Letter To Jack Straw Re Intrusive Surveillance

The letter below was sent to Home Secretary Jack Straw at the bidding of my solicitor, who was then also a Labour Councillor. I have to say that not only was the wording entirely mine (including any mistakes!) but I agreed - and still agree - one hundred percent with the sentiment. Talking of errors, I am not sure entirely that the phrase “political gerrymandering” is correct, but it is one I have used on occasion, and it certainly conveys the impression of duplicity, which was what I intended.

The letter is published here verbatim with one exception, I have omitted the name of my cellmate alluded to in paragraph 6.

The enclosed partial list of false rape allegations is included below the second dotted line; that part of the letter was entirely my own idea. This epistle was written originally using WordStar; for those who would like to view it in its original format, a copy of the original is included, as is a cut down version of my favourite wordprocessor.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hon Jack Straw MP,                                                93c Venner Road,
Home Secretary.                                                       Sydenham,
                                                                                   London SE26 5HU.
                                                                                   0181 659 7713
                                                                                  E-Mail A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK

September 22, 1997

Dear Mr Straw,

I was recently passed a Home Office document by my solicitor; Intrusive Surveillance is a draft consultation paper which has not been widely publicised although it is available to members of the public. In this it is proposed that the police should be given what amounts to carte blanche to bug people at will. I enclose my solicitor’s letter to the Home Office - he is also a Labour Councillor.

After September 30 the only people who will be able to object to these proposals will be MPs; I am astounded that a Labour Government or any government in a so-called democracy would endorse such proposals and I hope that you will not. You especially since you have yourself been the victim of such intrusive surveillance. Also, in June 1995 you told the Caribbean Times that your grandfather had come to this country as an immigrant. Many people came to this country from Nazi Germany and other repressive regimes to escape from such tyranny, and they must now be turning in their graves.

The police line is, or appears to be, that they need such Draconian powers to combat the ever escalating problem of serious crime. This is blatant nonsense; the best way for the police to combat crime is by proper management and by targetting real criminals. I have personal experience of this. In November 1996 I was arrested and spent six months in gaol awaiting trial after a thinly veiled political frame-up.

Excuses to the contrary, the real reason for this was that the police were out to get me after arresting me in August 1996 on account of my publishing activities, which certain people find distasteful. After the August arrest they went through all my private documents and have since arrested two of my friends and harassed more. In February 1997 the Attorney General ruled that no action was to be taken against me on this account, so their heavy-handed tactics were exposed as malicious political gerrymanderings.

During the whole eight days of my trial, Organised Crime Group officers sat in the public gallery, mostly the arresting officer, and he was obviously sick as a parrot when the jury returned not guilty verdicts on both counts. He was obviously being paid to attend this trial even though he didn’t have to attend outside of the two and a half hours or so that he spent in the witness box. That was all public money wasted.

In my time in Brixton I met many people who had been the victims of similar fit ups, and on my release I published an article in an Islamic journal on this subject (which I will send you on request). One of my cellmates was a young black man named H******** who had been gaoled for intent to supply drugs. He hadn’t actually supplied any drugs to anyone but had simply been entrapped by a police agent provocateur who had propositioned him in the street. He was a social inadequate and obviously none too bright so fell into the trap. As a result of this he lost his hostel place and the possibility of being rehoused, just because some little scumbag wanted to make his quota for the week. This sort of thing happens all the time; entrapment and incitement should be criminal offences, but they are not because they boost crime clear up statistics, and it is obviously much easier and safer for the police to engage in such tactics than chasing real criminals. As I stressed in my article, this sort of tyranny threatens everyone regardless of race, social or economic status or any other criteria.

Finally, I saw you on TV last week commenting on the always controversial subject of rape. It was claimed brazenly in this TV report that the courts are acquitting too many rapists. You sided with this feminist claptrap, unwittingly no doubt. The courts do not acquit rapists; sometimes they acquit alleged rapists. It didn’t occur to the commentator nor to you apparently that some of those accused may be genuinely innocent. Before you bow to this sort of emotional blackmail and further erode the rights of the accused you might like to see the other side of the coin. I have enclosed a partial list with this letter.

Yours sincerely,
A Baron

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

False Rape Allegations: a partial list since 1994


Man cleared of ‘shared bed’ rape, by John Steele, published in the Daily Telegraph, January 27, 1994.

Reports that a woman allowed her former boyfriend to share her bed “for several nights” on the understanding that there would be no sex. Indeed.

Student cleared of raping girl who did not resist: ‘Weakest case’ collapses after judge rules on alleged victim’s consent to sex, by Colin Randal, published in the Daily Telegraph, November 24, 1994.

A few hours after David Warren met his “victim” they went to bed at a friend’s house. She “invited him into bed, initiated sexual foreplay and gave no sign of wishing to resist him.” She started to cry during intercourse but they parted in the morning “on amicable terms”. The prosecutor agreed with the judge that it was the weakest of rape cases.

Art student is cleared of rape, by David Graves, published in the Daily Telegraph, December 1, 1994.

After a 3 day trial, a jury of 7 men and 5 women took just 2 minutes to clear a student of raping a fellow undergraduate student. She was said to have had whips and chains and a riding crop in her room and to have allowed him to massage her with oil and to have had oral sex with him. She reported the alleged rape to the police 9 days later! No defence evidence was heard!

Times, March 4, 1995, page 3, after being acquitted on a trumped-up charge of rape, Liverpool actor Craig Charles was said to have lost an estimated £250,000 in television and radio appearances, commercial voice-overs and corporate videos since the previous July! He was arrested after the “so-called victim” (in his words), complained of the alleged rape on the morning of July 8, 1994.

Woman made up stalker story, police believe, by Stewart Tendler, published in the Times, May 18, 1996, page 3.

This reports a high profile case in which a woman claimed that she had been terrorised by a man calling himself Chuck - who does not appear to have existed. She is said to have written threatening letters to herself. At one point she claimed to have been raped by her alleged stalker while under police protection. The police investigation is said to have cost £200,000.

‘Cracker rape’ all in the mind, by Dominic Kennedy, published in the Times, November 30, 1996, page 1.

This reports that a man was cleared of sexually abusing a woman “whose recollections of the attack were triggered by watching television and reading a book.” The victim was sincere but wrong.

Yard in fingerprint blunder, by Stephen Grey, published in the Sunday Times, April 6, 1997, page 1.4.

An interesting article which reports that a man had spent 2 months in gaol after an error in fingerprinting. Another case led to a man in Nottinghamshire being wrongly gaoled for rape.

Britons face jail for hotel rape lies, by Michael Theodoulou, published in the Times, August 23, 1997, page 5.

This is a report about a woman named Susan Warburton who, together with her fiancé Paul Shearsmith, fabricated a false rape claim against a hotel employee in Cyprus. [This was widely reported; incredibly, they were not gaoled.] The motive appears to have been purely financial; they thought they could claim on their holiday insurance!

A fortnight prior to this a Dublin woman was gaoled for four months by the same court for filing a fraudulent claim against two Irish soldiers and an Irish tourist!

To this Letter in WordStar format
WordStar 6 basic set up, ZIP file

To Letter re rape law reform
To Rape statistics ‘ludicrous’
To ‘Alleged rapists’ will lose right

Back To Correspondence And Open Letters Index
Back To Site Index