The editor of a paedophile book to which Peter Tatchell contributed an article in the 1980s was jailed three years ago for child sex offences, Christian Voice has learned.
Warren Middleton, also known as John Parratt, was given a 12 month sentence in July 2011 after being convicted of having indecent images of children.
Middleton was the editor of Betrayal of Youth, a notorious paedophile campaigning manual to which Peter Tatchell contributed a chapter on ‘Questioning Ages of Majority and Ages of Consent’. Middleton was also vice-chairman of the Paedophile Information Exchange, known as PIE.
Betrayal of Youth was published in 1986, just three years after Peter Tatchell lost to Simon Hughes in the Bermondsey bye-election. The bye-election did not go well. Tatchell was disowned by then Labour leader Michael Foot and Hughes highlighted Tatchell’s militant homosexuality.
Afterwards, Tatchell complained of ‘a witch-hunt’. An exasperated Neil Kinnock, who would win the Labour leadership election in October, was variously reported as saying ‘The trouble with Peter is, he can’t tell the difference between a witch and fairy’ or “I’m not in favour of witch hunts, but I do not mistake bloody witches for fairies.” Tatchell has since joined the Green Party, where witches and fairies are made more welcome.
Also jailed in 2011 were the leader of PIE, Steven Smith, aka Steven Freeman, John Morrison, Middleton’s flat-mate, one Barry Cutler, and Leo Adamson, a member of the PIE executive who was also involved in the 1970s with ‘Gay Youth.’
the court was told that more than 5,000 images were found on three discs at the Putney home shared by Parratt and Morrison after a police raid in July 2008.
Steve Smith’s history of PIE, as published in Betrayal of Youth, can be found HERE. Steven Smith was also jailed twenty years earlier, in 1991, for child porn offences.
Jailed earlier were PIE executive members David Joy of Loughborough, and David Bremner, a PhD from Clapton, E London.
Interestingly, who was the Barrister who defended Steven Smith in 1991 and came out with the rather lame line that ‘Smith and the others would not have published the magazine if the police had warned them it was in breach of the law’?
It’s the same barrister who served on the Gay Rights Sub-Committee of the National Council for Civil Liberties when Patricia Hewitt and Harriet Harman were in charge in the 1970’s and 1980’s alongside his ‘learned friend’ Geoffrey Robertson QC and paedophiles David Bremner, Michael Burbidge, Keith Hose and Tom O’Carroll.
Here is a clue: He was the first openly-gay barrister, championed by homosexuals, to be appointed a High Court Judge, in 2002.
Here is another: It’s the same man who set up the Conspiracy to Corrupt Public Morals group to defend Tom O’Carroll in 1979. How nice to know he was still prepared to accept a brief to defend a pal of his old fellow sub-committee-members 12 years later.
Arise, your Lordship, Sir Adrian Fulford.
Sir Adrian Fulford has now stepped down from hearing criminal appeal cases while he is investigated by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.
The same newspaper also reports how the Chairman of the National Council for Civil Liberties in the 1970’s and 1980’s also sprang to the defence of PIE, both in campaigning terms and by acting for Bremner when he was convicted with David Joy in 1984.
He is now the Chief Coroner for England and Wales, Peter Thornton.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Hello, I’m not a witch, I’m a druid and I find it curious that you’ve chosen my author profile to make a point in this article. Paganism is a legally acceptable choice in this country, and does not condone child abuse. We also don’t condone tarring all people with the same brush and we aren’t collectively keen on hate speech either. You may well have some important points to make in this article, about corruption and truly immoral behaviour, but you’d make a stronger case if you focused on the specifics rather than drawing gays and Pagans into the debate in a way that makes you sound, frankly, a bit irrational.
Hi Nimue, Thanks for dignifying my throw-away line about the Green Party with such a rational reply.
One thing I prefer about paganism to Christianity, is many pagans’ use of the eight special astronomical dates to divide the year up into eight equal seasons, i.e. the two solstices, the two equinoxes, and the four mid-points between these (e.g. the one on 31st October, or thereabouts). That has been how I have divided up the year in my own mind since childhood.
My style of churchmanship doesn’t bother with the Roman Catholic “church calendar”. I don’t like Christmas or Easter, for example. Some of us just like to celebrate all of God’s doings, every day of the year.
I can see the appeal to the modern mind of this aspect of neo-paganism – the calendar. But nature worship? Polytheism? Magic? No thanks! Worshipping the creation rather than the creator is identified as the reason for – er – certain modern trends, shall we say, in Romans 1. Ask Peter Tatchell about that.
“Worshipping the creation rather than the creator is identified as the reason for – er – certain modern trends”
Correct me if I’m wrong,but doesn’t paganism pre-date christianity? Hardly a modern trend!
Stephen, there seems to be a link between child molesting and, at least some, homosexuals.
As far as Peter Tatchell is concerned – wile I strongly disagree with his lifestyle I do give him credit for standing up for the free speech of Christians who get arrested for expressing biblical views on this issue. For example, when street preacher Dale Mcalpine was nicked in 2010 Tatchell offered to speak in his defence at the trial.
You are doing a sterling work by standing firm on this issue when many other “Christians” have become like chocolate soldiers, melting at the sound of battle.
Incidentally, did you know that Justin Welby has stated that there is a link between the savagery perpetrated against Christians by Muslims in Africa, and gay marriage in the US and the UK? It seems that an increasing number of Muslims see the “Christian” West as promoting homosexual perversion and are using this as an excuse to attack Christians. Also, in the same interview Welby stated the Christian belief that marriage is one man, one woman and that sex is for marriage only, truly we must be thankful for small mercies, at last a senior church figure actually speaking the truth!
Regards
Bob Hutton
Keep up the good work exposing these disgusting paedophiles.
sister Dianne
may i point out that we should hate the sin and not the sinner
we should pray that GOD moves thier heart to repent and seek HIS forgiveness
May HE send righteous people into thier lives who by thier example lead them to JESUS
It is a fine line between accusing Pharisee and loving Christian
On the other hand:
Matt 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
My wife and I have a close friend who was an effiminate homosexual. He became a sincere Christian who who bravely witnessed to homosexuals. Though he struggled against his homosexuality, he condemned the practice and didn’t call homosexuals “gay”.
It is interesting that far from putting a nice spin on homosexuality, the Bible always regards it negatively. It never uses the term “gay”. It is the Bible’s negative approach to that sin which angers the homosexuals and is why so many of them openly condemn–and therefore hate–the Bible. It seems that those homosexuals have a better grasp of the Bible’s teachings on the matter than some Christians!
The term “sodomite” is a clear example of the Bible’s negativity towards such sexual activity. I wonder if that’s because once indulged in, it is one of the sins that is among the hardest of which to repent. Indeed, when God concluded that the sodomites had no intention of repenting, he rained fire and brimstone on them. Would he do any less to unrepentant paedophiles?
We should never make excuses for wickedness–our own or that of others.
It is right and proper to pray for the repentance of paedophiles but it could be said that it is a bit late in the day for the victims who’ve already been abused. For the abused to become true Christians they would have to forgive those who attacked them so despicably. That must be a toughie! But it can be overcome, like paedophilia itself, with the help of God.
To have more sympathy for the abuser than the abused, however, strikes me as a bit pharisaical. A lot of religious types I have come across (especially those in churchianity who wear their phylacteries broad–actually and metaphorically), seem to see all who disagree with them as right-wing. I have even heard churchians use that term. Presumably, they use that term because they are left wing, otherwise why use it? As Christians, surely we should be neither wing. All our paradigms should be subserviant to Scripture [2 Peter 1:20], not to the fashions of the times. And we must stop listening to Satan’s deceitful questions as in Genesis 3:1. That’s where it all started.
It’s noticeable how so many people are absolutely horrified by paedophilia yet tolerate homosexuality, fornication and adultery. I would like to know on what principles these people decide what is right and what is wrong. As I see it, it is not a coincidence that there seems to be a string of high profile paedo cases at the moment…I think this reflects the subconscious guilt people have got following the redefinition of marriage. By taking an ostentatious stand about paedophilia, they can pretend they are somehow holding on to morality.
Very true, Busy Mum. Sin is sin and it is God who states what is sin and tells He us the only way it can be forgiven. If we justify any sin, we are saying that God is wrong and we are rejecting Christ’s terrible and awesome sacrifice.
Dear Busy Mum,
well I for one do not tolerate homosexuality, fornication or adultery any more than I would paedophilia – all these things disgust me, especially when they are spread across our newspapers and even our TV magazines. When I was in my teens you didn’t have ‘partners’ – you had spouses; ‘cohabitation’ was still known as living in sin and babies born out of wedlock would still have raised eyebrows.
Not that I am condemning the sinner – it just shows how far from God’s ways and laws we have strayed. But the Bible states that all these things would happen in the last days.
Busy Mum, I think it’s very obvious why this is. Homosexuality, fornication and adultery are engaged in by consenting adults, and in fact fornication and youthful homosexuality by some teenagers. That is up to them. But paedophilia involves a very young person, often truly a child,being exploited by an older person for the older person’s gratification. I’m very surprised that a Mum can’t see the difference. It perhaps becomes clearer if she considers who is to blame. In the case of adult homosexuality, fornication and adultery, you would normally blame both participants. But is she going to blame the child for paedophilia ?
A common fallacy. Consider:
If, for example, adultery is engaged in by consenting adults, it also affects any children of the marriage. Do the parties ask them? It never crosses their mind.
Legalised, visible homosexuality affects the cultural environment of us all. And a young person can be drawn into it if he sees celebrities indulging in it, politicians promoting it, authority figures like teachers saying it’s just fine. Did anyone ask the people before sodomy and gross indecency were decriminlaised if engaged in by ‘consenting adults’? Perish the thought. The man in Whitehall knows best.
Fornication affects our cultural environment as well. How many couples now live together without the societal formalities of marriage? How much school sex education promotes the idea that fornication is just fine so long as you use one of these? Does Government care how many children are becoming infertile through skin-born STD’s? Of course not. Do teachers involve parents thoroughly in their sex education programmes? Not if they can help it.
And at what age of participant do you argue something should be regarded as ‘paedophilia’? 18? 16? 14? 12? 10? 8? It is, for homosexuals, a bit of a spectrum. And PT argues that if both are roughly the same age, it isn’t paedophilia at all.
Busy Mum is right. Morality has been jettisoned in sexual and financial areas. The elite now pretend to be appalled by the worst aspects of it so as still to appear to have a shred of morality left. Look at Maria Miller, defended by David Cameron, for a recent example of the latter. ‘She apologised, so that’s alright.’
I’m not saying that all these other things are right, or that they don’t affect children. I’m explaining why so many people are absolutely horrified by paedophilia. It’s in a class of its own. You can argue about the exact age limits of course, but if a man is 45 and a little girl is 6, people are absolutely horrified by it. If two people living together turn out not to be legally married, of course people aren’t horrified to the same extent, not even if one of them is legally married to somebody else.
Of course if the boy is 17 and the girl is 15, it isn’t paedophilia. In practice, our society has always been understanding with genuine couples like that, even when strictly speaking the law has been broken.
I seem to have written “of course” rather a lot, but it does seem rather obvious, as I said to Busy Mum in the first place.
Actually, your whole point was that they don’t affect children.
On what basis, if it’s just your opinion?
I really don’t see how you can make that out.
” paedophilia involves a very young person, often truly a child,being exploited by an older person for the older person’s gratification ”
There is nothing to suggest that I don’t think that would affect the child. Of course it would.
It is hard to gauge whether the views espoused by this website and the commenters on it are done purely for a reaction or whether they are sincerely held. All I can do is offer my sincere condolences that you have worked yourself into a corner where your release is spouting off against those who are clearly ‘under your skin’ such as banks who have wronged you or gay people. This article and the comments on it are offensive. I say that not because I think you will change your pattern of thought and behaviour but because it is important you are told so never rely on the excuse of being ‘misguided’, especially in front of your maker
Sometimes he calls himself ‘Ben’, sometimes he calls himself ‘Bob’.
But what sort of person would call an article critical of paedophilia ‘offensive’?
a damning silence from bob/ben then
Stephen – I have said what I needed to say. As I said, I do not expect you to change your established patterns. The purpose of the post was to stop any possibility of you pleading ignorance when all of this catches up with you – as it surely will at some point.
Good luck, I mean that genuinely, to change to become a useful part of society would take great courage that I am not sure I would have but I hope you can muster it. That would be truly inspirational. Maybe the only hope is you are blinded on the road one day…
We don’t rely on luck here, we rely on God’s blessing.
I pray you will also come to know his blessing, forgiveness and healing in your life one day soon.