Grooming Gang scandal, UK

[Rizotto]

Posted by Eric J (Viking) (here)
I see Musk has stated Starmer will be gone soon…

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1876486484070731878

Good on Musk for exposing the perpetrators of these crimes in the UK. But what about child trafficking in the USA? The Epstein's child trafficking scandal for extortion for the benefit of Israel? Musk needs to get on this, especially since there were mostly American kids that were trafficked, and get Epstein's 'black book' published. Even if it contains the names of Mossad or zionist operatives. Especially if it contains the names of Mossad & zionist operatives. Musk, don't wait, get these criminals exposed and prosecuted now.

[Tintin]

Here's another shocking case that was aired by Channel 4 on December 18th (2024). This concerns the harrowing testimonies of three young women in the Barrow area (Cumbria). It is, as Charlie Peters shared in a comment on X, a strong piece of journalism.

Barrow victim breaks silence on grooming ordeal and justice denied

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Y7bpSu_dpys

Published: 18 December, 2024
Channel: Channel 4 News
Run time: 29:26

Description:

This is a story about the grooming, rape and abuse of children in Barrow, Cumbria. Of girls sometimes still in their school uniform.

(Subscribe: https://bit.ly/C4_News_Subscribe)

It is a familiar tale - Rotherham and Rochdale now bywords for the historic grooming scandals which rocked the country - and from which famously, lessons were supposed to have been learned.

A month ago, three brothers were convicted of a raft of serious sexual offences against children across Barrow, and in Leeds. Any conviction of historical abuse must be seen as a success. But tonight we can reveal that police knew some of what was happening in Barrow as far back as 2009. It has taken 15 years for some of the abused girls to get justice.

Our report focuses on one young woman, Ellie Reynolds. She identified one of the brothers to police as her alleged abuser six years ago but her case never got to court. Instead, the authorities tried to prosecute her. She has taken the extraordinary step of waiving her right to anonymity to tell us what happened.

Barrow is a town which went to war with itself - after another girl's claims of abuse at the hands of an Asian grooming gang turned out to be lies.

For Ellie Reynolds, the legal process has kept her silent until now, when, for the first time, we can tell her story of justice denied.

Warning - this report contains descriptions of rape and sexual assault which some may find distressing.

If you’ve been affected by anything in this report, please go to https://www.channel4.com/support

[Tintin]

From Julie Bindel, journalist, recounting her experiences with legacy media when reporting on abuse cases. Quote: “When I first published my investigation into the grooming gangs in 2007 in The Sunday Times, The Guardian wouldn’t run it. The editor said that we would be seen as racist...I was absolutely sickened and appalled—and that cowardice remains today.”



---

Gang rape of white girls – feminists are still turning a blind eye


Source: The Conservative Woman
Author: Paul T. Horgan
Date: January 9th, 2025 (republished from original in 2016)

I wrote this article nine years ago pointing out that the sisterhood were not speaking up about grooming gangs, ‘honour’ killings, and female genital mutilation with the same strength they reserved for attacking white middle-class men for acts they perceived as sexist, or indeed their opposition to The Sun printing a photograph of a topless woman on Page 3. I mentioned Jess Phillips’s casual attitude to attacks on women in Cologne by third-world men on New Year’s Eve, 2014. It is noteworthy and depressing to see how little has changed since then. This article was first published under the heading ‘Feminists turn a blind eye to the horrors perpetrated by third-world migrant men‘ on March 10, 2016

MY LATE father once said that in the USA to be a feminist was to be a Marxist lesbian. Well, steady on, Pops. It’s a stretch to restrict feminist activity to the sisters of Sappho, but on the Marxism angle, he was spot on.

Marxism is a particularly loathsome philosophy that has been directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of millions of men, women and children. When Bertrand Russell was writing about Marxism in his History of Western Philosophy, he was forced to issue disclaimers so he did not have to explore how it was put into practice. And he was writing some 70 years ago. By that time millions had died, and millions more have died since.

Marxism encourages democide by explicitly championing one section of society to conduct a war of extermination upon another. It made ordinary people around the globe prisoners of their governments. Every Marxist government was obliged to establish security forces to prevent emigration of the disaffected to the point of using lethal force.


British feminism, steeped in the culture of Marxism, also has its enemy demographic. It is the white, middle-class male.

Three examples serve to illustrate this hatred.

Last June [2015], Professor Sir Tim Hunt, a Nobel Laureate, addressed a meeting in Seoul where he made some jocular remarks about the conduct of women in the laboratory. While the mainly female members of his audience took his words in good humour, the female members of the left-wing commentariat here attacked Sir Tim mercilessly by distorting what he said to its worst possible interpretation. This poor man, whose work in medicine can only be of benefit to humanity, was hounded out of his positions and has now left the country to work in New Zealand. The feminists did not care. They had won against their enemy.

In November 2014, there was great celebration as the European Space Agency managed to land a craft on the surface of a comet. Comets remain mysterious objects that can tell us a lot about the origins of our solar system as well as the beginnings of life on Earth. However, all this was swept aside by the feminists when Dr Matt Taylor appeared at a press conference wearing a shirt with racy illustrations of women on it. This poor man, whose father was a bricklayer in East London, was subject to such online vilification that he had to make an apology where he broke down in tears. Devoting his life to science and exploration, he was not a person to worry about sartorial matters. To its credit, the Guardian did not make an issue of this, unlike the online sisterhood.


However, there was no quarter given by the Guardian when solicitor Alexander Carter-Silk made a few flattering comments about human rights barrister Charlotte Proudman’s picture on a social media website. Instead of taking issue with Mr Carter-Silk through the site, Ms Proudman decided to share her outrage with the world through Twitter, whence it was taken up by the news media. For some reason, she believed that she had been a victim of sexual discrimination in her place of work, stating: ‘There is a continuum between receiving a sexist message on LinkedIn and being discriminated against in the workplace.’ The horror. The precise nature of this so-called ‘continuum’ that this person, who is paid to provide reasoned and articulate advocacy, had pronounced into existence does not seem to have been made clear, but it does seem to be as all-encompassing as the more famous Einsteinian counterpart. Perhaps Dr Matt Taylor could investigate it, if he dares.

Proudman is an archetype of the main beneficiary of modern British feminism, namely the white, middle-class female in employment. There are bonus points if said female works in the state sector or academia or specialises in law, the arts or humanities. Such people are seen as unimpeachable.


Feminism has no traction in the hard sciences. Since advancement is based on pure achievement and the peer-review process is gender-blind, it cannot be based on quotas or accusations of sexism. The Higgs boson was not discovered because the gender mix of the team was correct.

Feminism can provide no explanation for the rise and success of Margaret Thatcher. She earned not one but two university degrees, in science and law. As a wife and mother, she managed to be elected to a male-dominated parliament in 1959 and went on to have a ministerial career before becoming Prime Minister. And all this in an age which was, according to feminists, rife with sexism. Margaret Thatcher’s success was due to her sheer ability, not to positive discrimination. It demonstrated that any woman could make it to the top with sheer talent. No wonder she is such a hate-figure for the left. Feminists also have no answer to why no woman has been elected leader of the Labour Party [still the case in 2025].


The further women are from this white middle-class archetype, the less favoured they are by modern British feminism. And this is a serious problem in our country. In a way the feminists are like Alexander the Great, who wept when he discovered there were no more worlds left for him to conquer. Women in the UK have achieved equality in the cultural, social and professional spheres. Legally-enforceable protections mean that there is always a remedy for an injustice or inequality. Violence against women, once brushed under the carpet, is a major issue of law enforcement. However, the fact remains that there are women and girls living in the UK who are less white, less middle-class and less employed, and are thus are virtually ignored by activist left-wing feminism.

The most glaring omission by the feminists has to be the prevalence of female genital mutilation (FGM), a practice so odious that I simply cannot bear to describe it beyond the term. There are currently more women living in this country as victims of this primitive and barbaric practice than there are lesbians in civil partnerships. And yet which has had more media visibility, more demonstrations on our streets? Perhaps my late father was right after all.


There are regular articles in the Guardian and elsewhere on FGM. There are also pressure groups, notably Daughters of Eve, but they are not mainstream. FGM has been criminalised in the UK since 1985. However, despite there being nearly 200,000 women in Britain who have been victims of this cruel crime, no one has been successfully prosecuted. It is ironic that feminists, whose consciousness was apparently first raised by Dr Germaine Greer’s book The Female Eunuch, have scant interest when one of their fellow women literally becomes one. Because it exclusively affects ethnic minorities, it is seen as a minority issue. Perhaps, according to the feminists, these British victims are not British enough. They are certainly not white middle-class women.

The barrier to action here by left-wing feminists is multiculturalism. This is the bogus belief that all cultures have equal merit and therefore all deserve equal respect. This takes no account of the fact that peoples from other cultures who settle here leave their places of origin because our culture has created an economic and social environment that will provide them with a better life than they could possibly enjoy had they stayed. It also means that, according to these feminists, our cultural values, including equal rights for women, can be safely ignored, because they only really apply to one of the many cultures in our country. Thus the only people who campaign against FGM are victims. There is no wider campaign or indeed greater visibility. And so frightened eight-year-old British girls go on being permanently maimed while being held down by their parents.


Rather than wear a t-shirt stating ‘No More FGM’, which would have been a worthy cause, Green MP Caroline Lucas chose to grace Parliament in 2013 with the slogan ‘No More Page Three’. Feminists have also protested about so-called ‘lad’s mags’ featuring topless women. At the time of the protest, these media items were on the way out. Page 3 and the magazines are gone. An easy, but pointless, win. The readership had already gone to the internet.

Lucas, however, will always play second fiddle to Britain’s top feminist, Harriet Harman. In 2014, Harman wore a t-shirt to Prime Minister’s Questions with the slogan ‘This is what a feminist looks like’ as part of a campaign by the Fawcett Society on women’s rights in the workplace. It emerged that this £45 t-shirt was made by women in sweatshop working conditions who were paid 62p an hour and slept 16 to a room. So what a feminist looks like is a cynical exploiter of cheap third-world labour for bogus ethical purposes. Sounds about right.


Another bogus assumption of feminism is that people who come from third-world countries with frankly third-world attitudes to women’s rights will somehow become enlightened when they step on to these shores. For some reason, the organised gang rapes perpetrated by men with third-world cultural backgrounds that took place in Rotherham in South Yorkshire and elsewhere are not seen as a feminist issue. While feminists abhor violence of any kind against women, it does appear that once again, because the victims were not middle-class women in work, there has been no popular protest by any feminist group or writers on anything like the scale that targeted Sir Tim Hunt, Dr Matt Taylor or Mr Alexander Carter-Silk. This is despite the fact that politicians, state officials and police officers through their wilful inaction facilitated the rapes in the name of community cohesion. Indeed the Guardian stated: ‘In last May [2014]’s local elections, Ukip won most votes and became the official opposition on the council. A march by the English Defence League during the campaign drew 500 supporters. On Tuesday, one of the first on Twitter with a gloating tweet was Nick Griffin of the BNP. In that context it is understandable that the Labour council was sensitive to the reputation of its Muslim community.’


This is actually a fiction designed to salve guilty consciences and to paper over the inconsistencies of political correctness. In Lancashire in 2011 there were 100 prosecutions for organised gang rape. In South Yorkshire for the same period, there were zero. Zero. Not that the feminists would ever point something like that out. It is not ‘understandable’ by them.

Politics and reputation were more important than organised gang rape. On this the feminists said nothing. This has to be because the feminists have nothing to say. So what is the point of feminism? Rotherham’s Strategic Director of Children’s and Young People’s Services, Joyce Thacker, quit her job with a £40,000 payout after being on sick leave for a while. By my reckoning, Thacker was paid about £5 per rape victim betrayed by Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council. No feminist protest there. This may be because Joyce Thacker was a white, middle-class woman in work in the state sector. As I mentioned before, in the feminist canon, she is unimpeachable.


Domestic violence and rape in marriage would appear to be important feminist issues. However, again when the victims do not conform to the archetype, they are ignored. The case of Shafilea Ahmed is an example. Shafilea was a 17-year-old British girl who was murdered by her parents because she refused to marry a man in her parents’ home country whom she had never met. She attempted suicide by swallowing bleach which caused her to be rejected by her potential suitor. Back home, she was murdered by her parents in their living room. This is not the only example of parental murder. However it is not seen as a mainstream feminist issue, despite the fact that the victims are British girls, but not Charlotte Proudman-British. And since the perpetrator is not a white, middle-class male, nothing is done by the feminists.

Compare the silence of the feminists here with the murder of Stephen Lawrence, a young man of Afro-Caribbean descent knifed to death at a south London bus stop in 1993. From the day of the murder, the pressure on the police was constant. After a change of government, there was a major public inquiry and major reforms in criminal investigation. There was a change in the law to facilitate double jeopardy prosecution.

By contrast, no laws were changed to protect future Shafileas, there were no protests, no inquiries. No one stood up for her. It was not seen as a political issue. No change of government has improved things. No one used her murder to discredit authority. Especially not the feminists. They were far too busy doing better things than saving lives or virtue.

British feminists have found an alternative to protesting about organised gang rape, FGM, community-based daughter-murder and forced marriage, which is to academicalise the issue. As women’s rights have increased to the point where they have equal rights and protections, there has been a growth in gender studies in colleges, which substitute observation, theorising and comment for protest and action over the physical dangers that face British girls and women when they are in contact with third-world male attitudes. Numerous papers and tomes are produced on the topic. All sound and fury cataloguing numerous intersecting ‘oppressions’, but signifying nothing. This is gentrified militancy, arguing over ever-narrower issues like, for example, whether feminism can ever find in sado-masochism an acceptable expression of womanhood.

To understand the modern left-wing feminist mentality, it is useful to analyse the comments made by Labour MP Jess Phillips on the BBC’s Question Time when she was forced to discuss the mass attacks by third-world migrants on German women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve. Jess did not want to discuss the topic for the reasons that modern feminism is always in second place to multiculturalism. She did not want to admit that men from other cultures are more sexist; according to her ideology that would be racist. So she clouded the issue, saying, ‘There is violence against women and girls that you are describing, a very similar situation to what happened in Cologne could be described on Broad Street in Birmingham every week, where women are baited and heckled.’

Here she tried to trivialise the issue, saying such behaviour is the norm in Europe (it is not) and comparing acts of robbery, indecent assault, and rape in Cologne with women being ‘baited and heckled’ in Birmingham. This is typical muddled socialist thinking, trying to find equality where none exists. Police in Birmingham state that they had five instances over eight weeks of the kinds of crimes perpetrated in Cologne on one night.

Phillips went on: ‘We have to attack what we perceive as being patriarchal culture coming into any culture that isn’t patriarchal, and making sure we tell people not to be like that.’

A direct, but rather mild attack against multiculturalism. But it has been sandwiched here between two pieces of nonsense. If Jess Phillips had just said this, she would not have attracted criticism. Note also, that despite years of Labour’s open-door immigration policy designed to ‘rub the Right’s noses in diversity’, it is only now that some Labour MPs are openly admitting that their party has imported third-world attitudes to women into this country.

And then she threw this in.

‘But we should be careful in this country before we rest on our laurels when two women are murdered every week.’

It is irrelevant in the context of the assaults by third-world migrants in Cologne. The statistic also makes no account for murders committed by the mentally ill. People were not being smug about violence against women in this country at all; there was no schadenfreude.

There are about 500 homicides annually in the UK. It is not okay that about one hundred of these are women, but that does mean that four hundred murder victims are men. Who will speak up for the men? Jess Phillips was making a political point about a murder statistic that is favourable to women as a way to distract from a third-world problem that is coming to the first world. Murder is bad. It is morally dubious to turn a single bald statistic into a feminist argument to divert attention from rape and indecent assault.

Left-wing feminism has a terrific blind spot about women oppressed in this country due to diversity in cultural values. The blind spot extends to rape, mutilation and murder. Governments of all shades have some responsibility here as well, being hobbled by fear of being seen as racist by vocal left-wing opposition for cracking down on unacceptable cultural values.

The hard fact is that women now have equal rights in this country which have been won after successful campaigns. Modern feminism has no answers to the ongoing persecution of women and girls by imported cultural values practised by closed communities. If they had any decency, the feminists would admit their failure and work harder for universal women’s rights in this country outside of their clear comfort zones instead of picking pointless political fights and non-stop virtue-signalling about bogus issues. But they cannot do so without being accused wrongly of being racists by opportunists. If they can’t save British girls and women from rape, mutilation, and murder, they need to step aside and let more competent forces do the job.

David Cameron, in his most recent party conference speech [October 2015], said the following: ‘For too long, we’ve been so frightened of causing offence that we haven’t looked hard enough at what is going on in our communities. This is passive tolerance. And I’ll tell you where it leads: to children, British children, going to Pakistan in the summer holidays, before they’ve even started their GCSEs, and forced to marry a man they’ve never met . . . children, British children, having their genitals mutilated, not just in a clinic in Lagos but the backstreets in Britain.
‘This passive tolerance has turned us into a less integrated country; it’s put our children in danger. It is unforgivable. So let me say it right here: no more passive tolerance in Britain. We’ve passed the laws – now I want them enforced. People who organise forced marriages – I want them prosecuted. Parents who take their children for FGM – I want them arrested.’

Left-wing feminism has encouraged passive tolerance for their own narrow political ends. Hundreds of thousands of girls and women have suffered as a result. Left-wing feminism has no credibility left. The casualty list is too long.

It is perhaps time for a new One-Nation Conservative feminism to lead the way, based on universal values of a woman’s right over her thoughts, her body and her economics that are currently undermined in the name of a bogus settlement of community relations. I do hope that, despite the tensions caused by the impending referendum, that David Cameron’s call for all British girls and women, regardless of their background, to have equal rights and protection is heeded. There must be more arrests and prosecutions of people who would do harm to British girls and women. Despite differences in race, colour, creed and opinion, they are our people in our country and they deserve like everyone else, our protection. And this dangerous and obsolete left-wing feminism can go to hell.

[rgray222]

Kemi Badenoch, Conservative Party leader, addresses Keir Starmer in the House of Commons:

[norman]

The narrative is getting a shove off course even by Badenoch.

She stood up at PMs questions and said "We know that people were scared to tell the truth because they thought they would be called racist".

It's a trendy RaRa sound bite but it's not the heart of the matter.

I also listened the Liz Truss interview and for a politician I like Liz a lot but she wouldn't cross the line into the heart of the matter either. Although, she came very close when she told us that when she was Prime Minister she "had a gun held to her head".

The real power structure of the problem is hidden behind secret oaths to a secret master.

I'm waiting for the moment when that truth becomes the focus of the fight. Until it does, we are being dangerously strung along towards ending up contracted to serve the very same master they do.

[Bruce G Charlton]

Although this business is (if the facts be true) one of the worst evils in the entire history of Britain...

The fact that it is now being raised into a public outrage storm, in the mainstream media and officialdom and by Establishment figures such as Musk, after a decade (or two decades, depending on how you count), of inaction/making-things-worse -- strongly suggests to me that we are being manipulated for some ulterior and evil purpose.

This kind of public emoting is easily (and often has been) railroaded into adverse agendas. Almost never do such orchestrated outrages lead to effective preventive action against the abuse - the energy is all expended in feelings and words.

If we remain alert, this ulterior purpose will probably soon become apparent - I believe the intent may be to pave the way in public opinion for large-scale UK participation in war in the Middle East - which could entail military expansion - +/- conscription.

[norman]

So what are we going to do ?

Wave our team scarves and point our smart phone cameras at a ball game in politics, just because the players are wearing ®Empathy Corp' shirts. ?

[Matthew]

Time has not healed the anger over this. It's been carrying on for decades. Now the chickens are coming home to roost, much like a lot of other Brits, I'm too furious to be reasonable. God have mercy on the people guilty of hiding this because if it were up to me there wouldn't be much left of them. There's a trail of horrendous stories spanning SO MANY YEARS. If they don't do a full transparent job of "due process" the horror will only backlash at them... I almost wish it on them (God have mercy for me). But that's only hypothetical; we know due process will be a political joke so let me predict right now they'll try to weasel out of it and then it's going to get even hotter. Anyone remember that joke? "You should have seen the look on the monkeys face when he tried to put the cork back in". I'm adding nothing to the discussion, just venting. It takes 43 muscles in your face to frown, but it only takes two or three muscles to lunge out and slap someone in the face.

[BMJ]

This Is Truly Insane

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wb9RttPk8q8

modernity
11/1/2025

Also this interesting comment from @aegeafamily717 1 day ago

The general public do not realise the absolute MASSIVE scale of this. I was director of childrens charity campaigning & raising awareness about CSE in UK... 2012-18. We are talking about MILLIONS of children here... not thousands.

The estimated figure in 2016 was OVER 1 MILLION.

We are nearly 10 years on, with a much larger perpetrator population. We are not talking 50 or 100 towns, we are talking EVERY town where these people are near. This is like Vikings, only WORSE. THIS IS HUNDREDS of towns & MILLIONS of children. Blair & Mandelson (search: Labour-sent-out-search-parties-to-entice-migrants-to-UK-Lord-Mandelson-comes-clean) imported a culture who see nothing wrong with taking the previous owners of the land's children, as sex slaves (they believe the land they step upon is theirs). The current estimate is OVER TWO MILLION GIRLS.

"Shut up for the sake of diversity." Is the ugliest most heinous crime... & enabled & supported by police, authorities & government. Head of CPS at time: Islamist promoter, child harmer starmer, who says you are right wing if you complain.

[Tintin]

The 2014 report commissioned by Rotherham Council is now in our library along with the explanatory note for the Communities and Local Government Select Committee on the scale of child sexual exploitation, referred to by the acronym CSE.

The full report running to over 150 pages can be viewed here, and the explanatory note, here.

---
Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham 1997 - 2013
Explanatory note for the Communities and Local Government Select Committee on the scale of child sexual exploitation

1. No-one knows the true scale of sexual exploitation in Rotherham over the years. The Inquiry report makes this clear.
2. The Inquiry estimated that approximately 1400 children were sexually exploited over the full Inquiry period, from 1997 to 2013. This is a conservative estimate. The true scale is likely to be much higher.
3. In addition to the estimated 1400 victims, an unknown number of children were at risk of being exploited. (Chapter 4 page 29).

Why the true scale of CSE in Rotherham is not known.
4. South Yorkshire Police were unable to quantify the scale of the problem prior to 2013. In that year, the Force introduced a category for CSE.
5. From 2001, Children’s Social Care in Rotherham did have a category for child sexual exploitation. However, the code was not correctly utilised. For example, some child victims of sexual exploitation were wrongly classified as being out of control. This tells us something about past attitudes to child sexual exploitation, and the low priority given to keeping accurate records of the problem.
6. Even at the time of the Inquiry, Rotherham Children’s Services were unable to provide information about how many child victims were known, other than 51 cases that were being dealt with by the specialist CSE team.
7. In evidence given very recently to the Communities and Local Government Select Committee, the former Strategic Director of Rotherham’s Children Services stated that, in total, Rotherham Council knew 145 children who were victims/at risk of CSE. The Inquiry had asked for this information and Rotherham Council did not provide it. Indeed, Rotherham managers told the Inquiry that Rotherham Council did not know how many current CSE cases were currently being dealt with, beyond cases dealt with by the central CSE team.
8. Rotherham Council provided information to the Inquiry for 11 of the 16 years covered by the Inquiry. For these years, Children’s Social Care recorded 1402 contacts and 712 cases where the child was a victim of CSE.
9. The Council’s information systems were simply not good enough to provide accurate data about the scale of the problem over the Inquiry period. Data was missing for five out of the 16 years. For other years, particularly in the mid2000s, records from inter-agency meetings showed the Inquiry that the number of children being exploited was much higher than the numbers recorded by Children’s Social Care.
10.At key points over the years, for example in 2005 and again in 2007, multi-agency groups which were monitoring the problem of CSE were overwhelmed with referrals (97 cases being monitored in 2005 alone). The response of agencies was to remove large numbers of children from monitoring. This concealed the extent of the problem.

Information available to the Inquiry.
11.The starting point for the Inquiry’s estimate of 1400 victims was the aggregate figure of 1402 contacts known to Children’s Social Care over the period of 11 years. This was clearly an underestimate for the 16 years covered by the Inquiry.
12.In addition to aggregate data about contacts and caseloads, the Inquiry received information from case files and records of multi-agency discussions about child victims and other children known to be at risk. These were a total of 1475 children, in the following groups:

a) 988 children known to Children’s Social Care and/or the Police.
b) 412 additional children known to Risky Business and/or the Police and
Children’s Social Care.
c) Approximately 75 children who were groomed and abused by a sex offender
convicted in 2007.

13.Information not available to the Inquiry but directly relevant to estimating the true scale of exploitation included records of children discussed at the inter-agency ‘Key Players’ meetings. This group met regularly from 1999 to 2003. It monitored children who were exploited as well as suspected perpetrators. The records from these meetings could not be traced. However, the Inquiry was told by staff who were operational managers at the time that the meetings discussed hundreds of children over a period of approximately four years.

Sampling and file reading.
14.The Inquiry randomly sampled 66 cases and screened several hundred more cases from the lists of children monitored in inter-agency meetings. 5% of the cases sampled were found to be children at risk of CSE rather than victims.
15.The Inquiry also had access to residential care records for looked after children. From these notes it was clear that for several years - until around 2007 - child sexual exploitation was rife in units for looked after children and care leavers. From the records, it appeared that staff were powerless to protect looked after children. The Inquiry concluded that over a period of many years, children in residential care homes and care leavers were targeted and abused. This was not properly recorded in individual case files. A substantial number of these children will not be included in any of the above figures.
16.The file reading process is described on page 125 of the Inquiry report. The vast majority of cases sampled were children who had been victims of CSE, in many cases subjected to violence and great brutality.

Estimating the scale of child sexual exploitation.
17.File reading suggested that approximately 5% of children were at risk of CSE rather than known victims. When this was applied to the total figure of 1475 children (see paragraph 12), the estimated number of victims was 1401 children. A further 74 children were considered to be at risk of CSE.
18.It is clear that there was a substantial number of additional victims in residential care who were not included in these records. In addition, there are five years of missing case files and there is no indication that the scale of CSE during these years would have been any different.
19.From all these sources, the Inquiry estimated that the scale of sexual exploitation in Rotherham comprised at least 1,400 victims, and in all probability the true number was much higher. As far as possible, records were checked for double counting and allowances were made for that.
20.At the outset of the Inquiry, it was suggested to the Inquiry that the problem of CSE was exaggerated. The Inquiry found no evidence of this. The scale of the problem was clear from about 2003 onwards, and efforts should have been made to deal with it decisively, rather than downplay it.
21.We know that, in addition to issues of under-recording by South Yorkshire Police and Children’s Social Care, the problem is hidden because many children and parents are/were afraid to come forward and make complaints. Those who did so in the past were threatened and intimidated. Here is just one comment from the minutes of a multi-agency meeting:

“The methods are the same, e.g. where the girls are meeting, where they are picked up and girls going to Clifton Park, girls picked up at the petrol station in …..….. Road. The chair said this is a fairly grim situation. The men’s names
don’t change but the girls’ names change as they become too old to be useful. None of the girls will give a statement as they are scared….”

(Strategy meeting, 2007 – attended by all the relevant agencies).

22.The estimate of at least 1400 children was the best estimate the Inquiry was able to make on the basis of the information available. It must be seen as a conservative estimate. Any errors in the estimate will have resulted in undercounting the numbers of victims.

Alexis Jay OBE.

Author of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham.
22 October 2014

---

Related article:

Stabbed in the head and dumped in a canal: How authorities failed grooming gang victims in Rotherham
Published in The Telegraph yesterday and authored by Sam Ashworth-Hayes
Archived here: https://archive.ph/1mj5v#selection-3037.4-3037.104

[rgray222]

[jaybee]

*
*

Damning report alleging deep connections between the Grooming/Rape Gangs AND the Labour Party...


The Labour Elites COMPLICIT in Muslim Grooming Gangs - Raja Miah (1:04:05)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6egrJ5Vi0o4

Politician Raja Miah has uncovered everything about the Labour Party’s links to the Muslim grooming gangs in the UK. He has faced all manner of attacks for his work - and it’s time to name names of those responsible for the cover up.

0:00 Raja Miah Highlights
1:30 Raja Miah’s Incredible Work
4:30 Failure of DBS Checks & Mosques Led By Offenders
7:00 Postal Votes & Labour’s Involvement
8:30 Islamic Cartels Collecting Postal Votes
10:30 Islamification of the UK
14:30 The Grooming Gangs
17:30 Labour: ‘Daddy’ is one of Ours
20:30 Oldham’s Shisha Bar Grooming Gangs
22:50 Labour Threatened to Sue Raja
25:30 Magistrate Asking Raja For Help
27:30 The Labour Leader Who Laughed at Raja
30:00 Bare…Faced…Lies!
32:30 The Police Missed 9 Times!
34:00 What About White Gangs
36:00 Mayor Andy Burnham Shoulda Known Better
38:10 What Maggie Oliver Had to Do!
40:30 Operation Hexagon!
45:10 How We Fight the Cover-Up
46:30 Dangerous People After Raja
49:00 Should We Have Compulsory Voting
53:00 Does Raja Feel Any Hope?
55:10 Mothin Ali & The Palestine Flags
57:30 Labour Making Muslims Feel Fear
1:00:30 A Heretic Raja Admires