IICSA unravels Chris Fay’s lies

We have been watching with some interest as the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) began its Westminster hearings on so-called VIP child sexual abuse this week. In particular, yesterday’s topics—which included the Elm Guest House, Chris Fay, and the “Mary Moss List”—have all been long-time favourite discussion points for those who would like to see paedophiles behind every door.

We have talked about Chris Fay in relation to his and Bill Maloney’s coaching of Andrew Ash, a vulnerable adult who subsequently made allegations about birthmarks on the private areas of Leon Brittan. In the hands of Maloney, and then of Abraham Christie, those birthmarks transmogrified into tattoos, which eventually would become a major talking point for those who promote the Hampstead SRA hoax.

While many who read this blog are already familiar with the story of Fay’s involvement with the Elm Guest House, the IICSA’s opening statement offers a good overview:

Interestingly, starting on page 140 of yesterday’s hearing transcript, Commander Neil Jerome of the Metropolitan Police Service describes the 1982 raid on the Elm Guest House.

He states that an anonymous member of the public had reported the presence of a child on the premises, and that following police observation of the house, which came to nothing, two undercover officers posing as members of the public went inside.

They determined that a 10-year-old boy was indeed on the premises, and were concerned enough for his well-being that the raid was conducted and 20 individuals arrested. Following the raid, it was determined that none of those arrested were prominent or well known, and that no victims, apart from the 10-year-old boy, were found.

This runs counter to the later narrative, in which it has been stated that 10 boys and one three-year-old girl were taken away.

‘Uncle Leon and the big house’

The boy, known as WM-A9, made allegations of “having suffered extensive sexual abuse at the hands of a number of men” over a number of months. The list of men who had abused WM-A9, Jerome said, contained no prominent or famous people.

However, during WM-A9’s police interview, a Social Services worker named Andrew Keir was present.

Jerome stated yesterday,

Whilst Mr Keir and the police officers are taking the statement from the child, Mr Keir mentions something that the child said about an ‘Uncle Leon’, and Mr Keir said that that had stuck in his mind, and that it was used as one of the people who had abused him.


When Keir was interviewed in 2012, he claimed that WM-A9 had actually uttered the phrase “Uncle Leon of the big house”. In that interview, said Jerome, Keir said he recalled looking at the police officer taking the statement and they’d given each other what he called 30 years later a “raised eyebrow look”—presumably acknowledging that they both knew who the child was referring to.

However, the typed record of the longhand statement which WM-A9 made in 1982 contains no trace of any such comment. And Keir had not only signed off on the 1982 interview record, but had stated again in 1986 that it was a true record of the interview.

Somehow, the phrase “Uncle Leon and the big house” made its way into a revised narrative, 30 years after the fact.

The Elm Guest House list

In yesterday’s proceedings, Jerome confirmed that the Elm Guest House list had originated with Fay and his colleague Mary Moss.

Fay claimed that two or three days after the 1982 police raid, he had met with Carol Kasir and she had provided him with extensive detailed journals and notes, as well as photographs. Amongst those who Fay alleged had attended the guest house were Leon Brittan, Harvey Proctor, Cyril Smith, Anthony Blunt, and Nicholas Fairbairn.

However, Fay has never been able to offer any evidence to back up his claims, Jerome said.

Despite offering detailed, incendiary descriptions of at least one such photo—in Fay’s words, “Leon Brittan with a 12-year-old prepubescent boy on his lap, wearing a French maid’s apron, frilly hat and nothing else”—he was not able to show police any of the actual pictures.

Noting Fay’s 2011 conviction for money laundering, Jerome stated that there is good reason to approach any of Fay’s statements with extreme caution.

In 2015, Jerome confirmed, Fay had made two statements to police about an alleged incident which had taken place 30 years earlier.

In the first, he stated that he had been approached by two large white men who had guns. He said he had a brief conversation with them and one of the men placed his hands around Fay’s throat and told him to stay away from the Elm Guest House.

Three months later, he told the story again, elaborating on the details.

This time, the men were wearing dark grey suits and had black guns in brown holsters under their left arms. In a major departure from his first description, Fay stated that one of the men had removed his gun, held it against Fay’s temple, and said, “Keep your nose out of Elm Guest House”, before tapping him on the cheek and saying, “Be a good boy”.

In this second version of the story, Fay claimed that he had followed these Special Branch men—as he claimed they were—and had watched them climb into a sky-blue Ford Capri. Fay was even able to report part of the number on the registration plate. Police were never able to identify such a vehicle registered to anything connected with law enforcement.

In another claim, Fay said that in 1988 a boy, WM-A28, had alleged that he’d been abused by Brittan at Elm Guest House. He claimed that Special Branch officers had visited this boy at his home and warned him to be quiet about Elm Guest House.

He alleged that Special Branch officers had warned the boy off again on the day that Fay had reported on his case to NAYPIC, the organisation he was associated with. He stated that WM-A28 had gone to Richmond police station to make a statement about this, and had been “fobbed off” there.

WM-A28, however, told quite a different story: he said he had no knowledge at all of what Fay had claimed, had never been to Elm Guest House, never been abused by Leon Brittan, and in fact didn’t even know Fay and had “never knowingly communicated with him to any degree”.

Asked to summarise his conclusions regarding Fay, Jerome said,

The conclusions are that the credibility of Chris Fay is called into question; that there is evidence that does not prove his claims, and in fact prove that some of the claims have—there’s absolutely no substance to those at all, and the overall conclusion is that there is no evidence to substantiate any of Mr Fay’s claims.

Jerome also described Mary Moss, Fay’s colleague who claimed to have evidence regarding the Elm Guest House list. He noted that as part of Operation Winter Key, the police had asked Moss for access to the documents she claimed to hold, but she had refused. She did provide some of them to the BBC, who also refused to share them with police, as they had not received Moss’ permission to do so.

In the end, the police obtained a warrant and raided Moss’ home, where they recovered “a sauna appointments book and an appointments desk diary” in addition to 40 boxes or so of various material” including hand-written notes, press clippings, and other material.

However, police were unable to determine the provenance of any of the material they found, and were unable to link any of it to the raid on the guest house.

When the documents were reviewed by officers…there were suggestions that multiple people had attended the Elm Guest House at one time or another—but often without specific dates having been provided—and there were no specific allegations.

The documents, Jerome agreed, had no evidential value.

Given that stories about the Elm Guest House and its infamous list have underlain so much of the general hysteria regarding VIP child sexual abuse in recent years, we’re finding it fascinating to watch the fabric of Fay’s lies unravel before our eyes.

64 thoughts on “IICSA unravels Chris Fay’s lies

    • Needless to say, I had the opposite view, it was actually refreshing to listen to the officers being honest, after being subjected to the likes of wedger, and savage. Very committed to their jobs and I’ve been glued to it.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Angie is willing to overlook any behaviour in order to keep her narrative in tact, it’s frightening how determined she is to keep to it and how she has a complete inability to discern.

      Liked by 2 people

        • Spot on there with your comment Flo. Angie desperately needs the stories of VIP abuse to be thought of as true because if not then the whole schtick of VIP conspiracy theories surrounding Elm Guest House and more are blown out of the water. She needs folk to believe that people in power are depraved paedophiles because so many of her stories rely on these stories being believed to be true.

          Liked by 3 people

    • Stupid frigging cow she is. Fay had no “evidence” just gossip which he made a nice little earner from by selling his increasingly outrageous tales to tabloids, a fact overlooked by just about everyone (she’s probably jealous as they don’t have the budgets any more).
      Can’t wait for “Nick’s” trial.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Fay is such a liar. If you have ever watched the videos of Fay and Bill Maloney together then you can see how he has added to his stories and tried to make them as horrific as possible. I wonder what the fruitloops will do if Nick is proven in a court of law to be a fantasist

        Liked by 1 person

  1. It always annoyed me that the press referred to Chris Fay as a ‘social worker’ when he’s not. Was Mary Moss a social worker?

    Liked by 1 person

    • They both started that frigging NAACP or whatever it was called with a local council grant but they got booted out of the rented premises within a year and the council refused them any more grants so it shut down. Still it was long enough for Fay to hear tales from street kids, something he was quite fond of doing even in his spare time in his extra curricular work in the small afternoon West End drinking clubs favoured by the local riff raff & rent boys.
      He was classed as a social worker when he worked for the council but nothing to do with youth.
      Of course tabloids just repeat these claims ad infinitum as though they are real.
      Personally I would cross the road to avoid him and I don’t like mentioning looks but I can’t help it- he’s f*cking hideous and I think that comes from inside.

      Liked by 3 people

  2. Off topic – are you aware that Through the Black has posted a video of the Hampstead children? It’s called The Airport interviews. Let’s see if we can get this taken down please.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. “We have been watching with some interest as the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) began its Westminster hearings on so-called VIP child sexual abuse this week.”

    You say so-called VIP sexual abuse. Do you really think no person in power has sexually abused a child.

    Shame on you.

    Dear oh dear.

    What about Sir Cyril Smith?

    Was he innocent too of abusing boys too?


    • I know that various people in positions of power have abused children. When I say “so-called VIP” I’m pointing out the obsession of some with focusing only on people in the public eye, at the expense of the vast majority of children who are abused by their very ordinary family members or others known to them in their daily lives.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Undoubtedly there have been some abusers in positions of power, and there have been some who have never been near the halls of power…

        Unfortunately some individuals seem to thrill in making up stories of them being abused by every famous person in history, even when it is obvious that they are lying about it, one (in)famous Australian woman claimed that practically every Australian PM abused her, as did a US president (Nixon)- and so did Walt Disney- a rather remarkable feat, as he died two years before she was born….. speaking of course of Fiona Barnett

        People like this not only tie up valuable police resources, but smear innocent peoples names (it is quite possible she was abused, but she has cried wolf so many times and made up so many implausible stories, that she really has given any abuser (if there was any at all) a ‘get out of jail free’ card- simply because unless there was valid and incredibly convincing evidence to prove it, it is unlikely any court would convict just on her say so

        Worse it puts any person coming forward with actual real abuse claims in the unfortunate position of having to actually ‘prove’ it happened, a very tall order indeed in most cases where abusers tend to abuse in private, not in the middle of High St at noon so to speak…

        Put simply these *&^%$&*&^%*&*&^%*% ‘people’ actually decrease the likelihood of genuine abuse victims coming forward- especially if the person is actually in a position of power, not because of their position protecting them, but by the fear of being added to the list of people like Barnett

        Liked by 4 people

        • Yes, the fantasists not only ruin the reputations of the people they falsely claim to be abusers but they also make it a lot harder for actual victims of abuse to come forward and be believed.

          Liked by 5 people

          • Another one thats been pushing the ‘everyone famous is a pedo ‘file” here in Australia lately is Adrian Wells (who quite frankly seems to be in need of some major mental health help) and just released a new video today- an hour long rambling rant about ‘every public figure is a pedophile’ and apparently President trump time traveled back to 1984 to sell Adrian in the US or something (or was President in 1984… which would have been news to Ronald Reagan…) which consists entirely of him pointing a phone at a laptop and yelling at the clip being shown of an a public address

            (oh and there is the obligatory ‘chased through the woods’ and left for the animals to eat, but his version is better, he as a kid had to beat off a wild bear!!!! SO THERE Angie!!!)

            (Oh trump named his kid Barron after Adrian (because his name was Baron because he Adrian is a English Baron- hey I am just relaying it… making sense of it is up to others lol)

            Oh and apparently the Liberal party in Australia was in government in 1984, funny, I was under the impression Bob Hawke was the Prime minister, and I am ‘pretty sure’ he was not a Lib…. to put it mildly….

            My brain hurts now….

            Liked by 1 person

    • People from all strata of society abuse but the allegations are of an organised ring of powerful VIPs running a pedo ring (including some Satanism tossed in for drama) protected by secret services and even common & garden coppers with children being routinely bused to places like the Elm Guest House in a Rolls Royce at times with the occasional lad being murdered with a pen knife as Ted Heath looked on or by being tied between two cars and ripped apart with such dramatic actions being totally ignored by suburban residents and ..well one could go on forever.

      I say it’s all bloody bullshit.
      I say that because no-one has ever presented any proof of these ludicrous claims except creeps like Fay who posted scraps of paper on the internet of so-called VIPs who apparently are so stupid they all booked into some tiny guest house to abuse children and used their real names or a hack like Don Hale ( currently giving “evidence”) who famously interviewed someone about Jimmy Savile’s alleged actions and published that “evidence” but neglected to check that the person he interviewed had actually died 4 years previously (he may have attended a seance to do it) or claimed that Barbara Castle actually went out off her way to deliver a “VIP dossier” of abuse when Castle would no more speak to tabloid hack like him about something so important because Barbara was no wilting flower and if she had knowledge of such matters she would have fronted Parliament in a fury to denounce alleged abusers.

      These actions and rumours have spread like a wildfire via the internet and reached such a point that a bunch of high-priced lawyers are now sitting discussing alleged actions (there are bound to be some actual truth in some claims) re-hashing stuff that’s been said a 1000 times over at an outrageous cost estimated to eventually be £100M that should be spent on the 100,000s (if not millions) of British children living in poverty today.

      This Inquiry will do not a single thing about abuse just as every inquiry before in recent years haven’t reach any conclusion that benefits anyone or changes anything except makes lawyers very rich, provides an avenue for some genuine victims and probably some fantasists to get more compensation without needing to prove anything- but they can do that anyway these days.

      What is the point of the whole exercise?.
      It won”t “clear the air” as none of the previous ones have.
      It doesn’t take a bloody Einstein to work out how to protect today’s kids or those in the future. This is something largely driven by Britain’s ghastly gutter media that thrives on sensationalism ( as do many readers ..do you EVER see such endless repeated “Inquiries” operating in European countries which are no more or less lawful than the UK?..no because they don’t have a media that is so powerful) and makes huge profits on promoting falsehoods built on some fact and in which it always wins because it can promote the lies and exaggerations first and them when they are found to be rubbish (as in Ted Heath) it can turn on sixpence and profit once again by pulling it all apart as they did with the Haute de la Garenne matter which always sticks in my head because at that time I was visiting New Zealand (no, not looking for a Wave Power Thingy to invest in) and still vividly recall turning on a hotel TV to see a BBC journalist in Jersey (they’re as bad as the tabloids) solemnly announce “today I am standing on ground and beneath are buried dozens of bodies of small children who were either murdered or died in a children’s home”. It was just coconut shell.

      # If you have any evidence on what Cyril Smith may have done take it to the Inquiry. No point on speculating on here and using claims as an excuse to dismiss valid points made here.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Recently on have been looking at the Governments own website for teachers who have been in front of the disciplinary panel, I am quite shocked at the number of teachers, men and women, who’ve been struck off for inappropriate sexual relationships with their students. None of these teachers have anything to do with any VIP paedophile ring, but some of them have been protected by other teachers for years.


        • Do you have a link for that, FG? That’s completely at odds with my experience. I’m not in denial that it goes on, of course, but I would swear to my dying breath that it’s extremely rare and that the majority of teachers are not like that and are passionate about child safeguarding.

          Moreover, there are more checks and balances in place than ever before, not to mention rigorous compulsory training programmes.

          I’d be interested to know what they mean by “struck off” too, as that hasn’t been a thing since the GTC was disbanded in 2012; staff vetting is based on references and DBS checks.


          • As a start for you, look up Steiner School Kings Langley, then look up disciplinary panel then all will be explained to you


          • As a start for you, look up Steiner School Kings Langley, then look up disciplinary panel then all will be explained to you

            I’d prefer a link, or at least a concession that we’re not all paedophiles covering up for each other, rather than that (with all due respect) slightly patronising response.

            Also, Steiner Schools are categorically not representative of the teaching profession, as has been covered on here before.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Angie’s planning on staging a one-woman protest at Facebook HQ. Oh to be a fly on the wall 😂

    Liked by 2 people

  5. “Miles Johnston… [is] a gatekeeper… he got me humàn hunted by Lord Bramhall and others”

    Liked by 1 person

    • @Smut Clyde Go to 13:04. Devine’s mentioned Cook Street again. This is what I meant yesterday. Although Cook Street is, as you say, a New Zealand street where Wanoa’s incident took place some time ago, Devine keeps pushing it as a London street that they’re planning on taking on the 28th”and then it’s game over”. Go figure 🤔

      Liked by 1 person

      • And yet, having established beyond doubt his ownership of 61 Cook Street, Mr Wanoa is not using it as the office space to handle the administration of his sprawling technology empire. Perhaps I missed something but I believed that to be the whole point of his short-lived seizure.


      • That is sad to hear. These people are going to be mightily pissed off with Wanoa and Devine when they realise they won’t be seeing their money again.


      • I read the comments earlier. They all deserve each other. I don’t think we are talking about a scammer praying on the “vulnerable” here. We are talking about an idiot involved in redistributing like minded idiots spare cash to himself. My sympathy levels for the “victims” are low.


    • Indeed.
      Whoever posted that simply brilliant “Hitler” video titled “Poor Andy” did say he ran his Wave Power Empire from a laundry. No wonder Harald Link is so impressed with him he wants to by-pass normal financial outlets like a bank and funnel $Millions to King Wanoa via untraceable Bit Coins.

      Honestly, you would have to be more deranged than the phony King of England to believe his madness.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. Sally the SENCo I never said you were all nonces, I said I was surprised at the amount. The powers that be can do as many checks as they like but unfortunately if a teacher hasn`t come up on any raydars before, it`s not going to show up, and in the Steiner education system teachers and members of staff do cover up for each other weather you like it or not, I`m sorry if I hit a nerve with you but that`s the truth, and please don`t call me patronising because I am not.


    • Hit a nerve? How do you mean? I don’t work – and never have worked – in a Steiner school. Or are you simply accusing me of being involved in child abuse? Sorry, I don’t quite get what nerve you’re saying you’ve hit.


    • It’s not whether an individual has come up on any raydars (sic) before. Every abuser has a time before they first abused – so by definition they can’t be on a list of abusers up until that point.

      Quite simply, you could conceivably have a perfectly maintained, managed and enforced list. And abusers could even (inconceivably) stop being very devious and deceptive. But the vulnerable will still get abused, because of that simple fact that can’t be reversed.

      Except, maybe, in the world of Minority Report. But you wouldn’t want to live there (though arguably we’re already there with hearsay being allowed on Enhanced Disclosures)


  7. Pingback: Fay & Maloney: Lies versus reality | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  8. >>they recovered “a sauna appointments book and an appointments desk diary” in addition to 40 boxes or so of various material” including hand-written notes, press clippings, and other material.

    Don’t mean to be silly but from this report it sounds as if Mary Moss had an awful lot of written material. If she was hoaxing she seems to have been hoaxing at a Htler Diaries level of activity. But that hoax was done for a lot of money, what on earth set Moss off building this archive?

    Not seeking to defend obvious nonsense and wickedness – but what is the story behind this stash? Anybody seen it (apparently the BBC did)?


Comments are closed.