Yes I'm fully aware of that but the CPS can only make a decision based on the evidence presented to them by the Met. Given the Met's recent previous, I'd seriously doubt there was too rigorous an enquiry

Recent previous? MPs and a Lord in prison. Prosecutions with regards News international not to mention 17 recently convicted of one child's murder. All the thousands of prosecutions every year. But hey let's get all moralistic over the "moral panics" that we see in the press.
Yes they and most prosecuting agents make mistakes but come on sweeping statements don't really add anything to a debate.

Try telling that to Doreen Lawrence, the families of Daniel Morgan & Blair Peach and numerous others who have suffered a failure of the justice system caused through the incompetence or outright corruption of the Metropolitan Police

Trawling through history will bring up all kinds of examples. It doesn't mean it can be used as an example constantly. You know in my world every lorry driver is a serial murderer all based on Peter Sutcliffe. Am I right of course I am not. It's how we move on from these events in history. I highlighted the recent 17th conviction for one black child's murder in Victoria station. Yes 17. Probably as a result of the tireless work of Doreen Lawrence. No stone left unturned and a great result but hardly a mention in the press. That's progress. Yes we all feel for Doreen and her incredible loss, but if there is any comfort at all for her it's that major lessons were learnt. That murder was in 93 in believe. 20 years ago. Whilst you can't say it won't happen again its fair to say its not likely.
Soham murders could have been avoided, Sutcliffe should have been caught sooner. History is littered with examples. It's how you learn and whilst the MPS seem to stumble from one crisis to another, 99.9% of their work is well received and carried out by honest men and women just trying to do their little bit to make life easier for the people they serve, the population of London. The press highlight the cock ups which whilst they can be big generally speaking do not affect the bread and butter of policing the capital. What the press fail to do is highlight the good.
One final example; How much praise have you seen for the Olympic operation run and controlled by the MPS?

What has being a Labour MP got to do with anything - he is a sewer dweller who would be criminally prosecuted in most commercial enterprises.

The Tories get plenty of stick on here when they get caught with their pants down - just asking for a bit of consistency.

Have we found out who the top Tory might be who was sodomising young kids bottoms in the early 80's.
Am I allowed to hazard a guess?

The name is in the public domain and can be found in 30 seconds using Google.

There is nothing here to suggest that anyone of any (perceived) political persuasion is excusing what MacShane apparently did.

Lets be careful before speculating with names on this site please.

Imagine the law suit coming rlfans way if someone made allegations that a top paedophile was a Tory.

What I find odd is that the BBC did not name the "top Tory" on Newsnight, unless they were advised it could prejudice a criminal enquiry. It is tantamount to saying they don't believe the victim(s). OK - I do take the argument that maybe they judged there was insuffient evidence to stand up in courst but why not take a chance? Based on Savile, I reckon other victims would come forward when the person was publicly named. Furthermore, the person could sue - but would he have the funds? Would he wish for all the stuff to be aired in court?

I think you'll find it more likely that a super injunction was taken out. Not only preventing the BBC from naming any individual but also preventing them from even saying an injunction had been granted

To be fair the Google search gives a lot of options as to who it could be. I'm surprised that the two MPs I read rumours about in the 90s aren't mentioned. It does however look like widespread and organised ring if all the names reported wer involved.

Tell a lie, had to go in a few pages before I found stuff on them.

I thought that anyone involved (or alleged to be involved) in the Wales abuse was protected by the inquiry, which decided against naming names?

And then threats of defamation and libel proceedings have been pinging around like mad in the last few weeks.

Which also, according to reports this morning, prevented any of the hundreds of witnesses and victims from refering to any alleged abuse that took place away from the home in question, which if the stories being circulated are true would mean that none of the circle of abusers, including any potential well known names, would have been named at the enquiry or even been mentioned in passing, as the alleged abuse by an outside group would take place when the children were removed from their beds and taken to nearby houses and flats.

Smells even worse than the original Hillsborough enquiry with its cut-off time enforcement does this one.

Good point.

Doesn't it just.

C4 News has just named one of the alleged kiddy-fiddlers.

He's dead, that won't count

The one named is not the one subject to recent talk.

Enough.

Cheers Graeme.

Just to reiterate: we are not going to be 'naming names' here – or dropping hints.

There are two reasons.

The obvious one is the issue of potential libel – and threats are flying around.

The second, though, is that there are a mass of names flying around at present and no evidence. Regardless of politics, let's not get into tarring people with such very serious accusations, which can stick even when someone is entirely innocent.