Grooming gang scandal

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.

But i think thats why successive governments are frightened of doing a proper inquiry; the can of worms could be huge
The key here is getting the balance right.

The problem is that if you put strict liability conditions on these kinds of jobs you'll limit those willing to apply for them. Those who are qualified won't want to do them, which ends up with a dumbed down workforce that ultimately benefits nobody.
 
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.

But i think thats why successive governments are frightened of doing a proper inquiry; the can of worms could be huge
There is a man called Raja Miah who is the spokesman for the **Recusant Nine**.
It's well worth spending a few minutes reading/listening to what he has to say on facebook.
 
The key here is getting the balance right.

The problem is that if you put strict liability conditions on these kinds of jobs you'll limit those willing to apply for them. Those who are qualified won't want to do them, which ends up with a dumbed down workforce that ultimately benefits nobody.
I understand that, but surely people applying for such jobs wont be thinking ,”im gonna let men rape kids”.

But i do understand that its where lines are drawn on a thousand issues
 
View attachment 172896

Personally think it’s a real shame he’s withdrawn.
Waiting for Badenoch to suggest Johnson chairs it...

(Anyone can score political points.)

Seriously, who is this paragon of virtue who will command universal support as chair, if a police officer who had a good record of investigating police failures is described publicly as "Cover-up King"?

And remember that maybe half of victims/survivors, maybe most, did not want another inquiry.
 
Waiting for Badenoch to suggest Johnson chairs it...

(Anyone can score political points.)

Seriously, who is this paragon of virtue who will command universal support as chair, if a police officer who had a good record of investigating police failures is described publicly as "Cover-up King"?

And remember that maybe half of victims/survivors, maybe most, did not want another inquiry.

I don’t think there’s many who’d be willing to do it, particularly now, let alone be able to command universal support.
 
I don’t think there’s many who’d be willing to do it, particularly now, let alone be able to command universal support.
A retired judge or senior barrister might be OK. A quick review of each case is needed: What happened, was it investigated correctly, and if not why not. See if a pattern emerges and if one is found investigate the reasons why.
The allegations are of a series of rapes poorly investigated by police and social workers not protecting kids leading to suspects not being charged. Rinse and repeat over several geographical areas.
Another reason a review is needed is because those found guilty appeared to have acted in the knowledge that involvement by police and social workers would be minimal.
 
A retired judge or senior barrister might be OK. A quick review of each case is needed: What happened, was it investigated correctly, and if not why not. See if a pattern emerges and if one is found investigate the reasons why.
The allegations are of a series of rapes poorly investigated by police and social workers not protecting kids leading to suspects not being charged. Rinse and repeat over several geographical areas.
Another reason a review is needed is because those found guilty appeared to have acted in the knowledge that involvement by police and social workers would be minimal.
Carnt be a judge as it would stop criminal action
 
People in here showing their true colours whilst pretending to care about girls being groomed in some way. As bad as our inactive politicians who do nothing about it except point score.
As is seemingly the norm these days, people are more intent on finding reasons to kick their favourite targets. Find a negative then paint the whole situation as bent/cover-up.
This enquiry will go on and on and the naysayers will have a field day spouting their agenda driven shite.
As an example, other victims who are involved in this enquiry have shown support for it but no, we don't hear about them much.
 
30 victims/survivors on the panel. Why should 4 resigning dictate what happens?

And as for the scope of the inquiry, here's the Telegraph from June with people wanting the inquiry to widen its remit.

 
Here is the letter from the 4 victims who have resigned:

Joint statement to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood: Conditions for survivors to return to inquiry panel​


Dear Home Secretary,

We, the survivors who have resigned from the Victims/Survivor Liaison Panel, are writing to you directly to set out what it would take for us to consider rejoining this inquiry.

When we agreed to join this panel, we did so in good faith, believing that after decades of being dismissed, silenced, and called liars by the very institutions meant to protect us, things might finally be different. Instead, we have watched history repeat itself. We raised legitimate concerns about the inquiry's direction based on our direct experiences in the process that you called 'justified', and in response, your safeguarding minister, Jess Phillips, called our accounts "untrue". Evidence has since proven we were telling the truth. Being publicly contradicted and dismissed by a government minister when you are a survivor telling the truth takes you right back to that feeling of not being believed all over again. It is a betrayal that has destroyed what little trust remained.

These are not unreasonable demands. These are the basic standards we need to have any faith that this inquiry will be conducted with integrity.

We can only consider returning to the panel only if the following conditions are met:

1. Jess Phillips resigns as Safeguarding Minister. Her conduct over the last week has shown she is unfit to oversee a process that requires survivors to trust the government. Her departure would signal you are serious about accountability and changing direction.

2. All survivors on the panel are genuinely consulted on the appointment of a chair, who must be a senior sitting or former judge, with no major conflicts of interest in policing or social services.

3. Victims are free to speak openly with their support networks without fear of reprisal

4. The inquiry's scope remains laser-focused on grooming gangs and group-based child sexual exploitation, as Baroness Casey recommended, without expansion or dilution.

5. There are serious concerns about the suitability of the current victim liaison lead, we would like to see her replaced with an independent mental health professional

We have been failed by every institution meant to protect us. We were failed as children, failed by police who didn't believe us, failed by social services who blamed us, and failed by a system that protected our abusers. We will not participate in an inquiry that repeats those same patterns of dismissal, secrecy, and institutional self-protection.

These conditions represent the absolute bare minimum for survivors to trust that this inquiry will be different from every other process that has let us down. Without them, this inquiry risks becoming yet another exercise in protecting the reputations of failed institutions rather than seeking truth and justice for victims.

Yours sincerely,

Elizabeth Harper
Fiona Goddard
"Jessica"
Ellie-Ann Reynolds
 
Sorry to piss on the the usual suspects parade, but government conduct on this enquiry is as bad, if not worse than the Horzon scandal.

The whole thing has to start again with a fully independent long term judge or retired judge,
and Jess Philips has to have nothing to do with it.

The actions of Jess Pbilips, and those of the Government/ government have NOT been in any way independent in this process.
 
Last edited:
Sorry to piss on the the usual suspects parade, but government conduct on this enquiry is as bad, if not worse than the Horzon scandal.

The whole thing has to start again with a fully independent long term judge or retired judge,
and Jess Philips has to have nothing to do with it.

The actions of Jess Pbilips, and those of the Government/ government have NOT been in any way independent in this process.

I don’t agree with that at all, they’re following what Casey recommended.

What actions of Philips and the government are you referring to?
 
I don’t agree with that at all, they’re following what Casey recommended.

What actions of Philips and the government are you referring to?
I would be interested in knowing this too. There are no specifics in that letter stating what Phillips was referring to that she believed was untrue. I'm not saying the signatories are wrong to call her out but I'd like to know what she's being called out for first before diving in.

I absolutely get the frustration from them over the highlighted issues but the trouble with these inquiries is that they can take years and years. This one was only announced some months back so it will be in its infancy. Any tweaks that they're asking for - whether rightly or wrongly - will knock the progress back further.
 
I would be interested in knowing this too. There are no specifics in that letter stating what Phillips was referring to that she believed was untrue. I'm not saying the signatories are wrong to call her out but I'd like to know what she's being called out for first before diving in.

I absolutely get the frustration from them over the highlighted issues but the trouble with these inquiries is that they can take years and years. This one was only announced some months back so it will be in its infancy. Any tweaks that they're asking for - whether rightly or wrongly - will knock the progress back further.

They also aren’t representative of all the victims. The questions they were asked were recommended by Casey too.
 
Sorry to piss on the the usual suspects parade, but government conduct on this enquiry is as bad, if not worse than the Horzon scandal.

The whole thing has to start again with a fully independent long term judge or retired judge,
and Jess Philips has to have nothing to do with it.

The actions of Jess Pbilips, and those of the Government/ government have NOT been in any way independent in this process.
What do you mean by 'start again'? Not even got going yet.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top