It was a rainy night on Exmoor in 1975 when a Great Dane named Rinka was shot dead. That sounds like the start of a bad detective novel, doesn't it? But it's actually the moment everything started to unravel for Jeremy Thorpe. If you’ve seen the TV show or read the books, you know the name A Very English Scandal, but the reality of what happened in the 1960s and 70s is even weirder than the dramatization. It involves a Member of Parliament, a botched assassination attempt, and a society that was desperately trying to keep its secrets buried.
Jeremy Thorpe wasn't just any politician. He was the leader of the Liberal Party. Charming. Witty. He wore a signature brown fedora and seemed like the future of British politics. But he had a secret that, at the time, could have landed him in prison: he was gay. This was an era when "homosexual acts" were still illegal in the UK, and for a man in Thorpe’s position, exposure meant total ruin. Enter Norman Josiffe (later known as Norman Scott), a stable hand who claimed he had a long-term affair with Thorpe.
The Relationship That Shouldn't Have Been
The whole mess kicked off in the early 60s. Thorpe met Scott at a stable, and according to Scott’s testimony, they began a relationship. Thorpe allegedly called him a "Bunnies," a pet name that would later haunt him in court. It’s hard to imagine now, but back then, there was no "coming out." You either lived a double life or you faced the police. Scott, who struggled with mental health and didn't have a penny to his name, started telling people about the affair. He wanted his National Insurance card back—which he claimed Thorpe had—and he wanted recognition.
Thorpe tried to pay him off. He used party funds, funneling money through associates to keep Scott quiet. It didn't work. Scott was persistent. He was loud. He was, in the eyes of the Liberal establishment, a "nuisance" that needed to be dealt with. This is where the story shifts from a tawdry tabloid gossip piece into something much darker.
Why the Liberal Party Panicked
The Liberals were finally gaining traction in the UK. They were the "third way" between Labour and the Conservatives. If their leader was outed as a "pervert"—the word used in the press at the time—the party was finished. Thorpe’s friends, including fellow MP Peter Bessell, went to incredible lengths to cover it all up. Bessell later became a key witness, admitting to all sorts of shady dealings. Honestly, the level of incompetence in the cover-up is almost as shocking as the crime itself. They weren't masterminds; they were desperate men trying to protect a status quo that was already crumbling.
The Bungled Hit on Exmoor
Eventually, the "problem" of Norman Scott reached a breaking point. In 1975, a man named Andrew Newton—a pilot who was clearly out of his depth—was hired to kill Scott. He lured Scott to a remote spot on Exmoor under the guise of protection.
🔗 Read more: The Night the Mountain Fell: What Really Happened During the Big Thompson Flood 1976
It was a disaster.
Newton shot Scott’s dog, Rinka. Then, his gun jammed. Scott escaped, terrified and clutching his dead dog, and the whole thing blew wide open. Newton was eventually caught and sent to jail for the shooting, but he didn't immediately implicate Thorpe. That took a bit more time. When he finally did, the British public couldn't believe it. A sitting MP and party leader accused of conspiracy to murder? It was unprecedented.
The Trial of the Century (and the Judge’s Famous Bias)
By 1979, Jeremy Thorpe was standing in the dock at the Old Bailey. The charges were conspiracy and incitement to murder. The prosecution’s case relied heavily on Peter Bessell and Norman Scott. Now, Scott was a colorful character. He was emotional. He was erratic. He didn't fit the "respectable" image the court wanted.
The judge, Sir Joseph Cantley, didn't hide his disdain. His summing up of the case is legendary in legal circles for its blatant bias. He described Scott as a "fraud," a "sponger," and a "whiner." He basically told the jury that Scott’s word was worthless.
- "He is a crook," the judge famously suggested about Scott.
- He reminded the jury of Thorpe’s "distinguished" public service.
- He treated the idea of an MP committing murder as almost an absurdity.
Unsurprisingly, Thorpe was acquitted. He walked free, but his career was dead. He never held office again. He spent the rest of his life in a sort of self-imposed exile, suffering from Parkinson’s disease, while the ghost of A Very English Scandal followed him to his grave in 2014.
💡 You might also like: The Natascha Kampusch Case: What Really Happened in the Girl in the Cellar True Story
The Misconception of "Innocence"
Just because someone is found "not guilty" doesn't mean they didn't do it. That’s the nuance people often miss. The jury didn't necessarily think Thorpe was a saint; they just didn't feel the prosecution had proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt, especially given the "unreliable" nature of the witnesses. Years later, many of those involved, including the man who allegedly hired the hitman, suggested that the conspiracy was very real.
Why We Are Still Obsessed With It
So, why does this matter in 2026? Because it represents the moment the British "Establishment" lost its invincibility. It showed that the people at the top were just as messy, frightened, and prone to violence as anyone else. It was a turning point for gay rights, too, though in a tragic way. It highlighted how the law was used as a weapon to silence people.
The story also persists because of the sheer absurdity. The Great Dane. The jammed gun. The "Bunnies" letters. It’s uniquely British—a mix of high-stakes politics and low-rent farce.
What You Should Know About the Evidence
If you look back at the investigative journalism by the Sunday Times at the time, the paper trail of money is what really sticks. The Liberal Party's "election fund" was being drained to pay off Scott's landladies and buy back incriminating letters. You don't do that if you're innocent of a relationship. Whether Thorpe actually said "get rid of him" in a murderous sense or just "make him go away" is still debated, but the intent to suppress the truth was absolute.
Lessons from the Thorpe Affair
Looking at this scandal provides some pretty clear insights into how power works—and how it fails. If you're researching this or just interested in the history of British politics, keep these points in mind:
📖 Related: The Lawrence Mancuso Brighton NY Tragedy: What Really Happened
- The "Old Boys' Club" is real. Thorpe survived as long as he did because his peers in Parliament and the press protected him. They knew about his sexuality long before the public did.
- Character assassination is a legal tactic. The way the court treated Norman Scott is a textbook example of how victims are discredited based on their social standing.
- Secrets are expensive. The cover-up is almost always what gets you. If Thorpe had ignored Scott or dealt with the fallout of his personal life early on, he might have survived. Instead, the conspiracy to murder became his legacy.
Moving Forward with the Facts
To truly understand the impact of this event, you have to look beyond the TV dramatizations. Read the trial transcripts if you can find them. Look at the contemporary reporting from 1979. The most fascinating part isn't the crime itself, but the way the British legal system bent over backward to protect one of its own.
If you want to dive deeper into the historical context, start by looking into the Sexual Offences Act 1967. It’s the law that partially decriminalized homosexuality in England and Wales, and it was the backdrop for Thorpe’s entire career. Understanding that law makes Thorpe’s desperation much more understandable, even if it doesn't excuse his alleged actions. Also, check out the memoirs of Peter Bessell—they’re out of print and hard to find, but they offer a chilling look at the "fixers" who operated behind the scenes of the Liberal Party.
The case of Jeremy Thorpe remains the ultimate "very English scandal" because it exposes the gap between the respectable public face of the UK and the chaotic, sometimes violent reality of its power structures. It’s a reminder that history isn't just a list of dates; it’s a collection of people making terrible, desperate choices under the pressure of a society that refuses to change.
Next Steps for Researching the Thorpe Case:
- Consult Primary Sources: Seek out archival footage of the 1979 trial and the "Rinka" shooting reports in the Guardian and Daily Mirror archives to see how the tone shifted as more evidence emerged.
- Analyze the Legal Precedent: Review the judge's summing up in the Thorpe trial; it is still used in law schools today as a primary example of judicial bias.
- Contextualize the Era: Read about the Liberal Party's performance in the 1974 elections to understand exactly what Thorpe was trying to protect at the height of his power.