Sir Edward Heath Abuse Claims

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41503143

"Sir Edward Heath would have been questioned over sex abuse claims if he was alive when they came to light, police have said"

"No inference of guilt should be drawn from this fact, police stressed"

Well....that's OK then isn't it ?

[douglas9401]

If we still had those 20,000 officers surely there would be even less in the pot for investigating corpses.
They don't work for nowt tha knows.

[mikey4444]

Dougie....all that is needed is a quick shake of the Money Tree....it worked when the Bowler-hatted Bigots needed a bribe.

[douglas9401]

We're into autumn Mikey, the leaves are gone from the tree until next year.
All surplus loot has been allocated to the good doctors McCann and their search for Maddie.
If the public want a long and tireless police investigation into Cap'n Morning Cloud they should find some 'evidence' in warmer climes. Seems to concentrate the police mind wonderfully.

[mikey4444]

I'm not sure that the Solent has quite the appeal though, although it is off-shore I suppose.

[hereIam]

Thanks mikey.

[Ellipsis]

> If allegations are brought to the police, they are duty-bound to investigate them, as they have done, and they have found that Sir Edward would have had questions to answer had he been alive.

Do we know what questions he would have had to answer?

For example, if X goes to the police and says "Ted Heath abused me", and Ted Heath is still alive ... would Ted Heath have had questions to answer along the lines of "X said you abused them. What have you got to say about it?"

Or does it mean more than that? For example, Saville-like, a couple of hundred people each individually go to the police and give stories that the police can see are somehow consistent ... would Ted Heath have had questions to answer along the lines of "There's a consistent pattern of alleged abuse across over 200 victims - what have you got to say about that?"

Just leaving it hanging out there that he would have had questions to answer, without saying why, continues to besmirch his name and makes the police look bad too.

Really, if no "inference of guilt" can be drawn from whatever they discovered, then why did they bother discovering it?

[Coppit]

I've recently finished Ziegler's biography of Heath. Did I nod or turn over two pages by mistake because I saw no mention of something I read in the Daily Telegraph many years ago? It was a short item at the foot of an inside page column? All I can now recall is a magistrate's court, Heath, a man (accused or defendant?), photographs. Heath won or was acquitted. Has this come to anyone's notice in recent news about this case?

[zebo]

How far back into history are these 'investigations', really just collecting unsubstantiated allegations, going? Apparently Lloyd George knew my Father and it was reciprocated. Do I have a claim?