The Walton Hop and Operation Ravine.
When the Walton Hop opened its doors in the Surrey countryside of 1958 it would scarcely have been described as a ‘teen disco’ – too few people would have understood the meaning. ‘Teenagers’ had barely been discovered, indeed the word was first used in the previous year by an American rock idol – Bill Haley – to describe the war babies who had just reached their ‘teen years’ with more pocket money and freedom to spend on clothes and records than their parents had ever envisaged.
The music business was as fledgling as the dot.com business was in a later decade – and attracted those who were quick off the mark to find a new and exciting way of earning a living. Who wanted to follow their father’s footsteps to a life as a clerk in a shipping office when you could wear what you want, get out of bed late and earn money in the music business? Even the Riki Tik club in Windsor, which kick started the career of many famous artists, was not to open its door for another 4 years.
In 1958, the ‘Hop’ was probably the first place in the country where you could go and listen to the ‘new’ music. Scarcely surprising that is should have attracted so many music industry figures, nor so many teenagers – though viewed through the prism of near 60 years hindsight, there must be a lot of people around who reading of the Walton Hop, and alleged sexual attacks on teenagers, imagine that the music industry figures were only attracted to that club because of the teenagers. Truth is, there wasn’t anywhere else for either teenagers or music industry employees.
Suddenly we were the most fashionable age group in the world. While once we’d been called war babies and raised on rationing and the Welfare State, overnight we were reclassified by advertisers as that bouncing new modern generation – teenagers.
In the late Fifties, the newspapers were full of us. We were, they said, uncouth, rebellious and sex mad, the clothes we wore were loud, and the raucous music we listened to was certain to lead us into something called “moral turpitude”.
The music industry attracted a lot of individuals who were homosexual; like the fashion business, hairdressing, the theatre – it allowed you to express your personality and not force yourself into the standard ‘short back and sides’ and John Collier suit that the shipping office required. Kenny Everett, Chris Denning, Paul Gambaccini, Tam Paton, Brian Epstein, Jonathan King. Being homosexual doesn’t equate to being a paedophile. Nor does having a flamboyant personality and long hair in more conservative times (1960) equate to being homosexual. The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, John Mansfield of the Rikki Tik club. It does make you an object of some concern to the deeply conservative forces of law and order.
So it was that in 2000, 40 years after the Walton Hop first opened its doors, that Surrey Police launched Operation Arundel to look closely at some of the relationships that had been formed between teenagers above the age of consent at the time, and assaults against those who may have been below the age of consent – though where homosexual activity had taken place, there was no age of consent in 1960, homosexual acts were strictly illegal – therefore absolutely no point in worrying about the age of your partner.
The first arrests Surrey Police made in 2000 were of Paul Weller and Mick Hucknall. Neither involved children, nor homosexual activity. So much for Operation Arundel investigating a ‘gay paedophile ring’. Both men were exonerated, and released with no charge, though not before their reputations had been trashed by their arrest being leaked by Surrey Police to the world wide media.
It was to prove the beginning of Surrey Police’s ‘Stars in their Eyes’ panto season.
By 2003, they had marched into a Birmingham theatre – and with positively ‘theatrical’ flourish – had arrested ‘national treasure’ Matthew Kelly playing Captain Hook in Peter Pan. On the uncorroborated ‘evidence’ of one man who claimed Matthew had molested him 30 years beforehand. The media loved it; sadly all that publicity only damaged Matthew’s career – the police were unable to find anyone to corroborate their ‘victim’s’ allegation. Matthew only had to wait five weeks to be exonerated and released without charge – current victims of the various ‘Operations’ would be grateful for a mere five months.
However, the five weeks was long enough for ‘senior officers’ to ‘act on a tip off from a British journalist’ and fly to Sri Lanka, to Kelly’s holiday home, and there to seize 54 videos and one o’ they new fangled computers… the videos proved to be of such degenerate viewing as “Mary Poppins” and “the Hunchback of Notre Dame”. Did Police Officers receive suitable counselling after having to trawl through this material?
They arrested Jimmy Pursey for ‘forcibly kissing a 16 year old girl‘ in a Weybridge newsagent. Not even underage, and a girl to boot – Pursey accepted a police caution for the act, but even so, rumours of paedophilia have haunted him ever since from those who have never bothered to look up the original charge.
Finally a ‘big fish’, Chris Denning, and amongst media leaks that he had been seen at the Walton Hop, there was excitement that perhaps the ‘gay paedophile ring’ had been busted. It had, in a way, but in Czechoslovakia rather than humble Walton.
Life continued to get embarrassing for Chief Inspector Brian Marjoram, in charge of Operation Arundel – he was moved to the Milly Dowler inquiry as a reward for his ‘performance’ on Arundel. Sadly, officers on the Surrey force, under Marjoram’s directions, called on Levi Bellfield on several occasions – but gave up when he failed to answer the door. Whilst the Surrey squad were pursuing their interest in gay celebrities, Bellfield murdered two further girls, Marsha McDonnell and Amelie Delagrange, and Kate Sheedy narrowly escaped the same fate. It was not until Chief Inspector Colin Sutton, from the Metropolitan Police, not Surrey, took over the squad that Bellfield was finally arrested – he would have been charged with the attempted abduction of 11 year old Rachel Cowles, but ‘leaks from Surrey Police to the media’ had resulted in prejudicial material being published and those charges had to be dropped.
One of the most oft quoted ‘successes’ of Operation Arundel, was the arrest and conviction of Jonathan King in 2001. King was certainly convicted of homosexual acts with young men under the varied ages of consent. He certainly visited the Walton Hop on many occasions. The curious thing is that he was acquitted of all the charges relating to boys claiming that they had been groomed and assaulted by King as a result of attending the Walton Hop – the charges he was found guilty of had nothing to do with the place.
For all the noise and column inches generated by Operation Arundel – it only resulted in three charges and convictions for ‘serious sexual offences’. It is not clear whether this statement relates to King’s convictions, which of course were not ‘Walton Hop’ offences, or whether there were others unreported, because they were not news worthy.
As a result of Operation Yewtree, which also netted a number of ‘I was assaulted at Walton Hop’ allegations, Merseyside Police opened an investigation into whether Surrey Police had correctly investigated Walton Hop in the first place.
This in turn has led to the setting up of Operation Ravine which is following up intelligence received but not acted upon regarding Operation Arundel. It remains to be seen whether such intelligence will amount to anything or not. The media so obfuscate every report, that it is impossible to tell at present if the intelligence turned out to be an anonymous letter saying ‘Ere, there’s loads of poofters and nonces at that Walton Hop’ which may be a heartfelt opinion, but is scarcely evidence likely to lead to a conviction.
Last December, Chris Denning was jailed for 13 years at Southwark Crown Court, for sexually assaulting 24 boys – some as young as 10 years old – between 1967 and 1987.
Prosecutor Neil Moore said at the 73-year-old’s sentencing that some victims claimed they were abused up to 60 times, and that Denning found them at skateparks, youth centres and discos such as the Walton Hop.
…and at disco’s such as the Walton Hop…between 1967 and 1987, when such a thing as an age of consent for homosexual behaviour first came into being.
Denning is obviously a prolific offender with a particular interest in young boys – young boys, even ones who manage to find themselves abused by the same man 60 times and wait 40 years before complaining, do deserve to be protected from predatory sex offenders. They are still children, no matter that they may have appeared to be enthusiastically assaulted. It is for adults to restrain themselves, not children, to obey the law.
Without having sight of the full case transcript, it is impossible to tell whether any of the charges in respect of which Denning was convicted actually relate to offences carried out at the Walton Hop – or whether the word itself is being used as shorthand to conjure up a picture of a mythical predatory paedophile gang of homosexual monsters for the benefit of the media.
Much as the one known occasion when Ray Teret drove Savile’s motor caravan to Jersey for him came to be shortened to the ubiquitous ‘Savile’s chauffeur’ and used to ensure that Teret’s conviction became the proxy conviction for all Savile’s alleged crimes.
Curiously, there are so many ex-teenagers with happy memories of the Walton Hop, over 1,000 of them, that they still have an annual reunion to this day. Next one is January 23rd next year.
-
October 5, 2015 at 9:52 am -
Rumour has it that Chris Denning accepted all the charges due to being destitute and in very poor health – but it’s curious and perhaps a sign of these “enlightened” times that he received half the sentence of the heterosexual Ray Teret, who still maintains his innocence and was acquitted of over half of the mountain of pernicious charges against him. Ray’s “victims” even took to firing out messages to strangers on Facebook – here’s one of the charming stars of BBC Two’s “The Detectives” addressing me for daring to wish him a Happy New 2014:
01/01/2014 16:23
Ellie MoorcroftWhat makes you think Ray Teret will have anything to celebrate at the end of 2014?
-
October 5, 2015 at 10:13 am -
Hysteric chrono-correction?
In 1944, US Philadelphia media magnate Walt Anennberg (later US Ambassador to UK under rabid Right Pres RayGun) launched ‘Seventeen’ mag, and WFIL-Radio & TV ‘Bandstand’ in Rockin ’52. Rocked in Rockin ’56, then become ‘American Bandstand’ by, er, a D.J. KidSeX scandal! Involving young teen gals (quell surprise), prompting tough Sth Philly punks to quip that his license plate number was, ‘R U 13’!
While serving as Editor and Publisher of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Mr. Annenberg saw the need for a publication for teenage girls and, in 1944, established Seventeen magazine. In 1953, as a result of his belief that television’s growth would create a demand for more information on the part of viewers, he established TV Guide as a national publication. Under Mr. Annenberg’s leadership, Triangle Publications bought a radio station in the early 1940’s in Philadelphia and built a VHF television station which was one of the first television stations owned by a publishing house. The radio-TV division of Triangle grew to include six AM and six FM radio stations and six TV stations. The Philadelphia station pioneered a number of broadcasting concepts among which was Mr. Annenberg’s decision to use television to present a series of educational programs that ran for more than a decade. In 1951, Mr. Annenberg became an early awardee of the prestigious Alfred I. DuPont Award for pioneering education via television. He was also given the Marshall Field Award in 1958. In 1983, he received the Ralph Lowell Medal for his “outstanding contribution to public television.”
http://www.annenbergfoundation.org/board-of-directors/walter-annenberg
-
October 5, 2015 at 10:47 am -
I do think that at the heart of *all this* is old-fashioned homophobia, these things not having gone away but can no longer speak their name ‘in plain sight’. In the interests of ‘equality’ they’ve rolled it out to apply to all men, and to make amends made sure the penalties are geared higher towards ‘the straights’ who “offend” against the female of the species – but the prejudice no-one is allowed to voice any more is never far below the surface of this witch hunt, whatever the ‘operation’ – perhaps going 50-50 with the middle-class leftie ‘punk prejudice’ I’ve highlighted before that means pre-punk entertainers & right-leaning and/or Jewish politicians are top of the list.
-
October 5, 2015 at 10:58 am -
Here’s a reference to ‘teenagers’ from 1956:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q96ylFiQK_I
Way off topic, I love song and video though….
-
October 5, 2015 at 2:19 pm -
Gary Puckett & The Union Gap didn’t mince words …….
-
October 5, 2015 at 3:04 pm -
Joe Public,
He doesn’t say how old this young girl is, she could be 19 and him 30 for all I know, so just a ‘young girl’ to him. Perhaps a friends sister or daughter….
I never heard anyone try and read too much into that song until fairly recently, it was covered by Darren Day in 1996….
-
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 11:24 am -
Not so ‘off topic’ Anon, this topic is timeless!
Ur Rockin ’56 sensational Frankie Lymon clip was just 2-years before his successor Pop pedo scandalised Michael Jackson was born.
And lil teen BIG Hit Frankie, 13, was also notorious as a proactive aMused non-victim ‘Adultophile’ shaggin’ a 20-something fancy dame. Plus brazenly smokin’ BIG cigars while strollin’ down London’s Palladium backstage hallowed halls. Yeah he died too young of illegal substances in Swingin ’65, but hey – that’s SeX Drugs Rock n’ Roll?
Today’s low dishonest era in denial, for careers/ratings/profit et al deviously masked by Mass Deception, as ‘Child Protection’, just can’t grasp the fact that natural instincts kick in WAY before inhuman crap laws do.
-
October 5, 2015 at 11:57 am -
Eccentric,
You know a lot more about Frankie Lymon than do, I saw a film about him not so long ago though.
I really like the song and the performance though. He seems much more confident than Micheal Jackson, which I put down to Frankie starting his career when he was a bit older, becoming well known at 13, rather than 9 or 10 like Michael Jackson, and it not taking over his whole life, like being famous and the Jackson 5 did with Micheal Jackson. So he’d had bit of a life before, and outside the band, and before he became well known, so a far less sheltered life, which I think Micheal Jackson often complained about having had….
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 11:43 am -
Slightly off-topic, but the following article may be of interest:
“A shaking of belief: victims and impartial investigation”
http://www.police-foundation.org.uk/news/182/23/A-shaking-of-belief/d,Blog-main-
October 5, 2015 at 1:16 pm -
What a brilliant and well informed article. Breath of fresh air.
-
October 5, 2015 at 1:30 pm -
Somebody posted a link on Twitter – I forget who, I’m afraid – and I clicked without any great expectation (given the destination). I was very pleasantly surprised! It’s a shame it’s not appearing in the ‘real’ press – great writing & clarity.
-
October 5, 2015 at 1:41 pm -
That was indeed worth the read, thanks Bandini.
-
-
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 11:51 am -
Shame this otherwise excellent piece is marred by an out-of-character surrender to popular prejudice when Ms Raccoon pronounces judgement on my old friend Chris Denning.
He is described as a “predatory sex offender”. But what does this mean? “Predatory” is a tabloidism unworthy of this esteemed blog. It implies a beast that attacks and kills, with utter disregard for its victims. The Chris Denning I remember is a kind, pleasant, humorous guy who wouldn’t hurt a fly, much less a child.
As for being a “sex offender”, as you point out yourself, Anna, so was every active gay man not so long ago. To use that as a condemnation is to beg the question. If you are going to say that sex with willing children is wrong it is not sufficient to assume the truth of your assertion based solely on the fact that there is an offence in law. What if the law is not justified?
As you have in effect admitted, Chris’s so-called victims (some of them pre-teen) were plainly willing and active participants at the time. Where is the harm in what happened between them other than that generated by our culture’s savage reaction? – a reaction that can and should change, as it has for gays.
You are simply parroting the chorus of those who are terrified to subject the supposedly “moral” foundations of society to scrutiny lest they are seen to be held in place by nothing but relentless blasts of hot air.
In reply to Chris above, Chris Denning was indeed destitute and in poor health.
-
October 5, 2015 at 12:00 pm -
October 5, 2015 at 12:09 pm -
If you are going to say that sex with willing children is wrong
I think she has on numerous occasions.
-
October 5, 2015 at 12:28 pm -
It’s not just a man made law though, it’s not in keeping with nature either and is potentially physically dangerous. That’s all i’m saying.
-
October 5, 2015 at 9:36 pm -
Just over 100 years ago the age of heterosexual consent to sex in the UK was 12.
-
October 6, 2015 at 5:25 am -
Esther Rantson,
I heard it was 12 for girls and 14 for boys, probably because 12 is when the average girl starts her period, and so could potentially get pregnant (I think it was more to do with marriage), there’s usually still a bit of growing for girls to do after 12 though, and boys usually start puberty a bit later and finish a lot later than girls.
This guy was talking about sex with ‘pre teens’ though, 12 is technically ‘pre teen’ with still some growing to do for girls, and probably a massive amount of growing still to do for boys, but I wasn’t sure he was just talking about ‘pre teens’ over the age of 12…. :/
-
October 6, 2015 at 12:57 pm -
The age of consent for heterosexual acts in England was set at 12 in 1275 during the reign of Edward I.
A concern that young girls were being sold into brothels led Parliament to raise the age of consent to 13 in 1875 under the Offences against the Person Act 1875. After W. T. Stead’s Maiden Tribute articles, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 raised the age of consent to 16.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#History_29-
October 6, 2015 at 1:40 pm -
I think I read somewhere that the minimum age for marriage was 12 for girls, 14 for boys, the ‘common law age of puberty’, e.g probably means when a boy and girl where typically expected to become fertile.
You can see from your link Wales had that law, but no age of consent law as such, this was probably the law in Scotland too, but that particular page seems to mainly be referring to the law regarding sex/marriage for girls, rather than both girls and boys….
-
-
-
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 12:40 pm -
You are simply parroting the chorus
TC, I get you feel that AR was being unfair to your friend, and your criticism of her using the word ‘predatory’ may be justified ( I don’t know CD). But I feel you owe the Landlady an apology for the above. You know damn well that she never ‘polly-wants-a-cracker’ anything.
-
October 5, 2015 at 1:04 pm -
‘Chris’s so-called victims (some of them pre-teen) were plainly willing and active participants at the time’. Do you really believe a pre-teen is emotionally mature enough to consent to sexual activity? It matters not if the activity is hetero or homosexual; any adult who indulges with a pre-teen is expoiting their immaturity and should know better. A boy or girl 24 hours away from their 16th birthday is a different kettle of fish, but 11/12? Sorry, but that’s just plain wrong.
-
October 5, 2015 at 9:39 pm -
In some countries the age of sexual consent is 10 years or even less. Does that mean those countries are wrong?
-
October 5, 2015 at 9:52 pm -
In my opinon, yeah. Personally, I think the infantilisation of teenagers today warrants the age of consent being raised, not lowered. 21 should be about right.
-
October 6, 2015 at 12:35 am -
Perhaps the case is that in countries like Italy & Spain and so on which have a much lower age of consent, the general public have a far more mature attitude about sex which is passed on to their own children.
Having now lived in Australia for a number of years I recall how weirdly obsessed Britain is with sex, especially pre-teen sex. While not a subject that interests me I always felt very uncomfortable with the British tabloid’s obsession with sex and especially with illicit sex. In a country like Oz where half the population is either born in the UK (about 1 & half million) or their parents were, this obsession seems absent. I seriously put this down to people having a far more active outdoor life, sunshine and so on. That may sound simple but I believe it is a definite reason because people have so many more opportunities for physical activity and less time for introspection.
Of my mini surveys of the Brits I do meet, most are disinterested in the current UK ‘Operations’, most seem to think the Savile claims are hugely exaggerated or are about compensation (given that the cost of living in Oz is far less & you get more bang for your buck, another reason so many Brits seemed consumed by ‘pedo panics’ in the UK) and the sympathy seems to be mostly with the harried celebrities and indeed I think the media & police have totally underestimated the huge respect there is for Cliff Richard which seems to be one Yewtree too far.
Perhaps that’s why Rupert Murdoch eyed the News of The World and The Sun as his prizes and understood that the British appetite for illicit sex tales is unlimited. And the same seems to go, more or less, for the USA. -
October 6, 2015 at 1:51 pm -
Sorry, Petunia, but with our legal system the way it is, how many more hysterical court cases do you think you will see by raising the age of consent? The answer surely is to confront infantilisation?
-
October 6, 2015 at 3:31 pm -
Tongue was nestling in cheek there, Windsock. It’s an alternative to fighting a losing battle against those whose opinions are set in stone.
-
October 6, 2015 at 3:51 pm -
Oops! Too subtle for me!
-
-
-
-
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 1:11 pm -
I think you’ll find that I described Denning as a ‘prolific offender’.
It might not be your position that the law is to be upheld even if you disagree with it – but it is mine.
Whilst I would also welcome a debate on the age of consent, and would not be adverse to it being raised as it happens, I would never advocate that the law be broken simply because some feel that the debate should have been held earlier. The debate is overdue, 100 years overdue.
Some children may not be harmed by early sexual experience – the number of people who have gone on to have happy marriages to their ‘first’ boyfriend at age even 12 is testament to that, but that doesn’t mean that no children are harmed by such an experience, context is all – and the law is there to protect them all. It should be obeyed.
You think I parrot a ‘terrified chorus’ – really? I can tell you – its a bloody lonely business being such a parrot.-
October 5, 2015 at 1:24 pm -
I think you’ll find that I described Denning as a ‘prolific offender’.
So you did- I have just checked-and that means ToC probably did what I did when I first read the article, his ‘eye’ turned ‘prolific’ into ‘predatory’ (which is in the next sentence). There is a word for that, can’t recall what but the scribes and monks of the Middle Ages had a hell of a problem with it. Turning a ‘surfeit of lampreys’ into an excess of eating ponies on one occaision (Gildas?). ToC’s posts are usually so well reasoned and well written that he has me reaching for dictionary.com, however this comment of his screams ‘upset on a friend’s behalf’ and I’m guessing he pressed ‘send’ far quicker than he normally might.
-
October 5, 2015 at 8:12 pm -
>…this comment of his screams ‘upset on a friend’s behalf’ and I’m guessing he pressed ‘send’ far quicker than he normally might.
Yes, BD, you are right. Thank you for your very generous interpretation.
This is what Ms Raccoon wrote:
“Denning is obviously a prolific offender with a particular interest in young boys – young boys, even ones who manage to find themselves abused by the same man 60 times and wait 40 years before complaining, do deserve to be protected from predatory sex offenders.”
The fact that the word “prolific”, as an intensifier of “offender”, is in there along with “predatory” seems merely to compound the prejudicial effect. The implication – unless Anna cares to repudiate it – appears to be that Chris was both prolific AND predatory.
Anna also said:
“…that doesn’t mean that no children are harmed by such an experience, context is all – and the law is there to protect them all. It should be obeyed.”
Children are definitely harmed by the fallout from engagement in forbidden activity, including the often hysterical reaction of parents when they find out and the heavy ordeal of the legal process. So, yes, while the law is as it is, it should be obeyed. Predictably, though, it won’t be, despite a rising tide of ever more frantically savage punishments, surveillance and media hostility. This is the wrong direction, folks. It is just making everyone nastier and harming kids in the process.
-
October 6, 2015 at 12:42 am -
I suppose the average blokes who go to the pub or disco on a Saturday hoping to pick up a lady could be considered predatory (and the females as well) and indeed, all those Sun Sex & Suspicious Parents lot invading the Med are predatory. It’s probably the appropriate word to use but stands out in this article when really, it’s part of the nature of most teenagers and young adults to be predatory and this fact is a part of being a human being.
The word stands out as it is mis-used so many times especially by the media as a form of insult.
But really, is there noting more predatory that Britain’s tabloid media? I think not. -
October 6, 2015 at 12:59 am -
Thank you for your very generous interpretation.
Da nada.
This is what Ms Raccoon wrote:………………………
The fact that the word “prolific”, as an intensifier of “offender”, is in there along with “predatory” seems merely to compound the prejudicial effectFar be it from me to interpolate upon anything the Landlady has written but I think you missed the trenchant wit of her comment . That whole ‘manage to find themselves abused by the same man 60 times and wait 40 years before complaining,’ reads to me as a typical Raccoonism, her ‘jaundiced’ view. But that’s just my interpretation and may well be wrong.
And as to the Age Of Consent personally I find the idea (used I think in some European countries) of a rolling AoC or what I think some US states call ‘Romeo & Juliet’. From the age of , say, 12 a child may indulge in sexual activity with someone who themselves is under 16. From age 14 with someone under the age of 17, from 15 under the age of 18 and at 16 with anyone under the age of 21,@17 then 25 until finally at age 18 there are no restrictions.
Mind you I see some virtue in raising the AoC to 21…or even 25….seeing the damage all those teenage fumblings resulted in (and i’m not talking about pregnancies). It is a sad fact of our existence that our bodies develop far quicker than our souls….no doubt for good evolutionary reasons.
-
October 6, 2015 at 5:41 am -
The Blocked Dwarf,
If you’re gonna pick an age of consent by mental maturity I think it would have to be at least 40.
I’m sure most people would make better parents after 40, would only leave a very small window for having children though….
-
-
-
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:04 pm -
As part of the block of sessions we had on law during my college training, once of the subjects we covered was which laws are enforced and why do some fall by the wayside? One of the reasons given was that mass flouting of the law by the populace resulted in specific laws being seen as risible and therefore not enforced.
I had my first sexual experience with another man in 1976 when I was 18 and he was 27. Do you think he should have been prosecuted even though I entered into that liaison willingly although it was illegal for him to do so?
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:22 pm -
Windsock,
Re: “I had my first sexual experience with another man in 1976 when I was 18 and he was 27. Do you think he should have been prosecuted even though I entered into that liaison willingly although it was illegal for him to do so?”
No, as even though the age of consent for homosexual men was 21 at the time 18 was still considered a legal adult at the time, or was it? Was it 21? I don’t know?
That’s the problem if you say someone is a legal adult at 18 capable of making their own decisions, what’s the point in putting restrictions above that age? It’s been lowered to 16 now so I don’t think he’d be at risk of prosecution anymore.
Over 18 and 21 or even 30, you might be an adult capable of making your own decisions for the most part, but quite often still make mistakes and the wrong ones. I don’t think there is a magic age where we all become wise and incapable of making mistakes, we learn from out mistakes and learn from experience….
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:35 pm -
I’m now 57. I’m not sure even now about the value of some of my decisions…
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:39 pm -
Well let me reassure you that your decision to post here today was the right one.
-
-
-
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 1:20 pm -
Tom, I tried seeking an explanation from you for what seem to be contradictory beliefs – that supplying a child with alcohol & cigarettes is wrong but engaging them in sexual activity is not – here:
https://annaraccoon.com/2015/08/16/parish-notice-5/#comment-125088
You didn’t reply, but I’d still be interested to hear how you rationalize this.As in THAT case (Charles Napier – your friend), that of Richard Alston & the present one we have men who you state would never hurt a fly and yet they all seemed to have little interest in the ‘intellectual paedophilia’ of poetry & grapes and rather more interest in jazz mags, sherbet dib-dabs, mucky videos, booze, fags & even drugs:
“He [Denning] offered them cigarettes, alcohol and drugs, bought them gifts and gave them money. He gave them access to pornographic material and gave them the means to do what they wanted in order to groom them.”
Presumably you will once again condemn the bribery but not the behaviour these men were only able to engage in thanks to the same. The logic escapes me.
I dare say that a 10-year old could be enticed in to being what YOU might term a “willing and active participant” in all manner of activities if, for example, he or she were first given a taste of sweet cocaine – with a promise of another junior-line on subsequent visits. But it wouldn’t be right. In fact, it would be wrong.-
October 5, 2015 at 2:00 pm -
I think it’s worth pointing out that Tom O’Carroll is a former chairman of the Paedophile Information Exchange and it is no surprise he is expressing deeply misguided views on this website.
Of course we need to accept that there are grey areas regarding the issue of paedophilia but grooming pre-pubescent children for sex, as Denning did, is plain wrong and deeply unhealthy for a child’s emotional development.
Just because Denning is a victim of his genetics (many of the studies into the causes of paedophilia do conclude that genetics play a factor, along with childhood experiences) does not excuse his behaviour. Those that abuse children are often incapable of confronting the consequences of their actions unless they accept therapy. The work of the Lucy Faithfull Foundation in this respect has been rightly publicised on this website.
Just saying.
-
October 5, 2015 at 2:04 pm -
I think it’s worth pointing out that Tom O’Carroll is a former chairman of the Paedophile Information Exchange
Thank you Captain Obvious
-
October 5, 2015 at 7:46 pm -
>…plain wrong and deeply unhealthy for a child’s emotional development.
Evidence, James? You may think you have seen truck loads of evidence in the media from heart-rending “victim” testimony. Unfortunately, the story is not so simple. Yes, there are lots of screwed up angry people. However, the background is invariably complicated, with all manner of violence, neglect and other stressful misfortune as a part of the mix. Early sex is often blamed because it is the easy and fashionable thing to point to.
But lots of people, such as gay guys given a hard time as kids by rejecting parents (especially macho fathers) enter a healing process, not a damaging one, when they form an intimate relationship with an adult.
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:11 pm -
I have met people (and some have become friends) who claim to have been sexually active since as young as six years old by their own choice and who also claim not to have been emotionally or physically harmed by the experience (in one case, I think that is plainly delusional thinking). Despite that, I would still argue that an age of consent should exist – there are those children who enter into sexual activity without realising the consequences nor the importance of the activity, nor the boundaries between consent, coercion and abuse.
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:29 pm -
windsock,
Re: “I have met people (and some have become friends) who claim to have been sexually active since as young as six years old by their own choice and who also claim not to have been emotionally or physically harmed by the experience”
I’ve heard far more men than women come out with ‘I lost my virginity on a tennis court when I was 11, and if you don’t believe me, i’ve still got the leaf I found in my arse afterwards to prove it” tales, I used to believe them all uncritically, now I think *some* might have been exaggerating a bit, or a lot to try and ‘impress’ people….
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:37 pm -
I have no reason to doubt the veracity of these particular people, but I do take your point.
-
October 6, 2015 at 2:43 pm -
‘I lost my virginity on a tennis court when I was 11,
I lost my virginity in Wales …on a welsh farm somewhere with far too many ‘L’s in it’s name…and I shall stop there so not as to put the lunchtime guests off their croques and anchovy pizzas.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
October 5, 2015 at 12:04 pm -
King as a result of attending the Walton Hop – the charges he was found guilty of had nothing to do with the place.
That little fact still leaves me gobsmacked. Next you’ll be telling us that there was never any Ritual Satanic Abuse in Cleveland. Wasn’t King supposed to have groomed the entire teenage population of Esher & Walton? 10,000 or something? As every watcher of any TV murder mysteries knows, when all the witnesses are singing from the same song sheet then there is a conspiracy afoot to convict an innocent man and I begin to wonder if, anyone with all the aesthetic charm of a Spitting Image puppet (sorry JK but you know you’ve been batting way way above your average for your entire life), ever managed to groom one boy let alone having hundreds queueing up to bend over the bonnet of his TR7. Now there’s a crime worthy of jail time-have you seen what jeans’ zips and rivets will do to a TR7’s paint job?
It says much about the man that he hasn’t become an embittered recluse, with only rottweilers for company and a razor wire fence around his Island Hideway but has remained the sort of man whose friendship is valued.
-
October 5, 2015 at 3:31 pm -
Better a TR7 than a Triumph Spitfire – the latter had individual raised chrome letters spelling T R I U M P H all across the front of the bonnet which, depending on your approach, could leave some long-lasting mirror-image letters embossed across the bare buttocks or belly of the lucky recipient – the completeness of the word varying, depending on the girth of the victim.
(I won’t admit how I know that, suffice to say that she wasn’t too happy with the resultant indentations).-
October 5, 2015 at 3:43 pm -
she wasn’t too happy with the resultant indentations
The poor girl’s version of ‘she got the Mercedes bends‘
-
-
October 6, 2015 at 12:52 am -
There is so much evidence that ‘pedo panic’ has replaced gay panic and this is demonstrated that society still views an older man with a much younger male partner (even when they are both legally aged) as almost a perversion or that the older is a ‘predator’.
Yet an older bloke doing the same with a younger lady- Rupert Murdoch?- is hardly blinked at and when it’s a far older bloke – Hugh hefner – he’s promoted by the media as an heroic stud to be admired.
I reminded of this by a long time pair of friends. The older by 25 years was a senior media executive in Australia who kept his relationship with the young merchant seaman he met on a voyage and who came to live with him, a secret. Now the older is in his 90s after nearly 40 years together, is suffering dementia while the younger, now a senior citizen in his 60s is caring for him and at the same time, battling with the older’s relatives who see the younger as a ‘predator’ hoping to keep the family home they have lived in together for decades.
-
-
October 6, 2015 at 11:39 am -
Empathy for all TRUE victims.
But, if the honorably uninformed millions were the honored Cilla and millions more unsung NON-victims, they’d have a whole new pedo point of view. Perhaps crystalized thus, “If U don’t know it, don’t knock it!”
“I actually wasn’t 16, I was only fourteen!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjakDTNOztE
“He was a great kisser…the younger you were the better.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlI2RKNGnLU
And, quote Rock God Good Pedo Presley’s BIG buddy BIG Johnny Cash, “A Boy Named Sue…ah came away with a different point of view.”
{ 52 comments… read them below or add one }