On 21 June 1963, almost three weeks before Stephen Ward came to trial, the Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, set up an enquiry into the security aspects of the Profumo affair. It was headed by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Alfred Denning and Macmillan hoped a report, to be published at the end of the year, would stop ‘the flood of accusations and rumour.’

Denning later wrote: ‘I saw Ministers of the Crown, the Security Service, rumour-mongers and prostitutes. Some of the evidence I heard was so disgusting that I sent the lady shorthand writers out, and no note was taken.’ This ridiculous man described Steven Ward as ‘the most evil man I have ever met.’

I am sorry to say that his Lordship’s prose would not meet the standard expected of contributors to this forum. Much of the report is written in short, jerky sentences and this, no doubt, is an outward and visible sign of the masturbation he enjoyed whilst scribbling.

A photograph of Alfie and extracts from the report will follow.

What, I wonder, are his hands concealing?

He looks like the star of one of those cheap caning video's sent over from your side of the pond.

From ‘The Principal Persons’ – the first chapter of Lord Denning’s report:

The story must start with Stephen Ward, aged fifty. The son of a clergyman, by profession he was an osteopath with consulting rooms at 38, Devonshire Street W.1. His skill was very considerable and he included among his patients many well-known people. He was also an accomplished portrait artist. His sitters included people of much eminence. He had a quick and easy manner of conversation which attracted some but repelled others. It pleased him to meet people in high places, and he was prone to exaggerate the nature of acquaintanceships with them. He would speak of many of them as if they were great friends when, more often than not, he had only treated them as patients or drawn their portraits.

Yet he was at the same time utterly immoral. He had a small house or flat in London at 17, Wimpole Mews W.1. and a country cottage on the Cliveden estate next to the River Thames. He used to pick up pretty girls at the age of sixteen or seventeen, often from night clubs and induce them to come and stay with him at his house in London. He used to take these girls down at weekends to his cottage. He seduced many of these himself. He also procured them to be mistresses for his influential friends. He did not confine his attention to promiscuity. He catered also for those of his friends who had perverted tastes. There is evidence that he was ready to arrange for whipping and other sadistic performances. [I would guess that His Lordship had a wank at this point.] He kept collections of pornographic photographs. [Another wank?] He attended parties where there were sexual orgies of a revolting nature. [Wank, wank, wank.]

In money matters he was improvident. He did not keep a wanking account. He got a firm of solicitors to keep a sort of wanking account for him, paying in cheques occasionally to them and getting them to pay his rent. More often he cashed cheques through other people; or paid his bills with incoming cheques. He had many cash transactions which left no trace.

Finally, he admired the Soviet regime and sympathised with the communists. He used to advocate their cause in conversation with his patients, so much so that several became suspicious of him. He became very friendly with a Russian, Captain Eugene Ivanov.

BORDEAUX, France (Reuters) - A French judge was placed under official investigation for "sexual exposure" in a courtroom, prosecutors said on Friday, after a newspaper reported the judge masturbated while a lawyer pleaded her case.
The 39-year old judge masturbated for several minutes on Wednesday while listening to a female lawyer addressing the court in a case dealing with a dispute between neighbors, regional paper La Charente Libre said.
One of the paper's reporters saw the judge "making unambiguous gestures after discretely lifting his judicial robe and opening his trousers," it said.
The judge was temporarily suspended from his professional duties and examined by a psychiatrist, a prosecutor in the southwestern town of Angouleme said.

More from the first chapter:

Christine Keeler is a girl, now aged 21, whose home is at Wraysbury. She left home at the age of 16 and went to London. She was soon employed at the Murray Cabaret Club as a showgirl, which involved, as she put it, just walking around with no clothes on. [Wank] She had only been at the Cabaret Club a short time when Stephen Ward came there and they danced together. Thereafter he often telephoned her and took her out. After a very few days he asked her to go and live with him. She went. She ran away from him many times but she always went back. He seemed to control her. She lived with him at 17, Wimpole Mews, from about June, 1961 to March, 1962. He took her to his country cottage at Cliveden and her introduced her to many men, sometimes men of rank and position, with whom she had sexual intercourse. [I will insert no more of His Lordship’s wanking points. They would spoil the flow of his jewelled prose.] A jury has since found him guilty on a charge of living on the earnings of her prostitution. She had undoubted physical attractions. Later on he introduced her also to the drug Indian hemp and she became addicted to it. She met coloured men who trafficked in it and she went to live with them.

Mr. Profumo was Secretary of State for War from July, 1960 to June, 1963… He has a distinguished record of service to the country… No one can doubt that a man with such a record was entitled to the confidence of his colleagues and of the country; and it should not be assumed by anyone that he would give away secret information. Whatever indiscretions he may have committed, and whatever falsehoods he may have told, no one who has given evidence before me has doubted his loyalty.

Mr. Profumo married in 1954 Miss Valerie Hobson, a talented actress, and her support of him over their difficult days is one of the most redeeming features of the events I have to describe.

The following extract is from the ‘Rumours Arising Directly Out Of The Profumo Affair’ chapter. I wonder why this sick man chose to write about the ‘Man in the Mask’ in his report. I am not happy about posting it on our forum, but have been requested so to do.

His Lordship wrote:

THE MAN IN THE MASK

Early in June 1963, a rumour spread through Fleet Street and thence 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 result of statements made by Christine Keeler and Marilyn Rice-Davies. The statement by Christine Keeler was contained in the story told by her to the Press. It was signed by her and Marilyn Rice-Davies on 8th. February, 1963. This is what she said:

“The more rich and influential people I met the more amazed I was at their private lives. Names who are household words take part in the most obscene things. One night I was invited to a dinner party at the home of a very, very rich man. After I arrived, I discovered it was a rather unusual dinner party. All the guests had taken off their clothes. There were both men and women there and the men included people I would not have suspected of ever doing anything improper. There was one well-known barrister who, I am sure, would be willing to make stirring speeches attacking that sort of thing. There were also some well-known actors and a politician whom I recognised. The most intriguing person, however, was a man with a black mask over his face. At first 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. The guests were not just ardent nudists. Even I was disgusted”.

This was the story as told by Marilyn Rice-Davies to the police and signed by her on 14th. June, 1963:

“About six people have told me (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 girls whose names I cannot remember and it is common talk among Fleet Street reporters”.

The story found its way into newspapers in this country and also in countries abroad where it was said that a prominent public figure was the man in the mask. There is a great deal of evidence which satisfied me [!] that there is a group of people who hold parties in private of a perverted nature. At some 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. But at others I am satisfied [by another wank] that it is followed by perverted sex orgies; that the man in the mask 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.

Lord Wanking continues:

My only concern in my enquiry was to see whether any Minister or other person prominent in public life was present at these parties; for, if he were, he would, I should think, be exposing himself to blackmail. I enquired closely therefore into the matter. In particular I endeavoured to find who was present.

Stephen Ward was undoubtedly present at some of these parties. On one occasion there seems to have been more men than women, and he telephoned the two girls, Christine Keeler and Marilyn Rice-Davies, and asked them to come. They came in towards the end of the party. Stephen Ward told them about the man in the mask and asked one of them “Guess who it is? It is Mr….” Ward seems to have got hold of the mask afterwards and given it to another girl who tells me that she still has it – a black leather mask with slits which laces up at the back – [His Lordship has already done that bit] and he told her that it was Mr…. who wore it. I asked Stephen Ward about this. He admitted he had been present at the party, but said no one prominent [!] had been there. He denied that he said it was the Minister. He said he had never even seen him. But he admitted that he might have said in fun “I even heard it was Mr…. the other day”. The story soon got elaborated. One of the girls told another that there was a photograph of this Minister 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 if 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 [what can he mean?] to be produced. No one has come forward to produce any.

Lord Wanking concludes:

I am satisfied [isn’t he always?] 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. [This is disgraceful. The old sod is writing as if Stephen was still alive]. 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 parties. Some of them were astonishingly frank about the goings-on. On of them in particular, a solicitor, impressed me with 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 identified for 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.

Apart from hearsay, there was not a shred of evidence adduced before me that the man in the mask was the Minister named, and the rumour was disproved as far as 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.

I cannot leave this rumour, however, without mentioning that some of the newspapers belived 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 Shepherd’s Market, about a man who, being chased by a policeman, hurriedly left a house by foot, leaving his car behind. [When Denning does write a long sentence it is sometimes difficult to catch his drift]. It was rumoured that it was the Minister’s car and that he took the precaution of contacting Scotland Yard, announcing his identity, and giving notification that his car had been stolen. I have caused an elaborate search to be made and there is no record of any such incident or any notification to Scotland Yard at all. If there had been any such notification of a stolen car (such as 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.

There have been many rumours reported to me of names of persons prominent in public life who have been said to have been involved with the Ward girls. They were so nebulous that it was difficult to deal with them. Suffice it to say that in every case I found a wholly innocent origin, such as that Stephen Ward had drawn a picture of a prominent person and that he had ‘dropped’ the name as if a friend of his. In no case has there been a shred of evidence to support the rumour. I reject them all as utterly without foundation.

Much to the annoyance of Christine, Lord Wanking chose to include in his report a chapter entitled ‘Rumours Arising Indirectly out of the Profumo Affair’. One of the rumoured rumours was the rumour of the ‘Headless Man’ rumour.

His Lordship wrote:

There were in June and July, 1963 rumours arising indirectly out of the Profumo affair, in this sense, that they were given credence because of it and became merged in the vast crop of rumours then circulating: and, for the reasons I have given, I have inquired into them.

“The Man without a Head”

A certain Minister brought two connected rumours to my attention concerning himself which I also heard from other sources. They were referred to in foreign newspapers too. He pointed out that these were of a damaging nature and asked me to inquire into them:

That he was the unknown man in an improper photograph which featured in the recent Argyll divorce case: and that a copy of this photograph was in the possession of Stephen Ward. (Another version of this rumour was that the Minister paid a sum of money to the Duke to have the photograph altered so as to have his head removed from it.)

That he paid money to prevent himself being cited in the Argyll divorce case: and that Stephen Ward acted as an intermediary in this transaction.

As to the first rumour, it has been demonstrated to my entire satisfaction that the “unknown” man in the photographs was not this Minister. All the photographs in the case have been produced to me. The man’s head did not appear in any of them. In order to enable me to dispose of the matter, the Minister offered to undergo a medical examination: and he was examined by a medical man whose name was suggested by me, and who is of the highest eminence. The medical man proved conclusively that the man in the photograph was not this Minister. He gave me a written report in which he set out convincing detail. He showed that the physical characteristics of the ‘unknown’ man differed in unmistakable and significant respects from those of the Minister.

Furthermore there were words written in capital letters below some of the photographs: and the photographs themselves were enclosed in a piece of notepaper on which there were sentences with capital letters. It is clear that the “unknown man” wrote the words in capital letters on the piece of paper and on the photographs. I have had the handwriting examined by an expert who compared it with a specimen of the handwriting of the Minister, taken without prior warning. The expert was able to prove conclusively that the writing on the photographs and that on the notepaper were by the same hand by not the writing of the Minister. The notepaper was the paper of a London Club, of which it may be fairly presumed that the unknown man is a member. But the Minister is not a member of that Club. There was further evidence before me (which was not before the judge in the Argyll case) which indicated who the “unknown man” actually was. But I need not go into it here. Suffice it that it was not the Minister.

The ‘Minister’ referred to by Lord Wanking was Duncan Sandys. It is now believed that there were two headless men in the photographs – Duncan Sandys and the actor Douglas Fairbanks Junior.

His Lordship continues to be satisfied:

As to the second rumour, here again it has been demonstrated to my entire satisfaction that the Minister did not pay money to prevent himself being cited in the divorce case. I am quite satisfied that right from the very beginning the Duke of Argyll put before his legal advisers all the evidence he had of adultery by his wife with anyone: and that he told them that they were not on any account to be influenced by the identity of any individual: and that, if there was any evidence against a prominent man, they were not to consider his position. [Unless, of course, it was soixante-neuf]. His legal advisers included some of the most respected and honoured names in the profession: and it was on their advice that the case was confined to the three named men and the “unknown man” in the photograph with whom I have already dealt above. At my request they gave me the fullest information about the case, and I am satisfied that their advice was sound. It was a hard fought case and no feelings were spared. I am satisfied that the Minister would have been cited if there had been evidence to justify it: and that the only reason he was not cited was because there was not such evidence.

That being so, there was no reason for the Minister to offer a sum of money, and I am satisfied that he did not do so. The Minister freely produced for my inspection his bank accounts for the relevant period, and there is not a trace of any sum of money have been paid directly or indirectly to or for the benefit of the Duke.

I have therefore come to conclusion that this rumour also is entirely without foundation.