2003-03-23 – So why take my guns, and not his?’
Dunblane reports finally allowed out

Thomas Hamilton shot and killed 17 in the primary school in Dunblane (nothing to do with Gill Marshall-Andrews, by the way.) The resulting uproar saw the files in the public inquiry locked away for 100 years. The government banned all pistols, and massively increased the number of hoops to be jumped through to get an FAC. The 100 year closure was illegal in itself. Hence the files have now been released. I feel the following speaks for itself.

Firearms Certificate – Thomas Watt Hamilton born l0/5/52, 7 Kent Road, Stirling

I refer to the above and have to report as follows. On Tuesday, 23rd July, 1991 the Child Protection Unit, Bannockburn, became involved in an investigation surrounding allegations regarding the above-named’s treatment of a group of children whom he had taken on a summer holiday camp to Loch Lomond. Hamilton is a self-styled ‘youth leader’ and as such runs boys’ clubs in Dunblane, Stirling and Dunfermline.
During the course of my investigation I discovered that Hamilton was no stranger to controversy and similar investigations had been undertaken by this and Strathclyde Police Forces in the past. Hamilton also features in local criminal Intelligence files. Throughout my investigation I met and spoke with Hamilton on a number of occasions. It is as a result of the impressions left with me by this man that I feel compelled to make this report. I have recently discovered that Hamilton possesses a firearms certificate which indicates that he owns a 9mm Browning pistol and a .357 Smith and Wesson revolver. He also has permission to acquire a .22 rifle and a 7.62 rifle. This concerns me. I am firmly of the opinion that Hamilton is an unsavoury character and an unstable personality. It emerged from enquiries that he, during the course of the first week of camp, seemed to become increasingly stressed and had difficulty managing the group. It was during one such moment that he became extremely angry and assaulted one of the boys. This particular child was in fact assaulted three times by Hamilton during the first few days of the holiday and was eventually removed by his parents. Furthermore, allegations were made, albeit uncorroborated, by one of the children that Hamilton induced the child to pose in various compromising positions, scantily clad in extremely ill-fitting swimming trunks for photographs. To date these photographs have not been recovered but neither I nor the officer who interviewed the child have any reason to disbelieve that the allegations are in fact wholly true. Convincing corroborated evidence was uncovered which confirms that two boxes containing approximately 36 slides each have not been recovered by the police despite Hamilton’s claims that he handed over all of the photographs taken. Mr. Hamilton has been reported to the Procurator-Fiscal in this regard for obstructing the police. The foregoing report, in part, conveys some of the concerns which I harbour about this man. I firmly believe that he has an extremely unhealthy interest in young boys which to a degree appears to have been controlled to date. It is his ploy, whenever challenged, to engage in ‘smokescreen’ tactics which divert attention from the focal issue and this is the purpose for the profusion of correspondence to MPs, Procurator-Fiscal, the Chief Constable and the like. I would contend that Mr. Hamilton will be a risk to children whenever he has access to them and that he appears to me to be an unsuitable person to possess a firearms certificate in view of the number of occasions he has come to the adverse attention of the police and his apparent instability. The Procurator-Fiscal at Stirling has not yet decided on whether or not he will proceed with the case against Hamilton but at the moment it appears in all likelihood that he will not. I respectfully request that serious consideration is given to withdrawing this man’s firearms certificate as a precautionary measure as it is my opinion that he is a scheming, devious and deceitful individual who is not to be trusted.

Paul Hughes
Detective Sergeant

So can I have my guns back then? Since the government claimed to have \”swept the guns from the streets\” gun crime through the use of illegal pistols has sky-rocketed.
My guns were never on the streets, unless my car wasn’t parked on my drive on a range night. The government says that we are not to be trusted with pistols. Why not? You can down a plane with a box cutter, and kill thousands. Prosecution of McMurdo, the man who failed to act, never happened. Instead, he got to retire on a full pension.
So, since I have managed never to kill or hurt or even threaten anyone with the guns I have got in the years I have had them, why can’t I have my pistols back?

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply