ONE of the common counter attacks when allegations of paedophilia are made about a late VIP – as they were once again against former British Prime Minister Sir Edward Heath yesterday – is that they have no right of reply.
This guy is in his grave. He no longer has a voice to put his side of the story – so therefore it’s grossly unfair to make such allegations.
There are two very poignant answers to that – one which most folk are aware of, one they are probably not.
Exactly the same defence was made of Sir Jimmy Savile in the days after he was conclusively exposed in a Channel 4 documentary in 2012.
His family instantly denied all knowledge. No surprise there – that’s what families do (mostly). So many in the unsuspecting generalpublic temporarily took Savile’s side and voiced the idea that this should not have been made public after he had passed away.
Those comments – and I’m not criticising them out of sight – subsided when a tidal wave of information followed to leave nobody in any doubt about Savile’s guilt.
This paved the way for police investigations and inquiries by some of the many places Savile was known to frequent to be published without any real opposition.
Savile, like Heath, was never charged with any such offence in his lifetime. But he was more than aware some suspected him of being a paedophile and sometimes referred to it, albeit in his usual flippant, attention-deflecting style.
Heath’s life was also shrouded by innuendo. As a man who never married, he was suspected of being gay – neither is a crime, thank goodness.
But he was very directly made aware of the allegations he would have faced had he been alive now as long ago as 1998, more than six years before his death.
Former BBC journalist David Icke, now commonly patronised as either ‘mad’ or a professional conspiracy theorist, published allegations that Heath was a paedophile in his book The Biggest Secret. Infact he went a good deal further than that!
These specific references were read to him by a current journalist to see if he intended to take legal action.
Heath neither batted an eyelid, nor uttered a word.
Now and I’m being as unbiased as I can here, I can well understand that response.
Had he consulted a lawyer – perhaps he subsequently did – he may well have been advised to steer clear of a day in court with a writer, outside of the mainstream, who would insist on giving his side of the story rather than routinely coughing up the cash.
Heath was also a man in his 70s and didn’t need the hassle.
He could also count on the allegations remaining out of the mainstream media and known Icke did not sell anything like the number of copies back then as he does now.
But my point is this.
Heath DID have a chance to reply to much the same allegations that were again made public in Wiltshire Chief Constable Michael Veale’s brave report yesterday – and he chose not to do so.