Jimmy Savile

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

I was obviously thinking of yet another loathsome creep, when! (Think very large...)

I know the name. But I daren't put it on here. GN might get sued.

Look on twitter.

OGM, yes, you're right. Who knows what the truth is?

Ana this one is very much alive! If the police have any sense, they'll get cracking before he tops himself (sorry to be flippant, but I have met this loathsome creep!)

Celebgran there are many old men in prison for offences of historical abuse, going back years. Some die in prison. The ones who have abused within the family have got away with it till the next generation starts arriving and the victims realise their own children are at risk. With support from partners, they often feel more confident about telling the authorities. It depends on the details of the abuse, whether a conviction can be obtained. Of course, adults tend to make more articulate witnesses.

Old men in paedophile rings have been prosecuted many years later, if they are still alive. Offenders often decide to name names when they are in prison.

Re: the high profile Thatcher era politican. His name and others have been bandied about with no result for years. Lots of info on the internet if you google 'politician named in North Wales abuse.' His name trended on Twitter at the weekend, so it's no secret. Interesting that so many politicians have been shifted overseas or encouraged to resign because they abused children. Such corruption. I wonder when public schools are going to have the spotlight on them?

I think he's dead now....like so many of them!

I did see in yesterdays Telegraph that despite some sort of restriction, the politicians name is "all over the internet". (I think they referred specifically to Twitter, which I don't use)

I cannot imagine how the politician/businessman manages to fall asleep at night...and when he does...are his dreams nightmares?

JO5... it seems there is a lot more to 'come out' about the North Wales case.... perhaps the play 'Care' did get it right. I know it was very believable , if shocking, at the time.

makes you sick to the stomach , to think of it all

Well, there is apparently a politicina/businessman from the Thatcher era also suspected and still to be named.

if someone comes forward to report abuse from over 40 years ago not from a celebrity Whenim (sorry pick on you cos of your background) would it be believed?

I realise this is a general type of question but I do wonder if the Saville case will open a can of worms for lots of families.

His 69-year old nephew, who 'hero-worshipped' him and refused to believe any of the allegations has died 'of a broken heart'.

Just read in todays paper that Saville is to be removed from Scarborough"s list of Freemen of the Borough .

Quite right !

Child protection is in place, Greatnan but our adversarial CJS does nothing to encourage victims to face court. Help from witness support and police is invaluable, but they can't coach or motivate witnesses/complainants. It's daunting enough for a professional to be quizzed by a smart-arse barrister....

Do you still not have it in the UK, when? I know all sorts of institutions are supposed to have child protection procedures in place but I can well believe they are not being implemented in some cases.
I wonder how a defending barrister feels when they hassle a child until it is totally confused?

Yes, Greatnan I had premises for female offenders before retiring, some of whom would occasionally make malicious allegations of abuse in order to avoid all sorts of consequences. The majority had genuinely suffered child sexual abuse, and one distressing result of keeping secrets as abused children is learning to tell unnecessary lies, for some of them who start offending themselves. Getting in trouble for breaching parole was easier to try and duck by alleging a sexual assault, or claiming they were attacked after spending the night with a boyfriend. They wasted police time, but none of those allegations went as far as court. From experience, and I can't prove it, I would say it's a very rare case that gets as far as a 'perverting the course of justice' conviction for lying about abuse. The cases are so exceptional that they do indeed, make national headlines. It's usually the opposite - the rate of attrition of those cases that actually get reported is massive, and a small percentage result in convictions. We really do need a criminal justice system that leans towards believing children when they complain about abuse.

I know full well that many abusers get away with it (when you have judges who think girls of eight are 'no angels' it is not surprising). However, I also know that some girls (and boys) make malicious or mischievous claims against teachers and ruin their lives. Doctors are also at risk of false claims, sometimes from women who have convinced themselves that they are having some kind of relationship, or who are angry because they have been gently repulsed when they have made overtures. It is impossible for a doctor to have a chaperone in every consultation, so it is very easy for women to make these claims. With teachers, a whole gang of pupils can concoct a story together.
I believe the Orkney case was complicated by the fact there had been some genuine abuse in one family, who were not popular in the area.
The Satanic abuse hysteria seemed to have resulted from one 'expert' who had been to the USA and was convinced it was widespread.

Absolutely granny23! Children will say enough, but not all, of what they have suffered. The reality of what abuse they have had imposed on them will never match what results in a conviction. I have seen child protection police officers in tears when offenders get acquitted for lack of 'good' evidence, or they get away with pathetic sentences that are insufficient to ensure they go through rigorous treatment. It's not a case of there being no such thing as extreme abuse, recovered memories, satanic or ritualistic abuse. These rare phenomena do exist, and there are too many missing children who will never be found.

Some victims of abuse don't make good witnesses, but that doesn't mean nothing happened. Some people tell lies about being abused by one person, but we should consider why they need to do that? How have they been neglected or harmed in other circumstances, that they feel the need to make such allegations? The court case doesn't always resolve what has gone before.

'^Most people thought it was pretty ludicrous to suggest that an elderly minister was prancing around in the nude in the Orkneys in the depths of Winter.^'

Precisely Greatnan but then is this not the tactic used by abusers (and other criminals) - to up the ante to such a degree that it is unbelievable, focus (the media will be very helpful in this respect) on these 'ludicrous' allegations, which are easily disproved because they never happened. Meanwhile, evidence of the very real abuse is lost in the witch hunt.

[Same kind of tactic used by politicians who let slip that they are planning to, for instance, abolish ALL Child Benefit, affect loads of fake indignation and then quietly withdraw SOME Child Benefit.]

The Courts are a very blunt instrument to use to tackle abuse, particularly abuse within a family, because the prosecution must concentrate on that which can be proved whilst the defence will put the emphasis on any allegation which cannot be proved e.g. through lack of corroboration or the wrong date in a statement. Most of my working life was spent supporting victims of abuse and I cannot recall a single instance of a court case which reflected the reality of what had actually taken place.

Thanks for that very interesting, informative and above all balanced account of what happened in Rochdale whenim64.

The press have a lot to answer for.

It was the Orkney one I was talking about tbh. (Awful there seems to be other cases!)

The moral panic about ritual/satanic/sadistic abuse in Rochdale occurred when I was a rookie probation officer, and we were all sent to conferences to look at how this had arisen and what facts/evidence were known. It seems stories were circulated on one very large well known housing estate with a high level of deprivation. Misinformation and malicious behaviour, such as telling the authorities that a family whose children were already in care, had buried children's bodies in the garden, were investigated and rumours spread like wildfire when the garden was dug up and bones were found - as it turns out, a family pet of previous tenants. The hostile relationship between tenants and the authorities worsened, every case of child protection was looked at with suspicion by the residents, and children were kept in care for their safety when neighbour rounded on neighbour. Families were moved and some correctly reunited with their children after undergoing procedures to ensure the children were less likely to be at risk of neglect or abuse.

As usual, the papers had a field day. So many residents wanted to give stories to the gutter press. The authorities could not give confidental information, such as the facts about sex offenders saying their children had been wrongly taken away when they were being routinely abused. There were nuggets of truth in the middle of this mess. Children did need protection, some had been threatened with satanic abuse in the same way that parents would threaten police and prison, children in care did need to be with foster parents and were not returned to parents afterwards, as decided by family court judges with the help of professional assessments.

There have been a few cases of ritual abuse known here and in the USA, very few. Interestingly, those Rochdale children will now be adults. They have not come forward to say they were unfairly placed with foster parents.

Well, it was your comments on the girl falsely making accusations that interested me in your post of 3rd Greatnan. I just thought, how awful if she was telling the truth, at least in one of the cases.

Decided to post my thoughts.

However, having now done so I am very willing to leave it at that.

Beyond reasonable doubt will suffice for me.