Almost as though he anticipated that some people might be less than delighted at his having been granted core participant status at the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, on Friday ex-DC Jon Wedger and his publicist Anna Brees threw together a Facebook video on the subject.
Standing in a wooded area west of London, Wedger stated,
Now there has been some confusion and obviously some criticism by people saying that I was never a core participant anyway.
Numerous applications have gone in, as I’ve said, and there was an incident earlier on in the year where IICSA themselves actually got a judicial review to narrow the parameters, which my legal team believed was a deliberate attempt to prevent me from giving evidence. And my barrister himself has been very concerned that it’s taken a year for me to actually be sworn in as a core participant and said, “There has been a lot of obstruction around you”.
Now you can only draw an inference as to why that is,
Why yes, we can. We would infer, for example, that at least some people involved with running the Inquiry have a modicum of common sense, and realise that granting core participant status to a person like Wedger is like offering a fox the keys to the henhouse.
As some of our commenters have pointed out, as a core participant he will now have access to unredacted confidential documents ahead of evidence sessions.
During the Westminster strand of the Inquiry, it was announced that material had been leaked to a journalist in advance of the evidence sessions which dealt with it, and that it was suspected that a core participant was responsible. Mark Watts, former editor-in-chief of Exaro News, outed himself as the culprit, and Brian Altman, Counsel to the Inquiry, stated that access arrangements would be examined regarding future strands.
Nevertheless, as commenter ‘Salad’ pointed out,
Even if this review of access to unredacted documentation limits what protected information Wedger has access to, his activities to date in attempting to establish himself as an entrepreneur of tales of abuse, and associated conspiracy theories, must raise concerns about access of any kind which helps him further this revolting career path.
The conspiricism is strong with this one
Quite aside from concerns about confidentiality, we are led to wonder whether the “obstruction” to Wedger’s core participant status had to do with his apparent urge to join dots, sometimes in an unintentionally hilarious way.
For example, in this latest video, Wedger claims,
They brought out a statute law in 2003, under the Criminal Justice Act, which was deliberately brought in, in my opinion, to attack witnesses that come forward that have got a criminal past. And they class them as people of dishonesty.
Now it doesn’t mean that these are people that are giving false testimony, it means that they can now use the judicial process to rubbish people coming forward.
They knew, long ago, the Establishment, the big “They”, knew that there was going to be an influx of victims and survivors coming forward, especially post-Jimmy Savile.
Yes, he really said that.
Apparently the law-makers in 2003 were not only prescient enough to realise that an “influx of victims and survivors” would be flooding the judicial system 15 years later, but they had an inkling not only that Jimmy Savile would die (in 2011) but also that in death he would be reviled as a serial child molester, and that this would cause even more victims and survivors to recall that they, too, had been sexually molested. Whew.
We wonder: do these law-makers ever do fortune telling at parties?