Rochdale grooming trial: Nine found guilty

[ariadneoliver]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17989463

Hope they get long sentences.

I hope that's all of them, including the one who wasn't ever named for "legal reasons"

Two were acquitted, but the 59 year old was convicted.

good, I am most pleased the 59yo was found guilty, that has made my day

Unfortunately it's far more common than you realise. The communities involved (with exceptions) will not deal with the authorities regarding any wrongdoing so people get away with so many things.

I remember reading/hearing about this sort of thing going on 15 or 20 years ago. It is common, but very difficult for the police to gather the evidence.

The victims are not regarded as human beings by the perpetrators or their communities - they are just commodities to be used and traded.

Does anyone know what kind of legal reasons would prevent the 59 year old from being named? I understand children can't be named bcause of their age, so what's special about this guy?

I assume there is a child or victim protection issue with the un-named one.

Well done to the Police (eventually), the CPS and the jury. But most of all, well done to the brave victims.

Frances, I have no legal training, but I believe the 59yo is some kind of religious figurehead in the local community

I don't know if that is why he hasn't been named, and the rest of them have ?

Aye, do you mean an extra child protection issue to the main crux of the whole trial ? Like I said, I have no legal knowledge at all

I was struggling to understand why the 59yr old wasn't named.

I still am, SB

I am struggling to remain tactful here, but if the former is true, that would make me really, really fucking angry

but I don't know

it has certainly been speculated on, but I don't know the facts of the case

I shall refrain from speculating but such rumours must be music to the ears of the BNP and their kind, which can only be bad news.

I know, SB, and I share your concern

I would like to understand though

I agree and surely some sort of explanation would be helpful.

i also wonder how some of these men managed to be acquitted of rape charges.

ok, what has made me properly froth is that when you google the trial, at the top of "suggested sites" is the charming destination "local.slags.co.uk"

nice, very nice

you can compain to google, right ?

*complain

Ann Cryer the MP for Keighley has been raising this and other related issues such as forced marriage for years. A very brave woman. Let's hope their sentences send a very strong message.

He is probably related to or linked to one of the victims.

The youngest was 13 , evil, evil creatures (I refuse to call them men)

I meant what lisaro said. Non-identifying usually happens when there are family links and yes, as an extra child protection issue. Better late than never, eh?

Some were acquitted of the rape charges because the jury didn't believe the Crown had proved that they committed the rapes beyond reasonable doubt. Hopefully, they will have had a thorough education by their involvement in this trial and will think long and hard about the company they keep.

I don't buy that (family links)

am going to STFU though, before I say something I will regret, and also out myself