OXFORD 'Grooming' Serious Case Review - heads to roll?
Discussion
RobinOakapple said:
Mark Benson said:
RobinOakapple said:
You will agree though that if the care homes were secure (i.e. girls could not get out) and if they were escorted to and from school etc by responsible adults, that this problem would not have arisen?
That being the case, it's really just a question of money. Not much good saying you can't lock the girls up, and you can't have the money for a minivan and driver, and then expecting this not to have happened.
Do you understand the distinction between care home and young offender's institution?That being the case, it's really just a question of money. Not much good saying you can't lock the girls up, and you can't have the money for a minivan and driver, and then expecting this not to have happened.
These children are in care through no fault of their own, why the juddering f
k should we lock them up - the word to focus on is 'care', they are as free to come and go as any other child of their age. I find it staggering you can 't grasp this simple concept.
Anyway, you are complaining about the problem, and I am looking at solutions. You are saying, in effect, that things should not be as they are, and I agree with you, if that isn't already clear.
But agreeing that things should not be as they are doesn't even start to address the problem. It's already common ground, I hope, that what we have here are a vulnerable group of people who don't want to engage with those people who could protect them if they co-operated. They have reached the age where they feel entitled and able to make their own decisions and act on them, even though society disagrees.
So what is your solution? And please try to make it actually workable...
It's the solution we've had for many, many years.
We lock up the people that do bad things. If there is a certain type of person that does these bad things, however difficult it might be accept, we have to look more closely at this type of person. If we get reports about them, we have to put aside our reluctance to admit that in some areas multiculturalism has resulted in groups of people bringing some traditions with them that do not fit into 21st century Britain and we have to make a stand, however much this might offend 'cultural sensitivities'.
What we don't do, is blame the victims and them look to see how we can prevent them falling into the hands of the perpetrators by restricting their freedoms, such as they are. The poster above was right, you can't monitor kids 24x7 and stop them walking out of school, so you accept that as the lesser of two evils and concentrate on the people who take advantage of them once they're away from supervision.
I know you want to blame anyone and everyone but 'the authorities', but it's quite clear that there is a failure to act on the part of police, social services and local government in Rochdale, Oxford and I suspect several more places before we're done. In your desperation to find a scapegoat you're coming very close to blaming the victims themselves, which I find utterly distateful.
Mark Benson said:
The solution is very, very simple. But you don't like it and won't countenance discussing it - that's the real shame.
It's the solution we've had for many, many years.
We lock up the people that do bad things...
What on earth makes you think I won't discuss it?It's the solution we've had for many, many years.
We lock up the people that do bad things...
Thing is, though, that we could also lock up car thieves and burglars, do in fact, but we still have sophisticated theft prevenetion measures.
Also, of course, we need the people to do bad things before we can lock them up.
Which means somebody has to have to have something bad to them.
I would sooner find a solution that didn't involve somebody suffering so that we could lock the perpetrator up.
RobinOakapple said:
Mark Benson said:
The solution is very, very simple. But you don't like it and won't countenance discussing it - that's the real shame.
It's the solution we've had for many, many years.
We lock up the people that do bad things...
What on earth makes you think I won't discuss it?It's the solution we've had for many, many years.
We lock up the people that do bad things...
Thing is, though, that we could also lock up car thieves and burglars, do in fact, but we still have sophisticated theft prevenetion measures.
Also, of course, we need the people to do bad things before we can lock them up.
Which means somebody has to have to have something bad to them.
I would sooner find a solution that didn't involve somebody suffering so that we could lock the perpetrator up.
So your solution is to restrict the freedoms of innocent people (either that or you lock up anyone you suspect might commit a crime in the future).
That's not (or shouldn't be) how the law works in this country.
It's naive to think you can prevent all crime, no matter how good your car or home security is a determined criminal will get in.
All you can do is strike a balance between what allows a relatively normal life to the potential victim and a deterrence to the perpetrator. I'd suggest an appropriately robust response to the kinds of incidents we're now hearing about would have deterred some and taken the others off the streets.
Sadly, this sort of thing happens. We can't prevent it ever happening just as we can't with any other crime. There are bad people out there who do bad things, ignoring them and allowing the systemic abuse to carry on unabated was the real tragedy in all of this.
Mark Benson said:
Define suffering. Being locked up 24x7 would, in the eyes of most people be pretty high on the list of suffering, doubly so for teenagers.
So your solution is to restrict the freedoms of innocent people (either that or you lock up anyone you suspect might commit a crime in the future).
That's not (or shouldn't be) how the law works in this country.
It's naive to think you can prevent all crime, no matter how good your car or home security is a determined criminal will get in.
All you can do is strike a balance between what allows a relatively normal life to the potential victim and a deterrence to the perpetrator. I'd suggest an appropriately robust response to the kinds of incidents we're now hearing about would have deterred some and taken the others off the streets.
Sadly, this sort of thing happens. We can't prevent it ever happening just as we can't with any other crime. There are bad people out there who do bad things, ignoring them and allowing the systemic abuse to carry on unabated was the real tragedy in all of this.
Be nice if you could restrict yourself to the topic, and stop calling people naive just because they don't fully agree with you.So your solution is to restrict the freedoms of innocent people (either that or you lock up anyone you suspect might commit a crime in the future).
That's not (or shouldn't be) how the law works in this country.
It's naive to think you can prevent all crime, no matter how good your car or home security is a determined criminal will get in.
All you can do is strike a balance between what allows a relatively normal life to the potential victim and a deterrence to the perpetrator. I'd suggest an appropriately robust response to the kinds of incidents we're now hearing about would have deterred some and taken the others off the streets.
Sadly, this sort of thing happens. We can't prevent it ever happening just as we can't with any other crime. There are bad people out there who do bad things, ignoring them and allowing the systemic abuse to carry on unabated was the real tragedy in all of this.
I'm not happy about restricting their freedom, but that's where the best hope for a partial solution lies in the short term. Given more time, we might be able to do something about the alienation that these girls feel, and offering them advice etc is a complete waste of time, unless it comes from their peers it will be ignored or even laughed at.
Your way involves about allowing these girls to be raped so that you can lock up the rapists. That's a bad way.
Far too many managers seem to get to a point of smug inviolability - this also includes celebs. politicians, councillors and so on - and management structures are sometimes so difficult for ordinary people to access that they give up. In some organisations, and here I'm speaking from experience in education, there can be a sort of local cosiness where it depends on who's relatives you are as to how suspicions may be treated.
I also don't think it's helpful to blame ethnicity - it's far to easy to crusade(I use the term deliberately) and create folk devils. Sadly abuse has been going on for centuries, but at least we have the societal structure to be able to try and tackle it if the will and commitment are there, and people get away from hiding it.
One of the many reasons that I gave up on trying to be a Christian was that the minister who baptised me ended up in chokey for abuse - not on me as I was an adult - but someone must have known, especially him, so back to the initial point of being able to hide behind your position.
I also don't think it's helpful to blame ethnicity - it's far to easy to crusade(I use the term deliberately) and create folk devils. Sadly abuse has been going on for centuries, but at least we have the societal structure to be able to try and tackle it if the will and commitment are there, and people get away from hiding it.
One of the many reasons that I gave up on trying to be a Christian was that the minister who baptised me ended up in chokey for abuse - not on me as I was an adult - but someone must have known, especially him, so back to the initial point of being able to hide behind your position.
RobinOakapple said:
Mark Benson said:
Define suffering. Being locked up 24x7 would, in the eyes of most people be pretty high on the list of suffering, doubly so for teenagers.
So your solution is to restrict the freedoms of innocent people (either that or you lock up anyone you suspect might commit a crime in the future).
That's not (or shouldn't be) how the law works in this country.
It's naive to think you can prevent all crime, no matter how good your car or home security is a determined criminal will get in.
All you can do is strike a balance between what allows a relatively normal life to the potential victim and a deterrence to the perpetrator. I'd suggest an appropriately robust response to the kinds of incidents we're now hearing about would have deterred some and taken the others off the streets.
Sadly, this sort of thing happens. We can't prevent it ever happening just as we can't with any other crime. There are bad people out there who do bad things, ignoring them and allowing the systemic abuse to carry on unabated was the real tragedy in all of this.
Be nice if you could restrict yourself to the topic, and stop calling people naive just because they don't fully agree with you.So your solution is to restrict the freedoms of innocent people (either that or you lock up anyone you suspect might commit a crime in the future).
That's not (or shouldn't be) how the law works in this country.
It's naive to think you can prevent all crime, no matter how good your car or home security is a determined criminal will get in.
All you can do is strike a balance between what allows a relatively normal life to the potential victim and a deterrence to the perpetrator. I'd suggest an appropriately robust response to the kinds of incidents we're now hearing about would have deterred some and taken the others off the streets.
Sadly, this sort of thing happens. We can't prevent it ever happening just as we can't with any other crime. There are bad people out there who do bad things, ignoring them and allowing the systemic abuse to carry on unabated was the real tragedy in all of this.
I'm not happy about restricting their freedom, but that's where the best hope for a partial solution lies in the short term. Given more time, we might be able to do something about the alienation that these girls feel, and offering them advice etc is a complete waste of time, unless it comes from their peers it will be ignored or even laughed at.
Your way involves about allowing these girls to be raped so that you can lock up the rapists. That's a bad way.
Your solution is unworkable, assumes every child in care is a victim and must be locked away for their own safety and that only children in care are the victims of these people. At the same time it does nothing to address the real problem, which is that there appear to be groups of men who take advantage of vulnerable kids.
It is naive to think that you can stop this by removing children in care from the streets, plenty of the Rochdale kids were living at home with their parents. Teenage kids are on the street in every village, town and city in the country every single night, you'll be suggesting a nationwide curfew next.
Mark Benson said:
Leave it out with the passive-aggressive schtick, it does you no favours, we're all grown ups.
Your solution is unworkable, assumes every child in care is a victim and must be locked away for their own safety and that only children in care are the victims of these people. At the same time it does nothing to address the real problem, which is that there appear to be groups of men who take advantage of vulnerable kids.
It is naive to think that you can stop this by removing children in care from the streets, plenty of the Rochdale kids were living at home with their parents. Teenage kids are on the street in every village, town and city in the country every single night, you'll be suggesting a nationwide curfew next.
Grown ups should be able to discuss subjects without making remarks about the people they are arguing with.Your solution is unworkable, assumes every child in care is a victim and must be locked away for their own safety and that only children in care are the victims of these people. At the same time it does nothing to address the real problem, which is that there appear to be groups of men who take advantage of vulnerable kids.
It is naive to think that you can stop this by removing children in care from the streets, plenty of the Rochdale kids were living at home with their parents. Teenage kids are on the street in every village, town and city in the country every single night, you'll be suggesting a nationwide curfew next.
Your misrepresentation of my position is presumably done in an attempt to divert attention from my point about your solution requiring these youngsters to be raped before you lock up the rapists.
Prevention is better than cure, should be bleedin' obvious but seeing as you are on an anti police/council crusade you are ignoring it.
RobinOakapple said:
Be nice if you could restrict yourself to the topic, and stop calling people naive just because they don't fully agree with you.
I'm not happy about restricting their freedom, but that's where the best hope for a partial solution lies in the short term. Given more time, we might be able to do something about the alienation that these girls feel, and offering them advice etc is a complete waste of time, unless it comes from their peers it will be ignored or even laughed at.
Your way involves about allowing these girls to be raped so that you can lock up the rapists. That's a bad way.
Perhaps we could have a criminal justice system that acted effectively to deter the rapists and abusers, without fear or favour of their creed or colour? If we had one of those then we wouldn't be having this discussion.I'm not happy about restricting their freedom, but that's where the best hope for a partial solution lies in the short term. Given more time, we might be able to do something about the alienation that these girls feel, and offering them advice etc is a complete waste of time, unless it comes from their peers it will be ignored or even laughed at.
Your way involves about allowing these girls to be raped so that you can lock up the rapists. That's a bad way.
Complex problems don't have simple solutions.
These children are often highly vulnerable and it's easy to groom them as the groomers are the first people to attend to the needs that have been absent in their lives. What aggravates this is the groomers will make the authority the enemy (which is even easier when the authorities aren't interested). When the end goal is generally "beyond reasonable doubt" in a criminal court, it's very hard work with people who often won't complain.
The parents clearly have some blame in a lot of the cases, as they are often terrible parents or such a risk to their children, their children are removed from them. The point is the authorities need to be in a fit state help and support vulnerable children, regardless of who is to blame. Of course it's worth remembering the offenders are always to blame.
Whenever the police fail spectacularly (usually a singular event) like Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence etc they can change to prevent similar things occurring again. I've no doubt that'll occur with CSE (as Jay notes, the police in South Yorkshire have done so over the past 4 / 5 years). I wondering how well the Local Authority will do so. The further report in Rotherham by Louise Casey was highly critical of that the LA didn't really accept Jay's findings, for example.
Time will tell.
These children are often highly vulnerable and it's easy to groom them as the groomers are the first people to attend to the needs that have been absent in their lives. What aggravates this is the groomers will make the authority the enemy (which is even easier when the authorities aren't interested). When the end goal is generally "beyond reasonable doubt" in a criminal court, it's very hard work with people who often won't complain.
The parents clearly have some blame in a lot of the cases, as they are often terrible parents or such a risk to their children, their children are removed from them. The point is the authorities need to be in a fit state help and support vulnerable children, regardless of who is to blame. Of course it's worth remembering the offenders are always to blame.
Whenever the police fail spectacularly (usually a singular event) like Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence etc they can change to prevent similar things occurring again. I've no doubt that'll occur with CSE (as Jay notes, the police in South Yorkshire have done so over the past 4 / 5 years). I wondering how well the Local Authority will do so. The further report in Rotherham by Louise Casey was highly critical of that the LA didn't really accept Jay's findings, for example.
Time will tell.
RobinOakapple said:
Mark Benson said:
Leave it out with the passive-aggressive schtick, it does you no favours, we're all grown ups.
Your solution is unworkable, assumes every child in care is a victim and must be locked away for their own safety and that only children in care are the victims of these people. At the same time it does nothing to address the real problem, which is that there appear to be groups of men who take advantage of vulnerable kids.
It is naive to think that you can stop this by removing children in care from the streets, plenty of the Rochdale kids were living at home with their parents. Teenage kids are on the street in every village, town and city in the country every single night, you'll be suggesting a nationwide curfew next.
Grown ups should be able to discuss subjects without making remarks about the people they are arguing with.Your solution is unworkable, assumes every child in care is a victim and must be locked away for their own safety and that only children in care are the victims of these people. At the same time it does nothing to address the real problem, which is that there appear to be groups of men who take advantage of vulnerable kids.
It is naive to think that you can stop this by removing children in care from the streets, plenty of the Rochdale kids were living at home with their parents. Teenage kids are on the street in every village, town and city in the country every single night, you'll be suggesting a nationwide curfew next.
Your misrepresentation of my position is presumably done in an attempt to divert attention from my point about your solution requiring these youngsters to be raped before you lock up the rapists.
Prevention is better than cure, should be bleedin' obvious but seeing as you are on an anti police/council crusade you are ignoring it.
Except when the so called 'prevention' is nothing of the sort. Respond how you like, I'm done with 6th form arguments to serious problems.
JuniorD said:
It seems that Britain is endemic with nonceiness and a regime that is either complicit with it or incapable of dealing with it. I wonder What the rest Europe is like in comparison. Do our neighbours see us a a shower of institutional degenerates, or don't they see this on their news reports?
Well, all I can tell you is that UK imprisons a significantly higher proportion of its population than other countries in western Europe, and a higher proportion than most countries on this planet.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...
Note: UK is listed separately as England & Wales etc
Claudia Skies said:
Well, all I can tell you is that UK imprisons a significantly higher proportion of its population than other countries in western Europe, and a higher proportion than most countries on this planet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...
Note: UK is listed separately as England & Wales etc
This nugget is often wheeled out to imply a degree of despotic authoritarianism - you hear the same of the USA. However, the flip side is to look at clean-up rates for crime and also to look at imported crime, because you will find these nations are very attractive to immigrants, some of whom are criminal and even arriving with the purpose of committing crime. A glance at the immigrant prison populations in the UK shows frighteningly high numbers for quite a few nations (some of whom are genuinely surprising, it has to be said) which sheds further light on the issue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...
Note: UK is listed separately as England & Wales etc
Claudia Skies said:
Well, all I can tell you is that UK imprisons a significantly higher proportion of its population than other countries in western Europe, and a higher proportion than most countries on this planet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...
Note: UK is listed separately as England & Wales etc
Because there is more crime here. The prison population per 1000 recorded crimes is significantly below many other EU countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...
Note: UK is listed separately as England & Wales etc
So, a higher proportion of the population of England and Wales are assorted slime balls, crooks, etc but we don't lock up enough of them as we should.
Mark Benson said:
Prevention is better than cure, agree completely, no argument from me there.
Except when the so called 'prevention' is nothing of the sort.
We haven't got as far as properly discussing the prevention, so don't dismiss the possibilities out of hand, you make yourself part of the problem if you do that.Except when the so called 'prevention' is nothing of the sort.
(I removed the extraneous material from your quote, I'm sure you won't mind)
IroningMan said:
Perhaps we could have a criminal justice system that acted effectively to deter the rapists and abusers, without fear or favour of their creed or colour? If we had one of those then we wouldn't be having this discussion.
There's no doubt that a larger and better resourced police force, that was not subject to political interference, would be able to bring more criminals to court.It's my belief that the senior leadership of the police have, post-MacPherson, been wont to put 'community cohesion' at or near the top of their priorities - certainly higher than the investigation of complaints of abuse from teenage tearaways directed at BAME groups.
It's pretty clear that the same concerns lay behind the Met's tardy response to the trouble on the streets in 2011.
It's pretty clear that the same concerns lay behind the Met's tardy response to the trouble on the streets in 2011.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff