Thread by @JEMilneSky

Back at Newcastle Crown Court for the continuing cross examination of Carl Beech, the man formerly known as “Nick”. Yesterday the court heard how Beech interchanged “Aubrey”, “John” and his best man John Prance when discussing the alleged abuse he suffered as a child.

Beech takes to the witness box. Badenoch QC begins by looking at Beech’s claim for compensation.

Beech kept a document on his USB stick about reporting child abuse, within this was the CICA scheme. Beech says this was part of a support pack. He says he first became aware of the compensation scheme when his mother fostered children. He knew about it before Wiltshire police.

Beech confirms he knew what the scheme did and didnt provide for. He says he read about the scheme online before filling the form in.

Beech confirms he knew it was a scheme provided by the state and in order to make a claim he needed to make full disclosure. He confirms he needed to make truthful statements, to withhold no material and not to mislead investigators or the scheme.

September 2013 Beech completed an online application for the CICA. Beech confirms he misled Wiltshire police about Aubrey, had “told them lies” and had called DS Lewis for a crime reference number.

Beech accepts he lied to Wiltshire police “in some areas” and that he put forward to the CICA that he had complained to Wiltshire police. He accepts there will not be a statement in these documents saying he had lied to police.

Running through the application to the CICA Badenoch QC explains the “reporting details” section was for Beech to explain what he had done by way of informing the police about reporting abuse to the police for the purposes of investigation. Beech agrees.

In the application Beech explains he did not report initially for fear of personal safety. He reported it to the Met and was then sent to Wiltshire police. He confirms he was reporting in order to claim money and understood he had to make a truthful application.

Beech says there were no questions asking if he “had misled police”. He did not write down the names of the men he says abused him at this time because he had not reported them to the Wiltshire police.

Beech did not enter his GPS details when asked, he says he doesn’t know why that was left off and that he subsequently gave it at a later date. He says he can’t “answer why it isn’t filled in here”.

He says he entered not attending his dentist - despite a broken tooth in other writings of his - he says because this was something he later recollected, not when he was filling in the form.

Beech says this was not part of his recollection at this time - it was another moment he blocked from his memory.

By this time Beech says he had not been committing child sexual offences. No names of the men who abused him appear on the form in the “additional information” box. He confirms he knew the names but had not told Wiltshire police.

Badenoch QC says Beech was providing additional information for the purposes of gaining money. Badenoch QC suggest Beech had lied to Wiltshire police and asks why he hadn’t mentioned that in the form. Beech says he was confirming what he told Wiltshire police.

Beech provided an additional page of information to the CICA. In four paragraphs. Badenoch says these are paragraphs Beech used his own headings for, Beech confirms.

Badenoch QC says this was his opportunity for providing relevant information for claiming money. Beech confirms. Badenoch QC says you’re suggesting this form was based on what you had told Wiltshire police, Beech confirms.

Beech accepts that he had lied, withheld information and positively misled Wiltshire police in “certain areas”. Beech says it wasn’t like that, when asked if he should have told the CICA that he had misled the police.

Had the fact that you had positively misled the police been keeping you awake, Badenoch QC asks. Beech says his whole past and what he decides to tell the police had kept his awake.

In the additional information Beech says he was abused by “senior military personnel”, “very influential” and “powerful people” - no names.

Beech says he didn’t put any names on the advice given by the police. Badenoch says this advice was given based on misinformation because Beech had only told the police half the story. Beech says that is not the case.

He says Wiltshire police advised him the “diplomas” were unlikely to be successfully prosecuted, when asked for clarification by Justice Goss QC.

In his additional information Beech lists addresses - “a number of other locations” when asked where he says private houses, military establishments, Carlton Club, Dolphin Square. All in this country. Beech says he was taken to Paris, this is something he has no reported.

He says he hasn’t reported this so doesn’t think he should say in open court how he got there. The court hears he flew there on a private flight, when asked what sort of plane - “Again, I’m not sure I should answer that.” He adds its was a private 747.

When asked who else was on the plane - Beech pauses. He says he does not recall. “I don’t recall”. Badenoch QC suggests he is making it up as he goes along. Beech says no. Should he had told the CICA about this Paris trip? Beech says no.

When asked why he hadn’t told the Met police about this trip to Paris, Beech says it is something he was not comfortable talking about.

Beech says he doesn’t look at his own body. He says he hasn’t looked at it in over 25 years. When asked, you don’t have any physical scars - the forensic pathologist did not find any physical scars. Beech says he has emotional scars.

Beech says he avoids taking pictures of himself, admits to taking one photograph of himself in his underwear to try and get over the fact that he doesn’t like looking at his own body.

In the box asking for injuries sustained, Beech doesn’t mention hospitalisation or fractures that he has previously said he sustained form the abuse. He says he was hospitalised while he was in Wilton and Kingston. He has not set this out in the “additional information”.

He says he didn’t write this down because it’s a relatively new recollection. He had not recalled this information at the time he filled in the form.

Beech signed the CICA application as a truthful report. He says because the abuse did happen.

Beech says he does not recall taking the photographs of children playing outside his house.

29 photographs were found, covertly taken of boys aged 10/11 outside Beech’s home address. He does not recall taking those photographs. He says he does remember having a camera, can’t recall which type. He says he can’t recall if boys played outside or walked to school.

Beech says he thinks he notified the CICA that the investigation had gone to the Met police. He did not tell them of the child sexual offences he was later charged with. He did not tell them he had been committing these sexual offences.

14 March 2015 Beech signs a settlement form claiming £22,000 from the CICA. Badenoch QC says this was 15 months after Beech made his claim. He says between those two dates important things had happened. Beech says he had gone to the Met police in 2014.

Beech now being presented with what Wiltshire police presented to the CICA - Beech says “there were some lies in there but it wasn’t all based on lies”.

Beginning of Jan 2014 Beech says without looking at his bank records he’s unable to say what state his finances were in. He says there was a lot of debt. He says he thinks he had cleared a lot of his debt. He confirms he was making this claim when he was an “indebted person”.

19 Nov 2014 Beech requests an update on his CICA application. By now he’d had a series of interviews with the Met police - Beech says he can’t recall when he told the CICA about the Met police interviews. He says he is “unaware of any lies” he may have told the Met police.

Beech says he is not aware of any lies he told Met police. He does not believe he actively misled the investigation by the Met police. He says he does not believe he misled them. Beech says he told them his experiences.

Badenoch asks when Beech spoke to the Met police, did you tell them the truth? Beech says, “I believe so”. “You’re obviously asking the question because you’re going to say I didn’t”, says Beech to Badenoch QC.

Dec 2014 Beech complains to the CICA as he hadn’t been paid.

March 2015 Beech says the car he bought at this time had been “on order for a long time”, expressing interest in July 2011 or 2012, when Ford said they were going to be releasing the Mustang in a right hand drive.

Beech says he placed the order for his Mustang around 2012/13. Order confirmed with Ford in 2013/14. Order transferred to local Ford dealer in 2014 and physically confirmed in early 2015, days Beech. Then order and physically ordered as soon as available.

Beech says it went to his local dealer in early 2015. He says he couldn’t have got to that stage before jumping through all the other hoops.

5 March 2015 CICA replied to Beech saying a letter was in the post regarding his complaint to them. “Your case is being passed to a senior decision maker” says he CICA. 6 March 2015 a letter was written to Beech to say he’d been assessed for £22,000. He said he hadn’t expected it

Badenoch QC says in the meantime Beech went down to the Mustang showroom to look at the Mustang. Beech says to confirm an order - yes. He placed an order on the 6th March for a Mustang. Beech says his order was already in place.

Beech confirms at this time he had debts. And that he had decided he would buy a convertible Mustang. 6 March 2015 at 11:02 document dated for the Ford Mustang, £34,035 total due from Beech.

When asked where the deposit was going to come from, Beech says if he was awarded anything but he would have found the money. He says he has no idea how much the deposit would be.

Document for the finance, total deposit for the Mustang is £10,000 - Beech says the deposit came from CICA.

Beech confirms he was paid by the CICA. The claim was based on what he had told the Wiltshire police. He confirms he lied to Wiltshire police. He confirms he used the CICA money to buy the Mustang but says he would have done so anyway.

Badenoch QC turns to the Met police interviews now. In 2012 Beech was interviewed by Wiltshire police, Beech confirms. He agrees he knew how an interview was conducted and that he was required to tell the truth to police officers and that he had 2 more years to think.

Beech confirms he lied “in part” to the Wiltshire police. He says at the time of the Met police interviews he could remember what he had or hadn’t said to the Wiltshire police.

Badenoch QC suggests the Met didn’t know what lies Beech had told. Beech says is he was “aware that he had intentionally lied” he would have wanted to clear it up wth the Met police. He adds “they weren’t deliberate as you’re implying”.

Beech says if he had remembered what he said in the Wiltshire interview then he could have possibly corrected any lies.

Beech says he wasn’t actively misleading Wiltshire police in that context. When asked about Wiltshire police by the Met, you would have wanted to tell them the complete picture, asks Badenoch? Beech says he did tell the Met he hadn’t released all the info to Wiltshire police.

Beech confirms he understands the importance of accuracy and that he had been thinking about his abuse for years. He agrees this was the opportunity to disclose all the information to the police “as best I could”.

Badenoch suggests Beech should have given the Met his journal entries from the outset. And that he could have given them a copy of Too Many Secrets. Beech says he thought he’d got rid of the book, because it was no use to him. Badenoch asks how many copies he had - just the 1.

Beech says he had “just one”. When asked where he kept it, Beech says he doesn’t know because he worked on for a little while and then stopped because he used his journals instead. He says he thought he got rid of it but obviously didn’t because “you found it in the storage unit”

22 Oct 2014 being interviewed in Gloucestershire by DS Townly. Beech confirms this was his opportunity to tell the Met the truth and that he had spent years thinking about his abuse. He confirms he had confidence in DS Townly.

Beech was interviewed for 20 hours or so by the Met police. Before the interview Beech emailed DS Townly on 9th October. “If you say so, yes” says Beech.

At this time Beech provided the officer with some information, some names in advance of the interview. “I might well have done, I would need to see the email”, says Beech. In that list of names at 17:12 - the first name he gave was Aubrey.

Beech says he does not know why he did that, “that was incorrect”. This email was sent from “the comfort of your own home” says Badenoch. Beech agrees.

At the beginning of the interview DS Townly says “if I ask you something and you don’t know, don’t try to find an answer.” Beech says he understood that.

Beech confirms he understands that DS Townly was asking for the complete picture and if you think you’ve got something wrong, take the opportunity to tell us. Beech agrees these are all so they don’t take the investigation in the wrong direction.

Beech confirms he understood he was not to withhold any information - other than the diplomats - and that he was to tell the truth.

At the start of the interview Beech explains he had been careful on his blogs about naming people, On The Tangled Web. On this blog he mentioned the hospitalisation incident.

First page Badenoch turns to concerns the Wild life park - Beech confirms this was the first time he had been raped, by Ray, that it had stuck in his mind, that John had been there and his father had raped John in the next cubicle and that he was bleeding afterwards at home.

In the interview with the Met, Beech told DS Townly “Towards the end of the day, he took me into the public toilets... he took my trousers and underwear down and pinned me up against the door... I didn’t know what it was at the time... the pain was indescribable”.

“When we got home he beat my quote badly for the screaming and the struggling... but that was the first time.” Beech agrees, there is “some” detail there.

Beech says he knows John is at the wild life park but there is so far no mention of John.

Beech stated the Wildlife park was in Burford between Oxford and Gloucestershire, telling the officer he was 7 at the time. “Just he and Ray had gone to the park” noted the DS. Beech says he hadn’t told the Met about John because he didn’t want to tell them about John.

He adds this particular incident has a lot of shame in it. He confirms he made a positive statement that was untrue. Beech says again “yes, I hadn’t told them about John and his father”. He agrees that he withheld information from DS Townly.

He says “it wasn’t something I could talk about. It was an admission I didn’t tell them about. I don’t think t was intentional, it was just something I couldn’t talk about.”

Beech explains himself while audibly sniffing - possibly crying, his voice crackling. Badenoch asks which version of this story is true - Beech says John was there. Beech says he was raped by his own father but not by John’s father at this time, he says he was assaulted.

Beech says that information is not given to the Met police because “I couldn’t talk about it”.

Beech then goes on to describe “the pain in his anus and that there had been a lot of blood” - Badenoch says you had no difficulty telling the detective about the pain and damage that was done to you. “What was the problem saying John was there” he asks?

Beech answers “the shame.” When asked if this is not true - Beech says “that’s not the case”.

Beech confirms he felt too shamed to tell DS Townly about the friend in this instance but he could then go on and tell them about him being there at other occasions. Badenoch suggests the reason is because Beech knew Townly didn’t have his book.

Beech introduces “the good friend” - John. He says “my friend has been able to piece it together”. Here Beech says is talking about John, not Aubrey, not Duncan, not John he’s known for years but John who is in California.

Here Badenoch suggests Beech is introducing this friend who suffered the same abuse who is now helping him talk about it, yes says Beech, “we helped each other”.

Beech gives John a pseudonym “Fred”. Beech’s first recollection of meeting him - he says he doesn’t know, in the Met interview, he adds, it’s like I’ve just known him forever.

Asked when he did first meet John (aka Fred) he says he doesn’t know the exact year, it would have been around the time of living in Wilton. Beech says he had already told the Met police that he wasn’t going to talk about John.

Beech says he had already told the Met he wasn’t going to discuss John. He says it is fair to say that he was “keeping something information back” and that he wasn’t purposefully misleading them.

Beech says he was still wanting to assist the detective and tell him the truth “as best I could”.

Beech confirms he had sent an email of names to DS Townly, who then asks who do you remember from the Bicester period, Beech answers, my friend mainly (Fred). Badenoch says, you’re confirming there that Fred is from Bicester.

DS Townly returns to when Beech first met Fred. Beech confirms they’d been through a lot together. Beech then says “I suppose he is the main one, of the others Aubrey, he’s from Bicester”.

When asked why Beech mentioned him, Beech says “I knew him from Bicester. I think I was eating confused and so I was using his name.” Beech confirms he told Wiltshire that was a name to pursue in Bicester and that this was a lie. He is now telling the Met the same.

Beech says it was “confusion” that led him to tell the Met about Aubrey, as he had done to Wiltshire.

Beech was asked by DS Townly to tell him what he remembered about Aubrey. In this interview Beech was putting forward other people who had been sexually abused - yes, Beech says he was confused.

Beech agrees Aubrey was a duff name for Wiltshire - he says “for a pseudonym, yes”. Again, Beech says “I think it was confusion and I did clarify it with the Met police”.

Beech then describes Aubrey over a whole page of the interview. Beech says this was because he was confused and that Aubrey has never been abused.

He says he was getting confused. Badenoch suggests he is lying to the Met police, Beech says “no, I was getting confused”.

Badenoch says the reason Beech is doing this is because he is making it up as he goes along. Beech says this is not the case and “I gave information that I remembered at the time.”

He adds he told the detectives this because of “confusion, stems from having to deal with an enormous range of emotions and memories and having to talk about those.”

Badenoch asks if Beech was confused when he sent the list of names to the police, Beech says he can’t remember and that it was “an emotional time for me”.

Court breaks for 20 minutes.

9 Oct 2014 Beech sends DS Townly an email providing a list of names of the other boys who were abused with him. First name is Aubrey. Badenoch says Aubrey was not subject to sexual abuse, Beech day no he was not. He confirms it was a name he used as a pseudonym.

Badenoch suggests Beech knew Wiltshire and the Met were never going to find him because he had nothing to do with the sexual abuse because he hadn’t.

Beech confirms Aubrey’s name is on the list - Beech says he was confused at the time. He says he was not confused about the other names on the list. Who is Steven, asks Badenoch. “Another boy” - Beech doesn’t know where he lived or the school. Nor does he know who abused him.

Names include Andrew, Duncan, James, Alex, John (he is the one Beech says he has been in lifetime contact with).

There is also Scott, he was one of the ones who died but was not involved in the group - says Beech in the email. He says he has nothing bad can identify him that he hasn’t already told the Met police.

Badenoch says there is no record of a Scott being run over and killed, no record of Scott being missing and no record of a child being run over and killed in Kingston. Badenoch suggests he isn’t real, Beech says he is, wishes he wasn’t.

Beech is now reading a document, said to be familiar to Beech.

Beech says he has no recollection of writing this document at all. He says he must have written it but he can’t remember. This was recovered from the garage of his address in November.

What happened to Aubrey, Ray and Ian - (is what I have heard the title of this document to be) - Beech has no recollection of writing this and so cannot answer if he is writing about Aubrey or John.

He discusses experiencing an incident in his early nursing career - Beech says this could be right be he has not recollection of writing this.

Beech writes about Aubrey experiencing a visit from the police. “We are now tracking down other boys Ian had contact with” - when asked who Ian is, Beech says he doesn’t know because he can’t remember writing this document.

In this document Aubrey told the police about “Ray” and Beech. Beech says he has no recollection of writing this. Badenoch suggests his is a fiction - Beech says “it is certainly not true on here”.

Did the police want to speak to you as a result of what Aubrey said? Asks Badenoch. Beech says this is all incorrect. He says he doesn’t doubt this is all written by him but he has no recollection of writing this.

The document then goes on to describe how Aubrey’s dad was sentenced to 6 years in prison because of the abuse he committed. Beech says this is all fiction.

Asked what’s the point of writing this, Beech says he doesn’t know because he can’t remember writing this. Badenoch asks if Beech is keeping he real reason for writing this from the jury? Beech says he does not recall writing this.

You’re talking about people being charged with criminal offences here, but it’s not true is it, asks Badenoch? Beech says, no, it’s not true.

Beech agrees the document describing Ray and what happened to him, “is all fiction”. He confirms he knew Ray was dead before he went into the police station to talk about him. Again Beech says “I do not recall writing this document”.

“Obviously I did write it but I have no recollection of it at all”. Badenoch says this is pages 15 and 16 of a 75 page document. Beech says “it doesn’t ring a bell for me” when asked if he recalls any of the 75 pages. He agrees these pages represent complete fiction.

He can’t answer what the point is of writing complete fiction because he can’t recall it. “Fiction has value if you’re writing a book and intending to publish as an author”, Beech says other than a nurse book, he had no intention of publishing.

Beech had previously published a book about nursing. Beech published his book via a self-publishing publisher.

What is the point of copyrighting a book asks Badenoch. “To protect others form using it” says Beech. He agrees it is to protect its commercial value. Beech agrees this is sensational and “looks to be published by him”bHe does not recall writing 75 pages of “sensational untruths”

Beech doesn’t remember specifically writing “Too Many Secrets”. The purpose of writing it, to help collate and organise his thoughts and memories and to have a time line of things he couldn’t say or loud, to sort out what was relating to him and to John.

Beech says these were for his personal purposes alone. He didn’t honk he had kept any copies himself. He says but obviously there was one in the self storage and an electronic copy. He says he thought he disposed of it and that it wasn’t a conscious decisions to put it there.

Beech says the date of renting the storage was coincidental that it was the day after his interview with the Met.

Beech says he wrote chapters and an introduction to “Too Many Secrets”. Beech says this might have helped him organise things, depending on what he wrote.

Beech now looking at a picture of himself aged 5/6 - a happy child holding the family cat. He confirms no marks on him of any kind on his hand or face. This is the picture Beech selected for his writing.

Too Many Secrets: How I Survived a Child Sex Ring - 26 July 2013 content created file created in 2015 this recovered from Beech’s USB. Beech explains this document has an introduction to help him. He says it is an introduction for a 3rd party reader but “not with that intention”

Beech says he dedicated this work to his son. He confirms he has dedicated this to his son, something that will never be published.

On page 51 there is copyright - Beech says it is an automatic, an e-book journal. Badenoch asks why he has done that if he wasn’t going to publish? Beech says he did this “to help me.” Adding “to help me put things into context, to write things.”

Stephen Chassereau - Beech copyrighted the document under this name. Beech explains because that is his first name and a family name.

Beech says he doesn’t know why he decided to change from writing in Word format into this e-book format. Beech has agreed that he is able to write “sensational fiction”. Badenoch suggests Too Many Secrets is sensational fiction. Beech says no.

When asked if he wrote this, Beech said “quite possibly” but he can’t remember the table of contents the court is now being shown.

Badenoch suggests the USB where this document was found was used to “keep your things”. Beech says what he told the Met was not untrue. Badenoch asks is what you told the police sensational if it was untrue. “I don’t know how to answer that because it was true.”

Beech says he doesn’t know if there was a market for books like this, about surviving child sex abuse. Beech says his journals had superseded these documents and he forgot about these, so he didn’t tell the Met about them.

Beech told the Met that he was happy for the police to go through his journals when he was there. He says the Met didn’t go through them. He burnt the journals but kept these other materials - Beech explains he didn’t realise he kept these. He burnt the journals May 2016.

Beech doesn’t believe it was relayed to the police that he had burnt the journals.

Court breaks for lunch - retuning 1405.

Returning from lunch, Badenoch QC asks, you had a lot of contact with the Met police over 2014/15. Beech confirms.

Direct contact with DS Townly and DC Chatfield when required. Beech knew they were following lines of enquiry that he told them. Knew he Met was investigating what he told them. Beech has by now met with Tom Watson MP Dan’s sought a meeting with Simon Danczuk.

He had by this point introduced Aubrey to the Met Police. He sought to clarify the matter with the Met Police, but Beech is unsure of when exactly he did this. He does not know. He says this was not something he’d thought about.

He’d been driving around the counties and London with officers and Beech confirms he knew he’d told the officers about Aubrey.

Beech provided a clarification to the police later - 31 July 2015 email sent at 00:21 - DC Chatfield to Beech asking what school Aubrey went to. Beech confirms he received this email, replying, can I ask why you are trying to find Aubrey?

Beech says at this stage he had forgotten the Wiltshire interviews and what he said there and the confusion around Aubrey to the Met police in the first place - Beech says this came as a surprise to him.

Beech was told Aubrey could provide corroboration as he is a witness. Beech remembers receiving the email.

Beech replied he did not know what school Aubrey went to. When asked why he is saying that, Beech says, because he asked. Beech agrees this is irrelevant because Aubrey has not been abused.

Beech says he didn’t tell the Met police officer that this is irrelevant because, he doesn’t know. He confirms he knows the police are looking for corroborative witnesses. Beech says he has no explanation for this.

He continues in the email “I don’t think it was my school.” Beech tells the court he doesn’t know why he said this. He agrees this is the clarification email he has been telling the jury about. He says he shouldn’t have written any of it.

Beech agrees this email is of no use to the Metropolitan detective. In the email he continues to say “I can point out where he used to live”. Beech says to the court this is no use to the police officer “I shouldn’t have said it”.

Beech says he doesn’t know why he was doing this. Beech says he doesn’t know why he did the things he did in this email.

Beech says he has no explanation, “I shouldn’t have done that”. He says he doesn’t know which address he was going to take the detective to, adding “I shouldn’t have put that down”.

Apart from using Aubrey’s name to refer to “J” the email is incorrect, says Beech. Beech confirms that sentence is correct.

He says he used Aubrey “primarily” when referring to “J”. He says because he had referred to Aubrey before.

Beech, in the email, says Aubrey’a father did things. In court, Beech says he didn’t know Aubrey’s father.

Beech confirms he knew the police were looking for a corroborative witness. Beech accepts he was lying to the detectives in this email, he says he has no explanation for it and no excuse.

Beech says “not that I recall” when asked if he was telling any other lies to the Metropolitan police.

Beech says it’s not as straightforward as lying about it, he says he just didn’t tell the police that John and his father were at the Wildlife park. He says he couldn’t tell them the rest.

Beech agrees with Badenoch that he lied in the interviews with the Met and in emails.

Beech says he does not know why he wrote that email and that he has no excuse for it.

Met police officers asked repeated about the pain that was caused to Beech and any injuries he sustained, they wanted to know if he had been injured. Why did Beech not offer the body maps? Beech says it didn’t enter his head to do that.

Beech says it was a very hard experience - to write out the body maps - Badenoch suggests it would have been something Beech would have wanted to tell the Met about, to which Beech says he did tell the Met about some of them.

The court are now being shown an email from 9 May 2013 - Beech writes he has updated his body map with colours on his body - Green, broken bones some required surgery. This is Beech telling his counsellor about the injuries he sustained through the abuse.

Beech confirms in his role as a nurse he saw thousands of fractures in children’s over the years and so he knew how they would be treated.

Beech describes an injury to his leg, in this document he did not mention this injury was caused from a skiing accident. He denies that he listed the skiing accident as a result of his abuse.

Beech says he assumed he had a fractured skull and fractured ribs “an assumption based on how he felt at the time”. Beech says according to the x-rays he recently had done, his skull had not been fractured. He says he assumed it had been fractured during his professional career

As far as he remembers, Beech was not immobilised as a result of his fractured skull. Beech says he didn’t carry on as normal, he says “it is a recollection of the head pain, the eye pain, the swelling in the head, the feelings he felt at the time, being quite sleepy”.

Beech says “it was an adult assumption, given the pain he had as a child”, that he had broken ribs.

This again is sensational isn’t it, says Badenoch. “No it’s just an assumption of what happened”, says Beech.

Beech says there is no double question mark near these entires because these are injuries that he had sustained or believed he had sustained.

Yellow - where I was hit that caused other problems. Looking at the body map, according to the marking he had bruises all over his chin, sides of face and lower forehead, both ears front and back. Beech says “it’s a general area of where the hitting took place”.

Badenoch suggests this would have been visible for everyone to see, Beech says “on occasion”. He says especially during living in Wilton.

Red - Burn. Beech says he was tied to a table one summer. When asked why he didn’t tell the police, he says he probably didn’t have time. The red is indicated on the back and shoulders and the soles of his feet. Beech is agrees he is saying he has been repeatedly burnt.

Beech says he doesn’t know if there are any marks on his body from these injuries because he doesn’t look.

Blue - needles and injections put into his body. Beech says he didn’t have that many injections into his body as a child.

Purple - snake bites. Beech confirms more than one snake bite. He says he snake was set on him once biting him on the thighs and arm. He says he thinks it happened during Bicester time and that it hurt. He says he had no medical intervention.

Beech says he doesn’t know if there was venom on the snake. Beech has written elsewhere that it is an Adder. He says this was a guess because he only knew of an Adder. He repeats this was an assumption not a fiction.

Black - wasp stings. Beech says this was used as punishment at times. Beech says this happened in Wilton, Bicester and Kingston. He says the group used it as a form of punishment. Beech says John might have been there when they were being used.

Beech says it was a punishment for one of us in particular rather than several of us. He says just one of the group would have set the wasps on him. He says Michael Hanley did it on one occasion. And others that “I wouldn’t have known”. He says he wasn’t always naked.

He says it wasn’t a swarm of wasps, it certainly wasn’t 100s or 1000s of wasps. He says he didn’t look around the count.

Beech says it wasn’t a continuous practice throughout the time so he suffered it between 3-6 times over the course of the years. He says there might have been other boys present but not being punished with him. “They had them in a jar, shake the jar and then let them in the room”

They exited the room after they opened the jar “it’s a wasp sting, not a life and death situation”, says Beech. Badenoch asks how the group got Beech out of the room without them getting stung themselves. Beech says he wasn’t concentrating on the group.

Badenoch QC suggests this is complete fantasy, Beech says he wishes it was.

Turning to the body map, Beech agrees that is a catalogue of horrendous markings. There is not a limb that has not been damaged in some way. Not a hand, toe or sole of foot that has not been damaged in some way.

Beech agrees there is not a mark on him - correct according to the prosecution pathologist. Badneoch asks, how did you draw this body map without looking at your own body? Beech says he doesn’t need to look at this body to know it happened. He agrees he did it from memory.

Badenoch asks, if you can remember all of these things from your childhood, why can’t you remember writing the document from before lunch? Beech says “I remember some things, others I don’t”.

Beech says his lies aren’t deliberate. He says they are intentional for the reasons he has so far explained.

In an email to Vicky Paterson Beech says he and John have been speaking about the abuse they both suffered as a child and that they had spoken just a week ago. Beech says John would have been in the USA though he can’t recall on the occasion.

Beech says he kept Johns number on either his blackberry or the iPhone. The police took his iPhone. Beech provided the PIN number for his iPhone. He says he doesn’t recall if this is the same pin for the family iPad. Badenoch asks what name John would appear under.

Beech says he would be under “John” or “J”. He adds that his son wants to know what he’s writing in his notebooks. He speaks about messaging with John, Beech says it could be texting or messaging - messaging using FaceTime on the iPhone, another app on blackberry.

Beech says he doesn’t have his phones. He again says he is not prepared to give John’s surname.

Beech can not help with the name of John’s father, who he says was also an abuser.

Beech in another email to Paterson says the last time he saw his step father Ray was when he was taken away by the police, in this email he says it wasn’t. Beech says he was trying to allude to the other members in the group.

“He found me a year on in Kingston” - this follows on from his description of his step father but Beech says his is referring to Michael Hanley.

Beech says he is trying to get things out to Vicky (Paterson). He says this was still in the early days of trying to get information out to her.

At the end of the email Beech says “you now know everything”, Beech admits that is not right but he was hoping to get everything across to her “some things took me years to get across to her, I still couldn’t talk to her about something”.

Beech says he was trying to get the information across to her in the best way he could, when Badenoch asks, did you tell her counsellor the truth?

Beech agrees he has “virtually written a complete book”. He says again the book was never meant for publication. Beech says he has written about counselling various times and how it helped him.

Beech explains he is anxious about going to Bicester, he confirms he went to Bicester with Paterson, showed her where he went to school. Beech says he told her about a child death but maintains it was in Kingston not Bicester, he says he may not have told her he location.

Beech denies that he took Paterson there to tell her a story. 3 Oct 2014 - Beech was about to go to the Met police. He had not yet sent the email with the 7 names to the Met. He had been in counselling for most of 2012, all of 2013 and 10 months of 2014.

Email to Paterson Oct 2014 - email about how angry he is about someone committing child sexual offences at the school at which he is a governor. “Just don’t think I’ve been cross like this before”. Beech says “I had been cross at times. I was cross at the process”.

Beech says he has previously committed child sex offences. Beech doesn’t know the dates of when he became a child sexual offender. He thought it was later than when he went to the Met that he was a child sexual offender He doesn’t know the exact dates “not something I’m proud of”

Beech says he doesn’t recall taking pictures outside his house. He denies having a habit of taking covert pictures of boys. Beech says he doesn’t think he was a sex offender at that time, he thought it was later.

In the email to Paterson he says “it looks like just downloaded stuff” as opposed to pupils at the school.

Beech denies having filmed a boy in his own house at this time, he says this was in 2016 and that this is something he deeply regrets. Beech says he put a recording device in the downstairs toilet and t captured him going to the toilet. “It was curiosity”, says Beech.

Beech accepts this is something he shouldn’t of done, he did it to find out if he found gratification in this kind of thing. Beech says no he didn’t. Beech says the indecent images and “Child E” is something he is disgusted in himself for.

Court breaks for 10 minutes.

Badenoch QC says the court are going to watch Beech’s media appearances and then he will be questioned.

Documentary was first shown on 17th Aug 2014 under the names of “Crimes That Shook Britain” on the Crime and Investigation Network. Beech says he did this voluntarily. In this Beech explains how he was abused by Jimmy Savile.

The detail for Jimmy Savile, Beech doesn’t think is in “Too Many Secrets”. Beech says he doesn’t recall if he told Wiltshire police all information about Jimmy Savile.

Beech says when he told police he had been raped by Jimmy Savile but not seen his face was the truth.

Beech appears as “Stephen” in this documentary. He opens by discussing the abuse he suffered at home at the age of 7. A silhouette of Beech on an exposed brick wall, his voice made deeper.

In the documentary the narrator explains Beech was abused for the next 9 years. Beech in the documentary describes how he was taken out of school by the group and abused and how it was “part of life”. He says “strange because no one said not to tell but it was made clear”.

The narrator says occasionally guests would join them and on more train once occasion Jimmy Savile was a guest. Beech in the doco says he wasn’t always told there was a guest coming, no names were used.

Commenting on this doco, Badenoch asks why are you saying names were never used? Beech says “it wasn’t applicable for what they were trying to get across”.

Badenoch says Beech was about to tell the Met that some of the abusers openly used their names so they could investigate the crimes that shock Britain.

Rewinding the doco, the court hears again Beech explains there would be a guest coming and that no names were ever used, didn’t use names at all. He came a couple of times.

Within a few months Beech told the Met the group used names. Beech says he felt more comfortable talking to the police.

Beech says “it wasn’t information I thought they needed to know”. The doco continues, in it Beech says Savile abused him directly, he describes him as sadistic in what he wanted to do and what he wanted other people to do.

Beech says Savile enjoyed seeing pain inflicted and humiliation. He says it’s hard to comprehend when you know who it is and you’re sat watching TV and you’re watching tv. It’s a strange feeling. He says we were just sweets in a bag that you hand round and share.

How does that reconcile with what you told Wiltshire police, asks Badenoch QC. You said you hadn’t seen his face. Beech says yes, I did, on TV. Beech adds he doesn’t remember seeing his face when Savile abused him. He does not recall. Beech says Savile abused him in Bicester.

Beech says he was representing a truthful position in the doco “as best he could”. He agrees that saying no names were used in the doco was entirely contrary to what he told the Met. DS Townly was not told about this broadcast at the outset. Beech says he told him when he asked.

Beech says this “escaped my memory” and that he was discussing things that “I was very upset with and trying to talk to the police about and that was filling my head at the time” - this is why he didn’t tell DS Townly.

The broadcast interview is also different to what Beech told DS Lewis of Wiltshire.

The next extract from the same doco shows Beech praising the work of the police, Beech says he was praising Wiltshire - these are the police officers he lied to “in part” he confirms.

Beech disagrees this was an opportunity to say he had misled the police. In the doco he says “it is easier to live with”, Beech clarifies - it was easier to live with his thoughts and emotions at that time around the abuse he suffered.

Having spoken to the police things had become easier confirms Beech. The next documentary is the BBC Panorama programme.

This from Oct 2015. By now Badneoch suggests Beech has lied to Wiltshire and the Met, Beech says “in part”. In the doco Beech is called “Stephen”. He explains his father started the abuse. Extracts from the previous documentary feature in this.

In the doco the narrator explains “Nick” wrote his experiences online. Beech confirms. Badenoch asks if he had been writing truthfully. Beech replies “as far as I am aware yes, or others, or John”.

The doco now shows “Nick” on 18 Dec 2014 talking to BBC reporter. Beech says he does not remember being the top story on the TV news but he does remember the interview with Tom Symonds. Beech confirms he knew what he was saying was being broadcast on mainstream TV.

“I’ve been very lucky, I’ve had a good career, I’m good at what I do. It effects personal relationships and the ability to trust. And from day to day things, what might trigger you, what might not. Simply having this hood up causes anxieties because I have to know what’s around”

Beech says he has spent his life looking over his shoulder and that it has been very difficult for him. He says he has never seen anyone over his shoulder connected with the abuse.

“Having baths, having my head under the water used to be a big problem” Beech says in his interview. “Baths have a negative association with me, just from the abuse, being cleaned up. It’s not a pleasurable thing like most people feel.”

Beech says he saw the Panorama programme when it went out. Beech says he knew it was being broadcast to millions of people. Beech says the Panorama “wasn’t my choice to do”.

Beech says he was not intending to publish a book. Beech says the Panorama programme was one “where I was doorstepped by the journalist and he police weren’t happy it was going out.” He says “I wasn’t happy because they turned up on my doorstep wanting a comment”.

Court concludes for the day. Court will return tomorrow at 1000 - I will not be here tomorrow. Apologies in advance.

Court sitting at 1030 tomorrow, not 1000.