Carl Beech: Drawing Some Threads Together

This has been a long time coming; from Sky News:

A former NHS manager has been convicted of lying to police and fooling Scotland Yard into launching a £2.5m investigation into a VIP paedophile ring that didn’t exist.

Carl Beech, 51, claimed he and others were tortured, raped and abused by senior politicians, military chiefs and the heads of MI5 and MI6 – and had witnessed the sadistic murder of three young boys.

He has been found guilty of fraud and 12 counts of perverting the course of justice,

There are now dozens of articles profiling Beech and summarising aspects of the trial, parts of which were live-tweeted tirelessly by a young Sky reporter named Jordan Milne, whose threads are available here.

The story of Carl Beech, aka Operation Midland’s “Nick” and “Carl Survivor”, is one that I have been following since 2014, when I first read about his claims in a prescient article (partially cross-posed to Harry’s Place) by the barrister Matthew Scott titled “Exaro News Is Playing A Dangerous Game With Its Paedophile Murder Story”. This was a couple of weeks after “Nick” had been showcased by the Sunday People in an article headlined “MPs and VIPs ‘child abuse ring’ at luxury flats near Parliament investigated by detectives” (still available on the Mirror website, which encompasses the Sunday People‘s web presence), by Keir Mudie, Nick Dorman and Mark Conrad. The article featured a photo of Nick, viewed from behind, sitting on a bench and talking Mark Watts, captioned as “reporter Mark” – it’s not clear if this is a misidentification of Conrad, or if for some reason Watts’ full name was deliberately left off. The story was branded with a Sunday People “investigation” logo and also that of Exaro, where Conrad and Watts were based. Two weeks later, the photo of the back of Beech’s head made its way onto the front page, as part of a splash titled “I saw MP throttle young boy to death”.

Matthew’s post was published in response to the story being picked up by the BBC’s World At One, which had run an interview with “Nick”. Matthew highlighted several reasons for caution which resonated with me: he referred to “rumours, which in truth have been flying around on the internet for years”; to the danger of contamination; to the possibility that the reports will “feed a monstrous hysteria”, with innocent people being unjustly accused; and to parallels with the case of Carol Felstead, who had made lurid false allegations against politicians following therapy. For my part, I was put in mind both of scurrilous stories published in Scallywag magazine in the 1990s and of the 1980s Satanic Ritual Abuse panic.

After expressing some cautious scepticism, in due course it was brought to my attention that “Nick” was actually a man named Carl Beech, who worked for the Care Quality Commission. Various NHS-related documents showed a portly but apparently cheerful figure, although there was also a critical website by some kind of alternative healer calling herself “Dr Cathar”, who had a grudge against him after he had apparently dispensed with her services as a hospital interpreter.

It also transpired that Beech had contributed a poem (a wretched piece, essentially a misery memoir blurb channelled through William McGonagall) to the October 2012 issue of the NAPAC Newsletter (NAPAC = the National Association for People Abused in Childhood), which had been published under his full name. The poem suggested a child-abuse ring (“They came in the night and they came in the day / Myself and my friend were always their prey”), but for some reason now that he was accusing public figures he was suddenly very keen to assert his legal right to anonymity.

This made it very difficult to piece the story together publicly. In particular, while Exaro were publishing about “Nick”, Beech was active on Twitter as Carl Survivor (@carl_survivor) and as Carl Chassereau (@carl_cassereau), producing lurid accounts of abuse on a related blog and on a website called This Tangled Web (to add to the confusion, his posts to this site were uploaded by a third party, and so were tagged “By Kate Swift”). Could these legally be cross-referenced, given that Carl was his real name? I did so in one post, but later out of an abundance of caution edited the connection out. However, some of the Tangled Web material made it into the media – in particular his story about being tortured with Remembrance Day poppies, which I discussed here. As “Carl Survivor”, Beech became the poster-boy for a “Wall of Silence” anti-abuse exhibition that was displayed in Bristol, at the National Assembly of Wales, and at City Hall in London – indeed, it was very nearly displayed in Parliament.

Beech had also previously used his middle name Stephen to appear in a documentary (with his face obscured) in which he claimed to have encountered Jimmy Savile at a child-abuse party. Why was this not mentioned in Exaro’s reporting? The fact that Beech was able to claim compensation for his supposed abuse by Savile with just a vague account raises questions about how many other people may have got away with fraudulent claims.

The wheels started to fall off in the summer of 2015, when Harvey Proctor gave a public statement about Beech’s allegations against him. He referred to several names that had been put to him, and one of these was Raymond Beech, who had been Beech’s step-father for a time (Carl’s birth name was Carl Gass). Proctor also revealed lurid details that Exaro had suppressed – I suspect because they were too incredible – such as that he had supposedly attempted to castrate Carl but had been prevented by fellow orgiast Edward Heath. A few months later, BBC Panorama ran an episode which raised doubts about Beech’s story and those of some other “VIP accusers”. The programme-makers were vilified for this, but vindication followed. The police “Operation Midland” closed down in ignominy; the Henriques Report made serious criticisms of how Scotland Yard had handled the matter; and then Beech himself came under investigation by Northumbria Police, brought in as an outside force.

We now know from the trial that there is overwhelming evidence that Beech fabricated his accounts of “VIP abuse” – he researched locations and details which he then presented to the police as memories, in one case describing the swimming pool at Dolphin Square based on a pop video which supposedly showed the location but which in fact had been filmed elsewhere. He created false collaborating witnesses via email. School friends and records disputed his accounts. Photos of him swimming and a selfie in his underwear fatally undermined his allegations of a phobia about being underwater or of looking at himself. Bodily injuries were not present. His computer yielded other versions of his story, and also reliance on books by an American named Timmy Fielding. The CPS has a round-up of the evidence here.

Meanwhile, it has also been revealed that Beech himself has been involved in crimes of a paedophilic nature – he downloaded images of child abuse, which he kept hidden on his computer, and he secretly filmed a teenage boy urinating. These are crimes he has admitted, and the secret filming in particular means we can discount any kind of “Chris Langham” defence that he accessed such images for some reason other than sexual gratification. Again, the law made it difficult to put the full story together – his arrest in Sweden after fleeing the UK last year was reported in Swedish media, but could not at first be referred to in the UK, and initial reports of his subsequent conviction for these offences could not be linked with his activities as “Nick” and “Carl Survivor”.

It used to be the case that previous convictions could not be mentioned during trials, but this is no longer always the case and following legal argument it was agreed that Beech’s sex offences could be disclosed as part of the fraud and perversion of justice case. This decision, although open to criticism, was reasonable in that the offences shed light on Beech’s motivations and obsessions when he made his false allegations. However, Mark Watts, who attended Beech’s trial every day (funded by whom?), now claims that the ruling “made it impossible for Carl Beech to have a fair trial” and that the convictions are “wholly unsafe”. Watts also suggests that the trial had “no insight into the possible effects of childhood trauma”. It’s not clear what is meant by this last point, but there are no grounds to doubt that Beech has mental capacity. Alternatively, perhaps he is arguing that true abuse may lead to false allegations, or even that false allegations are evidence of true abuse.

This is weak stuff. Clearly, Beech’s behaviour – his lies and manipulation, and also grandiose spending that resulted in large debts – was pathological, and perhaps can be explained by his experience of a violent step-father. We can’t disprove the possibility of sexual abuse as well, but that’s simply a truism and there is no good reason to depart from the principle of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. The jury’s verdict is supported by overwhelming evidence that anyone can assess for themselves. The nearest Watts comes to admitting this is when he concedes that “forensic examination of Carl Beech’s computers shows that police would have had no basis for referring to the Crown Prosecution Service his statements against anyone of child sexual abuse or homicide” – a rather opaque formulation that implies that some technical matter has created a bit of doubt, rather than that Beech’s whole story has been exposed as lies.

Despite everything, the conspiracy milieu – which is Watts’s primary readership – is unlikely to admit to a bad investment any time soon. Given the near omnipotence ascribed to dark forces (who for some reason were unable to suppress the story completely), Beech’s ruin and imprisonment can easily be assimilated into their narratives.

15 Responses

  1. It is awful when false claims of child abuse cover ups can damage public perception of genuine evidenced cases. “Nick” was under suspicion for some time, but he still managed to get taken seriously, costing the taxpayer, when real victims with evidence can be, and often are, ignored. The test is evidence for claims. And this is the majority sector. All the cases we have at the international criminal courts; I.C.C and U.N. are heavily evidenced that is currently 17,000 DOCUMENTS from officials, that prove abuse corruption, fully corroborated.
    In 18 years of international criminal investigations (violations of Rome Treaty) we, international prosecutors, and myself a victim atrocity crime, now Cases Compiler, have compiled hundreds of cases, and yet only come across one wild claim, with no supporting evidence supplied. If a victim is genuine, they will always have something – medical or council or residence or school or PSD evidence, something to trigger further investigation. If someone comes to me with a complex claim, yet cannot even demonstrate they were in an alleged location, then why pursue further ? I will give my time to someone else who can do that, and our professionals then advise what further evidence is needed to fill any gaps, medical etc. and how to procure it. Refusals to provide admitted withheld evidence by an authority are of course criminal violations, which is evidence in itself.

    What I hope people understand, is of course there can be a small number of false claims, made for psychological or financial reasons, but this in no way, should reflect on genuine victims who do have substantial evidence. The U.N. recognises Britain as the worst of industrialised member states of the U.N. for child abuse, and of cover ups, and is getting increasingly concerned about child torture in youth prisons, for example, with electric shocks on children’s small frames, and spit-hood use that has killed a small number of children by strangulation, and increasingly concerned that 70% of U.N. recommendations are ignored by the British Government. These very real issues should not be clouded by a couple of false or dubious claims. Child abuse, particularly institutional, and Denial of the Truth Crimes, is a reality in the U.K. and the number of victims is staggering. Eleven million (Radford), most denied Justice. The number of deaths resulting from abuse, belongs to a Nazi country or similar. The annual ‘no justice despair suicides’ rate tops a thousand, where suicide can strike years after the abuse, and what help is made available ? Hospitals and Charities / NGOs, but from the Government, not too much. Political statements and nothing more. Charities (and solicitors) are swamped, when group trauma psychotherapy is needed. We agree with The U.K.’s Representative to the U.N. Security Council, who argued in the Scripal case “Do you ask an arsonist to investigate his own fire ?” Well, what is the Police Reform Act 2002 doing ? Same-force, self-investigation into their own evidential crimes, homogenous in 41 out of 43 constabularies, which corrupt evidence or refuse to prosecute institutional child torture, in too many cases (only 2% of child rape cases ever see the inside of a U.K. criminal court room) leaving victims in despair. PSDs are a disaster of legally unqualified civilian staff led by one sergeant, paid by their forces to do nothing, so a well designed corruption machine. The Home Office “cannot intervene” in their police corruption they fund. I have a lot of letters from them saying the same !! Corruption is a reality, however many false claims surface, but the evidenced cases, the only ones we deal with, tell the truth. I won’t even mention the discredited IPCC !! You know that story only too well.


    Lindsay Fraser
    BHTCS Trials Centre

  2. Richard, thanks for this. Your post here plus the Daily Mail coverage post-trial verdict, and that of a few well-informed twitter accounts, seem to me the final note on this entire fiasco.

    • John Mann, a veteran Labour MP who commented after Proctor’s 2015 police interview that it was the ‘first of many’, has just been appointed independent advisor on anti-Semitism.

  3. In mid-2015, I noticed that the biographical details on the header of the Carl Survivor blog were identical to those given out by ‘Nick’ to Exaro News. As a past reader of Armistead Maupin’s novel ‘The Night Listener’ and a fascinated student of the abuse-hoaxer whose life it was based on – ‘Anthony Godby Johnson,’ actually Joanne Vicki Fraginals – I decided that it was time to point out ‘Nick’ and ‘Carl’s self-expressed links while also stressing the likelihood that the entire story was a monstrous hoax ( My linking of Nick and Carl may have been somewhat edgy, given there was a ban on publication of Beech’s name, but at the time, I didn’t know his name, so I felt linking two pseudonyms was reasonable. Only a year later, in 2016, I was off to the same races again dealing with the massive Pizzagate sexual abuse hoax that was manufactured for the U.S. election. The take home message for me now is that, notwithstanding the many genuine cases documented by people like Lindsay Fraser, above, the world has a tremendous appetite for false pedophilia horror stories, especially if political or social foes are involved, and there are thousands and thousand of people eager to initiate and perpetuate them. This social force carries some of the momentum of traditional group egomanias like anti-semitism, but also has a frisson all its own as a tickler of the titillations and an intense crucible for firing up a lava of outrage against every corrupt power a person has ever dealt with. Carl Beech is not an outlier. He is thoroughly integrated into society, and widely dispersed.

  4. Oh I agree with the above. He’s gone so far as to provide us all with a link to the exact person he describes as being integrated among us. Don’t forget Jimmy Jones the outlaw remembered witnessing Sir Peter Morrison picking up for boys from the Bryn Estyn, at least five times. Pmsl. Despite never being. Surprised to see link to an Icke worshipper on here. Times-a-changing I guess

    • Laverty, you bilberry!

      Didn’t you film yourself skulking around Haut de la Garenne in vain attempt to launder your reputation – again! – and appeal to worshippers of Icke & other assorted halfwits?!?

      Where’s it gone? Did the ‘Jersey Elite’ have it taken down?
      Go on, put it up on YouTube again – give us all a laugh! You made Bill Baloney look like the ‘award-winning film-maker’ he most definitely isn’t, a threadbare Shoestring bumbling around a Youth Hostel’s corridors… comedy gold!

      P.S. At least we agree that Bernie Najarian’s comment is spot-on.

      • Mr Laverty, nothing wrong with going on holidays to Jersey but taking time out to scout around the HDLG premises is a bit….weird, tbh.

        Bernie Najarian called it correctly from quite early on, to give him/her credit.

  5. […] Carl Beech: Drawing some threads together [Bartholomew’s Notes] […]

  6. […] Beech publicised his allegations on his blog, his Twitter account, and in his execrable poetry, over-generously described by Richard Bartholomew as “misery memoir blurb channelled through William […]

  7. […] himself, his blog, his whiny tweeting as @carl_survivor and his execrable poetry, over-generously described by Richard Bartholomew as “misery memoir blurb channelled through William […]

  8. For the benefit of Bandini, RTE and anyone else following this, the important question regarding the rumour regarding a certain MP on twitter, if it is true, then was he interviewed under caution? If yes, he is in the firing line, if not, he may have just provided a witness interview as they attempt build a case against someone else. Obviously, poking his nose into the affairs of people that are not constituents for reasons of political opportunism isn’t a criminal offence, though I’m tempted to say it bloody well should be.

    • Good to see Douglas Murray hasn’t forgotten other Exaro-touted liars, like “Darren”:

    • Thanks TDF, I am assured that others, in positions where they can ask more direct questions, are following up on the rumour regarding the “certain MP” and the current party conference season may, of course, see him directly grilled over the rumour. It is after all a public interest matter.

      The issue of whether he was interviewed under caution or not is, as yet (I understand), unclear. It’s also unlikely that the cops would confirm or deny whether he has or hasn’t been at this stage, especially if he is a suspect. Nor is it likely the MP/his office would confirm/deny at this point in case it backfired on them. But there is no harm in asking first… ;-)

      If the rumour about two forces being involved in questioning him it would certainly suggest that he’s in the frame either as a suspect for offences or as a witness as you describe @tdf. I’d suggest that there is enough existing evidence to demonstrate that he was at least pulling strings whether that influence crosses into criminal offences I don’t know.

      I also agree that whilst the political opportunism isn’t a criminal offence in itself, it is however a clear breach of parliamentary protocol and should be investigated by the office of the Speaker of the House in this instance because of the nature of what the MP caused. I suspect because of the Brexit chaos that it has been somewhat overlooked … for now.

  9. A titbit from today’s Henriques report and cap doffed to Bandini for drawing attention to it:

    Mr Allen sr was a chauffeur to the Australian High Commissioner, he may have been doing nixers for other VIP’s who lived in Dolphins’ Square.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.