(not satire – it’s the UK today)
In September 2013, under fire South Yorkshire PCC Shaun Wright decided to “consult” the public on local policing:
But bizarrely, the public were firmly told by Wright that having their say on policing issues did not include “raising complaints“:
Not that Wright or South Yorkshire Police should have been too concerned about their public ‘consultation’ producing too much in the way of criticism.
Because the window of opportunity for the public to raise their ‘concerns‘ (but not complaints!) closed a good five days before they were even informed of it:
You couldn’t make it up.
Here’s a site with a lot more interesting info on the whole tragic Rotherham farce:
Please feel free to comment. And share:
I actually sympathise with the police who are even now accused of being institutionally racist. Were they supposed to investigate all cases of alleged under-aged sex or just cases of alleged under-aged sex taking place between white females and Asian males? If so, this policy would be rightly flagged as sexist and racist, and I can see exactly why the cops preferred to expend their energy and resources doing something else and not “go there”.
The Infamous Culex said:
Might one conclude from this the nature of crimes the Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire would prefer to commission?
Reblogged this on nearlydead.
I always thought the PCC thing was going to be jobs-for-the-boys.
You may wish to reblog this too at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/why-is-no-journalist-asking-what-shaun.html
Catherine Cooper said:
Sent from my iPad
The Police Force — in whatever county of England — are supposed to investigate reports of sexual exploitation of vulnerable minors, with the purpose of protecting all vulnerable minors (under 16) from abuse…. it is about protecting the victims, not about protecting the ethnicity, or country of origin, or religion, of the perpetrators of sexual abuse and exploitation. Shaun Wright, a Yorkshireman, who was responsible for heading up Rotherham Council’s Children’s Services Department before he jumped ship should admit he fell down badly in his responsibilities to protect 1,400 vulnerable children, and he should resign immediately. The South Yorkshire Police Force cannot squirm behind a thin veil of ‘Political Correctness’ or not having wished to offend the Pakistani Community, because this abuse was taking place all over Yorkshire, not just in the town of Rotherham.
sandra bowes-rennox said:
who told this shit that the good people of rotherham could not speak their minds about the police…is this his own police state…the sooner the folks in rotherham get rid of him the better…he can only drag them down….to think what the children went through…he and the rest of those who should have protected them did not….SHAME ON THEM….THE FIGHT GOES ON…..regards sandra.
We already know that coppers prefer not to waste their time investigating complaints made by complainants who blow hot and cold, such as in domestic violence cases, don’t we?
Understandably, they tend not to take seriously complainants who are known to make a complaint and then subsequently withdraw it and go back to the alleged abuser to resume a physical relationship with him and turning it into a pattern of behaviour.
Understandably, they will regard all these cases of under-aged schoolgirls from certain backgrounds making these complaints as not to be taken seriously.
Even “Emma” admitted that she subsequently went back to her abusers and resumed having sex with them.
What the fuck were the police supposed to do?
Even if everyone in the police and the local council resigned, the real culprits will still not be apprehended.
Who are the real culprits then?
They are social attitudes – the liberal social attitudes which condone extramarital sex.
Once you condone extramarital sex, you will find yourself condoning under-aged sex. The slippery slope argument has been proven yet again.
If you found your under-aged daughter to be sexually active what would you do – put her on on the pill?
That is condoning under-aged sex, isn’t it?
We know what happened to the daughter of a British mother who did precisely that.
Oh, and Tracey Emin’s mum put her on the pill too when she discovered that Emin was having under-aged sex.
So, what are we asking the police to do?
Not bother if the under-aged female is having sex with a under-aged boy of her age?
Not bother if the under-aged female is having sex with an under-aged boy of her age and race?
What age does the male having sex with the under-aged girl have to be for the police start taking an interest?
Why have an age of consent if in practice people ignore it anyway and get away with it?
Lord Fraser of Tullybelton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Fraser,_Baron_Fraser_of_Tullybelton
Lord Scarman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Scarman
Lord Bridge of Harwich http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Bridge
Lord Brandon of Oakbrook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Brandon
Lord Templeman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Templeman
also guilty of condoning under-aged sex?
If it quacks like duck, walks like a duck, is it a duck?
“the court held that ‘parental rights’ did not exist, other than to safeguard the best interests of a minor.”
What is the definition of the best interests of a minor? When a knocked-up schoolgirl wants an abortion, of course.
What if the knocked-up schoolgirl doesn’t want an abortion but its parents do? The knocked-up schoolgirl gets to have it in defiance of her parents’ wishes, of course, who may then kick her out out of the family home, but then the state will give her council accommodation.
Are the police aware of the concept of Gillick competence?
Should the police be made aware of the concept of Gillick competence?
Should the police be expected to apply the rule of Gillick competence?
What is this principle exactly that establishes that an under-aged girl already having under-aged sex is legally competent to obtain contraception and abortions without telling her parents? It is the Gillick principle. Poor Mrs Gillick whose crowning humiliation was to have this principle named after her by liberal judges …
When a fish rots, it rots from the head down, does it not?
Have you had under-aged sex?
Do you have friends who have had under-aged sex?
Have you or any of your friends ever made jokes about children having under-aged sex?
Do you think an adult woman in authority such as a teacher seducing an under-aged boy is funny?
Do you as a man wish you had enjoyed the experience of under-aged sex?
Then you would condone under-aged sex in general, wouldn’t you?
In this kind of environment, do you think sex predators of any race and religion would make the most of the easy pickings available, with so much low-hanging fruit, so to speak?
Do you think this is a Muslim problem or a social attitudes problem?
Do you think unfit mothers who don’t care what their daughters get up and/or who have abandoned them to care homes have no responsibility at all for this state of affairs?
Do you find it easier and more convenient to blame Muslims and Islam for this rather than blame the lax social attitudes of non-Muslim Britons towards extramarital sex that has resulted in this state of affairs?