During the course of my oral hearing, it became evident
that the committee members had either not taken the time to read the
full content of this very important petition or that the Clerks to the
Committee ("Lawyers", or to be more precise, "duly elected
'legal bouncers'".) did not in fact provide the committee members
with all the papers. Read the full version of the petition, LINK. Read the enforced
impoverished version, LINK.
See what the committee members look like, LINK.
My correspondence with the Cullen Inquiry, before,
during and after the farce, was included in the closure order so Lord
Cullen can elicit little sympathy from the public for the way he conducted
his inquiry into the Dunblane massacre in 1996. LINK He
restricted the remit and concentrated more on the gun licensing argument,
"diverting the discourse" from Hamilton's background.
This would have been a major embarrassment to the establishment, shedding
light on his charmed life and why he was protected and by whom.
The inquiry, therefore, was a departure from what the public expected
A prominent Sunday Times journalist brought
it to my attention that my correspondence with the "Cullen Inquiry"
before, during and after the inquiry had been put on a 100-year closure
order, along with 105 other files. I then wrote to Lord Cullen
on 27 February 2003, demanding his resignation from the judiciary. LINK
I also wrote to the Lord Advocate Colin
Boyd, asking him what he was "prepared to do to bring to justice all
those involved in the child sex-abuse scandal, the subsequent murders,
and the ultimate whitewash." LINK
The Lord Advocate refused to address the issue.
It was claimed that the reason the "GAGGING ORDER"
was put in place was to protect the names of children who were victims
of sex-abuse. Lord Cullen, at the time of the Inquiry, said
there was no evidence of child sex abuse, but now, seven years after
his Inquiry, he has used the fact that there was evidence of child sex
abuse to try to justify his unwarranted "gagging order".
Others at the time also said, in support of Cullen, that there was not
enough evidence of child sex abuse LINK,
flying in the face of the real evidence. LINK
This just did not wash with me. My letters to
him did not mention a single name of a child sex abuse victim - for
I did not know any names. My letters dealt strictly with
the potential, then actual Masonic cover-up, keeping in mind the many
reports in the press at the time that the mass killer, Thomas Hamilton,
was a Freemason. LINK
I asked Lord Cullen to recuse himself if he was a Freemason.LINK He
got Glynis McKeand, the Clerk to the Cullen Inquiry to deny on his behalf
that he was a Mason following the question posed. I then asked
him by letter to instruct every witness to the Inquiry to declare if
they were Masons, because too many sinister loopholes were created for
Thomas Hamilton over a number of years to enable him to retain his gun
licence and continue running boys clubs LINK.
Hamilton was given this seal of approval despite many misgivings from
worried members of the public, certain police officers and others.
As it happened, Lord Cullen did not recuse himself,
even though, as I have since discovered, he is numbered 1702 on the
membership list of the 'Speculative Society of Edinburgh', which is
an exclusive off-shoot of Freemasonry LINK.
In fact, MASONS belonging to LODGE CANNONGATE KILWINNING No 2, founded
the 'SPECULATIVE SOCIETY' in Edinburgh in 1764. LINK
As the inquiry got under way, only one witness was
asked if he was a Mason, lollipop man Robert Comrie Heslop Deuchars
Answering in the affirmative, this Mason's evidence was later used by
the Clerk to the Cullen Inquiry, Glynis McKeand, to claim to me that
Hamilton was not a Mason, even though Deuchars testified that he had
never socialised with Hamilton and that he did not know if Hamilton
was a Mason. LINK
Cullen was therefore digging a hole deeper and deeper for himself as
his pseudo-Inquiry deteriorated.
When I learned of the 100-year gagging order, I wrote
to Lord Cullen, demanding his resignation from the judiciary.
The year after the Inquiry (1997) he was quickly promoted to the position
of Lord Justice-Clerk, the second top judge in Scotland, then in 2002
he was promoted to the Lord Presidency for his sins, the top law lord
in the country. After receiving my letter, it was reported he
was to be moved to the House of Lords. I had no intention
of allowing him to take refuge in the Lords so I wrote a letter to him,
addressing the envelope to the Judicial Department in the Lords, so
that employees in that department were fully aware of the scandal surrounding
the Dunblane cover-up.LINK
It would seem, however, that a judge who shames his own country and
countrymen is still good material for the Lords.
The only satisfactory way to now appease the relatives
and friends of the victims of the massacre and of the child abuse -
and, indeed, to appease the entire Scottish people who have been excluded
from the fundamental rights of citizenship as a result of the pseudo-inquiry
- is to conduct a brand new inquiry with no restrictive remit under
the auspices of a cross party panel of nonlawyer-MSP's and nominated
lay members whose lives were touched by the massacre.
The same panel must also conduct a full-scale inquiry
into Lord Cullen's status and behaviour before, during and after his
risible inquiry, and into his placing of the extra-statutory, illegal
100-year "gagging order" on the evidence, and the subsequent
loyalty and protection he received from various senior law officers,
such as the Lord Advocate, and others. In March 2003, Dunblane
families demanded the release of the embargoed files. LINK
(Due to the embarrassment caused to the Scottish Executive
by the illegal embargo, the Lord Advocate Colin Boyd was ordered to
release the files, so about half the 6,000 plus files were released
on Monday, 3 October 2005 - ten months after the Freedom of Information
Act came into force - but in such a redacted form that made them largely
illegible. In what was supposed to be to protect the names
of victims of child sex abuse, my name and address were removed from
my embargoed letters to Lord Cullen. So too were the names of
witnesses to the Inquiry to whom I referred in my letters. Place
names also became targets for the censor's pencil. In one case
even the name a pub was airbrushed over. Was this pub named after
one of the victims of child sex abuse? I wouldn't have thought
Nevertheless, as a consequence of my letter to Lord
Cullen, asking him to resign, my name and address were summarily airbrushed
from the already inaccurate description of the file held by the National
Archives of Scotland. After I wrote a letter of complaint
to NAS, it was changed again and now has the following relatively more
'1996 Apr-Jul Additional Productions
Correspondence between William Burns, South Queensferry, and Lord Cullen
and the Clerk to the Inquiry concerning possible connections with Freemasonry
of Thomas Hamilton, Lord Cullen himself, witnesses to the Inquiry and
civil servants; also extracts from inquiry transcript relating to possible
links with Freemasonry, and letters to and from Thomas Hamilton concerning
running of boys clubs, rebuttals of allegations made against him and
his claims against Central Regional Council and Central Scotland Police
(R77).' The latter (highlighted) section concerns Thomas
Hamilton material and is actually held in file COM21/4/105/2.
The former section, in relation to my letters to Cullen, is held in
file COM21/4/105/1, but the two were "yoked" together under
file COM21/4/105/1-2 to try to justify gagging my letters to him.
Since I was informed about the above new description
of the file, I have received yet another description of it, which details
every letter to and from the Cullen Inquiry, verifying that my correspondence,
along with a letter of mine that was published in The Scotsman on 20
August 1996, had been "yoked" together with totally unrelated
Thomas Hamilton material. LINK
But why was a letter published in a national newspaper also included
in the extra-statutory 100-year closure order? Can this embargo
throw up anything more ludicrous?
I lodged a Petition with the Public Petitions Committee
of the Scottish Parliament and sent copies to every MSP, exposing the
flagrant cover-up. At the hearing on 29 November 2003, I made
the following oral submission to the PPC:
"I don’t think there is anyone in Scotland who now
believes that the Cullen Inquiry into the Dunblane massacre was anything
other than a Masonic whitewash. The 100-year Gagging Order
on my correspondence with the Cullen Inquiry confirms that. This
committee was provided with copies of my documents so cannot ignore
the existence of this solid evidence.
"At the time of the Inquiry, Lord Cullen claimed
there was no evidence of child sex abuse in relation to Thomas Hamilton
and his connections, but seven years later he uses the fact that there
was evidence of child sex abuse to put a Gagging Order on the files,
claiming it was imposed to protect the names of victims, even though
most of the files buried do not mention any names of victims.
"My own files are in that category. It must
be clear to the committee that the only reason the content of my letters
to Cullen was 'gagged' was precisely to keep the Masonic implication
out of the equation; therefore out of the public eye.
"There is no statutory basis for the closure of
orders created by Scottish public bodies. These are the words
of the Lord Advocate, not mine. They were produced in a publication
on 18 March 2003 by the Scottish Executive - News Online, under the
heading: 'Dunblane police reports released.'
"That disclosure alone makes a mockery of the
Clerk to the Committee, Steve Farrell’s 'view' that it is not within
the competence of the Parliament to overturn or interfere with the terms
of such an order. The Scottish Parliament is the ONLY body with
the power to create a framework for imposing closure orders; but it
must do so in the public interest, not in the interest of collaborators
in secret societies.
"The Lord Advocate goes on to say: 'The Public
Records (Scotland) Act 1937 makes provision for the preservation, care
and custody of the public records of Scotland. The terms
of the legislation are permissive [i.e., lenient, tolerant or liberal,
reflecting a belief that there should be as few restraints as possible].'
'Preservation, custody and care of records' does not mean the exact
opposite; the 'smotheration, stash and snare' of public records.
"The report continues: 'By contrast, in England
and Wales the Public Records Act 1958 (as amended by the Public Records
Act 1967) sets a statutory "closure period" of 30 years, after
which records must, with limited exceptions, be made available to the
public. The 1937 [Scottish] Act DOES NOT impose similar obligations
on Executive departments, but IN PRACTICE those procedures are followed
"'In practice' means nothing and could well be replaced
with 'convenience', 'habit', 'obsession', 'fixation', 'weakness', and
a number of other meaningless slogans. Just because something
is widespread practice, it does not create a power that Parliament has
denied or has not legislated for. EVEN TRADITION HAS NO AUTHORITY
"Since there is no framework for closure orders
in Scotland, I am calling on Parliament to enact unequivocal legislation
to prevent people with a vested interest from burying evidence and diverting
the onus onto everyone from judges to procurators fiscal to the police
to clerks and to every Tom, Dick and Harry chosen for the purpose, so
that the real culprits can distance themselves from their illicit undertakings.
order was enforced not to protect the names of children, who are adults
now, but to protect the names of very high-profile Masons and paedophiles."
On being questioned by members of the PPC, I brought
it to their attention the fact that, in the Cullen Inquiry transcript,
three people gave evidence referring to Thomas Hamilton's connection
with the Queen Victoria School in Dunblane. These referrals
to Queen Victoria School were mysteriously ignored in Cullen's Report. (Lord
Cullen was appointed Lord Justice-Clerk in 1997 the year following his
Inquiry, a position that automatically made him a member of the Board
of Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Queen Victoria School, which entrusted
him with a legal responsibility for the custody and care of all their
pupils. In 2001, Lord Cullen became Lord President for his sins,
the top judge in Scotland.)
At page 286 of the Cullen Inquiry transcript [page
25 of 'Day 3' ], Grace Jones Ogilvie, a neighbour of Thomas Hamilton,
said Hamilton periodically got a van from Central Region for camps at
Loch Lomondside and Queen Victoria School. LINK
At page 1,803 [page 75 of Day 14], Ian Steven Boal, who was a teacher
and a friend of Hamilton's, told how he was helped by Thomas Hamilton
to get a job at Queen Victoria School. LINK
At page 2,267, [page 47 of Day 18], Robert Mark Ure, an ex-husband of
a friend of Thomas Hamilton, evidenced that his estranged wife had been
to the rifle range at Queen Victoria School with Thomas Hamilton. LINK
Why were questions not asked about who made it possible
for Hamilton to have easy access to and influence in QVS? According
to Glenn Harrison, a former school master at QVS, Hamilton was allowed
to wander around the school whenever he liked, had free access to its
rifle range, and even was found creeping around the dormitories at night?
Being a boarding school for children of the military, apparently
sten guns were occasionally used on the range.
Glenn Harrison also disclosed that he had been complaining
for years about very high profile people arriving at the school (Friends
of QVS they were called). LINK
The pervs - some of them major establishment figures and close pals
with Hamilton, according to the News of the World (9 November
2003) picked up their victims in flash limos to play out their perverted,
sordid, sexual fantasies on the children, and dropped them off the next
day, obviously distressed. Hamilton was the mediator for
this paedophile ring. This schoolmaster was prevented from giving
evidence at the Cullen Inquiry. He had earlier left QVS to a remote
part of Scotland as he feared for his life. LINK
What you had around this time was
three Secretaries of State for Scotland, Malcolm Rifkind from 11 January
1986 to 28 November 1990, Ian Lang from 28 November 1990 to 5 July 1995,
then finally Michael Forsyth from 5 July 1995 to 2 May 1997, who, by
virtue of office, were Presidents of the Board of Directors of QVS,
with a leading legal responsibility for the custody and care of all
their pupils. LINK
The last named was also responsible for the appointment of Cullen to
conduct the Inquiry. Cullen was the man cut out for the whitewash
and was chosen within a day of the massacre, before the bodies of the
victims hardly had a chance to grow cold. LINK
Then you had Prince Philip, a Freemason and the honorary
patron of the Board of Directors of QVS and is an honorary member of
the exclusive, secretive and highly suspect Speculative Society of Edinburgh.
His revered uncle, Lord Louis Mountbatten, the Daily Mail reported,
was a homosexual with a lust for young boys. LINK
Perhaps his predisposition was a family trait, passed on to his idolising
nephew, and so on. Then there is Lord Donald McArthur Ross, the
then Lord Justice-Clerk and Cullen's superior in the judiciary at the
time, who was also on the Board of Directors, and is also a "Brother"
of Cullen's in the Masonic Speculative Society of Edinburgh, numbered
at 1642. LINK
Five weeks after the hearing of my petition, I still
had not heard a peep from the Public Petitions Committee so I decided
to write to them, stressing my concern about the inordinate delay in
replying - notwithstanding the committee's (inappropriate and unconstitutional)
approach to Colin Boyd, the Lord Advocate, to ask why the 100-year Gagging
Order was imposed.
Even forgetting for the minute that the Lord Advocate
has no legitimacy in Scottish law whatsoever to agree to the imposition
of unlegislated closure orders in Scotland, it would take no time at
all for even a primary schoolkid to follow instructions, pick up 106
files, single out the second-last one filed at 105, read the straightforward
content, and declare: "I have no idea why these files have been gagged
for 100 years."
But we are not depending on schoolchildren here to
utter a response. We are depending on grovelling politicians
and the highly suspect legal profession. In a reply from the PPC
dated 9 December, I was advised:
"As you are aware, at its meeting on Wednesday 29 October
2003, the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee considered
the petition that you submitted on 26 June 2003. At that meeting
the committee agreed to write to the Lord Advocate seeking (a) further
details of the framework under which a decision to impose a closure
order of 100 years can be made, (b) confirmation as to why certain evidence
that does not name specific children also appears to be subject to this
100-year closure order, and (c) an indication of the timescales for
publication of the full catalogue of Cullen Inquiry material by the
National Archives of Scotland and for any subsequent decisions on the
release of material and variations of the closure period.
"We are still waiting for a response from the Lord
Advocate's Office; once this has been received it will be further considered
by the committee. You will be informed when the petition
is considered further and the outcome of that consideration."
After that hearing on 29 October 2003, the committee
agreed (not with me, but with one another) to approach the Lord Advocate
to seek further details. I retaliated: "That could take
another hundred years!"
By the time the decision was taken to bury my petition,
articles in the News of the World on Glenn Harrison, the former
QVS housemaster, and Lord Burton, the former Grand Master of Scottish
Masons, had long since corroborated what I told the committee at the
hearing of my petition – but to no avail, even though I had sent
on 6 January 2004 copies of the damning evidence in the two newspaper
articles to Brian McConnachie of the Public Petitions Team Support. That
further evidence ought to have consolidated the petition. This
evidence was obviously sent before the committee made their blunt decision
to disregard ALL the evidence in the petition and flagrantly "bury"
it. The Glenn Harrison article was in the 9 November 2003 edition
and the Lord Burton article appeared in the 28 December 2003 edition.
Dr Mick North, a retired university lecturer, whose
daughter Sophie was murdered in the 1996 massacre, branded Lord Cullen’s
Inquiry “a piece of theatre” in an article by the Daily Mail
on 10 March 2004. LINK
Joining the growing number of people campaigning to overturn Lord Cullen’s
100-year closure order is Lord (Norman) Tebbit, the former Home Secretary
who told the Scotland on Sunday (17 October 2004), “It’s fairly
clear that many people think the ‘sensitive’ material is sensitive not
to the children of Dunblane, or their relatives, but to other people
who perhaps knew more about Hamilton than they have so far admitted.”
On Wednesday, 4 February 2004, the petition was subsequently
unceremoniously "BURIED" without addressing any of the six requests
I made LINK
after Jackie Baillie MSP sinisterly proposed: "On a technical point,
given that the new petition [PE685] homes in on the key point about
the 100-year closure order and timescales, I would be inclined to close
petition PE652 and keep the new one live. That would be more
appropriate. The Convener: Are members happy with the suggestion
that we close PE652 and wait until the outcome of the review before
assessing PE685 in that light? LINK
The members indicated agreement, ignoring the fact that PE652 was the
principal petition and PE685 was related only on the periphery.
Not one of the six requests made in the petition was
addressed, despite it being a prerequisite that petitioners "show
clearly the nature of the remedy or action sought". It
was the most naked bludgeoning of a petition imaginable, despite the
Parliament's "Guidance on the Submission of Public Petitions promising:
"The public petitions process is a key part of the Scottish Parliament's
overall committment to openness and accessibility."
The Lord Advocate Colin Boyd, dragged his feet over
the release of the embargoed documents until the Scottish Executive
ordered their release (although in a much redacted almost illegible
form) on Monday, 3 October 2005. LINK
Rather than elaborate, I quote the words of William Shakespeare in 1
Henry VI, iii, 1592: "Defer no time; delays have dangerous ends."
To prompt a quicker response from Boyd, I periodically
handed out copies outside the Crown Office and the Scottish Parliament,
to employees and passers-by, of a booklet I produced about the iniquitous
but no-one except Carolyn Leckie MSP had the mettle to try to put things
despite the fact that I also provided every MSP with a copy, which I
handed into the Scottish Parliament personally on Wednesday, 2 March
2005. So there is no excuse whatsoever from that quarter.
Perhaps it was this booklet spurred the Scottish Executive to order
the Lord Advocate Colin Boyd to release the illegally "gagged"
With the constant pressure, ab extra, the occasion
finally caught up with the judge who shamed his country. Lord
Cullen announced on Friday, 15 July 2005, that he was to retire from
the judiciary later that year on 25 November. Before push came
to shove - to avoid getting kicked out for his dispicable role in the
Dunblane Public Inquiry - he was provided an escape route by the same
Brotherhood that protected Thomas Hamilton over many years. And
on a full pension for his sins.
If the above information does not on its own rouse
us, the public, into calling for a fresh inquiry into the events leading
up to the Dunblane massacre and the ensuing whitewash, we are all guilty
of something a lot more serious than complacency; we are all guilty
of complicity. "To sin by silence when we should protest, makes
cowards of men." ~ Ella Wheeler Wilcox.
It was reported in an exclusive article in the Sunday
Express on 21 February 2016, 25 years after former teacher Glenn
Harrison formally made complaints to Central Scotland Police about the
abuse, that a new investigation was to be launched into a VIP paedophile
ring operating at Queen Victoria School (QVS). LINK
Only time will tell if this is will be but another
one of those pseudo inquiries, set up strictly to find a way to pooh-pooh
legitimate allegations of physical and sexual abuse in places like QVS,
and to ultimately cover up high profile, perverted, "citizens-above-suspicion",
preventing them from being called to account.
In the near future, however, I envisage many clandestine
figures in the Police the Judiciary and in Parliament, with something
to hide, clumsily tripping over their cloaks and falling on their poniards/daggers.