Report #9: Pro-Paedophile Activism in 1970s and 1980s Islington: Fallen Angels and NCCL

This report (Report #9) is the ninth of a series of ISN themed responses to the Sarah Morgan review. In these reports Islington Survivors Network present a challenge to the findings of Sarah Morgan QC

Paedophilia & Public Morals, 1980: 32

Children’s Power means Paedophilia Now! The political objectives of the Fallen Angels Collective 1979-80

A note on terminology:

This report analyses ‘paedophiles’, the Paedophile Information Exchange and othe pro-paedophile rights activists as the political agents of legal and social change they campaigned as.

To be clear, this section uses terms made acceptable by child abusers in their pursuit of social acceptance – paedophile. Press reporting of court convictions prior to the emergence of the Paedophile Information Exchange during 1974, wrote of child molesters. Although the word paedophile is used in this report, it is a word chosen by child sex abusers/offenders to describe themselves. It was adopted by them as a definition in order to create and promote the idea that a sexual preference for children could be campaigned for as an oppressed minority, and to define criminal consequences for the abuse of children as an attack on the civil liberties of an oppressed sexual minority.

Where reference is made to FA-2 and FA-3 these were the two male members of the Fallen Angels who travelled to Spain with Sandy Marks (FA-1) in April 1980. FA-3 was also a member of PIE #248 and FA-2 (who self-identified as a paedophile) both lived at Davenant Road.


  • Location, Location, Location
  • Morgan QC ignores the political objectives of the Fallen Angels
  • What would a Fallen Angel have done?
  • Children’s Power means Paedophilia Now! An analysis of the political objectives of the Fallen Angels
  • Fallen Angels’ relationship to PIE
  • “The Child Protection Racket”and the unjust fateof ‘promiscuous’ girls
  • Women, especially mothers, should join the paedophile revolution
  • Fallen Angels’ Campaigning Literature
  • Repeal the Protection of Children Act 1978: Legalise child abuse images as “paed-positive” expression
  • The Pro-Paedophile positions on Local Authorities: Hand-On (PIE) vs Hands-Off (Fallen Angels)
  • The NCCL Climate
  • CAPM – A meeting of the NCCL Gay Rights Committee in exile
  • NCCL-PIE & PAL affiliation on an Islington Councillor’s watch
Morgan QC Review 7.11.18: 8.1

Location, Location, Location

In Chapter 8 of the Review, Morgan QC states that “the context for this Review and the allegations which lay behind it call for at least an outline understanding of the way in which pro-paedophile organisations were active in the 1970s and 80s.” Twelve paragraphs of vague statements about the rise and fall of the Paedophile Information Exchange follow.

To be constructive in approaching the truth for both ISN and Marks, this chapter required more than ‘an outline understanding’ of the way in which pro-paedophile organisations were active and organising in order to promote and facilitate organised / networks of abuse. However, the terms of reference required a sharp focus on understanding the way in which pro-paedophile organisations were active
and organising during 1979-81 and most specifically in Islington, not nationally.

A map showing Irene Watson Neighbourhood Office location (A), at the centre of Islington social workers reporting to local councillor Margaret Hodge their suspicions of “child sex ring[s] operating in this area” in 1990, the site of two of the Evening Standard
exposé 1992 and the proximity of pro-paedophile rights activists and PIE members to IWNO a decade earlier.

Same streets, different decade

The map above setting out the network of pro-paedophile rights activists in N19 across Highview, Hillrise, Sussex and Tollington wards shows how close Fallen Angels HQ of 1980 at Davenant Road (2) was to several sites at the centre of organised abuse (B and C) reported in the Evening Standard expose of 1992. See further Report #6 Organised abuse: The Islington Evidence / Davenant Road – Was it the same house IGA listed as Fallen Angels HQ in 1980 ?

Now converted into flats, during 1980 the three storey house in Davenant Road (2) was home to Barry Prothero (NCCL’s Gay Rights Officer from April 1980) and FA-2-TB, with FA-3-CS (3) moving across from Finsbury Park to house share with his fellow Fallen Angel once Prothero had moved out later that same year.

While house sharing, both Prothero and FA-2-TB attended the third meeting of Conspiracy/Campaign Against Public Morals (‘CAPM’) as minuted on 11 September 1979 to discuss rallying support for the defendants in the PIE trial. In those minutes CAPM’s next meeting was scheduled to take place at an Islington community centre (5) also local to other attendees – Marks (1) FA-3-CS and Pollard (6).

Questions the White Inquiry didn’t get the opportunity to ask

The discovery of Marks’ links to paedophile rights activists didn’t just raise questions if, when and how far her political beliefs changed before joining the Social Services committee and whether the White Inquiry would have received answers to those questions if it had known to ask them.

The discovery of the location of the pro-paedophile rights group Marks was linked to, Fallen Angels, as having its HQ address at Davenant Road within Irene Watson Neighbourhood Office’s small patch (1/24th) of streets between Hornsey and Holloway Roads, should also have raised further questions for the White Inquiry. What information could Marks have volunteered about child abusers politically organising in the IWNO area, albeit 5-10 years earlier, a few streets away from several sites of organised abuse exposed by the Evening Standard?

In Report #4: Morgan’s denial of organised abuse the Social Services Inspectorate statement contained in the minutes of a senior level Islington meeting dated 19.10.93 was referenced. SSI had decided that there was no need for a retrospective investigation into network abuse at Irene Watson. As a result of enquiries SSI had been ‘unable to find any substantiation to the allegation that there is currently a LBI paedophile link, although there was once in the past’. 

Some of the most vocal pro-paedophile rights activists (PRAs) lived and campaigned in Islington, including self-styled adventure playground pioneer and youth worker Roger Moody (9) and PIE Manifesto co-author and Joint Council for Gay Teenagers co-founder Micky Burbidge (7). Nettie Pollard (6), PIE Member #70 and NCCL’s Gay Rights Officer who worked closely with nearby Burbidge (7), lived just across Islington’s north west boundary. See further Report #10 Islington, PIE and Peter Righton.

The question now arises whether the ‘LBI paedophile link in the past’, of which no more is mentioned in Morgan QC’s Review, had any overlap with the group of pro-paedophile rights activists known to Marks before she became Councillor in May 1982? Were any of the pro-paedophile rights activists also employed by LBI, for example Roger Moody as a youth worker, and was this known to Marks?

Had the chapter focused on Islington it would have become apparent that since 1995 and the publication of the White Inquiry, so much more is now known about the Paedophile Information Exchange and other pro-paedophile rights organisations, especially due to and with regard to their prevalence in Islington.

Paedophile rights activists helped set up gay groups within established campaigning organisations such National Council of Civil Liberties (‘NCCL’), within political groups, such as the Socialist Workers Party Gay Group (‘SWPGG’), trade unions such as NALGAY within NALGO (National Association of Local Government Officers), the National Union of Students (‘NUS’) as well as more fleeting, focused campaigns such as Gay Activists Alliance (‘LGAA’), Conspiracy/Campaign Against Public Morals (‘CAPM’) and the Joint Council for Gay Teenagers (‘JCGT’).

How to create a surge of support: The PIE Trials of 1981 and 1984

The fight for paedophile rights and ‘paedophile pride’ was fuelled by the energy and multiple committee memberships of a group of 40 or so dedicated individuals, many resident in Islington. Following the perceived betrayal of the paedophile rights movement by Gay News in 1977, public agitation for paedophile rights and the pressure for the social acceptance of paedophilia in this small area surged during 1979-81 before the first PIE Trials, and surged again during 1983-84 in the months preceding the second PIE Trial.

The Fallen Angels were only one of a number of Islington based groups openly agitating for paedophile rights amongst the far left generally and far left gay groups.

The view, pushed hard during pre-trial months and presented as if it were the consensus amongst anyone truly considering themselves a radical and revolutionary socialist, was that support for children’s rights to protection from predatory adults in the form of a statutory age of consent was as good as homophobic, certainly bigoted, the opposite of paed-positive, and in today’s terms ‘paedophobic’ … and so to disagree would mark one’s card as a prudish Christian far-right Whitehouse supporter.

The real strength of the core PRAs was that they sat on committees of several groups simultaneously, enabling them to amplify their total influence, not just by proposing, seconding and voting but also by carrying communications across groups for quick mobilisation on specific issues when necessary. All were concerned with ensuring whichever group’s campaigning agenda they were discussing was inclusive of paedophiles defined as an oppressed sexual minority.

Archive documents and news cuttings, made available to Morgan QC, evidenced the writing and campaigning in support of paedophile rights by members of such groups, located in Islington:

  • London Gay Activists’ Alliance and their support for paedophile rights in their submission to the Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure (RCCP) signed off “Gay Love & Paedophile Kisses, Paedophile Love & Gay Kisses” (London Secretary: Barry Prothero – LGAA HQ same address as Fallen Angels HQ)
  • Conspiracy Against Public Morals meeting at an Islington community centre to plan picketing the court where PIE defendants were due to appear
  • Socialist Workers Party Gay Group circulating CAPM’s “Paedophilia & Public Morals” as late as September 1981

The purpose of providing this contextual information to Morgan QC was to factually locate and comprehend a time and a place, in which political activists could conceivably find themselves swept along with a dark current of sexual identity politics that they may later reflect on and regret.

Morgan QC ignores the political objectives of Fallen Angels

Morgan QC Review 7.11.18: 14.9

What would a Fallen Angel have done?

“It is unnecessary for me to detail [Fallen Angels’ ] contents in this Report,” and with this comment Morgan QC undercut the purpose of her review and revealed why she was left describing “An Incongruity” by Chapter 18. Although Morgan QC accepted Fallen Angels’ views as finding a place in ‘mainstream debate’, in dismissing their views as “warped and distorted thinking” Morgan allowed disdain to disengage her critical reasoning from viewing them as a highly politically motivated group, lobbying for legislative and social change.

Once in political office or in a position of influence over a local authority’s policy and practice on the protection of children what would a Fallen Angel do?

In failing to analyse Fallen Angels’ political objectives, Morgan QC remained unclear throughout her Review as to what a Fallen Angel’s political agenda might look like in action. This left Morgan QC to make comparisons between Marks’ response to allegations of abuse and the responses of her fellow Case Review Sub-Committee members to assess ‘impact’ as difference.

In the absence of analysis of Fallen Angel’s political objectives, ISN contend Morgan QC was unable to assess whether Marks’ views impacted on and influenced her role at the council with children’s policy and practice.

This fundamental weakness of the Review is the cause of the incongruity Morgan QC is forced to pre-emptively apologise for when revealed in Chapter 18.

Without being explicit on this point, Morgan QC has to have made the assumption that no other members of the Social Services Committee or the Case Review Sub Committee shared in part or whole a similar position on paedophile liberation as Marks or the Fallen Angels otherwise their role as any kind of benchmark or test control for Marks’ behaviour to be compared to is invalid. From Morgan QC’s perspective Marks’ fellow committee members on the Case Review Sub-Committee during 1992 shared her apathy for unknown unexplored reasons of their own.

However, during 1979-1981 Sandy Marks was far from alone in N19 or Islington in holding positive views on paedophile rights. Whether she was alone in those views on Islington Council, ISN contends, is also now open to question following information concerning former Mayor Bob Crossman’s support for pro-paedophile rights activism. See further Report #12.

Fallen Angels’ relationship with PIE

On the key issues of the abolition of the age of consent and the decriminalisation of sexual activity with children, the writings of the Fallen Angels reveal political objectives broadly aligned with other pro-paedophile rights groups such as PIE and PAL.

“In the first place, there is no way a child will consent to do something which is physically hurtfull. (sic) The child will scream the house down! There is no need to legislate against the possibility of some mistaken consent, as the possibility simply does not exist. In the second place there is a tacit assumption that all sexuality is orientated towards penetration and/or orgasm. This is a very adult notion. There are plenty of other expressions of genital sexuality and it will be precisely those other ways which are included in the substance of a consenting paedophile relationship in these cases.”

CAPM (1980) Paedophilia & Public Morals. p26

Like PIE, Fallen Angels also pushed a view of paedophiles as kindly, never sadistic and wholly disinterested in penetrative sex with children. Like PIE, the Fallen Angels argued the age of consent was unnecessary because a child would never consent to being hurt and since a paedophile would never want to hurt a child they would never make a mistake as to whether a child had consented.

However, the Fallen Angels’ radical agenda went even further in pushing for the liberation of children and child sexuality as the flipside to a coin on which the other side was paedophile liberation, most succinctly summarised in the blackboard illustration from CAPM/Fallen Angel’s “Paedophilia & Public Morals” (‘P&PM’) shown above demanding ‘Children’s Power means Paedophilia Now!’

In Chapter 7 of P&PM the view of PIE was that it was;

“effectively the one attempt so far by paedophiles … to confront that overwhelming weight of oppression”


“subjected to an increasingly vociferous witchhunt that over the years has led to a number of its member being prosecuted”

Interestingly P&PM’s figures for PIE are one of the highest given, 

“Overall, 450 paedophiles (who with the exception of 14 women, were all male), and including 100 from outside Britain, passed through its membership lists”

CAPM (1980) Paedophilia & Public Morals. p46

Fallen Angels’ Campaigning Literature

Morgan QC Review 7.11.18: 8.12

Despite Morgan QC’s assertion that Fallen Angels didn’t generate a body of campaigning literature, they were credited by PIE with the creation of the visually striking “Paedophilia and Public Morals” (‘P&PM’) — a substantial A5 booklet running to 60 pages at a cost of 95 pence (approx £4.20 in today’s money.)

CAPM (1980 ) Paedophilia and Public Morals front cover

This booklet, eventually published in September 1980, was still in print and being circulated by the Socialist Workers’ Party at a conference in September 1981. During autumn 1980 a member of the London Gay Teenage Group, resident at Manor Garden Community Centre Islington, wrote to Gay Noise deploring the refusal of a local co-operative community publishers to print P&PM.

ISN challenge Morgan QC’s interpretation that “Fallen Angels did not generate a body of campaigning literature” and assert that in reality CAPM and Fallen Angels produced campaigning literature of considerable length, lavishly illustrated and of sufficient durability to continue circulating at alternative/left conferences 8+ months after the event for which 60 page booklet had originally been written for had passed – the PIE trial of January 1981. These facts alone indicate Fallen Angels generated campaigning literature of substantial influence and reach through alternative/left networks.

CAPM (1980) Paedophilia & Public Morals. pp54-55

An analysis of the political objectives of the Fallen Angels Collective, however warped and distorted, as outlined in P&PM would have revealed Marks’ views on issues such as increasing children in care’s living allowances and allowing children autonomy of choice in being sex workers were capable of being interpreted as entirely consistent with Fallen Angels’ aims – an absolutely hands-off approach to what they called the “Child protection racket” in the pursuit of child liberation.

Repeal the Protection of Children Act 1978: Legalise Child Abuse Images as “paed-positive expression”

Alongside PIE and other groups such as;

– the London Gay Activists’ Alliance (headquartered at the same address as Fallen Angels HQ at Davenant Road)
– the Labour Campaign for Gay Rights (‘LCGR’) – see further Report #12 regarding Cllr Crossman as a member of both GAA & LCGR
– the Socialist Workers’ Party Gay Group (John Lindsay)

The Fallen Angels deplored the Protection of Children Act 1978 and wished to repeal it.

Child Abuse Images as “paed-positive expression”

As the Fallen Angels perceived it, paedophiles needed to retain some hope of acceptance in a cold world, while heterosexual adult pornography was sexist and to be deplored in solidarity with the Women’s Movement,

“For paedophiles, pornography may represent the only assertion of identity, the one confident statement in an otherwise silent world, that child-adult sex can be a reality. It is a disgraceful tragedy that the porn merchants have a monopoly of the paed-positive expression, and that this is therefore grounded in commodity sex objectification.”

CAPM (1980) Paedophilia & Public Morals. p26

“The Child Protection Racket” & the fate of ‘promiscious’ girls

The publication of Paedophilia & Public Morals was of huge significance to the Fallen Angels in setting out their critique of PIE’s failure to bring women and heterosexual paedophiles into the campaigning fold. In particular, the Fallen Angels were angry that girls under the age of 16 were being placed in care for having sex,

“age of consent laws do not ‘protect’ children, they operate to isolate ‘promiscuous’ girls and justify their ‘treatment’”

Fallen Angels Summary Submission on Paedophilia to the ILGA Conference, Barcelona, 1980: 4 – see point 1(iv)
  • Children should have the right to determine their own sexuality
  • Children should have the right to consent to sexual activity
  • Children should have the right to choose to live with adult ‘lovers’

Lurid victim-blaming headlines such as, “Girl, 12, lured ‘shy’ man to bed’; ‘Judges free ‘victim’ of sex temptress, 11″; ‘Sex temptress aged 12 made advances he couldn’t resist’ and ‘Court hears of schoolgirl temptress” were quoted by the Fallen Angels in an attempt to argue that while the older man should not be subjected to the criminal justice system neither should the girl be punished by being placed in care or a remand home.

“Note the similarity between the reporting of these cases and that of rape against women. Whilst it is OK that the men should get off, it is the girl who gets sent into care. Patriarchal age of consent laws receive eloquent expression through the mouths of judges and magistrates.”

CAPM (1980)Paedophilia & Public Morals. p31

In the Fallen Angels’ summary submission to the IGA April 1980 conference Marks attended, they criticise the National Children’s Bureau (where astonishingly Marks is briefly a Director from 29 November 1994 – 1 July 1995 for 7 months when the White Inquiry is published) for, in their view, increasingly denouncing the Women’s Movement and joining sides with the reactionary moral forces who ‘adopt the ideology of protection to defend the institutions of control’ under the guise of what the Fallen Angels call ‘the Child Protection Racket’.

When viewed in the context of Marks’ views repeated descriptions to the press of children in care as “no angels,” Morgan QC interpreted Marks’ lack of enthusiasm for preventing the sexual exploitation of Islington’s children’s homes as in line with the other members of the Case Review Sub-Committee. Morgan QC failed to observe that the views Marks expressed were also entirely consistent with that of the Fallen Angels: child protection as child control, a “racket.”

For example, during early 1993 when interviewed by the BBC following the publication of the Tunnard and McAndrew Inquiry Report, Marks’ apathetic and dismissive approach towards what effective child protection can achieve is remarkable at a time when some Islington social workers were acting to protect.

Sandy Marks: “We have to try to find ways to persuade those young people, some of whom were prostitutes before they were taken into care, to change.”

Interviewer: “Aren’t these precisely the people who need more care from you?”

Sandy Marks: “Yes, but”

Interviewer: “And haven’t you let them down?”

Sandy Marks: “I think it is extremely difficult to persuade young people to change.”

BBC Interview 1993

To present to the press the view that the Evening Standard exposé concerned children in Islington’s care choosing to enter into sex work, Marks had to put out of her mind the reports she had read the previous year at the monthly Case Review Sub-Committee such as the girl being forced to wear a dog collar and sign a ‘prostitute contract’ by two men from outside the home.

Marks also perpetuated the idea that children were abused before coming into care and did not address the allegations of institutional abuse. Neither did Marks appear to think that of course, some children were in the care system due to tragic family circumstances.

Women, especially mothers, should join the paedophile revolution

Although Fallen Angels was also a pressure group on the gay rights movement, accusing gay men of being hypocrites, it was equally if not more important to asserting paedophile rights that the Fallen Angels’ campaign to persuade the Women’s Movement that children’s rights were paedophile rights and vice versa.

The fact that Fallen Angels had a woman to represent them at the IGA Conference and specifically at Women’s Caucus which Morgan QC refers to as Marks speaking at on the Sunday afternoon of the IGA Conference 4th April 1980 would have been hugely valuable. Marks’ role as a mother and a woman and a Fallen Angel was self-evident that women with the political belief could be mothers too.

Women who failed to support paedophile rights were defined as selfish, keeping their erotic relations with children to themselves and damaging the entire Women’s Liberation movement at the same time by being gender-conforming in their maternal protectiveness, all the while oppressing children’s sexuality.

The Fallen Angels were particularly concerned to try and persuade the Women’s Movement that paedophile rights were their concern too, mainly by pointing out that there is too much pressure on mothers to be the primary carers for children.

The fact that paedophiles should be embraced by mothers as potential carers for their children is underlined by the Fallen Angels’ proposal for an all male staffed creche at the next IGA Conference. Morgan QC does not say whether her further interrogation of papers revealing Marks as actively encouraging contact from paedophiles as late as July 1980 confirms whether this free creche proposed by a pro-paedophile rights group went ahead at the next IGA Conference.

What is clear was that as early as 1980, less than 22 months prior to becoming elected as a councillor, Marks was in the position to understand that one way in which paedophiles could organise together to provide opportunities to abuse would be to offer free childcare.

Local Authorities: Hands-On (PIE) vs Hands-Off (Fallen Angels)

PIE’s Manifesto of 1975 wished to replace police investigations, criminal court convictions and prison sentences with an extension of local authority/ council power over children in their area, to decide capacity to consent to sexual activity with adults and issue injunctions prohibiting contact only after a child had already been assaulted.

Overall the effect was to place a chunk of the criminal justice system operating to protect children from sexual assault within the complaints system of each local council. It was no wonder Gay News felt unable to uphold the Manifesto’s position in the face of their private prosecution for blasphemy at the hands of Mary Whitehouse. Quite apart from saving their own skins, PIE’s position was a nonsense and every paedophile knew it.

Contrary to PIE’s convoluted civil /council-run structure for preventing paedophiles from going to prison, the Fallen Angels were not interested in local authorities exercising more power over children but less – an absolutely hands off approach. In particular they promoted the view that, for children and their sexuality to become truly liberated, children must gain;

  • economic independence
  • engaging in sex work where necessary as a positive choice

For Marks’ behaviour to fall in line with Fallen Angels’ political objectives, her response to news of children in Islington’s care being sexually exploited or suspected organised abuse networks requiring investigation would be to do nothing, or in the event of pressure, as little as possible and as slowly as possible, while suggesting it was the children’s choice.

As the more detailed chronologies of Reports #13, 14, 15, 16 show, Marks sought out substantial positions of responsibility in relation to the welfare of children.

A further demand of the Fallen Angels for the liberation of children and paedophiles alike was that children should have:

  • autonomy of choice as to who to live with including adult ‘lovers’ / abusers

NCCL: Creating the climate to campaign for Paedophile Rights as Civil Liberties

Morgan QC Review 7.11.18: 8.7

In Chapter 8 the role of the NCCL in helping to create Islington into a paedophile sanctuary is bypassed by Morgan QC, who viewed it as beyond the remit of her review.

With regard to the ‘duration’ element of Morgan QC’s ToR 1.A, Morgan QC was presented with screenshots from a social media site indicating Marks had become publicly connected via social media to Nettie Pollard (PIE #70) in December 2014. Pollard was the only other female attendee at the CAPM meeting of 11 September 1979 which Morgan QC concluded it was more likely than not that Marks had attended. Marks and Pollard’s public social media reconnection was 10 or so months after Pollard’s role in NCCL’s affiliation to PIE and PAL had been covered in the press. 

PIE & PAL Affiliation to NCCL on an Islington Councillor’s Watch

As an Islington Councillor for St George’s ward between 1974-78 Henry Hodge (later husband of Margaret Hodge), was also concurrently Chair of Executive Committee of the National Council of Civil Liberties in May 1975 when Nettie Pollard (PIE #70) offered affiliation to PIE and PAL.

Hodge held the unenviable position of being the Chair of the Executive Committee of the NCCL during the first two years of PIE’s existence when 3 PIE members (Keith Hose, Nettie Pollard, Michael Burbidge) formed 1/4 of the newly established NCCL Gay Rights Committee and began to push hard for the recognition of paedophile rights as civil liberties within the NGO more widely.

As a solicitor of 3-4 years post qualification experience, Hodge’s day job was working with the Child Poverty Action Group (‘CPAG’) under Director Frank Field. His fellow councillor for St George’s was Jane L. Streather, a colleague of his at CPAG and later Vice-Chair of Islington Social Services Committee during the early 1980s.

NCCL Annual General Meetings during the lifetime of PIE 1975-1984 became a public battleground for proposed motions put forward by Gay Rights Committee members who wished to have the NCCL on record as defending PIE’s freedom of expression and association in the face of press and police investigation.

Under a civil liberties banner, instead of campaigning for an equal age of consent, Pollard led the NCCL’s Gay Rights Committee to persistently seek out and support cases of mostly men being prosecuted for sexual offences against boys under 16 — children.

It was in the crucible of a local political climate, intensely fought between extremes of left and right that paedophile rights and radical socialism became fused enabling the creation of the political ideology and agenda advocated for by the Fallen Angels Collective.

It is remarkable to think that Marks felt able to reconnect with Pollard so publicly despite Marks’ denial of having attended the September 1979 CAPM meeting alongside Pollard. However, Morgan QC and Sprinz were not given the resources, technology or time to pursue Marks’ current contact with pro-paedophile rights activists or former PIE members so as to answer the ‘duration’ aspect of the Terms of Reference in 1A of Marks’ length of involvement with pro-paedophile rights activists and activism. This was a £300,000 review which by the time two people had read the entire combined contents of the Strong Room, London Met Archives and submitted documentation would have been spent in terms of time before any analysis or collation of data could properly commence.

CAPM: The NCCL Gay Rights Committee meeting in exile

Morgan QC Review, 7.11.18:14.20

In Islington, during 1974-79, NCCL’s role was pivotal in creating the climate for embracing paedophile rights as civil liberties.

In not wishing to address the impact of NCCL Gay Rights Committee’s support for paedophile rights, or Nettie Pollard’s role in affiliating PIE and PAL to NCCL Morgan QC failed to;

(a) recognise the role of the NCCL Gay Rights Committee meeting in exile as forming the foundation of the Conspiracy Against Public Morals (CAPM) campaign which Fallen Angels promoted.

(b) note the significance of Fallen Angels HQ address also being listed as the London Gay Activists Alliance HQ, led by FA-2’s housemate at Davenant Road, Barry Prothero, who in April 1980 was appointed Nettie Pollard’s successor as NCCL Gay Rights Officer.

CAPM consisted largely of NCCL Gay Rights Committee meeting members coming together outside NCCL who were indignant at Patricia Hewitt’s memo of September 1978 announcing paedophile rights were not exclusively gay rights.

Patricia Hewitt’s September 1978 memo to the NCCL Gay Rights Committee concerning ‘paedophilia’ as a civil liberties issue

As late as April 1984 PIE were buoyed by NCCL’s support and reported in their final PIE Bulletin of July 1984 that at NCCL’s AGM, the Campaigh for Homosexual Equality (CHE) proposed and a motion was passed recognising that ‘discrimination against people on the grounds of sexual orientation is an infringement of individual civil liberties’ and instructing NCCL’s National Executive Committee to ‘campaign to protect the rights of … affected groups when they come under attack’, and condemned ‘the use of charges of conspiracy and incitement to obtain convictions under the Sexual Offences Act.”

PIE Bulletin July 1984, submitted LSE/Hall-Carpenter archive documents adduced by CSA Inquiry, 26.3.19

By rubbishing and obstructing investigations the Council was refusing to acknowledge what was starkly apparent to others and would result in the White Inquiry asking for other Local Authorities to check recent employees against an Appendix of former Islington employee names: that a number of paedophiles had successfully sought employment in Islington’s children’s homes, many taking up live-in residential care positions as Superintendents and Deputies and that Islington’s children in care were very much at risk.

If entryist paedophile rights activists infiltrated far-left entryists entering the Labour Party, there is a very serious concern that other pro-paedophile rights activists also entered the council at the same time as Marks.

To be continued ….

Report #10: Pro-Paedophile Activism in 1970s and 1980s Islington: PIE Central and Peter Righton

%d bloggers like this: