Veritas report due tomorrow (Thursday) at midday re: Aimee Challenor

[criticalthinking]

Long time lurker, first time poster - subject says it all really.

Full report here: docdro.id/9or0q0H

So what now? What happens to things like girl guiding, the gymnastics organisation, and all the schools stonewall have had Aimee advise on policies for?

What about Stone wall tbf. They can't keep them on now can they?

He had hardly been a member for more than a couple of years.

Entryism. Moribund local party, run by a long-serving, loyal but exhausted old salt who is simultaneously chair, membership secretary, treasurer and campaigns officer, with at best nominal help from a revolving cast of students and transient hipsters.

Suddenly, over the horizon comes an organiser. Someone with experience in other groups - scouts, say - bringing also a wife and children who are also keen and motivated. Suddenly, there's a meeting which is quorate! They bring some of their friends, too, so there is stuff happening!

The Labour Party learnt the hard way that those bright, keen new arrivals are usually Trotskyites, and their objective is to use the respectability of a moribund local party to further their political agenda. Which is bad, probably, but amongst the groupuscles of the hard left it sort-of doesn't matter.

David Challenor didn't have different views on the role of Leninist Vanguard Parties in the early stages of a revolution. He was a child abuser, who wanted to get a cover for abusing children. The respectable family man, who's a scout leader and local politician? What could be better?

Thanks, QCM. That was quick: redacted release to leak of full report in, what, four hours?

If she was born female you'd all be 'poor thing, nasty dad but not her fault, shouldn't be blamed etc etc'. You're a bunch of hypocrites.

If Aimee was born female, my reaction would be exactly the same.

I think some of Aimee's actions, or lack of them, may have been a result of shock and self-preservation causing Aimee to keep going as if everything was fine.

It's odd that the two people who were told, and who wanted to 'support' Aimee, didn't mention it to Aimee again before the conviction.
And that neither of them, especially Matt, thought to ask if DC had any connection to the Green Party.

QuietContraryMary
Thanks for link - think I will save for tomorrow. Don’t want to lie in bed steaming about it

It was a lot quicker than waiting for the first report

ReflectentMonatomism
Very true - all the more reason to be cautious. Maybe other members felt unable to stand up to Aimee when she suggested him.

It says "I first found in November 2016 that he had been charged with serious sexual offences" (from AC, re DC)

However, Aimee's FB post from October 2015 to the victim of DC's rape suggests that Aimee had been interviewed by the police then & was therefore aware in substantial or whole part of the nature of the crime & identity of the victim.

It also notes that Aimee appointed 'Baloo [sic] Challenor' as Aimee's representative at a Green party disciplinary hearing in March 2018, to which Baloo attended.

Aimee goes on to say 'if the party had given me proper support, what with me a helpless autistic person', I wouldn't even have NEEDED to appoint a rapist as my aide (@ page 42)

Also even though Aimee knew David Challenor had immediately been removed from Coventry Pride on news of the rape charges, Aimee thought it was ok to continue to involve David in the Green Party.

QuietContraryMary Thank you!

Sounds like Verita is very strongly suggesting that AC does not actually have capacity to understand safeguarding.

From the full report:

"From our conversations with her, it is clear that Aimee Challenor did not demonstrate a clear understanding of safeguarding and still does not see the safeguarding issues that this case gave rise to."

For example:

6.62. We asked Aimee whether she considered there were safeguarding issues arising from her father’s involvement with the party. She told us: “There wouldn’t have been safeguarding. He had no personal access to members or members’ data".

Clearly AC thinks that safeguarding relates to data.

6.9 and 6.15 are interesting: AC was a member before DC.

6.11 implies TC barely knew she was a candidate, and could have been acting purely as a front for AC or DC. It's hard to tell: she isn't challenged.

6.13 shows again the pernicious and disingenuous effect of "reporting restrictions" and "contempt of court". None of what Tina Challenor is reported as saying is true - neither reporting restrictions nor general concepts of sub judice make the existence of charges something that cannot be communicated by the general public. However, this is not challenged in the report.

6.34 is the problem Labour now have: candidates who were selected in a hurry without scrutiny in 2017, who turn out to be major liabilities.

Anyone who can explain what 6.53 means is better than I am.

The top of page 45 clearly points of AC's culpability over safeguarding, both past and present.

Page 50 is more wearisome bullshit about autism, which AC uses to excuse everything.

I also am finding it odd that the Green Party is saying that only only two people in the National or local party knew about it when in fact five people did.

Aimee is still vice chair of Prism LGBTQ, a youth group in Coventry. I hope they have sound safeguarding policies.

My understanding is that there can be questions asked if you are seeking an enhanced DBS and share an address it’s a known sexoffender. The Veritasreport seems to point fights at the police. Should the police be at least talking to this group.

Full report see page 44 & 45 for significant Safeguarding comments.

Charities and organisations who Aimee Challenor works for and with need to take this point very seriously.

How odd that so many institutions have taken on board policies and procedures written by someone with no actual knowledge of safeguarding.

From the Guides, to the police, to universities, councils, everywhere.

Shame on you all.

pp63-65 are where the action is.

9.11 is shocking. Post-Saville, it's completely unacceptable, and Caroline Lucas should be treated as a political leper for leading a party which was so cynical.

How odd that so many institutions have taken on board policies and procedures written by someone with no actual knowledge of safeguarding.

Well, her father has detailed knowledge of how to avoid safeguarding, so there's that.

How odd that so many institutions have taken on board policies and procedures written by someone with no actual knowledge of safeguarding.

From the Guides, to the police, to universities, councils, everywhere.

Tomorrow's Telegraph covers NHS hospital ward policy:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3475792-Telegraph-article-NHS-trans-row-as-men-get-access-to-womens-wards-if-they-identify-as-female

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3385533-Prominant-campaigning-role-of-Tara-Hewitt-NHS-TELI-Social-work-universities-etc

Aimee goes on to say 'if the party had given me proper support, what with me a helpless autistic person', I wouldn't even have NEEDED to appoint a rapist as my aide (@ page 42)

From one autistic person to someone who claims to be another, fuck right off with the ‘helpless autistic’ shit.

Don’t fucking drag the rest of us down with you,

Isn't Aimee the one who said they had constant, regular confirmation diagnoses of their autism? And I think someone said that never happens?

And we mustn't forget that Aimee's mum took them to the doctor something like a 100 times in one year, indicating Munchhausen's. Or whatever it's called now.

Someone who seems to be relying so much on autism as an excuse, would make me want to check it out.

LibDem Voice article by Aimee Challenor:

'Why the National Autistic Society were right to reverse their decision on award winning charity Mermaids'
Sun 7th October 2018

(extract)
This week, in a move described as “worrying” by LGBT+ Lib Dems, the National Autistic Society removed all links to the trans youth charity Mermaids from their Gender page. Yesterday they reversed their decision and apologised. As a trans person with autism myself, I know it’s crucial that signposting to proper support is essential.

I was diagnosed with autism at 4 years old. It’s a diagnosis that has been constantly rechecked throughout my life.

When, aged 16, I came out as transgender, one of the first things I faced was disbelief in my Gender Identity by medical professionals because of my autism. Instead of seeing gender specialists, I was sent back to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS).

I turned to Mermaids for support, who helped me secure a referral to the Tavistock and Portman NHS Gender Identity Services. If Mermaids had not have been there for me, I likely would’ve continued to experience rejection of treatment because of my autism. I continue to be asked about my autism at Gender Identity appointments, despite it being repeatedly addressed. (continues)

concludes:
I’m thankful that the National Autistic Society realised quickly they made a mistake and worked hard to fix it. Thanks to people supporting autistic trans people, and the NAS reacting quickly. I know that more people will be supported in accessing support.

People’s perception of my autism diagnosis nearly stopped me from being able to be myself. I hope that other trans people soon won’t have to face similar identity policing. You can help make that a reality by responding to the Government’s consultation on the Gender Recognition Act until 19th October. There are guides available from both Stonewall and LGBT+ Lib Dems.

I dedicate this article to Kayden Clarke, a trans man who was shot dead by police in February 2016. He’d just been denied treatment because of his autism.

• Aimee Challenor is a member of the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group and speaks openly about her experiences of being a young transgender woman with autism."

www.libdemvoice.org/why-the-national-autistic-society-were-right-to-reverse-their-decision-on-award-winning-charity-mermaids-58805.html

The full report is a must read. AC's own words are extremely telling. Too much of this has been left out of the exec summary.

I have no idea how anyone thinks that AC has anything sensible or useful to offer as a politician.

They can't keep them on now can they?

This is 2019. Having the brass front to stick it out seems to be sufficient these days. Sadly.

"From our conversations with her, it is clear that Aimee Challenor did not demonstrate a clear understanding of safeguarding and still does not see the safeguarding issues that this case gave rise to."

I hope the Lib Dems are paying attention to this.

They won't. And it will bite them on the arse eventually.

Aimee goes on to say 'if the party had given me proper support, what with me a helpless autistic person', I wouldn't even have NEEDED to appoint a rapist as my aide

How far does that excuse wash? Either you are someone who is capable of standing for election and representing the public on your own - or you are freely admitting you aren't up to such a serious job and don't take that responsibility seriously enough. It sounds like an admission that AC couldn't do the job without significant influence and input from DC. I note at this point that AC didn't just stand for election. AC thought they were capable of being deputy leader of the greens.

AC can't have been unaware that the Green Partys limited resources mean that they could only ever possibly provide support on a professional level for elected representatives (and even then they have struggled) not other members of the party and they are wholly reliant on volunteers. The Green Party with the best will in the world can't provide that.

Being a politician is a high pressure and high responsibility task. It's one thing to need extra support. It's another to be into the realms of effectively needing a carer to do basic and essential parts of the job. If you are so autistic that it's this prohibitive, can you represent the best interests of the people you are supposed to represent, or can you only manage to represent your own personal interests and then merely present that as if you are representing lots of others? You have to be able to represent people with wildly different views and competition interests.

It just sounds like autism is just being used as an excuse and a shield to mask the self interest without any regard to the wider responsibility. That in itself is a red flag about suitability for office.

Note here: the Liberal Democrats DO NOT have any more resources than the Greens to provide Aimee with the resources and support Aimee seems to feel they need. They should not be allowed to stand for any position if their needs are this severe as its not in the best interests of those they are supposed to be representing. There are sadly limits to ability that constrain even the best of us, and if we are responsible we recognise these limitations and act accordingly if we have the best interests of the people, things and issues we care about passionately.

Seeing that single paragraph in black and white is so telling.

And its really not limited to AC. It's indicative of other parties, groups and individuals. And it's shocking.

But it doesn't come as a surprise to so many of us here. Purely because we understand what safeguarding is.