They're asking because there's political points to score. No govns have done anything about this decades old problem. None of them care except what damage they can do to the opposition.MPs rightly asking serious questions about the grooming gang inquiry process and all Jess Phillips can do is retort with jibes and personal insults.
3 victims on the panel have resigned because they have lost faith in the process ! Political point scoring is the last thing that this Government should be worried about.They're asking because there's political points to score. No govns have done anything about this decades old problem. None of them care except what damage they can do to the opposition.
I'm talking about the opposition. It was Labour, they tried scoring points, now its Conservatives turn.3 victims on the panel have resigned because they have lost faith in the process ! Political point scoring is the last thing that this Government should be worried about.
Definitely agree with that.I'm talking about the opposition. It was Labour, they tried scoring points, now its Conservatives turn.
None of these twats actually do anything about it when in power.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwykd173l3vo
A third survivor has now quit. In her resignation statemtent, Elizabeth said the process felt like "a cover-up" and had "created a toxic environment for survivors".
This is a mess that needs a non bias/ impartial judge to oversee it. Apparently they wanted a senior social worker and now a deputy chief constable! After everything’s that’s happened how can they think this is a good idea
This is a national scandal and it seems like the entire establishment is corrupt and doesn’t care about innocent girls being raped, because there scared of offending people. That’s right, this isn’t a film either!
As you say understandable. After everything’s that’s happened to these poor girls, particularly from the police and social services they have every right to be suspicious. They were told for years the people looking after them were ‘good people’ or good candidates as well.To be fair, who they are suggesting from the police would be a very good candidate. Automatically thinking it’s a bad idea isn’t a good thing either, albeit understandable from some.
Worth saying the “they” you’re referring to there isn’t the government.
As you say understandable. After everything’s that’s happened to these poor girls, particularly from the police and social services they have every right to be suspicious. They were told for years the people looking after them were ‘good people’ or good candidates as well.
Why not just get someone not from those institutions?
I think she speaks really well. I really don’t understand why the government, police and social services are so against sorting this out and putting peadophiles in jail.
What on earth is going on in a large part of our society. It’s beyond belief what’s going on
Apparently they want a panel led by people in the police and social services - is that a joke after how badly failed on this
If your question is (which I think is what you are asking) would someone get extra time for having a trial rather than pleading guilty then the official answer is no, although when the evidence is overwhelming the judge might be tempted to add a bit on unofficially.Hello friend lol
Seriously, to your last point......
Could anyone who pleads Guilty be subject to the normal/usual sentencing rules and guidelines and then.... if they plead/pleaded (?) not guilty be subject to "additional time" which would be dependent on the lengths that you went to or the obvious (in the eyes of the judge) lies you told? Extend the sentence along the lines of which they reduce the sentence currently? Crude I know.
I think she speaks really well. I really don’t understand why the government, police and social services are so against sorting this out and putting peadophiles in jail.
What on earth is going on in a large part of our society. It’s beyond belief what’s going on
Apparently they want a panel led by people in the police and social services - is that a joke after how badly failed on this
I'm actually a bit baffled. Baroness Casey called for (1) a police investigation into potential new cases and review of cases reported but not prosecuted and (2) a "national inquiry co-ordinating a series of targeted local investigations" (i.e. following the Telford model) - "an Independent Commission should review cases of failures or obstruction by statutory services to identify localities where local investigations should be instigated. There would need to be a process to identify instances and allegations of statutory agencies’ failures, and we recommend that the government develops a list of criteria to determine the types and extent of failures which should be used to assess the triggering of a hearing".
I'm just wondering if the survivors involved have actually misunderstood that the government is asking them (and others) about the "developing criteria" bit (i.e. what should and what should not be investigated).
And those same police officers , social workers, politicians etc should go to prison if found that their lack of action led to more rapes of children.They are all OK with putting paedophiles in jail but aren't so keen on the spotlight been shone on the incompetent police officers and social workers who facilitated the abuse.