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

[criticalthinking]

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

Indeed and those organisations which have a duty of care towards children eg scouting, gymnastics etc should now be carrying out internal investigations

I'd be curious to know how the animal cruelty conviction wasn't a red flat for them. If they didn't know, was that because (a) it wasn't picked up by a DBS check because...who knows? or (b) it was spent or (c) it happened after the check. Dunno, but it needs to be thrashed out.

If it turns out they sought a DBS check in the name of "Balloo Challenor" then that will be a massive thing.

Given how long social services were involved with this family, presumably there's a serious case review in the pipeline too?

Given how long social services were involved with this family, presumably there's a serious case review in the pipeline too?

One would hope. Quite rightly, one thing that is not publicly known is who the child victim was, and therefore how the Challenors came into contact with her. If it turns out, as would hardly be surprising, that the child was on social services' radar for other reasons then it's a total scandal. If the child was otherwise unknown to the authorities then it isn't quite the same issue, but the way in which the David Challenor managed to get his way into a network of volunteering should be a matter of great concern to social services.

I read a published newspaper article shortly after the verdict was announced that suggested Tina Challenor was on the radar of social services long before she met David Challenor. Childhood on, IIRC. I was left with the strong impression, though, that DC was one of those people who fight tooth and nail against SS and sometimes succeed in getting SS decisions overturned by the courts, as I believe he did.

If it turns out they sought a DBS check in the name of "Balloo Challenor" then that will be a massive thing.

When an organisation carries out the check the applicant has to fill in any previous names they were known by. Their current full name has to match their ID. So unless DC legally changed his name to Baloo and had matching ID it wouldn’t be possible. I used to employ performing arts teachers and they had to list their stage names.

There is now a process for transgender people who don’t want to disclose their sex to their employer (which I don’t agree with) but they still have to disclose those names to the DBS but on a confidential firm the employer does not see.

The animal cruelty thing is interesting. Someone may have had to make a judgment call but it depends exactly what the conviction was. I made a judgment call that a girl resisting arrest and ‘attacking’ a police woman when she was a silly drunk 17 year old didn’t mean she was any risk to kids as a 20 something teaching drama and the local authority where she worked first as a teacher, then a TA obviously made the same decision.

Given how long social services were involved with this family, presumably there's a serious case review in the pipeline too?

This needs to happen

Reflectent - this summarises the animal cruelty conviction (as well as DC's other crimes)

Challenor was also convicted in 2013 of “failing to provide suitable environments for two corn snakes, a bearded dragon, two cats, three dogs, a hamster, two hedgehogs and two rabbits.” He was jailed for 12 weeks, suspended for 12 months, with 200 hours’ unpaid work, and told to pay an £80 victim surcharge and £500 costs

So not something like failing to clean the litter tray out every day or having a couple of extra fish in a small tank

Sorry, ^^ was for Alexander

Having seen how difficult it is to get any prosecutions for animal cruelty, I’d say the conditions he kept his animals in must have been appalling.

When an organisation carries out the check the applicant has to fill in any previous names they were known by. Their current full name has to match their ID.

It's not impossible he had ID in the name of Baloo, of course. He managed to get himself appointed as an election agent in his made up name, after all. If someone wants to maliciously represent themselves as having a different name it's not that difficult. Even the lower and less exotic forms of security clearance want all your names back to birth and require evidence of it which is checked; that's not so far as I understand it the case for DBS. Rapists lie, unsurprisingly

I know we’ve talked about DBS checks and name changes before.

Im wondering WHY you need to disclose all names if they can check all names.

In many countries they have population registers so you’d put ‘Jane doe, ID number 123456’ and they’d be able to tie that number to all identities.*

So why ask for previous names if they have a way of seeing them all from current ID?

Can they see identities or not? If Jane Doe applies and doesn’t mention she was Jane Smith before marriage, there’s a paper trail but how is it visible?

I’m asking how the process works - if Jane sends in a DBS and misses a name change off, how can the people checking see that?

• I think one EU country is having pressure put on to change the ID numbers because it ‘deadnames’ people (you can tell the sex from the number odd/even.)

It's not impossible he had ID in the name of Baloo, of course. He managed to get himself appointed as an election agent in his made up name, after all. If someone wants to maliciously represent themselves as having a different name it's not that difficult.

It would show up on DBS.
ID may be used in other situations where an employer, landlord etc is solely obliged to see a copy of ID.

DBS works differently, it has a different function and uses a range of checks.

Im wondering WHY you need to disclose all names if they can check all names.

They will do additional searches on those names.

There would also be an issue (bearing in mind the reason for the DBS) if it came back and all names had not been disclosed.

It would be regarded as a potential red flag in situations of trust.

At the risk of becoming a stuck record, DBS checks are a part of some Safeguarding policies and are part of the Safeguarding framework.

Organisations which do not require emplyees or volunteers to have DBS checks, still have obligations to understand Safeguarding which will be informed by policies.

It seems the serious lack of understanding of Safeguarding contributes to a systemic failure within many organisations which intersect with transrights activism.

So giving one name automatically flags up all other names associated with it?

But I'm sure I read that if you are trans, you have to call a confidential phone number, who will then preserve your privacy.

Why would you have to call that number if your previous name was getting flagged up anyway?

Why would you have to call that number if your previous name was getting flagged up anyway?

Because the potential employer etc will only get the report back in your current name - it will cover all previous identities but under the current name.

That's the idea, anyway. But crickets from officialdom to all questions asking if this is open to abuse.

That’s sort of what I’m asking - a name comes in for a DBS check - what’s the process for making sure you’ve got all the names and Identities?

Without a single identifier tied to you from birth (like most countries have as an ID number) how can you be sure you’ve covered everything? What about country moves?

I guess I was hoping there was a system where Jane Doe applies and bleep! All her previous names come up on the screen and then checks are run from there. I know in the times in my life I’ve moved (a lot) the authorities have been dire at updating details. In other countries a central registry plugs into almost everything.

VickyE Searches are less searching only 3 years addresses now required.

That applies if you have one of the cat 1 digital ID docs. If you don't have a current passport or driving licence they'll come back & ask for 10 years worth still.

There is useful information about the scope, nature and legislative basis for the range of possible screening options, including various DBS options:

cbscreening.co.uk/faqs/

Because the potential employer etc will only get the report back in your current name - it will cover all previous identities but under the current name.

lang can you clarify this, i still don't get it. It's me, I'm sure!

If I'm going for a job and I'm a transwoman and I give my new name, Sophia Smith. But no other. What happens?

Datun
For those jobs working with children / vulnerable adults etc that are subject to a DBS check, the potential employee fills in the form in conjunction with the employer who also confirms the neccesary ID.

The employer then submits the DBS check as it is specific to the role offered.

This usually happens after a job offer and before taking up post.

(I presume)
The policy which allows a transperson to add their previous name (s) confidentially directly with DBS means that the purpose of the check eg to demonstrate no relevnt previous convictions is fulfilled whilst also protecting the privacy of the indivdual.

So with your example, Sophia Smith's DBS check is completed satisfactorily, their are no bars to her taking up the role.
Her employer does not know that she used to be called Stephen Smith, she contacted DBS with this information which meant that they were able to do the full screen eg no gaps in history.

The purpose of the DBS check is specific, to disclose convictions/ intelligence which are specific to the type of check being requested.
The type of check is determined by the role.

I am very confused by this thread, because I advocate for compulsory DBS checks for certain jobs and feel that I have come under attack for doing so.
I know that when I had to complete an enhanced DBS check 3 years ago it went a whole lot further back than 3 years - copy of birth certificate, passport, photos, driving licence, adoption certificates (if applicable) and a whole lot of other questions.
I really do not know what "safeguarding" means, because I believe it to be what any company believes it to be, and it is not regulated by any laws, so therefore it is much akin to letting the fox wait outside the henhouse and then giving him a pair of wirecutters to get through the fence.

Her employer does not know that she used to be called Stephen Smith, she contacted DBS with this information which meant that they were able to do the full screen eg no gaps in history.

Right, and if she doesn't contact the DBS with her previous names?

ROwantrees,

you forgot the birth certifificate for the DBS check?
How is anyone allowed to alter their birth certificate?

It also has to be a birth certificate issued in the first 12 months after birth too.