Safeguarding Report – Progress Summary March 2013

Another interesting piece from the files provided, once again, by our anonymous source to whom I am most grateful.

This provides evidence there were Quarterly meetings between the Council and MPs. The meeting referred to here happened on the 8th March 2013.


See also:

and the first document in this series:


11 thoughts on “Safeguarding Report – Progress Summary March 2013

  1. If you wish to remain anonymous. Please do so.

    If you wish to be protected please say so.

    If WE wish to expose. I will both protect you and advise you with some of the leading legal professionals in Europe. The senior judiciary et al. And my tens of thousands of pages of evidence from my own investigations.

    DON’T forget the victims.


    Do the right thing.

    Please contact Riik


  2. ‘In February 2016 Kevin Barron said he had only known of one case’
    We can surmise three things from his statement:
    1) RMBC/Councillors and Sir Kev never,ever communicated with each other and never,ever had any face to face meetings to discuss CSE.
    2) Sir Kev was very,very busy looking after his pharmaceutical clients and spent little or no time in Rotherham and was therefore unaware of the scale of CSE.
    3) He is guilty of a terminological inexactitude.

    Place your bets…………….


    • Mr Vines. You keep barking up the wrong tree.

      I am content to rely for my perspective on the various determinations of the courts, all of which seems to have awarded you nil points for evidence, relevance and judgement. [Your track record makes recent UK entries in the Eurovision Song Contest look like raging successes!]

      A paragraph in one judgement rather sums it up:
      “It is not only procedurally abusive for a defendant in Mr Vines’ position to accept the
      court’s judgment and then to make repeated, procedurally misconceived, attempts to
      challenge it, it is also unreasonable and unfair to the claimants. Moreover, although
      this is not a question that arises at this hearing, it is fair to say that I did not detect in
      any of Mr Vines’ documentation any basis for doubting that my decision on the
      summary judgment application was correct.”

      However, for the record, to the best of my recollection, I have met Sir Kevin Barron twice in the last decade:
      – once at a Yorkshire reception with at least 200 other people present, and
      – once at a community meeting with about 30 other people, where we were making representations about a particular local issue
      and I have never had any other communications of any sort (oral, written, e-mail, text, semaphore…) with him about any issue, including about CSE.


  3. Pingback: Quarterly meetings between the Council and MPs September 2013 | Rotherham Politics

  4. Pingback: Cause and effect? | Rotherham Politics

  5. Pingback: The Week That Was – Last Weeks Top Ten 29th October | Rotherham Politics

Leave your comment

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

You are commenting using your 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.