UK Establishment Seeks Ban on Media Naming Sex Abuse Suspects

Predator Savile poses with children taking part in his Jim ll Fix It show in 1974

Predator: Savile poses with children taking part in his Jim’ll Fix It show in 1974. Photo sourced


by Michaela Whitton


(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — The U.K. establishment is seeking to ban journalists from naming sex abuse suspects before they are charged. The proposed ban aims to protect them from pre-charge publicity.

Former prosecutor Alison Levitt QC, who provided the executive summary for the Jimmy Savile scandal, told The Guardian that “It should be a criminal offense to name someone before charge. I feel strongly there should be a presumption of not naming before charge, with an exception in certain cases.”

Currently, police in the U.K. do not name someone being investigated for allegations of sexual abuse, but they may occasionally release the name of a suspect if they think it will encourage other victims to come forward.

Subject to libel laws and contempt of court, media organizations are free to name suspects. This is what Levitt wants to change by insisting this step be approved by a judge first.

The issue has been in the spotlight as MPs and senior officers face questioning regarding their conduct during the widely-publicized case of Lord Brittan. London Metropolitan Police were forced to apologize to the family of the late politician, who died in January unaware that Scotland Yard had dropped a rape case against him.

Some may say the timing of the closing of ranks is a little ironic in the same week the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse apologized for “instantly and permanently” deleting vital testimonies of victims.

Naming of suspects pre-charge is viewed as a double-edged sword. Some are adamant that naming alleged offenders brings more victims forward, while others firmly believe the media shouldn’t get a look in until the innocent are proven guilty.

Whatever you think, plans to preserve the reputation of suspects will come as no surprise to many in the U.K. — a nation rapidly becoming notorious for its institutionalized cover-ups of pedophilia.



3 Responses to “UK Establishment Seeks Ban on Media Naming Sex Abuse Suspects”

  1. Lynn says:

    Another covert cover up. Goose stepping us into the abyss. There are no laws for us only designed to protect the villains. Making it up as they go along. The courts are as corrupt as the powers that shouldn’t be want them.

  2. ian says:

    Horrible bastards are ashamed of nothing. Short of lamposts and pitchforks, this is how it will stay.

  3. Aldous says:

    Of course this will protect the scum at the top and only the scum at the top. They’re allowed to ‘time out’ (disappeared more like) before they are ever charged or even questioned, whereas charges are often brought against Joe Bloggs with no serious intention of it ever coming to court.

    It’s the same with arrest, where the Common Purpose infested cops will arrest someone and keep them in the cop shop for as long as they are allowed, only for the arrested person to be released at some unearthly hour onto the mean streets in all weathers when getting a bus or cab is nigh impossible. I also understand mobiles and wallets are often retained as ‘evidence pending further inquiries’ leaving the accused(sic) in a right pickle.

    Repeat police bail is another nasty trick weapon in their corrupt arsenal, as are court appearances if ever charged which are routinely postponed at the very last minute, only for the flimsy/bogus charge(s) to be dropped entirely after the accused has been buggered about, often for months.
    If they live some distance away, the stress and cost is considerable – not to mention the very real risk of losing their job.

    It’s all there in the Frankfurt School Mentalist Marxist ideology:


    To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution ~ but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future ~ the School recommended (among other things):

    1. The creation of racism offences.
    2. Continual change to create confusion
    3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
    4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
    5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
    6. The promotion of excessive drinking
    7. Emptying of churches

    8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime

    9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
    10. Control and dumbing down of media
    11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
    (includes editor foreword and images)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.