Bad times in Westminster...

[Mr Mystery]

Afternoon all.

So this is a thing and a half (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914).

For those unaware (and one can only assume given it's potential magnitude, it's international news), it's starting to look like there has been a major cover up within British Politics with regard to high level child abuse.

114 files have gone missing, including dossiers potential naming kiddy fiddlers operating in Parliament, and using their position of power to arrange abuse.


A review commissioned last year by Mr Sedwill, into the Home Office's handling of child abuse allegations between 1979 and 1999, found that some 114 files were missing, although he found no evidence that they had been removed or destroyed "inappropriately".



114 files....suspicous no? It's possible it's just good old fashioned incompetence, after all we are talking about politicians. Except we now know Cyril Smith, a former Labour MP was a serial child abuser.

This could get very, very interesting.

[Psychosplodge]

Was he a labour? I thought he was a liberal *shrugs*
Considering how widespread it appears to have been among high profile media people its hardly surprising that high powered people with actual power would abuse it in the same manner.
What is more shocking is again the extent of the coverup and the amount of people that must have turned a blind eye to it.

[CoffeeGrunt]

There's been such a deluge of this lately, with only about half the celebrities being drawn in actually having committed it, while the other half have their reputations and careers torn apart. I'm really struggling to parse the good from the bad here. Sure, characters like Saville and Rolf Harris do seem to deserve it, though Rolf was a bit of a childhood hero to me. The other people like Freddy Star, the guy who played Kevin Webster, and others are getting dragged into it so people can sell their story to the Sun for dollar alongside these other, genuine cases we need to deal with. Now Freddy is a nervous wreck after months of abuse from people following the story, and Kevin Webster's actor is addicted to drugs due to the stress of the trial.

The whole thing's devolving into a witch hunt, and I'm really struggling to see this Guilty Before Innocent treatment people are getting as anything more than being as vile as the acts they're accused of. Lives and families are being destroyed either way, and half of it is for shocking front page stories and a few grand for an interview.

[YorkNecromancer]

I was there when he said 'yes'. She was sat next to me, and she said 'You raped me' and he sad 'yes'. I did not kill him. I did not attack him. I did not say anything. She said her piece as she needed to, and then we left.

I held her that night when she needed me to, I left her alone when she did not.

That night, every night for three years before, and every night since.

In 2008, I was a witness in the trial. It was deemed a case of historical child abuse, because she wasn't a child any more. She had never been able to say what he did to her, every night for two long years, not when she was a child.

At the trial, I was her only witness, because I had been there, when he said 'yes'. He was allowed to bring three people to attest that he was of good character.
And he was. I cannot deny how likable he was, and, for all I know, still is (I have taken pains to ignore him. I shall do so for the rest of my life. The knowledge he is alive? That he might be happy? It is too painful for me to bear.) In public, he was funny and charming. The life and soul of the party, the kind of man who could get along with anyone. He liked silly jokes. Because we all know that what a person does in public is exactly what they are like in the dark places when they know no-one is watching. Jimmy Savile worked for charity. Rolf Harris loved animals and cartoons.

They were exactly in private as they were in public. Or so their defence would have had you believe.

When I was on the stand, I was determined to be strong. I had right on my side; I was just. But my legs wouldn't work. I don't know why. They just sort of stopped, and I slumped in the witness stand, unable to keep upright. I don't get nervous talking in public, but that day wasn't like other days.

The prosecution had evidence prepared against me. He had been busy, going through my social media prescence. He had all the ammunition they needed. They held up a picture I had done of a Terminator Sergeant as a job application for Games Workshop; photographs of conversions I had made of Tyranids with bloodied mouths; a picture of the UK I had sketched filled with skulls, drawn twenty years before having just discovered heavy metal.

"Do you not agree that these graphic, violent pictures are disturbing? That they are the signs of a possibly disturbed mind?"

Coincidentally, that week, the latest 'Saw' film had been the number one film at the box office in the UK. I bring that up for no particular reason.

I tried to explain what 40K was. I tried to tell them it was a hobby, a game, the source of solace when I was the isolated, lonely freak at school who could never, would never know a woman's love. That it was, ultimately, not meant to be taken seriously. I even asked them to explain to me what bearing my love of little plastic soldiers had on the case.

They simply looked sidewise at the jury, who nodded at them that it was obvious.

And so, I was discredited as any kind of reliable witness. I was the outcast boy I had been, maladjusted and untrustworthy, probably only a hair's breadth away from some act of terrible violence.

Not like him. He was funny and charming. A responsible small business owner. A self-made man, who simply couldn't understand why all this was happening to him.

After the trial, we went shopping, she and I. I bought some dice, a few miniatures. I tried to forget the way he stared at me from the witness box. Tried to erase his face from my mind. On the day the inevitable not-guilty verdict came in, I fell to my knees and wept.

I threw the dice and models away.

So, my opinion that this is getting out of hand? Not something I agree with. I got to see first hand how broken the system is. There is a 4% conviction rate for those cases which make it to trial. The cases that make it to trial comprise 10% of all reported cases. Reported cases are only a handful of actual cases.

I have a friend who was raped. She's a lawyer, and has openly said she's not going to report it, because she knows the whole thing is stacked so utterly against her there's no chance her rapist will go to prison.

As you say, the onus is on the victims to bring evidence, to prove they were raped. Could you sit for hours, in a police cell, literally after you had been violated, with your rapist's fluids inside you, waiting to be tested? To be poked and prodded, photographed naked, and asked to relive the whole ordeal the very same day that it happened? Because if you want the evidence you need to secure a conviction? That is the price: to, essentially, be raped again - this time for your own good.

At least the police have the decency to give you a cup of tea afterwards, I suppose.

In the case of a historic abuse case, you have to do this when you're a child. You have to have the words to describe what happened to you, the ability to overcome the shame, the capacity to understand that it's not your fault - even when your rapist has made sure you absolutely believe it is, because that's how these people work... You have to do all these things.

Then you have to withstand a prosecutor who will blame you, say you wanted it, say you knew what you were doing, explain how you're crazy (which the attack may well have made you), how you hate your attacked (which you may... but if they're a family member, you may not: you can't stop loving people, no matter how much you may wish it).

and then, maybe if you can endure all that, and the knowledge that everyone who supports you rapist will hate you forever and may come seeking revenge, maybe then you have a less than 1% chance of securing a conviction.

Not guilty doesn't mean innocent. It means not guilty.

He admitted it. TO MY FACE. She listed everything he did, and he nodded like one of those little plastic dogs, and occasionally say 'I'm sorry', or 'I didn't mean to hurt you' or 'I thought you enjoyed it'.

He was as guilty as sin, and they found him not guilty because in a case of one person's word against another, you need physical evidence.

Operation Yewtree has had more failures to convict than successes for this exact reason. This latest investigation? It will fail. The evidence will not be found. Witnesses will be denigrated, insulted, destroyed. They will never be believed.

And the abuse? It will go on, forever. Because that's how the world is.

[Darren Richardson]

wow Hard hitting Yorkie, damn hard hitting stuff....

Still I know myself a bit about child abuse, being a victim of a less serious case of abuse myself.....

It does indeed last forever.....

[The_Gonk]

Afternoon all.

So this is a thing and a half (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28203914).

For those unaware (and one can only assume given it's potential magnitude, it's international news), it's starting to look like there has been a major cover up within British Politics with regard to high level child abuse.

114 files have gone missing, including dossiers potential naming kiddy fiddlers operating in Parliament, and using their position of power to arrange abuse.



114 files....suspicous no? It's possible it's just good old fashioned incompetence, after all we are talking about politicians. Except we now know Cyril Smith, a former Labour MP was a serial child abuser.

This could get very, very interesting.

I totally agree. I don't understand why they wouldn't have already handed over the files to the police either! That way they wouldn't have been lost, it does smell a bit....

On a related thing, if you have already put your mind to rest on the Rolf Harris thing DON'T read this. I read it and then kind of wished I had not because it made me start thinking about it again:

http://www.libertarianview.co.uk/current-affairs/rolf-harris-beyond-reasonable-doubt

[daboarder]

I totally agree. I don't understand why they wouldn't have already handed over the files to the police either! That way they wouldn't have been lost, it does smell a bit....

On a related thing, if you have already put your mind to rest on the Rolf Harris thing DON'T read this. I read it and then kind of wished I had not because it made me start thinking about it again:

http://www.libertarianview.co.uk/current-affairs/rolf-harris-beyond-reasonable-doubt

I find those comments more disturbing than the article......

edit: Jesus Christ, Those people.....****ing hell

[Mr Mystery]

I think what did for Rolf was the cohesive nature of the allegations, all reported to the Police separately.

[The_Gonk]

I find those comments more disturbing than the article......

Do you mean my post or the comments on the article? If you mean the article comments, I must admit I haven't read them!

[Mr Mystery]

Also, which is more reliable?

An online blogger who quotes Anny Rayndy, or the Jury who actually sat through the whole thing?

[daboarder]

Do you mean my post or the comments on the article? If you mean the article comments, I must admit I haven't read them!
the comments in that article,

I mean between the rabid defense of pedophilia and the rampant vulgarity expressed against women, never mind the racism....Christ I'd happily put my fist through those peoples faces....Or something more permanent.

[Mr Mystery]

Another curious thing, relating to Cyril Smith....

There wasn't a great deal of political fall out from that. I mean....really? We live in an age where a politician farting in a lift will cause issues. But a child abuser is exposed, albeit post humously, and.....nothing]???

[daboarder]

Also, which is more reliable?

An online blogger who quotes Anny Rayndy, or the Jury who actually sat through the whole thing?

Exactly, the jury will have access to more details than anyone in the media is actually bothering to report on, but this is the age of social media, where mob rule and short attention spans are the order of the day

- - - Updated - - -

Sounds like you guys really need this to happen:

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/

[The_Gonk]

Exactly, the jury will have access to more details than anyone in the media is actually bothering to report on, but this is the age of social media, where mob rule and short attention spans are the order of the day

I agree that the jury will almost certainly have had access to more details. Juries certainly aren't always reliable though. I think the thing that this threw up for me is that:
1. I still think the jury probably made the right call (given that I don't know what I don't know)
2. These historic cases are going to be extremely difficult to prove!

Think about it - On the charges that the jury found him guilty let's accept this, that all the allegations were true. In one of those cases no corroborating evidence that the event at which the assault happened could be found. Times were proven to be wrong in victim's memories and also locations.

- - - Updated - - -


the comments in that article,

I mean between the rabid defense of pedophilia and the rampant vulgarity expressed against women, never mind the racism....Christ I'd happily put my fist through those peoples faces....Or something more permanent.

I definitely won't read them then!

[Morgrim]

This isn't the first time Harris has been accused, it's just coming to light that it's the first time the accusations have been thoroughly investigated. So when there are historical records of things being said at the time and then nothing done about it the witnesses look more reliable. I'd love to post quotes but I'm having real trouble locating this newspaper article in an online format. (Why oh why does the most widely sold print newspaper in my state have a website that is nearly unsearchable??)