PDA

View Full Version : Child abuse, the Church is not alone...



Benedikt
27-08-2014, 09:20
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089
-did not want a racial motivated scandal because the men were (mainly) of Asiatic origin-....
nice...have to be political correct, haven't we?

rusmeister
30-08-2014, 07:54
I read another artcle on this that said the perpetrators were Muslims. Interesting that this article here pussyfoots around who the perpetrators are.

Benedikt
30-08-2014, 08:05
I read another artcle on this that said the perpetrators were Muslims. Interesting that this article here pussyfoots around who the perpetrators are.



and in order not to strain relations or being accused that the case is being racial motivated, investigators were told to leave it alone and the whole thing was brushed under the carpet. pathetic indeed.

sorry the article is now -archived- in that newspaper and needs -payment and registration- to get it out.

tonytony
30-08-2014, 22:01
I read another artcle on this that said the perpetrators were Muslims. Interesting that this article here pussyfoots around who the perpetrators are.



and in order not to strain relations or being accused that the case is being racial motivated, investigators were told to leave it alone and the whole thing was brushed under the carpet. pathetic indeed.

sorry the article is now -archived- in that newspaper and needs -payment and registration- to get it out.


There was an awful lot in the UK media about this story. This story came about as a result of gangs of Pakistani men abusing young, almost exclusively white, children.

The fact that it was British Pakistani men doing the abusing wasn't really newsworthy at all; there have been plenty of similar gangs of Pakistani men that have gone to prison for the same reason in different cities all over the UK over the last 5 or 10 years.

It's a really sad indictment of the UK, I feel, that the fact that gangs of Pakistani men are regularly jailed for child abuse cannot be debated.

What made this really newsworthy however, was that the local council and police force definitely knew but ignored what was happening and even, in some cases, deliberately suppressed the information or ignored the victims because the victims were white and the perpetrators were Pakistani.

There is now a multi-million pound class action law suit that has been launched against the council and the police force on behalf of the victims. Any American readers might be aware of how their local government and/or police forces react to these sort of things - they are much more common in the USA I understand.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2735169/Betrayed-PC-cowards-Damning-report-reveals-1-400-girls-abused-sex-gangs-social-workers-police-feared-racism-claims-did-nothing.html

Betrayed by the PC cowards: Damning report reveals 1,400 girls were abused by sex gangs because social workers and police feared racism claims - so did nothing


Over a 16-year period, children as young as 11 were sexually exploited by gangs of men – most of them of Pakistani origin.

But police and council officials suppressed evidence of the crimes because they feared being labelled racist.

Concerns about damage to community cohesion were put above the need to protect the vulnerable. Police treated the victims with contempt, turning a blind eye to their plight and in many cases holding them responsible.

Despite the appalling failures in the case, no one in authority has been sacked or even disciplined.

MPs and charities said the scale of the abuse was almost ‘incomprehensible’ and called for a criminal investigation into those who helped cover it up.

And at least six victims have now launched a class action against Rotherham council and could be in line for millions of pounds in compensation.

The devastating report by Professor Alexis Jay revealed that:

Staff were given ‘clear directions’ from managers to downplay the ‘ethnic dimension’ of the abuse despite almost all the perpetrators being of Pakistani heritage;
Three separate reports warning of the scale of the abuse were ‘suppressed or ignored’ by the council because it was ‘in denial’ about the crimes;
Serious discussions about sexual abuse were impossible because of the ‘macho’ and ‘sexist’ culture at the Labour-controlled council;
Police treated victims and their families as if they were to blame for the abuse, and took no action against the paedophiles;
The victims were left so traumatised that one tried to throw herself in front of moving cars and another said she ‘might as well be dead



Last night Rotherham council leader Roger Stone resigned, apologising to the victims let down by the authority.

The council, which commissioned Professor Jay’s report, said it accepted the findings, including that senior managers in child protection, elected councillors and senior police officers were responsible for failures ‘almost without exception’.

Some of the officials are thought to still be working for the council. Others have moved to jobs elsewhere.

There were calls for a full criminal inquiry into the cover-up by police, council officials and social workers.

John Cameron of the NSPCC said there had been a collective blindness over the abuse which allowed devastating child sexual exploitation to go unchallenged.

The charity said; ‘This report is truly damning. Many of these children were already extremely vulnerable, and the manner in which they were let down by agencies entrusted to protect them is appalling.

‘It is hard to imagine the damage caused to victims who were preyed upon with almost impunity over many years, because of a reluctance to
comprehend or address what was widely happening.’

It called for authorities to ensure that such failings should never be repeated and that ‘cultural sensitivities should never stand in the way of protecting children’.

Adam Pemberton of Victim Support said: ‘The extent of the sexual exploitation of young girls is horrific.

‘Almost as shocking as the details of that abuse is the abject failure on the part of social services to protect these children. Vulnerable girls were often not believed by the authorities because of their troubled backgrounds.





Some more about the gangs of Pakistani men abusing young girls:-

Smirking Rotherham sex abuse gangs would pick girls as young as 11 up from care homes
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/smirking-rotherham-sex-abuse-gangs-4132092

tonytony
30-08-2014, 22:27
This is an article from the Daily Telegraph newspaper about the report that highlighted this issue:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11063874/Rotherham-sex-abuse-The-utter-brutality-is-what-shocked-me-most.html

Rotherham sex abuse: 'The utter brutality is what shocked me most’

To begin with, the task in hand was straightforward, businesslike, almost formulaic. Professor Alexis Jay had investigated complex cases of child sexual exploitation before. She knew the form. When Rotherham council called her in to conduct an inquiry into its own troubling record, she had a clear idea of how to “come at” it. Minutes, notes, background reading… the necessary apparatus of research was set in motion.

It was when she started to read the case files and talk to people that her professional detachment was shaken. Something unimaginably evil was unfolding and on a scale that defied belief. Pages and pages of terrible stories from young girls who had been trafficked and raped by gangs of mainly Asian men over many years; of parents at their wits’ end while police and social services looked the other way.

“The utter brutality is what shocked me most,” she says. “It is really hard to describe it – the horrible nature of the sexual acts and the brutality of the controls these girls were subjected to. There was a vast amount of truly horrific material. I was taken aback at how callous, how violent, the operations were. These were girls of 11 and 12. They were children. The violence was worst. Petrol dousing was used as a form of intimidation. Oral and anal sex were so often a means of control and punishment. It was truly frightening that people in our country could be doing that.”

Taken aback. Truly frightening. Those are not the words you expect from an academic, a battle-hardened former chief inspector of social work, a woman who has spent more than 30 years working in deprived communities. They were not so very different from your words or mine on the morning Prof Jay’s devastating report was made public this week.

“I had no idea when I started out of the true scale of child-sex offending or the brutality,” she says. “You would not be human not to be affected. I would not like it if I wasn’t. It made me all the more determined to make some kind of redress for the victims. To say: 'I believe you.’ I understand [from conducting an investigation into child sexual exploitation (CSE) in the Western Isles] how much it means to child victims to have their story told. And to be believed.”

Prof Jay says she was unprepared for “the catalogue of utter helplessness” that spilled out, both among parents and tenacious frontline youth workers when they tried to raise the alarm. Under the restraint, her soft Scottish burr is scathing. “Oh, it was quite shocking how callous the police were in the early years, the attitudes about 'consent’, the inaction around missing people. Parents just gave up on the police. They wondered: what’s the point? Some wrote letters to politicians and councillors in desperation: 'Please stop this,’ 'How can I get help?’ There were a lot of good procedures but no one checked if they were working.”

She describes the case of a mother – not mentioned in the report – who found 125 names of men on her young daughter’s mobile phone, and a description of the activities in which they had been engaged. “There was no doubt what kind of activities they were.” When the woman handed the phone in to the police, she was allegedly told that it would be a breach of the child’s human rights if they were to act on it. In some cases, if parents went to the police, they were threatened with fire-bombing themselves, says Prof Jay.

Disturbingly, she found that senior social workers considered child abuse as a lesser problem than neglect because statistically it was smaller. She quoted a child protection manager as saying that CSE - child sexual exploitation - formed only 2.3 per cent of the team’s work and should therefore be kept in proportion. Young children were the priority [following the tragedy of Victoria Climbie, the eight-year-old who was tortured and murdered by her guardians in 2000] and older children dropped down the scale. “You cannot prioritise abuse,” says Prof Jay. “You cannot treat it as a hierarchy. It is all terrible – and it has all got to be attended to. The two per cent of referrals to the police are the most serious forms of abuse you can imagine.”

The current pandemonium about which negligent police officers, social workers or councillors should fall on their swords or be ejected from office does not concern her. Her report’s condemnation of official blindness and ineptitude, fuelled by a fear of appearing racist, is as far as she is prepared to go – and it is a long way. Now her overriding hope is that her findings will lead to proper rehabilitation for victims – past and present, for she is in no doubt that depravity is still rife.

“Child welfare must come first. There was no long-term support for these girls. At 15 and 16 they were discarded as too old for the purposes of the perpetrators and left with broken lives. Groomed by drugs and drink, needless to say there was a huge amount of self-loathing and guilt which led some of them to self-harm and to attempt suicide. That is not something you can fix with six sessions with a psychologist. One abused young person who asked for help was offered advice on benefits.”

She is particularly appalled by the wilful ignorance of what constitutes sexual exploitation. When a 12-year-old girl was found to have had sex with five adults (two of whom were let off with a caution) a CID officer claimed that it should not be categorised as sexual abuse because the girl had been “consensual in every incident”.

At times she laughs, but it is the hollow laugh of incredulity. The numbers are overwhelming – 1,400 is a conservative estimate of Rotherham’s young victims. The evidence was always there, but largely ignored. At one point, 318 damaged girls were being helped by a youth project and of those 90 needed one-to-one help for 18 months. “I don’t know how anyone could think: We’re coping here. How could you not think that was a crisis? It is hard to understand the mentality of collective denial.”

Prof Jay’s report stands out for its uncompromising language and the directness of its aim. “Nobody could say 'We didn’t know’.” “South Yorkshire Police regarded many child victims with contempt.” “The abuse is not confined to the past but continues to this day.” “Over the first 12 years covered by this inquiry, the collective failures of political and officer leadership were blatant.” She has made sure the charges will reverberate for a long time.
“Plain language has always been my goal,” she says. “You must tell people exactly what has happened. It is important not to fudge the issues or protect people from the worst aspects. And it is important for the victims that their dreadful experiences should be acknowledged in a public way. I feel sorry for the good and decent people of Rotherham in all this. I don’t know what you can do about that. I am sorry for the effect on the town’s reputation – but it is important to speak the truth.”

Her hope is that Rotherham council will work with its ethnic groups in a different way to tackle the “hidden problem” of sexual exploitation in the future. Instead of relying on so-called community leaders to represent the Pakistani-heritage community, she suggests, it would be more profitable to work with the Muslim women. “It is an issue that affects the women. We need to be much more open and direct. The imams and elected members ended up being a barrier rather than a conduit.”

Prof Jay, 65, describes the days following the publication of her report as “a whirlwind”. She lives in Glasgow but has not seen her home or her husband for several days. Though she has played a leading role in shaping key health, social care and children’s services policy in Scotland for years, she has cultivated a near-invisible personal profile.

In 2005, she was invited by the Scottish Government to set up the first independent inspection body for social services in Scotland and from 2011-2013 was its first chief social work advisor. When she was appointed chairman of the Centre for Excellence and Looked After Children in Scotland (CELCIS) last year, tribute was paid to her “passionate commitment to improving services for vulnerable people”. She received an OBE in 2012 for services to children and families.

Three previous reports about child sexual exploitation in Rotherham were suppressed or ignored and their authors subjected to “personal hostility”.
Does she fear reprisals? “The subject matter tends to attract rather odd people.” Her laugh is genuine this time. “I am confident of being able to deal with them.”

tonytony
30-08-2014, 22:38
And a further article from the Telegraph, more of an opinion piece:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11064290/Rotherham-the-real-scandal-is-much-wider.html

Rotherham: the real scandal is much wider

Barely credible though we have all found the avalanche of revelations about what had been going on in Rotherham for 16 years, they reflect only one part of what has become the most horrifying scandal in modern Britain. As was documented in Easy Meat, a report earlier this year from the Law and Freedom Foundation, similar tragedies have long been unfolding in towns and cities across the land, where, with the full connivance of social workers and the police, the criminal abuse of underage girls, many in state “care”, has been organised by largely Pakistani gangs of men on an industrial scale. It has then been systematically covered up by the very people who have allowed and even encouraged this to happen: council officials, police and politicians.

If this report is right in criticising how blame has too often in the past been ascribed just to “Asians”, it is itself too casual in blaming Islam or even Pakistanis in general. Part of the problem is that many of the culprits are of Pashtun tribal stock from Kashmir, regarded as “trouble” even by many Muslims and Pakistanis.

But this particular tragedy is only one of three different legs making up a very much larger scandal. This is how our politicians have allowed our entire “child protection” system to career off the rails. The second leg of this scandal can be seen in all those familiar horror stories in which some child, such as Baby P, has eventually met with an awful death, despite social workers, police and other agencies having long known of the child’s maltreatment without taking any action. How many times have we then seen some semi-whitewashing report, urging that “lessons must be learnt”, and leaving the dysfunctional system to carry on much as before?

The third leg of this scandal, which I have long been writing about in this column, is how, rather than failing to intervene when necessary, the social workers, with full support from the police and the courts, are now also taking record numbers of children into state “care” for what too often appear to be inadequate or even blatantly fabricated reasons. This can be just as much a crime against humanity and a travesty of justice as what we’ve been learning about in Rotherham; not least because, as I hear in new cases every week, children unhappily removed from loving families are often subjected, while in “care”, to abuse that is much worse than anything alleged against their parents.

When, last week, I was asked by my editor “how can we hope to see this mess cleared up?”, I could only reply pessimistically that the whole culture of our “child protection” system has become so corrupted that it is hard to see how it can ever be returned to some semblance of decency and humanity. The “good” social workers of old have largely been driven out, to be replaced by heartless, jargon-spouting zealots who are the last people who should be involved in the life of any family. Few things have shocked me more than the way the police have become such unquestioning accomplices of this cruel system. There may be a glimmer of hope in the realisation by Lord Justice Munby, our top family court judge, that some start can be made on clearing out the Augean stables by exposing more of the work of those ultra-secretive courts to public scrutiny.

However, the ultimate responsibility for all this must lie with the politicians whose laws set up this system, but who have since turned their backs on how the system has made such a mockery of the high-minded intent that lay behind those laws.

Two years ago I reported on how Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale, disclosed in the Commons something of the horrors that had been going on in his constituency, where social workers had encouraged the mass-rape of underage girls in “care”, on the grounds that it was merely their “life choice” to become prostitutes. Not one of the many MPs who spoke in that long debate, including two ministers, picked up on what he had said, as, one after another, they applauded a new government move to speed up the number of children being taken into “care”.

Until a great many more MPs are prepared to join Mr Danczuk and the admirable John Hemming in getting seriously engaged with this issue, this terrifying tragedy, in all its different manifestations, will continue.

rusmeister
31-08-2014, 06:18
George Washington said:


Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.


From his 1796 Farewell Address (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp)
This quote is regularly excised from public school textbooks which abridge the text and put ... in its place. It is an uncomfortable statement for people who deliberately exclude the traditional religion which dominated the mindset and worldview of the people who established the most powerful and influential nations in the world.
And it is true here.