the sexual abuse and murder of an underage girl stands.
2. Why did Mike Hames comment ? Er, because I asked him to. I worked with Mike during his time at the old Obscene Publications squad. His involvement in this story has absolutely nothing to do with Tom Watson – nor vice versa. I simply asked both for quotes.
Next time, before publishing such drivel, why not try doing a little research ?
- Bandini
November 10, 2015 at 11:59 am -
Hey, Tim, isn’t the Express a tabloid? I thought you “never” wrote for the tabloids!
Any chance of getting around to responding to Aaronovitch’s repudiation of your stated beliefs ? I know you are hiding behind the “we have a complaint outstanding with the BBC Trust”-shield, but no one buys that excuse. (I spent bloody ages batting emails back & forth with them yesterday regarding my own complaint, about which I would be free to write. My hands are not tied, neither are yours.)
http://barristerblogger.com/2015/07/05/satanic-abuse-a-reply-to-believers/
P.S. The ‘snuff’ story is one that started life via Needleblog, isn’t it? Like so many others…
- TIM TATE
November 10, 2015 at 2:13 pm -
A short, but heartfelt, reply to you Bandini. Either grow out of your childish attempts at provocation of **** off until you do.
Admin Regrettably, for such an experienced author, Mr Tate’s mastery of the English language has has been found wanting on this occasion, and his post has had to be moderated.
- Bandini
November 10, 2015 at 2:59 pm -
Childishness was stomping your feet & falsely stating that you never ever ever write for the tabloids; your anger is down to being ‘found out’. What a silly, pointless lie.
Childishness was suggesting I was libeling you, leading to this :“I did not investigate Rochdale. Ever. Full stop. If you have any evidence to the contrary you should produce it. You won’t – you can’t – because I didn’t and therefore there is none.”
Well, Aaronovitch provided the evidence – it was in your own book, you dope! – but you still haven’t got around to apologizing for your lax memory. (Ditto the tabloid-thing.)
I saw you a while back pontificating on Twitter, using your massive knowledge of all things relating to child-pornography; someone pointed out to you that in fact UK law meant someone could be prosecuted for possessing cartoons. “Rubbish!”, you barked (or something similar), absolutely unequivocally untrue! The link was provided that proved your error – but I think you had already angrily left the building:For someone who claims to be an expert you have some glaring gaps in your knowledge: over your own career (had you forgotten your tabloid articles?), over your own work (had you forgotten what you’d written in your own book?), and over your professed area of expertise (had you forgotten – or simply never bothered finding out – that drawing cartoons could be illegal?).
You remind me of that old ‘Fast Show’ character – the painter who would fly off the handle whenever he came upon the colour black; in your case, ‘black’ seems to be anyone daring to question you.
Please don’t slam the door on your way out – the hinges won’t take much more Tateian-fury – but do keep us informed of developments (or, God forbid, a resolution!) regarding your Needleblog-sourced ‘snuff’ story & your Solanki / Leon Brittan video-tale (cancelling out the Tricker / Leon Brittan video tale – which also came from Needleblog).
- Bandini
- TIM TATE
- Bandini
- windsock
November 11, 2015 at 7:38 am -
AAAAGH, wrong thread, really sorry! How did that end up here? I was replying to someone else, on a different thread. Mea culpa.
- Bandini
November 11, 2015 at 4:53 pm -
While waiting for ‘Owen’ to answer last night – twiddles thumbs – I had a bit of a delve into the outer reaches of pornland; those of a sensitive disposition should stop reading now.
(I think I managed to do so legally, but I’m leaving this here in part to show to the coppers if they come kicking down the door! Only half-joking here…)Not being convinced by the ‘snuff’ tale mentioned, and intrigued by its apparent scripted nature, I went a googling. You don’t have to go far…
(I’ve elsewhere quoted from a book which, while critical of Tate’s involvement in the ‘Satanic Abuse Panic’, mentioned how he believes that one of the problems with his subject of expertise – child pornography – is that more people don’t ever actually see it; the point of view that ‘if you haven’t seen the horror of it, you can’t understand the need to do something about it’, I suppose.)Entering a few terms from the tale – “cheerleader” / “snuff” / “daughter” / “choke” / “father” – into Google brings up a load of supremely dodgy looking links (as might be expected). I chose one with a reassuring .com suffix – but which looked ‘promising as in totally depraved’ anyway – and used the little drop-down triangle next to the search-results to view what lay in wait via Google’s cache. (I was careful not to visit the page in question directly, nor click on any of the links therein which may have taken me away from the relative safety of Google’s servers.)
I imagine that this is what would be termed ‘extreme pornography’… it was one of those pages-without-end, scrolling through terrifying descriptions (the ‘tags’ are mind-blowing) of video after video, thumbnail photos showing various still-shots from each ‘production’.
It would appear that these WERE professionally produced – most by the same company on the page I visited – and are aimed at people who, for one reason or another, enjoy watching women being mistreated, abused, tortured and apparently raped & killed.Some of the films are directly labelled as being ‘snuff’, although I am assuming that this part of the video – the death – is not real. Other parts, however, undoubtedly are – extreme S&M involving real violence, cutting, choking, needles… really, REALLY grim stuff.
(When we see that one involves the uterus being removed, for example, I hope – and pray – that the film has crossed over into brutal fantasy.)
There are questions in my mind as to whether anyone consenting to be treated in such a way is, in fact, of sound enough mind to give informed consent to anything, but that’s for someone else to answer.Back to Tate’s tale, and I can report that the themes of choking, cheerleaders, father-daughter incest/rape, etc., are featured prominently throughout, which does make me suspect that what the police & judge saw may have been similar non-letal – but totally deranged – material. I suppose it is also possible that accidents might happen when making such extreme recordings, and a planned ‘pretend death’ could turn into the real thing. I assume that there are police/agencies monitoring this stuff, stuff that is a click or two away from anyone. No need for the dark-net here, which makes one wonder what further horrors might be lurking there…
The ease with which anyone can view this makes me wonder about what kids look at on their ‘phones & tablets in the school playground these days; adolescents, particularly boys, are eager to push the boundaries, boundaries which I’m no longer sure even exist.
As I’ve said, I’d be surprised if real ‘snuff’ didn’t exist somewhere, particularly with the prevelance of cheap recording equipment these days (and the lack of needing to have films developed, etc.). But if the one of Tate’s article is real – or even really believed to be real by those investigating – I would have expected images of the man’s face to be released, the girl’s too, as their identities are just the sort of thing that social-media is so excellent at revealing; no faces on milk-cartons necessary these days, just use a hashtag to get to the truth.
One more thing – there was a photograph of a girl whose age I would have guessed as being 13 or so; then I spotted a large tattoo on her torso, which made me sigh a sigh of relief, as she suddenly seemed older. A small moment of “joy” in a truly depressing journey into the sewer; I came up feeling like one of those poor blokes in India who have to clean the human filth from the drains, by hand, without any protection…
I can’t recommend anyone repeats the experiment. And anyone having to investigate this kind of stuff must have a hard time holding on to their own sanity.
- Bandini
November 11, 2015 at 5:15 pm -
A curious coincidence: the BBC Archive tells us that today is the anniversary of the “bill to censor ‘video nasties’.”
https://twitter.com/BBCArchive/status/664430121206452224
(That Act was later found to have been rushed through in such a way that it was never actually passed into law, and anyone prosecuted under it might have been entitled to a bumper payout – including the bloke who got me interested in the Elm Fable, David Hamilton-Grant; more info in the documentary mentioned above.)
{ 58 comments… read them below or add one }