A Very English Scandal by John Preston

A Very English Scandal by John Preston

Sex, Lies and a Murder Plot at the Heart of the Establishment

#AVeryEnglishScandal, #JohnPreston, #PoliticalThriller, #TrueCrime, #BritishHistory, #Audiobooks, #BookSummary

✍️ John Preston ✍️ History

Table of Contents

Introduction

Summary of the book A Very English Scandal by John Preston. Let’s begin by briefly exploring the book’s overview. Imagine a world where powerful people live behind thick curtains of respectability, projecting perfect smiles and noble ideals for all to admire. Yet, beyond those curtains, something else lurks: secret desires, hidden crimes, and silent deals. In mid-twentieth-century Britain, whispers spread through quiet corridors, hinting that not everyone stood equal before the law. These whispers spoke of backroom arrangements, concealed letters, and desperate attempts to keep personal missteps away from public eyes. One politician’s story in particular captured these unsettling truths. It highlighted how, if one carried the right credentials and rubbed shoulders with the proper allies, justice itself could be shaped, twisted, and bent. That politician’s name was Jeremy Thorpe, a leader who once inspired admiration and hope but would become known for one of Britain’s strangest scandals. This journey will unravel how secret relationships, dark schemes, and hidden strings turned a celebrated figure into a living controversy you cannot ignore.

Chapter 1: A Rising Star’s Secret Desires and the Hidden Dangers of Ambition .

In the world of British politics during the mid-twentieth century, Jeremy Thorpe emerged as a dazzling young figure, full of bright ideas and charming charisma. To many ordinary citizens, he appeared as a beacon of hope, someone who might gently guide the nation toward a better future. Born into privilege, educated at Eton, and shaped by the lofty halls of Oxford, Thorpe’s circle included some of the most respected and well-connected individuals in Britain. He mingled effortlessly with aristocrats, journalists, and rising stars, always wearing a confident grin that made him almost untouchable. Publicly, he pushed forward policies that appealed to those craving change, projecting an image of progressive leadership and genuine care for the well-being of all. Yet behind the neatly tailored suits and polished speech, Thorpe guarded a secret life that, if revealed, could dismantle his perfect public image and shake the nation’s faith in its cherished institutions.

This secret emerged not from ordinary wrongdoing but from something considered scandalous in the social climate of the time: his attraction to other men. Homosexuality, then still illegal in Britain, carried both social shame and legal dangers. For a public figure like Thorpe, revealing such desires risked shattering his ambitions and reputation. He understood the high stakes. Despite his outward coolness, Thorpe must have felt constant pressure and anxiety, knowing that just one misplaced word, one letter exposed, or one disgruntled lover’s whisper could pull the rug out from under him. To survive and thrive in politics, he learned the art of careful concealment—speaking in codes, trusting only a handful of allies, and maintaining an outward persona that was squeaky clean. This delicate balancing act between public respectability and private truth demanded extraordinary nerve, and Thorpe believed he could handle it all without ever being found out.

But fate had other plans. In the early 1960s, Thorpe crossed paths with a young, emotionally fragile man named Norman Scott. Their meeting might have seemed unremarkable to outsiders, just a friendly suggestion that Scott reach out if he ever needed a helping hand. Yet Thorpe’s interest in Scott went beyond offering polite assistance. The relationship that followed would become deeply complicated and fraught with emotional turmoil. Scott, a man searching for stability and validation, found himself drawn into Thorpe’s orbit, unaware of the danger lurking beneath that polished exterior. Thorpe, in turn, saw Scott not only as a personal indulgence but also as a living risk—someone who might one day, intentionally or not, betray his well-kept secret to the world. This fragile bond, built on hidden desires and half-truths, would soon prove impossible to control, sparking a chain of events that no one could predict.

As their relationship deepened, Scott claimed that their initial sexual encounter was not consensual, implying that Thorpe had forced himself upon him in a moment of hidden cruelty. While the truth of that encounter remains shrouded in conflicting versions, one thing became increasingly clear: Scott would not fade quietly from Thorpe’s life. He wanted help obtaining a national insurance card—an essential document for legitimate work—and he expected Thorpe to deliver on the promises made in the glow of their early acquaintance. Growing frustrated and feeling mistreated, Scott began sharing stories of their affair. In a society still punishing same-sex love, these whispered tales held tremendous destructive power. As Scott’s accusations and demands escalated, Thorpe realized that this young man, who once seemed like a small indulgence, now represented a looming threat. It was the beginning of a perilous dance between public reputation and private desperation.

Chapter 2: Two Loyal Allies, Twisted Favors, and a Web of Deceit .

When the strain of dealing with Scott’s allegations became too much, Thorpe turned to two men he considered trustworthy allies: David Holmes and Peter Bessel. These men belonged to Thorpe’s network, a web spun from social ties, political favors, and personal understandings. Holmes, known to share Thorpe’s attraction to men, had been close to the rising politician since their university days. Bessel, a struggling businessman and fellow Liberal Party member, enjoyed Thorpe’s support as a benefactor who often used wealthy donors to keep Bessel afloat. Both men owed much to Thorpe’s influence and understood that their success and status were linked to his continued prosperity. They viewed Thorpe as someone who had paved their paths to opportunity and were prepared to return the favor, no matter how unpleasant or morally questionable it might become.

Under Thorpe’s instructions, Holmes and Bessel attempted to buy Scott’s silence through regular payments. Their strategy was simple: if Scott received a steady flow of money, perhaps he would keep his mouth shut and stop parading his damaging stories to anyone who would listen. Yet one crucial request from Scott—a valid national insurance card—presented a major problem. Issuing that card would create undeniable evidence connecting Thorpe directly to Scott. It would be a tangible link, a paper trail that could topple Thorpe’s carefully built public façade. Bessel and Holmes realized this and rejected the request. They hoped that the payments alone might calm Scott’s anger, helping him settle into a quiet life far from the political spotlight. But Scott was not easily discouraged, and every attempt to bribe him into silence only seemed to fan the flames of his resentment.

Scott’s defiance pushed Thorpe closer to the edge. As his political career soared, the stakes grew higher. More people were taking notice of Thorpe, and any hint of scandal could bring it all crashing down. Meanwhile, Scott grew bolder, showing letters from Thorpe to the police and even contacting Thorpe’s mother, hoping to extract money or assistance. The fear and frustration in Thorpe’s inner circle rose. The idea that had once seemed unthinkable now lurked in the shadows: perhaps, to protect his reputation, something far more drastic would be required. Although Holmes and Bessel originally dismissed the notion of violence, their loyalty to Thorpe prevented them from simply walking away. They stuck around, hoping that the situation would resolve itself, or that Thorpe would eventually abandon this dark solution and find another way out.

Yet Thorpe’s mind wandered into darker territory. He referred to the ultimate solution, a horrifying euphemism for murder. If Scott could not be silenced with money or favor, maybe he could be silenced permanently. It was a dreadful thought that tested the boundaries of morality and loyalty. Holmes and Bessel, caught between fear of being dragged down and the duty to protect their benefactor, struggled to say no outright. Instead, they stalled, kept paying Scott off, and hoped reason would prevail. But reason was slipping from Thorpe’s grasp. He saw Scott as a loose thread that, if pulled, would unravel his entire tapestry of influence and prestige. With each failed attempt to calm Scott, Thorpe stepped closer to a line that once seemed unimaginable. The world around him was about to become more sinister than he ever dared imagine.

Chapter 3: Secret Funds, Shadowy Deals, and the Plot to End a Life .

By the mid-1970s, Thorpe had risen to the leadership of the Liberal Party, becoming a figure who carried weight in national debates. Yet no matter how high he climbed, the problem of Norman Scott still clung to his coattails. In a desperate attempt to rid himself of this persistent threat, Thorpe turned to secret financial maneuvers. He requested a large donation of £17,000 from a generous party backer, Jack Hayward, claiming it would fund political efforts like electoral reform. However, Thorpe had hidden intentions. He asked for £10,000 of that sum to be placed in a separate account, not the official party coffers. This shadowy request raised eyebrows, but Thorpe’s smooth tongue and influence convinced Hayward it was necessary. Behind the scenes, that segregated £10,000 would become the war chest for something far darker than any political campaign.

The money ended up in the account of Nadir Dinshah, the godfather of Thorpe’s young son, marking a crucial financial step in the plan to eliminate Scott. Once the funds were secured, it fell to Holmes to find a suitable assassin. After one hired gun backed out, Holmes turned to an acquaintance who introduced him to Andrew Newton, an airline pilot who seemed willing to carry out dirty deeds for the right price. Holmes made it clear: Newton could choose his own method. If Scott disappeared, Holmes would pay him handsomely. The entire idea was chilling—political figures plotting murder to safeguard their reputations. This was no small-time thuggery in back alleys; it involved men in respectable suits, forging secret agreements to end a life that threatened their public image.

Newton began stalking Scott, learning his habits and waiting for the right moment. Eventually, he befriended the unsuspecting man and offered him a ride through the rural landscapes of southwest England. Sensing that something felt odd about this sudden friendly overture, Scott asked a friend to note down Newton’s car license plate number. That small step would later prove invaluable. As they drove through the quiet beauty of Exmoor, Newton prepared to carry out the grim plan. When he stopped the car, he drew a gun, intending to end Scott’s life right there. Instead, the weapon malfunctioned at the critical moment. In panic and frustration, Newton fired and killed Scott’s dog but failed to shoot Scott himself. Shocked and terrified, Scott fled, managing to find help and later report the incident.

This botched assassination attempt did more than spare Scott’s life—it cracked open the secret web Thorpe and his associates had woven. Newton’s involvement could be traced through his vehicle, leading investigators straight to Holmes. Once that link was established, the door to a deeper investigation swung wide open. Scott, who had long struggled to convince anyone of Thorpe’s hidden dealings, now had a gruesome piece of evidence to back his claims. A murdered dog, a terrified victim, and a suspicious airline pilot were not so easily dismissed. Suddenly, the authorities could not ignore Scott’s allegations. The situation had escalated beyond whispered rumors or private letters; it was a matter of life and death. With public interest rising and the police now forced to dig deeper, it was only a matter of time before Thorpe himself would be called to explain.

Chapter 4: Courtroom Dramas, Shrewd Lawyers, and the Struggle to Uncover Truth .

By 1979, Jeremy Thorpe found himself facing the unimaginable: standing trial for attempted murder. He became the first Member of Parliament to face such charges, and the media circus around the case was enormous. Britain had rarely seen anything like it, and the public watched, mesmerized. Journalists followed every twist, hungry for revelations. They dug into Thorpe’s past, scrutinizing every relationship, every letter, every odd financial move. For Thorpe, a man accustomed to praise and admiration, this plunge into scandal was a nightmare. Yet even now, he clung to a steadfast belief in his own influence. He knew brilliant lawyers, he had powerful friends, and he believed that somehow he would emerge unscathed from the storm. In court, his fate would hinge on the credibility of witnesses and the cunning of attorneys who knew how to twist a narrative to their client’s advantage.

One witness who would prove vital was Peter Bessel, who had assisted Thorpe in his attempts to pacify Scott. Bessel, offered immunity from prosecution, agreed to testify against his former mentor. In stark contrast, David Holmes, who had been deeply involved in the assassination plot, refused to betray Thorpe. This created a complex dynamic in the courtroom. The prosecution leaned heavily on Bessel’s testimony and the connection to Andrew Newton’s failed murder attempt. But George Carman, Thorpe’s sharp defense lawyer, fought fiercely to undermine Bessel’s credibility. He painted Bessel as an unreliable gossip chaser who might say anything for money or personal gain. Meanwhile, the British media fed the public’s hunger for scandalous details, and everyone had an opinion about the case. The once-revered politician looked more like a cunning trickster trying to dodge responsibility for a terrible crime.

Carman’s skill in shaping the narrative proved formidable. He seized on every inconsistency in the witnesses’ stories, every hint that Scott, Bessel, or Newton might be acting out of spite, greed, or personal instability. The defense aimed to show that Thorpe’s accusers were motivated by jealousy or resentment, and that their claims were nothing but tall tales spun for attention or financial reward. This strategy took advantage of the jury’s doubt. If the accusers seemed unreliable, if the murder plot felt too outlandish to be true, then perhaps Thorpe was just another victim of malicious rumor. At the same time, the British public wrestled with conflicting emotions. Could a man so polished, so respected, truly have stooped to murder? Or was the entire affair a theatrical show put on by petty liars seeking fame or fortune?

As the trial proceeded, the tension became almost unbearable. This was not just about the fate of one politician; it was a test of Britain’s cherished idea that all men were equal before the law. If Thorpe, with all his connections and resources, could escape justice despite overwhelming suspicion, what did that say about the integrity of the system itself? Media observers noted how calmly Thorpe carried himself, still hoping that, despite everything, he might someday restore his political career. The final outcome would be influenced not only by the arguments in the courtroom but also by subtle forces outside it—unspoken pressures, class loyalties, and the quiet understanding that certain people simply were not to be disgraced. What began as a scandal involving two men’s private desires had grown into a landmark moment that would shape how the public perceived the fairness of British justice.

Chapter 5: Hidden Hands of Power, Unnamed Allies, and a Judge’s Odd Favor .

Behind the scenes of the trial, the British establishment’s quiet influence appeared to be at play. The choice of the trial’s presiding judge, Joseph Cantlie, seemed no random selection. A known associate of Thorpe’s ally, Lord Elwyn Jones, Cantlie was a man whose conservative views and limited understanding of sexual matters might make him more sympathetic to a respectable politician than to seemingly disreputable accusers. Judge Cantlie’s own personal story—rumored abstinence until a ripe old age—suggested someone who might find it hard to believe that a polished public figure like Thorpe could be tangled up in sordid affairs. In his mind, gentlemen did not commit such acts, and anyone claiming otherwise was either deluded or lying. This mindset hovered over the courtroom, coloring every piece of evidence and every line of testimony.

When Judge Cantlie addressed the jury at the trial’s end, he made his feelings clear. He strongly implied that the case against Thorpe lacked credibility, urging the jury to be absolutely certain if they chose to convict. His closing remarks bordered on a direct endorsement of Thorpe’s innocence, sending a powerful signal. The establishment, it seemed, wanted Thorpe back in the shadows, free from legal chains. Even before the trial began, actions were taken to weaken the prosecution’s witnesses. For instance, Peter Bessel had signed a lucrative deal with a newspaper for exclusive stories on the affair. This deal, apparently approved by someone in the prosecution’s orbit, would naturally damage Bessel’s credibility. A witness who profits from telling tales to the press does not appear trustworthy, and jurors might dismiss his testimony as bought and paid for.

Some believed that high-ranking figures engineered these subtle manipulations, ensuring that key witnesses came across as greedy opportunists rather than honest whistleblowers. If Bessel was seen as a man chasing money and attention, it would be easier for the defense to discredit him, making it harder for the jury to accept his account of events. Thus, the establishment’s quiet interventions seemed aimed at preserving Thorpe’s image and avoiding a guilty verdict. The trial had turned into a stage where not just lawyers but invisible hands behind the curtain were performing their own acts. Every twist and turn served the purpose of guiding the public away from believing that a British political leader might orchestrate something as sinister as murder.

By the time the verdict was delivered, much of the potential damning evidence had been diluted. The jury eventually acquitted Thorpe, sparing him a prison sentence. Yet the stain of the scandal still clung to him. Though free from legal punishment, Thorpe’s reputation suffered severe damage. He never reclaimed his former political glory, and his dreams of receiving a peerage remained just that—dreams. Observers shook their heads and wondered how much the system had bent to protect one of its own. This quiet dance of influence and suggestion demonstrated that even in a place hailed for fairness, certain individuals seemed to enjoy extraordinary shields. The Thorpe case would remain as proof that the line between justice and favor could blur, and that the well-connected might escape consequences that would destroy ordinary lives.

Chapter 6: Deep Layers of Corruption, Protected Figures, and the Echoes of Dangerous Silence .

The Jeremy Thorpe affair was not the only instance where the British establishment appeared willing to place reputation and comfort above truth and accountability. History would uncover many stories suggesting a pattern: those with power and status often found themselves gently cushioned against the harsh realities of the law. For example, long after Thorpe’s trial ended, shocking revelations emerged about another Liberal politician, Cyril Smith. Smith, it turned out, had been a serial abuser of children, protected for decades by silence and intimidation. Complaints filed against him had simply vanished or been tucked away. Law enforcement officers who tried to raise alarms were warned to stay quiet or risk their jobs. The parallels were clear: high-profile figures, shielded by connections and friends in high places, could operate as though laws were flexible guidelines rather than rigid rules.

As the truth about Cyril Smith dripped into public view after his death, the outrage grew. How had this man escaped justice for so long, despite more than a hundred complaints? How had no one stopped him from preying on vulnerable children? The answer seemed to lie in the very same protective mechanisms that had shielded Thorpe. Power, influence, and the maintenance of a respectable public image mattered more than the pain of victims. Courageous officers who tried to shine a light on Smith’s crimes were confronted by senior figures who told them to keep quiet. The message was clear: certain individuals were untouchable, and stirring up trouble would lead only to personal downfall.

Smith was not alone in benefiting from such dreadful favoritism. Another disturbing figure, the entertainer Jimmy Savile, who had publicly supported Thorpe during an election campaign, was revealed after his death to have committed horrendous acts against vulnerable individuals, including children and hospital patients. Savile moved in circles where he rubbed shoulders with the elite, and his image as a charitable, eccentric figure had long shielded him from scrutiny. His misdeeds, like Smith’s, were brushed aside or not fully investigated when it mattered. The connection between these men and the establishment’s inability or unwillingness to hold them accountable reinforced the suspicion that British justice often tilted in favor of the powerful and well-connected.

Just as with Thorpe, it wasn’t lack of evidence that protected these men, but the subtle pressures and unspoken rules guiding those in authority. Police files disappeared, witnesses were discredited, and media outlets were discouraged from digging too deep. What mattered was preserving an image of orderly decency, of a Britain where wrongdoing was punished equally. In reality, when famous figures committed terrible acts, the system could twist itself to keep the truth buried. The cycle repeated: hush the victims, threaten the truth-tellers, and wrap the guilty in layers of privileged secrecy. The Thorpe scandal, Smith’s cover-ups, and Savile’s hidden horrors all pointed to a deeply rooted flaw. When confronted by disturbing truths, the establishment’s reflex was to deny and protect its own, leaving ordinary people to wonder whether true justice could ever break free from these shadows.

Chapter 7: Unseen Strings, Lasting Lessons, and the Ever-Present Shadows of Privilege .

Reflecting on these cases, it becomes clear that Jeremy Thorpe’s story was never just about one man’s hidden desires or one attempted murder. It represented a system of quiet understandings, unwritten agreements, and secret trades that shaped Britain’s corridors of power. Even as decades passed, the lessons remained relevant: when individuals with enough influence stand accused, investigations may be softened or derailed. The safeguards of democracy—an independent press, diligent police, honest courts—sometimes fail to break through the protective shell of privilege. Ordinary citizens who believed in fairness and honesty found themselves confronted by the uncomfortable truth that the system, so praised for its impartiality, could bend under well-placed pressure.

To a young observer, this might feel deeply unsettling. Imagine being taught that everyone, from the wealthiest lord to the humblest worker, faces the same blind justice. Then imagine discovering that, behind closed doors, a handshake, a nod, or a subtle arrangement can shift the scales. This dissonance challenges the very heart of what a fair society should stand for. It encourages us to ask tough questions: Who decides whose secrets are worth hiding? Why do some scandals vanish, leaving no permanent record of wrongdoing, while others lead to swift punishment? The Thorpe affair forces a confrontation with these uncomfortable mysteries, urging vigilant skepticism when confronted with polished public figures who claim to have only noble intentions.

What the Thorpe scandal and similar cases teach us is to look beyond appearances and seek the deeper truths lying in the shadows. Just as Thorpe’s seemingly spotless reputation masked dangerous secrets, other figures might wear similar masks. This does not mean there is no justice in Britain or that every figure of authority is corrupt. Rather, it means that vigilance, transparency, and courage are always needed to keep the system honest. Journalists who refuse to be silenced, police officers who won’t abandon tough investigations, and citizens who demand accountability all play roles in challenging the unseen strings of influence. When we shine light into these dark corners, we help ensure that no one is too powerful to be questioned.

In the end, the story of Jeremy Thorpe’s scandal lingers as a reminder that justice, while claimed to be equal and fair, sometimes needs a push from those bold enough to ask difficult questions. Power can coil around the law, attempting to choke it into submission. Yet, truth can still find a way through determined voices who will not accept half-answers. By studying cases like Thorpe’s, we learn the value of questioning official narratives and looking behind public smiles. We learn to recognize the subtle signs of privilege and to demand that respectability be earned through honesty, not purchased through quiet deals. Even years after the scandal, the memory encourages us to remain watchful, to understand that the journey toward true justice is ongoing, and that the shadows of privilege must continually be met with light, scrutiny, and unwavering resolve.

All about the Book

Delve into the scandalous world of British politics with ‘A Very English Scandal, ‘ where intrigue, betrayal, and dark humor unveil a captivating true story about power and notoriety that shaped a generation.

John Preston is an acclaimed British author and journalist, celebrated for his incisive exploration of complex historical narratives and his ability to weave compelling, thought-provoking stories that captivate readers.

Political analysts, Historians, Lawyers, Journalists, Sociologists

Reading political biographies, Following British history, Watching political dramas, Engaging in debates, Exploring historical scandals

Political corruption, LGBTQ+ rights, Media ethics, Societal hypocrisy

The truth is rarely pure and never simple.

Stephen Fry, David Mitchell, Russell T Davies

James Tait Black Memorial Prize, British Book Award, Costa Book Awards

1. What fueled the scandal surrounding Jeremy Thorpe’s life? #2. How did the political landscape impact Thorpe’s career? #3. In what ways was society’s view on homosexuality changing? #4. Who were the key players in Thorpe’s scandal? #5. What role did the media play in the investigation? #6. How did personal ambition shape Thorpe’s decisions? #7. What were the implications of the 1967 Sexual Offences Act? #8. How did Thorpe’s upbringing influence his political life? #9. What tactics were used to manipulate public perception? #10. In which ways did the scandal affect public trust? #11. How did legal battles unfold throughout the scandal? #12. What ethical dilemmas did Thorpe face as a politician? #13. How did the events affect the Liberal Party’s reputation? #14. What was the significance of the trial’s public scrutiny? #15. How did past relationships complicate Thorpe’s situation? #16. What lessons can be learned about power and accountability? #17. How did the investigation impact journalism standards? #18. In what ways does the book reflect on justice? #19. How was the LGBTQ+ community portrayed during this era? #20. What legacy did Thorpe’s scandal leave for future politics?

A Very English Scandal, John Preston books, British political scandals, historical non-fiction, true crime books, English political history, biographies of public figures, scandalous stories, politics in Britain, famous court cases, literary non-fiction, best-selling biographies

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1529110403

https://audiofire.in/wp-content/uploads/covers/4206.png

https://www.youtube.com/@audiobooksfire

audiofireapplink