Ex-Army Agent Claims MI5 Buried Kincora Evidence

  • "When I wasn't called to the Hughes inquiry I knew a cover-up was under way and I prayed for the time to come ... Now is that time."
  
Mick Brown with a piece on the MI5 cover-up of sexual abuse in the most notorious case of its kind in the North's history. It featured in The Mirror on 1 August 2014. 
 
MI5 COVERED UP the sexual abuse of boys in the notorious Kincora home, an ex-Army intelligence officer said yesterday.
 
Brian Gemmell, a former captain in the Intelligence Corps, has revealed he submitted reports to the head of MI5 in Ulster in 1975.
 
Breaking his silence, the 64-year-old insists "it was a lie" no intelligence officers knew of the matter, as reported in the 1982 Sir George Terry report.
 
Mr Gemmell's claims he officially briefed Ian Cameron, MI5's top man in Northern Ireland, will send shock waves through the Security Service.
 
It will also strengthen calls for the State's role in the affair that has haunted abuse victims for decades to be exposed as part of the Westminster abuse inquiry announced by Home Secretary Theresa May.
 
There have been long-standing allegations that spooks allowed the assaults to enable it to gather intelligence on unionist politicians but also to protect leading British establishment and security figures takping in the abuse of young boys at the home.
 
Former Army press officer Colin Wallace last week repeated that he and colleagues were frustrated by some superiors in their efforts to have the attacks investigated by the RUC.
 
In December 1981 three former Kincora staff now all dead, warden Joe Mains, his deputy Raymond Semple and house master and Orange Order member William McGrath, were jailed for sexually assaulting boys at the home.
 
From the outset of the Troubles suspected MI5 agent McGrath led shadowy loyalist group Tara and Mr Gemmell confirms he tried to expose the scandal after concerns raised by Tara's second-in-command Roy Garland.
 
Mr Gemmell claims the inquiry by Sussex Chief Constable Sir George Terry ignored vital evidence of the abuse.
 
Mr Gemmell took up his duties in late 1974 and served for two years, heading up the Army's loyalist desk during which he came upon the Kincora affair when in pursuit of information on Tara.
 
He said:
 
I was a lieutenant and then a captain in the Intelligence Corps, commanding about 27 27 staff, and an active contact of "the Political Advisor" [Ian Cameron] operating in certain matters under his direction and that of his staff.  The Kincora information was part and parcel of my Intelligence Reports (Intreps) on Tara. It was classified Secret and sent/taken by me to HQNI and handed over to MI5 staff there. Eventually, after a few weeks, Cameron summoned me to his office and rudely told me to break off all Tara contacts and investigation. He was angry and hostile. Why had he not responded like this when the reports first went in? I smelled a rat when there was no follow-up. I suspected a cover-up of some kind especially when 'Terry/Hughes' made no attempt to call me to give evidence. 
 
The Terry/Hughes inquriies were widely criticised at the time for their limited terms of reference, which some claimed prevented officers from speaking out. Last week it emerged some Kincora victims had also been made to sign "gagging orders". 
 
Mr Gemmell told how he knew the findings of the Hughes Inquiry were wrong when it was reported on the evening news it had found "no involvement of intelligence officers and no INT personnel had known anything about Kincora." 
 
He added:
I feel strongly about the abuse of innocents but I've never been anti-MI5 or anti-Establishment. Time has passed and a number of the conspirators have retired or died I expect. Post [Jimmy] Saville and Rolf Harris it seems there will be an ear to hear in the media, establishment or public about these things now. When I was not called to the Hughes Inquiry I knew a cover-up was under way and just waited for the time to come. Now, it seems, is that time. 
Mr Gemmell said he hopes a new regime at MI5 will allow the truth to come out. He added:
New blood in the Security Service may take a different view of things now and be prepared to own up to some of the deceit and failings of their predecessors. That will be progress and gives hope that speaking out again will be more fruitful.
 
 
SURVIVOR DEMANDS ACTION
 
 
 
An abuse survivor said now is the time to deal with the cover-up once and for all.
 
Margaret McGuckin, chair of Survivors and Victims of Institutional Abuse which represents some Kincora victims, said:
We intend to honour all the victims, alive and dead, some of whom died pitiful deaths as a result of the abuse. And those who feel they still don't have a voice. This will help us expose those who covered this up. 
 
Patrick Corrigan, Programme Director of Amnesty International Northern Ireland, which made the original call for the inclusion of Kincora in the inquiry announced by Theresa May, asid: "These are compelling new allegations which underline what Amnesty has said consistently since we called on the Home Secretary to include Kincora in the UK-wide inquiry. What we now need is a commitment from the Home Office that Kincora will come within the remit of the inquiry.
  
Furthermore we need to ensure that the inquiry panel will be able to access all the witnesses and files necessary to get at the truth of the allegations of a cover-up of abuse at this Belfast boys' home.

12 comments:

  1. About 30years ago I worked with three lad's who'd been in Kincora, spent five to six day's a week with them, working, drinking and generally enjoying each others company.
    As is normal, we'd get to speaking about what we done when we were children and, one day, as we dander up the Newtownards Road one of them mentioned how certain big names used to regularly be in Kincora. These same big names are still big names, still doing the rounds of the 'political circles'.
    Regardless of what Captain Gemmell says, regardless of what Peter Robinson say's, this will never be investigated since the truth will bring about the downfall of too many big names, at least according to my one time friend who spent his youth in Kincora.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mick,

    thanks for posting that here. Hope there is more to come. Lifting the lid on what the powerful don't want us to see is a laudable project.

    ReplyDelete

  3. 'Mick,

    thanks for posting that here. Hope there is more to come. Lifting the lid on what the powerful don't want us to see is a laudable project'
    Anthony, to coin a phrase, that's hitting the head on the nail!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I bought "Who Framed Colin Wallace?" recently which was described by historian Robert Kee as the finest and most alarming example of professional investigative journalism he ever read.

    I suspect Menace is right by saying the house of cards will remain standing. Not enough of the perpetrators are dead yet to enable an investigation. Too many skeletons in the collective cupboard. Those involved know too much about too many things to get their comeuppance just yet.

    I feel books like Paul Foot's one I mentioned already and The Kincora Scandal by Chris Moore are maybe the closest we'll ever get to understanding what happened.

    I hope I am wrong but the spooks weren't too pleased with the ones who originally rocked the boat. They're unlikely to roll over now so few years after the fact.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Menace did any of the people who spoke to you name any of 'The big names' who are still alive and in 'political circles' today...

    If I knew any of the names involved, I'd name them. I'd worry about libel laws later.







    ReplyDelete
  6. Frankie, Naming names would be a terrible idea.

    If Menace's friend named names and lost a defamation case it may harm the victims' chances of getting justice.

    If Menace named anyone that would put him in a worse situation as he wasn't a witness. He can't stand over any allegations. He heard it all from someone else.

    We also can't assume the information is correct in the first place. If anyone was named in error it could ruin their lives too.

    And lastly, it could harm the quill and jeopardise it's position as an outlet for discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Simon,
    I take on board what you are saying but anyone who was in a position of trust, power within the Kincora set up had to know things weren't kosher. And in my eye's they are guilty for saying nothing. Colin Wallace, Brian Gemmel, Chris Moore (and I'm sure a host of others) have names that tally...Name them. It doesn't have to be on TPQ. There are other outlets.

    All I read about is "My Mi5 boss told me not to procede with my Kincora inquiry". Talk about a lame excuse... Name the people who pulled the plug or covered it up. In my head Simon it's not complicated. If I knew someone who was a kiddie fiddler..I'd put them in hospital then name them. I wouldn't cover it up.


    I've put names up on TPQ who are linked to promoting paedophilia, Elm guest house and others places.. Harriet Harman the deputy leader of the Labour party argued for child sex when she was one of the mouth pieces for Liberty and her PIE letters...

    I'm still waiting for a libel letter to come through my letter box. If one does it'll get indexed under 'R' for rubbish.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Frankie, As much as we'd like to give sex offenders a beating many times in the past innocent people have been beaten or attacked after being wrongly accused. Would you restrict your beatings to those you catch in the act or those you think you have reliable evidence for? That would possibly start a trend where more people beat up more suspects including more innocents.

    What if you were accused in the wrong?

    How many wrongly accused people would have to get beaten up before we go back to allowing courts to deal with things? The law isn't perfect but it is better than beating up suspects. For a start not everyone is as bright as everyone else. I know of a paediatrician who got a brick through her window after appearing in the paper. Who would give these beatings? Anyone? That'd be a disaster. What would give a more intelligent person the right to beat a suspect up rather than a less intelligent person?

    As for naming names, if a suspect wins a defamation case and then later faces criminal proceedings it may be in their favour that they won the civil case. It might sway the jury into a not guilty decision.

    Why risk innocent people being accused or attacked and why risk sex offenders avoiding justice after a defamation case?

    "And in my eye's they are guilty for saying nothing." Colin Wallace was "guilty" of something all right- he was sentenced to ten years for manslaughter after being framed for murder. Colin Wallace was framed after speaking out about Kincora. Someone wanted to discredit him and get him out of the way.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Frankie, As much as we'd like to give sex offenders a beating many times in the past innocent people have been beaten or attacked after being wrongly accused. Would you restrict your beatings to those you catch in the act or those you think you have reliable evidence for? That would possibly start a trend where more people beat up more suspects including more innocents.

    Simon I'd restrict my beating to the child abuser. Similar to what a father done recently in Florida. He went out for something quick to eat and left his son in what he thought was a safe enviroment (his home) only to return a short ttime later to find his son being abused. The father simply beat the abuser to a pulp and then phoned 911 and explained what happened. Listen to the call.

    I'm not calling for vigilantism in any form.


    What if you were accused in the wrong?

    What if you were wrongly accused like David Stanley was when he was arrested at the start of Operation Ore and the police knew he was innocent but leaked his name to the press and others that he was a suspected paedophile to save face and it led directly to his death? This is (IMO) an excellent video called The Appalling Vista by an Irish Jornalist called Brian Rothery. that exposes what wrong. The crux of the video is two Russian crime lords set up lots of child porn sites, stole credit cards details world wide and accessed their own sites netting millions. The Feds then raided a house in Texas and arrested innocent people.. And Operation Ore began leading to the death of David Stanley. The lies the FBI the British police & Judicary told and are still telling is scarey..


    If I was Colin Wallace, I'd contact Brian Gemmel and Chris Moore and leak names. The spooks 'out' who ever, when ever they want when someone is surplus to requirements, some get a pension and some were expendable I'd cause a hornets nest if I was in Colin Wallace's position.. Both Wallace & Gemmell have to know who was directly involved in child abuse at Kincora. They must at least know the names of their superiors who prevented them going any further. Name them. If you want to bring the house of cards down then start at the bottom. . I wonder what the wives and daughters would think of their husbands and fathers today if it came out they (the fathers, hubands) could have prevented child rape but did sweet fcuk all about it except take pctures and blackmail people about it....

    ReplyDelete
  10. Patrick Corrigan, Amnesty International's Northern Ireland director, said: “The focus must be the protection of children, rather than officials and dirty secrets.
    “The Home Secretary must announce the inclusion of Kincora in the inquiry and an exemption so that Army officers and others bound by the Official Secrets Act can finally speak freely.”


    Unless I'm missing the point there shouldn't be any secrets. It's not like pictures of brown envelopes at election time under the table or exposing a mole or an agent or other... So Colin Wallce or who ever needs permission from Cruela to be allowed to talk about who was covering up child rape.and who or who wasn't involved etc!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Frankie, you say you'd restrict your beatings for the child abuser. Does your example mean you'd restrict it to ones you caught in the act? It would be vigilantism either way. I am not saying it would be wrong but it would still be taking the law into your own hands.

    Why restrict it to the child abuser? For example why not beat up the adult who physically leaves another more vulnerable adult in a pulp after a rape? All child abuse is wrong and all victims are vulnerable and they should be protected but how can you be certain if you're not a witness?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think we're losing focus on the original story. Apologies, that was mainly my fault.

    I think it has to be remembered that Kincora was acknowledged as a cess-pool of depravity and child abuse early in the 1970s and for ex-MI5 men stated then and now that it was such. It was covered up and we need to find out why. We also need to find the perpetrators and the police should have access to all the files, they should be impartial and thorough and left unhindered to deliver justice.

    Otherwise we haven't moved on since the early 70s.

    ReplyDelete