Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?

teqniq said:
Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences
Click to expand...

Only just seen that.

But it's reported in that article that Lord Janner will be the subject of a 'trial of the facts' rather than a full trial.

But surely that's not new information? :confused:

The above articles's from 7 December this year, but as I recall, it was suggested a fair while longer ago that only a trial of the facts would be what happened. The article looks (to me) like it's no more than a confirmation of what was predicted ages ago. Or was that prediction just spin at the time from sources close to ... ?

Correct me if I'm wrong though please.
 
William of Walworth said:
Only just seen that.

But it's reported in that article that Lord Janner will be the subject of a 'trial of the facts' rather than a full trial.

But surely that's not new information? :confused:

The above articles's from 7 December this year, but as I recall, it was suggested a fair while longer ago that only a trial of the facts would be what happened. The article looks (to me) like it's no more than a confirmation of what was predicted ages ago. Or was that prediction just spin at the time from sources close to ... ?

Correct me if I'm wrong though please.
Click to expand...
I think the idea was that there would be a formal process to confirm whether or not this was to be a trial or a trial of the facts. Nobody will have been surprised by the outcome, but it's just one of those hoops that needs to be jumped through.
 
existentialist said:
It's all got quite a "leaned-on" feel about it, hasn't it?
Click to expand...

Several different sorts of leaned on I suppose, but also other possibilities. I don't think I could discuss all of them properly because it wouldn't be fair to the bloke and I dont have enough information.

Instead I'll just say this is one of a number of reasons why I always go on in this thread about how important it is to a number of potential high profile cases that more victims come forwards. Because sadly a few isolated victims coming forwards and having awkward dealings with a few members of the press and or police, is not all that different to what happened in the 1980's or 1990's. Even though the climate has changed since then, the results are sadly similar if nothing more than this can be built, victims are left exposed, and I'm left with nothing more concrete than rumour. Especially as its almost inevitable that in some of these cases that go all wrong in the press, victims were actually damaged by far less high profile abusers, and somewhere along the way this damage has translated into a state where accusations that may lack a firm basis in reality come out.
 
The historic letters that have been released under FOI which expressed support from well placed members of society for the sex offences bishop Peter Ball are quite telling.

Archbishop and MPs wrote in support of bishop later convicted of sexual offences

In his letter to the chief constable of Gloucester, dated 5 February 1993, Carey wrote: “I have been keeping an anxious eye on developments concerning my colleague Peter Ball, whilst being keenly conscious of the need to avoid any suggestion that I might be attempting to influence the police enquiries.”

Saying that he wished to offer a “few personal reflections”, the then archbishop of Canterbury wrote of Ball’s “wholehearted commitment to his Lord and the Christian Church”. The sexual abuse investigation came as “a terrible shock to me” and “seemed to me at first most improbable”. He added: “If he is guilty of unprofessional behaviour it is quite unrepresentative of his style.”

He acknowledged that “‘special pleading’ would be entirely inappropriate; at the same time ... I believe I am justified in drawing to your attention the excruciating pain and spiritual torment which these allegations have inevitably brought upon a man in his exposed position and with his sensibilities”.
Click to expand...

A handwritten letter from Donald Coggan, the archbishop of Canterbury who consecrated Ball as a bishop in 1977, referred to his regard and respect for a “godly man, totally devoted to his church and to the people whom he has loved and served since his ordination”.
Click to expand...

Renton, who was arts minister in John Major’s government until 10 months before writing to the DPP in support of Ball, said the bishop had “suffered terribly over the past six weeks” of police investigation.

Renton said he had never heard a “breath of any suggestion of impropriety” regarding Ball’s behaviour while bishop of Lewes in the MP’s constituency. He continued: “However, I know him well enough to be certain that no punishment will be greater for him than any knowledge that he has broken his own vows of chastity. This alone will make him suffer for the rest of his life. To add the further shame of criminal action seems far too great a punishment.”
Click to expand...

Former high court judge Anthony Lloyd wrote that the bishop was “the most saintly man I have ever met” and that “if there is a latter day St Francis, then Peter Ball is him”.

He added: “And now he finds himself in this appalling situation ... He has obviously suffered far more already than any of us can imagine, and far more than a more ordinary human being would have suffered.”

None of the correspondents made any reference to the suffering of those who had made allegations against Ball.
Click to expand...
 
A couple more in the BBC version of the story:

The Conservative MP for Lewes, Tim Rathbone, wrote: "I find it literally inconceivable that he would ever become involved with anyone in the way the newspapers have described or insinuated."

James Woodhouse, the former headmaster of Lancing College in Sussex wrote that Ball was "acutely distressed" by some aspects of 20th-century culture, including "sexual permissiveness".

In his letter the warden of Radley College, Richard Morgan, said he had dismissed the allegations against Ball as "impossible" since the bishop had lived a life of "discipline".
Click to expand...

Letters of support for sex offender ex-bishop Peter Ball released - BBC News
 
Not sure whether they found the allegations incredible or whether they were urging other people to do so, or both.

Incredulity certainly played a large part in failure to act.
ETA: in general, I mean.
 
elbows said:
A couple more in the BBC version of the story:



Letters of support for sex offender ex-bishop Peter Ball released - BBC News
Click to expand...
I find myself completely uncomprehending at these expressions of support. Most of them seem to treat as irrelevant the question of whether he abused these people, and major on the idea that he's basically a Jolly Good Chap, as if that is really any kind of mitigation for the life-ruining stuff he was accused (and eventually convicted) of doing.

I'm probably repeating myself, but these attitudes that seek to excuse abusers in this way are as much a part of the problem as the abuse itself. I don't think a witch hunt is the answer, but the tolerance that is still extended to abusers, particularly those in public office, sets a very nasty tone for overall social attitudes.

I think we are still at risk of seeing the perpetrators of abuse stereotypically, and of somehow excusing those who don't fit the stereotypical picture, as if what they are doing is not as harmful or repulsive to the rest of us.

I hope that those who expressed support for Peter Ball, and whose identities are now known, are suitably shamed and embarrassed by their efforts to excuse a now-convicted abuser for his crimes, and for their unwillingness to even countenance the effect both his abuse, and their support for him, will have had on those people who, unlike Ball or his cheerleaders, never had any choice as to their role in the matter.
 
Last edited:
bluescreen said:
Not sure whether they found the allegations incredible or whether they were urging other people to do so, or both.

Incredulity certainly played a large part in failure to act.
ETA: in general, I mean.
Click to expand...
I think it often does. And, in answer to your first question, I suspect that they could not see past what they knew of this man (and remember, abusers don't just groom victims - they groom everyone around them), and if they couldn't believe he was an abuser, then it was impossible that he could be one.
 
Orang Utan said:
Apparently Vaz has deleted his Twitter and Facebook accounts tonight and a Sun front page tomorrow will feature a senior Labour politician. :hmm:
Click to expand...

I cannot think of that vile man without this coming to mind

CYEmPeyWEAEmGpp.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kid_Eternity
Is a revolution possible in the UK?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
195
Views
7K
A380
A380
tim
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby's time is up.
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
3K
Dom Traynor
Dom Traynor
Buddy Bradley
How long before we get a proper Tory-style sleaze gaffe from Labour?
Replies
0
Views
213
Buddy Bradley
Buddy Bradley
burtabraham
  • Poll
Should there be an elected second chamber, and how should it be elected?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
Puddy_Tat
Puddy_Tat
B
The status of terms 'people of colour' and BIPOC in the UK
2 3 4 5
Replies
144
Views
7K
likesfish
likesfish
Back
Top Bottom