Surrender retracted

I have received various requests for information on what my posting on child-rapist Roger Took and his haut bourgeois friends actually said. Given that it has now been suggested that its excesses might simply have involved the law of the land rather than certain dark forces, I will repost it, suitably amended (Cipriano does not openly advocate breaches of the law, but simply invites people to draw their own conclusions).

Nonce of the Year?
This week’s Spectator contained a real eye-opener of an article. It reported a really horrible case of child abuse which no-one had ever reported before. The article, by Charlotte Metcalf, stated (not alleged; there had been a conviction and sentence) that Roger Took, apparently a well-known art historian and curator, had been found guilty of serious sexual abuse of his step-granddaughters, and had boasted of far worse things online, including helping to gang-rape a five-year-old girl to death, though he was to claim that this was just a fantasy. The line the article took was that, both before and after his arrest and conviction, he had been protected by his high-society connections, living as he did in Chelsea, on money originally belonging to his wife, the grandmother of the proven victims. Bear in mind that this is the Spectator, not Dave Spart. Here’s the piece: http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/826056/the-establishment-paedophile-how-a-monster-hid-in-high-society.thtml. Do read it, in case you think I’m talking about mere bagatelles.
One’s first reaction to reading something unexpected in a British paper is that it must be bullshit. But names – i.e. those who helped in the cover-up - are firmly named, and we are looking at seven-figure libel if this is not true. Either way, it hasn’t got into the rest of the press, as it didn’t at the time of the trial. So either the press know the case is bullshit, in which case why hasn’t somebody sued? Or the Chelsea mafia cover-up has its tentacles all over what used to be Fleet Street. It can’t be that no-one sees a story in it.
Anyway, it’s reported that the nonce Took gets the Speccie in his cell. Let’s hope that the whole prison reads it, screws and inmates. The silly, over-law-abiding Speccie didn’t tell us which nick he was in, but there are ways of finding these things out. He’s only got three and a half years to serve, so even if he survives those he’ll be on the outside soon.
Meanwhile, what of the “establishment cover-up”? Nobody’s sued yet, and it’s nearly a week, so let’s assume it’s gen up. It took me 15 minutes on Google to place two of Took’s friends:
“Ute Chatterjee, a woman who had been helping Took with research, was the Membership and Meeting Secretary of the Great Britain–Russia Society. When Took failed to arrive in Russia as planned to begin his expedition [because ‘d been arrested], she took it upon herself to lie on his behalf, even phoning the other people involved to tell them he had had an accident. Later she began asking Pat’s [i.e. Mrs Took’s] friends in England and Ireland if they would receive letters or calls from Took. Pat wrote to the president of the Society in an attempt to stop her. Like others, Chatterjee found Took’s charm and academic reputation so plausible that she was happy to continue helping him.” (Speccie)
Ute Chatterjee lives at 43 Kenilworth Court, Lower Richmond Road, London SW15 1EN. Phone: 0788 4464 461 – and works at the Department for Education and Science, though hopefully not for much longer. ute.chatterjee@dfes.gsi.gov.uk., telephone + 44 207 340 4488.
Another nasty piece of work is Mischa Naimark, a Russian academic of some sort:
“Judge Blacksell deemed Took to be enough of a danger to the public to give him an indeterminate sentence but, because the case was hardly reported, it was up to Pat to tell many of Took’s acquaintances and friends about what had happened. Mischa Naimark, a former colleague in Russia, who was collaborating on Took’s next expedition, told Pat she should not go round publicising his arrest. Instead she should be a ‘good, tactful wife’ and suggested she was ‘jealous’ of her ‘younger rivals’. It was as if Naimark was ticking her off for exaggerating while Took’s impeccable social credentials and high-flying academic career served to cushion him from condemnation.”
Mischa hangs out at Miklukho-Maklaya str., 57 - 1 - 115 , 117279 Moscow, Russia. Phone number: (095) 334 83 20 (in Moscow). E-mail: mikanaimark@onego.ru. No doubt Russians will also draw their own conclusions.


In the meantime, having taken note of the total silence of the rest of the press on this subject, I was eagerly awaiting the new Spectator, replete as I imagined it would be with readers' letters on the subject. Not a sausage. I find it diffiult to believe that they hadn't received any. Lost your bottle, Mr Editor d'Ancona?