Gransnet forums

News & politics

Ted Heath allegations

(97 Posts)
Nonnie Thu 05-Oct-17 13:21:25

Is it right that the spokesman for Wiltshire Police has just been on the radio mentioneing the 'victims' several times? Are they 'victims'? Surely they are 'alleged victims'? 112 allegations were proved false and 5 or 6 remain so surely it is unfair to use that word as it implies he was guilty.

vampirequeen Thu 05-Oct-17 13:27:50

I don't think it matters how many were found to be false. The remaining allegations are such that, were he alive, he would have been questioned under caution.

The police have made it very clear that they're not saying he was guilty.

M0nica Thu 05-Oct-17 13:33:03

All these investigations began in the immediate aftermath of the Jimmy Saville revelations and the allegations of child abuse in high places based on the utterly discredited evidence of a man given the pseudonym of. 'Nick'.

All we are told is that if he was still alive Mr Heath would be questioned about them. Both Lord Bramhall and Leon Brittan had similar things said about them and both have since been completely exonerated.

I am keeping a completely open mind. Innocent until proved guilty.

Nonnie Thu 05-Oct-17 13:35:11

Sorry, I didn't make it clear. I am suggesting that calling them 'victims' implies he was guilty which has not been proved. I am not saying he was innocent, I have no opinion on that. If they are victims he must have been guilty.

Anniebach Thu 05-Oct-17 13:41:47

I am against allegations being made about a person who will never be able to defend themselves

pollyperkins Thu 05-Oct-17 14:13:07

I agree Anniebach. What's thepoint now? Nthing snyone can do about it even if true. I also think that asking for people to come forward encourages pranksters and people with grudges to make things up. Let's move on and hope that the current crop of politicians and celebrities have got the message that this behaviour is nevee acceptable and they will be found out.

MissAdventure Thu 05-Oct-17 14:16:12

Surely the point is that if the allegations are true, then they are proven so, and not just swept under the carpet?

Nonnie Thu 05-Oct-17 14:27:53

My point is that if you have a 'victim' you have a crime therefore TH is guilty!

What sort of society do we live in when more than 100 people make spurious claims?

MissAdventure Thu 05-Oct-17 14:32:48

I agree. There isn't a victim unless and until its shown that a crime was committed.

tidyskatemum Thu 05-Oct-17 14:40:29

Quite. Wiltshire Police seem to have started with the premise that Ted Teeth was a child abuser and gone out to find people to make an allegation against him. Then when they come out of the woodwork it's implied that Heath must be guilty - and we'll never know, will we? The Chief Constable has been a disgrace and if I were the Police and Crime Commissioner I'd sack him for wasting so much of the force's limited budget

whitewave Thu 05-Oct-17 14:43:11

I assume everyone who are disparaging the police investigation, have read the report, and can explain to me exactly why the police are so wrong in the investigation

tidyskatemum Thu 05-Oct-17 14:51:19

Try reading this - or just about any other coverage.

Anniebach Thu 05-Oct-17 15:01:58

I cannot agree with it, yes if there is a victim there is an abuser but alleged abusers have the right to defend themselves , Heath cannot so this is not true justice.

MissAdventure Thu 05-Oct-17 15:05:55

Neither would it be true justice if crimes died with their alleged perpetrators.

Anniebach Thu 05-Oct-17 15:07:20

How will these alleged crimes be proved?

Nonnie Thu 05-Oct-17 15:18:55

They won't be Annie which is why it is wrong to say 'victims' not 'alleged victims'. However, let us hope that lessons will have been learned which will help with future alleged crimes.

MissAdventure Thu 05-Oct-17 15:19:25

I have no idea. I'm a carer, not a legal professional. I think though, to just 'let them go' is an insult to victims. If there are any, that is.

whitewave Thu 05-Oct-17 15:20:38

tidythere is nothing in that link that isn’t on the news.

Over the years so many victims of this terrible crime have not been believed or given any time. I would like to think that we have moved on from this and recognise that this crime exists and countless children have suffered terribly, usually in silence.

I think that the police have to operate on an assumed crime having been committed and act with integrity and sensitivity in these cases. Whether or not Heath was guilty, I think that the police are acting on the assumption that there are indeed 7 victims of a peodophile. They are victims -those children suffered dreadfully.

Riverwalk Thu 05-Oct-17 15:20:58

As far as I can recall I don't remember any allegations over the years about Edward Heath, unlike Jimmy Saville & Cyril Smith.

From what I know of Heath's private life, I think he's on record as talking about an early romance with a woman who either died or went off and married someone else, and after that he remained wedded to his life as an MP, yachtsman and music lover.

Were there ever any wink-wink rumours about young boys being on his yacht or in his company? He may have been actively gay with adult men, I don't know, but could have just been a happy bachelor with no sex/romantic life.

Riverwalk Thu 05-Oct-17 15:23:32

Do we know what happened to 'Nick?

Anniebach Thu 05-Oct-17 15:30:12

Yes there are victims, but accusing someone who may be innocent is making that person a victim too.

MissAdventure Thu 05-Oct-17 15:32:16

Innocent until proven guilty is the way the law works.

MissAdventure Thu 05-Oct-17 15:37:48

I think there is quite a lot of at least anecdotal evidence that Heath and Saville's paths crossed a lot of times.

nigglynellie Thu 05-Oct-17 16:13:44

No one can ascertain Mr Heaths innocence or guilt which is what this investigation has proved. Surely it didn't take the expenditure of a million pounds to come to that conclusion?! money that could have been much better spent elsewhere.!

vampirequeen Thu 05-Oct-17 16:24:32

I was a victim. The crime was known only to me and the perpetrator. Does that mean that I'm not a victim because it stayed 'our secret' and was never proven in court? Should I forget it ever happened because the perpetrator is dead?

Hitler's crimes were never proven in court so did he only have 'alleged victims'. Same goes for Stalin and Pol Pot. Millions of 'alleged victims' but no one should discuss their suffering because the perpetrators are dead and can't be taken to court?