The Dalbury and Waterson children remained at home, but under social worker supervision.Over the months that followed, social workers quizzed them all repeatedly Some received group therapy for abuse. Their mothers were counselled and pressed to provide evidence against their husbands, partners and other suspects.In June 1992, Mary Dalbury, 14, ran away from home, saying her father had raped her over a number of years John Dalbury was arrested and confessed. He was charged with rape, and his wife with aiding and abetting him Both pleaded guilty. In December 1992, they were sentenced to seven and four years’ imprisonment respectively.By the summer, the police and social services, putting Jason’s and Mary’s allegations together with what other children had told them, were convinced they had discovered something horrifying in their quiet corner of Wales: a paedophile network.THE ARRESTS began on 8 December 1992 and ultimately 18 children from nine families were taken into care while 11 men and two women were charged. They included Thorpe, the alleged ringleader, his wife Sally, Waterson and Dalbury, as well as friends of Thorpe’s, other farmers and a civil servant whose children, taken into care after his wife had suffered a mental breakdown, had been in the same foster home as Paul Waterson.Opening the prosecution case in Swansea Crown Court in January 1994, Gerard Elias QC told the jury that children were victims of ”the most depraved and revolting conduct imagineable … [to] a degree of degradation that sometimes almost defies beliefBy now the accusations ranged widely. One social worker said that Mary Dalbury estimated that ”around 200 people were involved”, and the judge told the jury that ”if everyone named had been charged, the case would have gone on for ever”.The charges covered the period 1983-91.
Mr Elias said the adults had conspired to abuse their own and other children. Abuse had included ritual sex orgies in homes and outlying places such as derelict sheds, an old airfield, tunnels and seaside caves.The children, forced to participate from a very young age, were silenced by death threats from the men. Wives were similarly threatened, forced to watch and sometimes to take part. The 12 defendants (the charges against Sally Thorpe were held over, and dropped soon afterwards) all pleaded not guilty.Eight children aged from six to 15 recounted their experiences. Jason and the others gave evidence through pre-recorded videos and were cross- examined through a video link. The prosecution said their testimony, gathered independently, was consistent and amounted to compelling evidence. But Mr Elias stressed that the Crown case did not depend on the words of children alone: ”They are supported in material ways by the detailed evidence of two mothers, who will tell of some of the abuse they witnessed and of the threats made to them to prevent their coming forward.”When they took the stand, the two women indeed spoke of threats – but threats from the authorities Both claimed they had been emotionally blackmailed.
Anne Mason said she was forced to make up allegations by social workers and told that if she wanted to see her children again, she had to stick to her story.The defence questioned the social workers closely. Nigel Mylne QC accused one, Tudor Walters, of leading a ”blinkered crusade to convict the defendants”. This was denied.Three defendants were acquitted in March on the direction of the judge, and two others were cleared before the trial ended In all, 120 witnesses were called. During the course of the inquiry 500 statements were taken and 9,000 pages of evidence assembled. Ultimately, however, the case rested on the credibility of the children.The jury took five days to reach its verdicts. One defendant, an English farmer, was cleared of all charges.
The civil servant was acquitted of conspiracy but found guilty of serious sexual assault. The remaining five were found guilty of conspiracy, with Peter Thorpe being convicted of an additional charge of gross indecency with a child He was imprisoned for 15 years The others received sentences of between five and 11 years. The judge told the jury: ”The whole community should be extremely grateful to you. I certainly am.”YET there were many disquieting aspects to the case. Not one child had made an allegation of abuse before being interviewed by social workers.
No dates were ever mentioned, so defendants could not bring forward alibi evidence. There was no forensic evidence to speak of, although the circumstances of many of the alleged incidents suggested that there ought to have been. (For example, Jason pointed out sheds where, he said, his father had fired through the roof to frighten children; yet Crown scientific experts could locate no bullet-holes in the roof.) Several children referred to the use of cameras and camcorders at the paedophilia sessions; but no photographs, film or equipment were ever discovered.Medical evidence was scant and defence lawyers were unhappy with the way it was presented. Some Crown experts couched their testimony in equivocal terms: ”I could not find any evidence of the abuse as described, but that does not preclude such abuse having taken place; and I would expect that in the timespan between the alleged abuse and my examination, injuries arising as a result of such abuse would have healed.”There were no independent witnesses, although the allegations were so sweeping there surely should have been.