There will be a national enquiry into the grooming gangs

[inkognitha]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/14/keir-starmer-national-inquiry-grooming-gangs

Posting here for traffic

YABU: this was unnecessary
YANBU: this was the right thing to do

I misread and voted yabu.

Absolutely necessary.

I’m afraid I really struggle to understand your points so I won’t be engaging with you anymore

You said you wondered why some ethnicities were crossed out.

I said do you not know?

It is a closed question with a yes or no answer. You either do know or you do not.

By all means crack on and do not engage I am more than happy with that decision, do you know you don't need to announce it? (You won't understand that question) 😂

When you’ve lost the argument ( look at the poll) then all you have left is deflection, obfuscation and abuse .

What argument? And there's that theasuras again, are you passing it round?

Sorry, but the game’s up. The years of denial and DARVO tactics don’t work anymore. Casting doubt on those calling out on what happened to working-class girls doesn’t discredit the facts — it only shows how uncomfortable the truth still is for many.

Many people speak out about this precisely because they care about CSA victims, many posters here are CSA survivors themselves or come from communities directly affected. The tone you’re taking ends up doing exactly what institutions did back then: brushing aside survivors because acknowledging their abuse is politically inconvenient — a pattern typified by Polly Toynbee The Guardian (where else).

These conversations are being had now, for many they’re uncomfortable truths. The silence on this horrendous, monstrous rape scandal is over.

I haven't in any way, shape or form denied what happened. I would appreciate it if you could back up your claims with evidence.

Casey Review, Pg 121

Senior officials in the police, local authorities and other agencies writing in reports or
in public statements to the media conclude from the flawed available data that the
majority of group-based child sexual exploitation offending is committed by White
perpetrators or that the ethnic profile is ‘mixed’. Some also portray or even dismiss
concerns about Asian offenders as either a ‘media coverage’ issue or ‘historical
offending’, which risks detracting attention from all types of child sexual abuse. This
is misleading. The seniority of the officials making these statements also makes it far
more difficult for frontline staff to feel they can challenge them.

Pg 123

More often than not, the [earlier] official reports do not discuss the perpetrators, let alone
their ethnicity or any cultural drivers. There is a palpable discomfort in any discussion
of ethnicity in most of them. Where ethnicity is mentioned, it is referred to in
euphemisms such as ‘the local community’, or it is buried deep in the report and only
vaguely referenced in any contents index or executive summary. Most choose to
reside in more comfortable territory of examination and discussion of systems,
processes and multi-agency partnerships. These are important, and it is essential to
identify and learn lessons from failures. But it is also vital to be rigorous in trying to
understand the nature of and motivations for offending if agencies are to better
protect children.

You asked several times a couple of days ago, on this thread, why ethnicity was relevant - the implication being it wasn't and people were racist to suggest so.

Has the Casey report, now released, changed your view on that?

Pg 125

In July 2022 the Telford Independent Inquiry found up to 1,000 children may have
been sexually exploited between 1989 to 2017, with a high proportion of offenders
identified as coming from Asian or Pakistani ethnic backgrounds. Like the Jay report
years before, the Inquiry was notable for its directness on ethnicity. They said they were unable to examine this prevalence further due to the absence of any evidence submitted by offenders and on a lack of engagement from the Asian community
The Telford inquiry report commented on the apparent concern of agencies to tread
carefully in order to avoid stirring up racial or community tensions and made strong
recommendations about the need for transparency in the future. However, in the
positive progress report published two years later, there was still a high proportion of
missing data on the ethnicity of perpetrators.
We heard from police forces that local authorities would discourage them from
publicising the successful conviction of perpetrators of group-based child sexual
exploitation due to fears of raising tensions. Publicising successful prosecutions is a
well-established method for police to encourage other victims to come forward,
especially those that are historically under-reported like child sexual abuse and
exploitation

That’s what I mean . You turn to mockery ( there’s that thesaurus) rather than respectful dialogue . You can only mock and distract from the truth ( I’m using simpler language for you now. HTH)

Have you read the report yet MiloMinderbinder925? Or are you confident that it is without merit from a distance?

Labour did not want an inquiry as it would almost certainly reveal the prevalence of Asian gangs, probably Muslim, and this was something they wanted to keep covered up to avoid alienating their supporters.

I said many times that fear of racial tension was a factor behind people turning a blind eye. I said several times that it was well known that the perpetrators behind these cases were predominantly of Pakistani heritage. I haven't at any point denied the ethnicity of the perpetrators and would appreciate it if you could quote where I have.

I have read most of it. Why?

Are you going to clarify what you mean or continue with the personal attacks?

Because if that hasn't convinced you that ethnicity is an important component of this crime and the cover ups that followed then I know that I can step away from the thread knowing that you are beyond reason.

I was already aware of the ethnicity of the perpetrators. This has been common knowledge for years and there have been several prosecutions of members of the gangs who were predominantly of Pakistani heritage.

Then, I don't understand any of your arguments and what you are trying to say?! You agree with the facts as they have been presented in the report, as does everyone else posting on here. I'm baffled as to why you want to continue arguing with other posters when we ALL agree on the same thing 🤷

I don't believe I said that. And I think you are misrepresenting yourself. Your attitude a couple of days ago was to repeatedly question posters on why ethnicity was relevant. The implication being it wasn't.

We don't agree on the same thing. I don't agree that the ethnicity of the perpetrators is the most important aspect of this. I agree it's a factor and contributed towards nothing being done but I believe the most important factor is misogyny.

I didn't think yet another investigation where none of the recommendations were implemented, was going to be worth the time and expense. Especially as these women have been through this many times over the years to no avail.

However, it seems as though the inquiry might see prosecutions happening for those who turned a blind eye. If that's the case, then I completely support it.

Then you misunderstood.

So you do think ethnicity is relevant? And you were just playing devil's advocate?

I've explained what I meant above.

100% this!!!