My infatuation with the media reporting of CSE Rotherham, and this appetite for non stop nonsense media circus that ensued with the Jay and Casey reports.
Jay on the whole was asked to do so by our council and my belief was she placed so many more questions rather than answers.
The report is long and tediously exhausting to comprehend, the redacted stories with gruesome details, the torment of families being broken apart and the constant reminder of 1400 children failed by the system. The very system that was there to protect them, where did it go so wrong.
The Casey report reflected more of the same and started touching on a few truths that spanned the gap between reality and reason.
The real truth is in between all of the statements correlated individually from the enquiries and a sense of understanding becomes clearer.
Testament to the courage of victims, will be written in the book of Justice.
“This Independent Inquiry was commissioned by Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council in October 2013.
Its remit, covering the periods of
1997- 2009
and
2009 – 2013, is appended”;
Preface Jay report.
Why in the name of God would a report start with two dates, and for that matter no break between such. Unless it would be making a comparison, or the author went out for a cup of tea.
Simply, Risky Business start/end and post Risky Business period. Coincidence!
I just want the truth.
Let’s see how much of the following is true.
●Casey report : p137; Staff who blow the whistle :
“Inspectors recognise that sometimes whistle-blowers may have other agendas and those who approach inspections can be aggrieved for all sorts of reasons. We have borne this in mind when reviewing the cases presented to us and have nevertheless formed a view that in these specific cases there was sufficient truth in the matters raised to be a cause of public concern”. (Concern for being out of a job, RB funding cut)
●Jay report : p3;
○1.4 Until 2004, responsibility for overseeing and coordinating a multi-agency response to child sexual abuse and exploitation lay with the Area Child Protection Committee.
In early 2005, this responsibility passed to the Local Safeguarding Children Board (the Safeguarding Board), which was established by the Children Act 2004. Its task is to co-ordinate the actions of agencies represented on the Board and to ensure their effectiveness in safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in its area.
●Jay report.
•Preface:
○This Independent Inquiry was commissioned by Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council in October 2013. Its remit, covering the periods of 1997- 2009 and 2009 – 2013, is appended
●Jay report : p3;
○ 1.5 In Rotherham, the first Council service to develop a special concern for child sexual exploitation (CSE) was the Risky Business youth project. Founded in 1997, it worked with young people between 11 and 25 years, providing sexual health advice, and help in relation to alcohol and drugs, self-harm, eating disorders, parenting and budgeting. By the late ‘90s, it was beginning to identify vulnerable girls on the streets of the town. Its relationship with any young person was voluntary on both sides. It was part of the Council’s Youth Services, though it derived its funding from various sources in its early years. One of its main functions was the provision of training to voluntary and statutory agencies working in the field, to magistrates, the Police, schools and foster carers. (failed in this provision)
●Jay report: 9. The Risky Business Project.
•9.7 The Council also placed high value on the training programmes which Risky Business provided to schools, seeking to raise young people’s awareness of sexual exploitation and its dangers; and it encouraged the extension of these programmes to a wide range of groups, formal and informal, within the community. The presentations on sexual exploitation that were given to councillors and senior officials in 2004-5 derived mainly from the work of Risky Business.
Presentations were given, in return we brought you glad tidings of hundreds of persecutions of young children. And we have condemned the bad people to hell.
By law we move from RACPC to RLSCB, what the hell was this seminar about, a new framework or Risky Business presentation for funding, out with the old gaurd in with the new.
Where am I going with this?
As some of the failures are not wholly included in the Jay/Casey report, there were the good results too.
●ROTHERHAM LOCAL SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN BOARD Annual Report 2005/2006
Appendix 2, 2005/6 Safeguarding performance.
○2. Section 47 enquiries
481 children were the subject of S47 enquiries by Social Care during this year;
• This represents 24 less and continues the declining trend over the previous 3 years.
•Waveney House Child Abuse and Investigation Unit recorded 398 referrals during the year (an increase of 40 on the previous year):-
49 were in respect of physical abuse
150 in respect of sexual abuse
199 in respect of neglect
•164 video interviews (an increase of 88 on last year) were undertaken in respect of child protection allegations and investigations led to 57 alleged perpetrators being charged or cautioned.
(To see a clearer picture the 57 charged or cautioned, how many would be attributed to RB)
○6: 147 children were placed on the child protection register this year (9 less than last year); 84 were registered under the category of neglect, 22 under physical abuse, 9 under sexual abuse and 32 under emotional abuse.
○10: Percentage of children on the Child Protection Register who were reviewed within timescales during the year Rotherham’s 2005-06 outturn = 100% The proportion of child protection reviews which should have been reviewed that were reviewed is indicator C20 in the Performance Assessment Framework. Performance has continued its improving trend (2003-04 – 53%, 2004-05 = 95%) and has been judged nationally as very good. Rotherham’s performance exceeds IPF and England (99%).
We move on
●Jay report : p7; 2 chronology of key events.
June 2005 The Forum was dealing with over 90 CSE cases and the decision was taken to reduce the number of cases being discussed.
●Jay report : p7; 2 chronology of key events.
The Council funded Risky Business. Funding was maintained and then increased in 2006
let’s look elsewhere:
●Appendix 2 Sub-Committee Membership,
5. Sexual Exploitation Forum, surprise you know who pops up again.
A stark contrast to apparently the reported 2005 seminar. (no whistle blowing yet)
•Appendix 1: Rotherham’s sexual exploitation action plan, list of usual suspects.
•Appendix 2: Rotherham young peoples services.
You will have to read it to believe it, and the questions raised.
(Any ideas anyone, they didn’t have a clue, just questions! A year on from the creation of RLSCB. Not clear enough for you yet, no suggestions on who and wholesale)
Is this the moment of clarity.
●Jay report: 9. The Risky Business Project.
•9.12 Several people interviewed were of the view that the project’s success, particularly in Operation Central, was one of the causes of professional jealousy, which led to them being assigned a lesser role in Operation Czar and for children’s social care staff to take the lead with the individual girls involved. This proved to be a serious misjudgement, as is referred to in Chapter 13.
Can anyone one see who was failed by whom!
And lo and behold, Risky Business is closed in 2009. (What did Ofsted do in 2009, not found in public record but RB was useless. Does it confirm the two periods of time in the preface of the report)
●RB may have worked on girls in Operation Central, to suggest it was down to RB.
●The victims say, prosecution was down to the police case. Although there were many issues in the logistics of the case, one thing for sure they saw it for what it was.
●RB may have worked on the girls historically who eventually were victims in Operation Czar, to suggest it failed because RB wasn’t there.
How do you work on a case if you no longer exist!
●Jay report : p11; 2 chronology of key events.
January 2010 Operation Czar began – a joint Police and Children and Young People’s Services investigation involving multiple perpetrators and victims. Abduction notices were made, taxi licences were revoked, but no convictions followed.
It doesn’t look like a complete failure:
Abduction notices.
Revoked Taxi licences.
The perpetrators stopped.
Shame is no solace for victims as no prosecutions.
It appears that results were better post RB. People actually got locked up, so why was the preparation for Operation Central so floppy. A fish out of water maybe.
If RB had any credible prosecutions from the start, wouldn’t you agree it would have been “check mate” every time at court.
Lessons I have learnt:
1: Stop wasting my tax money on incompetent fools.
2: That all public bodies even those who protect children in there private none redacted meetings are, black box sound and vision recorded.
3: Any place would be better than where we have been.
Child Sexual Exploitation – Project Survive – Rotherham Rise
http://www.rotherhamrise.org.uk/our-services/child-sexual-exploitation/
Post CSE Survivors- Rotherham Area
Age 12-18 – Young People affected by CSE
Adults affected by CSE
Families – Family members whose lives have been impacted by CSE
Counselling – Women, children and men who have been affected by CSE
For anyone lost! Directions to Rotherham Area Child Protection Committee (RACPC) I’m giving you an example: http://moderngov.rotherham.gov.uk/Data/The%20Former%20Cabinet%20Member%20for%20Social%20Services%20-%20Oct%202000%20to%20May%202005/20011221/Agenda/$ACPCDecember2001.doc.pdf )
Hotspot
Previously in this series:
Rotherham Politics 
I would like to whistleblow on the whistleblower.
Having attended RB as a CSE victim I can say nothing was done for me, no attempt to stop CSE. Sorry, I was given 10hrs of counselling of which there is no record of.
Years later I then volunteered, pre & post RB sitting within social care. Management was much better post RB. Before there was no supervision & people seemed to do what they wanted, this usually wasn’t much. When social care took over it didn’t go down well, sticking to rules & regulations annoyed some people.
RB didn’t finish till 2011 & I think being demoted back to a support worker (youth worker) & not manager really rubbed someone up the wrong way.
I then met Andrew Norfolk in 2011 at a conference and agreed to speak to him about CSE. To be honest I practically begged him to look at Rotherham & it’s CSE issues. He then started publishing stories about Rotherham in 2012. The whistleblower met AN a few months later with me. I then went to the select committee in Jan 13, as a witness. The council attended, Joyce Thacker, Martin Kimber and few others. Martin Kimber announced, to the select committee, that he would have a review/report done into Rotherhams handling of CSE.
Andrew Norfolk continued to print victim stories until the Jay report was released and after.
For some people, getting the truth out about Rotherham has been about victims/survivors getting justice, for others it was about payback, a vendetta.
LikeLike
Well said the whistle blower has done all this for money and personal issues against RMBC and syp I have been supported by her for 2 years the only time she reported any of my concerns in was when it was against them and them looking bad I told her numerous times I needed support for me and my family and never got nothing she did get 20k from the sky news interview and Sarah champion is aware of all the concerns around Jayne seniors as Iv got the minuets from the meeting she attended with 10 survivors which Sarah has chosen to ignore and carry on working along side her this will all come out matter of weeks / months I’d say they are taking credit for all the hard work surviviors are doing enough is enough we have been through enough without people cashing in on us anymore YES I have the proof of all this and will not be silenced anymore
LikeLike
Why don’t people ask victims and famliys from operation central seen has they was blackmailed into not speaking out their stories have never been heard rb worked with the girls when it was too late the first report about girls involved in central was March 08 rb didn’t work with one girl till sept 08 n rb reported to social care in October 08 operation central wasn’t has successful has people make out and Jayne senior put a press band on operation central I’ve read it in files and have prove of everything
LikeLike
Pingback: Rewriting history, the final frontier; The Wrath of Local Government Committee: I can’t believe it! | Rotherham Politics
Pingback: Last Weeks Top Ten 6th August | Rotherham Politics