The Old Boys’ Club III: The Dunblane Massacre and Freemason Speculation

Thomas Hamilton

Yet another tragedy made worse by a botched investigation and countless unanswered questions was the Dunblane school massacre on March 13 1996. More allegations of serial paedophilia, and masonic interference were present, the flames of which were continuously fanned on the internet and in the tabloids. This time, the Scottish Establishment was under the microscope focusing on two senior politicians and a lawyer.

Not known for its whistle-blowing of secret societies or Old Boys Clubs, a report courtesy of the Daily Telegraph drew attention to the fact that Thomas Hamilton, who shot and murdered 16 children and their teacher: “… was a major provider of pornographic photographs and videos to a ring of men prominent in Central Scotland, including police officers who protected him from numerous allegations of physical abuse at boys’ camps and clubs he ran.” And with startling regularity in such cases: ‘They protected themselves after the massacre which conveniently ended in his suicide’.  Last year on-the-scene paramedic Sandra Uttley’s former partner, Mick North, whose five-year-old daughter Sophie was killed, initially said he was ‘convinced’ of a cover-up. Detective Chief Superintendent John Ogg, who headed the Dunblane investigation, has said of criticism in the past: ‘I can reassure you that the investigation was absolutely thorough and we covered every angle’. ^[1]

Given the record of the police investigating paedophile rings, and Establishment crimes this “reassurance” was hardly convincing. Enter senior member of the Scottish Judiciary Baron Cullen of Whitekirk, East Lothian, otherwise known as Lord Cullen who was conveniently chosen to chair an inquiry into the many issues surrounding the tragedy. One of the questions first posed included how it was that Hamilton had been able to secure a firearms certificate while having a history of paedophilia and mental instability.

Lord Cullen

After years of stone-walling, bureaucratic delays and an initial hue and cry from a few media tabloids which added to the rumours of conspiratorial machinations, a 100 year old secrecy rule which had been imposed on some documents seen by the inquiry was finally overturned in October 2005, close to ten years after the tragedy. Almost 3,000 letters and reports were finally open to inspection. The crown office claimed the decision to impose the rule was made to protect the identity of children who may have been abused by Hamilton, and their families, yet many of the documents had nothing to do with children nor was it seen as a genuine reason to withhold vital information to the public when a simple “black marker” approach would have been sufficient. What amounted to an effective gagging order was underscored by the Lord Advocate’s words from March 2003: “There is no statutory basis for the closure of records created by Scottish public bodies.”^[2]  It seems Scottish law is not tied by the 30 year closure limit existing in England.

One report which was under the 100-year rule umbrella ban was compiled by Paul Hughes, then a detective sergeant with Central Scotland police. The detective’s investigations into Hamilton’s activities at a summer camp in Loch Lomond in 1991 took place five years before the shootings and further strengthened general accusations of police inaction and complacency. The report further “… recommended that Hamilton should be prosecuted for his activities at the summer camp and that he should have his gun licence revoked.” ^[3] Although Lord Cullen referred to it in his inquiry it was largely ignored and did not feature in the index or appendices to his final report.

In 1998 Lord Burton asked a House of Commons Parliamentary inquiry on the issue: “… whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of the Report by Sergeant, now Inspector, Hughes, of Central Police, into Thomas Hamilton; to list all the charges to which he recommended consideration for prosecution and whether they will state why the Report is not listed in the index or appendix to Lord Cullen’s Report into the Dunblane tragedy.” ^[4]  Under Secretary of State to the Scottish Office, Lord Sewel, only made matters worse by responding in rather diluted terms. He failed to answer the above questions posed by Lord Burton and merely reiterated past statements with no explanations. A general unease and suspicion as to why a ban was imposed continued to grow. (We will return to Lord Burton shortly).

Sandra Uttley, the paramedic who dealt with the aftermath of the Dunblane massacre went to the European Court of Human Rights to demand a new inquiry into the tragedy. “There are glaring anomalies in the inquiry, inconsistencies in witness testimony,” she said, “incorrect information given on oath and the absence of vital witnesses.” ^[5] Her partner Mick North also fought for the right to access essential documents for the sake of the public’s right to know and for his daughter Sophie whom he lost in the massacre. However, once more documents became available, he stated: “I do realise that some might feel I’ve fallen hook, line and sinker for the official version of events. […] I realise that some questions do remain, but I am satisfied that nothing untoward contributed to that. There seems little point in continuing to bang our heads off a brick wall. It is time to put the matter to rest.” ^[6]

No evidence of paedophilia rings was present in the documents according to North. Such a position is understandable from a parent who has lost his child in such a horrific way. However, it is surely naive to assume that putting “the matter to rest” when unanswered questions still remain, is somehow allowing justice to be done. Indeed, justice appears to have been done with the lifting of the ban and other questions having been answered, but this fails to allay the concerns raised about information that was not addressed in the inquiry and remains pertinent to this day.

The Key reports originally sealed and now made public included:

• ‘comparative analysis of Thomas Hamilton’ by Central Scotland Police;
• Information about Hamilton’s ‘use and possession of firearms,’
• pathology reports,
• Hamilton’s autopsy report, and analysis by Glasgow University’s forensic science lab on blood, urine and liver samples from Hamilton’s body;
• details on firearms licensing policies;
• a review by Alfred Vannet, regional procurator fiscal of Grampian, Highland and Islands, of ‘reports and information in respect of Thomas Hamilton submitted to the procurator fiscals of Dumbarton and Stirling by Strathclyde Police and Central Police;
• a psychological report on Hamilton;
• guidance from the British Medical Association on granting firearms licences;
• transcript of and correspondence relating to answering-machine tape which accidentally recorded conversation between police officers at the scene of the Dunblane incident;
• correspondence and witness statements ‘relating to allegations of sexual abuse made against Hamilton.’ ^[7]

This is an extensive set of documents that would leave most of us satisfied. The final judgment of the report attributed blame to serious police flaws and apathy on the part of the courts. Yet, the findings proved that witness statements and prior investigations concerning Hamilton’s increasingly deviant behaviour were ignored. Even as far back as 1988, 1991, 1992 and 1993 complaints were made about Hamilton’s youth camps and detectives investigated. On each occasion no action was taken by prosecutors.

Forewarnings of an impending tragedy were raised a full year before in a letter from the Children’s Reporter to Fife Regional Council and Fife Constabulary after another incident where two boys ran away from one of Hamilton’s summer camps. The letter read: “I feel that the events of 29.6.92 in Dunblane in a sense serve as a warning. If the kind of circumstances as described are allowed to continue without some kind of intervention, I consider that other children may be placed at risk. In like situations arising unchecked I fear that a tragedy to a child or children is almost waiting to happen.” ^[8]  The police had prior warnings from children, parents and associates over nine years before concerning Hamilton’s preoccupation with firearms, his mental instability and at the very least, his obvious  paedophilia. Social workers also failed to follow up on these consistent reports.

Why is it that the same exact pattern is revealed after each glimpse into paedophile rings?

As in other cases of a similar nature where a slice of reality that was ordinarily hidden from the public is finally seen, blaming it on simple incompetence and shoddy work on the part of police and social services is not enough. There was widespread inaction and gross negligence following the line of damage limitation by courts and police. The presence of widespread paedophile activity in government, law and police – not forgetting large sections of Hamilton’s history – was omitted from the inquiry. As a result, there is was and is no reason to assume that organised child abuse has suddenly disappeared from the Establishment, and as recent events have clearly demonstrated.

Are you wrinkling your nose at the prospect of alluding to freemasonic conspiracies? Understandably perhaps. But let’s remember that any institution that is secretive by nature is inevitably wide open to ponerisation. There is no need to indulge in woo-woo shadows under every stone. It is merely the nature of our societies to be hollowed out from inside by psychological pathogens, given half the chance. Once we are aware of that then “conspiracies” take on a different hue. Freemasonry is probably the oldest occult fraternity on earth, where codes of silence and secrecy include the clear assistance of its members outside the purview of the law. In relation to the Dunblane Massacre, the Freemasons’ role also required investigation, if only for achieving a balanced rendering of the law. This wasn’t to be. Yet, even if such an investigation were to have taken place, one could have predicted the results with 99.9% accuracy.

The lifting of the documents ban showed correspondence dated 11 April 1996, (less than a month after the shootings) between Lord Cullen and a member of the public whose name was concealed. A vocal petitioner raised the issue of freemasonry and the possibility of impartiality in the proceedings. William Burns thought that anyone involved in the inquiry who turned out to be a Freemason should be forced to resign including, Lord Cullen. The letter began: “It is in the public interest that Lord Cullen be asked if he is a Freemason, given the widely held view by the public that Thomas Hamilton’s Masonic affiliation was probably the reason that the Ombudsman overturned an earlier decision by Central Regional Council in 1983 to prevent Hamilton from running youth clubs, and that his Masonic affiliation probably facilitated his application for a gun licence.” The letter went on: “It is far too important to allow the Masonic implication to be whitewashed by furtive operations in the Freemasons, intent only in ‘diverting a discourse’ – a Masonic ruse – from the involvement of Freemasons and Freemasonry.” ^[9]

After consultation with Lord Cullen, a court staff, handwritten note was marked as a “verbal response” and dated 18 April. It said: “taken aback by the letter” and “not a Freemason, never has been”. ^[10] It seems rather odd that Lord Cullen would be “taken aback” by such a question in light of the following information.

From the same report an unnamed Grand Lodge of Scotland leader did not think Hamilton could have been a mason as, in his opinion, it “… would have come to light immediately after the Dunblane incident.” Either this man is hopelessly naive or he is choosing to rely on the same sanctity of the law that has consistently shown to be lacking in all prior cases of abuse. This led to a perfectly reasonable petition submitted by Thomas Minogue to the Scottish Parliament calling for “members of the Judiciary to declare and register membership of organisations such as the Freemasons, and for new members of the Judiciary to make a similar declaration. The Petition also calls for a register to record such interests and that this register be available to litigants on request.” ^[11]

Minogue affirmed the relevancy of his petition regarding the membership of freemasonry in the judiciary by drawing attention to clear impartiality which may exist from members sworn to secrecy. In other words, an Old Boys Club of the highest order. No action was taken following Minogue’s petition, nor were his requests addressed. It was also used as a referral petition erroneously based on the committee’s decision to ignore it entirely. Thus it was that William Burn’s petition in October of 2003 ran into similar difficulties.

After a series of letters sent by Burn to Cullen and which were sealed into the closure, he submitted the petition to the Public Petitions Committee of the Scottish Parliament regarding the Cullen Inquiry and the 100-year Closure Order where he presented a case that reinforced the possibility that there had been a cover-up with distinctly Masonic overtones. ^[12] However, this was given little media play due to so called defamation issues, though one is tempted to see that this may well have been other ruse to delay and obfuscate.

Burns proceeded to provide ample evidence of Cullen’s membership of “The Speculative Society” an offshoot of freemasonry formed by masons in the Canongate, Kilwinning lodge in Edinburgh. At the time of writing, members included not only Lord Cullen but a number of other judges, sheriffs and advocates. It was an issue that former Grand Lodge freemason Lord Burton also raised in his petition in the House of Commons which led to the Parliamentary inquiry in 1998. He was roundly bullied and threatened by other peers before and after his investigations due to his belief that information was suppressed by Cullen to protect high-profile legal figures.

The Speculative Society just happens to have Former NATO Secretary General Lord George Robertson as a member who enjoyed a peculiarly close personal relationship with Thomas Hamilton. After subsequently failing to sue the Sunday Herald for libel, though accepting a five figure some for slander, the media has kept Lord Robertson out of the spotlight.  It is noteworthy that Malcolm Rifkind, Foreign Secretary at the time, had a friend that was Chairman of his constituency party at Edinburgh Pentlands, Robert Bell. The party Chairman had allegedly “sold guns and ammunition to Thomas Hamilton only a few weeks before the Dunblane massacre, and it was reported he said he would sell him guns again.” ^[13]

What was important about Cullen’s involvement in a branch of freemasonry was not simply the fact he may have been  economical with the truth but the implications regarding Hamilton and his alleged “protection.” Some reports have affirmed that Hamilton himself had enrolled as a member of Garrowhill Freemasons Lodge (Lanarkshire Middle Ward) listed as: No. 1413, Garrowhill Drive, Garrowhill, Glasgow, in 1977, the same year he was granted a firearms certificate. Yet files connecting him to Freemasonry are alleged to have been destroyed after the atrocities on 13 March 1996. With no remaining evidence, they remain speculations. ^[14]

Further evidence of widespread paedophilia came from reports that allegations of physical and sexual abuse of pupils took place at Queen Victoria School Dunblane, between 1989 and 1992 which were not investigated or substantiated. The school is an expensive, high society, private institution for schoolchildren of the military services with the Duke of Edinburgh as its patron and Hamilton frequented the school on many occasions. Former housemaster Glenn Harrison, told a UK newspaper how he had “found Hamilton, 43, creeping around the dormitories at night. He said further: ‘I was one of the people who were making a fuss about Hamilton long before he killed those children, but no one wanted to listen.’  ^[15]

The report continued:

Glenn Harrison had kept dozens of files from pupils alleging bullying and abuse while he was at the QVS and wrote to parents warning of the dangers in 1991. It led to him being ousted from the school and just days before he left, police raided his home and confiscated the files. […]

‘Hamilton ran camps in the school grounds and he used the shooting range freely. He came and went as he pleased, almost as if he owned the place, and no one has ever tried to explain why he had such freedom. I am still haunted by the memory of picking up my newspaper on March 14 1996 and reading about what had occurred at Dunblane Primary School the day before. I just knew the killer had to be Thomas Hamilton. He should have been stopped.’

From previously confidential correspondence between William Burns and Harrison it was stated that: “QVS was a perfect cover for institutional physical and sexual abuse.   At first it was orphan boys. On and off, over decades, QVS has supplied children (with sealed lips) for abuse: “Where the carcass is, there the eagles gather.” They were accessible to “eagles” like top brass military, politicians, police officials, sheriffs, fiscals and successful business people in Perthshire. And fools like me could be squashed, swallowed up or sent to some island somewhere.  They all gather at the water hole.”  ^[16]

Harrison is now living in the remote Islands of Shetland.  He is an embittered man with no interest in pursuing the case any further, convinced that a masonic cover-up was at play.

The House of Commons Committee continued to dance around the issues raised by Burn’s and others’ petitions, though in part, with some considerable justification in that the evidence of concrete and provable links were missing. They were after all, according to Burns “embargoed” under the closure order. Once the closure was finally overturned in early 2005, Burn’s allegations of a masonic cover-up persisted.

The good news came in the form of the Freedom of Information Act that came into force on 1st January 2005. The bad news was that this provided only a partial answer to the question of the closed files. On orders from the Scottish Executive on October 3 2005 Lord Advocate Colin Boyd released only half of the secret documents but illegally refused to release the rest. To make matters worse Burns claims the files “were redacted to such an extent that they were largely illegible.” ^[17] The fact that a Lord Advocate refused to give up files and remains above the law is disturbing in itself, but there exist endless questions surrounding the Dunblane massacre that remain unanswered, primarily it seems, due to the intransigence of those in power, a faction of which may be sourced from the extraordinary omnipresence of freemasonry.

Sandra Uttley’s letters to Lord Cullen and Lord Advocate Colin Boyd pertaining to the suicide of Thomas Hamilton characteristically received no response. Uttley’s simple questions highlighted serious discrepancies which leads us to conclude that not only was something seriously miss in the inquiry as a whole, but at the crime scene itself, listed as follows:

• Why there were serious contradictions in the way Hamilton was dressed at the scene suggesting that clothes were removed after his death and replaced with others?
• Why was the off-duty police officer not called to give evidence especially after clear contradictions made by Cullen and those on the ground?
• Did the Crown Office deliberately withhold this statement because it clearly stated [in the police officer witness statement] that the witness did not see a revolver, only 2 pistols?
• Why did Hamilton only have one holster, not 4 as was originally claimed?
• If Hamilton did not have a revolver with him, how was he able to kill himself with a Smith & Wesson revolver?
• Did the Crown Office deliberately select the head teacher Ron Taylor to give evidence at the Inquiry, and not this police officer, because Ron Taylor didn’t know a pistol from a revolver?
• Why did Mr. Taylor refer to 2 guns – rather than 4 as mentioned in the Cullen inquiry?
• Why did the Janitor John Currie who found Hamilton’s body not mention 4 guns either?
• Why were the CCTV sightings altered?
• Who was driving a grey car at the scene of the crime which Boyd claims was Hamilton’s neighbour when witness statements contradict such claims? ^[18]

Many of the documents under the initial ban included the correspondence between George Robertson (who was bustled off into the post of tenth NATO Secretary General) to Michael Forsyth, who was then Secretary of State for Scotland. The letters focused on Hamilton and a ‘submission to Lord James Douglas Hamilton, MP, Minister of State at the Scottish Office, concerning government evidence to the Inquiry.’ ^[19]  It is evident to anyone paying attention that there is an unhealthy presence of freemasonry in police, civil service, military and government in general. It seems when members are threatened then they close ranks and protect their own. Just how far organised child abuse has infected  freemasonry one need only look at the glimpses of networks occurring across Western institutions.

While it is true that much of this occult fraternity may well be altruistic and well-meaning, the nature of its secrecy and influence over societies in Europe we must assume that a) there are at the very least, “bad apples” which deform the aims of freemasonry. Further, those paedophiles / psychopaths are attracted to the protective structure of freemasonry secrecy for which the finer points of freemasonic ritual and its occult beliefs are merely used as convenient cover; b) That the hierarchical structure of freemasonry itself is not only prone to abuse but is in fact, the essential core of its existence where only those who ascend the pyramidal tier systems know the truth, but by then it is too late. Or, it may be that only partial decay has set in from the edges to the centre. The latter hope is unlikely as the nature of ponerisation tends to infect its host from within and work its way out following the natural course of pathogenic “disease” the process of which can be a decade or hundreds of years depending on the entity in question. There is more than enough evidence to suggest that freemasonry as a whole went this way many moons ago.

When initiatory pieces of truth and wisdom are given to the elect based around an obvious elitism, these “pennies from heaven” can only foster imbalance and attract those for whom notions of power for powers sake and becomes the only reason for membership. Transparency from the higher levels must be forthcoming where the public good is valued more highly than the structure of freemasonry itself. If it is not, then proclamations of bettering human kind become increasingly insubstantial.

Although freemasons in Britain recently employed the services of a Public Relations (PR) company to repair their battered image stemming largely from their complete lack of transparency regarding the issue of paedophilia and protection, it will fail. No amount of PR can dissolve the very great blocks of distrust concerning secret societies of all shapes and forms. Though a full and thorough investigation of freemasonry is not within the remit of this book, it is clear that there are many decent and honest persons within its auspices. Unfortunately, as in the case of our governments and even charitable organisations, this does not preclude the ponerisation of the initial impetus behind the founding of a movement or grouping.

 

---

Notes

[1] ‘Dunblane killer in child sex ring’ by Fidelma Cook, Daily Telegraph, June 6, 2005.
[2] ‘Dunblane police reports released’ Scottish Executive, NewsOnline, 18 March 2003.
[3] ‘Call to lift veil of secrecy over Dunblane’ by Gerard Seenan, The Guardian, February 14, 2003.
[4] House of Lords Official Report Vol. 589 – No. 151 – 12 May, 1998.
[5] ‘Police, Dunblane killer in child sex ring’ by Fidelma Cook, Daily Telegraph, June 6, 2005.
[6] ‘Dunblane: files show police flaws’ by Marcello Mega, Scotland on Sunday, 2 October, 2005.
[7] ‘Dunblane secret documents contain letters by Tory and Labour ministers’ By Neil Mackay, Home Affairs Editor March 2003, Sunday Herald.
[8] ‘Revealed: the fatal failures behind Dunblane children’s massacre’ By Michael Howie The Scotsman, 4 October, 2005.
[9] ‘Question on Masonic links left Dunblane inquiry chief stunned’ by Michael Howie, The Scotsman, 5 Oct, 2005.
[10] Ibid.
[11] ‘Judiciary should declare membership of the Freemasons’ – Submissions to the Justice 2 Committee of the Scottish Parliament by Thomas Minogue, Petitioner. Petition to Scottish Parliament [PE 306] February 2003.
[12] Public Petitions Committee of the Scottish Parliament Cullen Inquiry (100-year Closure Order membership by the Scottish judiciary of the Freemasons, the Speculative Society) (PE652) Wednesday, 29 October 2003 Convenor Michael McMahon MSP Ms Jackie Baillie MSP, Helen Eadie MSP, Ms Linda Fabiani MSP, Carolyn Leckie MSP, John Farquhar Munro MSP, Mr John Scott MSP (Deputy Convener) Mike Watson MSP, Sandra White MSP.
[13] Edinburgh Evening News on 23 March 1996 / Public Petitions PE652.
[14] Regarding submission of Public Petitions PE652 & PE685 Support material submitted by William Burns to Bryan McConachie Public Petitions Team Support, Public Petitions Committee, 6 January 2004.
[15] ‘The Dunblane Massacre,’ by Marcello Mega, News of the World Investigates 28 December , 2003.
[16] The ex-housemaster Glenn Harrison’s synopsis of events as related to a journalist in 2003. Personal and in confidence to Davy R about QVS. “I am convinced it was a Masonic conspiracy, Ministry Of Defence (MoD), Her Majesty’s Shools Inspectorate (HMI), and Her Majesty’s Commissioners (HMCs), military top brass and others. The matter was a cover-up to protect people in high office in Government.” Article from William Burn’s website ‘Dublane abandoned.’ (no longer available on the internet).
[17] Ibid.
[18] ‘Lord Cullen refuses to comment’ Article from William Burn’s ‘Dunblane abandoned.’
[19] ‘Dunblane secret documents contain letters by Tory and Labour ministers’ Investigation: Scottish Herald, By Neil Mackay, 2002, March 2003.