Abuse of hundreds of girls as young as ten covered up by police and social services

[edam]

today's Times - sadly behind a paywall but you can see the first par here - has a major investigation into appalling, widespread organised rape and abuse of girls in South Yorkshire.

Not only did police and social services fail to help the girls, let alone prosecute the offenders, they actually charged victims and their parents - one girl was charged with using drugs, while the men in the room with her went free, while one father who tried to get his daughter back was charged with racial harassment, ffs. AND his poor daughter, who had been drugged, was charged with assault. Another parent was charged with breach of the peace, another girl - only 13 - was arrested for a public order offence and convicted, while the men went free.

It beggars belief. The Times has seen more than 200 confidential documents from Rotherham detailing the crimes which were often not investigated - even though police and social services knew full well who the perpetrators were. But they were more concerned with hushing up the heritage of the offenders - Pakistani, Kurdish, Iranian and Kosovan gangs and families - than investigating hideous crimes.

In one case, police in Bristol rescued two girls who had been kidnapped but South Yorkshire police (where they lived) didn't even question them.

Neither the police nor the council apologised, btw. Oh no, the council just says ofsted think they are great and 'some work with individuals did not lead to court cases for a variety of reasons'. S Yorks Police say now they have eight officers looking into child sexual exploitation and they are 'a leading force in safeguarding vulnerable children'.

But CrescentMoon - They DON'T see it as hypocrisy. Because an 'honourable' girl would be accompanied. An 'honourable' girl wouldn't be wearing revealing clothing. An 'honourable' girl meaning a MUSLIM girl. Which is how they justify this.

To them, these girls are seen as less human than their sisters, their cousins, their Aunts, their Mothers.

All because they do not act in the same way as Muslim girls. But this is NOT an Islamic Country, and these girls have the right NOT to be abused like this.

No matter what they are wearing, no matter if they have nobody with them, no matter if they smoke, drink or take drugs. They have the RIGHT not to be abused and raped. And they have the RIGHT to justice if it does happen to them.

Which is why the conversation is hinging around WHY British Pakistani's that are doing this are avoiding justice simply so as to not be seen as institutionally racist.

And the failings of S Yorks Police and SS has been ongoing for years. To the point that when I was a LAC at age 15, some 16 years ago, and was to be placed in a Children's Home there, I told SS that I would run away each and every time, and present myself back at their Essex office, until they relented and placed me with another family member in Scotland! If I as a 15yo knew how bad it was, why in Hell hasn't 't something been bloody DONE about this?!

The story of the girl that got arrested for D&D when screaming sickens me to the pit of my stomach.

These girls deserve MORE.

I don't care how it's done, but FFS ensure this doesn't ever happen again. Thoroughly investigate EVERY allegation of abuse. Doesn't matter what race/religious background the accused is from, EVERY allegation should be investigated with the same fine toothed comb.

Prosecute EVERY case that has proof. Dish out the maximum sentence. EVERY TIME. With no time off for 'good behaviour'.

Get the girls into SAFE accommodation. With caring, on the ball, well paid staff.

More patrols of areas known to have these issues.

SS to ensure the well being of every LAC.

Couthy, Catholic Priests don't necessarily see their sexual abuse of young people as hypocrisy either. In their minds, they think up what to them is a very plausible rationale for why what they are doing isn't bad. Senior clergy may also try and cover for them rather than admit what they are doing is wrong and hold them accountable. Perhaps they don't want to give the church and the community a bad name. However, that doesn't mean that there is anything inherent in the Roman Catholic faith, or Irish society, for example, that condones sexual abuse of children by priests.

It's the same for the perpetrators in Rochdale. They will come up with the excuse about non muslims "not counting" if that serves their needs. There may even be leaders within their communities who try and hush it up rather than hold them accountable because they don't want to give the faith and community a bad name. However, this doesn't mean there is anything inherent in Islam or in Pakistani British culture that condones sexual abuse of children by adult men.

I can assure you as well that the attitudes of some "authorities" that they couldn't/shoudn't intervene because sex with the girls was "consensual" or they were making a "lifestyle choice" is not uncommon in all areas of the UK (please see margerykemp's and my posts on the Megan Stammers thread.)

And, it's important not to forget that what you say is being used as an excuse that "non Muslim girls" don't count clearly doesn't apply universally. Believe me, there are Muslim girls and young women who are subject to sexual abuse from Muslim men. They just have to pull a different excuse out of the bag to justify that one.

I'm not saying we should completely ignore cultural or faith aspects of both perpetrators and victims as that WILL have an impact on how crimes happen, how to stop them and how to support the victims in their recovery. But, there's a danger on focussing too narrowly on this one point and missing the bigger picture, including the failings amongst social services and other people in positions of authority who allow their misogynist and classist preconceptions to get in the way of ensuring the well being of vulnerable young women.

Also, if we just focus on Pakistani men as being the most common/worst/etc. perpetrators of child sexual abuse, it gives all those other men another excuse in their bag of tricks - the, "I'm a nice white guy. I can't be a nonce."

The thing about the Muslim religion is that it is not organised centrally. Anyone, like CrescentMoon does, can say, 'This is not what the Muslim faith is about' when talking about honour killing or women wearing the veil. However, you don't have to look far to find imams issuing fatwas on Salman Rushdie and on Danish cartoonists, or blaming earthquakes on women wearing western clothing. It seems that Islam can be anything an individual Muslim wants it to be. This is handy when criticism is leveled at the Islamic faith generally or at individual Muslims for their attitudes.

I think there is plenty of evidence that in times gone by Irish society wasn't going to do much besides turn a blind eye to sexual abuse of children and that it was a widespread phenomenon. The Carrigan Report, commissioned in the 1930s by the government of the time, was deemed unfit to publish because it painted a picture of Ireland that was contrary to the glowing national image pedaled by the nationalist politicians still basking in the aftermath of independence from Britain. The report found an ever increasing rise in the number of sexual abuse incidents against children investigated by the police. The response was to regulate dance halls and increase the number of placements of poor children in industrial schools and magdalene laundries. Irish society treated the children of the poor appallingly. The priests and the bishops came from that culture. The hierarchical, patriarchical structure of the church contributed to the 'don't ask questions' attitude.

Irish Catholicism (both the organised church and the laity) in those days bore a strong resemblance to PrincessSymbian's description of Islam --
'Yes, I think Islam is a great method for protecting a community of people but woe betide you, if you should challenge those veiws from inside the community, that would lead to censure and rejection. And it does bugger all to protect people outside of those communities because people who do not follow the rules are therefore deemed unworthy.of the respect that should be accorded to all, regardless of whether they follow rules that a group of society have decided should apply to themselves.'
You could substitute 'the Irish Catholic Church' for 'Islam' there and not skip a beat.
It was an organisation that claimed complete loyalty and the threat of exclusion meant social disaster and condemnation to hell. The only people who could get away with standing up to a priest were those who had money or were very well educated or held some authority due to political connections. Those it deemed unworthy of respect were treated with the utmost cruelty.

CrescentMoon -- 'But what is widespread across the Muslim world are the Sharia law prohibitions on alcohol, gambling, drugs, sex outside marriage, breaking of ties of kinship. These are unambiguous prohibitions in Islam- from one end of the Muslim world to the other there is no disagreement that Islam bans those substances and behaviours. There are no exceptions to these prohibitions, not wealth or poverty, not male or female, not strong or weak. But I believe this is to protect women and children because they are often the first to suffer from the harmful effects of alcoholism, substance abuse, gambling addiction, promiscuity, absent father -ism. If you wish to say the rules are made up by men, then they are by a man who wished to protect his daughters and her children.'

Ultimately it is the man's good name that he is protecting, since the women and children in his family are his and reflect his standing in the community just as an individual's car or the appearance of one's house reflects on the individual in the west.

And on the subject of alcohol prohibition and protection, again, it is the 'protection' of only the Muslim girls that matters. Nothing in Sharia seemed to keep the Muslim men from drugging or administering alcohol to the Infidels prior to abusing them.

Sharia ultimately only benefits the Muslim man within his own community.

Sex crimes are not about sex primarily. They are about power.

I always put down cover up conspiracy theories around these cases as paranoid right wing ravings.
I am ashamed that I took the media and authorities at their word. The bogeyman Griffin and other right wingers were the only people saying that it was occurring.
Well we can plainly see who was lying now.

Anybody that has read the Times in the last week now knows the truth about the cover up going on across the media.
Other than a small piece in the DM nobody has taken up the Times report. The sort of obfuscation and lying by omission that the police and ss did is now, this very week, being carried out by the BBC and 90% of the rest of the British media.
If you haven't read the Times report you are only seeing a small fraction of what is going on.
I feel so naive and stupid. I will never again take anything authorities or the BBC say at face value.

One other point,
What happened on Monday was very close to what fleet street call a spike, where by one organisation put out a report on the same day that they know another counter report is coming out.

What are the odds on the The Rochdale Child protection report coming out on the same day as the Times report.
Tied into the fact that everybody else in the media is ignoring the Times report it makes you wonder.

Thank goodness for Nick Griffin. What would we do without him.

The media has not ignored this case it is all over the press and internet media.

Those posts were for childrenofthestones.

I refuse to engage with the Islamic morals discussions as they are not relevant. It could have been a gang from any background.

I agree achillea.

I do understand that it could have been any group of men. But the facts are, in this area, it IS a particular group of men bound together by their cultural group.

And discussing the reasons WHY that is happening is NOT Racist.

It's a bit hard to be Racist with a Pakistani Ex-H, and a DC that is half Pakistani.

Doesn't mean that I am not allowed to explore the reasons WHY this particular group of men seem to have the idea that young girls can be raped and abused rather than respected and looked after as they would want their sisters to be.

And the only conclusion is that they have culturally decided that the rules of Islam about abstinence only apply to Muslim girls, not vulnerable white girls.

They may be using this as an excuse, as their justification, but it doesn't mean that it can't be challenged.

The refusal to discuss this issue including the cultural issue is what has allowed this to go unchecked for so long.

What is needed in the Pakistani families there is for the police and SS to crack down on it, and prosecute each case to the full extent of the law.

Irrespective of whether the perpetrator is White British or British Pakistani or Green Martian.

Every case SHOULD be thoroughly investigated and punished to the full extent of the law.

And the leaders of these British Pakistani cultural groups NEED to come out and stand up for these vulnerable girls, and heap censure on the men who do this.

These attitudes need to be changed from inside the British Pakistani areas out wards.

And the police and SS need to sack anyone that doesn't follow official procedures during these investigations.

Maybe bring in police from other areas to change the ethos of this police department from one that blames the victims to one that tries to get the victims justice, one that tries to protect the vulnerable girls.

1- I cant abide the gimp Griffin. He is an opportunist of the highest order. But Achilla, can you deny that like me, you thought he must be lying when he brought it up at the time.
If the police had spent less time trying to prosecute him for telling what turned out to be the truth and more time prosecuting the child rapists he wouldn't have been able to make so much credit from it.

2-I gave up looking for reports about the Times story after Wednesday (Have you read it I mean the 200 secret files going back over a decade NOT the Rochdale Care report about the 8 men now doing time that was put out on the same day)
If you can show me where that report has been 'all over the press and media' I will happily take that back

Maybe doing some work with the Imams and other well respected locals to work on changing the attitudes of these men is the only thing that would work.

Get the Imams to publicly decry those men that do this, get the Imams to heap shame upon those men.

It is the only way it will stop, is if these awful attitudes towards white girls, that they matter LESS than their sisters, are changed from within that group.

3- Sorry I only just realised that " I refuse to engage with the Islamic morals discussions" was aimed at me.
Silly me.
Where did I mention Islamic morals?

Childrenofthestones the thing you mentioned, a report being met on the day of its publication with a counter report, isn't a 'spike' - a story is 'spiked' when it's not run at all.

Still not seeing much on this story on mainstream news. Much more fuss about the Kate photos - another aspect of general contempt for women, I suppose.

I probably have made some assumptions Kritiq but I still think the men in Rochdale worked in groups and it makes the whole thing very sinsister.

The christian faith doesn't believe in sex before marriage either but it doesn't mean christian men will go off and sleep with a person who has a different view and be unfaithful to their intended.

Maybe thePakistani men don't treat their wives like dirt but it can't be very nice to be married to someone who behaves in such a way and is unfaithful behind your back then turns up the mosque and prays.Not a great role model to his children.

I don't think much to any people male or female who cheat on their partners and sleep with underaged kids including the teacher.

I just think the men in Rochdale worked in a gang and treated the girls like prostitutes.

children - that wasn't aimed at you it was aimed at various other people upthread who were talking about it.

Tryingtothinketc.
You are right, I apologise and stand corrected. But you understand the fleet street tactic I am talking about, where they run a story that will deflect the impact of a rivals story. Of course paranoia is a terrible thing but nothing would surprise me where this story is concerned.
Any takers yet on proof of the Times story( 200 secret files not the 8 or 9 men sent down) being all over the papers and electronic media?

How do the Times know about 200 secret files? Perhaps why the story has been cut.

achillea - good investigative journalism. Quite possibly a leak from someone disgusted at what has been going on.

Islam doesnt allow a person a get out that once he is away from his community he can break all the rules. the Qur'an and hadith remind many times that religion is for every part and scene of a persons life - not just on Fridays or consigned to one month a year.

Fundamentalist Islam sets up a polarity between the Muslim and the Infidel. This brand of Islam expresses animosity towards the Infidel, and especially towards the concept of 'America'. It also expresses its animosity towards western women here it mixes up psycho sexual problems with issues of faith. There is a strong sense of Us and Them, with negative values and attributes ascribed to the Other the Infidel -- that is far too often accompanied by actual violence and disrespect. Western women in particular have been demonised and the process of demonisation has been accompanied by a process of distinguishing Muslim women from Infidel women via 'modest' clothing. There seems to be little or no sense of sharing a common humanity with western women. This sort of process can never end well.

There is no single 'Islam', as you have explained yourself. You cannot say 'Islam does' or 'Islam doesn't' X, Y, or Z. Nor can you say 'This element is merely cultural baggage while this is actual religion'. Your conception of what Islam requires of an individual could be completely different from the understanding of a jihadist as to the requirements of his or her faith; what constitutes a good Muslim is up to the believer to define.

The Irish state initiated the Children's Allowance quite early on in its existence, in the teeth of opposition from the Catholic Church (which claimed it undermined the Family) so that women and children would have something to live on no matter how poor the family and no matter for what reason. At the same time however, married women were barred from civil service employment and employment as teachers in the state education sector from 1932 until 1973(?) and there was a strong assumption that a woman would work only until she married if she was employed elsewhere (in business, in a bank, etc) Promotion in large companies was not for women therefore. Women could be doctors or lawyers, writers or artists, but naturally only a few from the educated classes could aspire to those areas. Women were 'protected' and held in a childlike state of dependency on either their husband or the state, while the primacy of the Family (the man) as breadwinner and adult was asserted. I see very strong parallels with the 'protection' element claimed for Islam. That word 'protection' is a double edged sword when men do it 'for' women.

There was a very active temperance movement in Ireland ('Pioneer Association') in the early twentieth century, and abstinence from alcohol was heavily promoted in church and school alike, with mixed results. I have many relatives who have never touched a drink of any kind all their lives. They wear their old Pioneer pins when they go out. The pins stand for 'Don't bother offering me a drink'. I have one relative who had a serious alcohol problem but recovered.

Actually it makes you wonder how many coppers might have been involved in abuse themselves. I don't want to cast aspersions on any serving or former officers but one factor in abuse scandals that have been hidden in the past was that the abusers included powerful people, who were able to silence the victims. Including police officers, MPs, celebrities...

And it's hardly unknown for coppers to demand a freebie from a prostitute. Perhaps some may have been tempted to do the same with victims of abuse - after all, many prostitutes are.

I think that is highly likely, Edam. Wouldn't be the first time. Anywhere there is crime going on in an organised fashion with regular profits or some sort of attractive benefit attached, there will be amoral people wishing to get their snouts into the trough.

So how could you stop the protectors becoming the abusers? Make them all eunuchs? Pop em all on bromide?

I too think it's highly likely, i have personally witnessed 'brotherhood' or an inpenetrable organisational wall of silence and inaction when i came up against the family court, social services, and police. I am painfully aware that its possible.