Jim Gamble pulls out of potentially chairing Grooming Gangs Enquiry

I agree, he comes across well and so well qualified. There is a lot of pressure and political point scoring on the inquiry that has already influenced 2 very well qualified to step away from from the role.

It will be impossible to satisfy all the survivors wholly and equally as their opinions already vary in the group. For example it was reported just a few minutes ago that 5 other survivors will only remain on the panel IF Jess Philips remains in post as she " has dedicated her life to hearing and amplifying the voices of women and girls who would otherwise been unheard".....had "remained impartial" ....and they want her to "remain in position for the duration of the process for consistency.".

Like others have already indicated Louise Casey advised not having a judge lead the enquiry as it could jeopardise legal prosecutions as well as taking longer. Plus it needs someone who has expert knowledge of interagency working to protect children from grooming and abuse. Louise hopefully will intervene, speak to the survivors and others involved in the inquiry and help facilitate a way forward....

I don't think I've ever seen an interview with anybody who would make a better Chair, so whoever is behind forcing him to withdraw should hang his/her head in shame.

NotSpaghetti

The thing is, Primrose53 They need to see who is in these gangs - not just make assumptions.

Please listen to the interview with Jim Gamble which touches on how he was intending to go about fact finding.

news.sky.com/story/jim-gamble-a-frontrunner-to-become-chair-of-grooming-gang-inquiry-withdraws-sky-news-understands-13455102

Excellent interview! Jim Gamble is a great loss.

theworriedwell

I heard, on the radio I think, that although these four survivors have resigned other survivors don't feel the same and continue to be involved in the inquiry. Does anyone know about that? Numbers weren't given so I don't know if a majority are involved or not. I don't think numbers are definitive about anything but I think it would be interesting to know.

I read somewhere that there were originally about 20 survivors on the panel. If that's true, these four are a minority. They need to be listened to, but it's interesting that they seem to be getting all the publicity. I wonder who's doing the briefing.

NotSpaghetti

He pulled out for reasons not to do with his career GrannyGravy13

It's a good and interesting interview in the link if you have a few minutes.

Is this link within the Sky news page Not Spaghetti ? Just so I can save it for later🙂

I heard, on the radio I think, that although these four survivors have resigned other survivors don't feel the same and continue to be involved in the inquiry. Does anyone know about that? Numbers weren't given so I don't know if a majority are involved or not. I don't think numbers are definitive about anything but I think it would be interesting to know.

NotSpaghetti

The thing is, Primrose53 They need to see who is in these gangs - not just make assumptions.

Please listen to the interview with Jim Gamble which touches on how he was intending to go about fact finding.

news.sky.com/story/jim-gamble-a-frontrunner-to-become-chair-of-grooming-gang-inquiry-withdraws-sky-news-understands-13455102

I think he'd have been excellent in that role. Such a shame he feels he has to step back.

Primrose53

growstuff

Primrose53

Several months ago I posted about the grooming/rape gangs and was told off by some on here for discussing it and told that there are white British abusers too - which we all know but usually they do this alone, not in gangs and not targeting white, British girls.

The point is with these Asian Grooming gangs that this is the biggest scandal in the last 50 years and it has been one massive cover up.

Who do you think could chair the inquiry?

Please see my post on the other grooming thread.

What did you write?

kircubbin2000

So many high up people in police and government who knew or were involved mean it will be sabotaged or useless.

Wow! How about some optimism?

Grantanow

Starmer should appoint a Judge.

If he does that, it could prejudice future criminal proceedings.

Surely the point of an inquiry should be to find out what happened. People won't tell the truth if they know what they say will be held against them personally. The aim of the inquiry is to stop the covering up of abuse, so there's no need for inquiries like this in the future.

If the inquiry finds there are individuals who should be prosecuted, that should be a separate procedure with everybody under caution.

So many high up people in police and government who knew or were involved mean it will be sabotaged or useless.

Starmer should appoint a Judge.

mum2three

Is something going on behind the scenes? Are people being blackmailed and threatened?
Why the public condemnation of Prince Andrew yet reluctance to bring justice for victims of the same crime in this country?

Yes plenty said about PA & E, regarding VG, but when it comes to our own girls, who btw, have had no massive pay out, no justice. It’s time it was sorted out once & for all.
Who can lead the enquiry, I have no idea.

growstuff

Primrose53

Several months ago I posted about the grooming/rape gangs and was told off by some on here for discussing it and told that there are white British abusers too - which we all know but usually they do this alone, not in gangs and not targeting white, British girls.

The point is with these Asian Grooming gangs that this is the biggest scandal in the last 50 years and it has been one massive cover up.

Who do you think could chair the inquiry?

Please see my post on the other grooming thread.

I think it is about how much trust there is in the system.
I suspect very little.
People in power are used to being believed but sometimes they assume people will just accept what they are saying. Prince Andrew was a prime example of this.
When that system is brought into question the drawbridges go up.
We need to question more and stop focussing on those at the bottom of the ladder and begin to scrutinise those at the top.
There is momentum gathering here- the Covid and PO scandals, the Royals and the system that gave Michelle Mone and others peerages.
We need things to change and transparency is one of the first things that we need.
Let's shake the tree folks!

Is something going on behind the scenes? Are people being blackmailed and threatened?
Why the public condemnation of Prince Andrew yet reluctance to bring justice for victims of the same crime in this country?

The thing is, Primrose53 They need to see who is in these gangs - not just make assumptions.

Please listen to the interview with Jim Gamble which touches on how he was intending to go about fact finding.

news.sky.com/story/jim-gamble-a-frontrunner-to-become-chair-of-grooming-gang-inquiry-withdraws-sky-news-understands-13455102

Primrose53

Several months ago I posted about the grooming/rape gangs and was told off by some on here for discussing it and told that there are white British abusers too - which we all know but usually they do this alone, not in gangs and not targeting white, British girls.

The point is with these Asian Grooming gangs that this is the biggest scandal in the last 50 years and it has been one massive cover up.

Who do you think could chair the inquiry?

Primrose53

Several months ago I posted about the grooming/rape gangs and was told off by some on here for discussing it and told that there are white British abusers too - which we all know but usually they do this alone, not in gangs and not targeting white, British girls.

The point is with these Asian Grooming gangs that this is the biggest scandal in the last 50 years and it has been one massive cover up.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

The women survivors have asked for a judge and surely one can be found.Louise Casey only advised against a judge as she thought it would make the inquiry take longer or so I heard on tv today at PMQ’s.
The women don’t want police or social services past or present and who can blame them?

It is all a terrible mess isn't it?

Maybe all those crying out for another inquiry are thinking twice...?

I do feel Jess Phillips and the government can't win.

Several months ago I posted about the grooming/rape gangs and was told off by some on here for discussing it and told that there are white British abusers too - which we all know but usually they do this alone, not in gangs and not targeting white, British girls.

The point is with these Asian Grooming gangs that this is the biggest scandal in the last 50 years and it has been one massive cover up.

petra

NotSpaghetti

news.sky.com/story/jim-gamble-a-frontrunner-to-become-chair-of-grooming-gang-inquiry-withdraws-sky-news-understands-13455102

This is such a blow in my opinion.
I have heard this man speak, seen what he's done, witnessed his dedication and commitment to trying to get things right for young people.
I think it's really really sad he feels he needs to step aside.

I have always thought him to be a truly honourable man.

If you had been let down, ignored, verbally abused by police would you trust one that that is heading an enquiry?
No, you’d be thinking he’s judging me just like all the others
If you were this woman, would you?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53394767

I really don't want to gaslight this woman because I'm acutely aware that not being believed is at the core of the inquiry and what all the women suffered.

Nevertheless, there's a problem. My guess is that they find it difficult to trust anybody as a result of what happened. They're cautious - paranoid almost - about trusting anybody. Consequently, it's not surprising that they're now tragically blaming people who are trying to help.

Incidentally, I'm not Jess Phillips' greatest fan (for a number of reasons), but I think she's been scapegoated here. She's always been on the side of women and children and has spoken up for them. I've also seen footage of her standing up to bullying Pakistani constituents, so I think those who accuse her of a cover up are smearing her.

I've also read the letter from Fiona Goddard, in which she accuses Phillips of calling her a liar. I know she's been called a liar in the past, but in this case I think she is wrong. Phillips claimed she (Goddard) had misunderstood, but that's not the same as calling somebody a liar. The media and Conservatives have picked up on it and are point-scoring.

I think Jim Gamble is right and there is political point-scoring going on. I'm not convinced the girls (now women) have the best advisors.

I was thinking exactly the same Casdon and NotSpaghetti. It has to be somebody with some "gravitas" who is able to chair meetings and has experience/knowledge of child protection, but can't be somebody with a social work or police background. I would guess people such as teachers and politicians would be ruled out for the same reason. Louise Casey advised against appointing a judge. I'm not sure who else is left.