coaches engaging in legal ***ual activity

[John2]

John, if people saw the article then my guess is they were happy that these 5 people would be taken off the streets and punished thinking that they were just a few exceptions of criminals compared with the general population. Like if a child killer is caught you wouldn’t expect there to be a whole gang of them behind the scene. Turns out in the cases in Rotherham and other towns there were a few more compared to the general population doesn’t it?

Anyway, none of the victims ever came to me to tell me that they had been abused. What they did do though is tell the police and social services and what did the police and social services do? Nothing.

Your theory falls apart when later that year it was announced nobody was facing charges, there was no outrage then.

Even the guardian's reporting of the time illustrates how attitudes have shifted:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/...liquechrisafis

"The case is understood not to have involved coercion"

A 12 year old girl couldn't identify a father out of 5 men and none of them had a positive DNA test - and the "left wing" guardian said the 12 YEAR OLD hadn't been coerced!? And collectively as a town we accepted this attitude, these were not seen as victims, its there in black and white.

If you want to make yourself feel better that when these warning emerged you dismissed them as not realising the scale of the problem, or perhaps you only found it outrageous when discovering the race of the assailants, that's up to you. But we definitely had warnings that the people of Rotherham did not get upset about until it was way too late.

[Shark27]

Your theory falls apart when later that year it was announced nobody was facing charges, there was no outrage then.

Even the guardian's reporting of the time illustrates how attitudes have shifted:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/...liquechrisafis

"The case is understood not to have involved coercion"

A 12 year old girl couldn't identify a father out of 5 men and none of them had a positive DNA test - and the "left wing" guardian said the 12 YEAR OLD hadn't been coerced!? And collectively as a town we accepted this attitude, these were not seen as victims, its there in black and white.

If you want to make yourself feel better that when these warning emerged you dismissed them as not realising the scale of the problem, or perhaps you only found it outrageous when discovering the race of the assailants, that's up to you. But we definitely had warnings that the people of Rotherham did not get upset about until it was way too late.

Was there anything pointing towards this happening on a mass scale? Should we have assumed that the relevant authorities couldn't/wouldn't do their job? I know we can assume that now by the way.

Maybe the left wing guardian said the girl had not been coerced due to the race of the perpetrators? That certainly played a part in the left wing council rejecting a report from the home office on the issue.

[John2]

Was there anything pointing towards this happening on a mass scale? Should we have assumed that the relevant authorities couldn't/wouldn't do their job? I know we can assume that now by the way.

Maybe the left wing guardian said the girl had not been coerced due to the race of the perpetrators? That certainly played a part in the left wing council rejecting a report from the home office on the issue.

OK, so you only think a 12 year old being treated in this way is only worthy of the town's outrage if only we had known there were more instances like it. Got it.

Maybe if the girl had been treated by the town as a victim rather than complicit the other authorities would have treated it differently too. This was a society wide failing.

I'll reiterate my point. At the time people barely raised an eyebrow because these girls were not seen as victims by practically anyone.

[Shark27]

OK, so you only think a 12 year old being treated in this way is only worthy of the town's outrage if only we had known there were more instances like it. Got it.

Maybe if the girl had been treated by the town as a victim rather than complicit the other authorities would have treated it differently too. This was a society wide failing.

I'll reiterate my point. At the time people barely raised an eyebrow because these girls were not seen as victims by practically anyone.

When did I say that? Quite right to be outraged if a 12 year old is raped. Just like it would be right to be outraged if there is a murder in the town. But towns would all be getting outraged quite a lot if we deal with crimes on a case by case basis. Raging would have no time to go to work based on what happens in his local area.

It comes to a head when the realization that people who should have been doing their jobs weren't and this was over many years (partly due to the race of the perpetrators - this kind of thing makes you outraged doesn't it?).

I'm sure if a gang of white child rapists were allowed to get away with it for years there would be similar outrage one it was acknowledged that the authorities knew about it.

[John2]

All of which misses my point. These children were not even seen as victims back then in the way someone who gets murdered would be. This is something the townsfolk were collectively guilty of.

Even now, in 2020, we have people going to the trouble of asking why victims of these sorts of crimes "don't say no" which to some appears to be suggesting they are in some way responsible.

[Shark27]

All of which misses my point. These children were not even seen as victims back then in the way someone who gets murdered would be. This is something the townsfolk were collectively guilty of.

That's your opinion, based on what you heard at school from a bunch of school kids and one case mentioned. Doesn't mean it's right.

[KerrAvon]

OK, so you only think a 12 year old being treated in this way is only worthy of the town's outrage if only we had known there were more instances like it. Got it.

Maybe if the girl had been treated by the town as a victim rather than complicit the other authorities would have treated it differently too. This was a society wide failing.

I'll reiterate my point. At the time people barely raised an eyebrow because these girls were not seen as victims by practically anyone.

How was the 12 year old treated, John? On the face of it, she identified 5 adults who she said had *** with her. Two youths admitted it and were cautioned and there was deemed to be insufficient evidence to bring a prosecution against the other three. Beyond those bare bones, neither of us know what happened. You criticise the use of the word 'coerced' by The Guardian, but do you know if there was any actual coercion in the case to which the report refers? The 'fault' in the use of the word 'coercion' is simply that it indicates a possible failure to recognise that abuse victims can become victims in other far more common ways

You are right that there was a widespread failure to identify the victims of abuse as being victims. To a point, that is not surprising given that many victims would have denied that is what they were. That is the whole point of 'grooming' what they were (initially, at least) and some would not have cooperated with the police to the point of being actively obstructive. That is the whole point of 'grooming' - to prevent victims from realising that is what they are. Instead, they are generally persuaded that they are 'special' and in a loving relationship with their abuser. That does not excuse the police officers who had dealings with the victims, but it does go some way to explaining their failings.

I don't buy into your idea that the whole of Rotherham should have known what was going on. Did you have any understanding of the nature and the scale of what was happening? If you didn't it's a bit unfair to expect Shark and Stovic and the entire population of the town to have known.

The real issue that I take with your argument is that by arguing that the whole town was at fault, you risk letting the actual people at fault off the hook. I'm a great one for believing that blame is best reserved for the blameworthy. That means the offenders primarily, but also those people who should have known what was going on and acted to prevent it as part of their jobs.

With the police, I suspect the primary reason for their failure was poor training for front line officers coupled with the jaundiced outlook that can develop as a consequence of their work unless they are careful to avoid it. The problem is that there was something else at work, which was an unwillingness to disuss the issue and identify the grouup of people responsible for fear of walking into a minefield created by the liberal Left, in which ethnicity was only to be spoken about in the context of a celebration of muticulturalism.

I have said it on here many times - because it is true - that abuse happens wherever adults have contact with children - whether that is in the home, school, scout pack, church, swimming club or many other locations. The issue in Rotherham was a particular one, however, in which initial contact was often via fast food outlets and taxi drivers followed by local trafficking within a particular part of the community. The problem was that the minefield laid by the left prevented the people who needed to talk about it from doing so. The truth gave way to hopelessly misplaced 'political correctness'. Imagine if the abuse was taking place by a group of teachers, but social workres not being willing to talk about it for fear of offending the teaching profession or feeding prejudice against the NUT. That is how absurd it was.

[wendun]

KerrAvon, if you are not a lawyer you should be. A forensic demolition of John2. I read his comments and instantly saw what you see in your sentence beginning "The real issue..." That is precisely the point and aim of John2; a deliberate and repeated attempt to divert attention from the actual guilty parties. A common tactic but no less disgraceful for that.

[Stovicmiller]

All of which misses my point. These children were not even seen as victims back then in the way someone who gets murdered would be. This is something the townsfolk were collectively guilty of.

Even now, in 2020, we have people going to the trouble of asking why victims of these sorts of crimes "don't say no" which to some appears to be suggesting they are in some way responsible.

what a load of *******s, you obviously believe what comes out of Yr mouth. You say the townsfolk were collectively guilty of not seeing these girls as victims, maybe people you knock bout with saw it that way but not in the circles I frequent. Ofcourse the people of Rotherham were outraged any normal person would be. The court case you mentioned is not the same has finding out 1600 to 2000 girls have been ***ually assaulted.

[rolymiller]

KerrAvon, if you are not a lawyer you should be. .

I think his true vocation should be as a tory politician always puts over the tory view very well. I think he tends to leave too many holes in his arguments to be a lawyer and is too inconsistent, he would get torn apart in court by an even average barrister. I expect he is still learning his trade to be fair if he is a lawyer and nowt wrong with that. Keep working at it Kerr you will get there! Not quite ready for the first team yet though.

But yes I would vote for him as a Tory MP if I voted Tory and had a centre/right - Tory stand point (somewhere between Heseltine and Thatch).