The Sky prog above does make clear the abusers of "Sarah" were white and Asian and Maggie Oliver thinks the class of the victims is more relevant than the ethnicity of the perps.
Having said that, this did strike me in the transcript of the File on 4 programme: downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/fileon4/PG10_Rochdales_Untold_Story.pdf
"I got picked up by the police so many times. It was
always like drunk and disorderly, assault, racial abuse. It was always when I was out with Asian men. Never once was anyone ever arrested, only me. [MUSIC] This guy - he used to
buy me stuff - and one night he tried it on. I was like, no, and he said, ‘Right, f-off, you
white slag.’ He punched me in my face. I called him a Paki bastard. When the police came,
I tried to explain, you know, he tried to have sex with me, but nothing happened.
HARTE: That night, Daisy was arrested and later convicted of a
racially aggravated public order offence. Nothing happened to the man who she says hit her."
There was also a case in Yeovil where the 16 year old grooming victim was prosecuted for hate crime for racially abusing her perpetrator (but acquitted)
www.somerset.org.uk/ipost/iPost%20Documents/Fenestra-SCR-report-FINAL-01.11.17.pdf
There is no evidence of professional practice in the identification of CSE being influenced by the ethnic origin of the perpetrators, who are both Turkish.
5.2.2 However, in November 2011, perpetrator A complained to the police that 16 year old Q was verbally racially abusing him. She was charged and at a later trial found not guilty. By this stage Q had disclosed to police her sexual relationship with perpetrator A, and a police investigation had been initiated, but following her retraction the investigation was filed as no further action. Moreover, at the time of the incident perpetrator A was in the street with 6 teenage girls, which should have been viewed as a cause for concern, given the history of allegations known to police. A victim support letter was sent to Perpetrator A, although it noted the history of 'domestic issues' between him and Q. The officer in charge noted that A had been in an underage relationship with Q. However, there was no senior officer involvement and these factors were not shared with the CPS who made the decision to charge Q.
5.2.3 The police report for this serious case review suggests that on occasion police officers were confused over what was the most important issue to deal with, with the alleged 'hate' crime overshadowing the real offending taking place around CSE. Hate crime is seen as a high priority offence that requires robust action, and the response in isolation would be correct, but not when placed in the context of the wider picture already known to the police.
5.2.4 The prosecution of victims of CSE for alleged 'hate' crimes against the very people already known to have abused them is a further abuse of the victims, and will undermine any trust they might have in authorities.
So the ethnicity of the abusers clearly was and is relevant to these persistent grooming scandals, but not the whole story