Note from David Burrows

To any survivor reading what follows:

Here’s a first attempt at a throughly justified demand/request to Mrs May: I’ve never drafted something like this before (ie my ‘expertise’, like another prominent solicitor I know of, is limited in this field).

I’ve tried to keep it simple: five demands (where there are bullet pts there should be numbers; but translation from Word to Worpress on my computer seems to loose this: sorry).

I’ve not mentioned my own preference for a High Court (or higher) judge. I go for a judge, not because I’m a lawyer and so are they. (In fact they are judges, and I am an advocate (as is M Mansfiled QC): ie totally different jobs, in my view.) It is because judges are trained to be impartial (and know when to say if they are not); they are trained to read piles and piles of papers, and to assimilate the important issues from them; they are trained to deal with all aspects of child law and crime (if a specialist child lawyer); and they do their job without fear or favour and take on anyone they think they need to take on, cross-examine etc.


Survivors to Theresa May, Secretary of State for Home Department

From the undersigned survivors of child sexual abuse; and

In respect of the Home Office child sex abuse inquiry (‘the inquiry’) announced on 7 July 2014


  • You have agreed to consult on the matters referred to below (and as a matter off fairness you should do so);
  • Whilst we urge that the inquiry start as soon as possible, we insist that it be set up in a way in which we have as much confidence as possible

WE RESPECTFULLY demand [request]:

  • That we, and any other survivors whose addresses are notified to you by 29 November 2014, individually be consulted as to the appointment of a chair to the inquiry (‘the chair’)
  • That we individually be consulted as to the terms of reference of that inquiry (‘terms of reference’), which will be fixed finally by you in agreement with the chair
  • That the inquiry should be on a statutory basis under Inquiries Act 2005, with full powers under that Act
  • That the chair should start work full-time immediately following finalisation of the terms of reference
  • That the chair should report six-monthly to Parliament, to your Department and (in summary form) to individual survivors whohave provided a means of contact to your Department; and that this reporting arrrangement will continue until such time as the inquiry is complete in accordance with the terms of reference.


Dated this     day of November 2014




  1. Pingback: #CSAINQUIRY: REQUEST – SURVIVORS TO HOME SECRETARY | Baronesslewisblog's Blog

  2. Excellent work, I was told a lot of these names and the the survivors need all the help they can get. I worked with survivors , who were told they would not make a credible witness and have gone on to commit suicide

    • Baronness Lewis there are many of us survivors who up until now are just a statistic a number in the government system. I went thrpugh abuse from few months old upto 18 everything you could imagine. Solicitor wouldnt take my case on on a no win no fee as they would have to work for there money. The fact this same firm rang me up few hours later and said paul of cause we will take on your case if you pay us 3000 upfront and set up a paument plan monthly so what they are saying is i infact do have a case. Also this solicitor made me angry upset and i contemplated suicide again because of this next comnent if you said you were abused by someone famous paul we could guarntee you 5000 now and at least a substamcial six figure sum. This hurts i was abused by ten people isnt that enough for this government. And the fact she said people like me jumping on the band wagon. It took twenty years of heart ache and courage to finally decide to sue for it to be chucked back at me. The fact i gpt my files back from this firm i sent them in a certain order with some pages turned opppsite way see if they were read funny allthe pages were in the exact order and the elastic band in the exact same place as i marked it just to see. She said the time limited would be tough to challenge but she said the files didnt include alot of the abuse that was my point exactly. Pages and pages missing. But to her im just a number. I can never work again i have nine of the ten personality disorders. My life would have been different if this hadnt happened but for solicitor to say its my fault the abusers will get away because i denied anything happened in obe of the cases in 1992.i was a mixed up alcoholic at that age. The ract i told everyone about most of the abusr in 1988/90 bit wasnt believed thats why i denied it later sorry its a long message i cant stop crying at minute its not about the money. Like some people think of cause winning the case will lead to financial compensation. The fact i will never own my own home now and i live on disability benefits when yhings would have been so different. Pkwhitehead007@gmail.com thank you for reading this. I suffer daily as i still bleed from my bottom

      • I don’t want you at all to think I haven’t read what you’ve written. As you may know, I am helping (I hope) with the inquiry. If you want me to try to find someone to help you in relation with what you’ve said here, let me know

  3. Keith Vaz raised a problem at the HASC hearing when Fiona Woolf told him about her reporting plans. Parliament will be dissolved on Monday 30 March 2015. He urged Woolf to make her initial report before the end of February, i.e. the new chair would need to make the first report within the six month period if there’s to be a report while current Members of Parliament / the current HASC are in position.

  4. That was for a panel said to be already in post: we cannot expect a chair under my above suggetion, to be installed till mid Dec at the earliest; so 6 months wld come in just after election. If it’s one person with a bunch of email addresses I can’t see why reports shld not be – as someone has suggested – by eg monthly newsletter. All that said, fequency of reports is maybe secondary to TOR, sttautory inquiry and a single (?Judge) chair?

    • Certainly it’s a secondary issue, but potentially a useful way of guarding against delays. Vaz may have keen to ensure he and HSAC would have the opportunity to scrutinise progress before the election, but it’s worth bearing in mind that the election has the potential to wreak havoc among MPs from all parties and even the returning old hands may take some time to get up to speed. So it’s important after all this delay that an eye is kept on how the inquiry is getting on with with its task. Your idea of a monthly newsletter report isn’t unreasonable, but with a timetable of regular scrutiny.

  5. I have already asked Home Secretary not to appoint Michael Mansfield QC. My argument is that he has already been involved in 3 areas of the Police Corruption Lawrence and Morgan inquiries currently being conducted for Theresa May by National Crime Agency who instructed them May 2014.

    (1) Arrests by Det sgt Alec LEIGHTON Met Police of UDA hit men and drugs criminals at their UDA base of operations Margate Kent. Mansfield role defence barrister of UDA defendant at consequent murder trial (Killing of London supergrass David Norris)

    LEIGHTON founded Mayfayre Associates 1996 (A PI company) and his wife is said to have held a co-directorship with the director of the PI company for which murdered Daniel Morgan worked.

    This creates a complex question in law about statutory duties to report under Terrorism Act 2000 and whether privilege would not be a defence against non-disclosure by a lawyer

    (2) While the David NORRIS murder trial was ongoing the Met Police witnesses (facing defence barrister Mansfield QC) became concurrently the murder case detectives for the Stephen Lawrence killing.

    (3) The arrests of UDA in Margate allegedly resulted in no proceeds of crime inquiry or any Kent inquiry into a local right wing support network for UDA. Of particular interest being local paramilitary activity and their association with European white supremacist groups and unlawful paramilitary collusion missions to Ulster and Ireland. At the European end of this there are alleged links to the Belgian “Pink Ballet” paedophile network.

    (4) It is known that the notorious Parker twin mercenary paedophiles were among mercenaries subject of the 1994 Desmond Tutu Commission of Inquiry into mercenaries deployed to destabilise the Mandela Regime by the nazi European white supremacists. Evidence to the Tutu commission was from Ronald Deuster (Mercenary) and the UK Searchlight magazine who published 3 reports about this in 1996. There were about twenty black murder victims of the mercenary activity. Open questions are about the preparation of the mercenaries and whether it took place in the Margate area of Kent.

    (5) In 1997 Sir John GRUGEON Chair of Kent Police Authority called for inquiry and report into terrorist and paramilitary activity in Kent. Including into the highly relevant security history of Deal Royal Marines Barracks. An open question being whether the leader of a Kent paramilitary front was an emplyee of the late Charlie Kray an associate of Clifford Norris and whether he was an associate of Det sgt DAVIDSON of the Lawrence Inquiry.

    (6) Kent Police conducted Lawrence inquiry whilst refusing to comply with their Police Authority call for inquiry and report. One month after MacPherson reported, Jack STRAW suppressed the Kent Police Authority call for inquiry and report. This was in spite of a call of concern from Chief constable RUC to Home Office because of Kent Chief constable being at the time on Rosemary NELSON murder inquiry. Kent Chief constable soon left that inquiry once Jack STRAW had covered up paramilitary and mercenary activity in Kent.

    (7) Mansfield’s charity British Irish Rights Watch knew this history but concealed it from their submission to the Rosemary NELSON tribunal.

    (8) I think Mrs May should avoid a situation in which the Head of a Child abuse inquiry is concurrently subject of National Crime Agency Inquiries. Inquiries which extend to corruption of the Lawrence Inquiry (By Kent Police and Jack Straw allegedly) and paramilitary cases touching on an alleged European paedophile network.

  6. I should add in case you publish. That the Deal barracks based paramiitary group had no Crown Authority (Secretary of State for Defence replied that they were “Private contractors”) At the time of the events described above the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819 was in force that made such “Private contractor” armed groups unlawful.

    When Jack STRAW became Justice Secretary he repealed the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819 at a time crime complaints under its provisions were still raised.

    There is currently a complaint to IPCC alleging Misconduct in Public Office against Kent PCC Ann BARNES. IPCC have yet to decide whether it should be recorded and called in for independent inquiry.

    Mrs BARNES has long been aware of the above history. The argument is that to fulfil her role in Police answerability she has power (Section 54 Police Act 1996) to raise HMIC coercive inquiry but that she consistently failed to do so. Even as new evidence emerged she elected silence.

  7. I was never given any support when I gave my statement of abuse to police about care homes I was in the police past my information on to victims support and I ask them for help telling them that I’m in a violent relationship and my partner stabbed me and keeps attacking me I told them I wanted out but had no were to go in the end I just left and was homeless I was put in hotel only to be chucked out as they said I wasn’t a priority as I’m not coming from abroad and I’m not terminally ill Not gay this was there reasons even tho I had OD the year before this made me more depressed so I went and got my own help had therapy and anti depressants so fat lot of good people do to help survivors went threw it in care then went threw it out of care no help and I think bill Maloney should be on panel and the victims if this is to be fair and MP Brian Gerrish thanks Lee Jesson.

  8. Pingback: A Fortnight in the Life of the Overarching Child Sexual Abuse Inquiry. Where now? | cathyfox

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s