Saturday, 21 December 2013

Rochdale to Lawson, rich vrs the poor




The Serious Case Review also concluded: * Police, social workers, health workers and the Crown Prosecution Service failed to grasp the scale of child sexual exploitation.
* Lack of organisational priority over child sexual exploitation, an unstable duty and assessment team and a "chaotic" duty system.
* The authorities 'struggled to empathise' with the girls, partly because they were from 'poor backgrounds', giving them a 'skewed picture of their behaviour'.
* GPs had explicit information that could have helped authorities "identify the possibility of sexual exploitation".

An independent listener to the Chief Constable of Manchester Sir Peter FAHY QPM would be forgiven for thinking that  he - the Chief Constable - had read none of the conclusions of the report, let alone been the leader of one of the major perpetrators of a crime against, not one, but a whole series of children under his protection?

Those “professionals” still only listen and talk to others themselves within a system of ‘prescribed groups’; groups who now clearly have not the slightest idea of what real life is like.  I end my argument with one name, Sharon Shoesmith?  To extend my angst I reflect on the compensation her professional colleagues awarded her and ask what damages are awarded to the real victims of professional ineptitude? Seventeen groups legislated to protect children and in Britain today they fail the white, indigenous, ill-educated and most vulnerable amongst us!  And they get well paid to fail.  Enough must mean enough.

If ever there can be a reason for denying those who want the legal age of sexual consent to be lowered, this kills their argument completely. If a highly respected and supposedly highly educated and sophisticated woman in Nigella Lawson finds the witness box harrowing, what chance does the poor, white, ill-educate indigenous child have when confronting gangs of men who had threatened to douse them in petrol and set them alight if they didn't submit?
 
The pusillanimous defence of the indefensible professionals has to get challenged as the three Political Parties of State have repeatedly shown they are unfit to do so. When the Judge in the Rochdale gang rape case suggested he hoped that they would reflect on the damage they had done to their victim, he completely answered charges here within submitted by compounding the fears of young victims.  No retribution, little punishment and no justice for the victims.  Not even a recommendation for deportation.  And what of the victims' father, on the Radio, stating that he firmly believed that at least thirty of his daughter's attackers were still walking about his neighbourhood?

 Judge Foster said the defendants had displayed "disturbing and worrying behaviour" but he did not regard them as dangerous. Before they were led to the cells, he told them all: "I hope, with these sentences, that you learn you must respect the dignity of all human beings, particularly the young and vulnerable."  

What?  What?  What?  After the judgment of Simon Newel in releasing Jane Cloughs' assailant out on bail to murder her, this is ludicrous reasoning at any level.  Gang rape and conspring to traffic English children is not a dangerous undertaking?  Whatever happened to The Rule of Law, British Law and the enforcement thereof?  Is it all Colour Blind?