On 3rd August 2015 Wiltshire Police Superintendent Sean Memory held a dramatic news conference outside the late Prime Minister Sir Edward Heath’s former home, Arundells, a beautiful house in Salisbury Cathedral close.
He told the gathered reporters he had information that:
“a trial had been due to take place in the 1990s and information was received in that trial that Sir Ted Heath was involved in the abuse of children and the allegation is from the result of that information that the trial never took place.”
The police were now opening an inquiry into possible child abuse by the former Prime Minister, and were encouraging anyone who had been abused by him to come forward.
The trial to which he was referring was that of a well-known Salisbury Madame, Myra Ling-Ling Forde, who, it was suggested, had persuaded the authorities to drop charges against her of keeping a brothel by threatening to name Sir Edward Heath. Ms Ling-Ling Forde was my client. There was in fact no trial, and the case was dropped after prosecution witnesses, at least some of whom were serving prisoners, refused to give evidence.
It did my former client little good: a couple of year later she was prosecuted successfully for similar offences. No mention of Sir Edward Heath was made in her defence, and she was duly banged up for several years by Judge Martin Tucker QC, who described her, colourfully and just a little hyperbolically, of being responsible for a “festering sore of vice.” Judge Tucker is a very religious man with high moral standards.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission investigated the allegation. It found that the reason the case was dropped had nothing to do with allegations being threatened against Sir Edward, but was because the prosecution witnesses decided not to give evidence, a not uncommon occurrence, especially when, as in this case, many of them were themselves serving prison sentences.
But although that particular allegation has been discounted by the IPCC, Wiltshire Police have continued to lead an investigation into Sir Edward’s alleged criminality: it has been claimed that he was at best a paedophile with a penchant for teenage boys, and at worst a Satanist, a mass murderer and a shape-shifting reptile.
Last Sunday the Mail on Sunday led its front page with a dramatic story:
More than 30 people have come forward, the article alleged, with claims of sexual abuse by the former Prime Minister. They were said to have given “strikingly similar” accounts, although the individuals were not known to each other.
Wiltshire Chief Constable Mike Veale was “said to be 120% convinced” that the claims are true although he publicly responded with a statement distancing himself from the “120% convinced” claim, while not expressly denying having said it.
On Monday the Mail had an update: 0ne group of women was said to have told the police that Heath was part of a Satanic sex ring that murdered 16 children “in churches and forests around southern England and also in Africa.” It was left to the reader to guess whether Mr Veale was 120% convinced by this specific claim, even though it suggests that about half of the witnesses are “part of a group” rather than being in any way independent of each other.
The Mail on Sunday had cited as evidence the fact that Heath had in fact owned a car, even though his supporters – notably former Cabinet Secretary Robert Armstrong – had previously said that he had not done so. The former Prime Minister was pictured standing beside an old-fashioned Rover, and the paper also showed a picture of a man in glasses who bears some resemblance to Sir Edward sitting in the driving seat of another car. At least one of the pictures was taken in Weymouth, and the other was taken either in Weymouth or Blackpool. Ownership of a car – even if true – seems an unstable base on which to establish proof of Satanic serial killing, although it is true that many mass murderers have also been drivers.
Since Exaro News went bankrupt last year stories about establishment paedophile rings had died down somewhat. With the Mail’s “revelations” the internet immediately came alive again with believers in abstruse paedophile conspiracies claiming the story justified everything they have been saying for years.
Former BBC sports reporter and one-time Green Party leader David Icke crowed particularly loud. He had, he pointed out, said that Heath was a paedophile Satanist who sacrificed children in his book The Biggest Secret which was published in 1998 (not available from good book sellers, but very much available on his website, or Amazon). On Monday night he took to the airwaves again through his associated internet radio station – The Richie Allen show – to remind us that the former Prime Minister was not just a paedophile but a “monumental serial Satanist responsible for the death and torture of extraordinary numbers of children.”
Icke is not just an internet bore and fantasist. His behaviour is thoroughly nasty. He has accused innumerable people of being involved, like Ted Heath, in reptilian blood-drinking ceremonies, including Queen Elizabeth, Al Gore, Brian Mulrooney, Bob Hope, both George and George W. Bush, the Rothschild family and Kris Kristofferson These people may be famous, but they are still real people: you do not make such claims about real people unless either you have utterly cast iron, unimpeachable evidence or you are indifferent to the hurt you cause to others.
Mr Icke clearly does not have such evidence.Nor could he, because what he is suggesting is plausible only to the idiotic and the brain dead. What is more, if he had had evidence he would have been morally obliged to take it straight to the police. But Mr Icke’s coinage is not evidence: it is anonymous unverifiable allegation and innuendo distilled into the most scurrilous lies, which he then deploys without scruple. He delights in goading his victims, knowing that even if they sue him the resultant publicity will mean he rakes in yet more money from his repellent publications. What matters to him is that there is an audience of gullible dolts who pay to lap up his toxic emissions. The refusal of those who are still alive to to sue over his monstrous claims is presented as evidence that they are true. (In fact – although you won’t find much about it on his website – Icke was successfully sued in 2015, and agreed to pay damages of £50,000 damages, plus costs, to a Canadian lawyer called Richard Warman, whom Icke had falsely accused of trying to suppress the “truth” about Satanic child murders).
Despite, or perhaps because of, the nonsense in which he deals he is astonishingly influential. The starting point and central pillar of his success is an immensely popular website and an associated forum where discussions take place on such topics as the illuminati, Satanic practices, vaccination, race and immigration, 9/11, UFOs, reptilians and the Jewish control of the slave trade. He has 170,000 twitter followers, he speaks to packed houses all round the world (a ticket to listen to three hours of his drivel at the Casino de Paris will set you back around £50 or £60, and even with the benefit of a restricted view it is Є60), and his You Tube videos have had millions of views. According to Richie Allen, just one of his shows alone – Icke talking about paedophiles in 2014 – has now had over a million views. No doubt his relentlessly plugged books also sell well.
His core message is that many events in the world are controlled by the “illuminati,” many of whom (perhaps all – I’ve lost the thread a bit here along with some of the will to live) are “shape shifting reptilians.” Amongst the most evil and powerful of all these people are the Rothschilds, and he believes, or at least affects to believe, that Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin were illuminati under the control of the Rothschilds.
The list of things he disapproves of is a long one: he is anti-vaccination, anti-EU, anti-Queen Elizabeth (“indulges in human scarifice at Balmoral”), anti-President Obama (“a fake”), anti-Michelle Obama, anti-Hilary Clinton (nuclear war would have been a certainty had she won the election) and almost as much anti-Trump (his Presidency will prove catastrophic). Princess Diana was murdered in an occult ritual and 9/11 was, of course, an inside job arranged by the illuminati, amongst whom the Bush family are prominent members.
In Mr Icke’s world almost every public figure is a villain, and virtually all politicians are crooks if not lizards, although a possible exception seems to be made for Vladimir Putin (who, confusingly, in the real world actually is a crook, if not a lizard). It is true that if you delve back to 2009 Icke told us that Mr Putin was “illuminati controlled” (together with the snide, supposedly important, and false, information that “his mother was a Jew”), but in recent times the many stories about Russia on the Icke website have contained no reference to Mr Putin being controlled by reptiles. Instead, when you click on stories about Russia or Russian actions you are often taken seamlessly to the website of RT.com, the Kremlin funded propaganda site. Whatever Mr Icke’s view of Putin in 2009, his website has since become, through such links, an outlet for Russian Government official propaganda. Since Mr Icke would surely not willingly link to reptilian propaganda we must assume that he now absolves Mr Putin of involvement with the illuminati.
Unlike his view of Putin, Mr Icke’s view of Ted Heath has not mellowed over the years. Sir Edward was, of course, a member of the illuminati: half man and half reptile. Icke claims to have actually met him in a Sky Television make-up room in 1989, when he partially revealed his reptilian side:
“When I arrived at the studio I was told to go to the make up room, I was , there was one other person in the room, that was Ted Heath who had come to have his make-up taken off. I turned to him and said “alright then, nice to meet you. “
He never reacted, he turned to me, he never moved his body just his head, the only thing that moved was his eyes, … he scanned me … his eyes went from the top of my head to my feet and went back up again got to the top of my head then turned his head back and looked at the mirror all of his eyes, whites, and c0lour all went black. … When his eyes went into this blackness there was no point where I made eye contact.”
Icke learnt more about Sir Edward from a lady described as the “wife of a guy who used to be warden of Burnham Beeches.” Typically for Icke, she is not named, or properly identified.
“She said to me that her husband was a Satanist, because they had to be to do their job because one of ther roles was to organise Satanic rituals for the elite in Burnham Beeches. During a period with her Satanic husband, she saw a light and when she got closer she saw a ritual going on with people in long gowns and the man leading the ritual was Ted Heath. This was amazing enough. As I was leaving .. I made a joke of it, I said I have been meeting people who keep telling me they keep seeing people turn into reptiles. I made joke of it I heard this woman heaving for breath … I turned around & the first thing she said was “oh my God I thought it was only me?” She said “ As I was observing the ritual Heath turned into a reptile and grew about 2 feet.” This growing into a much taller entity is, probably about 95% of accounts ….”
It is not clear whether the 30 people now claiming to be victims of Sir Edward’s paedophile activities have described the already 6’0” former Prime Minister growing to eight feet and developing reptilian eyes. Mr Veale would no doubt cite operational reasons for not telling us us if they had. More to the point, nor is it clear how many of those claiming to have been abused by Heath have heard about his activities on Mr Icke’s You Tube channel, read about them on his website, or on the thousands and thousands of posts on his forum, or indeed any of the myriad other public and private places on the internet where Mr Heath’s murderous and paedophile tendencies are taken as established beyond question. Given the importance ascribed to the fact that the witnesses have given “strikingly similar accounts,” it is of considerable relevance.
Mr Icke’s is far from being the only website to trash Heath’s reputation. I have not even bothered to mention the suspended barrister Michael Shrimpton who specialises in spinning wild and convoluted tales of Heath’s wrongdoing. In Shrimpton’s world “German intelligence” plays much the same role that reptiles play in Icke’s, but they share the common theme of paedophilia and child murder.
Mr Veale and his team will have needed almost infinite resources of time, patience and money to wade through even what is publicly available – to say nothing of what chatter may have taken place in anonymous chatrooms and Facebook pages – before being able to decide that the complainants are “independent” of each other.
It would be nice to think that at the end of this police inquiry we will have a nice clear report setting out what the evidence is against Heath, allowing anyone interested to make up their own minds. It is, of course, just possible that out of this miasma of misinformation and imagination some real evidence of criminality may even be found.
Unfortunately that does not seem to be the intention of Mr Veale at all. Instead, he has promised:
“at the conclusion of this investigation a confidential closing report will be written. Our approach is to be as open and transparent as possible and at that time I will take advice as to what information I can properly put into the public domain. This investigation may contribute to the wider picture of truth seeking and reconciliation ….”
What is the purpose is of a “confidential closing report?” One notable advantage of confidentiality is actually set out in Mr Veale’s statement itself: the police can decide – on advice – what information they can properly “put into the public domain.” We can be sure that no names, or information capable of identifying any of the complainants will be made public, because to do so where sexual allegations are concerned would be a criminal offence. Any Icke or Shrimpton-influenced chancer or fantasist is thereby emboldened to say what they like about a man who cannot respond.
The coppers are only human, and it would hardly be surprising if they do their best to ensure that whatever information is eventually made public, it does not make them look like boobies who have wasted the best part of two years and a million pounds preparing a case that can not only never be tried in court but can never even be made public except in an anonymised, bowdlerised and – to use a word police officers love – heavily redacted form. Even if it were the job of the police to draw conclusions about Mr Heath’s guilt or innocence (and it is not), any conclusions they do choose to make public will be untested, largely untestable and possibly self-serving. Mr Icke will have another field day, the rest of us will be none the wiser.
How exactly any of this will contribute, as Mr Veale puts it, “to the wider picture of truth and reconciliation,” is quite beyond me. Who is to judge the truth of the allegations? By what means is that truth to be established? Who is to be reconciled with whom? The sole beneficiary of the whole sordid circus so far has been the revolting Mr Icke. Once the inquiry is wound up and the confidential report is duly delivered by secure courier to Mr Veale’s secure office it is hard to see how anyone except Mr Icke will have benefited at all. These are tough times and Wiltshire Constabulary could be better employed than in using public money to lay on a massive public relations exercise for Britain’s leading lizard-hating conspiracy theorist.