Coming Out of the Darkness first Report

Coming Out of the Darkness

11 March 2016 – Village, Otley, Leeds

Coming Out of the Darkness

26 thoughts on “Coming Out of the Darkness first Report

  1. I feel uncomfortable with the fact that Adelle Gladman’s husband is a partner in the law firm dealing with the majority of these cases.
    Dave Smith

    Like

  2. Rik, Are the previous postings an emerging phenomena connected with the May elections? An organised effort to move conversation away from the victims and the council’s failing. Instead seeking to demean and belittle those who are seeking to help the child victims of CSE.

    I get a feeling there a Labour Group dirty tricks campaign, to break up coherent debate, by sending in comments to redirect readers focus away from the big issues and Labour’s embarrassment.

    They daren’t criticise the victims, but feel they can those who assist them.

    We know that Sarah Champion gets serious grief from some in Labour Group because she exposes their denial of their failures to protect children. They want her to keep shut.

    Maybe this is part of the same phenomena.

    I say to readers, read the report..it is good, and clear.

    Ignore those who failed for years to protect children, yet now seek re election, using devious techniques to break up debate and hide their culpability.

    Like

    • Which is why I asked Dave to clear up what he meant, Wuff. In what capacity are they “dealing with the majority of these cases”? Are they representing the survivors or the defendants?

      I can see no problem with Ms Gladmans husbands firm representing the survivors of CSE in their claims for damages against RMBC and/ or SYP, they are entitled to legal representation, are they not? Ms Galdmans husband is, perhaps, uniquely positioned to help them given his wifes own experiences with SYP and RMBC. There is no conflict of interest if that is what is happening.

      There would be a conflict of interest if they were representing the defendants though. I don’t know who was representing them, but I’d be utterly gobsmacked if it was the same firm her husband works at.

      Like

      • Adele gladmans husband is a medical lawyer and has no involvement with cse Iv Sen many of Dave smiths comments and he could start a fight with hisself in an empty room seems to spend days trawling sites abusing people keyboard warrior comes to mind he might comment in his other account now or maybe his third

        Like

      • But again, who are they representing? How are they “dealing with the majority of these cases”? And what is it about it that makes you feel so uncomfortable, Dave and Janet?

        Everyone has the right to legal representation, even the accused. I am sure we all agree on that principle, yes? The prosecution in Criminal cases is handled by the Crown Prosecutor, not a private law firm. The defence is usually handled by a private law firm.

        In Civil cases, both sides are usually represented by private law firms. Hence my confusion. Dave hasn’t been clear what he means by “the majority of these cases”, is he talking about the Criminal cases against the accused, or the Civil cases being brought by the survivors?

        As I said above, if the Law firm in question was acting as defence for the accused in the recent Criminal case, then yes, that could be seen as a conflict of interest.

        But if they are representing the survivors in civil proceedings then there isn’t a conflict, is there?

        And I seriously doubt this firm are representing SYP or RMBC in the Civil cases.

        So what’s the problem? Dave? Janet? Anyone?

        Like

        • There is no conflict of interest involved, further comments on this non angle will not be published.
          There is much to discuss arising from the conference report without further diversion!

          Like

    • Chris Read didn’t attend though, nor anyone else from the ‘still in denial’ brigade from RMBC.
      Can’t give the source but the report is excellent and pretty comprehensive, don’t you think?

      Like

      • Poor showing all round from RMBC, one opposition Councillor and one Commissioner. To an event being attended by one of the MPs for the Borough and one very famous Dame? Normally they’d be there like flies around sh*t waiting to have their photos taken with someone like her. If the conference were for any other reason you can pretty much guarantee the leader, the mayor and the rest of the cabinet would be there, hovering around waiting for an opportune moment. But not for this one. I wonder why?

        Perhaps they thought that, because the Childrens Commissioner was attending there was just no need for anyone else to go? But I suspect it’s because they are ashamed. Either way it is yet another slap in the face for the survivors, there should have been at least some members of the cabinet in attendance. I wonder what the Advertiser will make of it?

        And yes Rik, fair play to your source, they did good.

        I hope the conference did some good too.

        Like

  3. Yes I can confirm the report is fairly accurate but they only home in on Sarah Champion asking a question I asked a few questions and I personally took the opportunity as a representative of the people of Rotherham to publicly thank Andrew Norfolk Prof Jay and Louise Casey for the work they did in exposing this
    And yes I did make the point openly at the conference that I no senior officer the chief exec or the lead member of children’s services bothered to turn up
    They also did not comment when I brought it up at the Commissioners Meeting on Wednesday
    They are still very much in total denial

    Like

    • Slightly confused Caven, earlier threads?

      Confusion aside, can I just say thank you Caven for attending. It’s good to know that you at least, have a conscience. Unlike the Leader, the Mayor and the rest of the Cabinet who, it seems, just couldn’t give a toss.

      Like

    • My mistake, I misread!
      “a member of her team attended”, actually the report says “Representatives [plural] from the staff of Jane Collins MEP”.

      Like

  4. If anyone is interested in what actually was covered at the conference, rather than what Adele Gladman’s husband did many years ago when working as a junior for another firm of solicitors, – and really it wasn’t much … .
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7894188.stm

    …. then it is worth reading through this twitter feed for that date ( 11 March 2016) https://twitter.com/Donna_Peach
    Ms Peach was at the event and tweeted throughout it, along with taking photographs and retweeting other relevant tweets.
    She is both an academic and professional in the field, and in her tweets manages to isolate and identify just what was significant.
    I trust what she wrote.
    .
    The author of the report above simply doesn’t have that insight, or credibility, or lack of bias.
    (I am aware of who authored the report above – but Rothpol doesn’t wish me identify the person on this forum. )

    Like

  5. “Ms Peach was at the event and tweeted throughout it, along with taking photographs and retweeting other relevant tweets.
    She is both an academic and professional in the field, and in her tweets manages to isolate and identify just what was significant.”

    So professional was she she texted throughout? Words fail me, with your chauvinism towards those you wrongly assume are without benefit of your exulted academic intellectual level.
    All reports are parsed through the brain and personality and are therefore subject to hidden bias, that is why, before conclusions can be drawn, a number of reports should be read alongside one another.
    Did you not learn critical analytical thinking along the way, because it’s absence from your statement speaks volumes about yourself, more than anything else could!
    In short grow up!

    Like

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.