The Spectator rushing to support pedocriminals – again

Last week, I drew attention to Rod Liddle’s attempts to ridicule the fact that Ted Heath was a serial killing pedocriminal.  This week Charles Moore is at it again.  He has written in the interests of those facing pedocrime allegations many times before,  implying his friends are being witch-hunted.

In The Spectator’s Notes in this week’s issue, he gets straight into his favourite subject again, attacking the Police Officer in charge of Operation Hydrant, Chief Constable Simon Bailey suggesting he is too suggestible, and that the investigation will believe any allegations of pedocrime automatically, without any attempt to verify the allegations.

The recording of all allegations is, of course, the duty of an investigation.

The facts are otherwise.

Pedocrime investigations are loaded in favour of the perpetrators.  One of the main pieces of evidence against a longterm perpetrator is the number of people who come forward to make allegations against them, once an investigation starts.  In court, the judge will only consider the evidence of each allegation separately.  The fact that a thousand people have all come forward and made separate claims of abuse against the same individual is inadmissible in the British system.

Each allegation is heard simply as that of one person’s word against another, when in fact it is often one person’s word against a thousand.

Why is Charles Moore so keen to misrepresent the truth of the British legal system to his readers, by his failure to state how loaded the system is against those making allegations? Your guess is a good as mine.

The system of government runs on pedocrime, with all on the inside protected for their crimes.   Charles Moore disappointingly appears to be just another part of that system, rushing to the defence of the perpetrators in each week’s issue.  Maybe next week he’ll balance his output by writing in favour of the victims who he never mentions, as if they don’t exist.  I wouldn’t hold your breath.