Document text
t 92
-.. . -=.,e'o A
' "_'
_' _ P
»
. . I . ,'
. -
.. .-"- 92'-= ' ' ~'*.*=-re;-...--.i~':*"=-2.-=~-.-' . .=-1~.- . _-:7 -__ _ -4 v .. k .¢.a-. _ - _ r..___.'-"=1 ?'Y" :~f-.7 =+<-_;_%_¢_q5.l- _ , " "_:.~_; - *'=i='- ' ' .'--.
I "' ;*.~*.."eé¬-:1 _ '-gr {*1 . " é_=F _ - Ti "'_n,_, ~" ,=*= -" $.52; _ V,.1"-2 -" .~».- I. _--. _._-;._... "-§;-2:-;-?~::-=~_"2¬92*3=-__ --an :_ l;___L* ,5, r,._-K"'1 e -J-;"*¢","-' "'**' -"- -Y -s . ."'1--~ e. . Q,-1: e- i- ,3: .- ' - .- .__1_ ,4~_' :4_. _L_-_"_' .-j
-.~_; ~'_:-tar -_._'___;*I .;_- ' __ H. r A-_ .' . '1;-=' ' so _.,-:
--_- -.. '1_' _"';/._',' 1-4-u92_ ,r,_J-1-4' 4... ,_ t ._92,-'_ -> *_
J1:-_-_{_-..r__-"at"-.'*jfr:' ~*__"1I- --s.-_, __-:;;d;~T-,3 -; -1-nah? .__;__. - :_~92i2-,:.;a-'¬.-',;';",'j_ _ :'-':-1*" ti---'~;.-1-~ ,1-"*-'».~"-.-'?"¥131.£§§?". '1"...--.'.-.r_. .7 . ... " ' %,_' 5.;. -: -"_--:-w t- r a _ " 41:-"I -; . -
. -3*-.= H - _ .3;- ...., - - -. _- . - ' ' -~».1~' ~>.- *3.. -,5! _-__ . _,:=»;KT -e-5,;"7-"' +1.2:-'.=~ -. ...==~e, e"
. .-."i=-l.~£1- ' -*1»-'-:=l'*-:,1 921.¥ "". -__ .-.1-__;.,,~ - t _,;-;g_~¢_ - W_~_>.».5_3'¢..-.. . '.,.:- ,._-. 1|-4"...-,.. - '-'1 .- . .--~,;_ .-_...-_'..-..t_ :F'92_~_-' 1»? éj qr in _#"_____ ____ _."r" -.3. . :---*5: ' : £1 _ _ qs----.. _____ -e - - - -'~__"-" 1 *1r'- ;'-iii. -. -2 '-.-_ at F_ V__ ___--_!d_-. .12_ '.=..-1' "'.. .. I1;-' ~r....:»~ » ~ M
rt" F;
i .~I>/<- 924| 1I-. ._.-tr-i:..;---_ -
Q. - --- --- an we2
92 -
L- ---.--- __4
. 92 _
I-1_ ._- _
- 112. The debate endedyat 1.22 a.m. and Mr.
Secretary, went straight home. No one askednothing of the events of the rest oI1enight;* f L - 1 -' "* |.*~éf¥;,**=' .-1." " -;.,_.:.":.1.-¢1i;__..";
_p _ .- spars.-asrsarmnu-»oor_r»qg..,.
173, But use Chief Whip had meanwhile seen_Mr. Prolumo. Ml.had beento a dinner see looked mm the House on his wayhome. timethe Chief Whip, who told him of the accusations that had beenChief Whip said to him, -I must ask you point blank. did you or didntyou? e I % t". .l..ed me I-hie! whip told him that he thoughthe might have to make 1- statement: but that he should go back and io
to bed. Soi'Mt'. Profumo. with his wife, went back to bed. Their house was
besieged by reporters, but they ran the siege and got in about 12.40 a.m.,'very wrought up, took sleeping pills, and went to bed; s" - ~ " "
1 . .' B rrnpo ._. . '; E._... 1
174. The Chief Whip meanwhile had been thinking more about the
matter. It occurred to him that these statements in the House alforded an
°PP°92'm!1il! lQ.b1'iti»b¢ tu1nq92.1r=..w mold and tl1=t.th¢=. sh! way to deal
with them was for Mr. Profumo to make a personal statement in the House.
He telephoned to the Prime M.inister,_who agreed. The _actual_ sequencejog
events is diteult to disentangle but this is what tool: place. After the debate
was over, about L30 a.m., the_C'h_ieI_ Whip asked Mr. Macleod who, as
the Leader of the House, was _naturally_ concerned in any personal statement!
to come along to his room. Soon afterwards the Ayttorney_-General tame in.
He took the viewvery strongly that this was the occasion which Mr. Profumo
ought to take to deny the rumours. Mr. Profumo had been waiting-__fo_r an
opportunity to bring a libel action. But here was an opportunity to scotch
them by a personal statement. Next the question arose as to when it should he
made. It was agreed between them that it was undesirable -to leave the
rumours unanswered over the week-end for the Sunday newspapers would
have them without a denial!. So it would have to be done in the morning,
Friday morning. They all thought it was desirable _ to have rst-hand
iniormation about what had been said. So they asked Mr. Deedes the
Mini.ster_ without Portfolio! to come as he had been present in the Chamber
and heard all that was said. He had gone home. but the Chief Whip
telephoned him and asked him to come back. The Solicitor-General who
had gone to his room! came bank too. So there were present all the Ministers
who heard the statements made except the Home Secretary!, together with
the Chief Whip and the Leader of the House, who had special responsibilities
a aW
4
.1__ p ] 1. whsthappened: "_We wereso poggy.Ahe thesssistant!nidz.'L0oh.
1-n
i
- ._92=_"- .1" _._:=¢" -»" 77-. t. W _ - _ E:-.s=-ns.&l-§=- .- ~'= -ca--Q - -- -. .- - --. 1-- 1- - ' "F:-'~-t " *=-42.: - ¥ :.
" . .__-_-3;,-¢_-n-3: ~ v . __ J "7. . - . -_r_ ----J. .' .T":5;*'- . "-,-L; .IA _ - " - ' _ r-' --.._ ~ ~ eta __
1' _. 1 _ _ _ _ t .- _ :__ V- '.
. __ ~_ - ' 4 I ' _;»;-,.%;;_.
-. -.3 -- . "'_-- Q".-' * -. -. ' Jw -1 _ ._ .. __ "a-:1 .- .-FY;--.:_:~ ."::- .1. ~ -.-.1: _ --;;-.»'- -_~ 2? -. _ - --~*T~.- -1"~».- ..-;',':' . ;__ ",'§% F 3-g-,1-55" _.:"-."£ i""i};,-X--1 ,.-_-'.?_-;:_:.?=§;'.::*.§*n.- - 3, . M ,. F mu-¢§_' - - .- 1' ~- -,. p .; ..~t=»-.--:~.-.-_- .-
.' tsf-I "-~t%§.=»*"'°;?§t'~gi:='e'- --:92""'-5-.'l~:sgé' 1. Z"' .-2;_<_" .._.-»_= . , __ '_;.',,&?92;'2§_5,~.~ _ .-._ :lg.-3,,;=:, - :-.;;" -v._~~='. ..v"-.-..~.. i-'~-.31-he,. ;_:_'-; .£:? f", .1a"L'." -;,;;92_'.;'-':;:>',_"..:: -" gr --.. .. --. :1?-' "*"- -'~.-'. -ope:-. 1 '2-1 "i*,-"=,.+-"<~.<- =Pk.
==-1 "i'*.92v~=3~§:§_.-.1 . -. _ _.. ;-;*:---..-.-.- resi.-,*~'~e_§_¢l'*-" .4 ='- _,j-.-..-.1: "*' I-' -"'j*:.,. ser #:~'-I-- =4 "..,-:.-c ..,__. 1'. =.-t " {'*~.~,-;§?;-F _,Y." -m-- .-Ass}.-'-.es-.==,.~" 4:5! ~.| .. . - - . 40-92. -e . .-~ - . ~*'-:-¬*§ !- =-.=,.. >5-: - - .. . .,. ..-v h ..92 .. ._ . _$1; l *1- . -' r-'_w--. . ,.:~.! _ r. ;',_-st"_ ; ._~_r-3' a.--927."':. ; "_, ' ' >' "_ I -e .. . - ..,_¢ >3 ,|,::__,' ??lF~n~'s. -- e-3. .E" -. - 92- J: . -_ ,.- _-,_ - --'. = r A; ;'.% I '- . ...,- ' --"- - '- '_+._ _ 1 - ..at h, "~=~"=.-ir>'-4; . :*»+.7"9-'5. V .-.;_ Y?-,; ._e :.~ . ' t -
- s 7 "..",*-"'" .{-~=
"~- ' ' J. . ' '-" - I 1'2-.1-= -i-'.-. ...
w"__#_, _.,,_ r Q _.._.
,1
ouhsvegottocomebscktothel-Iouse.andI:erne1nherJ gapingF; way round, saying I must have a clean shirt-and
cud-links through. So he dressed and went down to the "--- -so -. . _ -.,-W '
11s. The Attorney-General thought am Mr. Pro-fumo's unt should
be there too. and the Solicitor-General agreed. The reason ill! because the
personalstatementyvsstobeusedasthecccasiontorretungtherumours;[vhich otherwisewouldbedoneinalibelaconltwasunderstoodthatMr. Prolumo had given instructions to issue writs and it was desirable that
the personal statement should not contain anything to prejudice the litigation.
Furthermore; the thought did occur to the Attorney-General that
Mr. Protumo might have made some admissions to the solicitor under the
cloak of legal professional privilege-and. if so, the presence of his
would be a cheek to see that the personal statement was in lull accord with
what he had told his solicitor. A telephone message was therefore sent to
Mr. Clogg and he went to the House too. He arrived some time betore
. V!T|lQS l¢lIEIlilDl'Il1Q _. _ ' 92_
111. When M1-.'Profumo's solicitor arrived the meeting split up into two
parts. The drafting was done by the Attorney-General. the Solicitor-Generalldnd so. P1'ofumos solicitor in consultation in one room. The others,N Mr. Maeleod, Mr. Redmayne and Mr. Deedes were in a room next door.
Mr. Protumo arrived whilst the drafting was going on. He did not wish to
take any part in the drafting and left it to the lawyers. He talked with the
others. Eventually. by about 3.30 a.in. or 4 a.m. a rough draft was prepared
by the lawyers in the handwriting of the Solicitor-General. They brought it
through to the others. The Solicitor-General read it out paragraph by
paragraph. Everybody said That's all right " except that Mr. Protumo took
one point about his association with Christine Keeler. He asked. De I
really have to say I was friendly with her?". and the others said, O! course
unln m _ In fhn fans nf thn letter heinninll Dnrlint vou must J UH e-new auwv v; --w --- -- -3-it - ----G J _ _ ____,
acknowledge your friendship with her." The draft was then typed which
took about 20 minutes!. brought back. and Mr. Protumo read it through and
said he was content. By that time it was about 4.30 a.m. and they all leftthe House. . l i i
Vi!TldReIl0ll0I'|QhIIll~
p 178. It has sometimes been assumed that this meeting of the live
Ministers was an investigation by them about thetruth of the rumours, and
that it iwas for that reason that Mr. Protumos solicitor present to protect
his interests. I am satised it was nothing oi the The 'Mm1stets" ' sii
accepted the assurances of Mr. Profumo previously given! that the rumours
were untrue and were concerned to see that they were -t A
emphatic way possible, namely. by his making a persoml iHouse. It was known that he hid been waiting for an -
action to refute them--and here an occasion had --1
statements in the House! iivhere they could be refuted by a ~. Y_. statement.
The solicitor was called in so as to make sure that this statement
would not embarrass any action Mr. Protumo might bring. -
es:J!-I i
.__ .
. ,4. 92.__ _ , -4» ; " - --- --1:1---r --' -41.-B '- s:-' -_1 A4 .a- -_~l_l _ __
I
-_ .¬.
m- .. L;
. ~ st-,_' it
__.i.-_i_i__ - _ "~
:_ _ -:-;f,;":L-_-; "_ ;, 7 .2. _ ._':IV_' - _ - - "-.;-~--.'=:; - 1.", ,- ;' .-_- _-111*._*__={g¢-j-re!" .{_.y?:_t7f_;%;-_,-=. ._. 3"»-1
. e___._ r .
" -in - Qt;-j-T, w -;;* ' ' -, , _ _ at_ ; 1-: _ ___L __-__. ._. 5:-._. - t-..s- 5"" .-.-- . . ." _ 92'___ '--'4-'--.'-. - V|-1. = .._-ea-seen--'-e;~. " ._ - .' L 10- '31. !.-e. -i-'- -~#=."92'="'.'[;+-ii ':-*-1 -- -. r__ ____ T. _, _ . _._92. _ rp H1 _ _ __. 5 .w .--"Ir; , - p '_ ..'--;¢2:'.;*=. . . ' : - P"§.-V" 7»- -.~ 92 '- ' '--a- --1 '-- 92 " -*1-Q- . . . .. __ V. . 92 . Y . "- - -.1-"4 ' ~ - ; . : ._' " ' " 33-? .3-**'t'ss='.*~.;-;". -1 ' --~»". 'as - - --1;_.~- - -.' 1*-'1." '-T _.- *-:44 :-1 -~ .- u ."-<L*.'=. ¢'¥' A ,_.-,_;-_ _ - -I »_-_.~ _ we '___,x__,_,_ 1---p.» ,, __-= =
'-"-. LC _. '_ § "_é=4~._,_,-1_T .7-__Y;-?:.i$~ ;_i,::;:.r~:s;;s>;;>5§{tif-$1-$1" *-.-.5.-.-.-"=. <, ,,_'- - --'.-'3 .--i.-p..- - --=" -_|:| ,_' ~§_§.' ,1 ' T=§g§."E.-»r-*'75"?.,"'?';~,---4- -- - ll-==t~ -ego ;_',v*__92-.1-'- . .-8!.-I =>_".~.:L=-:vJ""' * _.'... ; _.4_ __ ___'_ _, _oi .-.-1.» _ " 92 " __ -¢ -_.-_' "%;- ""-'* -4--" 1 _ .._-._. __'- , - -- .92 . '1-:' , -_¢';:.a.. --;'_ ~ ' -'1 M» .-"""'_,___ _- - -1'" " ------;_b_:_ hi-_¢uw-.-' p r-;..___ 1.; .---;._-__._._r_ ,. J3}
. '-."1_<,~=., _'.-t-'5'"V" ._. -hwr ._1r~_'*; p _-;
-.:..--.»_~=-.__ - _..-_ 5:" - -..- t;.'.~rs, -._.,,4."-'9"-..**"f._.-'1':-1'-"J .-~-.~ ~ at--_ .
- . *- ". i.;§i.:'-7'" 1.-.' . ".' :-'.' 1-. -I ~*=1;,.t»'"a'»--.-_; " " ;¢i'-**=:f:;i 92
:&' '-- .f ..¢
, _ 179. The reason tor the long session three hours from 1.30 a.m. to4.30 am.! was not because the ve Ministers were conducting a detailedinvestigation, but because of the long time it took to get hold of Mrl Cloggand Mr. Protumo at that hour of night. The actual drafting at the personalstatement and discussion of it only took about one and a halfreason for it being done at that hour was the desirability in the hb; ofgood government that these very damaging rumours should be atonce without being given further prominence over the week-end. The $51!in all their minds was not, ls Mr. Profurnos story true? "-tor they acceptedit as true coming from a colleague-but rather, He ought to make a personalstatement in the House in the morning so as to refute these rumours ". -.
.-. 3-»_ .. :..._ -. .¢-.! . ..¢- . -. i- .1-q, ,,~ -- U-n-1-____: Y-Y-.r;;,__ _ w,_".,,:V_ !_ ;_, .,-f.i..V ,,{.'- r:__r; .
" vii! A Point in Mitigation " _,
-. 180. There "is one thing which should be said in mitigation ofMr. Profumos conduct. He did not seek to excuse himself by reason of thevery exceptional circumstances of that night. But his wife made this statementto me: This is terribly important. "I would like to make a statement aboutthis: I just simply know that. if it had not been for the extraordinaryconcatenation of circumstances of timing that day. and that early morning,lack would never have made that statement. I was there and I know about thesleeping pills and the tiredness, and the fact that we were really groping roundthe house. letting in strange people and getting through loads of reporters stillon the doorstep. I sat up in the drawing room with the cat on my lap until hecame back at 4.45 a.m. and he said This is the statement '. . - . . I am surethat had we had time, as a husband and wife, instead of . . . with a timeIat . _ _ i . ' i . t..- 92
* . viii! The Knowledge oi the ve Ministers 1. ' - . - < . . -
181. I do not consider it part of my duty to assess the responsibility ofMinisters to the House. That is a Parliamentary matter upon which I wouldnot seek to venture. But I do consider it my duty to set out the knowledgewhich the Ministers had at the time-when they drafted and approved thepersonal statement made by Mr. Profumo, the considerations which werepresent in their minds, and the steps they took to satisfy themselves of its
truth. , . _. .-
A! The two Ministers who had most to do with it were the Chief Whipand the Attorney-General. The Solicitor-General had a fair amount, but moreas assisting the Attorney-General. Their evidence before me disclosed these
matters: > . e .
! They knew the rumours about Mr. Profumo, which, stated shortly,were these: a! the rumour as to immorality that Mr. Profumo had hadan illicit association with Christine Keeler; b! the rumour as to secwitythat the Russian Ivanov had also had an association with her about
thesametime; c! therumourastotheperversionogfissigthatMr. Profumo had helped her to disappear. Only this last tothe disappearance had been raised in the House that night, theyfelt that all the rumours should be d:alt with in the statemetl.
. , Is .
_ -..
-..--_--__ .H_.-__--..._._-..i-..-e-4..... ._.;,, ._.. -...._-..__.-t-..--.__k -.a._ a , ,__. _ _a
92 -
v v ,.- E
T-'92
1 -" ,
-- .4 " '._.....-- _
!Astothetum0urast0|'nmt0rality. They _
Christine Keeler was now. but Mr. Prof|.ltll0.satd
knew hm, she was very different. They knew, on bkthat he had been to Stephen Ward's at on several ocll when
Christine Keeler was amongst the guests, and that, on two ocmaions.
they were alone together before the other guests arrived. They knew, on
his own admission, that he had written her a letter starting ' Darling '
7 but he said that it was simply a short note. saying that he could not
- come to acocktaillparty. They knew she had told her story to a
newspaper and had handed the newspaper the -Darling letter. ..
! They had very much in mind the case of Mr. Galbraith, who had been
assailed by rumours and resigned, and yet the rumours had turned out
to be utterly false, and they did not want arepetition of anything ofth kind. ' l ' ' . 2 1 '
! They were of opinion that a Minister oughtnot to stay in oce if
there are scandalous rumours about him which he is not prepared to
_ answer. The scandal which loomed largein their minds was the illicit
asmlaticn Christine Kmm. The security of the Rtnlailll
was quite incidental. So also was the disappearance of Keeler.
It was essential therefore that Mr. Profumo should take the earliest
opportunity of answering the scandal of his association with Christine
Keeler. . g . . .
! In answering the scandal, they considered this one point to be crucial:
Had Mr. Profumo in fact committed adultery with Christine Keeler or
not? They took it that. if he had not in fact, committed adultery, the
rumour. lacked foundation. It would incidentally clear the other
rumours too: for if he had not committed adultery, he was not a
security risk: and there em ac motive for helping her sappear. It
t may be questioned. however, whether that was thecrucial point. The
real point may be. not whether Mr. Profurn_o_ had in fact committed
adultery; but whether his conduct proved or admitted! was such as
to lead ordinary people reasonably to believe that he had. If that were
' the real point, the disarming answer of_M_r. Profumo will be
__i"-"I-"'-i- rremembered: Nobody will believe that I didnt sleep with her, but
it happens to be true. It is for Parliament to consider what was the
proper point for consideration: though I may perhaps illustrate the
point by an analogy drawn from the civil law. H a man commits
ms wi_fe may have just cause for leavg him, but it does
not depend on his in fact committing adultery. If he associated with
another woman in such circumstances that, on the proved or admitted
facts, his wife reasonably believer he has committed adultery with her,
again his wife has just cause for leaving him. The reuon is because
his conduct is such as to destroy the condence which
should subsist between them. . .. , .
! In considering this one point whether Mr. p la fact
committed adultery! they did not regard themselves fl . an
investigation or inquiry but rather as concerned to colleague
from ramchrs with which {it tn: assmances were i M Q
been improperly assailed. The Law Otllcers tested his assurances _as
a lawyer would his client, by telling him to be absolutely hank with
as _,.-
1
7 - |.'@-;-:-»-- '1=-,§-;1-- -» .'~.f-.- __ ';-
- » ,_ ti--1»-s. ..=~<-~.-1; ;==¢+,.»¢»--;~;t- ,. -.=; 3'9" _, l '*", ;:,;,.; " ;E " ' - -,1. _ naici.-' - ..,, » __. -- -- =- .-r "-'.>;-.-.-= -{I '_-' ' '- 2*! '5 __r __ t,___. . t e E; _.17.1,; _ __ _ _ _ _ :3. _,_ 1.-. ,- __ . ,.- _ .-to-.";~' 92| ~ ~.,,L; -_~ Vl 4;:-V -_T:' :;,é;j. ;i "ti _ ;_ |__=_r-4. . '~i 1 »A .s.- 1 ' ;'.,_ 1 :2-_ ;,':-"..é:_ Z.-Q --_--,__ .t=; r Mug,1;. _,.,__ ___: -:.:§__1_ _.W:!- _-_ -.'1:- -J" '-~.--15: }'.E".'*'1~.! _ _ 1 e . 1- . "_92- ,_,-'--ii y I""23-L». -1" ___._*-1-~;_, -AZ-. ___ __, -' _---= * '1» -l-,-1.-L hclsl ___ q 1"=~'1--eta?-.+e '.~ --... »___,___ _ 1» '-xv y
. :1, --, 11:.f '~:__ ._:: -~ - ,1», _ ;_'_
- V .. M? , ..'~--1'-' i '1-"' - ""=' '1 I"N -_§<E:"-'~ "'-I92';Z-'-;-- .'1~l"-"F 11'. ' ' .¢. 54;=:.;' -1-,1;-at-_ ,r_,~ _ =" -T ,=_,:~ : <me%_e<s<~:.¥.=..-._~_=_ . .. M =r¥§§n=.»=:~. .2- . ;-e .-- I-.=._._._ . -,»~ ¬h,_.e , -,»--_~ ~~ 7- - -rd _.w¢r~.=_'»- -rif .j="* __ "'_.Qr._ '. .. " n'::"92"",_-'_: '4:-5.f-2. -.*_:- ' -_ ' ' def.:_ _-- ,2 _ - ,1; . ___ ..»-' ' _ _ " _?V____
.. .-+s¢~..I-=+: Text, I-=:= '5' .-".4.--Y - "H"|-o" t "~'.'f§'Y'_e_ V; -'_ ._ ' - . . _,- I-er-92{'- _. " ' . -' . 1-- - " _ -= _ 3;. - as, --:1 ._ , _ .i_.-,.,,. , my I T-;:_;"_fL~F!. :1--as _____ __. ;,§;,'_';:1'>.,__ .-...-..~;;- " V _ _-=>= . -" "--1* -- ""' . ' .; ' -- '91. _.:. ,; - --."'..e_=' _'~'g-f-_- =< -._i_.- _ ,;;t'-.--" _ 1 = _'-4; ea--!_;_.11-i'.~:~I.E_"";' -"'1' ._-1-77' -,' --'--.,.q%'e ~-. - - >.~..j.':=-___tmo&;' S----.»<
r'~" ~
--.._
I92 -
____ t"- --*1.-gala-1-|~
Z4
= -asking him questions.
ootI1uct.Then,having eometotheeonclusion mathkaanuuegpe
and shouldbeaooepted.theyteltthey shouldgonoturthes:.'l'_j§d-- Whiptestedhisassursncesinacommonsensewayandalaeptelthem. 1: is a matter for Parliament to consider whether
have gone further. I only record the fact that they did not g a
sight of the Darling letter. They did not ask the newspaper to let
them see it. nor did they ask Mr. Profumo to get it for them. The
Attorney-General told me he fett it would be improper. on behalf of
a prospective plaintiff. to ask a prospective defendant what evidence
he bad.! I also record the fact that they had no knowledge of the
statement made by Christine Keeler to the police on the 26th
January, 1963, or by Stephen Ward to_the police on the 5th Feb-
ruary. 1963. which was passedgto the_Security Service on the 7th
February, 1963. Both the Chief Whip and the Attorney-General told
me that if they had had those statements they might have taken a
very different view. They might not have been content to take Mr.
l?rofumos word. andthey might have insisted on going further, as,
for instance, by confronting Mr. Profumo with them. Mn Profumo
told me that, if he had been faced with them. he too might have
taken a dierent attitude.! - _ ' _ ;_ - '_ ,_
- ! They were all conscious of the very damaging situation which would
arise it Mr. Profumo was not telling the truth and that is why they
u tested it, as far as they felt they possibly could, before accepting it.
B! The 'Leader of me'n<m_ _ Mr_. Iain Maclepdl and the Minister
without Portfolio Mr. William Deedes! had much less to do with the matter.
They had heard the rumours but had taken no part until this night. They
had no special newlwge and they took part in the meetmg for these
Mr. Macleod because he was the Leader of the House and specially
concerned if a personal statement was to be made: and Mr. Deedes because
he was on the front bench and had heard all that had been said in the
House, and was able to give a rst-hand account of it. They did not regard
this meeting in the least as an investigation or inquiry. but only as a
refutation of rumours by a Minister whose reputation had been unjustly
assailed.
ix! The Home Secretary
182. The Home Secretary left the House immediately after the debate
ended and went home. He was not called back to the meeting. The question
has been asked. why was he not called back? The answer is that no one
thought of it; He had never been in the picture previously. It never occurred
to the Chief Whip or the Attorney-General that he was concerned in any
way. The meeting was concemed with a personal statement _ g a
Minister's reputation. It was not regarded as a security mattlt;
incidentaliy. Even if it bad been regarded as a security matter, i_
have thought that it was the responsibility of the Prime Minil g m
a matter for the Home Secretary. This seems to have been a
understanding at that time. The Directive of Sir Baviti " """
24-th September, 1952 referred to in Part II of this Report, which makes the
Director-General of the Security Service responsible to the Home Secretary
59
<*<"li"'-
__ 92 /§ I
iM
7°51
l
92
1
44
I' ' . '9 .--V.-' 7 ;~_ .1-.
. _=_ _92
_ _ - .._.a
ft -_
.__...an;':.*"-" " - _ _:'.arI- --~ /-
aE
L
EQIr. L,_ ,-" -"-wa__ ' '- ._.- , F --.~;,_
butaitharightotdireetaeeesstothePrLmeMinister!,badaavurheea'
ann0u063:anditdoeln0tlql;mtO_hl_V§beengener81lYkmII.:_' lmlltl:tesecurityaspecttherewalthedisappearanceofawitnesl-iaeidentaltotheessentia_leo_nee1ilot,thoregardedasonly P __wastorehttetherumourswithwhichalvnisterhadbeenassaiieirh anon! '- _. Hfthoughtofca11ingbac§t:he_ljlom_e_Seereta_ry._;_=; .- -To -l
z- i.».- :1; Y. -14., -_-. _ * _3 -_ . t Tu - " .2: "pl: If. _ _
- 183. On the morning of Friday, 22nd March, at 9.30 a.m. the Chief Whipand the Attorney-General called on the Prime Minister and discussed withhim the draft statement. The _Prime Minister made two minor draftingamendments and approved it. The Prime Minister had been fully aware ofall that had taken place since early February, 1963. The Chief Whipand hisPrivate Secretary had kept him informed of the rumoursmand of whatMr. Profumo said about them. But the Prime Minister himself had never atany time discussed these rumours with Mr. Profumo. He "told me that thereasons were twofold: First, if a Prime Minister sees s Minister and asks aquestion of this kind, there is no follow-up. The Prime Minister couldeither believe it or disbelieve it. and if he disbelieved it, he could not dobusiness again as a Prime Minister with him. Secondly, he thought it better' ' Chi IWhi . and others92 to get h-tends ol hll own age, the Attorney~General, the e p Overto talk to him: and if there was anything in it, he would say itto them.this period the Prime Minister was told repeatedly by them that Mr. Profumostuck absolutely by his story. And then. when he was told that Mr. Profumowas prepared to make a personal statement in the House, the Prime Minister
was satised completely of the truth of it. _e
1'
£-
-» -.
60t
|*
.."~>--a . 7 -.1-;r.sr.. ,-
-_ " ' '.-".--_*":.':- ~ '
|
7
s
-_ _ .1 aw ,.- as KW ,..--e- if - Hm ...e . _,._ ...,;,-L."n... .._._., -» F _.-~ ..- " 5'§'
.:'.2 _-'3_h-:¢ou ._ . _ _-_ --_+~_-
T -.__ -RA-Iii» "--. . " g - ' es
' --.~ ..*'1'f' 3'."-'._""lvs 1 - -5yn4'..' "_,-1 .~ -- ii - -.- not ..
' ' __ V .-. .._' .-3.! l- .._f -_ 3' Ea?
''~_--.- _ E ':;;- =' .-I; Y - ;.'*' M... '1'-~: - -- . r . -cg:-2..-'~ " ' ""1?_»,_ _ ;__:-Q-:.r r _ _ .*.- . .-..'-->'-.~* so-is.» ti .'<":** . F »..-"i-'¥*;'.-."?="" T ..::;_"_¬_-*5
5%,,-"'*>-'2 5;: 7,':=~?:".."'-=.",?,'?l.E";. *?_!}"S92*;.-.5 o ".-"I-...'.;;.-e.;,=¬31;.~'<::i ,._*._. * * ---*3 '""-- "i '" ::.-'12:-:'.=i1:.-.;s::..?*. -.4 , 1. :-.~*s-s-:33-=".12-;I.924c_ ."' ,___";-Y , N T, ',,1_-:" "
' _: "...n..:""" -- _ '.?__-§- _':;r--""~?.'~ *-*2."-, ~= A ;"'""~... . ~--n__-ti-. __-.._.-.' ., - I'.~*- ., "s.-~. -is - ,= -.:-1--1 .-*1-="=~--:1 *-'7» :.sr"=r~.: ;"-- . -." -.~:' 2 - -:.-». - -_ :31;-~ --hp,-x~,' -' . ;_ _1-L- F -1:.» . - '-| ,' ;,_" --_;_ _-.-?-¢.:. ;;r 71".-.-.. '9 _ . . 1: . 5.. - .. ._-;;-3'1
Z r;-__?:_q-pg-..-. _ _ __.:_ _. -. . H -
»~ " ~ 1. n-- r. . - .'v' -1-. _ e
_: * .r:':.t-¢.a<... "1" .;5-'+»a1r_z~~r"¥@-}i,=;t;.1
. e = . E.
f I-' ~ .
._.4e»-;-:-'_-;=.;- -- s
/92 -
1. 6
I-
F-' 3" -_>-j J] ., " .,-ti, ,_ i_;L__,. . ' 1,3
THE PERSONAL SIATENIENT ITSELF *- -§&.i?7""
- '-.;'; ,. . - w.~_.__~
I i! The Staterm audits Recepliol "
184. Shortly after 11 a.m. on Friday, 22nd March, 1963. Mi. Profumo
made his pemonal statement to the House. The Prime Mi:-dam, the I........-'-I
of the_House. and the Attorney-General sat beside him when he rose to
makeit.Itwasintheseterms:" " " " - *.. r .. .-/. with pelftlgission, Sir, I wish to make a personal statement: y
C 1 understand that in the debate on the Consolidated Fllnd Bill last
night, under protection of parliamentary privilege, the I-Ion. Gentlemen
_ the Members for Dudley Mr. Wigg! and for Coventry. East
V Mr. Crossnran!. and the Hon. Lady the Member for Blackburn
Mrs.'Castle!. opposite_,'spoke of rumours connecting a Minister within
Miss Keeler and a recent trial at the Central Criminal Court. It was alleged
that people in high places might have been responsible for concealing
information concerning the disappearance of a witness and the perversion
ofjusti°°_.r _ -w if 1- I ops.1
I understand that my name has been connected with the rumoursabout the disappearance of Miss Keelerl ' I ' '-
' I would like to take this opportunity of making a personal statementabout these matters.3 " " _" t_ _1_ 2'
I last saw Miss Keeler in December, 1961, and I have not seen her since.
I have no idea where she is now. Any suggestion that I was in any way
connected with or responsible for her absence from the at the Old
Bailey is wholly and completely untrue. _ . » - .-
My wife and I rst met Miss Keeler at a house party in July, 1961.
at Cliveden. Among a number of people there was Dr. Stephen Ward,
whom we already knew slightly, and a Mr. Ivanov, who was an attache
at the Russian Embassy. - " - ' - - '
The only other occasion that my wife or I met Mr. Ivanov was for
a moment at the oicial reception for Major Gagarln at the Soviet Embassy.
My wife and I had a standing invitation to visit Dr. Ward. t .
Between July and December, 1961, I met Miss Keeler on about half
a dozen occasions at Dr. Wards at, when I milled to see him and his
friends. Miss Keeler and I were on friendly terms. There was no
impropriety whatsoever in my acquaintanceship with Miss Keeler. ~
M1. Speaker, I have made this personal statement beettllle if Wild
was said in the I-louse last evening by the three Hon. Members.
of course. was protected by privilege. I shall not hesitate to I
for libel and slander if scandalous allegations are made or re - I '
the House. _ '_
185. IamsurethatthePrimeMinisterandal1theMinisterswere
satised of the truth of that statement. They could not conceive that any
61..-5 -
'.'u-- p . :.__v-
] _ -
., 92-.
__l..._-H
Vi
I
I
1
. _ .n-
:L, _.,,_ _92 Q
.. ~J . .. 3 '-~
of their colleagues would have the erontery to make a false statement to
the I-Icuse.Thebusinessotthecountrycould'nothecarriedonitapmberof the Government could not accept the sword of another " -
",1 "Z I ;ii ..!;'/g_ Jiil -
' it ii! Aes_aLlas-f .;-
186. But one or two members of the House did not accept the truth
oi Mr. Prnlumo s statement. And I rnustdeall at this point with a suggestion
thatthePrimeMinisteshirneelihnewthatthestatementwastmtrue.I_t
appears that early in March. I963. Mr. Profumo said words to this eect
Pve got involved withagirl. Iwrote heraletter. The Sunday Pictorial' have got itand itcancome out any day. Pvehad totellValerie. the PM;
The friend seems to have interpreted this statement as meaning that Mr.
Profumo had an rhicir_ association with "a girl and had confessed his guilt
tohiswiteandtothe_Prime Minister. ThetriendtoidaConservetiveM.P.of the conversation and he interpreted it He was so convinced of its
truth that. when Mr. Profurno made the personal statement on 22nd March.
1963, he idisbeiieved it. He whispered to his neighbour, saying at Proiumo.
He's a liar". And in the division on 1_'Ith June, 1963. when the Prime
Minister's conduct was under scrutiny. he abstained from voting. _
iii I am quite satised that both, ivir. I-r1oiumoi friensi and the
Conservative M1. misinterpreted what Mr. Profumo said. _Al1 that Mr.Profumo said to his friend wasrto the eect that the had got into ,8 diicult
situation because of his friendship with a girl: and that he had had to tell
his wife and the Chief Whip and the Prime Ministefs Private Secretary about
it. He never confessed to them that he had an illicit association with the girl.
Quite the contrary, he assured them that there was no improper association.
And he had never spoken to the Prime Minister about it at a1L It is. I felt.
such misunderstandings as this which have led to most unfotmded sugges-
tions. There is no ground whatever for suggesting that the Prime Minister
knew Mr. Profum0's statement to he untrue. "tie beiieved it to he true.
1
"~ t g iii!TbeAftesIn
188. For s short moment it looked as it Mr. Profumos personal statement
had been ettective. In many quarters though not in all! his reputation seemed
restored. On Friday, 22nd March. 1963, after the statement, he and his wife
went to the races at Sandcwn Park and were photographed there by the
l1¢WSp_pet'8. A few days later Christine Keeler endorsed his statement, thus
contradicting her earlier stories to the Press. On being discovered in Spain.
she said in the Daily Express of 26th March, 1963!. What Mr. Profumosays is quite correct. I have not been in his company since gettinghack to England she gave her story to the News of the __ Sunday.
3lstMarch.i963!. Certainlybothheandhiswi£ew¢e.i ofrnine.
But it was a friendship no one can criticise ". She was paid ,. _ " e story.
189. Stephen Ward also seemed to endorse Mr. statement.
On 26th March, 1963, he told Mr. George Wigg in the Hotifof Commons
I62 _ .,_
1q, _ <
I
________,_,,_____,_ _ I _ _ _. ...7.,,.?___.... ...-_n- .- _.._
92 -
__ -| - 7773-. __ ___-~ -:7. -- -~~,92z.< n
rx92s r§Q" ~ _ - -we
¢:§' "-
,, -92_..Iother things! about the Chved M I
subeequentlyMrProIumovisrtedh1aateaatleut ithat. so tar as he knew. nothing improper took place. - . 1;-_
190. But not everyone was content. Some soon
association with Christine Keeler. on. Saturday. 23:4 March, 1_ in
Daily Sketch came with 8 banner _:I0l1_n_ Ptftle.-'.
saying that- the spectacle of a Minister of the Crown having to_get_up_to
explain his acquaintancelwitli a 21-year-old 58. t__o_say
unedifying . On 30th March-. 1963. the Freud: the Paris-March.
published an article saying that Christine disperait mystérieusernent.
Profurno a aide Christine s'enfuir." Mr. Profurno brought an action for libel
in the French Courts: and the Paris~March published a retraction. On
_6th April, 1963. the Italian magazine ll Tempo published an article saying
that the name of Mr. Protumo continued to be associatednotwithstanding
his energetic denial in the House of Commons-with that of a good-looking
girl: and that, according to public rumour John Profumo would have
encouraged the departure of the girl. It was distributed in this country. On
8th April, 1963. Mr. Profumo issued a writ against the distributors. On
10th April, 1963, the action was settled. Counsel for Mr. Profumo stated in
open court that the allegations were unjustiable and without foundation. The
defendants paid £50 damages _and all the costs: Mr. Profumo said he
proposed to give the £50 to an Army charity.
_ 191. To go on for a moment: After Mr. Prohimo. on Sth June. 1963.
acknowledged that he had had improper relations with Christine Keeler, the
distributors claimed damages from Mr. Profumo because of his unwarranted
claim against them and he had to pay a large sum in settlement. But he
never acknowledged, of course. that he had helped her disappear. That he
has always and resolutely denied
192. Others raised the security issue. On Sunday, 24th March. 1963, the
Sunday Telegraph published two articles headed " Dr. Ward's links with
Soviet official and The Boil is Lanced . Stephen Ward regarded these as a
libel upon him and instructed his solicitor to issue a writ against the newspaper.
' iv! Mr. Wig: Memorandum
193. On Monday, 25th March, 1963, Mr. George Wigg, M.P., appeared
on television and said that security was the main consideration. He was
critical of Ivanov. On the next day, 26th March, Stephen Wand sought an
interview with Mr. Wigg in the House of Commons and defended Ivanov.
He gave a long rambling account which Mr. Wigg set down in a memorandum
in considerable detail. The memorandum shows that Stephen Ward said that
his friendship with Ivanov had been used in the interests of the country.
Turning to Mr. Profumo. he described the Cliveden week-end and said that
subsequently Mr. Profumo visited his at on at least six occasions, Q tint
as far as he knew, nothing improper tool: place". He sa the
Intelligence Service knew all about the visits. He was certain that _. ._
time had Mr. Profumo put himself at risk in security matters Ill ~ - -
with Ivanov. He described the recent activities of Christine and -- Y ' and
he concluded by saying that he wished to convince Mr. Wigg that ollkity
matters he was in the clear.
. 63
92.
392
__- - I i '-l J - -
D
E
_ -» ,._.1,
.__-na:.--_-=i-11'-P:
Fup ha conesponduncc and found pgmgmph 49} Ill! _!!I_27l Much. _ -Prime Minister. He that a mun
thought the M1nis1~=r ouaht w.
memorandum. andM1-, gotouthis V _Sir 1%.: Solkicu. M-R Th=_v wmid 1*
bepaswdtothIPrlmoM1niate!'|othatcouldboexa.minod.SoMr.W|onsentltA _ _ _ A_ V
_ .11 ..¢ ._..-... ---- »v --- I "_ . -- 1 -;
I ; _. ... - 1 "
' 4/
92'
5
i
1 1;
|.
1'
-
M,,. 92 -
..-0::-v4 '.92. ._. -1 ',.
_..'=¬vi;
,.
, "-'-
64
-1- . -, 194. During the interview Stephen .-
writmmwMr.Ha:oldWi]son.M.P._Ml;.n
o
_,_;_,_.-_ ,. _ _' _ _ ._~ ".:_"**- "=t'. ;-:-:*. ?F~?Ei§=. 1*;-<1 1---»-.~'~-" ?.*--';',_.'~ "=3 = .' ."'-*-==='->- ~.-»- '-
*,§_-__'wq;. v A-3»: .,.. - 1 '=..:f= W " ~=i'f*'A -- _ I .'--»- ->92.- _;'__ 5.! _lt,'- it-. - H-r3=,;.:_ __.. . ,- 51: - "~ A ->.;-s~.".~_.:..., -. -' ; -*,;.~¥-.-0 ._i__~-. -t_-_-_- W, ___ A I I . ' 4:- _i ,,;.'_ -_;_'_'92 -= Inn! F _ M. 1 i _*:-' ~:-~'-=-r ¢'-" -131*-r.. ~~..'17- *'- <..... s - * ./'=-Fur: ..1»- ~.-51 -rv_-s-_~<>..s<i-z;.¢s..~--.:.-.-_, .;_w . ,_ at'1-=-~*..'-l"i<i~~ ~i-gt. "f.=.. -.~. +.".'.- ..~ ';.;_I';" -{""'1.-L;- -'. {Q3- I ' Ir .- as .I
i
E* A-~*:Im||niI* nm*¢ @_
3 -1-'2 l - x_ , u - i I L' "" i Q ..=;l L! .t .- 3 '.' '2, J... .;=~h eniiL __ _ __ _ .
T; -
_ _ a
92 .- 1 - gr,-,3 ;,:~! ~ - - . __,_ .. .=1-' ;-.1:-'5""' +-..»:l"=5'.".'*-'t';...- :t_e... ' 1'. ' 'f» ;;,r..'- ~..*;: "-:?- ~$-';.-;'-5..':"-,1-:"* -.1"1'.,~ ".*r.'- ' _"=-=¢_':..s~-+»4'-- -"1 - ~-- -_:- _,¢'i-'-'-=2='~'::-=* -- .-779' ..,.,,=¢_* ..".:",~'.';"",.; ""-'7;1-is I ""r; I-z-Z -c i ,§7;;;;1--*--£-92--.
mgr: . .e._;--..; ...,,_ __._._ __ _ .- ._;.. "r....._=,,»_,_~ .--,:- ..;-..-3 -- ~_-- 1-;-'.-, =- - -3* .- ' ~-$161114-f-' "K ;,'_:1'.F<>< --p-- e;~+.?:~"" A $7. ";.E1-"~'~'T?,?-"--- .-s.r.Eie!.a n'...:..f.'"7°,'s*.v_- -;-.5 . ',._-~'*_-"!_ ?_'_-_*
.=-.§':§:='. -- i-'=-' . ' rise '.-¢- ,..-1: . _ .T .__.»=,¢,,__ --..--q, _|_._ _ .~ at _,_- ,_. 1-1., :-= r "er '=:..- - - -'- " 1. -;- '-=14"--'i = 1".-'- J-.sm=-2'--ts! "7 "=¬J&, i - .-..i . -- ».= .-.,--. '- ...-1 . --.e-'.--.--
,"ta-A _ .- -. ,_q-,-.'¢._- --<¢ '; _---. at-,,, _ _ -._ ._. . T;-if _,_ - _- r . ' _ 1. y. _-___-1:32..-_,,:'_:._;.__,}..,__ »- . . _. . 13-to ., V1 -41;-to._ - Q _-. ,..'.'.§.'.-.1! ___ _ 53¢; 1»-2;: er;
__: _ :--~- _-__ .. - _ -_1'-I ___;92_- --*3.-.s'at. ' .' .. .. ~ " -g"-4, =9!» -i-i_-<1:-_;_':_' - _- ' i, ii -"- Q'-a':_;:-.
...¢sr-.:#:4|'- ~_ --
|. ... =-, -. e. < t CHAPTER XIV 1- 1-2 ::I_t1t;,=;
I
92 >_ Jt -....- . e _ . ' P,-.'.,-,A _ ... _ Q... .; £1:- me MARCH, 19¢:-so JUNE, 1963UNEASY Two
f _ i! m Home swam; ash for ej-
l95. The Home Secretary believed Mr. Profumo's personal statemed.
He ind absolutely no reason for i g But it ieit him feeling" very
suspicious towards Stephen Ward. Then he heard rumours thstthe Security
Service had been so worried that they had sent anonymous letters to
Mrs. Profumo. The Home Secretary felt that he ought to know the facts.
So on 27th March, I963, he sent for the Head of the Security Service and
the Commissioner of Police and asked to be put into the picture. There was
present too the Permanent Under-Secretary of State of the Home Oice.
The meeting was so valuable that it affords a useful pattern as to the way
in which such a problemof mixed security and police interest-should be
handled. -"P '- .,-. _ --, ., .~.. . 7- .- . . | -_ .. .-s. .;.. r .
196. At this meeting the Head of the Security Service told the Home
Secretary that there was no truth whatever in the rumours that they had sent
anonymous letters to Mrs. Protumo. He then gave the Home Secretary an
outline of the steps the Service had taken, and said that. when Ivanov had
left the country, the security interest had ceased. Then he added two matters
of such importance that I set out this record of them made by him the veq
nextday; e _
! In addition to this there had been statements by Christine Keeler
ami one or two others that Stephen Ward had urged Christine to
ask Mr. Profumo for information about American intentions to provrae
the West Germans with the Bomb. If these allegations were true.
there might well be a case against Stephen Ward under the Oicial
Secrets Ad . . . we thought however that the witnesses in any such
prosecution would prove unreliable and we were not inclined to
pursue the matter! . . . ..
! The security interest in the whole case was limited to Ivanov and
his contacts, and it was no part of our business to concern ourselves
with what Wand was up to in connection with the girls with whom
he associated. The Home Secretary agreed with this!. :
197. The Home Secretary then asked the Commissioner of Police
whether there was a police interest. The Commissioner said that there
probably wonld be grounds for the prosecution of Stephen Ward if the
police were able to get the full story, but he very much doubted whether
they would succeed in this. '' -'.'i"I"§'f
198. Two things are to he noticed about this meeting: ' '- "1! It was the rst occasion on which any Minister had beenthe for iniormahion about the ms. The Home are
not lmowhewas the rsttobetoldaboutit. I-Iedidnotpelliltnto
any other Minister. He thought he was simply being brought up to
date by the Security Service. - '
65 __-/92 A
1. v
. '-1%
..J
92
_.,_..__.-.-n-_-_-.--.-.-_-,.. ,-ii-li1_
I
$-
H
s.-i- *"'-"_.i'uv - !'lheHomeSeeretaryagreedthatitwasnopert _
" theSeeu:rityServicetoeoncernthemselveswithw ._
- to % -iris. ~ - P I ' --- = I . '-: -. ' !!' =-11 aéti-7-'r~..r=
199. Further. at should he noticed that this intervention been Home
Secretary had two important consequences: First. the Head or the Security
Service immediately gave further consideration to the question of prosecuting
Ward under the Ocial Secrets Act for endeavouring to get information!
and took advice upon it which was against a prosecution. I-Ie decided on
4th April. 1963. not to take any action on it. Secondly, the Commissioner
of Police immediately gave further consideration to the question of
prosecuting Ward. and on lat April, 1963, set on foot the investigation which
eventually led to his prosecution and conviction. . - . ~
ii! The Police lnvediglte Ward! Activities - "
200. On 25th March. 1963. the Criminal Investigation Department began
to receive anonymous communications alleging that Stephen Ward was living
on the immoral earnings of the girls. and suggesting that he was beinggttected by his Eriends in high places. On 27th March. 1963, the Home_ etary asked the Commissioner whether there was a police interest in{Ward On lst April. 1963, the Commissioner decided that Stephen _Wards
activities should be investigated, On 4th April the police began to take state-
ments. They took the statements from many of the girls and other persons
who might be able to help. In they took a statement
Keeler on 4th and 5th April. 1963. which she signed. This dealt mainlywith Stephen Wards conduct: but in it she said that she had had intercourse
with Mr. Prohimo. She said he had taken her to his house whilst his wife
was away and she described the house so exactly that one would think it
-was not likely to have been invented. These are her words: - :
' When I went to Jack Prolumos we went oil the Onter Circle to a
house on the left-hand side of a small road. I went up some steps into a
' square hall where there are two large ornamental animals. I think dogs.
Thediningroomwasonthe rightandthestairsarestraightaheadon
.theright.Thestairs bendtotheleftandonthe wallisapictumofall
the things that Valerie likes and dislikes including pigeons and jewellery.
Facing the top of the stairs is Jack's oice. with a drinks cabinet inside.
I noticed a strange telephone and he said it was a scrambler. Next door
is the Profumds bedroom with an adjoining bathroom. I think there
were a lot of mirrors in the bathroom. There is a table in the centre or
the dining room." r i
She also said:
I last saw Jack Prol-umo! in December, 1961. Stephen Ward had
asked me to get information item Jack awn: the A.-netiea.-.5 giving the
Germans the Bomb. I did not get this information sq it was
ridiculous and could have been made in a ioke. jg
[Note.The question may be asked why these L were not
reported to any Minister. I deal with this later in 1.]
The police took several further statements from her, namely en 6th and
26th April. and 6th and 24th May. I963. On 25th April, 1963. they took
a statement from Marilyn Rice-Davies. They took many others.
66 .
192 - >n~ ~:_--1-nhnl " 1-:-'1'; "S" - ___
I . r
- I
|-_ V -'-r _
if
' . - . . - sJ - - - :-,_,
' ' =- 3:-:-is ' ;.."Z§;-.'~r"-_"* if *92' _; . -*1 :"-r?»-.l-'_"-TP-F!tl'¢-- 1.1qt.-w -- ~ '- :?a.¢-*1--};-_#-P-1.113 -*__ :_,3; ; .,;n__.};; _ - .- L _ 1. _V -_-"H _ . V, ---_-A,-ea; __"*_._. "' -- r.' 6 ~:r_.1-~,-."j-; . Q E ."'. " '_ _ .j 1 " W 3
-?"::-:'.._= """J-is ' -- -_'- -== r .. -_ .. I we». i '19 ' _ - _ - -_. .1i?_:'_.;.,.."e_u;_ 13;, . -. -*=*. '. .-.--;-s.;:_- . IQ? .;k,_-, _'_' 2-*:92..r_ : .__v L ..., ._--..-;.' -It-. - V - . " .' -" Y » . - . ¬T '=r"- -t."-== . -- .-"$3.. ;:'~~ .. .-" - "i"_i*-'--__-- -.. :.~:-.. '-; 4 _.,_.. F; ..,--, .141-t;-R, "._ ! - ,-,:-:1 I 7 .11 .i.__ ..,-. I .__.,_. - -. - .-ct " - - ' '- .--'-. 1- t .___.§ 1335.8. _:, i. ,___F- . _ f. _ ___£l__ l.3: 92.l'°"'}'-'7'; 1. J &_:_-1_£.i,.,¢,j_-_:'¥j?~fi3,f
'-*3 5";'-Q . 5?» ?I53§"""5L.<i¥' Q!"-_ -'-a.'3:- ;. _ .._.;F'--= 1 __ V.' - I _'vg,""=1"' -.=*"**--__- _;_;¢-..,, ; .H. kf_ms'-:n- ~,;-_;. . -_-1 *. -»;»-A ~ " - ' .
we-. -. we: . _:§?"..92.--t. __, .1-_ "'" '- _ _.__'-'-- 1'.~'.. RT - .1; ; *-'-:~Jq~1E 3» - 1' ... , _- ,4-=-_t-.' ,; _ _ if-. __ ,_. - ' as-_ -tr -.-.;k..:_g_.' _ vi. __ _. .' -n92..: "_' , _.-' . - |-!- w " . -..,__ ,';a.f;-",,_~'-" -£7" .' '~_-~l!_ 7': --1 I .. . - 7;_1'__ - - __ _..:.---. __ ,_ ?L1.=;f--u'-» -P '__ I.-i._-s ...-l_ ._. ,.
.._.-§-"'§f:'-i- - -i
5.G
_ SI:p||el_ Ward Attempts to,-Stave. OI n
20!. These inquiries by the police" got to Stephen Wardhe began to be nervous about them. He tool: exceptional action.1963'. he telephoned the Prime Ministers Private Secretary I g _see him. Anappointment was made for that evening andmade for an officer of the Security Service to be present} t mi x!¢ii§§!;__;§ti
. _ 202. A note wastalsen of the conversation. It appeared to theMinister's Private Secretary at the time and the note been it out! that themain object, of Stephen Ward: visit was to get the police inquiries calledof and to blackmail the Government by threatening that, unless the-inquirieswere dropped, he, would expose Mr. Profurnos illicit association withChristine l eel_er. Here are a few extracts from the note: Stephen Ward said You see the facts as presented probably in Parliament were not strictly '_speaking just like that. I fear a change may be forced in the_ situation L. .I made a considerable sacrice for Mr. Profumo . . . I feel I should tellyou the truth of what really happened. You probably know as a'mattel" offact anyway. He wrote Miss Keeler a series of letters. The attachment was"a much deeper one than . . . I- don't know whether you have any feelingsabout this, whether there is anything you can do. I know myself here thatthere is a great deal of potentially extremely explosive material in whatI've told you". ' I I1 T" ii e " -1 e . 7- 92 "
i . -.-. . >.. I, __ 203. Stephen Ward next tool: to writing -letters, still in the hope.apparently, of staving o a prosecution. On 19th May, 1963, he wrote this
letter to the-Home Secretary: _ _ _ _ _ __ _ '
" It has come to my attention that thee Marylcbone police arequestioning my patients and friends in a line, however tactful, which is1 extremely damaging to me both professionally and socially. This enquiryhas been going on day after day forweeks. -; :s ,. _ ~ L - ' A
The instruction to do this must have come from the Home Office. _
t Over the past few weeks I have done what I could to shield-M_r. Profumo from his indiscretion, about which I" complained to theSecurity Service at the time. When he made a statement in Parliament
I backed it up although I knew it to be untrue." - - . - ;. .;
P'ossibly my etlorts to conceal his part and to return to hima letter
which Miss Keeler had sold to the Sunday Pictorial might make it appear
that I had something to conceal myself. I have not... : .
The allegations which appear to be the cause of investigation. andrrhich I only know through the line of questioning repeated to me, aremalicious and entirely false. It is an invention of the Press that Miss
Keeler knew a lot of important people. . _, _ .
It was by accident that she met Mr. Profumo and through Lord Astor
that she met him again. I intend to take the blame no longer. -
That I was against this liaison is a matter of record in WarOiee. .- - sn Godfrey Nicholson who has been a friend for zs Ea inpossession of most of the facts since I consulted him at an i
92 .
-v - __ .- : ' he 61
g e c
t. <<'
_ J
1'
e
. :;-' P .'4_
I L --.
=.&';:"""_"_T.a§~ '-- ea
/t
I
E
e
E92
* *hI"~-- __,, _, ii: 4
rs!qI
., _.92_.
May I ask that as person who'has'lo'dgeti me "gem
_ ttgamst shouldlbe prosect1_teti._H.f-L . . Yo! .'t_L~*' 2' . '-'. .|'.'.t! P-F'_.'.'!'; 1:92'922'~.lt f;!'.iE- -: Y. ' "- -3 "-- -;_=;'vi :.-;.1- '1: 1" - I -3 il:~i .=;iE -..--"~i s.
Stephen Ward sent a summary of this letter to the newspapers but they did
D011 PIJIJHSII it.! '-tit.-'.-q _'.n- '1. .',-1 '.-8' ._!r=:1,..=' .11: 1'1-JR- at: .<=t_'.b£rt;
1 2&4: _ To which me very proper reply was sent next day; , ;g-.__
1 1' The Home Secretary has asked me to explain that the police. -tn
- making whatever inquiries they think proper, do not act under his
di1'0c0,?'--, '1 - ,'.'¥; '1'; . . ;- it :=='_» ,! ', 3.;:." /;7:4 at .. F-'
20$. cs the 20111 May, 1963f Stephen Ward wrote in his Member is
Parliament Sir Wavell Wakeeld! a long letter, in the course of which he
"Possibly inquiry may be necesslaryuwhen a Minister has not
told the truthtoPar!iament."..; _ y _.,.
our 1'IIr 1 n_-_-.l Al__ I_A.en._ nan 11- I"!-' an . t.4 . ,Sir waveii Waieeiti passm me setter tu use use
206. On 20th May, 1963. Stephen Ward wrote also to Mr. Harold
Wilson,M.P.,saying:_ ._ y, : . t,.p _ ._
Obviously my elforts to conceai the fact that Mr. Proiumo had not
toiti the truth in fariiarnent have made it look as if I myself had
something to hide. It is quite clear now that they must wish the facts
to be known, and I shall see that they are. t
207. On 23rd May, 1963, Mr. Wilson sent a copy of this letter to the
Prime _ , ;
208. This spate of letters by Stephen Ward had their ellect. Questions
were tabled in Parliament by Mr-. Ben Parkin and Mr. Chuter Ede for the
Home Secretary to answer. They were designed to ask him what information
he had received om Stephen Ward in connection with inquiries carried
out by the Metropolitan Poiiceno doubt meaning the information in his
letter of 19th May, l963but these Questions were subsequently withdrawn.
There was also a burst of speculation in Fleet Street. Everyone there had a
strong feeling that the stories circulating about Mr. Profumo were true.
Thingswereheadingtowardsaclimaat. . e . _~ _ ,
iv! Mr. Harold Wilson, M.l'., takes up the Security lame
209. :0n 9th April, I963. Mr. Wilson sent Mr. Wiggs memorandum
paragraph 193! to the Prime Minister through the Chief Whip. On
i7i.h Aprii. 1963, the Prime ivitnUster repiieri: ' " f" '
My Chief Whip has given to me the letter and you
dated 9th April dealing with George Wiggs con" a
Mr. Stephen Ward. I will ask the appropriate authorit'7'_ ,1 Ill
examination made of the information and will get in touch _; d_ later
on if this seems necessary. n t - 1 22;: 4 '=
The reference to ts Mr. Stephen Ward" has since been criticised asdisingenuous.! i ' " -- 7 '- ' ' 7 Y
68
_¢ .4i
I
J
. i3'
"9: .4 Mr. "Q; -..
_;., - 1. . ,. v-f';_.h-!>[,:-.<._.-1'. .,__- ." =._ .. -st" c. -- r 3-1 ..-ii lee; .1 :1---_-'-6, I.'.r- t '1-._' t '_ ' '11 I I ' t - " _ .'°" ..';-_"-=, f_~t2-- , .=.=1--§::_;':.;,, "_-.:-"f-.:.. :I:_-1,-5,; ,,- T" - 77- _ " a-:<.--:._;-
v_-- It I L. 1? =§;_f;_'_ -F"-Z;-;s-'.-Ye.
.- -
- -P-~t'~'= ~' --. - ...:¢'= 'r'I_. - -"I -~1~1o~E=r.-.1:-.' .',_ _ -~* _ .
c ' _'..-it" - - ..:-* *.-"-
'v. Q _ : Q
,~,_ g; -tugs, -...,/4-,.."-. ..t .>. .., _.,_ Vwy ,_ ,_t ___ >=-§f;:%:__::_:_,£___.._A ..__:',;. if; ; av?-- --iv- M: =. *-
;.-;;-.ne~.-. - '
'*i3."¢1'**i--V _-1*" '-3-'- T1.:_ _______'__. ._:_ '_ .A_Z; " =1.- ' =a.,;,; ~"'.-..-.9. ';-_!-~ .4. ..' ;. - ' """ ~ -' ' ' "" '- __ s -5- -' .r.-" " :2?-7~'-_- ---.. . W. I_, a. P ' -O- it 1}"f-'- . 1 e '-- .- '3 ' .., $1
l - J- --In- -- __ _ :
F "Kw " ""°9*"-_ an*-.. ; '-:'zT:-.: _q5f', __ "':§-
-:.";..- -z'.tr""-"iris-".:<=--_"~r'?£--*:= L-4 1
. -. J-.,'. ' '*'. .-.-.--.1:-lt"m.;5»ii. -=
_ _- _ _ .
r*"'»' 5
,___.-q.;,-1»-=_=;-. -_' 0
Q.
!
K
II S. gt... .. es..- .._. ..
., e Prime Minister did have inquiries made of the Security Senim
On 25th April they reported their interviews with Stephen Wardwarttini to Mr. Prohimo._'!he$' said: i ' ' *-' ' 1-~ ' '- 1
We have no reason to suppose that Mr. Profumo stands infnea of
further advice about security " and added, There is no truth in the story
that the Security Service was informed of the dates of, or anything else
in connection with, Mr. Profurnos alleged visits to Ward or to Miss
Keeler. -
211. On 14th May, 1963, the Prime Minister replied to Mr. Wilson:
I handed all the material to the appropriate authorities who studied
it very carefully. There seems to be nothing in the papers you sent which
ri=nn'rPc me in take 3CliOIl." -I.-iv]--..-.. _-- -- ~___- few
2l2. Mr. Wilson felt it necessary to pursue the matter further. On
Monday, 27th May, 1963, at Mr. Wilson's request, a meeting was held in the
Prime Ministers room in the House of Commons. Mr. Wilson said he was
disturbed to receive the Prime Minister's letter, and that Ward was a
self-confessed Soviet intermediary. He said that if the Government were not
prepared to initiate any action, he would reserve the right to raise the matter
in the House of Commons. The Prime Minister said that all the material had
been examined by the security authorities and they were satised that there
were no unresolved security problems left over. He would however ask the
security authorities to look again at all the material and advise hirn on the
position.
213. The Prime Minister did as he said. I-le asked the Security Service
to look at it again. And on Wednesday. 29th May, 1963, the Head of the
Security Service reported to the Prime Minister and disclosed to him what
he and his oice had not known before! that,
in a statement which Christine Keeler made to the police in January
1963 she said that on one occasion, when she was going to meet
Mr. Profutno. Ward had asked her to discover from him the date on
which certain atomic secrets were to be handed to West Germany by the
Americans. It is understood that Miss Keeler denies having ever put such
a question to Mr. Profumo . . . I am advised that the evidence would
not be likely to support a successful prosecution of Ward under the
Oicial Secrets Act. He is not known to us to have been in touch with
any Russian since Ivanov's departure. The security risk that Ward now
represents seems to me to be slight."
; v! The Lord Chancellor! Inquiry
214. On Wednesday, 29th May. 1963. the Prime Minister had a meeting
with the Lord Chancellor and the Chief Whip during which the Prime
Minister asked the Lord Chancellor to undertake an inquiry himself
relevant papers: and on 30th May, 1963, the Prime Minister
Mr. Wilson telling him of it:
I have been thinking about our talk on Monday. I am
own mind that the security aspect ot the Ward case has been
efticiently watched. but I think it important that you should
doubt about it.. ~
t_92f'"92 92-A 6° ~
_ 92
.» V c-
92
,______ ___ ,92v-_ F .,__._...* . . L =- 3 - ,--"1 V. I'l . _ ¢-. . 1
Ihave thercforeukedthelordchmoellottolookouyatthnsecurity reports and other documents which I have received lgwithzhiseaseandmmakeanyinquixywhichhedeenaneenrytcom
the security authorities and the pogiee, and 10' advise me 1:. in jpqlnion.any further action is desirable."_ , ;_ _ -- _ ,5. ,_é .;._,;;215. The Lord Chancellor commenced his inquiry on 30th May, 1963.M h had happened in between. -and reported on 13th June, 1963. uc _ '
" . ll _ ' . o .- _' I ,.:- .
I
k
If b
r
r
i
1 I
1
1.
* ' .» AL-
-1 1 - ,'- 1
92 :
7 1"
=,_- i 1 -..:1: ..-;~'.
~ ' ..1. ' 1 5:-3,31 11-2,;-1.1 .. ,'|1,|1 H A - 1 1 ..' '-.-. 5&8! .' 1.' 1'£>!1't' 2
' 3 4 1 ' 'r--
' .:.'f."'
7° _
_ __ ___ _ 3 41'" "-i"'_"'-"""92lL$|i ' " M-*4 iiifi '.' A' ' _[" M" Kim i _,,,¢g_
Qiibéi-X. v 7
3" - - J v 2 La '
4 .
I
i
r ' ~ w-
'--. . , .I
_ .4.-F--an n-|s- .. _.jar?-c" 1'-.~_ j _ _ -.;._-
u~_n- ~*-~ Q. ~23- -- "'*:¥:'F;§ "",.:. _-.~".~ ,.-4- ». HI!-* -'~ ~ - - " w -- = 3,-_r-kc J ..-='=:.__
.-i g-a_1 '-
-~ ~'1?-.5: . 1+. -' £2: .'.>.-r;-;_ '-'-:e.==.-. ..' -HI ~ -v no-_-_»~-u---_- .=- .;- ...7- -_ -,2
"- -. '2-"'_ »'.- .__ 'r_-.-".'.".-__-_»-~=§-'f,_ y__§;:.;_-~ r,;-7-jiK@5§v?..r.
-_.- --,-=.,~. -"-w .:- e;~_.....- . *2-1 :1'fi:-- g 1*~ -»~.*~.=.e<e::i-.=*~':;.';-it-i@i:~'=_.~§1:';;-1-.=.=..-
. ...., _ . .£_ __,;_ ,7 ~_ - -*-fa,- -r'~ --_-_.t--.7-_. . K -.-~ -- ~ . *=e|t2'-~-- -e':'=_-:-"--"--. ..-,_:,'- --. .._ __ --,_.____; -_----"W *5 _,. """'*". - .'~o'-'_*.'"-'7-*A'_- -.:.~-~,1f---Q __ _,i_; 7, _ . -_ ' ----' .Y. w_..T* P~- éi ' 1
- - -l. e. ..*.f._-H _ ~ V _,_-_ ;J_» E~92- ~ . __; -_Phi
- ' :.~..~.--=
mi x-"-. ml-.' "L $1.. .:_;_ .
.£~'. r-w
.___ _.._ . _
-A
'~».'i;- '1.-5. . K , . j
Q '_.;?'_§_1* I." _,"' ".'.-- F.t.-I-e-I-5 '==- -:5: '.;__:_f,, lg1 -" ::;~'" - ' - ._ -1- "5; e '5--> -T
. -~".~__*- -_.' Y 1' -I'._' .3 ' .;_ . '" -_ -|_.. .'_._._-. ._-' . ___7__5,:__ _, _ l _ _''.;t_-_._ - .. ' "'- .. '_ 92':.+r F"
i~" '~
._.-aes,=.-:-¢f-_-:.S- --_ _._-'
§
I
/_ . ;. ~.I~ss~.; .-=' Q . I92 -
. t 92'.-==7.=_'- -. .'ilI.'.' :71 L'.'!'.'.:;'., !;.-;t'l 1:.';~r.1t;'1 Q Jeri: if-.
:'I.:¢- 1 u=;~oa n' ..1 _CHAl'.TEl KY/.:-.enz;r1 t;
3- . .. .:- - - .. _ >,_.. _. 1,, ,_ 3 ...'.,, _,; U 113%
= ; - Mr. l'ROFUMOS tu=.stcmrto_1~t_~.- 1.;rE.= .mai§i§;
_ . -I 7. ._ .. _ _ ' _. . .. v 1, at-H '216. The security issue raised by Mr. Wilson and the burst of
in Fleet Street had their elfect. During the week. 27th-30th May.
Whip and the Prime Minister: Private Secretary separately Ii
Mr. Profumo. Mr. Profumo was told that it looked as if there would be
an inquiry. If there was any aw in his story it would do the Government
enormous damage. It was put to him strongly that, if there was anything
untrue in his statement to the House, he ought to reveal it of his own accord.
He again denied that he had said anything that was untrue. I-le was told
that the Lord Chancellor might want to see him some time the followingweek. i
~ l .
21?. On Friday. 31st May, Parliament adjourned for the Recess. The
Prime Minister left for a short holiday in Scotland. Mr. and Mrs. Profumo
left for a short holiday in Venice till Thursday, 6th June. The Press thought
something was going to happen. At London Airport Mr. and Mrs. Profumo
were inundated with Press men and cameras. They arri-rm at Venice in the
evening. Mr. Profumo told me that he had already decided that he could no
longer go about with this terrible guilt on his mind. He decided to tell his
wife. But they had a quiet dinner together rst. After dinner Mr. Profumo
told his wife the truth-for the rst time-that be had had an illicit
association with Christine Keeler. He told her all the details. They talked
over it most of the night. Mrs. Profumo said, Oh, darling. we must go home
now just as soon as we can and face up to it. That is what they did. Flying
back would attract attention. So they went back next day on the night train
and came back by boat. __ . g .
218. It so happened that after they had decided to retum! at about
9.30 a.rn. on the Saturday morning a message came through by telephone
to the hotel in Venice saying that he was wanted back a day earlier. That
was true. The Lord Chancellor was starting his inquiry and wanted to see
Mr. Profumo on Wednesday. 5th June. But they had already decided to
return. ' .
219. Mr. and Mrs. Protumo arrived in England on Whit Sunday.
3rd June. and early next morning motored down to Suffolk to Mr. and
Mrs. Hare who were great friends of theirs!. Mr. Profumo told Mr. Hare
the truth. After taking his advice, Mr. i-rofumo returned to London and
on Tuesday, 4th June, he saw the Chief Whip and the Prime Minister!
Private Secretary. I-Ie said without preamble. " I have to tell you that I did
sleep with Miss Keeler and my statement in that respect was untrue." It
was plain, of course, that he could not remain as a Member of the
Administration. He must resign.. _,..v
220. These letters then passed:
" Dear Prime Minister.
You will recollect that on the 22nd March. followirj
allegations made in Parliament. l made a personal statement. '
71
._92
4_ .._. _ .9 ... -, ._ .--I
' -- '-~r:.-
fl. .
_..-m:'--j-:..T- --- -~
/92 -
_ _ __ _ ¥_ _ ,_ _, __ ______ _ ___ .___' I n. , ..__. .. n _
E
i
I
E
!T"
'1
i
1
i'1-~ _ 17 1 -"' at.1 ' 1*." "
ajffrtu I
Atthattimerumourphadclmrgedmewithzhtbedisappearance of a witness ind with being involved inbreach of security. So serious were these charges that I lylel!
to that my persm-mi association with that witness, %been the subject of rumour. was. by comparison. of
only.Inrny|tnte:nenti snid'thettherehadbeennoimprop&in_'-this' association To my very deep regret It have to admit that this was not
true, and that I misled you; and my colleagues. and the House. I ask you
to understand that I did this to protect. as I thought. my wire e.-:3. 5:-:m:l}'.
who were -equally misled. as were my professional advi|ers.@1»-:'- =1f~"1- I-
', _ ' t 1 have come to realise that, by this deception, 1 have been guilty u
' grave misdemeanour and despite the tact that there is no truth .Wli=Y¢I in
the other charges: I cannot remain it mernberof your ihduiinistou.- of the House offommons. ' ' ' - ' " ' '
I cannot tell you of my deep remorse for the _emban'assment have
caused to yon, to my colleagues in the Government, tomy constituents
and to the Party which I" have served for the past twenty-live years. _"=
" - '.-.-t rt: _ 1 :.
'~' -_ ;Youts sincerely. -...---~ =»
" = - -" Y ~ 'IackProfun1o.' *-- 4
VIThe Right Hon. Harold Macmillan, M.P.p. _ 3' _ ._ __
-" -I .. I ; _. . I . .. :1? ._ . 1 .3; _.fDear P1'o'fum0,' _. .': -.-~_*:_ f ~ i: '- '- '
The contents of yourlektter of 4th_ June have been communicated to me,
' and I have heard them with deep 'reg1'e't. This is a great tragedy for you.
your family, and your friendsj Nevertheless, I am sure you will understand
that in the circumstances. I have no alternative but to advise The Queento accept your resignation. - I " i c " E
-- _J':; . ~ _ _ '_ L. 1 -_ * Uri i _. E _." '
~1- i. I '" -. f~ 21:. _ = Harold Macmillan. ""
rue Right Hon. John li0fumo. Q.B.E._, M.1§.f:.'_:;.'_. ._ "_;__.p;. _ _ A
' Y - :;" ' - c '
221. Mr. and Mrs. Profumo spent the next few days with friends. N0 one
knew where they were. The reporters searched up and doym the country but
couId_not nd them. The folk of the villageknew. But they did not tell anyone
outside. They knew they wished to he ieit alone. _ ' y_ " 1
222. Mr. Proiumo did not wait on The Queen to hand over the seals of
oice. 'I'_hey were sent by messenger. He applied for the Chiltern Hundreds and
ceased to represent his constituency. The House of Commons held him to
have been guilty of contempt of the House. His name was removed from the
Privy Council. His disgrace was complete- 1"" .. . . " -
- -V " -..- . "l :."' J
-'- ;~ '1?-' -;_" 1_
9' , ~
0 I 1.. 1 .|
?2
.-5 -
1-'4
e - .
-'."¬t-*= 7 1» _.'7 r,-.-" ='-.-.; -, ~v .._ . ,,
V _e-..r=.e>._ -. . .__
.1 '- ' at;V,_,_92__-,_ -.
4g,_e' _ ._s=-iv r-'A:~ .'0 .- , es? ,.7 .~_ at ~1 - -
. _- -_~ ,. .: :___IaF__ ._ e W_Q. Z1: ;-,-}]||'nI7r'~;,.'£iE's|, -" -' ;' use-rs'."$'1. t ----_- ,,,~ ; sf .- -. , .1 . ...»- ~- , ».--.-+.:;-.,- ~ <:2;*=.:*.w';*<- -+1-1's-;.§~§~_;-5:1».- --3 ""1 ._ »1"->1,;:,--P- . 1" " . -:»' ~71---_ JAM; J ;. _ n _ Au , ,.,,- *_.. H 1- 1»-. .';-,._¢' 4-I .1.- ___ Z - »--- a-. 1.:-;.-; .-a~ §;_-_";- ~i-1'-291% ,
*=~-_ ,_ ' - ' t .. ._ :1-' ;|,- .,,-- _ .7 Y --7'---'l'-.- ...-'--iii-"~, ".~ -,.'.,. . I - 4. - - _-sea, -.,t8, 2 ;-_..~ . - -t-'32-5',-~_;~1i-921'li_L'- " ". ; ,, -_' --_ -_:v:;s.~..-Y? "-. ' _ .' :-.-'..»>r .--t -ti - __ _ .. _ ,-
: ___;."- I-7. , ' 1. I V
.'_: _s'- ' _j"~-?_s - ; ' --'-.at I - . .r<u -~-- ~ - V .7--' T "'7 "» -. _,. 1.' ' "I
: ..4:»¢--.- -; -57-, __ _ _ '--.1---_-.~._ I, ,1-;-is-'517"-...: '-.92' ;§" P _;- ¢' '=.: -- -"~'- .- -..-'-7"?"-!~' -'~.P~'5?""*'=-i 1: -- I3. - _ ..:.7;;._.;__ -at-.|¢_;-,-._~,. _~.- _;-9} .-.7 .=. "'r.:" =" ' -~t a ....,."'$¥ ~11 -,- ~.~ - -- -. .-_, ~ cg,
. _'_; "l _-¬,_-F..,_§__j -.,. 2-2473. " -t I. ;.-_
i%m_U4§L%§
'._=¥i . - ' *=-~-- 1""-' l 2-
,_ r--an - --3-; ae-7 _-7,-' 1 *3 '=":-J e
11,',r- _ ___ -L»?-'~=.. .- j._.t-as
if IQLQY 492 sl-
-* """--has
Sis P '*_,»i1~Q*' 1-; 7* "'='- ,
:--F .. T
-.- .4 -;-. - , . .4.; - .. .,_v _ .;-
I"_. }-I
- -- --792 -
K
; - ;7,=_-' , ';, '7 .7. .">'_-C r 1,," 1671 ii-...h *-> i~..'t?t!'.~ll'l-ll-§'l_.§;_
2 -. - ~ ' - cmtrrntt *' i ts-#1 =-f.H%:,;%-;i.#'-.».i»
' '5-I; to : 4; ":. " * i I -1;-" 1'. _ 5' '-:ri -=_;rrfi'rs#t§.5 atzi
1 --- ' assume r~:vr-:1~ns »:,. -_ '-. -ft-as- -- 1-I» -- ~'--' -;-3." 5 .--y _ t _» _ - ' -15, :."'l'l..r;;?a: '7,
223. 'Mr. Profumo resigned during the Whitsun recess. It was announced
on Wednesday, Sth June, 1963. On 9th June. 1963, the Sunday Mirror
published on itsfront page "a photographic copy of Mr. Profumos letter 0!
9th August, l96l, to Christine Keeler. It had come in useful alter all. On
the same day the News of the World started publishing the Christine Keeler
story by instalments. They had agreed to pay her £23,000 for it. . i J "- "
224. The members of the House of Commons held a debate on Monday.
17th June, I963. On 21st June, 1963, you asked me to undertake this inquiry.
During the course of this report I have referred to Lucky Gordon and
Stephen Ward. it may be useful if I set out the hare details of their trials,
but no more, for I do not consider they have any relevance to my inquiry.
i! The Lucky "Gordon Cue -_
225. At 12.30 a.rn. on 18th April, 1963, the police received a telephone
call to the effect that Christine Keeler had been attacked by Gordon a few
minutes before and that police assistance was required. A search was made
for Gordon and he was arrested about 24 hours later, on 19th April, 1963, at
1.20 a.m. He was committed for trial and remained in custody meanwhile.
226. On the 5th June, 1963, he came up for trial. On the 6th June, 1963.
he dispensed with the services of his counsel and conducted his own defence.
He said he wanted to call 30 witnesses in his defence. The Commissioner.
after inquiry, decided that only two o_f the witnesses could actually speak as
to what occurred. The police tried to nd these two but could not do so.
On the 7th June, 1963, Gordon made a statement from the dock. He did
not give evidence on oath. The jury found him guilty of occasioning actual
bodily Harm and he was sentenced to three years imprisonment.
227. On llth lune, 1963, he gave notice of appeal. On 30th July, 1963,
the Court of Criminal Appeal allowed the appeal on the grotutd that there
were further statements they were statements of the two witnesses whom
Gordon wished to call! which might have led the jury to have reasonable
doubt.-
1 ii! The Ward Cue
228. On lst April, 1963, the police started their investigation into Wand:
activities. Many statements were taken and a report was made in the
Director of Public Prosecutions. A conference was held with _ __ on
7th June. On that very evening information reached Scotland Ylrdf F '"
was about to leave the country. In consequence Ward was
Saturday, 8th June. He applied for bail but was refused it. He
custody throughout the hearings before the magistrate. These
concluded until 3rd July, 1963. He was then cormnitted for trial,bail, in spi { objections by the police. .
73I 92/ -~ .,, -
. -
l-:-._ :_/e
4-- _ - ' ~ '92_?._L -,' _'- '._ -Q?»i-
l
- 4
If l
%' -'-=
--Z.-'5'-_*:.i'& e-~ -e
1
F
L
w I
n . 4
-w-. 1''4 .. _ ,
7 o. '
229. The trial of Ward started on 22nd July and continnelbhdays. He was allowed mu throughout. oneaom July, 1963. namehis summing-up. but had not nished it when the court ad " Ch the
morning of 31st July Ward was found unconscious. havingof drugs. Tn: Judge concluded his summing-up in Ward: lb mfound guilty of living on the earnings of prostitution between 1ltJ'nne,' 1961,and 31st August, 1962 Christine Keele: being the woman concerned! andbetween lst September, 1962, and 31st December, 1962 Marilyn Rice-Daviesbeing the woman concerned!. The Judge postponed sentence till Ward wastit to appear. But Ward never regained consciousness and died on 3rd August,-
I963. The story ends. as itbegamwithhim. : .. ; _- ._ -' -'
l , _ I
4
1
y i
N
' 192 . r ,.
F i; .' J
2
I
_ 1 l
r ..'_
._ .... .,-: L
iT'Z.I%:.".. .
c *
~l. 1113?; ' _. - r
" : ..
~-Y -.-, ..
1 I . --
74
Q i /:-0
1 .A¥ ,>' L. V17"i:* -1 l-_. -I ¢
.1.
4 ._.... ..._._ _ -_ _
' .
T I"
3-1=~. -;';.,- _-2 .1; - '1 =-.l=.~ -. -..'.:':$ 92---_, ::"::.~- :'- -~ - 4'»-=7-,,~ - - -.-=- -
U. --If an?
L; -. 1='a=...- ;T-.1-E I;-5;. " " '-'- " X...-;:.:..-, ,_ __- 1. -._--'. ._r,1i. 3.1 1-;_=1
1? mi.»-< "r "-'71. T '-?§. ~.
:?*-f-:-*:?'.=-~="¥==~r ,1; 1'-==
" -;*:' A"--~"'-----V-_:@: I-_" .-* 7' :'--vi-?=;§- L' ""'"=< " -,.".>_;;..-.U.. = _': .- " 7 5'7? ':=O'=.3§:';-;. "
=-~ I-1 '*-'5? ~+==-I-=5 O "-"W T; - ' '-."5r -n-;_-:1. g__-__ 1:? " 92,r_;-_-,;E--' V...-4 .+,V..' . _ ...__- ., » ..' »-_' ';;:»,_ "'- =,..-"z.~..'" jfv-. _,;_~_;;~ 2:-_-;_'-~ _. "Q j_>;',;¢..- _5?.-*1. -* '0" 1'. - ' " "i .-1 *""- ~ -- .,-1."?-'3 1 -- 5t . . __éL.§-_,,~._ J?
;»;3:;g3,=" .2-_.~.a=..j-5%. _."l_' .",___,' ' ___. r . . __. :____ __; Iv!
' "-7 4: :1. -4 -L -' . ; ;:: -1.-'~I| I1- I "pi - 1-v - . .-4?~g- , _ ~ ' '
H" . .PART ll
THE OPERATION OF THE
SECURITY SERVICE
1
K ._..|n=.-:-'f:3- - -- 7 9- K
92-.- ' </
I - V
I92_ ____92/
J292 .I , '92
-92.1|-r ~u-cur I'-"'1 ~+-~- _~-
4
I' . '- -.>-".311 l
_L... 7 __. ..n 7
I
0
' it
T
O
- 3' -r =1»; ._ ;" ' --. . .. " -sf _ ' rs 1-*:*:.-55?.--stats-,-1,si._,:t.;"-.;;;"'.-.="-'r.ss; .
.;'- '=-i-'§"<.:_.':'t:s._.I-L=£*" ? -' _ e--, -K-sh-Aid--_ '-- .-s'.'-"' /'&'$ ..¢'92-""""-.5 - ---»-M-~ -1-.~= c" - -1:.-"--1 " - . ;-=-'-'- -e >="-% _'-2.. -<-.~_ 5;:-.=_ ' "' _ ,- '7'.~:'
.' -5' -- -92-HE!»- an _ - __
.-.~-* "'- -. _ . .=¥Z.--.= __ ...e - ---- -1-_ - .'._.--"--: "-"' -- _., . ----~s_=..1r~ .is 2% T3: "-w§'~-~14-a"-'31 cart.-"_ »'_ 92;%;:.'1r: .. . .,__. . _.! a; -s.-,,_-. _§~_'. _ _ 92¢._.-.- "$4.9-ih-e" *' ,1. "~11 ' 4 _._,_'__ - ,,: ¢ _. _ ..-.. ..- . -. ---' - ,_ .--/-' 92 . --..- -.-"' .. - .» .9!"-.e,__ ._s.-.-,.-. 1- . - '42,. - , - -V.-.~, __ .,,,_,- _- H, _. ,_ . ,_, -2 1-i!I~ = - reel .5 s-- an 1.!-ill - t. 4- Q. ,_;,-;,,___,.,_ .' ' '-.-- .1-.__ff _ ' . ,__r.._:':;A'r. V_;:-_.3" [email protected]*7'¥' 'fe3.¢i;*?".:§ » . : ' . ,. . ._ --an.-. ,- -- 't~- - - _:t.. -_- '_¢_-_u-is ml»-§.' ..- "4-_;_ a=.I"=."' I Ia we .»= l-'4 § I--'.:-;".E:.i-11*:riizfir--:_' -F--t. '~'-1 _-',=r:§l1".':»;'; -_-..~~ I- ;~ -..--'.'§*»=.=.-ii-3 .ik:' ,1 is _.__.. .-v-_ 1. -_1;-, _ ._ .7- ?.é>. "-4":-fa-'=i-a-.-».-.-'¢==.--T *3: = '".-_-:s_@g.<,:,"=;"'?:c-'- .6:- ;=_'%;.'1Y.-?-'"'*$* ..--"3*'!,»_,-f . ..,;:.,-e.1r: K-fV'..,5,t-,_,..._:V_ __v u-em _.. -3 ; i ,1
.~i+~=e -; "
i .1-;l.?t£-Ti .
---'-i"'." 4' I .If ._g.~;.=-* _ _ -1 if '- ?7;-- -"?."'_:""".' ; " '
O_ ' 1*» i.;s~-°" - tO Qo{l_/}_'_ass:.:-""_~=;- --- eno . t _31092< 92%a7 Z
-. .Q K5
' 92 .- % C l f"/ '1._ __ 7 ~ ;__% --:' '~;, w r 4 _ -1
. , _- - - I - .. --»- r " -r in ..I -'.'~-- ._ ii.v."l.l M;
,- - L .' " ~ ' -:. in .- _ "._.=.¢!"i-F-1'._",_£i5 :1
p . - cnarran ;, . _
. ., ; .. .d.;l: ,_-.|;
_ __ . TI-IE ROLE OF THE. SECURITY SERVICE ._:-_,_¢; .,; P-,-.i_,
:a ~ '3~ . ' A - -i.--l
230. No one can understand the role of the Security Service in the
Profumo affair unless he realises the cardinal principle that their operations
are to be used for one purpose, and one purpose only, the Defence of the-
Realm. They are not to be used so as to pry into any man: private conduct,
or business affairs: or even into his political opinions, except in so far
as they are subversive, that is, they would contemplate the overthrow of
the Government by unlawful means. This principle was enunciated by
Sir Findlater Stewart in his Report of 27th November, I945, paragraph 37,
which has formed the guide for the Service ever since. It was re-stated by
Sir David Maxwell Fyfe in a Directive of 24th September. 1952, and
re-afiirmed by every Home Secretary since. Most people in this country .
would, I am sure, whole-heartedly support this principle, for it would be
intolerable to us to have anything in the nature of a Gestapo or Secret
Police to snoop into all that we do, let alone into our morals.
231. Once this principle is appreciated, it will be realised that the only92
proper role of the Security Service in the Profurno alfair was to defend the
country against any activities by or on behalf of Russian agents. In particular
against the activities of Captain Ivanov. For Captain Ivanov was not only _r
a Russian Naval Attache. He was also a Russian Intelligence Oflicer. He '
must not be allowed to get secret information which the Russians needed.
Stephen Ward was a sympathiser with the Russians. He was a close friend
of Captain Ivanov and was indiscreet. He counted many prominent people
among his friends. He should not be allowed to get secret information -
which he might pass on to Ivanov. Ward was known to be involved in I
call-girl racket. He was the provider of popsies for rich people '. If
any of his girls came into contact-both with Captain Ivanov and also withMinisters of the Crownthat would be a situation which needed watching Q
in case Captain Ivanov might use the girls as a channel of information.
232. There was yet this further possible role for the Security Service.
Was it possible to get Ivanov to defect from the Russians and help us?
For. as a Russian Intelligence Oicer, he might have information of much
value.
233. When the conduct of the Security Service is examined as I will
examine it in the following pages!, it will, I think, be seen that they conned
themselves to the role I have described. They had, at one critical point.
carefully to consider whether they should inquire into the moral e _'Z ~ -r 1
of Mr. Profurno-they suspected that he had had an illicit w - -- _' with
Christine l eeler-but they decided that it was not their c ~ _ .
new problem for them to have to consider the conduct of a
Crown, and they decided it by reference to the principles laid
them, to wit, they must limit their inquiries to what is n
Defence of the Realm: and steer clear of all political_questions. And
what they did. »
I f/Q. 11 ,, .
92- _ s.-he
92 -
_ ._._. _.. w3
r-92,_
It 1 J
._..aa:.-:-"- :-i'--- ".1'._.-..- 92
234. The only criticism that I can see of the decision
of Mr. Profumo disclosed a character defect, which poin
security risk e.g., the girl might try to blackmail him or
him to disclose secret information!. But at the time wh
came to their knowledge. his association with the girl h
Ivanov had gone. And what remained was not sucientinfringement of the principle that the Security Service must not pry-intprivate lives. At my rate, it was not such a risk as they should investigateWithout express instructions. - ' ' " _ - * ' j'
~_;_ »". 1- V.
" ~ i * 1
1 1
r
r
1
e
r
92 V I l
I
w
I 92-
r -
-F
1 . .1 . ,_,_,.. 1 ilid_@%' _ . I
' r" 1 ' LI, f.
1| r r_
-rs _,
J
l
. 92- I.. __ . ¢_-5;-_- ;
1§,_-._.. -_ -~ , ... ~-,-,_,.___f"-_'. ._I
O
r ¢
I
. . 4
. u' _ . -:-_- --, H1; _¢t---:_.,.-,92.,_-, ..é3- - __ '-.-;_.-- =1»: .~..*:s-=.'.'. .:1.":t+':-' . ...w.,' '-"_lr'v>-.._J- ;'.. _¢ ;-;..-S-~£$._ . -=1: -"»1~t-s.»;.fr?l: ,..,- .. _-»- ;-. ..- -cg tin-.-t-i8<.!vIu> , ~_-K<-, 3- __,_92._;.:_,,,,-,',_:; .;-- 't.t;...- rs . _'---""'-+ -"-_ _= i _ . ..,.... -es __ ' - --1 T ff T-" HQ?":,' -9 *' ' .?
'-T - . I. ' ,1.
._92:"._-Z 1.-'.-'§.. .. - .5-'.".t _ =- i
'2. _.:r ;_="~~ s * _=_.§__-" . ,__-:_-1., - :- "1 .?'~._~~7E:.3 "'=_ '.-$2": :9 _"_'1- .' '_ __ - _» _7._ -tn -2,~ . p *..:-1.-;'I_~'*.:__: lift" _, -, '....1:.:72t-§é'$~""~f-L.-°.:=r. p.--- -1 -1- .2.--4*-W -. 1f_ , _ __-4..' '?_,_»g,.-_"';" 1§ ':;?':__ .1". *.:.::. 4"
~.' " 11
,, ;.._.: ..
. "_- _ .rt3L.,n ..-.e k "_+ k .i-:._,_;,U_ J. ». I. . _-' ._...e,..¢.,~, .4; '. -I-.-.3: .',vf_',9292L92-¢~a-.- _.~ '- " vii .1 """i~nr3r92C»2-i_;'.'--1:- JD .52 --m_"' -'1": -_ Zr -_.~=~ - '1; -J9 _..:9292|v-_-:- -I-_-1-_. -1,; '-_-__ fr- . _. -._. :1--~_-W--*1'., ._* '".'....,1:_,_=.92=-._.-=,-515- -J ~#*:: -== --___-,,_ ~- ,,r_r_=» .--> -'5-e---,- e . '3-rm .-- - *-- 1-: '- T C -.- .'""e=.r-",-I ._-=1
_92_='_. p as . -'L_ _1 '_'},_. -f _. :-:r¢_$.*.-ti - -- '-A; -4* -:1~--P 31-1_é-aziiI;f - -4_4.;-l'_,.,1-- - _- .;- .3;-5. _,_»:»». ;. .r' = . .. "-- we. .. .-=----._ . - , .-- .1;f,'.4 . , - .91»-.f;¢z?;.'-q. -:t*_1e'-15 -'_1..Q,-pf __ _
. J I. ' - ' »-'- -ml - - - -¢_- --ve is ;-.-» =0-ta --92"'__.: ____,_.-*-,.._- ;- -aca .. _:_.-1." J1. ?-'-5""_____. _... _ b .___. . _. _,_.-.;_92--m.g _t . __ _ 3-,, . - --. -_.r -_~W V-1:7-':.Q¢;-1 .,___,,_ .._._ ....,._...,,.. _-_ -. -5- . .-.. .__ 1 ._ a 7- . ..-., -,'
" I I
r = ' Q-.--£.-.-.-'~*"_-':.-T-- '-- -i
L
E1
I_ ____ 7__ -1&4 ---*' "1-n|""'-----h-1-7' ti "'* _, H
-" . 5 -1 pp. A1-c.»:; .. -- ' '~ '- '1-.-1¢Er:i}-6 :>ruirl erlt ri-.vi.d:,_u* .~-t =13? '- 1- - J-tu . ';...-.252-.": zrainilvf orbit!
. 1" Mrivrsrnanu. nr-:s'1?oz~isrnrr.|1'v"-1 t .. .-. stretai.
. _' . ' '_ ! '. . . . = . [ n- 23$. There has been considerable misapprehension about the
responsibility for the Security Service: and this misapprehension seems to nae
to be the cause of some of the troubles that have arisen. The relevant
documents are so little available that it may be helpful if I give considerableexmcm - .. . .. .
i! The Prime Minilter till I952 .-=
236. Up till 1952 the Prime Minister was responsible for security. This
followed from Sir Findlater Stewart's Report in 1945. He took as his starting
point its purpose. . ; _ _ V
Its purpose ", he said. is Defence of the Realm and nothing else.
It follows that the Minister responsible for it as a service should be the
Minister of Defence, or. if there is no Minister of Defence, the Prime
Minister. as Chairman of the Committee of Imperial Defence. It has been
argued that this would place an undue burden upon the Minister of Defence
or the Prime Minister, and upon the stall of the Cabinet Secretariat. But
from the very nature of the work, need for direction except on the very
broadest lines can never arise above the level of Director-General. That
appointment is one of great responsibility, calling for unusual experience
and a rare combination of qualities; but having got the right man there
is no alternative to giving him the widest discretion in the means he uses
and the direction in which he applies them-always provided he does not
step outside the law.
ii! Sir Norman Brook: Report . .
237. In 1951, however, a proposal was made to transfer the responsibility
for the Security Service from the Prime Minister to the Home Secretary. This
was done in a report made by Sir Norman Brook. In March, 1951, he
recommended that the Security Service should in future be responsible to the
Home Secretary. He said: _ ' - _- ' ?
I believe that Sir Findlater Stewart exaggerated the defence aspects
of the Security Service. In practice the Security Service has little to do with
those aspects of the defence of the realm with which the Minister of
Defence is concerned. And the arrangement by which the Security Service
is directly responsible to the Prime Minister is now justified mainly by the
fact that it enhances the status of the Service. In practice the functions of
the Security Service are much more closely allied to those of the Home
Oice, which has the ultimate constitutional responsibility for defultliq
the realm ' against subversive activities and for preserving law anterdsr.
I recommend that the Security Service should in future be _ '
to the Home Secretary. I believe that it would be helpful to the __
General of the Security Service to be able to turn to a senior __ T i_
Secretary for advice and assistance on the policy aspects of his with and
on his relations with other Government Departments; and that he would
receive from the permanent head of the Home Oice support and guidance
19
..92.'a
92 -
1__ _ _"Tea/3 ;~>~;j-"
wbichthePrimeMinistersseeretariatisnotinapoeitie'ih.-'__ _'!I'hePrime Minister: personal contact with the1'!irector-Geuetdg __ _ 'Service need not be wholly interrupted as a_ result olti i S in responsibility. The Prime would " _to send for the Head oi the Securitypservice from time to _ {utesthegeneral stateothisworkandpartictdarmatterswhiel heolspecially close concern to him. And on matters of supremeand deli¢!»¢y. the Head or thegService_ should aiways_he_able, a_t___hi§initiation. to arrange a" personal interview with the Prime
Si! DIVE FYk'l DIIRHTG .
238. On 24th'September, 1952. Sir David Maxwell Fyie, then HomeSecretary," issued this Directive to the Director-General of the Security Service,which is the governing instrument to-day: - '- " ' 1 '
cl l. In your appointment as Director-General of the Security Serviceyou will be responsible to the Home Secretary personally. The SecurityService, is not. however. apart of the Home -Oce. On appropriateoccasion you will have right of direct access to the Prime Minister. 7 '
2. The Security Service is part of the Defence Forces of the country.Its task is the Defence of the Realm as _a whole, from external and internaldangers arising from attempts at espionage and sabotage, or from actionsof persons and organisations whether directed from within or withoutthe country, which may be judged to be suhversive of the State. ' "
r 3. You will take special care to see that the work of the SecurityService is strictly limited to what is necessary for the purposes of this
task - ".-.1'_'"'.... w
4. It is essential that the Security Service should be kept absolutelyfree from any political bias or inuence and nothing should be done' ' ncerned with th'ethat might lend colour to any suggestion that rt is cointerests of any particular section of the community, or with any othermatter than the_Deience of the Realm as _a whole. " ; "1 S. No enquiry is to be carried out on behait of any GovernmentDepartment unless you are satised that an important public interestbeating on the Defence of the Realm, as dened in paragraph 2, is at
6. You and your sta will maintain the well-established conventionwhereby Ministers do not concern themselves with the detailed informationwhich may be obtained by the Security Service in particular cases, butare furnished with such information only as _may be necessary for thedeterfnination of any issue on which is sought? '_ t '
s a i an 1 if n
239 After hearing a considerable body of evidence, I; = girdapproval that the Directive of sn David Mattwell Fqte " S - '-fl-T4principles. I would try to summarise the salient pomts: _ 1- .
@_
2t! The Head of the Service is responsible - 2 ..Secretary tor the efcient and proper working of the Settled andinthe ordinary waytothe Prime D '- '
so
P5 -
1
l
4
I
_=- - - '% :'-2-1'-e-"' ;~ '1; ." -;'.?.:.z .' -" .5-F .;.~.*.-:1-2.. ...'- -3 w t-. -. -'-_- - 7.-2-. ' .. ' . ..;-_- .
p .=._~r:- r "F'*_~'a+,=-5--at - ac,1- -_ _ r - _ "'*"" . A"- _-¢- --I.;1_,-- ' " . - -""" §'..
. - . ' -' '- ' =e.':1;i='-1+." '.._ _ "1 .. ' ' I »'.v X1-.3» .: '_ '_ l'=e4:P§'G. ' _';f
J ,9 ., V.._*' .' -sf-_-'=~ '1'?" .. -'_, in-Qn " -. .sw>92'~' .":_-;, ~- '- ._¢.;;___;.: ' _ .7 '_'.-_9' .. Up - ..¢~ Q. *- ere.-r.-.' _- _. 4»; -.. #1--.-5%-;~.---. -I"r 'i'- -""-¬- -'1; -43-q, --Q?-+-.e.t=;e - __; _ .--.~-?'.4v-5- ~- . -r»~~ »-,-.- --~ . - - - '~'. --*1 *--.-.-.- - . .-- fr ---.- -. - - ==;.-.1- "- -= 9 .. -- . '_ ' -.. -".1 "',.r "-r"-" .-.- . .1. . .- t. =- ., ...,i_. -....:.-.--;-.. sq,» - 1- ' -*1-, 7:-_ .-".---'=_ - .. _ _1- - ' -A. _ . F :-toe-$r¢-'-vs r~..-. "R---1-17.- -a --1- --- " -1* » =-in-e'1 2_=.- -» _ -54- '-.|» -,_;..-|...;-E,-_..e;,I_';,:;-.¢.:,d.§§, r .-Q. _ 1 ;I_H___. ¢ : --. t ~ .
__~ -._ _... -.. v_- s'_.,'..r.. __.__c.;_._ Aw
._'--'---» .-.:~'~-~- -.:7... -~-. _ -_ _- - . I .t -,__ _...... _., - . , . __5-_1_,'7£"? >_ 1- 'a1_ ___,._=';_._:;.. _ - -. .1 _ . .--- - - 1" - ' ' - ' - ;-.-- - -'--1. . -'1; ..a_-,_.. T'~J- _._§_.: ~75- '~.';. ' - ~ ' ..-- fr I -'¥'1".. - -.1.-!..._..~, - _*. ~:- __ 3--__ __M_._.., _ Q: - - .'1 .. L~.;' _. " .,. 1;-_ _- ._ __ -. ;#_=j.f_" , - -__---1.. ; =:__.. '___-__7 _-.._ .~<;!'__= . _._ _. _~»_ -A _; ~ ,, .;3se;-a92map+.>;<-;~-. 7?! * -.-1 13"? ' _ .- t~'_» . ' ."e- '.'.."_, Q
1-='~'. - -. i. --"ii--""'-4 -Ti?-"7..l= -. e r." e .' = '="-. _ "-an-.-.&.-.2
'1' 1
-.__.§.¢;.-:-"'-:5"-. ._.. .
k.i
_.._ _ :;I W ""'~" :tt ""' 7'7 " *1_n-_nr~-- ----1j - --|-- 41-» -1 - ._=ii _____
92 92
The Security Service is, however, not a department of the
It operates independently under its own
but he can and does seek direction and guidance from
Secretary. subiect always to the proviso that its activities- absolutely free from any political bias or inuence. ' ""
' ! The function of the Security Service is to defend the Realm as a Whole
' from dangers which threaten it as a whole, such as espionage on
behalf of a foreign Power, or internal organisations subversive" of the
State. For this purpose it must collect information about individuals.
and give it to those concemed. But it must not, even at the behest of
a Minister or a Govemment Department, take part in investigating
the private lives of individuals except in a matter bearing on the
Defence of the Realm as a whole. " ~ _- _' - _, - , .
! The Head of the Security Service may approach the Prime Minister
himself on matters of supreme importance and delicacy. but this is
not to say that the Prime Minister has any direct responsibility for
._ . the Security Service. He has certainly none in day-to-day matters.
It would be a mistake for the Prime Minister to take such responsibility
because he cannot in practice exercise adequate supervision, and he
has not the secretariat for the purpose. p 1
i i ' v} Application of Principles-
249. The result of these principles is that. if the Director-General of
the Security Service is in doubt as to any aspect of his dutiesas, for instance.
when he gets information about a Minister or senior public servant indicating
that he may be a security riskhe should consult the I-lome'Secretary. The
Home Secretary then will have to take the responsibility for further action,
that is to say, whether to take steps to eliminate the security risk or to put
up with it. If a mistake is made, it is the Home Secretary who will be
responsible to Parliament. , 1
241. It was suggested to me that, when the conduct of a Mirtisler was
in question. it would be preferable for the Director-General to approach
the Prime Minister direct rather than approach the Horne Secretary bet-aux
the Horne Secretary might nd it embarrassing to have to investigate the
conduct of another Minister. The majority view was. however, that in all
cases there should be a clear and unambiguous channel to the Home
Secretary. . . t . - -
~ vi! Ministry of National Security
242. Most witnesses thought it was not desirable to set up a Ministry
of National Security. and for these reasons: It is important that each
Government;Departme11t e.g., the Service Departments! should be regarded
as responsible for its own internal security. It would lead to slackness if
each Department could feel it could leave its security to others. The
Service performs a very useful function in advising Government Dmenuon their security problems but should not take them over. If it be at
each Government Department is responsible for its own internal .;_ i ,
then the Security Service itself deals with national security 38 8 h '1!
great body of opinion before me was that this should be dealt with "saute
responsibility of the Home Secretary and not as the responsibility of a separate
Minister. - . - -' _- '_ - _» ', 5 ;j _
bi
-i
E "3
1
1
E
._i#-
I 1 ""92~"* J 3' .
pf ~; p -' I
_..-aE»v$""- :.*_..- »-31 I""- I -., l_:._, . -
J, J1
- '."92..' ' "'." ' -.-.-*-- .- I __ e ..,. , .. _ . _ ,L ;__-3|. ___, - i - > ;-- 1
' THE SECURITY SERVICE IN i961 AND 1981?,-"-y_ _,-1.,» .
-. - - - - ~ ' ,-~'l-~11-5-#.i"'gc Q:-.,.;.-_-t
' ' - i! The Service nd out IbD'.wIId. ..:.>~_-"E" - ,1"
243. It was on 20th January, 1961, that Stephen Ward rst met Captain
Ivanov. Their friendship developed rapidly. The Service %n got to
know of this triendship and desired to know more about it.On 8th lune, 1961.
four weeks before the Cliveden week-end!. an oicer of the Security Servicewent to see Stephen Ward at a restaurant in Marylebone. His report said this:
Ward, who has an attractive personality and who talks well, was
completely open about his association with Ivanov. Despite the fact that
some oi his political ideas are certainly peculiar and are exploitable by
the Russians. I do not think that he is of security interest [that means he
_was not considered a danger] but he is obviously not a person we can
make any use of. Ward took the Security Oicer to his mews house
where he introduced me to a young girl, whose name I did not catch.
who was obviously sharing the house with him. [This was probably
Christine Keeler.] She was heavily painted and considerably overdressed
- and I wonder whether this is corroborating evidence that he has been
involved in the call-girl racket. _ ' " ' p _ t '
244. The security oicer added in the report;-p -1- ' M, 't __' _.
As we were saying good-bye, Ward asked whether it was all right for
him to continue to see Ivanov. I replied there was no reason why he should
not. He then said that, it there was any way in which he could help, he
would he very ready to do so. I thanked hint fa his offer and asked Mn:
to get in touch with me should Ivanov at any time in the future make anypropositions to him. . = , _ - - _7-I 5 ' _ 1: T, if-.L.';',[_ L :r__f: s_-3=923!I ,_,_,:-t R; :__J_,dE 3- 3153,32 '£1:'Se -1.- ,, .' - ~ »,- - r ' - "~; " ' cnsrrna .=*iw 11.»-==:~ _-;; .
ii! 12th July, 1961--Ward tells them of handy: Request for lnlonnation
245. Four weeks later there was the Cliveden week-end, and it came
immediately to the notice of the Security Service. On the Monday following
the Cliveden week-end, 10th July, 1961, Stephen Ward telephoned the security
oicer and asked to see him. It must be remembered that the security otoer
had asked Ward to tell him of any propositions that lvanov made to him. The
security oicer saw Ward on Wednesday. 12th July, 1961. Stephen Ward then
told the security oicer that Ivanov had asked him to nd out when the
Americans were going to arm Western Germany with atomic weapons. It is to
be noted'that Stephen Ward was quite open about this to the security oicer.
The security officer told Stephen Ward that he should make no attempt to
full Ivanovs request and if by chance he obtained any such Httnation
through the indiscretion of any of his inuential friends, he on noaccount tell Ivanov . . _- .4 ._ __ 1,, i- _, 1. _ _ :_;"92
iii!WardClnimsl"92'iend|hipwithMr.lrohlo_'_ '3 __ _";"
246. Ward told the oioer that Ivanov had spent the last Sunthy at Ward;
country cottage on Lord Astor's esmte. There had been quite a partyrot
celebrities there disporting themselves in the swimming pool. including
82 S
_.__ _ .
. l
:._"- i
. faA ._;92_.,.;_
an-5---:1.-_-r_. . .";. r ~ i
< l
I
1
' ' r
- .1
-" >2 -...:"=e.a~ _._ d92I:!.& ' .292 ~y--P --.'-1--.-92-v" e-1-:-~-' - 1 -'-ah.-.-_'-. ..- - i_,e~.1_..-_,, -_ _._-_1_ --. - .._-'.,.._,_ _...~i-.,a-:, _
-.aq,_.-' . .1 _ . -- _¢'._* . -_- _¢, ~ ._, - _. ~ ____ ,:--»-av-_;_; r .. -..:=.9.;.-_.-...-..-_ if - -4*~v'._"'-~". '*"'-'-41"" - j_
" I: -71- - V re .. , . ..'.'~-
ism?-i"-?"" ;= - .-="" '-- . _ ___, - __ _ __ ; ._., __._. ,_t, .7. --1:. ' s ;- _ --@,;-It -I -:~ x -'. - HF-.:-' 15*!-= _-_-_:f"..,;_ - ..___.¥- ;.~¬-:_ ;~ xvi - MI. ; ' pt .9? ._ _. __é_e__@§.=.. E.-.--_F . T:-~s-it -'1_'iitr.";-:- _- ._ -1-; ~, J,-_ .; ----_..-<-. ' * .. Rf. - y I: _ -t
r er....¢ '.-. ' ' . -- -:*4"',,,,-,';s. -- - :7 'i '.-s-..'-¥s-.- i j.. -;-r . wj.-'~f.e1_r,»;~--.r-. -Vt _- .-_ .4 -r .-. ".92H1'I-" -..=.1-1.
.- L; '- -:1 __ii ' H.-. _-..: ~~t ___ ' _ .-.92_* . .. " ._-:;f___ Q! " r r.-heI. '=r~"¬*- "- »_~ :.|r.- _ '--1-75:5.-' >':.§-181Jr-' -T 7 tr. it-"1' ' '
.:_.92:.-' . 4'53 ' I§f'___':.~_ ~ - i.." - -
. ».-3;;-"7,fl"i="?-"¬E':-. e- -1 e '*i"'% '-"?T'
' .r;-'.-' -'1 :; " '" -. . . -'»=~-- s.-.-~='.:¢.:=
-I . T_.... -_ .__ ; _
'¥
4
r
/§ .292 -
_ -1 |I|llnr -- ~1rri|n--'~ i ~e~-at-:1: '- - - .1._ _.. ...¢ c92 .
92»92_W ._92D _ Mr. Profumo, the Secretary of State for War. lvanov had been much Illtllcd
by their antics. Christine was there. Ward explained tlut lb
young girl who lived in his house.! Ivanov was undottbtedlyntllillhy
Christine. After the bathing party. lvanov had taken her back to Na ll?!
house and they had drunk between them two bottles of whisky. Ward chimed
that he and Mr. Profumo were quite close friends and that Mr. Protutnor
visited him at his London house. The security oicer summed up his opinion
ot'Wardinthesewords:- -K
' ' I do not think he is ti security risk in the sense that he would
. intentionally be disloyal, but his peculiar political beliefs. coupled with
his obvious admiration of Ivanov might well cause him to be indiscreet
unintentionally. A - '- " » _. . _ _ :2 ~ '
iv! The Service think that Mr. Prolnllo should he Warned
241. The Security Service followed up this information in two ways.
First they wanted to get more information about Ward's establishment and
about Christine. So on 31st July, 196], they asked the Special Branch of the
Metropolitan Police to make inquiries. 0:: 8th August, l9é!, Special Branch
reported to Security Service that Christine could not be identied and that
inquiries revealed nothing to the discredit of Ward. The address was in n
respectable neighbourhood where any openly unseemly conduct would soon
come to police notice. Secondly, the Security Service thought it would be
wise to warn Mr. Profumo to be careful what he said to Ward: because Ward
was voluble and indiscreet and might easily pass on to Ivanov any
information which Mr. Profumo might let fall. Further, a thought occurred
to the Security Service that, perhaps with Mr. Profumos help, it might be
possible to get lvanov to defect. Mr. Profumo might be a lead-in" to
Ivanov. The Director-General carefully considered what to do. He felt tlmt
he could hardly approach Mr. Profumo direct on the matter. So on 31st July,
1961. he spoke to Sir Norman Brook about it. Sir Norman was the Secretary
of the Cabinet and was in a position to speak to a Minister on it. He did
speak to Mr. Profurno I have dealt with this in an earlier chapter-
paragraphs 33-35!. p ' . . _
. . v! Mr. Proiumo is Warned '_ '
248. It has been widely assumed that the Security Service knew that
Christine Keeler was having an alfair with Mr. Profurno and Captain Ivanov
at the same time: that they reported this to Sir Norman Brook; and that
their object was that Sir Norman should acquaint Mr. Profumo with the
danger in the situation. If the Security Service had had such knowledge I
should havq thought it was one of those matters of extreme delicacy where
they might approach the Prime Minister direct: or, if they had reported it
to Sir Norman, I would have thought that Sir Norman should have reported
it to the Prime Minister. In failing to do so, he would have made ya pistakc.
as Lord Radclilfe said in a television interview. But I am satisoti the
Security Service did not know that Christine Keeler was having
Mr. Profumo or even with Captain Ivanov. They knew she
Wards mistress in the house. that was all. Their two purposes It ' __ 1%
were ! to warn Mr. Profumo to be careful what he said to Stepii Wad.
and ! to see if there was a ' lead-in ' to Captain Ivanov. It would hardly
seem to need t e intervention of the Prime Minister for these purposes.
92 '92 as __
I 92-
=5
*-st
92
7 4 _4;__ _ _ h
.,_..-n|'.rr,-:r**'..':¢=n- wt_" .-
_-I"-
1 ' 249. -It "has been said -that the Security Sctvioeought to have done
dillerently. They ought terms set "a" watch on Ward: house or got
permission to tap his telephone calls: for they would then have
that Mr. Profurno was having an affair with Christine Keel¢"1;:_&phen
Ward's house and that Captain Ivanov was often at the house I am
satised that this criticism is mistaken. The Security Set-vice tint
they needed to know about the Ivanov-Ward relationship! and-itfibtlldnot
have increased their knowledge to set a watch on Wat-ds house. They knew
that Ivanov was a Russian Intelligence Oieer. They already had from other
sources information as to Ivanovs visits toand relations with Ward. They
knew also _that Mr. Profumofwas on occasions visiting War_ds house. They
acted on that information by having Mr. Profumo warned. I do not think theSecurity Service should be blamed for not doing more. I
I-:.wi= ~'- -_zi 5,11.-H t ":; ' :i P" !;_tit .-171."; Lf"-._' ti " V
_ p Z _ vi! Suspicious Grow about lard I W, _ , ..
" 250. From November, 1961. to May, 1962, many people were beginning
to be suspicious of Stephen Ward. At a party at the Soviet Embassy. he
seemed very much at home. In talking to patients he was obviously
sympathetic to the Communist régimc. Several thought that he was a
security risk. Reports began to come into the Security Service: and also to
the Special Branch of the Metropolitan Police. who passed them on to the
Security Service. Stephen Ward got to know that he had been reported as
a suspicious character. So he himself approached the Security Service-no
doubt so as to get in rst. On 28th May, 1962. the security oicer saw him
again. He was the same oicer who had seen him previously. He reported
that, e ' -t i- l" 1. "_
more than once Ward assured me that if Ivanov ever attempted to
make use of him for any illegal purpose, or if he showed any inclination
to defect, he would get in touch with me immediately . . . my impression
of Ward remains the same . . . he is in my opinion basically a decent
fellow despite the fact that he has accepted as true much of the
propaganda pumped into him by Ivanov. '
I do not believe he is a Communist but there is no doubt that he
holds queer opinions about Russia's aims in international alfairs. I do
not believe that he would wittingly be disloyal to this country but at the
same time I recognise that he might well do considerable harm without
intending it. One of his very obvious faults is that he talks too much."
vii! The Foreign Oce is Warned
251. The Security Service followed this up by making sure that the
Foreign Oice knew about Ward. On 12th June. 1962, they wrote to the
Foreign Oice and also saw them; and warned them that Ivanov was 1
member of the Russian Intelligence Service and that Ward was both naive
and indiscreet. ' ' " . I.%»'-252. A few months later reports began to come in to
Service, too, about Ward's immoral activities. On 4th
were informed that, "From what I hear of Ward and his
women and his enormous circle of friends, I strongly suspect t
provider of popsies for rich people. _ S
84 .
92 -
7 J-¢tttunttnQh~ he ~ ,~IJ5 g
,_ - 3 253. Then came the Cuban crisis. The Russians were carrying nuclear '" ' ' Z '1 "-1 " ' arms to Cuba and the United States were about to intercept the shi. 1&0 1 critical days were tthtti Wednesday, 24th October, 1962, when the- ships were heading for Cuba until Sunday. 28th October, 1962, whei theyturned back. During this time Ward made frantic etforts at Ivanovs request.' ' to get the United Kingdom to intervene. He wanted Her Majesty:Govemment to take an independent initiative and summon a summit
conference.1 viii! Ward is not to be Trusted i
, .254. By this time the Foreign Oice were becoming very suspicious of
Ward and asked the Security Service for information about him. On
2nd November, 1962, the security otcer the same one who had always seenWard! told the Foreign Oice that he 7 ' _ '
has a number of titled and inuential friends and patients, including
several members of the Cabinet. It was this fact which led us to pay
some attention to him because we felt he might acquire delicat
information from them which would nd its way to Ivanov. Ward is__a
talkative extrovert; he looks upon Ivanov as a real friend; he is also a
man of few morals and is said to have provided some of his inuential
friends with highly satisfactory young mistresses._It is not easy to assess '.
Ward's security reliability but we believe he is probably not a man who
- would be actively disloyal but that he is so under the inuence of Ivanovthat it would be most unwise to trust him. -..t 7 ' - ' '._,,__ . _ _
7 " ' " _ - 255. It it quite plain to [BB that ihfghui 1962 the Security Service
'. were keeping a close watch on the activities of Ward and Ivanov and were._i: »- 71: H '"_ 7 '4 s - Ice n the Forei n Oice ve ro rl informed on the matter. 7 W - ° " 8 8 7 " "° 7 t r
T713-Z"? i-n'er_§;T' -1»--v ~'- ac.-=.
_ is-if __." #153
1? " "J-
.,. .-=2»:-1. 7 ..i-it -' ~ ~.7._<_- ; it .:'.._.2._=". ' ' _
. r '1 P -J.' ~ . ' - ,i.-
_ . - y. - t 1 - ___. - , . .. -hr;-_._c.
£1-IIs _ ' 4 L-it-. 7. ' " '
=- 1-1-I-_ 1;-_--st. _~-:1?--;; "f ' 1' -. ..;.- -._, H, ;... _ 1 . -g_- i_- -_-_ .-v,___ ,§- A :7 - - - .. . _ 1 .., V . - --__- i. "2. '.'."t'4T 5' '¢t~'-r92-'-t-;_--.-=;r,- ,,- '~. . - -v"_::v»-iii: LN, - ~. J9-3'» _--_-v-'-Q -7- . - ,_ J.- -s_-;-.- ~71 est--. ~ 1- ~<s=~7-71:1-"~ s.-5
-"""3 I _____ 1: . _ .__ ,..-t ,,,.,_...,._. t. .:.' i.=.::';-;1- :~Z..5'E-'='; .-iii -l='-rt.*>"~.'.--~51? -iuvié----*7 ems. --51% t ,__.'j;w=--_::; -I_fl.5]i- __ -i _92, 1;.77 qt§5..~- f= ;7==~*7-i-st.-_t 7:"=_..'I§_~_;;,.-.-»1f-'-"7-" .27 :'-*>- 7- 7=;,_."7'?--- -**- 5' ., ~-'-*7.-.= ' 'r.¢7- s.
é,.1~- . if -'~7--- 1-_~,_-.-* - ---'._>~_-w -.=- '<__ __ - -.7 ; . ,.__...-_ .¢!'=t " 0 ~.;_.r-_ 7 t-_" ""3 7.<--rats 7
t in. . - If - i . -'.-1.r . ,.=,_, .5;-~__; .1 ;.- _, -7 7, , KL; .. V_ ~-r92_ .3 1- __ g __.__,: _- * __"___ ___ Se:=_~ :-":,?*-£4" =.~_'-- 7 : 7_t_'#j?*f. --~-as -_ _ .~.__. ,1 ,---...__.....,-1. 7 . __;J=;_"'-i {-7.1 ",-'- ...,, ,.. ._.'.-. s-L,. . 1;-'-7'."'.."_a= Y 1' "- " "rs." 7 ..,;'4.-,4 '7 __ . ' - ~ _ 5.. . - '-
. §,_
l"' t
=_n-r;.-.-:~7~_e..;- -~- 85 ~ x
% - _ 9292/
' l - tCit. i
V <
I
i
I
92
4:
I
..m_ _ _ -.- .. ___. _,_ '<' Z .
g i
. ._.:.~..*;3..:- 'e=:.:'~_ ~ 1* - "~ t- ;-_=," . i .~. *2. 1* .-,- -~-..e~..-on -v ;'r;.;, -.-.4 '1'-'~ * '. '- - "=-'_- -_ .= - ,-.1.I_...:.,*1 _ 1- ~',_;-- 11'1": "3" a.I,Tq~v- -- -ti?--"' .~1.-s:-.,...- .- _.- -,5; '-:-" - ' -:.:.4r.'-" - , --re _.¢"L= -.,.__m,_ _-"-~i.=,_xf~_,- - ",'._.%In . I 4v'.i- - an "' I
'_r-be -_._ - -.-'-g-er ___;_
' - - ~ i ' -em .. _. .,, ..._--._ _
flzliéfv 1-v T ' -- =" "' " ¥'v:-171* :"_',;. -'- .' mgtis ' J?-3;-'1's"' . ' - '"~-1" - <'>-'-.,.3i- Kg, .--1 92'-1 r.._:,92 1.1 ,_. one 1' ». .. ,,_~:e_= .---5:? _ 2 ,_. ... s'-- 1---."¬ 92."r. " . 5° ~.;;'~.-t- E.-~ 4!f >' .;,.' -.- a ':.':Pf_,_;.- -i '. - --?,-t-;- - '-7-., - -...;';? ;;e+."-"-'-'l- ~' .-t-_._=-'-.=1:'.*@*-ft-i--w =.~ ... "'-em - -+-;~~~s::-- . .. - ~-. - - T.-lw-"i.-=T~' -"""-"' --if '- =-erlsdieenm
. "»..- .~:-i=~-*""":-T.-If-.'?"¢> -.-<'.-;<,_. .Q1:§"_""*,-,' _.';'_'-ea;--_;,;_ ,I_'§..1.-"-'- - ' ' -'- §-'t.,;;;';;~'_';'>:'_,".,J-, _" - -~-1,7. -92"_l!. _F__ ... tit. re. .- .. "'-;.=-c$-.- .. ._.=
5.#r.+..'.:'~"~=~~t H_ ,:.-rt-1-,.,' -»._;___ ~__;._'.'-_: -- '"" " " ='~:""' -1. .1--T,' " "' .
'.'."-1,-"..&?_§' ~,_ t_ - _~ Y . :9. ._ - -*1 - !92;_ .t - * -'- :_-K"; E-§ . "- ' -'.-,,;g.»;-.¬ . - - ,- ,2-1. .~. . 1:: I 5" =2 , 7. .' . - ..-=:l'"' ' are-'1-."-; =-- -i J: ' _ ..?* _. '.- ..-.-V-"~. -<3 ~-'r- .. _, - . *'=-*-..,_...." _. hf ,.'..._ ;._ __";,*,g1;-1;";,,.7 -__ ~___.. _ -_V -* .. _ 4 .;;_._.__ M5 ;-7--1-_-I ' _ ._.
, 2. ;=-.-.<f=;'* 1 I.
r-_-aEI;"-"'-_ :-47- --. -
:
.-..._._..._.i..._i.__.792 -
~ r/ _, X-~ _.- at i R .t..i. xi . . . .' ' ii i J - "Y "it_"2": .*'"r'1§->£_'§.i "erl'T .'§¢.i'IJ nt;<:r"?! er? -5-'==n"J"3B§§t'l"l.§i§-312:" . _ii in a t I -1:. we-v rrttd 2.::::~'l 1..?t i.m.'it~j;.?. .75} c .-:' , . . . " ._ _ _ Z4<92-. ,~. _ . *"i- _ . =. -1 EL. 1- .' .1 it -311-, nigh £355" ._ _ . ..._.L-___4
- t ctutrrea an-1-we-;:'= -
._ s ..'--at -.... ._
THE SECURITY SERVICE IN 1963-THREE lMP_ORTAN'l"' F :.. . . _ _ .,_,J'" S DECISIONS ' ' ' _' '_
t
! 29th January, 1963-lt-anov Leaves _ .
256. The Edgecombe shooting incident did not aect the Security
directly: but. as I have said earlier, it was the cause of Christine Keeler going
to the newspapers and selling her story, with the consequence that Ward got
very worried. He saw Ivanov on 18th January,'l963, and it is reasonable to
infer that he warned Ivanov that thegstory might break soon. Within a
day or two Ivanov made arrangements to leave England, far earlier than
expected. About 22nd January. 1963, the Security Service got to know that
he was leaving on 29th January, I963. and he in fact lefton that day. 1
> _ __ r H . _ . 1 ' .. .¢ "'. -
ii! Mr. Prottuno sees the Head oi the Service
JI. Meanwhile the imminent -pa-hiidty had got to the in-"s oi
Mr. Profumo. In the evening of 28th January, 1963. at 5.30 p.rn. Lord Astor
had alerted Mr. Profumo to the danger. And immediately Mr. Profumo asked
the Head of the Security Service to come and see him, and he did so at
6.45 p.m. The purpose of Mr. Profumo as at any rate it appeared to the
Head of the Security Service! was to see if he could do anything to stop
publication of Christine Keelers story in the newspapers. He gave the_
Director-General an account of his ,acquaintanceship with Ward in the course
of which he had met Ivanov and Christine. He described the bathing party
at Cliveden. He said that he had visited Wards at in Wimpole Mews on a
nnmmr of occasions, generally when there had been parties there, hnt once
or twice he had found Christine there alone. He had written little notes to her
but they were harmless. He referred to the Shooting incident and added that
he understood that Christine was a drug addict. He said that he had been
warned that the papers had got a story in which she alleged an association
with him and might also bring in Ivanovs name saying that he was a Russian
spy.
258. it/Ir. Profumo said that he remembered that, when Sir Norman
Brook had cautioned him about Stephen Ward on 9th August, 1961! Si:
Norman had hinted that the Security Service might try to get Ivmov intoits employment. It occurred to the Head of the Security that
Mr. Profumo hoped that the Security Service had Ivanov in flggloy;
and that they might, in the interest of security, ask the n jot to
run the story.! The Head of the Security Service told Mr. ' -.-' - they
had not enlisted Ivanov for their work, so Mr. Profumo did I, » -- 1 the
point. But the Head of the Security Service formed the irnpreon that
Mr. Profumo's object in asking to see him was to get a D notice or something
to stop publication, which was a vain hope. 92 e
86 ..5, _ -_ _ ,
-_._.-... ._.. r
»»- ,#_':_ »r~~ 4- 92-______l.:-zil _- .*'=:*'92=r-""".=t.-:i'.:g;.!"r-_'-='J,: . -4 j~f=-3*- .»,=,w-gig-........-_ . . = ~3=.._ cf, -. . Ff, . ~t2;*" _ ;_-g-__~;;_92 ,:§"'f" ;___Hu-
._ _ _ . F6.
A ix _.
' i vi, "" ;..~ _; . - _.
l - '~*-'-==.'..-.=- "*- i-1: .- _.
. ' '-»'- --4-er-.-. c , - .-e.-'_" "~=..-* .-.- 1=* -. .'¢.=- ré'U-1:--;¬~="-inf? "1<fi -.=.~-. . it --¢a*:*-~*--itm ~ ;_._ ls. 2,, . - -. . .._ " = -_ -*5--"» .~$3,;-is ";"Tie~-1 .-_..e.;~ »"=7'";*_§***'--!-';i*~e',#?;-;92==*~>.-" '--"'1'! 's= * -Xv-1 t'3"*'-.-.':..; -' - . 5": _":'}'.-7. -'e"', 11;? _'.'§r-Jr!¥"'..:f?-'-'i..£- .;.;e"-.--r=-:";;i-- ;;,..g..,.,.;..* -"* "**-"=-*;'-*=- - e -W. .;-*-. -e ,- -..-.1.-;.¢s.-*' --1 . = .. ~ -sag ' -i ' *i=e.~;-.--F Fer. .. -.;_*"s:r.:=~1:t; c -'. _ "r-- _ ' . __*'-~ -F":
-._;~.-.=1~.- ere-as-2 W"-7,.-r. -1-_.;. - ' »-1." .-23,1.-»e: ._-' _,.-¢
""5. --.'- - Ti. ~ r-.- .l'i-"3". - ?§¢*.»14:7 - -. ;.v:-;'¢.e..s'-- @v'.: c, -:_,<~-~_ - _,- - 1,,-> *" -. _1_-.;:~_r;P"§_'§:r._ -1* :-In-. .'" = *-.:::§- ' Z.-' j.-:.:..*,"@=":!r,*.i--7;-*- 3-L"-"' .' -*'_.'."'~.-._- ,. ._ __:>.,_..--,.... .. ' _- -=? Zr: r
1:
ti '- 3
._4v.-:-'-_~:_a=-- -~ ~<%
1.
I5
u
I92 -
it
C iii! Report! ltd mes the Senrlee of mi." Prole!.. - -_ _- , = - Cl n ':_ .A.;; " r. t-1f_'__O=.H259. On zatn and zeta January, 1963. more reports were
the Security Service from a secret source considered reliable! shod,
and his activities. They learnt now for the rst time that Mr.
said to have an association with Christine Keeler. They were told that Ward
had stated that the girl had been visited several times by Mr. John Profumo
and by the Russian Assistant Navai Attaché, Captain Ivanov: that
Mr. Profurno subsequently had a prolonged allair with Christine Keeler and
two very amorous letters signed by him had been given by her to the Sunday
Pictorial : that the Russians were so certain that a scandal was brewing that
lvanov had been told to leave on 29th January, 1963. The Security Service
already knew that lvanov was leaving on 29th January. 1963.! It should be
noticed that Stephen Ward said on several occasions that he told the Security
Service of the association as long ago as 12th July, I961, but I am satised
he did not tell them anything about it and they learnt it now for the rst
time. J
{iv - "nary, 1963--At: important '92-"..e.'.a...==~=
260. On the morning of lst February, I963, these reports were considered
by the Head of the Security Service with some of his senior ollicers: and he
came to this important decision: It was not within lire proper scope of the
Security Service to inquire into these matters. These were his reasons:
' ! He thought it was possible that Christine Keeler had been
Mr. Profumos mistress. But he did not think it was the function of
the Security Service to nd out whether she was his mistress or not.
It was a purely personal side of his life which the Security Service
were not concerned to look into.
! It would be a security matter if Mr. Profun-to was sharing a mistress
with a Russian Naval Attachéif it meant that there was a ow of
secret information passing through her from one to the other. But
Ivanov had now left the country. So any present risk had gone. And
there was no reason to suppose that any information had passed from
Mr. Profumo through the girl. Mr. Profumo, whatever might be his
private life, was a wholly reliable Secretary of State for War and it
was not to be supposed that he had given away secret information.
The only security point was the possible leakage of information
through Stephen Ward to Ivanov. As to this, Mr. Profurno had been
warned by Sir Norman Tiroolt and there was no reason to think that
he had not heeded the wanting. S " . '
261. So on lst February, 1963, the I-lead of the Security Service gave this
important ruling: - y ' _
Until further notice no approach should be made to anyonejn the
Ward galere. or to any other outside contact in respect of it. If are
approached. we listen only." _ . I .! z _ _ T. . .- A
r' ';_~:.' * --1 §i
92
-tS._ .._ _
-%92_..~; {:..|I
-~ 2 r *%j__ _92
Principal Private Secretary told him of a call by at senior ne.WlP92P3.o1l=lBi92'0
whohadsaidthatastoryhadbeensoldbyagirltoanewspewwnditwould include passages in which she was involved with and
in which the Russian Assistant Naval Attache also gured. Uqtty
Director-General said it was recognisably the same story as they a-lleltIy_ha_d :i
and itwas agreed that therst stepiwasto see Mr. Profumo and aeeittherej;
was any truth in it. The Private Secretary said he would tell the Chief Whip__;_i_ "Y. __ _ . i*____
and the Prime Minister. Full details are given in Chapter VIII, paragraphs.
263. It is to be noted that the object of the Prime Minister's Private
Secretary was simply to tell the Security Service about the call of the newspaper
executive and to get any information which might be useful for him the?
Private Secretary! to report to the Prime Minister. His object was not to ask
the Security Service for a report as some might think from what the Prime
Minister said in the House of Commons on 17th I une. I963 Hansard_ col. 56!.
The Security Service did not understand tint they were to make a report."
Nor indeed that anything more was required of them at that stage. ; .
,. -,>_.92 -' v-In: :1; _- | .v<.__-,- , .
' ' - 1 - vi! 4th February, l963=An'othcr Important Deckioll S -
264. Meanwhile one of the oicers of the Security Service had prepared
a minute which came before the Head of the Security Service on 4th February,
1963. It is lled. as he told me. with prophetic insight. It is of much importance3.ndIsetitoutinfull:'__'_ . p ' . S
If a scandal results from Mr. Pi-ofumos association with Christine
Keeler, there is likely to be a considerable political rumpus in the present
climate produced by the Radclilfe Tribunal. If in any subsequent
inquiries we were found tohave been in possession of this infer"-nation
about Profumo and to have taken no action on it, we would, I arn sure,
be subject to much criticism for failing to bring it to light. I suggest that
this information be passed to the Prime Minister and you might also like
to consider whether or not, before doing so, we should interviewMiss Keeler. ' ' _ :',_ Q ' ' ' _
265. The Head of the Security Service considered this minute and
discussed it too with his Deputy. They appreciated the point that if a scandal
results from Christine Keelefs association with Mr. Protunio there is likely
to be a considerable political rumpus-but they thought that that was
essentially a political matter which was now in the hands oi the politicians
and not the concern of the Security Service. They knew that Admiralty
House were in possession of the story and had decided to confront
Mr. Profiimo with it. The Head of the Security Service felt that the action
which the oicer was suggesting was leading them outside the proper
function of the Security Service and that he ought to pull him back a bit. So
he issued a rm instruction not to go into it: V '" --
The allegations there referred to are known to Admil House.
No inquiries on this subject should made by tts.
Thus the important decision was made that the Security kviee not12c»:21.!.4 ' ' "t : - p F
pursue any investigation in thematter. In particular they should not interview-
ChristineKeeler._, _ . ,_92_._;__p A _- . s .._.88 .
ho , . r-':.,*..i'. - e -- -m "' - ' _'
.- _ 7*-ah.
. i .i
F7 ' ' 1-
-- .::-" __ _ "'*- I __ T-E"" -
» . """ i ~-
. "- . ' P
..._. -_=.'7;,?;;.__ __ ' $13.; - _-
'- ' 5. ' 7" __-. 1 ' '. "1';"'j , ' i l, _._ 1'. v
. _ 1,;-.:. '" --: ';t - _. ' *-' -- '. 1' "- * ~ ~-..,,92- i - - .=-.»--3 1 "1: '" ' '-+ "1'
""_ ff.-~: r =. 5"; _ .' "j-_="'5<e
mp-LF 1.... s e .- .. ' _ -i... -
1:-4-H
. @~a;....t--'1, -.4 - _ " -Av7 _ B '>' : - - _ "" ; 4-:55? - - -Kim-I '1-I-r-r-_ an 1 1- "" ' '~ .--?".'§§'E I-"-.£+' +.. "F. -H --..' » t e;*e~ t :.:~'-"r. - 1 .
~ ~ ...-
--e-.
'- - - 1 -- .7' - ..'I_§_1_ ~.,.- _ _ -' ,m. '2' -1---A P "F ..;_ $_,___V c. l--I~a--9 H _---_ l t-_- -S" "_,_ ._. .
--»_--'g3_*-K1 , .--;. -~-_ as-.. -.* -we__ -J '
e x92 _ ~5_,,~=e»-=- I ta. _ ¢_.. i -;!"§ "" H --
-e - 1? -E "Q-" ""f. *?;:r*-.t<~*'. - p" §1"i%-'l.~.~-'--..Y-'-s_#!- ' 5;-.. rg-a.---i--IQ-9E-J---- "" "P-.1"-.".-.~.-- '.t2==-'-':.,-,,: .";'..1*_;.;. "__,.
._,_ ~'--= -.,- -- ' -z.»-. . -=-. ~'-/-. a 21.; ».-.'.'.'~:;;.: -- " i.'*"§-=»-1*"-= _.=-- -;=.1=§.,,.. - ~-11'. F .-=.-' ->--ea--/1 '-P -- --_;._. ,__-__; , -. .. ____{,______. ,_y,£_.- -'1 "=3 :--. -r~ '' .- .1-9-' -5;: ;i5F""'2-_"._92 '5-.1 .4 . . _ L-_-_-_-e '».-.3'-_-.__-;:,_ sf? a _ _-.j_ -',- ;.._. ."_'-5%->t~ 1 . P
' -i~.---'- '7=t":'E'-'?- '1'2--- -_+- . u_,_,_ ¢-S"w- ~ 7'-2-1-*' -T-f' .1. -',&-L15-»<. _. ' ,_c"=".$g';:'§¢e;- -._ _, ' ._.- . ' -!".".q"§5¥9-'_..-_. #1 . -.; y|;,§ ";I'.,,;'..., ._,._ . -_., _ _..._ H ___ ,,_;_ V _ _ ._-W.-'i<.':'-_ .'_."" '_I,_; 7: :1.-.~ "3 ' - '--'.:"r "' ' ' viI, 1. .__ o- -. ... -»___-5.".-__",|-.».~-_92.-->~a..¢._..e..».
r "" ii.
-__ai.I#_':'..|T --C --s
we/
O
_ . _p '__ vii!_'m .1-mm-1" 266. On 7th February,-1963. the Commander of Special
to see the Security Service with the report of the Marylebone oi
5th February. 1963, This report showed that the police had been if Q-
Christine Keeler on 26th January that there was an illicit association betwem
herself and Mr. Profumo, that she had met Captain Ivanov on a number of
oxasions. and that Stephen Ward had asked her to discover from
Mr. Profumo the date on which atomic secrets were to be handed to Western
Germany. Further. that the police had .a!so. been told a good deal by
Stephen Ward on 5th February. The statements are set out in full in
Chapter V1. paragraphs 80 and 87.! The matter was discussed by the
Commander of Special Branch with a senior oicerof the Security Service
who had been at the previous discussions and whoknew of the decision
that had been made!. They decided that there was no security interest involved
such as to warrant any further steps being taken. The papers were put before
the Deputy Director-General. whoagreed with the decision and wrote this .minute: ' " " -' ' l "
No action on this at present.b'Please keep me informed. of anydevelopments. ' _ T If W , .
viii! Did the Security Service Err?
267. That decision was of crucial importance: for it meant that the
important statements of 26th January and Sth February. _l963. never got
any further. They never got to the Prime Ministerior the Prime Minister:
Private Secretary or to any Minister until 29th May, 1963. The Home
Secretary had some information on 27th March. 1963, which I have
mentioned in paragraph 196. The question is whether the Security Service
erred in not putting them forward. Qpon this point I would set out these
matters for consideration. . . . ' '. . J . .
! The Security Service were not greatly impressed by Christine:
statement about Ward's request for information about atomic bombs.
There was no suggestion that Christine Keeler had complied with the
request, or that Mr. Profumo had ever given her any such information.
The only security interest would be a possible charge against Steph
Ward under Section 7 of the Oicial Secrets Act, 1920,, for
endeavouring to persuade Christine Keeler to commit an oenoe
against the Act. But such a charge would be dependent on Christine
Keelers testimony and it was very doubtfui whether this was
suiciently trustworthy to warrant a prosecution.
! There was at this point th February, 1963! no security risk. By this
time Captain Ivanov had left the country. They had I10 reason ini doubtthe loyalty of Mr. Profumo. True it is they might
doubts as to his moral behaviour-for he might have hid _ '
association with Christine Keelerbut that was not a -=- 1 r . ' .
to report. It might have political implications but it had - -" '
any security interest. It might have been desirable to warn the Hit
Minister about it, had he not known of it. But Admiralty House knew
of it. So did the Chief Whip. And Mr. Profumo had been seen, They
had not been told the result. Nor had they been asked for a report.
'92 as --
. K11 92 -~
Jan-.
in-II
t1 -
** A e ' 1 " " *~e* ~' ~ . .~
av ____
--=5'==='-".2-.3-__92
1 oh. .92. N _
I -' 4-"
! The Security Service had told
of 26th September. 1952, thattheir ta
ii as e whole, that they were strictly
' and that no enquiry was to be _
Government Department unless theypublic interest was st stake. bearing on Mawhole see paragraph 238!. --J ~r -1»... ~.
zsa. 1 think that Directive explains the three irnpotttlnl decisions at theSecurity Service at this juncture. The Directive is imperative that they are
not to meddle with snyiing which is not clearly and am-;l1%y their business
as s security matter: and having come to the conclusion, as they _di_d. that,
there was no security risk involved. they did not think it right to pursuti_
the matter further. I cannot blame them for this decision. The one point of
diiculty is whether, having been sent for to Admiralty House on lst February,
they ought not to have followed it up by their going on their or-into Admiralty House on 7th February when they received the police report:'.
the Lord Chancellor in his inquiry held that they should have done. and in
failing to do so, they hart concunitted an error of judgment. But he did not
have the Directive before him. and having regard to the strict terms of the
Directive I would not myself nd them at fault in not going to Atimiraity
House.
ix! An Unprecedented Situation S _
269. Nevertheless the fact remains that the police reports of 26th January
and 5th February. 1963, did not reach any Minister until 29th May. 1963:
and it has been suggested that they should have done. 1f the Security Serviceis not to blame, who is to blame? 7 ' 6 ' i . 1 i
270. I think the explanation is that this was an unprecedented situation
for which the machinery of government did not cater. It was, in the view 0!
the Security Service, not a case of a security risir, hut of rnorai misbehaviour
by a Minister. And we have no machinery to deal with it. '
' _ xl Subsequent Events _ - ' _ '
iii. After the three important decisions of lat, 4 .th February,
=t.-i=lR: "':..:w -~ -92 -
-__v ' -K __-1-I- 1|-I-'in-n|- -' ' ' "'- L_&§=*I---- ' '
A J
-rag e at 1 1-.-vi--11 ,1:-t:="r;:.'-.-'|';t.* gr "r'-sic rt: as L'.!;nr;_=:1' '- - .:ro_£i.,i:51:>
92-_ :. .1. -_-ti: _ " 1. .. ' -.' .- I" .-- :3 rI.t.ul QT:
ADEQUACY OF C0~0PERA'l'l0N -- E:-"it In
- -, '_v-. i jg; __-_ ,1 -- 1, '- f..J'»' ».
2?3. No one can understand the nature of the co-operation between the
Security Service and the police forces unless he realises: ' V" ' '
I! The Security Service n ma country is not established by Stamte nor
. is it recognised by Common Law. Even the Oicial Secrets Acts do
not acknowledge its existence. The members of the Service are, in the
eye of the law, ordinary citizens with no powers greater than anyone
: else. They have no special powers of arrest such as the police have.
No special powersof search are given to them. They cannot enter
premises without the consent of the householder, even though they
may suspect a spy is there. If a spy is eeing the country, they cannot
tap him on the shoulder and say he is not to go. They have. in short.
no executive powers. They have managed very well without them. We
would rather have it so, than have anything in the nature oi a secret
. police", _ _' ' - T T, ' _ ,
! The_Security Service in this country is comparatively small in numbers.
In_ some other countries there is to be found a massive organisation
with representatives dispersed throughout the land. Whereas in this
' country it is and remains a relatively small professional organisation
charged with the task of countering espionage, subversion and sabotage.
! Those absences they are not deciencies!-the absence of powers
and the absence of numbersare made up for by the close
co-operation of the Security Service and the police forces. In
particular, in London, with the * Special Branch " of the Iviciropolitatr
Police and in the country with the Chief Constables. If an arrest is
to be made, it is done by the police. If a search warrant is sought, it
is granted to a constable. The police alone are entrusted with executive
power.
274. I have had evidence which satises me that there is excellent
co-operation between the Security Service and the police forces. For instance,
I have been present at the nal stage of a combined operation by which a
Soviet intelligence officer was tracked on a journey across the country and
his every movement was covered. And I have seen the close collaboration
which goes on when a case of espionage is suspected. The Security Service
makes all the initial investigations. relying on its technical resources and
specialised eld force. But as soon as an arrest is possible. the police are
called into tfonsultation and from this point onwards both forces work as a
team. This is absolutely essential at the crucial stage e.g., when a secret
document is handed over by a collaborator to a spy} and an arrest is
imminent. Precision of timing is everything. The arrest is made by k police
and thereafter the case for the prosecution is in their hands. two
organisations work in the closest co-operation until the trial is ovet.&'ilg
the hearing the Security Service tries to remain in the background. This is
to keep their ' cers anonymous and their techniques secret. The recent
notorious spy es cases show no lack of co-operation ; and should be
91 a
r _ .. ,K- 92__,-
J' 92
i
I
--in:--:-aw »~ K":-- i, -;¢~ e _ *:-__ '-Iiili *_ _ -'
,1
.~..
4 .92.
ft -~ y
regarded as an outstanding achievement. rather than as I
5",» v ", ll"; .- - QM
27$. Inasmuch as most cases take place in the metropolis, in keurity
Service, in their co-operation with the police, work mostly with M Special
Branch: but in the country. there is excellent co-operation also.. ,| I
276. Turning to the present case. it aords a good illustration of
well the torces co-Operate. S ' _ ' _
! On 31st July, 1961, when the Security Service wished to know
something of Stephen Ward's activities, they sought the aid of Special
Branch.. . , ' 92 . . . ' ,
! In April, 1962, when Special Branch received rep-erts that Stephen
Ward was sympathetic to Communism. they passed them to the
SecurityServico. , 7:; _ x
! As soon as reports came in of the Edgecombe shooting on
15th December, 1962. Special Branch informed the Security Service. .
! As soon as Detective-Sergeant Burrows of the Metropolitan Police
got Christine Keelers statement on 26th January, 1963, Special Branchwere informed. There was an unfortunate failure Qppo-ordinate within
the police force see paragraph 85!. But on 7th ebruary, 1963 as
soon as the Sth February report was received!. Special Branch went
to the Security Service with the report and they agreed together on
what was to be done. The decision may have been right or wrong.
but there was no failure in co-operation.
277. The degree 0! co-operation which is essential between the two
services seems to be a further reason why the ministeriai responsibility
should be in one Minister. namely, the Home Secretary.
T
4
t
u..._ ; ti.
,,
' is-7'-'
-Yxésr -
'92
92 _
r; 1*_§;£=;-57*. », ' -1 » $1 6
.9 fM_ _ . _3l-92_ .-1. -1i-1-1-=~ ' " " _ " W";"' A
.. -
,»' " '- - .,_Y__ V _.._._.__ __7k _, -'
-- .- - 1, P-*.-.~eu_~¢-1"-:1 _I '7?,4r3_',}~92',",-" ., r -.., 1 1,-'4 -4 ?f, _ . _ ;... -.r"I. .. 1 , _. qg-___. .~.~'.1=-'.--4--_.=m»:.~:.1:*:?'--" - ~ ..' '1 - - -"'=*' "1-.t{ _* "*-- '* " K J~_-_-v' 5;, ->-. 2':-1 = _-_ -i- A . z -1"""- ., iii-.~5-§"£-. --,_ . "1_._ ,__ 6- J _ ' i V,.=---~'.- .¢~-."""n ¢ .¢ :_'_~_ -1.: - . _ .v '1.- - -_X1, ,'__.; --r
- ;_-_;_;, . .1 If 1 . _L,» F _ .-- 7- ~~ "' - "_ =-4;»:_.-.11: ¥'J92:-1..- $1 ~-_»-e- ' f- =-1 - ' I_f_ g92.'.§=T'_; '7 *."¬"'3$_ _ _
1--1:5;-1--=- " --"'-1» -Q,_' -._-=1,-'5 #3; -} .1 _?:2 ,- -.0-.f..E"" -_~~' , »___ ;3_ ""-.L.-53 '1" " . ."7- =9-' =-'- 1; ' .1 4 ~ ' , VH7
I-His?.11 _ -_=' .135 .~'-.-3?-. ~ .- =1. *1?
.
- Mn'1 L *1,.1-..11..-...._ ..-.-~'. - .- Q _t1:,,_ _,..v'j$.._,, 1 _,._._....,.-- .-
-, _ ._ _ ,
- "";1# 4&'1;i': .. 1&1 . . ; ;,-1-,;;,,,11:'_:'. 1; -"_"_;. ' '1-. "";;Q3*-i?:"¬&--*Fll;3*,§§§§,?'4- -12 5**"
- .*i?avé;:- T-4J:§. ;-.*f:,':==:':; _ -¢ 1Z;33i. _.. - ,. -_,..-_., __-_.wd» H _ ~11.
-_';:_,.__ -1 é-N;_._ _ 1-$5. 1 ~_,.,,i__--.. I-....r~. . . w -1.1 --;~"I.;~t.+i B ?<:,,-_!," _ <1"?-'"' $.,~,;_;- _ -~ -..- -, -__. ,. ._
¢;'='- " f-L=-92**'~>}'**"'-"':-'¥'- K»-1. -21:15-E1-r*" "' ' --:1" » 1- - - '-' _. _L.."<'- ;~_- ._ T.'::~.__-'1-,*».'.._ 7" x ? **_'@~l._ I. ,_ .- - -- _ .- '-I J'_-. w--1 -.
>- -_~9292i-"I».'1- .1 .- __ _ M , ,_,
r*"
._...aa.-=-"f~:.T- --»- »
|92 - -
1
-, __J I .
PART 111
WHERE LIES THE RESPONSIBILITY?
1" -s .- ___A _-@ , mi i 1 ,__ g~ IF
-II-.'.
I ., ,-_;§;92. V
w-is
-
I 4
_'*_»'
*5;
Q
.|. 3
.:_. _ _ _ _... 3 -
- , . _
,_.s__' . _-.-.1--.1 -- 1; . 3* '1! -=- -' ? .._- .92 2; . 'l 3 Hf- "4" -,-';f'-*5 4 4-' =» ' .- - -- -,.;-,,:__' __,,;;j,.;__;'T'...:..-..... '_,{-_,-;_=-,- -fr;'. = ----' ;_- ,-a V ';_-0:.-_.e' ;.'. _o~- r I;- - ' 4F.;:; .r;t.¢_, --. -._ gr... ~» i.=92-'-r--"7' . "-'2' '- - __" . -":2 - ,~ T '3. .. _ .. .
as -1*?-"""-==o* as-r ..-e
7 1n,4i~.-qp;q,.1n. "-it-v"'-" -
_t _' -*- -'--- ,+-_:.:.. .'1"';" ': .
. .. .. ss.-rs :1, ... .. ..- .;=t_g,53, as _' '-t'1-';".;.»~.o"'l"'hr..'_"-i'""" I - ""'°
ft-_ F P p ~*'_
as A _ J: ~ >l . '7_.",;. -1- Q - .,. : ' '-e -. - ._ _--§~»_' . -}.";t_--~'YT:*',~"?- -;- _<3-. ' ---..._e_.,--_-=-- -1'
g,,} . ,4!-" -_ -, ."- r- ''_-._.¢ _ a.. " '. K1 '--f___:',;1,"___.l ' _' K._.' C. ' ~ _ -- - .5. ;- 4. ~1 - .'L_. 1'? '- ".'%'.'-,-
'~ 1 r-I.-. -s.:_.§_n2.31:-=.- '-._- .__ -....-3
, _»-.
..-r-.,.-_ .,_._. I __ §; |;_¬.~re|----s._- -;; _- . -egg;'3; --92.r-'.92- 1.... .|'{_'_. - - . . _t-st-_... .-- .- .. _._.11. i -92-; . ' 1- ' '- '-.-; -. ' . '- - - ' - "1; .. w. _es-<-.
- _..; ' . ._ _,_ ..92_r:v; -.1,-_. . ____. »~cs£--* as L. ._.,,_»_- . .-,_~ . 1, -- i' .-=- -1...,-e-. ,- ~ .-
t '
,_..-m:;-f-:aT-.- L-T-"F
-fer! ..
~< 92 I
/i . - 5
- i
55/92
-_-ih _ _ av--A
-.1.-V I. f ' " '<1r.' -" l 2? '. if." .1": " f,;:E:in: 2!
1' .- . .~_ -- CHAPTER XXII "~ '1. .- .__,:b 'teil"i_1§:;_" is
*= -c =. 1 : -P -pl ' : -a * ~ ".5; ""?.-:.'";
THE PRESS, THE POLICE AND THE SECURITY
278. At the close of these two Peri-8. the question must be asked: Where
lies the responsibility for what occurred? - ~ -. A. -. - ~ '
279. The primary responsibility must. of course, rest with Mr. Profumo:
First, by associating with Christine Keeler as he did: Secondly,iand worse,
by telling lies about it to colleagues and deceiving them: Thirdly, and
gravest, by the falsity of his solemn statement to the House of Commons.
280. But there is a question as to the secondary responsibility. Ought
the Security Service to have reported to a Minister the information they had
on 7th February. 1963? Or the police to have reported their information,
particularly the statements of Christine Keeler on 26th January, and 4th and
5th April, 1963? Lastly, ought the Sunday Pictorial to have disclosed the
Darling letter? Or the story that Christine Keeler had told them? It may
very well be that if any such material had been placed before the Prime
Minister or the Home Secretary, or indeed any Minister, Mr. Profumo would
not have succeeded in deceiving them. The Ministers would not have accepted
his assurances. He would have resigned earlier and never made his personal
statement. Let me take these in the reverse order. . p D _
i! The Newspaper
281. It is noteworthy that the senior executive of another newspaper did
go to Admiralty House on lst February, 1963, and gave them information on
the ground that it was a security matter. It may be asked: Ought not the
newspaper itself to have done so, the newspaper which actually held the
Darling letter and had Christine's story? They were under no legal duty,
of course, but was it not their public duty? If the information had disclosed
a present and grave risk, allecting the very security of the country. no one
would doubt that it would have been their duty to tell those in authority. So
also if it pointed clearly to a Minister being, at the present time, a security
risk. it might well have been their duty. But the case does not come as high as
that. The Darling letter was, as the newspaper said, " effusive, but not
conclusive ". They were not even sure it was genuine. And they did not know
how far Christine Keeler was trustworthy. Stephen Ward had told them that
what she was saying about Mr. Profumo yvas quite untrue. In any case it was
18 months ago. It was a story to be told, not a danger to be averted. That is.
if the story could properly be published at all. As it was, they decided not to
publish it. They changed the policy of the paper and decided not to publish
that type of story. I do not think the news,-saw was in any way at halt in
keeping the story and the letter to themselves, as they did, until after
Mr. Profumo resigned. After all, many knew the letter existed. No otI_',ever
asked to see it.
ii! The Police
282. It was unfortunate that the police did not take a full statement
from Christine Keeler on lst February, 1963, as arranged, or a day or two
later. It might have led to further inquiries and brought everything to a head
92 95 "' '
'1!
~1--."F
1
92
- . 7"
5
s s
"TB-I§¢"=i"=.-nt;:...-*- 1.1" . ' T 1"- _ -_-;__..=;s .1-.1 - -5-'§=*-""" -.1- "~ -- -- ' '.= .. -T ..
-1Z'.'T-'- I .~>--=--- """" -'9.;;-,7 .'- - . iv?-*= 1 an-av _
4-"i'r."." "--2; ,_ '4.-.-...- -.1 .. _." _ ;_ -i"-'r=-'3'."-'Z"' .; - -1==*..._ .- . -1. - -" " _ _; é »~. ,- e._ . ___._ . Q
".'~'.=.:P =. #' f'_- L-._-,4 .- - ';1: tr==._, .. . .§;.14 --» .._--5., R ,,,_=»»t''IdVL"'~ -=5,. if -%- 1*
"' ~r'-q--- - -.;. . 4- ~,-__'-.-er- '- 4..-._., ' '5-- <- . ,-HE-at ';" '" :14; ~*-~ '-<'._ '---- .~;.~."'~'-""--.- - * *. ==.,+--A ~ _ .~-..
-.;=..' __"'r -.,__¢=-t-:.=-is---*7. ~ .335-3_'Q . ,3. A 3'. ,..
Iv-*in.u7-1-tr_, ..'.'* _. .» p . i -; - »I=-- -. s
92 r- " INF ,1; "I- _ *:.-.:n'* <-=. " -':__..k;.f_-rt I , 4.. v_ _ .7 S "* ¬k"""'
~ r 333533: ---_;_--._ -e_;-_'_--r..=¢-92.__t,_. .1. --<.- _ : " ;
1" -4. - - £2"
' I .n l.- " m .
":~ ; .!::'f:.'. l..<-V - ."":--:. i, in Pi".-,+v :1. _ . ____,..-, ., ..__. _____, H, _'_'J' ' ._ - ..-._::t:..-="_ "_. ;__._, __ _;__- - -»s. ._ _+__ A. _ . . i .~-.@;.__. _ - sh"-"* 5"-_--M_ - __._ 2 '
..n» _--n M -1. - . _*-:'~::e.:."'r:¥" I '. 5% !_": 1" _'-'5-0%.,"-7 "I: ' .""i"~'-'!" §f- -v '- *-';_+ _'.'--*7
' erI! - ;. ,9
--_-1: .l..,:_r -. ... .1-- ---- _ ._ . - . _. .' I:-v---. I""'.l;' "' * - Bf-._ 2'. . ix". *3 '._.'."-.---=-t-~ -= I- --» In .- . . -1V -_ »*-<5-: .... -- " . _ -.'.'"".1 . .A
1 ,.,9_.»{ _
"I7 1-. '2
_ -_._ _.
i
I1
1- -inn-1-"4
'7 S "4f"-r " ._ I!
l92._. 92
4 '-92 - ,-V4' '-. '?.-I '
earlier. It might, for instance, have led to an earlier prosecution
an earlier discovery of the truthabout Mr. Profumo. Thi
failure in co-ordination for which no one individual Clef _
-1,.-.~.,,-ta-tel-1 as}. B-at save tori rt-.n=-..~= n-.4-.'responsibilities. The substance of Christine Keelefs story on at
the Security Service on 7th February. I963," and thmdllli the
responsibility passed to the Security Service. The police did eventually take
a statement from Christine Keeler on 4th and 5th April. 1963 while they
were inquiring into the case against Ward!. This disclosed further details
of moral misbehaviour by a Minister, but added nothing on the security
issue. And it was not their duty to disclose a moral misbehaviour. The
police are not to report upon private lives, even ot Ministers. In any case
the substance of the story had been passed to the Security Service as long
agoasith February, 1963. ,, g; I. , ._,.. A ,_' i, ,
-. . '- ' " "51? :*. ..
1. ' .-' ' ' iii!TlI¢5I=¢IIl1!5¢I'!i=¢,-.:;..'-
' ,. - ,1 -:-.
283. I have already considered in detail their position. I need only
repeat that they work under a strict directive to conneythemselves to danger
to the Realm as a whole. Once they came to the conclusion that there was
no security interest in the matter, but only moral misbehaviour in a Minister,
they were under no duty to report it to anyone. They did come to that
conclusion. They came to it honestly and reasonably and I do not think
they should be found at Iaulc
1|-.=:..:.;/- }-@
, . -. Weenooletolllane? :. . 1
If it be asked, why then, was no'one to blame except Mr. Profumo my
answer is that none of the governmental services was to blame. As I have
said before, this was an unprecedented situation for which the machinery oi
government did not cater paragraph 270!. We are, ll suggest rightly. so
anxious that neither the police'nor the Security Service should pry into
private lives, that there is no machinery for reporting the moral misbehaviour
of Ministers. Certainly the police must not go out to seek information about
it. Nor must the Security Service. But even if it comes incidentally to their
knowledge, as it did here, there is no machinery laid down for reporting it.
It is perhaps better thus. than that we should have a ' police state '. If that
be so. then when a Minister is guilty of moral misbehaviour and it gives
rise to scandalous rumour, it is for him and his colleagues to deal with
the rumour. as best they can. It is their responsibility and no one else's.
:_ wt '
"';=§l"' r -._»~§ .
..1.'.':£ A
e
-».92.-I; c. "
:-- 1, '
. ~v ""_';-r-_~ p -
96
_ ~-_...--.--v--- --~-
J
l
?
1
c
l r _
1i
I. L i _
Q
4
P-- P2-.-P _..-_.'_. .--:--'- __ 2: __;_e"__ __},':;;1'.."_*,"_ , _ v.-s--q --~n.n~'~ "'..
--1_..'..9292-';L'}92_'. __-;.,_ i§'_._?Tf.:':-_;,u- __~7 . _=' '
we e. - . J: ..=-'.-svtfe *1._ __.'_~|. _ _ ._ _,_ _ ___" ; " "_ .~-...=i-", - ~. 1. - -to-!|_ - -~_- _-I ___ -my _ _92 I _»'7"-_-.=?5.-":*,;§*..i:-=Ii-A-~ -- _ > , '_;'I,,-a-.»'¢~ -. .. ' - 'u .+'-».+=-hi--s.=-r» -.-=-~<»'- '-i .. *'92.";"~I§"."~1J.j§' _-_=:'<"'Z_~>" " "'1"-:2 . ._r,.,._,,,,, -iv.
' 28d. This leaves only the Ministers. What is their
The case is reduced to this: there were persistent rumours about Mr. Hill.
the crux of which was that he had an immoral association with Christine
Keeler. The Ministers knew that this was crux of the matter. for it was the
point on which they concentratw their attention. If these rumours were
aecting the condence which Parliament reposed in Mr. Profumo or the
Government, then it was for the Prime Minister and his colleagues to deal
with them. The Prime Minister did not himself see Mr. Profumo but he left
it to the Chief Whip and the Law Oicers. These Ministers inquired of
Mr. Profumo whether there was any impropriety in his association with
Christine Keeler. He repeatedly assured them that there was no impropriety.
and in the end they were satised that he was telling the truth. And. on being
told by them, the Prime Minister was satised too. All were clearly acting
with the utmost honesty and good faith: their integrity is beyond question.
285. Nevertheless, there are two matters which Parliament may wish to
consider further: _
a! Did the Ministers ask themselves the proper question? They
concentrated their attention on the matter of immorality. And the
one question they asked themselves was whether Mr. Profurno had
in fact committed adultery: whereas the proper question may have
been: was his conduct, proved or admitted, such as to lead ordinary
people reasonably to believe that he had committed adultery? if that
were the proper question the answer was clear. His conduct was such
as to lead to that belief. And no further inquiries would help. {See
generally paragraph 181 !.!
possible, I should have thought. for them to ask the newspaper to
let them see it, or, better sti1L to get Mr. Profumo to ask them. After
all. it was his copyright. Whether the newspaper would have complied,
we do notknow. They were never asked. If the Ministers had seenV H Z l an ' b! Ought further inquiries to have been made? The Ministers did not
?}_ _ ' ;_ know of the statements made to the police and could hardly be expected
-v to ask for them. But they did know of the Darling letter. It was
. ~ .!' . - ill ?! - . '9--' . "- _.' ' ' - - --" ' ~F: ' .- A ..._>k.'-. .._=ib"-~,~=.-- ~11-,9. e _"-5;-g{J_!'~5'-~-':&i92 i1. "1.- -. ;==-92-' '.' _' '<-- ;--+1:--»..r m_ ,_' --».- -'- _e~,q- 1 _5 Y - ii- ~'" ""5 ;"' "3 ,?k'»- l ~£¢". , _,,__,,._=. I'.,1,,' --L. J '_92 "492I"" 1'<-.'57"l92'_";"<$_I' _- 1. - ; . _.__- ,_ -',"- .1. 1"" _ ._...'";.*." s -- ,-.'| --- -. v-J, -- - _i-i=7Zn._' r 7*-.-=.~=,~-"-. 'e-1.3: -V=.:'ALf-7" e;.__1.'¬,_.!._,_.e :1 H:"i1":~.." "xi !E *- V1.11-T'.'_ .: '-Iv .--*1? p _ . - ._f_- . ~ . - = nigger --1%.;-_- "e L r". -"1",-, '. " 1.: I- " --_ -J 1- . ____.___s,;=:..f *_,.__.-_,_§s..,.,,_-__;l~;;,-: ,__;..,_=<&.._|,l..¢;;§_ri_.5_ ..;'+:§92;_92__§';-_-i____.:. . _," . -- -"e~ . ,_,. = _. _- -1 1-,;_ 'i-'-- P ~'-- , 92'
.it. it might have turned the scale between belief and disbelief of
Mr. Profumos word. At any rate, there would seem to be a considerabie
risk in accepting his word, without knowing what the letter contained.
286. Those are questions which I would not seek to answer. They are
matters for Parliament and not for me. Nevertheless, the fact remains that
the conduct of Mr. Profumo was such as to create, amongst an inuelll
section of the people, a reasonable belief that he had committedwith such a woman in such circumstances as the case discloses. It the
responsibility of the Prime Minister and his colleagues, and of ,
to deal with this situation: and they did not succeed in doing so.
»-.1".
s._-nszz-"-":54?-v - -_ -l
1, I92.___-3 -. -
I"' ' -4 -- _. _ H . -um: <1, -4.
0"
. .,_,_ _ _1
CHAFTERHXXIH u
92
. 1__ _ _ _l_§£i~ __ - --1-'-- -'-:n-nn|»J-u-_-1-- -~--
I
. .1 _ I
Y.A 1
I
PART IV
RUMOURS AFFECTING THE HONOUR ANDI . INTEGRITY OF PUBLIC LIFE
W "T- ,
0
I
-._-£I':7-'*":..|;- --__ _. K - II, 92 ,-' 92/ _Ii-92_
7 I" "'-92.= LI-92
I
. . _192_e,
.. Hy. -1+ _H3'-E-Iii g k r-__[ I .21-_b_"'_¢_'§ -1'" PIP,;-,,,,- _...i~; ;';'3'-.".:.'*"-=-it" ' "-: ''-* ;' '*~" i.+j:1;_-'_.-- ' ,," "_.-;:- ---- .-;..
"1: :o'f_.':_ I
P _. _ I... _._5%? -_- _- :' -2:. ' i_, - -iii "$**."f'."';=..: -P .7 7. ._u 1 _.T-ff-Q: 1; " _. '3 ""111,-» IV -1.- .-e1;i+;i?:=" ;,-+»i__r¢ ;=_- .1. _ .. ,,,. . . _ ..i .-
. L - ,5 ,¢i-,"» . -}'.92 '<~ 1-1. : ' - 3:4: f.!'.':' " -*5 _7."_'92;'
-_ -.-.-.--_ .. - .s- ~- _ :,..., _ -_ '1 @'"*..~ ' " sr >--Q »..-'@~.?i'* ' -1E4-I--_ , . 1- - - ' J "" ._ . '. '._"-' 1-"==~" _92_.,-: -qt . _ -'ij"=_'92V'_#:.&'-_ "e"-''.Li;._-- -. i"§:}§':_; I-V -,;;. .~.1i_,_ .. _ - ._,,,__. ~ 3, -_-1-i ..= .a. .- -.--'
-:-2-I =.-*.~ r. .-1->;=i '- -- '<- -1; .. ._...__.- F-;".}=j. -- * ' _ T. ~ '- _
__-I _ qr 7»-'__---I .2: 1
_ ,.____>¢..:',- 1_ ._ -1.--,.... .-.. i .- - i . .- Q.~_. -. >.;§- ' -l-*5~'4I"92-I-.s»L - -' : --3." ' - ..: -" '- .;;- _- 1 -=4 _ "-' . :.--- - . st; i ;~e *5 six;-l "-'*;'"£n=af " t-5% 2" 1-. l
_ _ , .Q
I '
._..aq:~'f-_-:3» --_ -E
l
i
5
P
I92 0
_m* ..f_ _ _
anxious consideration, that I should. If these rumours were
and integrity of public life in this country, andwere unfounded,fj____ _ it myduty to inquire into them and show them to be so. Whereas il well-
founded, ind aeeted our national security, the mun should hidden.
Only in this way could the condence of the public be restored. Some of those
who appeared before me objectedto my investigating rumours ot this kind..
They said they were irrelevant. But, rightly or wrongly, I held the contrary.I have investigated them. _ __; F" _, . '. ' '_. _, ' ' _
_293. Even so, there were serious questions to solve on the second
condition. " l_ "- - 71 ' ' { <7 * '" '- -' _,
_. ii!WhatlelSecurityRilk?- '_ 9' "
294. All the rumours reported to me were to the effect that a Minister
or person prominent in public life had been guilty of immorality or
discreditable conduct of some kind or other. But it is not every piece of
immorality or discreditable conduct which can be said to be a security risk .
In my opinion immorality or discreditable conduct is only a security risk if it
is committed in such circumstances that it might expose the person concerned
to blackmail or to undue pressures which might lead him to give away
secret information. For instance; I would normally regard homosexual
behaviour, or perverted practices with a prostitute, as creating a security
risk, at any rate if it was of recent date. Again I would not ordinarily regard
adultery as a security risk. at any rate when committed clandestinely with I
person who was not likely to resort to blackmail. Much must depend,
however, on the circumstances. The Vassall Case showed how photographs
may be taken of persons in compromising situations. The existence of such
photographs heightens the security risk: So also do compromising letters.
They would be a most potent weapon in the hands of a blackmailer. even
after several years. Yet again, to pervert. or to attempt to pervert, the course
of justice might well be a security risk. The participants would be undu
extreme pressure to keep it quiet. In short every case of immorality I
discreditable conduct must depend on its own special circumstances. and not
leasl on the length of time past since it happened, and the likelihood d
undue pressure being exerted. Hence the need to investigate the particular
circumstances of every case reported to me, and this I have done. ,
_ iii! Where Lies the Burden 0! Drool? _' '
295. This raised an important issue: for there was quite e body oi
opinion to the effect that, where there is a persistent rumour about a Mittistl
which, it believed, would mean that he was a security risk. it must, as I
matter of political necessity, be disproved or he must be asked to relign.
An analogy was drawn with the Civil Service where a man ' toyedfrom secret duties " because after the fullest investigation, hi
reliability remain, even although nothing may have been hhon standards which would be accepted in 1 court oi law ".
on the Findings of the Privy Councillors on Security 956!
2%. wens: r app:-e-.~'.=:s the pea-ass: erg.-tree-.r..-s i -e
expressed, I have felt unable to adopt it for the purposes B
I02 1292. So I had to ask myself, whether I was to inquire into those
which arose thus indirectly out of the Profumo Altair. And I.-ma
Q
I
I
e
i.
I
F
,-...__l
23 >
. . Y...It _ - hi --0; -- I. .
nL..._
r
92
4
* I
I
4 . ._ ' Y
. . ;_~_'- -e" _ "H'- --.1-e» - _- ...». ': ._; ""..@»»=a...-...~. .'-' _ 1-_~-Q.-~ - P.» _ . V --~I ., -_-_,,.q, 3.-=.~~ r-21- ,,- I3 3. ,3-. __"-'_92.':_ 3} -- e-_ -e -21 n-n._.L_|_ --1. 92.-H ,-t_____;_ .- 1:" " . _~.-I r'.:w_ _; 4, ._ , .-'*.""-'T'-?-- ;-- _,_ .9_r-=-2_:_*-' -L.---2'_ .- -.._t.. '§"-13 -I1-4,110!" --- ~ "" "927' -ta 5- --: -' "~' .-. -Q"-~¢-._92-j ._ '.,_ _.,.-1. 1;!-iis'1 ' ,- =-4-"' " "- 'I .'.. ¢.~'- - ' _-,-em
_, - '--"7. '.?{.:*.. - ~fF"" ="-':!:,:I*,-.1»- _.¢%';=:~.**.»'_-.A..t.___;-_ -;-*_-;-- _ _ :»,_ 1I 92- . 5 r a as -." "=~i~'-='-. -" at it g HW if M -' rjq ,fH_*:¥c_ . _ n 1? q _ I _ _. 1- ..-- ----=a;;.':~- -»-.;. _'
~ we - .. .. - ~-- ._.'-- Y 8*-_ '..=.- .£ -= '_--~-3w . '"-.-_--'L~;-.;_j f:':-!'.-Tait» _ -;-.<>.3.;-..-.1- ~92-;;¢-t-:1___ -_-it "Ti-.-~ag.e__. f._=_._._, y§_!,._.2 "1ia : ';,-' -4 its-' 1;";..-.-.r.'-..;¢"<';'*.~e~-lair "~>-x-3"»1 _"
-""s"¥;?J=.= -. _-...a-t.-T""».'!; ' =.@ ~ -'t. '*"":i?___5~.._... -- -. - -92.-..-- '_ " 1-"-:_-; r -if-'s~ 4-.-. .' .:, -_ ._ "..,5__. Z- ' up-5;--' _T- _
. Hg.-. ,1 _-._-;{_' " '1._._'.-92'|H+',¢-:3. - '-J ,_- .:.-7:, I - ._ ,2..;.- -..§J1;.'.;". -5., - -7391; E -.,~ "A.1 #115 ' -1=" ,3.-=*-'~,._w. '~-->1-;~ "-. - -2..__ - .'r.f'.¢eJ' ' -r ;s-f_-';f'i F, _;: .-u- 1%?._ -if _._ E 3 :=:_,. -_ . '" - -- .4 * .s:'.>-'---__" |'...4r:'1~- _"_-._ - _. .. -.
"I". ";. Q_. _'-_t;.,,_
I
I t - f
t_.-m=_-::''f-:..Fia- »-W »
I0
'0
n921
-. 1';-¢'.il'e~'.'fF!/I 1; ts bur: ic»Z_ ...2£~" I"
S '. 5 Ln". .ti1.'.. - ', u i '.--".- >21. 11;: - ii". 1' ".'.92i nit '8' -. ' . 1 -» - t '. ': '_ 1". ' ' ' * I I .1 ' ::~ "L'iZ.u.d"lG . unt-, . CHAI"'TER!O I_V . 9 5'5.1 '1;-. ; . _. . I, ti: 1.,-n .1. ;.'j in '1¢_n§¥ ;k
2a1., 1 has unis pert of nijjmis at reference, You
to investigate any information or material which may come to my! a_ttent_:'on
in this connection Ihe Profumo aair! and to consider-"any evidence there
may be for believing that national security has been, or may he, endangered .'
288. In announcing the terms of reference to the House of Commons on_
17th June, I963, you said It will be within the knowledge of many Hon.
Members that in connection with the recent episode, rumours are circulating
which aect the honour and integrity of public lite in country and. it
they were true, might point to a security Such asituation cannottolerated. - .;- .92,- .1 -- ' 1.. :r92 s .. .- ..r- - --. .92. .4- ......-. _ ._. .-
289. I have felt some concern at the scope of thispart of my Inquiry.
There have been many rumours lately concerning the honour and integrity
of public lite in this country, and I inter from your statement in Parliament
that you envisage that some of them might come within the scope of my
Inquiry. _ ' g -1 - -g _
1 290. How far ought I to inquire into rumours? I interpret my terms
of reference I must inquire into them when two conditions are satised: q ~ A
a! The rumours must arise out of the circumstances leading to the
1 resignation of the former Secretary of State for War, Mr. J. D. Profumo:
' or, more shortly. they must arise out of The Protumo attair ". . i :-
_' b! The rumours must'be such that. if true, they may give rise to the
belief that national security has been or may be endangered; or. more
1 shortly. that they point to a security risk . i . a
_ i _ i_! _Whc_n' do Rurnourl out oi the
7 291. So interpreted, however, there is yet another question to solve on the
rst condition ; when can a rumour he said to arise out of the Proturno aair?
Some of the rumours gave rise to no diiculty, such as a rumour that a Minister
was associating with Christine Keeler or one of the Ward girls, or a rumour
which was traced to statements made by those girls to the newspapers. Those
rumours arose directly out of the Profumo aair and no one has doubted
that it is within my terms of reference to inquire into them. But there were
other rumours which arose indirectly out of the Profmno aair. in this seme.
that they would probably never have seen the light of day. or at least never
have credence, were it not for the Profumo aair. The
of Mr. Protumo that he bad lied to the House ot Commons ao_
condence of the people of this country that they were ready to
rumours which previously they would have rejected out of hand. ' '_ __
was the denial of a Minister to be accepted. The word of any informer, ' _
bad his character, might be preferred to the word of a Minister. Ann Urbain
abounded. They saw a chance oI_ making moneyby telling their atedl to
the newspapers as Christine Keeier did. Hence rumour! "'- =
tot
c.;~.,-
JII
t, . -1-._- i 1 .L
4_r_... _ t. -.., j..__._ 1 ti
>
' l
I
i
E
.- - "' .=..,,..--- ».=,§,3r-- '1-. -. .- ' '4-92-Q53?-V1 ': ~ '-- =¢.=;_ -'~-,:..--,-tar: '-xv.-.=-=--_:' ' =#=t» ,; .. =?s..'~?1*;raa.~=**',,-~-"=I--
or '-
"'"1?."* _Q-' '-"13 es: ,.'-. ~4= ,,~'
.. g~_" 3 ' ' _"..-r ""-1;
-..*'- t -- '4-=_; _-t-..- _.'-L-5 *- §'_1_: _:'Y'it-';;b-:}§i:¬a.'§.?;i; -_",':;-l".' '_
3;; _, - i. - ' -j -_ -.-':-. _-~._ _i:.5..-t~.t ,r;,,.- -V __
- : , '~},,~;'=.-*-"+-* ti _..==.- f =qt. ~ ' ,_-.-5'%~':..._..--'= -slats , - .. -{ ;,._. -;_k-__; ,;* 1 * 92 w D- ,.._.. ._ ,,____.,_Y:_..__;_! _._. _ _ _ _.',,.. ;":t3___ Us I'-==i~-I*T$é7-*~e -..,;. .._ r_'}.._--'73 ;<. *"§§g"i,"§*1"'; ,~e_3=>_,L __~'92 E __ ; ,,."_~-.:-.-92-..;§t"¢1a=_--~s--, . __-_.¢ i are-.;:;:.j.:-_ ,-7" " ;:'~ =-"_,;- ;--. =:_; . ._ _ .. '.___ I . __92.___ i V -, .i_"--lee? ' ;'*<Laé *1-$+1_:.t. ._= ' '=-. '- - , -,.+."_§-5'.,, -T -"., =.; '- 2 _ _ _ ---__.- - _. 4. _*-_i-..._,--7, ,'z'.e=.1 - . - _._.-~ 1-" *=- - ~ . ~
_ -.11; » -1- I ___ -¢¢:_'_* T- 7 -.*T'§-'-I-' :1 -"'1-'-.. -r@-3'-*'--" '.*1?_-::- *5-?r;=_++ =Trl'u' . *--'5'" ~ ~ "155 i '--.'-1'" =i- 1" "7" "T-'4-. -- ', ' 5,.-~¢"§,7'?.-; jB:;';:"-":.. . _ _ ,, .. .
- . ,- _ L_
EL r
=.--I.ar.-':*"_":=.£- -e
1
IG
- 92
0
J
' .. 1 I0392 -
'~1nieir '- F - ' "*
' ms to me to he most unfair to thetklinister concerned. It means
he is the subject of rumour, it put: on him the burden of
innocencea thing diicult enough for any man to doand ei
contrary to what we believe to be just. It is bad enough to require lole
to meet a charge based on rumour--a charge in which therein no proseentu.
of which there are no particulars, where the witnesses speak often enough
from hearsay. -and when they cannot be cross-examined. It would be worse
if the individual aifected had to disprove a rumour when there is no
gyjdgncg again;-,t11im_ 2- -z 1 tr ; :2 . '-
1; 297. In these circumstances I have adopted this test: If there comes to
my attention information or material which points to a security risk, I
1...... I-A t92I92I92 An it 1 can l':l'l}92:l|'92Pl" it in nf crlirinni eiapicnnrn tn mall for an c Aunvu av uvualuun v -Ivy an uuwl -- -up Vi. -.--. u-.--. Va ....-_..-- -- -..-- --- -
answer._ If it is, I must call upon the person affected to hear what he has to
say; Then, having heard him, I must consider whether, in the result, it can
properly be said there is evidence for believing that national security has
been, or may be, endangered. In short, is there evidence which, sitting asa
judge, I would think it t to leave to a jury? 1 4 V ' I -
I ' p ' cw! Contents of f|1ieP8l_IoI at nqwnff--' _ ' _ -
- 298. I have endeavoured to investigate all the rumours reported to me
i_n accordance with those principles. And I have to report that in no case
have I found any evidence for believing that national security has been or
may be endangered. I would like to have stopped there, but I feel that, if
I did. I would lay myself open to the charge of covering up the truth;
and there would be a danger that. in the absence of detailed refutation,
the rumours would persist. I have therefore in the succeeding paragraphs set
out the course of my investigations. But I have deliberately refrained from
setting out suspicions which fall short of evidence, or immorality or
discreditable conduct which does not amount to a security risk; for if I were
to do so, it seems to me that my Inquiry would be turned into a witch-hunt,
parallel to the McCarthy Committee in the United States, where people would
be condemned for past sins. which are better forgotten and forgiven. I feel
that such an inquiry into private lives would be repugnant to the greatmajority of our people. ' - ' a ~ r ' i 1 {-
299. I tum therefore to consider the rumours in detail. In doing so, I
have refrained from setting down the names of the persons alfected by the
rumours: this should cause no diiculty. Those who have heard the rumours
or repeated them, will readily be able to identify the persons from my
description, and will, I hope. read the refutation. Those who have not heard
the rumours are better o. They need read nothing. _ r y -i - -.
. r k l
" =" ='='i£" ' ' - -5&2.
J _ 1 i :4 I " l
I __ '4 I
_ , . t : I
e
q_. .
_'*~... 92C *7"
» .
»-i
'¢- . _.
...I_ __ _. . ... ,. . --__ -'I
_ i.._.____,_. . . ......____-_1_ __,_
~__ -__.. ,,..._..._ _ 1 - 11" T 1 i-.7 _' '4' __-='_<=.-,3, L i _.... .-_ - _ ~ ..__'7 :*_; '= ;.¢,.-;.92.~_._;7 '§','_ _-- e 7 -~._,- _ ~ -.»i
E
_; ,__ .. .H_______ :____£___ _ _ _,i*' - "I-5..""r "'- - _ ~=-;,, .."- - - ' .. = s.<' I ri'%'! -.; P _ " - V -* . .; |: .-1. . - _ __ __' -. . '- t ' '. ._ . _ __ _ . Uvn ., -2.. - ' _ ___, ~,..--1
1 _ 1 .'*-.-_... %,e _ . . _. r!£'_. ,-__~.-:::_ __ *1: _ L . & '- _ - {-1-}; ".3: ,3; e- - . . e Y*5'1F#::e;.~; 5 $#+*? -.- l"-§' Ifrie "1.'~'1 '5-:. I -$4";_,,,._-_r_ R1 -311-~ ., . -_.'_s:+" -" '1 ,4-""1 -'--'J * I __-;:-_..._ - -=+- :" .:"" -- we-f==~ ~ _-;1_ , er, -.1 _.-.= _ _..- 1..._I,. :;;,' - ;-. ':. - ...___; _- ..~.-.¢,_..;s_ .13; .-. w_;_1_i .._::;i=.=;.~:~'-e--"e.-;§" . _
.._.,'.;;:::'.'< . ~__-,. -"-- .__;_,,-1-t-':t"*""¢',1'."1;.=.;~
92 L3; ___~. .,__._-. it 1- 92 - '-an-_?.-an-.- .- . ". p 3* "... ' f"k J-LBJ 1. , - .a=:. _ _ .1 V ' rt" -""' :;?=--:" *.9.9 V ,92
In
' i.~fT* 1*-;l.i1_;:-_:';t_;;j3;.;T.e: - » -' ' -:.r-- -.:
1- -- 1 +~=:.T"' -I --».|--no---L *5-_ ~p_ w,L-,;- --t- H -._ -.-. _._s,._..,.._-... _. .- _ ,, . A, . A.
-. '- '7-+- '. ' =. 7 ' ""=! '5'? in-"' Y.
, .r~- '
'--
I*".'= -. W .. --at-.¢.. _ ...-_e--.
n
11... .. -
- . ~. J: J- 5* vI_ ,:; '3 .:
aosrouns ARISING nmncrur our or rm? W
1 . PROFUMO AFFAIR Q ";.'." I '
300. These rumours usually sprang from the fact that Stephen Ward
met a large number of persons prominent in public lite. He met someat
Cliveden, some in the course of his practice asan osteopath where he had
a high reputation for skill! and some in the course of drawing portraits ot_
people. Although he only met them thus casually. he used afterwards in his___-.____ :..... ,. 1- e..| -:- .......-. .. : -Uunvcisaiiuu i.u sci. uni ihcn names in iiiéff "v'v'61'% C1656 {IE1 T'i'i¬ }'0'uu." "
girls whom he had about him were attered to be in the company of one
so well connected. And when they afterwards told their stories to the
newspapers the names were a goodselling point; _ p _ _ H ' ' _ f
301. There was a heavy crop of rumours immediately preceding my
inquiry. On 18th June, 1963, a French newspaper published a long article.
purporting to be from London headed Tous les familiers de la Piscine _du
Docteur Ward ne sont pas encore dans le bain" All the frequenters of
Dr. Ward's swimming pool have not yet been ducked in the water!. Inthe
article the newspaper set out, with added spice, many of the rumours then
current. The newspaper is distributed in Great Britain and its contents became
known. Immediately after I began my inquiry I wrote to the Managing
Director and asked for the grounds on which the article was based and to
be put in touch with his London correspondent. But I' have received no
reply. I do not wish to attach any special importance to this mischievous
article but it contains such a convenient tabulation of the rumours that I
quote extracts trom it. " s - ' 1 ..
" i! The Appalling Allegation "" ' p _
-362. This French newspaper amused the Prime Minis-eruaud another
Minister who was named! of a political olfence, namely, d'étouffer faaire
Keeler :'.e.. to stie the Keeler aair!. This accusation was quite unfounded.
But that is not the point. When the newspaper got to England some persona
reading it presumably their French was imperfect! said there was an
appalling allegation against the named Minister. The hearers interpreted
this sexually. as they usually do. and said that the Minister was guilty of
indecency with little boys. Hence the rumour. It was a fantastic suggestion.
as anyone who knows the Minister will appreciate. And it was of course
completely unfounded. It just shows how rumours arise.- - -1 e t e I
ii! Negotiations [or a Cottage303. This French newsPiP'-"1' said of another Minister " llcas aucun dome que the Minister! était en relations tires '
Dr. Ward et sa troupe de girls". i.e., There is no
Mr. .......... .. had very close relations with Dr. Ward and his pee! of
This is entirely without foundation. The only connection of this M1
with Stephen Ward was as follows. ' E 4
104 ____....m .___ . _
rs"
-
- _=,:~~* r -* a-s_'- -
e-...-,1; - * .1- ? .-.-.-._ - ~_ 4 --.:. '9'? -* 1&7~_.»__.-.._.-.._._ ,1... t2£_.""._ """'"".:.t=1 _ ' -Zr. *~ AT-- _ _ y _,.. _ - __
A - 1. '3-.£G'9292i'* -
__ h _ 2:"-92_ _ * g _ ...-...._.."Ir" Br -»-r--w-1-<-up -».. " -1-,__-92- :-* ,-_ -E. ,.Jr..e_- Q? .: i _ e':,,_:;_u_i flit-3 ,1§ if ':_..I§-IF1.--» "-.5 * " 53" 3; ; "~- QT ""**
' s" '...-- "' he "":.r- isla ,;-g_- ~ - .r-eigit _:l;-r'4r-.-_ " ' 1-~.. 7 1". =-_..Q,;- ..~¥"*'*"Y "' "'*.:*3.*i'?.'i *"*'***¢»~~..¢- "i* *"* _ I.- "1. .,.. hma»$-wftt-%- ->"*
' -'-c.-. t ___- :1_ ..... H. 4"I 0-"92°":_ 1*: .. a -1.... _e_ __._ -.....,. 4 ~¢ ve +-~in--.1 .-1 "' "we-R - .,~"= ¥' E'&-..Mt..__3~. _!_ -V $,.,__ W.¢-..~_.--h-_...,- em __ .. __ an-'4-. _ _~_a
._-1%";-I--"-;'_,;T-, -4. ' . In March, 1962.. the Minister and his wife stayed the at
Cliveden with Lord Astor. On this occasion they met Stephen Waligcame to a luncheon patty at the house. He had some conversation it
Minister and his wife on portraits and so forth and left about half an H _
lt.lnt:h|:OI1. J-" - ::' '..-L W--e 15...; '1? f_;?i'r;'-' '_=l! i-: -_-= -.5 =r. :1 <-=.r-;;."w:q"_.=?§~¬
If 305} On this week-end, 'during'it' wait '-in the grounds, Lord Astor
pointed out to the Minister a cottage, called Ferry Cottage, on the estate
which. he suggested, the Minister might care to take on lease from the
National Trust. At that time the cottage was derelict, with no lavatory or
kitchen. The Minister thought it might be made into a suitable place tor
himself and his familyfor holidays: and over the next year he took steps
to get a lease of itand do it up. They got builders to do work on it. During
that year, 1962, he and his wife and family went to'the' cottage three or
four times to see its progress and they had picnicsoutside; but they did not
stay. On one of theoccasions the Minister happened to pass Stephen Ward
with three girls and said good-day to them, but had no conversation with
them. In February, 1963, the Minister and his wife moved in some fumiture
preparatory to moving in. On 3rd March..l963. they went with the children
and had a picnic in the snow outside. They never slept there. e
' 306. Stephen Wat-d's cottage was about 400 yards away from Ferry
Cottage for which the Minister was negotiating. In March, 1963, the Minister1.--- ..__.. .. ... :..t.. ...| : t ' ' 'neaici reports Whlbll §'nu¬ hlm decide not to go on with the negotiations.
He terminated them at the beginning of April, 1963. ' '== - " ' -i
. 307. That is the whole of any conversation or connection whatever which
the Minister had with Stephen Ward. and neither the Minister not his wife
has ever been in Wards cottage at Cliveden, nor his house in London.
308. Out of that wholly innocent incident the rumour about this Minister
has arisen. There is not a shred of evidence to support it. .
-' .
1 ' y iii! The Borrowed Car o
. 309. In March. i963. there was a rumour that another iviinister had ieni
Mr. Profumo his car knowingly for the very purpose that Mr. Profumo might
take Christine Keeler for drives in it. This in turn got elaborated into a
rumour that the Minister himself had taken Christine for drives in it in
Richmond Park. When printed in the French newspaper the rumour got to
the most extravagant lengths. La prochaine vedette sera certainement .' . -
qui a fourni it Miss Keeler les somptueuses voitures avec lesquelles elle se
rendait en compagnie de Profumo a tfhonorables parties de campagne'.
Seton lea personnes bien informées . . . aurait été Porganisateur des orgies
qui se déroulaient clans le pavilion de chasse du Dr. Ward. ll n'était pas
settlement ie spectateur passii des spectacies et des demonstrations tie nuuume" "
darts la piscine de Ward dont Profumo était particulierement friend. t
next victim would certainly be Mr. . . . who provided Miss K __ 9 _
luxurious motor cars in which she went in company with ' '1_
, 0 I. lg country week-ends .tAccording to well-informed persons. Mr '
the organiser of the orgies which took place in Dr. Ward's country
He was not only a passive spectator of these sights and of the disphys of
nudism hjeh took place in Ward: swimming pool, of_whieh Profume wasparticuI21&_y{p1}d_! . p .. . V
1 105 K. ' _ ;/~. -" -1 .
.-.92. .___ '92'-.s
4
J_s_._ _ -.__ ..
__ _- _-H-L " - Y. ._ __-n ---
.: --~;~'1.. _. .,i i
,. :A""_-4321' "".:d»I,l_, 1.! _-..;.*..- A -- "»- »-EL - ---*1 - . '.ti-:, ,}_;. __-_i_ Ci} 14%? L0 _. ' F- ' -
" -":~;: ,_ ...-i.- "
-+;- n '=I'.' '*'. -__ J-i '_,;.,-_;.,:; _-_ _ A . _ _g;_ It' "'-'-'en~ .'...t-1-... __-- -. ;__ '1,_-"F. _,.92__:#.;r-V_:_;i_¢a iv V' ' -- fr ~:.=*.~z=<r 41,- ..--;-.~"
".-T1-. '4? .."~' , '- , ~ a. if i-'7 ._ _;;=--er; _'-".1-"'.;'I I .. 4... V, _ .. -- :2 ~- ,,.t,¢. ~. U % ~- ' "- -i1.1?¬' ' ':'§ - " -
; e _;- l- "'~_1,}¢¢ ,-1It: v .1. _ A t--._.r-,.__.
':-L " -5e-.'»':=":- *- '1?--qt-ms 1. J P":-
. - i 1 ,',n.. .- . "- , . _ -_~-;_-_;. _' _.-1 A .- , - I. 1? '_92. ' *1 _ ,f%:1:i T?*: gt .-- _ -_ ;; k . ..*,-.;,;i;;_.__;__5. -i92§t<92e -"1--en. -* .-~-..;._ _. " ..
l-.41»;-~.= :1. - "Ii ' . -"" - "t " *";1 be-P.¢- i -.-at: - ->4, 1-_ ;.,;..92._ i . _- y his-1» -13 ,, E-. ' . v nr=&'-.--~ - ~ * e -*_-*- -
,. 1'", ' -» __ __' "is.~ meme __ - .2.-st, gr
--'5 is-.__;;3.t,»-.15.-._1,..... ;_- -_-_ ' ~ ;.:.__=,,;92 =_
'1.
=.-i!i§-i"I- '*- '---.- - 2 II
' p .
%
_E
1
I92 -
Zia M ii-I-i - l-ant-' '_ ' Qu* ' I __ rgi- ___ ___ 4- ..._ kg? _
92
,--' i .____ y
it
310. These rumours are entirely without foundation: The true mu on
this rnatter are these: During e week-end in July, 1961 probe lvth July",1961! Mr. Profumo borrowed the Minister's black Bentley gmascot on it which identies it. The reason for borrowing it i because92.| ' ' -mrs. Profaine had gene to the want.-y in rhea: own 9..-'. T5-.-
not using his car that week-end as he was going__ as he
constituency by train; and Mr. Profuino asked it he could _
had to be in London. The Minister let him _have_th_e _keys.oI the ca_r and
thought no more about it. Mr. Profumo did not tell the Minister the purpose
for which he was going to use it, He did in fact useitéto take
Keeler for a drive or two in London. He pointed out to her the mascot on it
and told her that the car belonged to the Minister. He returned the car on
the Sunday night. This was the only occasion on which he took out
Christine Keeler in the Minister's car. The Minister had no knowledge that
Profurno nsed his car Io: this He had no idea whatever that
Mr. Profumo borrowed the car so as to take Christine or any other girl out
min ' ' -.';e.' r-.'.-:-*1:"3"'."'*,':"-4~_-- » .;
31!. The whole incident was so unimportant to the Minister that it
faded completely from his mind. Nearly two years later. when Christine
Keeler gave her story to the newspapers, she actually told them that
Mr. Profumo had driven her out in a car which had this particular mascot
on the bonnet. This showed it was the Ministefs car. The newspaper believed
her story. When it was put to: the Minister as it was on 2nd April, 1963!
he said there was no truth in it. This was a most unfortunate mistake on his
part. I an: satised, however, that it was an entirely innocent mistgez he
had simply forgotten that he had lent the car. As soon as he was reminded
of it as he was by Mr. Profumo on 6th June. 1963} he corrected it and
acknowledged that he had made a mistake; Y ' . - i
312. I am satised that these rumours were entirely without foundation.
All that happened was that the Minister quite innocently lent his car to
Mr. Profumo for one week-end not knowing the purpose for which it was to be
l iv! The Cup, of Tea ':.: ~ . a t ~"
.311. In this same French nevvsnaner the names of t-W0 other Ministnttt
were mentioned, as if they were in the Ward orbit. Des membrcs du cabinet
comme MM. . . . et . . . y venaient volontiers prendre une tasse de the. . . .
Or voici qu'on raconte que les conversations mondaines . . t. avaient leur
prolongement darts les apparternents de Ward. Mais on y tenait évidemment
un tout autre langage et lon sy ennuyait beaucoup moins. Such Cabinet
Ministers as Mr. . . . and Mr. .'.i.'are glad to go there for a cup of
tea. . . . It is said, however. that the social conversations. . . are carried
further in Wards at. Obviously a quite dilferent language is spoken there
and one which is less boring.! These rumours have never got into circulation
in Englandthey were too obviousiy preposterous-and I dwell upon
v! The Spaniard; Phvlrllli '. '
314. I turn now to yet another Minister whose name at appear in
the French newspaper! but about whorn the following mini circulated
which arose directly out of the Profumo affair. - I 3 i _
106 -
q, -
. .
. ,I -. ._ .. -- ". i.
I
- 92>
92
1_
*7 -.-r av. _ _ -~ ¢-,_ _ us»:-;--». ¢,.a..______ -.._ _ .- -' * >~..=»*__-H.-I-=**=.~.*:-1:=**P°=1_*§"r'=*r.~~=_>."' H :-1-_--,.-. -. ;. _-.~ -21- - 1: -' -- he.--~ '1'-1 :5 ;'-r__-_,, ~ -.1: '_ ._a..-_ __. ..,._-.~--... _ .* =.-.:1~-er-1';"._,."r' -T-':.. __'.--___ - ff ;*§i;'r'..*2' ' .._ ' ,,_;.~ .-_. Q92:1;";_f_;
_-,,_-_ - - ,_ - .. -'-'- ~:-2». aw - ->..92.;"" I -<' ""g, ' --_. . 1'" _.-~ .. *=. - --.-. é.-t» -".1-"=" ,_A -.3 . . ',fl" "92I, _- .'-=>ev.--» _.-.-2-» Au; - "4" _;w;;;i~_C"'F~=- :..::._.=- =7_ _-4- _ = hair; .. as- "ts -> r
. _*-__ _ .-;_ _ __ res. w,_;.._. ._ ._.. ..-r-,_ _ -' -. _-it H 7- 21$-..__-£1_ - _- 92{_'r --_ -_; _i_ .'__ ,. . ~'-ya -:- . ' - H '4». :,.4=';._.tet.J....a"
~..-- .».'~_-=»:-"~.-s; .<~'r - -.-
_ 1 -___ --=~-______ . ;_-.-T;-as--_ t." - .....:=s"" ,_
, _ .. __.,..1.1,, - ",..._!_»i;_:§£ _,. -. _;;;.-irlf '3.-=. <1 -".~;;_:t _,__ Eli
= -;~.;=* - '
.._ .-I ._. ~-ca:-..-..., ,¢ 0- -._....i-I-""A" H .. _- ' -- I: r-92_
a ..---on 92.'5G' ' '1- . " . -. A -I-r
.- _ ._ _ ' I _ at their ivxlives. Names who are household words....-arr-'-1..-'1-':-:4-» -- - -
. ., Q 107
ll-
Ii
IO
092 -
_. c i 1; --1
r. 92
' iii; In June. 1963; it was nimoured that the Ministerwas '_" - =
the Ward I can ieé how this nnnour On Sunday} 19th - I
the Minister was agnest of Lord Astor at C1iv'eden.Dnring"thattlmi " -
Ward cameup to the house andgave him and other guests so'me' f" '_ 'treatment. Stephen Ward askedithecould drawapictureofhim.'I,1|e' -' .._ r _
l_1'ecould.' Qnp22nd June, 1964!, _Ward went to his house and dtetfhis
picture. That was the whole extent oi the Minister's aoquaintaneeship with
Stephen Ward. pl-Ienever went to Ward: house or met any of the girls. But
it appears that Stephen Ward thereafter mentioned his name irequentlyas if
he were _a close friend of his. Hence peopleassumed that the Minister was
involved with_the girls; I am satised that there is no foundation inthis rumour
whatever"; 1 ' ' * " "'A l "" '*
V r,_-, .' I " .;-1 .'- I.-
3l6. In connection with this rumour, a more detailed rumour arose:
about the middle of June, 1963, it was rumoured that there was in existence
It photograph of the Minister in thecompany of Christine Keeler which was
in the possession of a Spanish refugee who worked part-time as a photographer
in the night club " LI-Iirondelle " in Swallow Street. -. t .92 ..
_' 317. p I was able to prove that this rumour was completely untrue. It is an
eitce]lent_illusLration of how rumours arise and spread. There is a photographer
who is a Spanish refugee, and a few years back he did take photographs in a
restaurant then called the Lido, but now L!-lirondelle ", in Swallow Street.
In April. I958. the manager thought that one of the customers in his restaurant
was this Minister, and asked the photographer to take a photograph of him.
The photograph was taken without the customer being awarewof it. But the
photographer did not think it fair to take a prominent man unawares, so he
did not make copies of it, but he kept the lm. When the rumours became
current that the Minister was involvm with the Ward girls! the photogapher
may have mentioned, and probably did. to two or three people that he had
a photograph of the Minister with a girl. This went around, and soon it was
assumed that the photograph was of the Minister and Christine Keeler. '" _
- 318. The photographer at my request searched through all his lms and
found the lm of this photograph and has produced a print to me. It is plain
that the man in it is not this Minister. or indeed any Minister. To anyone
who knows the Minister it is obvious that it is not he. The manager and the
photographer were completely mistaken in thinking it was. " ' "
=_- ' vi! TheManintheMask"' '
_ 319. Earljvinlune, l963,arumour spread throughFleetStreetandthence
through the House of Commons that a certain Minister was the man in
the mask . It is clear to me that this rumour was the direct -V
statements made by Christine Keeler and by Marilyn Rice-H __
statement by Christine Keeler was contained in the story told by V ' H '1.
Press from which I have quoted an extract in paralflltil 65! It
by her and Marilyn Rice-Davies on am February. 1sss._ This _n-,='- . - - . V »"Q15}; - i , , _ t , ; _ :. P2} -.1 =4
e t Tilt more rich and inuential people 1 met me more
ta
4
1
Il
H 3:.
M. .__.. _
. 5' - t ' '!l
1..!
:92;,e
-~-W
most
home cl a "v
- rather unusual
There were ho
would not have
one well-known barris
stirring speeches in courtatta
some well-known actors and a poli
intriguing person. however, was a man with a black mask
At rst I thought this was just a party gimmick. But the truth was that
this man is so well-known and holds such a responsible position that he
did not want to be associated with anything improper. And I can assure
you that party was improper. The guests were not just ardent nudists.Even I was disgusted"? ' - ": ; .. ~ - 1
'1. I .,
320. ' This was the story as told by Marilyn Rice-Davies to the police
and signed by her on 14th June, 1963: _ - I -_" 2 ' ' "
About six people have told me that naming a Minister! indulges in
weird sexual practices and has been to naming the host's! parties where
he wore a mask. Stephen has told me this and other girls whose names
I cannot remember and it is common talk among Fleet Street reporters.
321. This story tound its way into newspapers in this country and also
in countries abroad where it was said that a prominent public gure was the
man in the mask. p . - e ;__ . . .
322. There is a great deal ot evidence which satised me that there is A~- ~ "tn .i___ _ group of people who hold parties in private of a perverted nature. At some
'. -'f"92' _']"__'**"4&*=. .=' 395- ' 35""-:*' ,-rig;: " 9%-*-_
" .._.." .._.,.»-.=- . I ,5.
1- -. ' _ _. :';_.-'-'-' .,__- r.
. .7-5" "-. ' .'.. - ,...- --
1 p .-_:;E-_ -0' I -71 '1' - : : -I ";7-_':-1:. .. - "... .'."""'."' =*;?*- ' ,':- _ -We-. -.?'-sh!-,;<'- Q: _;.__v;.7 .- --=+.; -.----~.-.;.=,,_.;_-e~. -..--- .. e sag»'---'**:-- EH-£1» .- .-.-_, ...r.'.-*-'. ~ " -"-. 2.9 {'15, _____,"-t:- 1 .__ :~ .»_/_.- -e .:.'- 2* '._-- ~ -t" --- .-'.-.. T"? '3 '-,"aa|s192él§7',.--___- ' --, 7 a _,~4- 4. -~ - ' ..¢-5.u. V '---1-= 1*: -.5-:t . _. _.,. - ' .e ~'*1'..-;--"" _ 1"-5?. . _ _. _., ~ - -.~ ., ,. _. -_- ~,- . -. ,._. 1- -y..~ - _i.v;_*_}%% -.-1*. .i._.,-._ .':'»e.. :5 "-t. _;r-%92§ "-3%:-"*1 ' -we--» T13-1*.'.="" E-Ev 5*_-;'-f_'1.§-
> f'»-Q - -- 7 ..;' '. e ~ .. ,- ._.92.- . __ __-,_'j '-";."'* -* ' -- 1- ; -1:-.,s./-. 1'.-"':".__,,.'92
I» ".. ff V -.V ...-- _,_,__2_',;_,-Q-,_ ,._,-w - pk, Fit__-_.. -- ___-_:__.-_ - I-,2. __L_ '"- -_i_'>_ e 4.--=.--, t _._ __"" -' ' ;' Tr '7'. L - .7 H sav-_ - __ _... , _ _ :_- - - __ ,_
- ,92_.,..__.,. _4 -_ .,= . _._. _- . __..| .g_n,r,, .. ,,,,_, ._.5- _p- 1'" ' -.4-1--sh-" . -1- '- .--.1. ' = . ' - ~;.92»~ '.-.-'-."'*.i§ "...~ -*. - - - """".T'- - e "'"-- _ -ns _ '!5!?!'n""
;_f_:..§" .t'__.- ' ' .1 ts, :'--'-_. __ : ' ::._._" I. ---E1-J» __ ,,r_ 7.. ...' s._. - _- ....- -- ._..92 _____._ H . .-.,_ , .__-_ _;.'92--_ _ ff -_.:_'-. -._,-W - ._ 4-f -1- fl: -L .F, '- 1- ..-, ¬~' -. :.. #1.." ::1;*' -
J1:
r.__1nI=r:"-"=""_":'.&'-- ~ »of these parties. the man who serves the dinner is nearly naked except for
a small square lace apron round his waist such as a waitress might wear. He
wears a black mask over his head with slits for eye-holes. He cannot therefore
be recognised by any of the guests. Some reports stop there and say that
nothing evil takes place. It is done as a comic turn and no more. This may
well be so at some of the parties. But at others I am satised that it is
followed by perverted sex orgief that the man in the is a slave
who is whipped: that the guests undress and indulge in sexual intercourse
one with the other: and indulge in other sexual activities of a vile and
revolting nature. . .. v . r- . -
323. My only concern in my inquiry was to see whether any Minister or
other person prominent in public life was present at these parties; Ior, if he
were, he would,gI should think, be exposing himself to blackmail. I enquired
closely therefore into the matter. In particular I endeavoured to nd who
waspresent. _ " _ ' . . - . ,. =, _- I-... -
324. Stephen Ward was undoubtedly present at some d" _ parties.
On one occasion there seems to have been more men than --and he
telephoned the two girls. Christine Keeler and Marilyn _ __ and
asked them to come. They came in towards the end OI I it Rephel
Ward told them about the man in the mask and asked one d- ' Guess
who it is? ItisMr.... Wardseemstohavegotholdolthemaak
afterwards and given it to another girl who tells me she still hi ita black
I08
Q --,
9292
t-.._;_ _.. 4 92 0
U_. . -. 4,-"v"-=r,'E'§;' ;_ _;.,;,, ¢.- _ r. .. . -- a V _i1' 92 92 ..',--. ... .' I -- - ' ~. - - .- . _.-_. -_¢ _t_!,_~_- -.- . -
¢_ ..~~ ~ -... __s-1"e.r§;..:il'.-?."-.-...,e . _-.»- -_ ,, ,_;: "-_.r:-".-'7. ~= -~ '"-,";..._. ;".92- .2; -,- ~ _ A _ I L. __ A .__._.; #222.-- - ~._. . ... -. J "'..._ -7. .2
¬
r
a_. - -.
_ _ K ..;f_'._ - e _.-w 1. 7 I '' "1' ' " ' " _ '__._, 83.-T45_ __ _ N.. __M _Vb
. _ .,..- ' ~ ___ . ~_ -. ~ -- i__f. _ __
.-.. - *1 _ -" : --"'lv'-':;'_r . . -.- e -a -.s_.3_r- -3, - =-.,.-.-..-*~ B,"
w
1' r ~§"?.' - -.~r- -~- ~ - ' 5'=' - " ¥._, ~ "192= "-.:f '»';c'~=';_= ¢~.IIi_ue-..-:~--~1--=- '= *1. -.- #-,;=r ;-'1... ~.. r:.""J'?¬"¥ :-1-i..a-i -15;; -. - _ __Ti? §.a:'*"@.*:;'*'-- H.. -; _'§ '- ' -,3-q; J. _ . 4". .___-,-5.0, ' ~,;_~_r_._ ; - r .-1.21 ,:.;;_._$-_.- - A, ._.. -m% jg 1; .7 _ Y _ - - a- In -' .- i- - -_ .>». =":.;" e...._~' ';__.. I 4* -.7--r ¢t_--_. ; -- -- _ ».»- -- ~ _ .yg_ .-V;-____.._ -... - a. ...._,._..._ Mt. _,'....t _ _ ;,;__ _
=._._.&;£ _-"5-ii-II-._ _-,1?. K 77 .7 .-_
.-,p_f..' _~_-_
7. I -1" hi '-L ,. Z I {£22; ..".:.;.'_'; ;J_- _ ' .1.--F E;-;""!~./. " ... F 7" '-..' ." ":7.-* -rZ='p;=:"'r&~.ut. ._ . ., . _ .- . '_ '.'T _.,.e - ' 3"-5, __ __ - ' - I":s_,*__..-_-__~ -L--»-+ -
kI92qIni?"G_ -92k,=s.-L I.~t -- ..,. ._,-:.t.-age-- .-s .. e _.. -- _...-........
z_ ats.
1
4
Il
Pt_"lL
.,. Y:1. »92;
I
O
Q
e92 -
____,..jsnn1-'e~'r- .1- "- erode-i-tr -1- - ~_:.~
'92
leather mask with his which laces np"at the he told III __ i
mm. . vrhowore it. 1 asked Stephen Ward about this. He . '-
h_ehadbeenpresentattheparty._butsaidthat_nooneprominent _,
there. He denied that he said it was the iviinister. He
e-venseenhim.Butheadmittedthathemighthavesaidin
heard it was Mr.-. . .'the other-dayf. The-story soon got elebolllill
One of the girls told another that there was a photograph ct this
with the mask on and nothing else. and a little card saying " If my services
don't please you, whip me ". Soon it was said that one of the newspapers
had the photograph. All I would say is that I have made the closest
inquiries to. see it there is such a photograph, and there is none. At any
rate no one admits having one or having seen one. I have appealed for
any photographs or other material to be produced. No one has come forward
to produce any.
325. I am satised that the events I have described are the origin of
the rumour that this Minister was the man in the mask. It is wholly hearsay
derived from Stephen Ward. He is so untrustworthy an origin-so given to
dropping names-that no one should give any credence to any report
emanating from him. But I would not wish to leave this matter merely by
saying that the rumour was not proved against this Minister. There was
much to disprove it. I have seen quite a number of those who were at these
mu-ripe Qnmi-. nf them were aetnninhinolv frsmlr nhnut Hue. tminos-on. One of [no--.--in vv_-- V; U--v-u u --- _...-v...»-......=.J _----.- ----- --- Q-_a_ -_- __. __
them in particular, a solicitor, impressed me by his truthfulness. He told
me the names of many present. They did not include any Minister or
any person prominent in public life. The host and hostess and the solicitor
identied tor me the man in the mask: and this man actually came and
gave evidence before me. He is now grievously ashamed of what he did.
He does not bear any resemblance whatever to the Minister who was the
victim of rumour. '
326. Apart from hearsay, there was not a shred of evidence adduced
before rne that the man in the mas: the Minister named, and the
rumour was disproved as far is it was humanly possible to disprove it, by
producing the people who organised these parties and some of those who
attended them. I reject it therefore as utterly unfounded.
327. I cannot leave this rumour. however, without mentioning that
some oi the newspapers believed it because of an earlier rumour they had
heard about this Minister. It was rumoured that in 1957 he had been involved
in an improper incident in Shepherds Market, about a man who, being
chased by a policeman, hurriedly left a house by foot, leaving his car behind.
It was rumoured that it was the Ministers car and that he took the preetionof contacting Scotland Yard, announcing his identity. and giving
that his car had been stolen. I have caused an elaborate search to bi,
and there is no record of any such incident or any notication to i
Yard at all. It there had been any such notication of a stolen car lid! Ii
the rumour suggests! a record would have been made of it. There is none.
There is therefore not a shred of evidence to support this additional rumour.
I09D... y
1., '
a - .W _ -7
._|