Share, , Google Plus, Pinterest,


Who is afraid of Richard Kerr?

Malicious and unfair assaults on the credibility of Richard Kerr, the Kincora whistleblower, are nothing new.

The most concerted effort to undermine him so far was one perpetrated by sinister individuals posing as journalists who attempted to get him to join forces with the now notorious conman Carl Beech. This occurred when Beech was featuring prominently in the mainstream British media as ‘Nick’ and was holding himself out as a victim of VIP child sex abuse when he was nothing of the sort. Beech was later exposed as a liar and a fraud.

Richard realised from the outset that Beech was a complete fraud and refused to have anything to do with him. Village has argued that Beech was a plant all along who was constructed from day one to be exposed as a fraud and taint genuine victims of VIP sex abuse. Village’s analysis can be found at: Does ‘Nick’s’ conviction mean Jimmy Savile and Ted Heath are innocent? Yes, if you work for the British tabloid press. By Joseph de Búrca

Another dirty trick is to assert that Richard has made a claim when he hasn’t. Judge Anthony Hart was tripped up repeatedly by his reliance on press reports containing errors. Hart relied upon articles about Richard which appeared on the Internet. Some of them had misreported what Kerr had said. As a judge, Hart should have known better than to have relied upon hearsay and dross from the internet in his egregious and woeful 2017 report on Kincora. Worse again, Hart himself conjured an allegation out of thin air that Kerr had claimed that he had been abused by Sir Maurice Oldfield, the former head of MI6. Kerr never made such an allegation. The supreme irony is that Hart claimed elsewhere in his report that Richard had not in fact made any allegation about Oldfield abusing him.

Judge Hart, the only judicial figure in legal history to rely upon hearsay and internet dross to determine credibility.

Bizarrely, one of ‘Nick/Beech’s’ allegations was that he too had been abused by Maurice Oldfield.

Kerr decided that he was not going to have anything to do with Judge Hart after some tentative engagement with the clown. In light of the multiple errors Hart made in his lamentable report, Kerr has been vindicated.

A third line of attack is to claim that Richard must be making up stories after he releases new information. Why? Well, because he had not made the disclosure previously. This presupposes that all interviews that Kerr has ever given were intended to be comprehensive biographical accounts of his entire life. Suffice it to say Kerr has not attempted to provide anyone with a full biographical account of his life. It would probably take a book containing 100,000 words to describe it in a way that would do justice to it.

Another factor in all of this is trust. As Richard is at pains to explain to anyone who talks to him, a severe symptom of his post-abuse syndrome is a lack of trust in people. This is a symptom common to most abuse survivors. Hence, it should be apparent to any intelligent journalist, writer or researcher who has conducted even the most elementary preparation for an interview with a sex abuse survivor that trust must be built up over time. One figure in the UK with an overblown view of his own importance has attacked Richard simply because he was not given chapter and verse on his life when he established some tentative contact with him.

Fear is also a factor in hesitating about making certain disclosures. Richard encountered brutes like John McKeague, a sadistic Red Hand Commando/UVF terrorist, not to mention the fact that he he has been beaten up by RUC and English police officers to shut him up about what he knew about Kincora. McKeague was a vicious serial killer who enjoyed torturing Catholics in UVF ‘romper rooms’.

Yet another factor is the suppression of traumatic memories. Irish legislation makes a specific exception for victims of sex abuse who wish to take a legal action later in life. The normal time limits do not apply to sex abuse victims where they are found to have been labouring under a psychological disability which prevented them taking litigation at an earlier stage in their life. Time only begins to run when they emerge from such a psychological disability. This legislation was based on advice furnished to the Irish government by psychologists and experts in the field of sex abuse trauma. There is similar legislation in other jurisdictions.

The TV Star

There are many stories yet to come from Richard including one involving a cabinet minister in Margaret Thatcher’s government.

In addition, Richard has yet to name the well-known TV star who abused him in London in the 1970s. The individual in question is still very much in the spotlight. Indeed, he has appeared all over the British media in the last number of days. See: How the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring Trafficked Boys from Belfast to MPs and a TV star in Britain

Richard has also been subject to intimidation. He was sent a letter purporting to be from the Ulster Freedom Fighters (i.e. the Ulster Defence Association) which Village magazine has published. Most assuredly, it was not sent by the UFF, rather by individuals with a vested interest in convincing the public that the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring never existed. The threatening letter can be read in full at Careless about Kerr

Bearing all of the foregoing in mind, a new video has just appeared on the Internet which features some photographic material provided to the producers of it by Richard. Unfortunately, a number of errors have crept into the video. Since a clown cast from the same mould as Judge Hart could yet be appointed to look at Richard’s case at some stage in the future, it is important to nail these errors before they take root.

In fairness to the producers of the video, some important issues have been raised in it with which Richard Kerr takes no issue and indeed are based on revelations which he did make to them.

The video can be found at

Let us now turn to the most blatant errors in the video.

One of the pictures in it is described as that of Lord Louis Mountbatten with the assertion that it was taken by Richard. Richard does not maintain that he took a picture of Mountbatten. Furthermore, the man in the picture is clearly not Mountbatten. Judge for yourself by reference to the picture taken from the video which is available on YouTube and reproduced immediately below this paragraph:

Second, there is a reference to Richard having taken a photograph when he was in London aged 14. Richard does not claim that he took such a picture when he was 14.

Richard did indeed furnish the producers of the video with a picture of an individual who was part of the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. The producers describe the picture as ‘blurred’ which it certainly is. However, Richard does not claim that the ‘blurred’ individual in it was “well-known”. The photograph is one of Mike Anderson, an enforcer from Manchester who served the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring.

Nor does Richard suggest that Jimmy Carter had him brought to America. The correct circumstances of his emigration to the United States are outlined in a story published on this website. Please see Trump’s mentor: another sociopathic paedophile child-trafficker in the mix; from Roy Cohn to Epstein and Maxwell.

Fourth, there is a photograph of Roy Cohn, the notorious New York attorney in the video. Richard does not claim that he took this photograph. Furthermore, he knows full well what Cohn looks like since Cohn abused him. The picture is one which is freely available on the Internet. Two other people feature in it, one of whom is Donald Trump. The significance of the photograph to Richard is explained in the Cohn story mentioned above.

This article has been written in haste as an immediate response to the video which was only brought to our attention on 1 August 2020. It may be necessary to expand upon further errors at a later stage.