Tuesday, 17 March 2015

THE HAMPSTEAD (ALLEGED) CHILD ABUSE CASE


"Meeting this Sunday at 10.30am outside the Christ Church in Hampstead London – a call from ardent supporters, investigators and activists:Christ Church, Hampstead Square, London NW3 1AB – Phone:020 7435 0054"


https://whistleblowerkids.wordpress.com/2015/03/17/meeting-this-sunday-outside-christchurch-in-hampstead-london/comment-page-1/#comment-362


Dear Sabine,


Re. The Above.


Good luck with the public gathering, which I hope will be peaceful and reasonable, though large enough so that it and the serious issues it raises cannot be ignored any longer.

The issues are clearly ONE, discovering the facts of the allegations which will have to involve, despite the delay, reopening the the police investigation, if necessary with experts from another force, and TWO another separate internal inquiry as to why the initial investigation failed to follow the Met's own guidelines or call on its own expert paedophile unit or other psychological support. Also why it failed to obtain from the children, signed statements as to their detailed allegations of named persons, or why no subsequent interviews under caution were carried out. In short why STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES were not followed in this case?

Presumably, in the light of the very serious allegations of child rape and murder, far more senior police officers were involved in deciding how to proceed, or not as the case may be, including the decision to coax an alleged "retraction" by the children on the 17th September, 2014 after they had been in protective custody for six days and the very premature and irrational decision on the 22nd inst. to state "Case not proven" and no further action to be taken.

It is not irrelevant that it appears the police have provided no evidence to counter the belief that no effective investigation had in fact been carried out on which these pronouncements were made. Indeed it would appear that the whole approach was designed to 'bury' the story, to negate the allegations, to pursue and persecute the adult accusers in order to shut them up and to warn and give time to the accused to take whatever steps they could to remove evidence and cover their tracks. No evidence has emerged to support the view that the accused have ever been interviewed to enable them the opportunity to present their side of the story or if necessary, defence. Could there be more telling condemnations of Police and Social Services (insofar as they were involved in the decision making) in this case? These general observations are wholly supported by the content and tenour of the police interviews that have found their way, by what ever means, on to the web for all to see.

This case has implications far beyond the individuals involved - although of course these should be the most important. It is a current case study into how the family courts and the police actually perform in instances of alleged child abuse. Legally obliged to do everything in the best interests of the children and to follow the evidence wherever it leads, they have clearly failed. It would be hard not to conclude that this case proves the very opposite is the reality in Britain today, and in circumstances that could hardly be more disturbing. The implications for the reputation of both institutions - the Courts and Police, not to mention child protection agencies themselves - could hardly be more important if the already badly shaken confidence of the public is to be retained.

That this catastrophic failure of both child protection and criminal investigation should take place now, at the very heart of the Capital and Country, at a time when the Met Police stands accused (yesterday's BBC 1 o'clock news) of perverting the course of justice in earlier allegations relating to Cyril Smith and others (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31908431) and now the unprecedented sacking of three Judges for accessing pornography on work computers (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/three-judges-sacked-for-allegedly-viewing-porn-on-official-judiciary-computers-10113032.html)

Further the Home Secretary herself has recently stated that 'people across Britain do not yet “appreciate the true scale” of the abuse and that once the inquiry is done “we will never look at society in the same way again”'. She adds: '“I hope and believe it will give all victims and survivors a voice,” Mrs May says. “For too long nobody listened, nobody wanted to admit the darkness in our midst.” She warns that “the trail” will lead into schools, hospitals, churches and youth clubs as well as “and many other institutions that should have been places of safety but instead became the setting for the most appalling abuse”. What we have seen so far is “only the tip of the iceberg.”' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11471581/Theresa-May-Sex-abuse-runs-through-every-level-of-society-like-a-stick-of-rock.html)

Mrs May has been appraised of this Hampstead case and so we wait to see with baited breath whether in fact anything has been learned and if her heartfelt assurances have practical results, for only this will prove whether they are genuine. Will the Hampstead children be returned to their loving mother and grand-parents at the earliest opportunity? Will their accounts be listened to and recorded in a proper empathetic objective manner? Will a well resourced police enquiry that retains public trust be re-instated and pursued wherever it leads? Will an inquiry be instituted to reveal what individuals were behind the specific inexplicable decisions in this case? And will the facts of this disreputable case have application throughout the whole childcare system?

On the answer to these questions rests far more than even the reputation of Mrs May. 

Regards, Tim.END.

No comments:

Post a Comment