Sir Edward Heath Paedo ?

Former Tory Prime Minister Ted Heath who gave us decimalisation, took the UK into the Common Market and refused to acknowledge his homosexuality throughout his career was also a paedophile if the claims against him are true.
Wiltshire Police say Heath is accused of raping an eleven year old boy.

The seven victim disclosures for which Sir Edward would have been interviewed under caution:

• 1961, London: Sir Edward allegedly raped and indecently assaulted boy, 11, during a paid sexual encounter in private in a dwelling
  
  
• 1962, Kent: Sir Edward allegedly indecently assaulted a ten year-old-boy during a chance encounter in a public place
  
  
• 1964, Sussex and London: Sir Edward allegedly indecently assaulted a 15-year-old boy in three paid sexual encounters
  
  
• 1967, Guernsey: Sir Edward allegedly indecently assaulted a 15-year-old boy in a public building
  
  
• 1976, Jersey: Sir Edward allegedly indecently assaulted, over clothing, an adult male at a public event
  
  
• 1992, Wiltshire: Sir Edward allegedly assaulted an adult male after consent was withdrawn in a hotel
  
  
• Between 1990-1992, Wiltshire: Sir Edward allegedly indecently assaulted a male, aged between 12 and 14 years, in private gardens
  
  

He may be innocent but I personally doubt it given his widely reported "cruising" activities. When Heath was PM, the legal age for homosexual activity was 21 so it looks like the guy who presented himself as a paragon of society did not have much regard for the law, let alone for his victims.

If you read the rest of the BBC article you will see that it is quite likely that these allegations are false. At least one of them includes allegations of satanic ritual abuse. The police publicly trawled for allegations and have already dismissed the majority of the allegations and are thinking of prosecuting several of the informants for wasting police time.

To me it looks far more like the police refusing to admit they are wrong and persisting in a witch hunt.

xmiles wrote:If you read the rest of the BBC article you will see that it is quite likely that these allegations are false. At least one of them includes allegations of satanic ritual abuse. The police publicly trawled for allegations and have already dismissed the majority of the allegations and are thinking of prosecuting several of the informants for wasting police time.

To me it looks far more like the police refusing to admit they are wrong and persisting in a witch hunt.

There were over 40 allegations, some from nutters and some from people who couldn't prove it. The seven listed above are the ones where the police deemed there was enough evidence to pursue further. I think it's quite likely they are true.

wanderlust wrote:

xmiles wrote:If you read the rest of the BBC article you will see that it is quite likely that these allegations are false. At least one of them includes allegations of satanic ritual abuse. The police publicly trawled for allegations and have already dismissed the majority of the allegations and are thinking of prosecuting several of the informants for wasting police time.

To me it looks far more like the police refusing to admit they are wrong and persisting in a witch hunt.

There were over 40 allegations, some from nutters and some from people who couldn't prove it. The seven listed above are the ones where the police deemed there was enough evidence to pursue further. I think it's quite likely they are true.

Why do you believe they are true? If one or more is alleging satanic ritual abuse or is based on recovered memories those are obviously untrue. Where is the evidence? These are just the few allegations that are not demonstrably false.

I don't agree with the way the police have handled this affair, especially as Ted Heath is unable to defend himself. However, i do believe the issues should have been raised.
I think I've said this before, but I remember many years ago, references to Heath and his liking for boys, often surfacing by way of jokes. Nothing was said officially then either, although there seemed to be a tacit agreement that that was his preference.

I think the idea that Heath was a paedophile comes more from his obviously slightly odd manner than from anything he did. Back in those days people were a lot more uncomfortable with anyone not being clearly sexually "normal". He was probably asexual.

I have no respect for the police in this country absolute twats, this is typical of their shite.

I agree, lets get rid of the police and let Trotters fans do the job.

xmiles wrote:I think the idea that Heath was a paedophile comes more from his obviously slightly odd manner than from anything he did. Back in those days people were a lot more uncomfortable with anyone not being clearly sexually "normal". He was probably asexual.

Then why did he regularly pay for sex with men then?

One of the barmaids in my local claims to be "pansexual".

She actually laughed when I asked her what was so exciting about shagging catering equipment.

A Sunday roast is popular in many locals.

wanderlust wrote:

xmiles wrote:I think the idea that Heath was a paedophile comes more from his obviously slightly odd manner than from anything he did. Back in those days people were a lot more uncomfortable with anyone not being clearly sexually "normal". He was probably asexual.

Then why did he regularly pay for sex with men then?

And your evidence for this is what exactly? Were you one of those he paid?

Bastards are cowards they won't go in two inches of water to save a man who is having a fit and drowning but they will chase a dead man years later with what?? Fuck all bastards pc scum.

xmiles wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

xmiles wrote:I think the idea that Heath was a paedophile comes more from his obviously slightly odd manner than from anything he did. Back in those days people were a lot more uncomfortable with anyone not being clearly sexually "normal". He was probably asexual.

Then why did he regularly pay for sex with men then?

And your evidence for this is what exactly? Were you one of those he paid?

Amongst the 1500 + lines of enquiry were the interviews with his driver who confirmed he regularly took Heath to a private house where two of the victims claimed they had been sex workers. As the driver was interviewed without knowing what locations the victims had specified, they corroborated the story.

One of the investigators wrote:
“The same names used for him, the same places and same type of incidents keep coming up. What stands out is that the people giving these accounts are not connected but the stories and the details dovetail..”

wanderlust wrote:

xmiles wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

xmiles wrote:I think the idea that Heath was a paedophile comes more from his obviously slightly odd manner than from anything he did. Back in those days people were a lot more uncomfortable with anyone not being clearly sexually "normal". He was probably asexual.

Then why did he regularly pay for sex with men then?

And your evidence for this is what exactly? Were you one of those he paid?

Amongst the 1500 + lines of enquiry were the interviews with his driver who confirmed he regularly took Heath to a private house where two of the victims claimed they had been sex workers. As the driver was interviewed without knowing what locations the victims had specified, they corroborated the story.

One of the investigators wrote:
“The same names used for him, the same places and same type of incidents keep coming up. What stands out is that the people giving these accounts are not connected but the stories and the details dovetail..”

Even if this is true that doesn't necessarily make him a paedophile. And I'm still worried by an investigation led by someone who is "120 per cent convinced the allegations are genuine".

Angry Dad wrote:Bastards are cowards they won't go in two inches of water to save a man who is having a fit and drowning but they will chase a dead man years later with what?? Fuck all bastards pc scum.

Two inches of water? Why didn't they just pick him up?

Angry Dad wrote:Bastards are cowards they won't go in two inches of water to save a man who is having a fit and drowning but they will chase a dead man years later with what?? Fuck all bastards pc scum.

Ah yes....the scum. Are these the type of individuals which you allude to?

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiPuoSig9_WAhXIDcAKHaTUCFgQFgg0MAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk-england-lancashire-20916213&usg=AOvVaw1tdI4TpYBhWG1PjfTk_IcR

Reebok Trotter wrote:

Angry Dad wrote:Bastards are cowards they won't go in two inches of water to save a man who is having a fit and drowning but they will chase a dead man years later with what?? Fuck all bastards pc scum.

Ah yes....the scum. Are these the type of individuals which you allude to?

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiPuoSig9_WAhXIDcAKHaTUCFgQFgg0MAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk-england-lancashire-20916213&usg=AOvVaw1tdI4TpYBhWG1PjfTk_IcR

Tell it like it is RT.

No RT they are not, you're a clever chap you can find the one you know I'm on about.

Times have changed they won't go in the water now not even a few inches.

If you are referring to the case in Greater Manchester a few years ago the accident took place in a deep quarry and the first attender on the scene was a PCSO ( mobile scarecrow ) who couldn't swim. At one time all sworn police officers had to learn to swim and those that couldn't were taught to swim when they attended a ten week training course at their regional training headquarters. The policy was scrapped years ago and there is no currently no longer a requirement for policemen and women to be able to swim. I blame cutbacks.