No porkies, but one PIE too many!

After finding myself cast as the pantomime villain for the Whitehall farce known as the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), last year, the show finally took to the stage for a three-week run of public hearings last month.
These March hearings focused on the so-called Westminster strand, probing alleged V.I.P. child sex rings and cover-ups in politics and government. The inquiry had asked me to address a number of questions about the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), going back to the 1970s when I had been secretary and then chair. What they wanted from me, chiefly, was information that would confirm or refute an extraordinary claim coming from a senior civil servant, no less – not the most obvious source of wild fantasies – that PIE had been funded through government grants made at the behest of the secret services.
It struck me as a great opportunity to ridicule this absurd claim, backed by irrefutable documentary evidence in my possession. This would contribute to the long overdue and much needed discrediting of a whole gamut of conspiracy theories and allegations that exploded into the media in the wake of the Jimmy Savile “scandal” a few years ago. Among them, it will be recalled, were outrageous lies that falsely portrayed two PIE committee members as brutal murderers, along with the hilarious claim that former prime minister Edward Heath had attended PIE committee meetings.
Five years ago, when I first heard the claim about PIE getting government money, I wrote here at Heretic TOC:

… a former civil servant called Tim Hulbert has been peddling the fantasy that PIE was given as much as £70,000 of government funding. I wish! Unless our treasurer quietly trousered all that lovely lucre for himself, we received not a penny of public money. We always operated on a shoestring. I had assumed this Hulbert character was some low grade tea maker cum errand boy but it turns out he is now retired after ending up as head of social services at Bedfordshire County Council.

Turns out that Hulbert had been a senior consultant in a department overseeing grants to the voluntary sector. In statements made over the last few years he has been adamant that he confronted the head of the department, one Clifford Hindley, saying he had seen a proposal floating around in the office for a grant to PIE, and that he demanded to know what the hell was going on, because he thought it could not possibly be the right thing to do.
He said Hindley, who died some years ago, admitted there had been such a grant and had been of the opinion that PIE was a legitimate campaigning organisation, which made it eligible to be considered for public funding. Hulbert said he had been told to “back off” because the money had been given on the authority of Special Branch to allow it to keep an eye on PIE members. An earlier independent review, published as the Wanless-Whittam Report,  declined to rule this out, saying it would be “odd but not impossible”. Hulbert said he had even seen a copy of PIE’s magazine, Magpie, in the department, possibly in Hindley’s office.
And now, in person at the inquiry, the long-retired Tim Hulbert would insist once more that this conversation with Hindley really had taken place, and that he had seen the grant proposal. I saw the live feed of his evidence from the London hearing; the videos are still online for all to see, here for the morning session (from about 11 minutes in) and here (from the start) for the afternoon.
So, what did I make of it? Hulbert came across to me as slightly confused (not senile, but losing sharpness), of a rather excitable disposition and with an unreliable memory.
But I do not think he is a liar. There were no outright pork pies I could detect. Nor do I think his story is entirely false. His boss Clifford Hindley could very well have been a PIE sympathiser. I had never heard of him until his name emerged in the media following the allegations – but then we learned plenty. High up in the civil service, Hindley had clearly been a scholarly man, a classics, philosophy and theology graduate who studied at Oxford and Cambridge, and with many published articles to his name that showed “an obsessive academic interest in gay relationships between men and boys” as one report put it. These included a number of papers on pederasty in ancient Greece and others on composer Benjamin Britten’s known interest in young boys. Hindley’s focus on man-boy relationships has been monitored and logged just as obsessively by pianist Ian Pace at his Desiring Progress website. Pace discerns a tone sympathetic to man-boy eroticism in Hindley’s writing and I think he is correct.
What’s more,  soon after Hindley’s name came to media attention I had an email from an Italian postgraduate student who just happened to have bought a second-hand copy of my book Paedophilia: The Radical Case on Amazon. It bore the hand-written name Clifford Hindley on the fly-leaf, having apparently been his own personal copy. On several pages there were notes in the margins revealing the owner’s thoughts about aspects of the text – thoughts which definitely suggest a scholarly brain at work, such as Hindley obviously possessed. In my view, this definitely has to be our man. But before Mr Pace sees this and starts wetting himself with excitement, I should report there is nothing remotely salacious in these marginalia; the notes are more legalistic than erotic.

From the fly-leaf of Hindley’s copy of Paedophilia: The Radical Case

But none of this means Hindley ever succeeded in smuggling a grant through the system or even that he tried to do so. If there was an attempt, I know perfectly well he did not succeed, because I was familiar with PIE’s accounts at the relevant time. I was even able to submit a 1970s treasurer’s report as an exhibit for the inquiry, showing where all our very limited money was coming from, which was mainly from membership subscriptions. The Wanless-Whittam inquiry mentioned above had been unable to trace any money trail leading to PIE, which is not surprising as no money reached us.
Hulbert characterised that inquiry as shallow and “like something out of Yes Minister” – not so much Wanless as clueless. But Hulbert had no documentary or witness evidence to support either his suspicions against his boss or the cloak-and-dagger theory of secret service involvement. By contrast, Brian Altman QC, counsel to IICSA, had referred in an earlier session to my written statement and told the public hearing that my version was “consistent with the other evidence” on the matter.
In the end it was Hulbert who ended up looking like a buffoon from a satirical TV show. He started squealing like a stuck pig when Altman began politely asking a few gently sceptical questions about his evidence. It was “outrageous” that his word should be questioned in this way; he felt “insulted” to be subjected to such a “cross-examination”.
Best of all, though, was a moment of absurdity that that went way beyond Yes Minister. This would be the full Monty Python!
It came when Hulbert’s dodgy memory dug up a dim recollection that he had seen a grant renewal spreadsheet in the office with an entry on it relating to a grant for the Women’s Royal Voluntary Service (WRVS). This was a biggy because the WRVS were getting over £1 million a year. One line of the paperwork indicated a grant listed as WRVS (P.I.E.), according to Hulbert. He thought this was an attempt to hide money (some tens of thousands of pounds ) going to the Paedophile Information Exchange by hiding it within the much bigger grant going to WRVS.
What he actually saw, though, in all probability, was not WRVS (P.I.E.) but WVS (PIE). This emerged in the hearing through reference to something Hulbert could well have stumbled across in the archives, dating back to the wartime work of the WRVS going back to 1941, before the organisation was “royal” and was just the plain WVS.
This would have been referring not to P.I.E. (or PIE) the paedophile organisation but to actual pies, the ones we eat! The inquiry heard that the WVS ran something called the Rural Pie Scheme thorough which millions of pies and snacks were distributed to agricultural workers during the war.
Who would ever have guessed that one of the unfortunate consequences of the Second World War (though hardly among the most unfortunate, except, perhaps, from Hulbert’s point of view!) would be that an aging civil servant would make a fool of himself at a public airing of events far removed from the war effort nearly three quarters of a century after it had ended! Priceless!
Hand-written notes in Hindley’s own copy of Paedophilia: The Radical Case.

Another remarkable feature of the inquiry for me was the surprisingly sad spectacle of some bitter testimony given by retired detective sergeant Bryan Collins, who had been with the Obscene Publications Squad (OPS) in the 1970s. I knew him all too well: he was the officer who arrested me in 1978 the course of the police investigation of PIE and who handled the case until its conclusion with my conviction for conspiracy to corrupt public morals in 1981.
I have nothing against him personally. He told the inquiry he had been hand-picked by the OPS chief as an “honest cop” following a notorious period in the history of the Metropolitan Police Service when corruption had been rife, with officers taking substantial cash bribes from those operating “sex shops” and the like in the capital, to dissuade them from seizing pornographic magazines, etc., that were on sale, and from launching prosecutions.
Offering a big bribe was well out of my financial league so I never had a chance to put Collins’ honesty to the test. But I have no reason to doubt it either. In fact, if he is to be believed, he and a now deceased colleague turned down an extremely tasty offer of £25,000 each – huge money in those days – from former PIE member Sir Peter Hayman to drop an investigation against him.
Collins is clearly still angry and bitter some forty years later over the fact that the case against Hayman was dropped, despite strong evidence against him in relation to child pornography. To him, it was very clearly an establishment cover-up. To have prosecuted Hayman would have been too embarrassing to the powers that be, given that he had been deputy commandant of the British military government in West Berlin from 1964 to 1966, and had served as High Commissioner to Canada. He was also the only real, as opposed to fantasy, secret services person we now know about in PIE’s history, as he had also been deputy director of MI6 – oops, sorry, there may have been Geoffrey Prime as well, but he spied for Russia!
Hayman did not escape embarrassment in the end, of course. As those who know their PIE history will be aware, the story of the dropped prosecution came out in Private Eye, and then Geoffrey Dickens MP called out Hayman in parliament as a paedophile.
What really sticks in Collins’ craw is that instead of being given credit for mounting what could have been a successful prosecution of Hayman, he and another officer on the investigation were blamed for leaking the story to the press. As he put it:

All they were interested in was getting somebody’s head to roll for what was published in Private Eye. That was their only intent … I was good at my job. And they couldn’t have cared less. They ruined me – it is not good to stand there and somebody turns around to you and says, “You’ve done this. You’ve committed an offence. We want your warrant card… To me, that was – I’d rather be stabbed than have that happen.”

As for the cover up, it had been achieved via a cosy (and very unusual, if not irregular) private chat between Hayman’s solicitor, Sir David Napley, and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Thomas Hetherington. Here’s how the inquiry heard it:

Altman:  The way you see it, Mr Collins, it was Sir Thomas Hetherington doing a deal with Sir David Napley in relation to Sir Peter Hayman?
Collins:  Best club in the world, isn’t it: three knights of the realm? You know, not bad, is it?
Altman: Well, that will be for others to answer.

Bryan Collins and I seemed to have a totally different view of everything. I remember him saying to me we probably couldn’t even agree on what the weather was like. I have to say, though, he is dead right on this one.  And despite our differences I couldn’t help feeling considerable sympathy for him after hearing this testimony.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
36 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] here may recall that I was contacted by the official solicitor to this strand of the inquiry and asked to give […]

daniel

I am sure he will be fine they will give him the same “support” as they gave me.
https://theukdatabase.com/2019/04/06/adam-gill-leigh/

Debauch

It seems that another documentary is coming out in favour if MJs innocence.
Here Razorfist or “fist” interviews Brandi and Taj Jackson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsuxaa3qIzE&t=4s

daniel

is onami politics still alive? (sorry for the spelling) cos ive heard he still is cos of a story i heard about him getting into trouble with the police, and if he did get in trouble was it cos the fascist state made him crack?

Debauch

Looks like Sargon of Akkad has had his words taken out of context. It seems he has debated with Amos in the past. When the guy in this video said, ‘Now I’ve finally read the script I finally understand’…. I thought he’d looked into the history of pederasty and has enlightened himself, but I digress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpjIj2kVmEY

ProdigalJohn

Yeah, thanks for reminding me of how toxic people can be about all this: they’re eager to smear people who even dare to talk about the topic of pedophilia.

daniel

speaking of amos yee as he thought of getting citizenship in the united kingdom and is he still ok in the u.s.a

stephen6000

I don’t know the answer to either of those questions, but I thought I’d take the opportunity to say something about Yee. Not too long ago, I criticised him, saying that he has been no help to our movement, or something similar. I now think this is unfair. He is tremendously brave and though his very in-your-face style is not everyone’s cup of tea, he has had the courage to come out and openly support us at some cost to his popularity. And it may be that a more vigorous style of presentation has more influence on some people than the highly cerebral, heavily qualified, approach that I and some others tend to go in for.
Incidentally, if he IS thinking of applying to come to the UK, I’d strongly advise him against it! Whatever his problems in the US, they are likely to be worse over here. In this country, freedom of speech is not legally protected in the way it is there.

stephen6000

BTW, I’ve just noticed something disturbing. Yee’s wordpress blog appears to have been shut down: https://amosyee.wordpress.com/ – unless it’s another hoax like the one that affected Hikari.

daniel

stephen6000
Speaking of Amos Yee being effectively silenced i have a strong feeling that the same thing has happened to Ed Chambers when he stood up for me on Facebook, this may also be one of the reasons he doesn’t come on here anymore. (which wasn’t my intention of course)

daniel

stephen6000
>in-your-face style is not everyone’s cup of tea, he has had the courage to come out and openly support us at some cost to his popularity.
I feel that society needs more in your face,because the system isn’t working and society needs a reality check, and at the same time many genuine victims of sex abuse that the state has got control over ie women like Debra LaVave have no rights what so ever.
>Incidentally, if he IS thinking of applying to come to the UK,
If Amos does come to the uk one can assume he will need a place to stay maybe some ppl would be open to suggestions (if he’s reading this)
>In this country, freedom of speech is not legally protected in the way it is there.
freedom of speech is limited by the fascist state and as a result of this many survivors of genuine csa suffer because of the age of consent and many are unfairly imprisoned.
> cost to his popularity.
Sometimes telling the truth isn’t popular but if other oppressed minorities didn’t speak out then they would still be in the same hole they where 200 yrs ago.
>BTW, I’ve just noticed something disturbing. Yee’s wordpress blog appears to have been shut down: https://amosyee.wordpress.com/ – unless it’s another hoax like the one that affected Hikari.
yes i found this out on my search.

Explorer

ALL (at least, all known to me) of Amos Yee’s web pages across ALL Web platforms (at least, major ones – Twitter, Facebook… and yes, even WordPress) was banned simultaneously – much like what, a bit earlier, was (in)famously done to Alex “Infowars” Jones. Yet, unlike Jones, Amos has neither a major website of his own nor a large base of followers – so, his situation is different, and much worse. While Jones is still being heard (as he always was), Amos was effectively silenced.
This is not the first time WordPress bans a controversial person’s blog because of pressure from “respectable”, “mainstream” circles. Somewhat less controversial – well, if being compared to the consensual intergenerational sexuality, the most emotionally unbearable topic for a modern Western(ised) individual! – 9/11 Truth Movement has lost its most notable WordPress blog, “Truth and Shadows”, some time ago.
Whatever is your evaluation of 9/11 Truth Movement and its positions, you probably agree that the obvious intensification of the “mainstream”-driven Web censorship of virtually anything “fringe” is indubitably an ugly and threatening sign. Don’t you? Just don’t forget that the stance being defended on this blog, and some others, is the most “fringe” of all “fringe” stances in the modern West…

daniel

Explorer
It doesn’t surprise me one bit, they say they want a better world but when u tell it like it is they will do what they can to keep u quiet, cos they don’t want the truth outed don’t know if u have heard of Brian Harvey story something tell’s me that Amos with have similar problems. and thats why we need to keep strong in these difficult times.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/mar/22/east-17s-brian-harvey-arrested-and-hospitalised-after-self-harm-threat
>Amos was effectively silenced.

stephen6000

I read the article you linked to and what I don’t understand is why this guy is in police custody. He needs some form of psychiatric/counselling support. Maybe there is a good reason for the police holding him, but if so, the article doesn’t say what it is.

stephen6000

OK, I re-read the article and it says he ‘has been arrested on suspicion of sending malicious communications after threatening to self-harm during a live stream broadcast from his home.’ (How could I miss that? Must remember not to send in my comments so fast!) But now my question is (like yours) about free speech. Unless he was actually inciting a crime (and threatening to harm HIMSELF surely cannot be put into that category), then I cannot see that it is a criminal matter. However, the police may have acted correctly within the law – the problem is with the law itself.

daniel
daniel

stepen6000
Brian Harvey has a youtube channel complaining of harassment issues that he has been getting, if you watch his videos u will get a better idea of what he’s talking about, and with the rise of paedophile hunters i can say without doubt that other ppl will develop similar symptoms in the long term and the british tax payer will have to sadly foot the bill it.
>I read the article you linked to and what I don’t understand is why this guy is in police custody. He needs some form of psychiatric/counselling support. Maybe there is a good reason for the police holding him, but if so, the article doesn’t say what it is.

Debauch

What to you make of the arrest of Julian Assange Tom, as an ex journalist….I hope you stand in solidarity with him and ‘resist’.

stephen6000

News that Roman Polanski is suing the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for unfairly expelling him over his conviction for statutory rape 40 years ago of 13-year-old Samantha Geimer:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48021540
The report includes a video of a very revealing interview with Geimer, in which she describes how people seemed to want her to have been more damaged than she actually was.

galileo1439

One category of sex laws that should be abolished are laws prohibiting sex tourism. First world countries since the early 2000s and late 1990s have passed laws prohibiting their citizens from having sex with people younger than their home AoC while traveling abroad.
In the USA, a 2003 Federal law punishes any US citizen with up to 30 years in prison for having sex with anyone under 16, or any sex act in return for payment with anyone under 18, while visiting a foreign country.
MAP advocates should make a big effort on repealing these laws. Many MAPs like to meet and have fun with kids in exotic places. Kids in third world countries are more mature than kids in first world countries. And the only reason many third world countries would oppose western pedo tourists is due to influence by Western colonial power.

Debauch

There is some truth in that!

galileo1439

Anyone know why alicelovers.net Visions of Alice is down? Did they get banned by their host or DDoS attacked?

Explorer

Just looked – VoA is still online and well. Probably a hackers’ attack, like the one to which IPCE is occasionally subjected. And let’s not forget the dirty trick done to Hikari’s blog (anyone remember its apparent “ban” that turned out to be a hackers-made fake)?
One who does have problems now is Eivind Berge, whose Twitter page is suspended after his many years of activity there (look at the comment section):
http://eivindberge.blogspot.com/2019/04/it-was-clear-and-sunny-with-fresh.html
Well, I have a lot to disagree about with Eivind, sometimes strongly so, yet I still condemn this act of unpredictable censorship, as I condemn all the other ones.
(Sigh)
Only if Twitter and other censorious web corporations gave a damn about my (or anyone else’s) condemnation. The Internet censorship is constantly intensifying – while (pro-)MAPs and Child-Lib people are the most attacked targets, all other non-mainstream types are suppressed as well. Apparently the “perfect world”, according to the mainstream defenders, is one big echo-chamber where only officially approved views are allowed to be expressed and no one dares to question them.

stephen6000

I recently watched the documentary ‘Pervert Park’. It was made in 2014 (and it may even have been discussed on this blog before, though I wasn’t able to find it by searching). You can access it here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00042l9/storyville-pervert-park
Despite its unpromising title, I found it to be very fair in its approach, just letting the participants talk without passing judgement. It’s about a sort of supervised hostel for sex offenders in Florida. The residents are on a program which includes counselling and I thought the guy running the sessions was very sensible and humane. Of course he has to ‘talk the talk’, including references to ‘grooming’ and such like. I guess he would lose his job if he didn’t. (And of course he may believe it to some extent anyway.) But it did seem like he cared and that he didn’t just accept every received dogma going about the subject. (For example, he criticised the excessive attention paid to ‘victims’.) The offences of the residents ran the whole spectrum of seriousness from child rape (i.e. genuine rape) to just being the victim of a police sting operation (as in the case of one young chap, a Ph.D, student). I really recommend this documentary if you haven’t already seen it.

daniel

MESSEGE TO EVERYONE
is any 1 interested in a meet up at some point, cos it wud be a nice change from all the twats out there i know that tom has other commitments at the minute but maybe we can all arrange something.
Thank you.

Debauch

That is a dangerous thing to suggest, The only person I know to be real is Tom himself…..No offence, (offenc) But you could be part of. sting operation.
As for as “legal” sex is concerned, for those of us that are non exclusive, I found the Red light area in Amsterdam disappointing: It seems locals get a better price than tourists, and €50 is going rate for sex, but if your a tourist that will just get you a blow-job. I understand it is supply and demand etc, and these girls are businesswoman, but there is duplicity at play here. After I agree a price, next thing, she says “touching is extra”…..Problem is, sometimes we need to touch, and that is never made clear before you pay. In a nutshell, not the best experience. Also Ann Frank house you need to book in advance!

stephen6000

>That is a dangerous thing to suggest…
Well, insofar as you seem to be saying ‘Under no circumstances, do this…’ I don’t agree. Of course, you have to take certain precautions. Above all, never agree to do anything that is remotely illegal. Most people are what they same to be. The problem of course lies with the small number who aren’t. And they can play a very long game, sometimes befriending you over a long period before ‘going in for the kill’. But as long as you keep to the rule of never agreeing to do anything illegal, you are pretty safe.

Peter Herman

“And despite our differences I couldn’t help feeling considerable sympathy for him after hearing this testimony.”
Let’s put this in a different perspective. I would not feel sorry for a rat that bit me and then in turn was killed by a predator higher on the food chain. After all, the rat does what comes naturally to it and has no ill intentions other than to survive.

daniel

never mind ive read it.

daniel

Also Tom what is the investigation about?

daniel

Tom
It is my view and I am sure u can correct me if i am wrong but isn’t there bad apples in any kind of organisation just like the NSPCC,Lab,Cons and anything else so why should they have been closed down?

Debauch

Speaking of the NSPCC, they had the audacity to stop me at the Airport, I just thought she was lost, then she asked if I’m over twenty five (that ship is long gone) then started going on about if I know of any ‘abused kids’, I just said I’m busy and going to the toilet. I did think to myself, maybe I should have caused a ruckus. I made sure to avoid her on the way back!

stephen6000

It seems to me, Tom, that you are one of the few people emerging with any integrity in this whole business. Your account has been accepted as truthful and this presents an enormous contrast with a civil servant apparently suffering from an over-active imagination and an establishment class caring nothing for the plight of the ordinary MAP, but anxious to cover up for one of its own.

phil

I find it very unsurprising that a character such as Hulbert would find himself the head of a social services department, well embedded in the apparatus of the Great Witch Hunt in all its nebulous unaccountability. I yearn for the day Amnesty International gets involved with Britain’s illustrious SS.

36
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Scroll to Top