Brian Eley

[Mike Gunn]

I prepared a similar report when CJ de Mooi suddenly resigned as ECF President while representing the ECF at the FIDE Congress. I collected statements from those involved and that formed the substance of the report. The final report was not put in the public domain (it went to the ECF board) because a couple of people (including CJ) said they would not speak openly about those events if what they said was made public. I would follow a similar procedure with the Eley case, but the victims and (possibly) chess officials would be offered anonymity if they contributed.

My qualifications for doing this are that I have about 20 years of chess adminstration experience including 3 years as non-exec chairman of the ECF and 3 years as chair of Council. I drew up the safeguarding policy for my chess club using advice from a retired police officer as well as drawing on previous safeguarding policies from the chess world and elsewhere. Although my main employment has been in universities I am a professionally qualified engineer (CEng) and spent a couple of years working for my professional institution involved in the training of junior engineers (which included training in professional ethics).

As we know from the Savile case, accusations about his behaviour lead nowhere during his lifetime because he was effectively protected by colleagues/ those within the establishment with whom he had formed links. I believe that a report into the Eley case could still help the chess community understand how pedophiles operate and protect themselves from detection and would be useful from that point of view. Incidentally I have no specific legal training or qualifications but I don't think that is necessary here. I am independent in the sense that I never met Eley and had no connection with the BCF in the period before he absconded.

[MJMcCready]

The chances of finding that are about the same as 'The life of Brian Eley' being a topic on Mastermind.

[NickFaulks]

My qualifications for doing this are that I have about 20 years of chess adminstration experience including 3 years as non-exec chairman of the ECF and 3 years as chair of Council.

I cannot think of anyone better qualified than Mike to perform the task as he describes it. I would certainly have more faith in his findings than in those of some generously paid outside expert.

[John Upham]

In terms of establishing a timeline for BRE is it generally agreed in which year his offending amongst male chess players commenced?

[Nick Ivell]

Well we have Clacton 1974, if not before.

[John Upham]

Here are the (IMHO) relevant BCF Officials from 1974 until 1981:

Code: Select all

Year	President	General Secretary	Junior	Home	National Junior Coach	Secretary for Junior Training	Secretary for Junior Selection	National Junior Training Coordinator
1974-5	J. Rushton	Ann Hopton	EE Croker	PM Shaw				
1975-6	J. Rushton	Paul Buswell	WA Cordon	PM Shaw				
1976-7	WA Cordon	Paul Buswell	WA Cordon	PM Shaw				
1977-8	CE Williams	Paul Buswell	David Jarrett	PM Shaw	Bob Wade	Leonard Barden		
1978-9	?	Paul Buswell	David Jarrett	PM Shaw	Bob Wade	Leonard Barden		
1979-80	David Anderton	Paul Buswell	David Jarrett	PM Shaw	Bob Wade	Leonard Barden	Mike O'Hara	
1980-81	David Anderton	Paul Buswell	David Jarrett	PM Shaw	Bob Wade	Leonard Barden	Mike O'Hara	D. Evans
	David Anderton	Paul Buswell	David Jarrett	PM Shaw	Bob Wade	Leonard Barden	Mike O'Hara	D. Evans

[Roger Lancaster]

It's a question I maybe should have asked earlier, and a quick skim through this thread doesn't seem to answer it, but what more precisely do all those statements accuse Eley of? Are we talking penetrative sex with minors or something less serious? If the former (in as few as one case) then that's statutory rape in virtually all European jurisdictions - including the Netherlands - so it's not clear why extradition didn't take place. If something more along the lines of grooming, I'm far from clear whether that would have been an offence under Dutch law, in which case I think I'm right in believing that the Netherlands would very likely have declined to extradite. I ask the question because I don't see how any objective investigator could confidently arrive at a 'guilty' conclusion without being able to explain why the Dutch police took no action. (Feel free to PM me if you prefer).

[Matt Mackenzie]

Well there is surely a mid point between outright rape and "just" grooming - ie "serious sexual assault".

(which at least a few accused Eley of, I believe)

[Andrew Zigmond]

It's a question I maybe should have asked earlier, and a quick skim through this thread doesn't seem to answer it, but what more precisely do all those statements accuse Eley of? Are we talking penetrative sex with minors or something less serious? If the former (in as few as one case) then that's statutory rape in virtually all European jurisdictions - including the Netherlands - so it's not clear why extradition didn't take place. If something more along the lines of grooming, I'm far from clear whether that would have been an offence under Dutch law, in which case I think I'm right in believing that the Netherlands would very likely have declined to extradite. I ask the question because I don't see how any objective investigator could confidently arrive at a 'guilty' conclusion without being able to explain why the Dutch police took no action. (Feel free to PM me if you prefer).

This for me is the crux of the issue and why I have profound misgivings about a) the demands for a report/ enquiry and b) Carl and Jack for allowing this thread to drag on for so long. Only Eley and each individual victim know exactly what happened between them and Eley's tongue is now forever stopped. A fair few of them will have likely given statements to the police as children which was likely a harrowing experience - we know that even now survivors of sexual abuse are not treated well, particularly male ones, and this happened thirty years ago. Some will likely never feel able to speak about it but they live with the consequences day after day.

If individual survivors wish to put their stories in the public domain, they have this choice. But quite frankly the details do not belong in any public report and they are certainly NOT the business of anybody on this forum.

Survivors UK is a charity that supports male victims of sexual abuse. Their website is here https://www.survivorsuk.org/?gclid=CjwK ... 9IQAvD_BwE They are an excellent organisation who are the best source of support for those affected by Eley's crimes (and many more men like him). I'm sure they would welcome donations.

Thirty years ago an enquiry would have been useful in determining what complaints were raised and with whom, who then passed on the complaints and who didn't. However it is not thirty years ago and any report would be riddled with gaps from those who are now deceased and therefore unable to give their version of events or provide vital information. Likewise any recommendations as to how anything similar could be prevented would have been useful thirty years ago but will now have been largely superseded.

[John Upham]

What are the thoughts of the good people of this place on the parallels (if any) between

The BCFs (and then ECFs) handling of BRE

and

The Football Associations handling of Barry Bennell

For example, https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... -concludes

[NickFaulks]

Likewise any recommendations as to how anything similar could be prevented would have been useful thirty years ago but will now have been largely superseded.

So we know that bad things happened, but the good news is that they couldn't possibly happen now so let's move on.

[Mike Gunn]

One of the reasons for recording the details of cases like the Eley one is so that the
chess community as a whole become more aware of the possibilities that coaching
affords pedophiles. Of course the readers of Kingpin and this forum know about
Eley but how many chess parents read this forum? Not many, I suspect.

Based on my personal experience the ECF tends to sweep under the carpet the
details of anything which would lead to embarrassing publicity for the ECF or
chess in general. In some cases this could be the appropriate course of action
but (in my opinion) this whole case represents unfinished business and the
ECF needs to do the right thing (as other organisations like the BBC and FA
have).

[Andrew Zigmond]

Likewise any recommendations as to how anything similar could be prevented would have been useful thirty years ago but will now have been largely superseded.

So we know that bad things happened, but the good news is that they couldn't possibly happen now so let's move on.

Is that what I said? No it certainly isn't!

A report produced on the Eley scandal at the time would, at the very least, have recommended a proper complaints procedure where they would have at the very least have been logged, creating an audit trail. That is now done as a matter of course.

I stand by my comments that those people demanding a report are more interested in the lurid details than any genuine empathy for the victims. I will also keep repeating my request for Carl Hibbard to shut this thread down.

[Andrew Zigmond]

One of the reasons for recording the details of cases like the Eley one is so that the
chess community as a whole become more aware of the possibilities that coaching
affords pedophiles. Of course the readers of Kingpin and this forum know about
Eley but how many chess parents read this forum? Not many, I suspect.

Based on my personal experience the ECF tends to sweep under the carpet the
details of anything which would lead to embarrassing publicity for the ECF or
chess in general. In some cases this could be the appropriate course of action
but (in my opinion) this whole case represents unfinished business and the
ECF needs to do the right thing (as other organisations like the BBC and FA
have).

At that time the organisation was still the BCF. It's a relatively cosmetic detail but still an important one.

Mike - do you dispute that if Eley or somebody similar was active now that he would at least be subject to safeguarding procedures and complaints would have been properly recorded?

With reference to your first paragraph surely chess does not afford any more opportunities to paedophiles than other sports/ activities or teaching does? While chess parents might not be aware of a specific scandal from thirty years ago they are surely aware of the overall risks and expect the appropriate actions and safeguards to be taken.

[Roger Lancaster]

What are the thoughts of the good people of this place on the parallels (if any) between

The BCFs (and then ECFs) handling of BRE

and

The Football Associations handling of Barry Bennell

For example, https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... -concludes

I'll just point out that the Offside Trust, a charity concerned with the welfare of abuse survivors, said of the Sheldon report into football abuse - "The recommendations are ones which would have been blindingly obvious to anyone within a few weeks of the scandal breaking". Essentially, they amounted to a very strong recommendation - Bennell was far from being the only offender - that the FA tightened up its safeguarding procedures. It's hard to see how any investigation into the Eley affair would differ in this respect. The ECF already requires that ECF-registered coaches submit Enhanced DBS checks but the ECF has no jurisdiction over an individual, not necessarily an ECF member, who sets himself up as a chess coach without registering. In fact, there's a difference that, in the FA case, the coaches in question were employed by clubs which might have been the first line of defence against abuse - the same is not true of chess, where coaches are typically self-employed and advertise openly.