Grooming gangs

[Teddy Eagle]

Did you miss “some” or are you just determined to prove how pedantic you can be?

Every one of those jobs anticipates the possibility of human error and has procedures, checks or fail safe mechanisms in place to avoid disastrous consequences.

For instance there are co pilots and auto pilots ready to overrule any decision which would result in a disaster. There is no comparison at all with the situation under debate.

Where were the procedures and checks in this case?

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Being described as having Dickensian attitudes is offensive to right wingers.

The orange antiques bloke?

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Which is in practice what is happening. Keeping the community leaders onside and in the loop is though valuable.

Them again. Who are these community leaders?

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Where were the procedures and checks in this case?

There weren’t and that’s the point. There was no time to develop them. An approach was needed immediately.

Decisions were made, no doubt on scant evidence and no experience, but in good faith that they would deliver the best outcomes. The learning process started then. With more evidence and experience other ways were found to be better.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Them again. Who are these community leaders?

That varies but is often the Imams.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

The orange antiques bloke?

He is one too.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Hard to gather samples from a rape victim. It is mandatory in most cases unless it was a gang of peodo rapists you don’t want to upset too much.
Ffs when will you wake up to the truth.

When, as so often was the case, the victim did not see themselves as a victim whilst the crimes were going on, it can be hard. Rape victims are often consumed by shame and slow to report.

Why on earth would I be concerned about upsetting a rapist? I am merely talking about the practical difficulties of collecting admissible evidence.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

There weren’t and that’s the point. There was no time to develop them. An approach was needed immediately.

Decisions were made, no doubt on scant evidence and no experience, but in good faith that they would deliver the best outcomes. The learning process started then. With more evidence and experience other ways were found to be better.

And the fact that there are now isn't any consolation to the twenty years worth of victims and their families.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

That varies but is often the Imams.

Which might present a problem in itself. Who are the leaders of other communities though. I have no idea who mine would be.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Let there be sight of the original email, in full and in context, then perhaps we might know.

I knew there would be more to this story than was being suggested here.

BBC “Verify”, bless them, have much more access to resources than any of us and have investigated these claims. It seems I was right. Mr Afzal has admitted he never saw the alleged email, which the BBC has searched for and cannot find. It seems it was all just an invention. Now why would anyone do that? More importantly why would Musk repeat it now without checking?

Retractions are awaited!

How Elon Musk seized on baseless memo claim to create wave of misinformation

The X owner shared false claims that a Home Office memo urged police not to intervene in child grooming cases.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I knew there would be more to this story than was being suggested here.

BBC “Verify”, bless them, have much more access to resources than any of us and have investigated these claims. It seems I was right. Mr Afzal has admitted he never saw the alleged email, which the BBC has searched for and cannot find. It seems it was all just an invention. Now why would anyone do that? More importantly why would Musk repeat it now without checking?

Retractions are awaited!

How Elon Musk seized on baseless memo claim to create wave of misinformation

The X owner shared false claims that a Home Office memo urged police not to intervene in child grooming cases.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why indeed would anyone do that. Particularly the chief Prosecutor for NW England.

 

[DANGERCLOSE]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1877378359052648783

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Why indeed would anyone do that. Particularly the chief Prosecutor for NW England.

Did you read the article?

It doesn’t suggest he was the instigator, only that like others had assumed it was true because it had been reported.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Did you read the article?

It doesn’t suggest he was the instigator, only that like others had assumed it was true because it had been reported.

Weren't the claims for its existence based on an interview he gave?

 

[Stirlingsays]

I knew there would be more to this story than was being suggested here.

BBC “Verify”, bless them, have much more access to resources than any of us and have investigated these claims. It seems I was right. Mr Afzal has admitted he never saw the alleged email, which the BBC has searched for and cannot find. It seems it was all just an invention. Now why would anyone do that? More importantly why would Musk repeat it now without checking?

Retractions are awaited!

How Elon Musk seized on baseless memo claim to create wave of misinformation

The X owner shared false claims that a Home Office memo urged police not to intervene in child grooming cases.

www.bbc.co.uk

If Afzal indeed lied about this circular, and indeed it can't be known without a proper independent public inquiry. However, if this is truth and he lied....because he repeated this claim more than once over separate years, then in that case I would indeed withdrawn my remarks on Brown and Smith.

Truth is more important than ego.

However, without that inquiry we are going on trust and I have zero trust for these people. We have seen what the left in charge of institutions has done for vulnerable white working class girls and until people are held to account and consequences given we know that nothing really changes. I remain to be convinced that these attitudes towards these girls wasn't directed from leadership positions.

Also, I will add that Starmer playing re-direction when he refers to the 'far right' on this issue, this is an 'everyone' issue.

We still await justice.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1877378359052648783

Let’s read what he actually said shall we?

“Mr Burnham attacked Tory “opportunism” but called on the Government to launch a probe for the sake of victims. I will add my voice into this and say I do think there is the case for a limited national inquiry that draws on reviews like the one that I commissioned, and the one we have seen in Rotherham, the one we have seen in Telford, to draw out some of these national issues and compel people to give evidence who then may have charges to answer and be held to account."

Mr Burnham said the flaw with local inquiries - which Sir Keir has proposed - is the inability to force witnesses to appear. He admitted: “That is something I couldn't do at my level.”

He is critical of the Tories but also thinks a case can be made for a “limited” national inquiry. Something the government has actually not ruled out.

He is obviously entitled to his opinion which no doubt will be treated more seriously than most of the others offered in recent days. I very much doubt though that it will change the mind of the government. The case having already been made, and rejected. Importantly Professor Jay who chaired the 7 year long inquiry has rejected the need for another and I think she is probably better placed than Andy Burnham, or anyone else, to judge that.

 

[cryrst]

Let’s read what he actually said shall we?

“Mr Burnham attacked Tory “opportunism” but called on the Government to launch a probe for the sake of victims. I will add my voice into this and say I do think there is the case for a limited national inquiry that draws on reviews like the one that I commissioned, and the one we have seen in Rotherham, the one we have seen in Telford, to draw out some of these national issues and compel people to give evidence who then may have charges to answer and be held to account."

Mr Burnham said the flaw with local inquiries - which Sir Keir has proposed - is the inability to force witnesses to appear. He admitted: “That is something I couldn't do at my level.”

He is critical of the Tories but also thinks a case can be made for a “limited” national inquiry. Something the government has actually not ruled out.

He is obviously entitled to his opinion which no doubt will be treated more seriously than most of the others offered in recent days. I very much doubt though that it will change the mind of the government. The case having already been made, and rejected. Importantly Professor Jay who chaired the 7 year long inquiry has rejected the need for another and I think she is probably better placed than Andy Burnham, or anyone else, to judge that.

I’m paraphrasing here but The inquiry was called to look into all child abuse and rightly so but was instigated to happen by dint of the grooming gangs of Asian Pakistani scum. They are mentioned once in some 500 pages and Rotherham once in 500 pages. Even if as claimed only 5% of child abuse is committed by these scum would you not expect at least a section be dedicated to the scum rape gangs or a mention of ethnicity more than once or even pages 200-225 etc.
The report is a cover up of the Highest amount and again paraphrasing farage who said it was a shotgun scatter approach when this needs a rifle shot approach dedicated to the Asian rape gangs.

 

[HKOwen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1877378359052648783

AB seemingly has nothing in his past that implicates him as one of the many Labour enablers who are now looking over their shoulders