IF and that's a big if it went on, if the source is an ex employee I don't see them having anything to lose being named.
How come the source knows soooo much? Were they making it all up for the money, if the incidents happened were they party to them, could they themselves be a paedophile, has the newspaper pasted the name of the source to the police for further investigation?
I think in the rush to tell the media what people saw or knew about, some people are inadvertently implicating themselves. It's like with the programme about Savile - some of the people interviewed revealed a little too much (in my humble opinion, of course).