Predators in the shadows
AFTER weeks of investigation, it was hard not to suspect that David Allen and John Wiley had died because of paedophilia, blackmail, a looming Cabinet scandal of epic proportions – and the urgent need to protect the reputations of certain other top politicians.
It was a hell of a story. However, little of what I knew would appear in print.
The inquest failed to establish the real reason behind Wiley’s death, and no clear picture emerged of the reason for what still appeared to be a suicide. Furthermore, it was found that no one could be held criminally responsible.
The day before the inquest, on May 14, 1987, I wrote a story under the headline “Wiley inquest in Simon’s Town today”. I pointed out that in South African law an inquest had limited scope. That story also contained this rather promising-looking announcement: “After an intensive seven-week investigation into Mr Wiley’s life and death, the Cape Times will publish the ‘Wiley Dossier’ after the inquest.”
We were alerting readers to the fact that I had interviewed dozens of Wiley’s closest business and political associates and friends in an attempt to clear up aspects of the mystery surrounding his death.
I had spent many hours seeking facts from every source willing to discuss the intimate details of the sex and professional lives of a Cabinet minister and his police reservist friend, as well as a couple of Cabinet colleagues. I had spoken to a source whose information was based on the account of a Bird Island eyewitness. I knew for a fact that a child victim needed a life-saving operation. I was told of concessions lost and given, of blackmail and corruption. The most explosive of these allegations were not vague, but very detailed. I even had an off-the-record confirmation from a hostile cop that Cabinet ministers had been implicated in acts of sex with children.
But any hopes I might have had of seeing in print any counterbalance to official “findings” were dashed by the newspaper’s decision to handle the matter with what I deemed to be unwarranted diplomacy. I was not allowed to reveal most of what I had uncovered.
This excessive caution exercised by the Cape Times in the case of the Wiley story was as baffling to me as it was infuriating. Various excuses were used, including the fact that my primary source was a “colourful character”, as if that made him a liar.
Although I had always applied the same standards of journalistic treatment to the living and the dead, the newspaper acted like it had never heard the words “dead men can’t sue”. In fact, I had known the paper to be less cautious in accusations against people still very much alive.
I would like to think the newspaper was once again just being overly respectful of privacy – despite the matter clearly being in the public interest – but I could not stop wondering whether there was more to it than that. In my moments of darkest suspicion, I feared that the newspaper could be trying to protect two other ministers who had been named to me as having been on the alleged sex tours to Bird Island. But then, I would argue with myself, why would a liberal paper that had fought so bravely to expose the excesses of the apartheid government want to protect two of its most notorious stalwarts?
I did not have the answer. And nobody ever gave me one. Although not everyone involved in the newspaper’s decision-making processes was as liberal as editor Tony Heard, I could not even begin to identify the person responsible for ensuring that the “Wiley Dossier” was reduced to an insignificant little tattletale.
Of course, it was no secret that the Cape Times news editor had an unhealthy belief in the credibility of government officials – especially policemen. Despite the fact that I usually wrote the bigger stories of the day, he and I clashed. Still, he did not have sole decision-making power.
I suspected then, as I still do, that it was probably the result of a collective call by the newspaper’s hierarchy, inspired by a lack of courage or an obligation on the part of somebody to cover up the truth.
Either way, when the “The Wiley Dossier – a Cape Times investigation” finally appeared in the paper on May 16, it was a masterpiece of understatement. The headline of the front-page piece posed the question, “Who was the real John Wiley?” The blurb continued: “The motive behind Mr Wiley’s suicide – not clearly established in the inquest evidence this week – appears to be as baffling and secret as was the true nature of his character during the closing chapter of this life.”
The newspaper said: “During an intensive seven-week investigation into Mr Wiley’s life and death, Cape Times reporter Chris Steyn found herself bombarded with accusation, insinuation and rumour which, without specific corroboration, cannot be published.”
The paper did admit that during interviews with at least 25 people, including political and business associates of Wiley, new insights had emerged: a picture far removed from what most South Africans believed the former Oxford cricket blue and man-about-town to be started taking shape… In reality, Mr Wiley preferred the company of men to women.
The story as it appeared in print that day had been so watered down that, on reflection, I felt it would have been better if it had not been published at all. Even if people were able to read between the lines, they would have been hardpressed to come to any useful conclusion.
The most glaring omission from the published story was that it contained no reference to what had allegedly occurred on Bird Island. And the story’s only redeeming feature was that it included a mention of the charges against Allen. It also contained a quote from sources in the gay community who confirmed that Allen had a preference for young boys whom “he could get rid of when they turn 16”.
In the end the “Wiley Dossier” served mostly as a roll call of Wiley’s achievements in terms of his education, career and political life. Yet his death stood in stark contrast to his persona. He was found on his single bed next to a lamp that was nothing more than a mounted bare globe. These unglamorous surroundings were in sharp contrast to his flamboyant personal image. He was noted for his immaculate dress sense.
Wiley’s younger son, Mark, had told the inquest court that his father had been “bitter and disillusioned” because “exceptional pressure” had been exerted on him to sell his beloved De Goede Hoop Estate manor house in Noordhoek. Finality of the sale was to have been reached in the week ending 30 March – the day after he killed himself. His wife disputed this and said that although she was aware he had financial worries, she did not think this or the upcoming election would have driven him to kill himself.
This was corroborated by his elder son, Jeremy, who said that his father’s indirect involvement in the affairs of the company couldn’t have contributed in any way to his death; nor did his death affect the financial or trading position of the company, which was, he said, “healthy and sound”.
That Wiley had not left a note baffled everyone. This was because he was regarded as a “meticulous” man who “always wrote notes”, even to thank people for the smallest and most insignificant gestures. In the end, the court found that “no one could be held criminally responsible, through an act or an omission, for Mr Wiley’s death”. But the story did highlight that Wiley had died caught in a web of deceit spun of his own good intentions and colourful lifestyle. His much-publicised marriages and other liaisons with beautiful women, such as Hollywood starlet Linda Christian, turned out to be the bright side of a shadowed life. In reality, I wrote, he preferred the company of men to women.
This had become clear, I informed readers, during interviews with several of Wiley’s close associates in Port Elizabeth and Cape Town, and was something openly discussed in gay clubs in the city after Wiley’s death. This had made him vulnerable to blackmail and it was this, a source had told me, that had finally threatened to expose him. I could never corroborate this allegation.
It was easier to confirm and prove Allen’s proclivity for young boys. There was one boy who had openly admitted that he had lived with Allen for years before being turfed out when he turned 16. I also reported that sources had said that Wiley had visited Allen in the days before his death.
At some point the Wiley inquest docket was returned to the office of the Cape Attorney-General because of the possibility that press investigations could bring new facts to light. But they never did and we never returned to the story. In all fairness, no newspaper could have afforded to let one of its most prolific hard-news reporters languish indefinitely on an investigation full of dead ends – literally and figuratively. But I never stopped thinking about it.
● This is an edited extract from The Lost Boys of Bird Island by Mark Minnie and Chris Steyn published by Tafelberg at a recommended retail price of R280