BBC on David Challenor - well, finally.... [Edited by MNHQ at OP's request]

[sociopathsunited]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-45328860

I wonder if their feet are sore from dragging their heels for so bloody long..

The BBC article is shocking. It's almost entirely about brave and stunning Aimee Challenor. The majority of the body of the article is quotes from AC.

The Coventry Observer is far more explicit, with a very interesting paragraph which seems to confirm there were more than one victim

Prosecutor Andrew Wallace said most of the charges related to the ordeal to which Challenor subjected one girl, who lived in the Stoke area of the city at the time.

So, AC didn't know what was going on because AC had spent periods of time not living at their parents address! Completely ignoring the fact that AC was in contact with his parents, hence using DC to verify her political application, using DC to help form policies reducing women's rights and used their parents address as local HQ, seeking DCs help to take one individual to court. Yet, we are supposed to believe that AC was not fully aware that DC was accused of sexual abuse and rape against a minor!

The dad must be very good at compartmentalizing and lying about their life if this is the case. Or perhaps this is a trait that has been passed onto at least one child as part of their disfunctional upbringing.

How come the Potts - max sentence 20 years, all just basic lowlife scum - are more newsworthy than DC - sentence 22 years, high profile political activist family?

Just classism?

Connections. Connections, connections, connections. Some day, it will all piece together and we'll find out who the worm at the heart of this particular scummy apple is.

solihullobserver.co.uk/news/solihull-councillor-releases-public-apology-as-west-midlands-police-announce-investigation/

One of them was a councillor?

Or is it a different Potts family?

The difference in reporting between the Potts and Challoner case is stark.
Also surprised the Potts case didn't make national news.

Different Potts, I think. It's not a name in the BBC report anyway..

I thought exactly the same,

How can she only just have heard of this when she took her dad on as her agent after he was arrested?

MsMc
Aimee’s surname Challenor not Challenor, which is why your search may not be working.
There is a huge difference in reporting in those 2 stories

Oh FFS Challenor
Not Challoner

oh bugger did I spell the name wrong?

@MNHQ can the thread title be corrected please?

Thank you MNHQ for fixing my atrocious spelling mistake.

I have complained to the BBC about the bias in the article. You do not need to leave your name to do this, although if you do they will reply to you

I was one of the early complainers when we first started discussing it. I did leave my name. I haven't even had the standard brush off.I don't

Worth referencing the BBC Editorial Values in any complaint:
1.2.1 Trust

Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest. We are committed to achieving the highest standards of due accuracy and impartiality and strive to avoid knowingly and materially misleading our audiences.

1.2.2 Truth and Accuracy

We seek to establish the truth of what has happened and are committed to achieving due accuracy in all our output. Accuracy is not simply a matter of getting facts right; when necessary, we will weigh relevant facts and information to get at the truth. Our output, as appropriate to its subject and nature, will be well sourced, based on sound evidence, thoroughly tested and presented in clear, precise language. We will strive to be honest and open about what we don't know and avoid unfounded speculation.

1.2.3 Impartiality

Impartiality lies at the core of the BBC's commitment to its audiences. We will apply due impartiality to all our subject matter and will reflect a breadth and diversity of opinion across our output as a whole, over an appropriate period, so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or under-represented. We will be fair and open-minded when examining evidence and weighing material facts.

1.2.4 Editorial Integrity and Independence

The BBC is independent of outside interests and arrangements that could undermine our editorial integrity. Our audiences should be confident that our decisions are not influenced by outside interests, political or commercial pressures, or any personal interests.

1.2.5 Harm and Offence

We aim to reflect the world as it is, including all aspects of the human experience and the realities of the natural world. But we balance our right to broadcast innovative and challenging content with our responsibility to protect the vulnerable from harm and avoid unjustifiable offence. We will be sensitive to, and keep in touch with, generally accepted standards as well as our audiences' expectations of our content, particularly in relation to the protection of children.

1.2.6 Serving the Public Interest

We seek to report stories of significance to our audiences. We will be rigorous in establishing the truth of the story and well informed when explaining it. Our specialist expertise will bring authority and analysis to the complex world in which we live. We will ask searching questions of those who hold public office and others who are accountable, and provide a comprehensive forum for public debate.

1.2.7 Fairness

Our output will be based on fairness, openness, honesty and straight dealing. Contributors and audiences will be treated with respect."
www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/bbc-editorial-values/editorial-values

from thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3296433-BBC-Bias-Collecting-Examples-here

Using the mealy mouthed "abuse" rather than "rape" makes it clear that they're trying to downplay the conviction in an effort to save Aimee's career.

June 6th 2018 Guardian interview:
'Aimee Challenor: ‘Yes, I’m trans, but I’m a Green politician and proud of it’
by Alfie Packham

(extract)
"And Challenor has experienced prejudice herself. It started on the night she came out as trans at her school prom, aged 16. She wasn’t allowed to wear a dress, her headteacher told her, because it was “unnecessarily attention-seeking” and would make the school “look stupid”. (The school back-pedalled after a complaint from Challenor’s parents.) Since then she has been attacked mostly via social media: her mental health began to suffer after a recent barrage of abusive tweets. “One of the things that has helped me ignore the hate is the fact that yes, I’m trans, but I’m a Green party politician – and I’m achieving at something I’m damn well proud of.”

Challenor lives with her parents in Coventry and was a Green party parliamentary candidate for Coventry South in 2017."

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/06/aimee-challenor-theresa-may-lgbt-inequality-transgender-green-party

Many years ago I complained to the BBC.

I liked radio 5 live and they had an evening phone in regarding the rubbish prison sentence given to a paedophile, whose unattractive mugshot was on the front of every newspaper.

The next day they had a football programme with Graham Rix the star turn, a convicted paedophile not long released from prison.

I felt the BBC were saying if you've got a suit and are part of the establishment we don't care about your crimes.

I complained as why was it ok to vilify one paedophile whilst employing another.

The response was Rix had served his time, the football community were prepared to accept him, helped in his rehabilitation blah blah.

So nothing the BBC does surprises me anymore.

I live on the other side of the world, but since the advent of the internet have listened faithfully to Radio 4, but I can't bear them anymore, there is no honesty and no news.

with a very interesting paragraph which seems to confirm there were more than one victim

Prawn, within the context, the quote of:
Prosecutor Andrew Wallace said most of the charges related to the ordeal to which Challenor subjected one girl

I think probably refers to the other charges of child pornography (which was, IIRC, 3 years on top of the rape/torture charges). So no real confirmation, although these predators usually have more than one victim, and you would expect that if WMP suspected there were more, surely the CPS would not have dragged their heels getting it to court?

To clarify, my post above which includes BBC editorial values from their website is simply a resource which people may find helpful if they have chosen to make an individual complaint.

I'm putting my head above the parapet here because I work for the BBC and know a bit about the story. Sometimes there are, genuinely, court stories we miss and when we found out about this one neither the BBC's own reporters or our trusted agencies had been in court. This made it difficult for us to do the story immediately because of the way we check material. We absolutely understood the seriousness and horrific nature of the convictions and followed it up as soon as we could - in the event by incorporating it in the story about Aimee Challenor, which had by then developed. I realise this isn't a perfect solution and you'll note that the BBC has added more detail to the charges (partly after having seen complaints, including those on Mumsnet and agreeing that more detail was necessary). We often won't go as far as some other media in detailing the more extreme and distressing elements of an abuse case - not to shy away from them but because that too draws complaints - especially as the website is widely used as a trusted news resource by younger audiences. I hope this helps explain a bit about what happened here. I feel criticism of the BBC really deeply because I have worked here for a number of years and know how seriously the BBC's journalists take their responsibility to get things right and to be fair. I have never, ever seen a story suppressed because of personal contacts and the process by which a story is published means that this would be almost impossible. I appreciate that people perceive the BBC to have institutional biases and positions but again, we try very hard to be fair and trustworthy and to offer the most balanced and accurate version of any story. I'm happy to answer any qus anyone has.

Thanks. How come this wasn't on the court list? Do you know?

Are you a local reporter? Why have you not pursued the local Green Party for answers about when they knew about the charge and why DC was used as an election agent?

Are you still pursuing the story?