Exposure, newsnight etc discussion part 2

[MrsjREwing]

Last thread full.

Steve has released a statement responding to Lord McAlpines statement.

Entwistle may be decent but God, he's inept in a crisis. Not only was he spectacularly useless over the original Newsnight-pulling-Saville-investigation story, and then useless in front of the select committee, he was useless again in this latest, incredibly damaging row.

Giving Humphries pathetic excuse after pathetic excuse for the fact that no, he didn't know anything about the second Newsnight investigation into 'a prominent Tory', no, he hadn't bothered to find anything out about it (really? you don't think after the first one, it might be an idea to be rigorous and have procedures in place to make sure stuff is properly sourced and checked?), no, he hadn't seen the Guardian front-page lead exposing the Newsnight story as a pile of cobblers... honestly, it was like listening to a particularly wet fourth-former explain that his homework had been eaten by the dog. Again.

Here's a tip for the next DG - when the shit hits the fan and you have to go on the Today programme or in front of a select committee, it's a good idea to do some preparation first. Oh, and being aware of really really big shit that is hitting the fan is quite important. Set up an RSS feed or something, or get your staff to mark up the press cuttings or something, ffs. Shame none of that occured to Entwistle.

Giving Humphries pathetic excuse after pathetic excuse for the fact that no, he didn't know anything about the second Newsnight investigation into 'a prominent Tory', no, he hadn't bothered to find anything out about it (really? you don't think after the first one, it might be an idea to be rigorous and have procedures in place to make sure stuff is properly sourced and checked?), no, he hadn't seen the Guardian front-page lead exposing the Newsnight story as a pile of cobblers... honestly, it was like listening to a particularly wet fourth-former explain that his homework had been eaten by the dog. Again.

Indeed. It is literally unbelievable. As in, as if that was what happened, I mean really? About as believable as Steven Meesham suddenly deciding he's got the wrong person, I would say.

Shouldn't Mark Thompson, former DG, be carrying some of the can? Wasn't he the one in charge when Newsnight pulled the Savile story and the Savile tribute at Christmas was shown?

I agree with Feenie I don't beieve this at all. Or the SM 'mistaken identity'. It's all far too convenient. They have both been hung out to dry.

So far only one poster has mentioned psychopathy, and that is telling.

Only when we understand psychopathy, that there is a disproportionate representation of such people at the top of society, will we understand why humanity is hurtling to disaster.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/the-jillings-report-how-the-truth-about-north-wales-child-abuse-scxandal-was-suppressed-8303903.html

A damning report that laid bare the North Wales child abuse scandal might have aired the issue of sex attacks on children in care nearly half a decade before an official judicial inquiry in 2000.

Instead copies of the report were ordered to be destroyed because the council that commissioned it feared it might be sued, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. Only a handful remain, including one obtained by this newspaper.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/the-north-wales-child-abuse-scandal-a-damaged-generation-waits-for-justice-30-years-on-8303901.html

WARNING:very distressing

The four brothers were subjected to physical beatings, three of them were passed around and endured terrifying abuse by paedophiles. Two are dead, one in horrifying and unexplained circumstances. The remaining two live in terror at the margins of society, racked by the fear that the men who spent years hurting them will return.

I heard Entwhislte on R4 yesterday interviews by Humphries. I didn't believe him. I know people in similar jobs. I often have a working life like his. He said he was giving a talk that morning so he did not see the Guardian article. People in his job would have known. It just did not seem credible. If he knew he was so bad at this kind of interview he should have refused it or else on those questions said I will leave it to the BBC investigation.

On the post above I think it has been said for a good while that one reason one report from years ago was hidden was the Council might be sued.

I suppose the bottom line is we must stop this happening to children. Secondly the tax payer always pays.

I don't agree with rubberg though that there are many more people at the top of society doing this. I think it cuts across all classes. Whilst some people rise to the top at anything because they are happy to spend hours at it (I am like that) we should not associate that with those attracted to chidlren which is a very specific thing some seem born with.

In fact I think we should put a lot more effort into research into that, comparing what makes the sexuality of some which is not in others from birth, genes, exposure in the womb, being abused yourself etc etc That could long term be the best child protection method of all.

Its almost as though everytime the focus is on the Government ie Camerons gay comment, the BBC are then thrown into the spotlight again with something even worse.

Its becoming a bat and ball session of politics and covering arses, seeing who can expose something more terrible to claim the days headlines.

What about the victims, they seem pushed to one side yet again.

I started to read the Waterhouse report out of curiosity and have only got to the 4th page and am already steaming.

One of the care homes wasnt investigated because the 2 children who had reported abuse were disabled so could not offer conclusive evidence and another home where abuse was reported fell into the year 1969 so they decided that didnt need investigating either because of the date.

It appears to be an inquiry just like Hillsborough where the remit was set to fit the answers they were prepared to give and not an ounce more. The whole feel of it is that the witnesses will be unreliable before they even answered a question.

A Man in his 70's now arrested, lets see if he grabs todays headlines to give the Beeb and Government Sunday off before the mud slinging starts again tomorrow.

That article is so sad Frothy.

i think it is a mistake, to say the least, to call sadistic raping, assaulting and manipulating children a 'sexuality'.

nick davies article is extremely thorough. thanks to whoever linked it.

I remain angry about how all this BBC shit has deflected attention from the very fact that CHILDREN WERE ABUSED. This continues to need investigating.

Its almost as though they are more concerned about the BBC Brand that they have forgotten about jimmy Savile and what started this whole ball rolling.

The BBC is just another business and not some God like creation for the UK.

What about the children. Its a distraction so that the public forget the questions they really want answering.

Who gave the Keys to Broadmoor to Savile and why?

What the hell happened in childrens homes accross the UK and why did officials turn a blind eye?

Why do the courts give such lenient sentences to those found guilty of sexual abuse?

Which big names were scrubbed out of reports to protect their identity?

Why havent hospital bosses been arrested for allowing a paedophile access to its vulnerable patients.

Why didnt BBC sack JS years ago?

Who was protecting JS and why?

This is just a few of many questions that need answering.

I hope the Welsh community are gearing up in the same way the people of Liverpool did to make sure they get to the truth.

www.nickdavies.net/category/child-abuse/

I have read the odd story over the years of children being let down by the system. When you put them all together like the link above then you get a real feel for the true scale of the hidden horrors going on in this country.

I read the Colin Smart -Sunderland first and can honestly say i had never heard a word of what happened there.

I dont understand why and what the hell can anyone can do to stop it happening again.

What can be done to stop it happening again?

1. Do not take so many chidlren into care - the Government has just announced the opposite. If you go into care you are more likely to end up in prison than university. However bad often birth parents are not quite so bad.

1. Have zero tolerance however senior anyone is for exploitative conduct (including against adolescent girls, and young women for that matter) at work and elsewhere.

1. Appoint many more women. If a boardroom is 50% women you cannot engender a culture of locker room whether that be locker room re adult women or locker room re young boys.

1. Entwhistle's replacement could be female for example (and yes some women do abuse children - there was that nursery worker etc but it is much less common than amongst men)

1. Give children the means to complain, access to email and the internet, mentors and third parties to speak to. Educate them as to what is acceptable and what is not. Monitor those caring for them.

(swallowed, we may disagree on that terminology but we don't disagree on stopping it. I think if we could stand back and try to find the causes and how to prevent men (and a few women) who sexually abuse children we would protect children best. Whether you call it a sexuality or an inclination it does in many of them seem to be there from when they are born).

On the link above this is a good example of what should be looked into again
Now sadly masses and masses of women every year falsely accuse a husband they divorce of abuse and it is terribly terribly wrong and must be stopped with much harsher punishments for the women in my view, in some cases it may of course be true.

In the piece below it is the third party evidence which would have clinched it - medical evidence of an STD being passed to the child, interviewing the child.

"The Guardian, September 2008

Police have been ordered to review their handling of the case of a judge accused of sexually abusing young children after claims that they failed adequately to investigate him because he was a friend of the chief constable.

The judge, who for legal reasons can be named only as Judge X, has been accused by his former wife of abusing children as young as 18 months of age, giving one of them a sexually transmitted infection; downloading child pornography on his computer; and using the transcripts of trials involving sexual offences for his personal gratification. The judge has denied all the allegations.

The former wife?s allegations in June 2006 were referred by social services to Dyfed Powys police, who investigated and concluded that they were baseless. The judge?s former wife then complained that the investigation had been inadequate and had the appearance of bias because, she claimed, Judge X was a friend of the then chief constable of Dyfed Powys, Terry Grange, a claim which Grange has denied.

Now a review by the Independent Police Complaints Commission has ordered Dyfed Powys police to reconsider the former wife?s complaint about the weakness of their investigation. In a summary report the IPCC?s case officer comments on the rejection of her complaint: ?I fail to see how the findings can be supported without any evidence of a thorough investigation into all complaints made ? it is clear that the investigation has not been completed.?

The IPCC review was told that:

· Although the former wife said she had personally witnessed Judge X naked with named young children, Dyfed Powys police failed even to interview the judge and phoned him for an off-the-record conversation, which had no evidential value;

· Although the former wife said she had witnessed Judge X downloading child pornography on his home computers and identified two sites which she claimed he had been using, Dyfed Powys police failed to seize any of the judge?s computers;

· Although she alleged that the judge had passed a sexual infection to a child Dyfed Powys police made no attempt to obtain relevant medical records;

· Although she accused him of using court transcripts for his sexual gratification Dyfed Powys failed to mention the allegation in its inquiry report.

When the former wife heard the outcome of Dyfed Powys? investigation in January 2007 she filed a formal complaint that it was inadequate. The force considered this complaint and in July 2007 rejected it.

In August 2007 she appealed to the IPCC, who initially refused to review the handling of her complaint on the grounds that her paperwork had arrived with them six days after the statutory 28-day deadline. She sought a judicial review in the high court, which in June this year ordered the IPCC to review the case.

The IPCC review comes to no conclusion on the validity of the former wife?s allegations against Judge X. In a statement last night he told the ITV programme Wales This Week: ?I only wish to state firmly that there is absolutely no truth in any of these allegations.? Nor does the IPCC make any comment on the claim that Judge X was a friend of the then chief constable, Terry Grange.

Grange, who was a spokesman on child protection for the Association of Chief Police Officers, retired with immediate effect last November after being accused of misusing force email and a credit card while having an affair.

The IPCC?s report requires Dyfed Powys police to reopen the case, initially in order to establish whether the former wife?s complaints about the original inquiry were properly handled. In a statement the police said: ?The force will revisit and reinvestigate the complaints submitted, a process that will necessitate further engagement with the complainant. A new investigating officer has been appointed.?

Its William De'ath who has been arrested this morning according to Mark William Thomas on twitter.

mrcrumpswife- thats exactly my thinking this morning.

So Newsnight had inferred that McAlpine was a peadophile- if the original investigations and inquiry had not been so blatantly whitewashed then we wouldn't be having all this speculation. If those in 'power' were open and honest about any findings then McAlpine would never have been suspected/involved in speculation.

But again- someone high up is hiding a massive amount of information.
Each one of your questions in your posts are going around and around in my head.

I am actually incandescent with rage about all this. Its disgraceful.

Should have said Wifred De'ath

Dead right that "if the original investigations and inquiry had not been so blatantly whitewashed then we wouldn't be having all this speculation". Yet because Newsnight is so completely discredited and the DG has resigned, those in power and the media is completely distracted into a 'whither the BBC' story and NOT asking 'bleeding hell, what about the victims and the cover-ups of widespread depravity and horrific abuse'.

Ive just had to comment on the daily mail site.

Its shameful that this newspaper is trying to discredit him.

fucking rag.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231212/A-victim-delusions-Astonishing-story-BBC-DIDNT-tell-troubled-star-witness.html

Not shameful at all. We have freedom of the press.
He may well make things up. That is why we try to have due process and do it better at least than Iran and China even if it's not always perfect.

There are a lot of substantial facts in that article which had not been in the press recently as people wanted to believe SM is God kind of thing.

That does not mean children aren't abused. They have jailed those men in Yorkshire for what they did to girls under 16. We just have to keep at it in investigating and protecting children.

I am actually quite concerned about the new database though teachers in secret are adding to in today's press run by a company called something ilke One. Parents are not told about it. We do need to get the right balance between protection and privacy, all very hard.

What darabase? Can you explain a little more please, Xenia?

That Daily Mail report is disgusting. Thankfully, the comments I read corroborate that opinion.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231272/Personal-details-million-children-secret-database-parents-knowledge.html

Xenia- do you really think that people viewed SM as some kind of 'God'??

I have seen people make compassionate comments about him, ones which exude empathy and an anger towards 'The Establishment' for not investigating child abuse in North Wales.

I have never seen any evidence thus far that would place him 'up there' with God.
can you link to what you have read to prove me otherwise????