Today, Sir Leon Brittan has stated:
“This was the normal procedure for handling material presented to the home secretary. I do not recall being contacted further about these matters by Home Office officials or by Mr Dickens or by anyone else.”
Yet, according to the Guardian (funny some people claim the Gaurdian isn’t covering the CSA stories):
“The Home Office commissioned an independent review last year into what information it received about organised child sex abuse between 1979 and 1999.
The review found information had been dealt with properly.
It disclosed that material received from Dickens in November 1983 and January 1984 had not been retained.
However, a letter was sent from Brittan to Dickens on 20 March 1984 explaining what had been done in relation to the files.
According to an extract in the review report, the home secretary wrote: “You drew my attention to a number of allegations concerning paedophilia when you called here on 23 November and in subsequent letters.
“I am now able to tell you that, in general terms, the view of the director of public prosecutions is that two of the letters you forwarded could form the basis for inquiries by the police and they are now being passed to the appropriate authorities.“”
Does that not directly contradict Sir Leon’s statement released today? It suggests there were TWO lots of information supplied by Dickens, not just one “dossier” and two lots of contact to present that information, not one. It also clearly shows that there was a documented follow-up from Leon Brittan.
It was also acknowledged by Leon Brittan that there had been “subsequent letters”.
Far from “not being contacted further” it appears Leon brittan actively suggested that the content warranted criminal investigation, and that he had an ongoing written and verbal conversation lasting several months with Mr Dickens.