Frank Beck was manager of three Leicester children's homes. In 1991 he was sentenced to five life sentences, found guilty of sexually and physically abusing around 200 children in his care over a 13 year period.
Frank Beck was a bully of the worst kind. Although he was capable of enormous charm, he was also physically threatening. He beat up the children in his homes, allowed a colleague to run a torture regime, and intimidated his staff to such an extent that they were not just terrified of him but were actually moulded into believing that Beck was acting in the best interests of the children in care.
Beck's managers knew of his unorthodox methods, especially his "regression therapy," where children were dressed in nappies, given dummies and bathed by staff. Most of the managers ignored the welter of complaints received about Beck. He apparently took on the worst children in care: child prostitutes, drug users, children with criminal records, and managed to control them. So, complaints were ignored.
It is thought that Beck murdered 12 year-old Simon O'Donnell by wrapping a towel round the boy's neck while he was being raped. A verdict of suicide by hanging was passed on the boy at the time.
Why did Frank Beck get away with the abuse for so long? Managers and police ignored complaints by outsiders, temporary workers, students etc and by children who ran away, but was this just the culture of the time or was something else behind this willingness to ignore?
At the time, Leicestershire's chief executive, chief constable, several chief officers, the Conservative group leader and other senior Tory councillors were all masons, giving the impression that some council decisions were made at lodge meetings. It should be stressed, though, that the United Grand Lodge of England says that there is no record of Beck ever being a mason.
(Community Care May 10th 2000)
Should someone be asking how many of those people in power knew about Frank Beck's activities? At least one person in a position of power appears to have known.
Enter Greville Janner QC, later to become Lord Janner of Braunstone, knighted by Tony Blair.
According to C.H.R.I.S (Children Have Rights In Society)
In 1991, after accusing LORD/MP Greville Janner of paedophilic behaviour with a teenager, Frank Beck was arrested and charged with the sexual and physical abuse of children in his care over a thirteen-year period.
At his trial Beck stated that: - “One child has been buggered and abused for two solid years by Greville Janner“...
.....Shortly afterwards, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alan Green, let it be known that “for lack of evidence”, Janner would not be prosecuted, even though Paul Winston, who was just thirteen when he and Janner first met, was able to describe Janner‘s home, the hotel rooms they had shared, and Janner’s habits and person in detail.
The Director of Public Prosecutions, himself, was arrested for kerb-crawling in Kings Cross a little while later.
Green had come to the attention of the police previously for this same misdemeanour and was quietly given a formal warning. The scandal prompted his resignation from public office...
..Beck discovered what had been going on after Winston was put into his care, at which point, he informed his superiors at Leicester Social Services. At one point, Janner visited the care home with a new bicycle for Paul but Beck denied him entry and would not allow the gift to be passed on. This was confirmed by another witness at the trial.
So, if I am understanding what is written in the above article on the C.H.R.I.S web site, Frank Beck was arrested after accusing Greville Janner of child abuse. Are we to assume a connection, that Greville Janner pointed the finger at Frank Beck after Beck accused him of abuse and that was why, after 13 years of abusing children in his care, Frank Beck was eventually charged? Accuse the accuser of worse crimes?
JANNER used the device of a ‘Personal Statement’ to deny all the accusations against him. Statements to the House of Commons of this kind, apart from being covered by Parliamentary privilege, are exempt from the usual interjections *and questions* from other MPs. After making his statement JANNER was invited by the press to answer their questions *outside* the privileged confines of the House. He refused to do so, and refused to explain why. (C.H.R.I.S Link above)
Janner then claimed that he had been cleared by parliament, which isn't true. He simply used a parliamentary rule to give his side of the story where he couldn't be questioned.
Thus it may be seen that his subsequent claims to have been “cleared by Parliament of all accusations” is utterly untrue. JANNER ducked a genuine opportunity to clear his name by taking legal action against his former victim who, as a grown man, has re-iterated his evidence outside the protection of the witness box. (C.H.R.I.S.)
I ask again: how did Frank Beck get away with abusing children in his care for 13 years? Was he a Mason and did his Masonic brothers make sure he was never brought to task? And how come Greville Janner, with accusations of child abuse, for which he was never cleared because never charged, was knighted by Tony Blair?
Frank Beck died on 31st May 1994, apparently as the result of a heart attack while playing badminton in prison. His body was cremated on June 9th 1994. At the time he was said to have been a fit man and other inmates suggested that he had been poisoned with methamphetamine in his food. At the time, Beck had been working on his appeal, repeating his claims against Greville Janner.
Time to revisit this case, I think. It appears that at least one person, Lord Janner of Braunstone, has some questions to answer. See Cover-ups? for a long list of proposed questions.