Rotherham Council mass resignation.....

[spadriver]

Yes, we know that but there is always the pm facility for the three of you to use. It was a thread about a serious problem in Rotherham, about Pakistani taxi drivers, some Pakistani council workers, even possibly some other high ranking people.Those who really care about whats going on about bringing
these sick perverted barstards to book, want to hear about that matter, not read up about what ex coppers? Have to say and thier note comparisons.
Sorry but this thread is wrecked.

[V8 Fettler]

spadriver said:

Yes, we know that but there is always the pm facility for the three of you to use. It was a thread about a serious problem in Rotherham, about Pakistani taxi drivers, some Pakistani council workers, even possibly some other high ranking people.Those who really care about whats going on about bringing
these sick perverted barstards to book, want to hear about that matter, not read up about what ex coppers? Have to say and thier note comparisons.
Sorry but this thread is wrecked.

Do you have no interest in how the serious problem in Rotherham arose?

[spadriver]

Yes, I and most others contributers have already read about it, now we want to know when these sick fkers are going to jail.An event that seems more and more unlikely because of the race/religion involved.

[voyds9]

The way it's going at the moment the headline may well be:

Muslim man rapes child, policeman locked up for it.

[spadriver]

voyds9 said:

The way it's going at the moment the headline may well be:

Muslim man rapes child, policeman locked up for it.

I now have to dry my keyboard,surprising how far coffee can spray
BUT, there is probably some likelyhood of that happening when dealing with teflon coated people.

[V8 Fettler]

spadriver said:

Yes, I and most others contributers have already read about it, now we want to know when these sick fkers are going to jail.An event that seems more and more unlikely because of the race/religion involved.

CSE offenders operating in Rotherham have been jailed, and I'm sure there will be more jailings. Do you not have an interest in how the "system" failed to prevent the offences in the first place?

[RobinOakapple]

carinaman said:

RobinOakapple said:

Is anyone apart from the two participants reading this stuff?

Yes. Me.

Nobody cares about the kids getting screwed do they, because it's not their kids getting screwed.

Isn't the need to keep the police brand pristine part of the reason they covered up Hillsborough and lied about the victims at that football stadium?

The victims are to blame in Rotherham. Just as they were at Hillsborough.

You people will take every opportunity that exists, and manufacture what doesn't exist, to blame the police for everything. Remember for once that it wasn't the police who abused these children, and that there is little the police can do to prevent such abuse if the victims don't co-operate.

As for this thread, it's been ruined by two people who are filling it up with semantic arguments that nobody else is interested in.

[RobinOakapple]

V8 Fettler said:

spadriver said:

Yes, I and most others contributers have already read about it, now we want to know when these sick fkers are going to jail.An event that seems more and more unlikely because of the race/religion involved.

CSE offenders operating in Rotherham have been jailed, and I'm sure there will be more jailings. Do you not have an interest in how the "system" failed to prevent the offences in the first place?

It's not the job of the police to prevent that type of offence. If they manage to do it at all it is only by catching offenders and jailing them.

[spadriver]

Quite right, root cause is brought about by 'people'who think the laws of Britain do not apply to something they think is perfectly ok in thier native backward countries.Its now time the message went out loud and clear that you leave those kind of things behind when you come to these shores or you WILL pay the price.

[spadriver]

voyds9 said:

The way it's going at the moment the headline may well be:

Muslim man rapes child, policeman locked up for it.

I now have to dry my keyboard,surprising how far coffee can spray
BUT, there is probably some likelyhood of that happening when dealing with teflon coated people.

[V8 Fettler]

RobinOakapple said:

V8 Fettler said:

spadriver said:

Yes, I and most others contributers have already read about it, now we want to know when these sick fkers are going to jail.An event that seems more and more unlikely because of the race/religion involved.

CSE offenders operating in Rotherham have been jailed, and I'm sure there will be more jailings. Do you not have an interest in how the "system" failed to prevent the offences in the first place?

It's not the job of the police to prevent that type of offence. If they manage to do it at all it is only by catching offenders and jailing them.

So who has the responsibility to prevent CSE?

The primary function of the police is to prevent crime, I know that because the chief inspector of constabulary for England and Wales has said so.

[anonymous-user]

V8 Fettler said:

You now agree that the data is flawed, but you state that it might not be fatally flawed. Goalposts, for the moving of.

When would it ever not have some flaws?

V8 Fettler said:

Full prisons is a measure of the effectiveness of deterrence, i.e. current deterrence is not particularly effective, if it was then the prisons would not be full because the offenders wouldn't offend due to the effectiveness of the deterrence.

Or a measure of how the police are able to evidence gather to the high criminal threshold because they are able to detect crime. Whichever way suits you to interpret it.

V8 Fettler said:

Re: unknowns, are you referring to unknown criminals offending against unknown victims? If so, how do you know the scale of the criminality? You can only guess, I would prefer that my tax money wasn't used for guesswork.

Intelligence / mapping of organised crime etc will give you the scale of criminality.

V8 Fettler said:

So what is the scale of CSE offending then? If you have that information then please forward it to Jay. It's currently an unknown. If you are risk adverse then you start at the worst case scenario (see UK designs for AGR nuclear power plants), if you want to take a chance with starting with something based solely on previous experience then be prepared for Chernobyl/Fukushima/Rotherham.

Who said anything about risk aversion? It's about starting from a probable place when faced with general information until more specific information moves us away.

The context is effective resourcing (which you keep to process etc from) when there are unknowns.

V8 Fettler said:

And in the real world, "improbable" typically means so unlikely that it can be discounted. But as I said, a numerical means to measure probability is preferred, to eliminate misunderstanding leading to error.

But probable and improbable cover possible, so it doesn't need stating itself since possible has a probability itself.

V8 Fettler said:

There's an issue here with a mindset that places victims at the bottom in any context. I'll ask the same question again: How do you know there are no offenders unless you are closing the information loop by measuring the scale of the number of victims?

There's no mindset issue. You're taking the top-down approach out of context. I as using it as a means to show how you were wrong to state they couldn't effectively resource (see below, again).

You're now twisting and presenting it as a representation of priorities.

You don't know there are 'no offenders'. But you are able to effectively resource with just knowing your offenders, or more accurately, without knowing unknown to services victims. The EDL example shows how you can resource effectively with unknowns.

V8 Fettler said:

But - as Jay stated - there is no data available concerning CSE where the victim is not known to any agency. Without this data there is no means to accurately identify trends (are we winning?), or to plan resource (do we have enough to continue to win?).

V8 Fettler said:

So how do you identify the scale of the number of offenders you don't know? More guesswork perhaps?

Intelligence / mapping / other information sources. I realise you like to think this can't occur because it shows how the following is wrong:

V8 Fettler said:

But - as Jay stated - there is no data available concerning CSE where the victim is not known to any agency. Without this data there is no means to accurately identify trends (are we winning?), or to plan resource (do we have enough to continue to win?).

[RobinOakapple]

V8 Fettler said:

RobinOakapple said:

V8 Fettler said:

spadriver said:

Yes, I and most others contributers have already read about it, now we want to know when these sick fkers are going to jail.An event that seems more and more unlikely because of the race/religion involved.

CSE offenders operating in Rotherham have been jailed, and I'm sure there will be more jailings. Do you not have an interest in how the "system" failed to prevent the offences in the first place?

It's not the job of the police to prevent that type of offence. If they manage to do it at all it is only by catching offenders and jailing them.

1) So who has the responsibility to prevent CSE?

2) The primary function of the police is to prevent crime, I know that because the chief inspector of constabulary for England and Wales has said so.

1) Whoever has guardianship of the child.

2) It can only do that indirectly, by catching criminals and therefore discouraging others, or by interrupting a crime that a policeman witnesses. The former requires the co-operation of the victims, and the latter isn't likely to happen with CSE.

[spadriver]

Also there must be quite a few, not necessarily involved but most certainly knew, local people who would of heard what was going on.What did they do or say? Probably absolutely nothing and for the same reason there was a rush to hand in resignations.

[V8 Fettler]

La Liga said:

V8 Fettler said:

You now agree that the data is flawed, but you state that it might not be fatally flawed. Goalposts, for the moving of.

When would it ever not have some flaws?

V8 Fettler said:

Full prisons is a measure of the effectiveness of deterrence, i.e. current deterrence is not particularly effective, if it was then the prisons would not be full because the offenders wouldn't offend due to the effectiveness of the deterrence.

Or a measure of how the police are able to evidence gather to the high criminal threshold because they are able to detect crime. Whichever way suits you to interpret it.

V8 Fettler said:

Re: unknowns, are you referring to unknown criminals offending against unknown victims? If so, how do you know the scale of the criminality? You can only guess, I would prefer that my tax money wasn't used for guesswork.

Intelligence / mapping of organised crime etc will give you the scale of criminality.

V8 Fettler said:

So what is the scale of CSE offending then? If you have that information then please forward it to Jay. It's currently an unknown. If you are risk adverse then you start at the worst case scenario (see UK designs for AGR nuclear power plants), if you want to take a chance with starting with something based solely on previous experience then be prepared for Chernobyl/Fukushima/Rotherham.

Who said anything about risk aversion? It's about starting from a probable place when faced with general information until more specific information moves us away.

The context is effective resourcing (which you keep to process etc from) when there are unknowns.

V8 Fettler said:

And in the real world, "improbable" typically means so unlikely that it can be discounted. But as I said, a numerical means to measure probability is preferred, to eliminate misunderstanding leading to error.

But probable and improbable cover possible, so it doesn't need stating itself since possible has a probability itself.

V8 Fettler said:

There's an issue here with a mindset that places victims at the bottom in any context. I'll ask the same question again: How do you know there are no offenders unless you are closing the information loop by measuring the scale of the number of victims?

There's no mindset issue. You're taking the top-down approach out of context. I as using it as a means to show how you were wrong to state they couldn't effectively resource (see below, again).

You're now twisting and presenting it as a representation of priorities.

You don't know there are 'no offenders'. But you are able to effectively resource with just knowing your offenders, or more accurately, without knowing unknown to services victims. The EDL example shows how you can resource effectively with unknowns.

V8 Fettler said:

But - as Jay stated - there is no data available concerning CSE where the victim is not known to any agency. Without this data there is no means to accurately identify trends (are we winning?), or to plan resource (do we have enough to continue to win?).

V8 Fettler said:

So how do you identify the scale of the number of offenders you don't know? More guesswork perhaps?

Intelligence / mapping / other information sources. I realise you like to think this can't occur because it shows how the following is wrong:

V8 Fettler said:

But - as Jay stated - there is no data available concerning CSE where the victim is not known to any agency. Without this data there is no means to accurately identify trends (are we winning?), or to plan resource (do we have enough to continue to win?).

Having now listened to the "authorities" making their excuses re: Oxford, it's clear that a broad brush is needed to avoid going round in circles, so no more post dissection.

Thornton (Thames Valley Chief Constable) was interviewed on the Home Service yesterday lunchtime regarding CSE in Oxford, she referred to the "Kingfisher" unit, where police officers and social workers worked together taking any suggestion that there was CSE, winning the confidence of victims, finding out what was going on. She stated that this revealed more and more cases of CSE. That has to be the foundation to resolving the problem.

From https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-unveils-toug...

UK Government said:

Prioritising child sexual abuse
Child sexual abuse will now be prioritised as a national threat, like serious and organised crime which means police forces now have a duty to collaborate with each other across force boundaries to safeguard children including more efficient sharing of resources, intelligence and best practice, supported by specialist regional CSE police coordinators.

So prior to yesterday, the police had no duty to collaborate across force boundaries to safeguard children. This should have been in place by default.

[V8 Fettler]

RobinOakapple said:

V8 Fettler said:

RobinOakapple said:

V8 Fettler said:

spadriver said:

Yes, I and most others contributers have already read about it, now we want to know when these sick fkers are going to jail.An event that seems more and more unlikely because of the race/religion involved.

CSE offenders operating in Rotherham have been jailed, and I'm sure there will be more jailings. Do you not have an interest in how the "system" failed to prevent the offences in the first place?

It's not the job of the police to prevent that type of offence. If they manage to do it at all it is only by catching offenders and jailing them.

1) So who has the responsibility to prevent CSE?

2) The primary function of the police is to prevent crime, I know that because the chief inspector of constabulary for England and Wales has said so.

1) Whoever has guardianship of the child.

2) It can only do that indirectly, by catching criminals and therefore discouraging others, or by interrupting a crime that a policeman witnesses. The former requires the co-operation of the victims, and the latter isn't likely to happen with CSE.

I'm sure that there will be some individual guardians who can protect the children in their care, I'm equally sure that the majority of guardians would not be able to protect the children where motivated, violent offenders are involved and the children are amenable to contact with the offenders (making ropes from sheets being one example).

I would prefer that CSE didn't occur in the first place. The authorities can prevent crime by deterrence, the deterrence should include the certainty that the police are aware of the extent of criminal activities (authorities identify victims), the certainty of arrest, the certainty of being charged, the certainty of being prosecuted, the certainty of being jailed.

[carinaman]

RobinOakapple said:

You people will take every opportunity that exists, and manufacture what doesn't exist, to blame the police for everything.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29941714

I don't know how that compares to the Risky Business premises having files and computers removed?

[RobinOakapple]

V8 Fettler said:

I'm sure that there will be some individual guardians who can protect the children in their care, I'm equally sure that the majority of guardians would not be able to protect the children where motivated, violent offenders are involved and the children are amenable to contact with the offenders (making ropes from sheets being one example).

I would prefer that CSE didn't occur in the first place. The authorities can prevent crime by deterrence, the deterrence should include the certainty that the police are aware of the extent of criminal activities (authorities identify victims), the certainty of arrest, the certainty of being charged, the certainty of being prosecuted, the certainty of being jailed.

Good effort, but I've spotted the attempt to draw me into your thing with La Liga

[chris watton]

I guess the question is who told the Police to ignore the issues?

Unless the Police as a whole are of one mind and value multi-cultural cohesion above paedophilia and rape?

Which is it? No Officers spoke out about this - why?

The whole thing seems to be rotton to the very core.

[V8 Fettler]

RobinOakapple said:

Good effort, but I've spotted the attempt to draw me into your thing with La Liga

Not at all, merely responding to the points you raised