Wednesday, 24 July 2013

Mixed Messages

Too many judges are putting out the wrong message when dealing with the perpetrators of child abuse.  `I don`t criticise you for being a teacher who`s attracted to children` said Judge Mary Jane Mowatt who allowed a 63 year old to walk free. Then there are cases where the police are reluctant to charge offenders. We have also had inquiries such as the Jillings report which failed to provide a full and honest report of the physical and sexual abuse of children in care homes. There have been the scandals covered up by the BBC. To say that child abuse, particularly paedophilia, is not being taken seriously by some members of the establishment, even by those who say that they are, is an understatement of enormous proportions.

By way of contrast there is another article in the Telegraph which reports on a project to identify youngsters at risk of growing into future extremists! We are told that `More than a hundred children aged under 12, including a three-year-old, have been identified as future extremists or at risk of radicalisation.`

We are informed that `Police leaders last night said the project, which has been gradually rolled out nationally, is now recognised as a vital tool in protecting communities.`

These children by way of pseudo-scientific crank theories are being accused of something which has not happened. The company `Channel` claims to have expertise and wrap around support,  but don`t they all?  Where`s the common sense?  To plot a child`s future out in this way, THIS is child abuse. Meanwhile the actual perpetrators of the abuse of children walk free.


From an article in the Telegraph

5:21PM BST 29 Jul 2011

David Armstrong, a supply teacher, escaped jail with a suspended sentence after admitting possessing 4,500 indecent images of children.
As she allowed the 63-year-old to walk free from court, Judge Mary Jane Mowat told him: “I don't criticise you for being a teacher who's attracted to children.
“Many teachers are but they keep their urges under control both when it comes to children and when it comes to images of children."
Child abuse campaigners yesterday described the comments as “outrageous” and an insult to victims.
Teachers also attacked the remarks, saying they cast a shadow over their profession and sent the wrong message to child sex offenders.
Peter Bradley, deputy director of the children’s charity Kidscape, said: “Children who have been sexually abused would be horrified to read this judges remarks.
“Schools are not places where those attracted to children can work – schools are there to provide learning in a safe environment where children know the people who look after them can be trusted and relied upon.
“This teacher should not have been in the profession and it is outrageous for the judge to say many teachers are sexually attracted to children.
“The message needs to be clear – if you are sexually attracted to children then you don't work with them.”

 Another article from the Telegraph

Judge asks why paedophile was let off with a 'slap on the wrist' by police

A judge has demanded an inquiry into an “inexplicable” decision to let a paedophile off with a caution.

Jones received a caution in April 2011 for 14 offences Photo: Getty Images

Judge Keith Thomas ordered the Crown Prosecution Service to review why Robert Jones, 24, was never charged after admitting a series of sex offences, including grooming a 14 year-old girl.
Jones only came to the court’s attention because he breached the terms of his original “slap on the wrist” and was finally prosecuted two years later.
It was revealed at Swansea Crown Court that Jones received a caution in April 2011 for 14 offences, including making indecent photographs, arranging or facilitating the commission of a child sex offence and meeting the teenager after sexual grooming.
Judge Thomas said: “I find this inexplicable. I want to know why serious offences had been dealt with in such a way.”
Jones, who suffers from Asperger’s syndrome, a form of autism, was later arrested after police visited his home to carry out an unannounced check of his computer. 
They discovered he had been engaging in sexually explicit “chat” on the internet and found 10 indecent images, including some involving children.
Catherine Richards, for Jones, said her client had complex needs and recognised he needed help.
Judge Thomas sentenced Jones, of Ammanford, South Wales, to a three-year community order after he admitted possessing the illegal images.
The defendant had restrictions placed on his computer use and will be required to sign the sex offenders’ register for five years.
The judge asked Ieuan Rees, the prosecuting barrister, to provide an explanation within seven days about the circumstances of the original caution.
A Dyfed-Powys Police spokeswoman refused to comment. A spokesman for the CPS said it was investigating.

Monday, 15 July 2013

Reject GIRFEC Surveillance

Here is an excellent blog from Fazzledown

More from Sovereign Independent below:

Petition at
"The Children and Young People Bill which has recently been introduced to the Scottish Parliament seeks to establish a universal surveillance system in respect of every child and associated adult in Scotland. Details of the Bill as introduced may be viewed: "
"Known as GIRFEC (Getting It Right For Every Child), it is already being used, and in some cases abused, by professionals within universal services and other agencies who have been routinely gathering, storing, assessing and sharing sensitive personal data on every child and every associated adult without express informed consent and in the absence of any enabling statutory framework."
"Disguised as a child protection measure but nothing of the kind, GIRFEC has spawned a series of ‘wellbeing’ indicators known as SHANARRI which represent a universal prescription for a state approved childhood. It has essentially shifted the threshhold for intervention in family life on child ‘protection’ grounds from “at risk of significant harm” to “at risk of not meeting state dictated ‘wellbeing’ outcomes”. Every parent in Scotland is now routinely assessed on his/her “parental capacity to provide wellbeing”, based on government defined criteria which, according to its own ‘National Risk Framework to Support the Assessment of Children and Young People’ places every child under five, and most older children and young people, in the ‘vulnerable’ category (thus liable to ‘early intervention’). "(
"The Bill further seeks to impose a ‘named person’ on every child in Scotland (whose function, it is specifically stated, may not be undertaken by the child or young person’s parent), which is a gross intrusion into family life and completely unwarrated on a universal basis..."
"GIRFEC, as has been practised to date (in the absence of any statutory framework and thefeore without lawful basis), has already damaged relationships between many parents and professionals and will inevitably place the most vulnerable children at greater risk of harm if parents seek to avoid contact with services which are seen to be staffed solely by state snoopers. "

The Children and Young People Bill is a Trojan horse piece of legislation which seeks to undermine parents, abolish the right to family privacy and confidentiality, including medical confidentiality, since all records are to be shared, and introduce a national identity register, cleverly disguised in ‘chilld protection’ clothing, by the back door...

Wednesday, 10 July 2013


There could be no greater display of hypocrisy than the way Environment secretary Owen Paterson has recently played on people`s natural emotions in regard to children. 'Children will die', he says, 'unless we back GM food'.

Meanwhile he will not be dining on GM food in the Parliament restaurants he attends because Parliament has rejected such food. Why should he not eat his own words?

There has been little mention in the BBC propaganda machine, or elsewhere in the mainstream, that there have been global protests involving millions of people marching against Monsanta, one of the biggest GM chemical producers.  [See Russian Television RT which has reported on these mass events because they are now a more informed source of information than the BBC these days.]

There is no mention of the thousands of Indian farmers commiting suicide because they are trapped into buying Monsanta seeds and there is no way out of the cycle of debt because the seeds have the terminator gene and cannot grow plants which reproduce seeds.  Consequently poor farmers must go back the following year to Monsanta for replacements who can charge what they like. What a way to stitch up a population?

This is a NEW science - putting foreign genes into unrelated plant species without understanding the consequences for the ecosystem is a risky venture.  The trouble is that once these alien genes are in the gene pool of plants, on which all life depends, they cannot be controlled or taken back. Some would say that this is too NEW and revolutionary a science to let rip on any environment for whatever emotional reason without thorough testing.

Obviously those in Parliament agree and are taking care with GM food..  

Just not for you, me or our children.

"A new peer-reviewed report authored by Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant, and a long time contributor to the Vital Votes Forum, and  Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), reveals how glyphosate wrecks human health."

"The Horrific Truth about Roundup"

"In 2009, a French court found Monsanto guilty of lying; falsely advertising its Roundup herbicide as "biodegradable," "environmentally friendly" and claiming it "left the soil clean."

"Mounting evidence now tells us just how false such statements are. I don't believe that Monsanto is one of the most evil companies on the planet for nothing. The company has done absolutely nothing to improve their worldwide influence on human and environmental health. "    

Monday, 8 July 2013

PANTS, The underwear rule

"If the Underwear Rule can become just as well known to children, we can stop abuse early, or even before it starts."

What a statement from the Herald reporting on a new campaign!   Actually FOCUSSING on children`s underwear has got to be a paedophile`s obsession, surely, and nothing any normal parent would want to encourage. Who dreamed up this acronym and this ludicrous campaign?

Well, according to the article it was the NSPCC who launched a 6 week radio advertising campaign in Scotland. You know, that same third sector charitable organisation which had much to say in the GIRFEC consultation in Scotland but which few parents knew about. - the same charity involved in the Victoria Climbie case.  Read: NSPCC doctored information

Their reason for the campaign is to make protecting children as easy as getting them to eat their vegetables. Yeah right!  Tell children to say No and `we can stop abuse early, or even before it starts.`So if any child does not say NO properly they have only themselves to blame. Should we approve of that subliminal message? I don`t think so.

As if it is down to children to keep paedophiles in check!  More likely this campaign is another excuse to allow Childline to get closer to other people`s innocent children as well as a campaign for more money.  Isn`t it strange that Childline claims it does not have the funds to answer all telephone calls but it can go into every primary school in Scotland?

Esther Rantzen, founder of Childline, has an appalling record of failing to help abused children.  Admitting that BBC staff `blocked their ears` to the rumours surrounding Jimmy Savile, she is also a trustee of the NSPCC.  Relationships in these charitable organisations are always cosy.  Nowadays the NSPCC and Childline are one and the same. 
There are suspicions that Childline, like Crimestoppers, is a gatekeeping front organisation to weed out child abuse reports involving VIPs. Given the length of time that the Jimmy Savile abuses took place and the number of his victims it would be naive to assume there were no cover ups by the BBC. 
The Jillings report into abuse in care homes in Wales has recently been released after being suppressed for almost 20 years.  The report states: `Time and time again the responses to indications that children may have been abused have been too little too late.` Speak up - someone can help,` according to the PANTS campaign, but that depends on who you are and who is abusing you, does it not?

 One reader responding to the blog of a child abuse survivor who wrote `Cry Silent Tears` has this to say about the NSPCC and Childline.
`re the NSPCC.  I have long held many suspicions about this so called charity and also Childline.  I know of at least one instance of both failing to help a neglected child left home alone since I was the person that reported the parents to both and saw they did absolutely nothing.  I agree with the above too about the extensive and expensive TV advertising which pleads for donations rather than using the opportunity to promote their helpline numbers thereby extending a lifeline perhaps to kids who might need their help.`
`Does not surprise me one bit if they are indeed providing their staff with flashy cars.  Disgraceful.  Since reading your book Joe I have read many others and most recently `Unloved` by Peter Roche. This is particularly relevant here in discussing the NSPCC, since his photograph as a dirty, neglected and abused child, taken by Lord Snowdon, was used to promote the NSPCC`s fundraising efforts for many years!!!!!!`

`Interestingly this author mentions that he still went on to suffer for many years AFTER the NSPCC became aware of his plight.  No doubt Lord Snowdon made a nifty few bob for his part in this promotion paid for probably out of the NSPCC`s advertising budget.`

It`s about time the NSPCC and Childline started manning the telephone lines in order to respond to the children in need, who mostly want help for being bullied at school, instead of harassing parents and frightening innocent children with superficial and nasty minded campaigns.

Campaign aims to help parents warn children about abuse
A NEW campaign by a charity aims to make protecting children from sexual abuse as easy as teaching them to eat their vegetables or learn the Green Cross Code.

The campaign will be supported by the Childline charity's schools service, which will visit every primary school in Scotland.
It has also been backed by Scotland's Commissioner for Children and Young People, Tam Baillie, who said: "The simple messages in the NSPCC Underwear Rule can be used by parents and carers to raise these difficult issues in a way which children can understand."
The launch comes amid heightened awareness of sexual abuse following the revelations about Jimmy Savile and other high profile celebrities. However, experts warn assaults by celebrities or strangers are far less common than abuse carried out by a relative or someone a child knows. [Disingenuous. There`s no way to compare figures if there are no thorough investigations of child abuse in public institutions.]
That message is getting through according to a YouGov poll carried out for the NSPCC that found 74% of Scots recognised that relatives (34%) or acquaintances, neighbours or family friends (40%) pose the biggest risk of sexual abuse to children. [Yes, that`s the message that`s important to the government friendly NSPCC !]

Is there more to Crimestoppers than meets the eye?


We’re beginning to understand just how far the authorities are willing to go to cover-up their filthy activities as recent reports on VIP abuse scandals have revealed.
Could Crimestoppers be yet another layer of the cover-up?
If we look at who exactly runs Crimestoppers, it becomes even more mysterious.
Here are the names of some of the organisation’s Trustees:
1) Nick Ross-
The former colleague of murdered presenter Jill Dando. His wife Sarah Caplin, is a cousin of Esther Rantzen and a founding director of Childline. Suspicions have been raised that Childline is also a “gatekeeping” front organisation which is used to gather data on any child abuse reports that may involve VIPs.
2) Michael Ashcroft-
The controversial Tory donor who pays no tax and has non-dom status. He has been described as ruthless and “not a man to cross”. Made a Baron by Her Maj.
3) Peter Imbert-
A former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police who was in charge from 1987-1993 and may have a lot of information about why abuse claims made between these dates were ignored. Made a Baron by her Maj.
4) Lord Waheed Ali-
The first openly gay peer in Parliament and a wealthy entrepreneur. Owns a business, Shine Entertainment, with Rupert Murdoch’s daughter Elisabeth. Is a close friend of Tony Blair. Made a Baron by Her Maj.
5) Peter Clarke-
A former Metropolitan Royal protection officer in charge of guarding Princess Diana at the time of her death. Made a CBE by Her Maj.
6) Sir Ronnie Flanagan-
A former Chief Inspector of Constabulary. Was previously in charge of policing in Northern Ireland and Iraq. May have a lot of information about why child-abuse rings have been covered up.

Jill Dando 1

Jillings report confirms 'extensive' abuse at north Wales children's homes
Heavily redacted version of 300-page report finally published after 20 years following freedom of information requests 
Bryn Estyn children's home
Bryn Estyn children's home in Wrexham: the report was commissioned in 1994 to investigate allegations of abuse in the 1970s and 80s. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

"A report into physical and sexual abuse at children's homes that was suppressed for almost 20 years concluded there was "extensive" mistreatment of young people over a "substantial" number of years."

"The Jillings report into residential care units in north Wales, which has finally been released, said the lives of many children had been blighted by the abuse they suffered while living at the homes.
It said the panel that investigated the abuse had considered abandoning its inquiry as it was not sure it had all the material from agencies including police and social services that it needed to see the whole picture."

"The report also expressed concern that there was no independent mechanism to investigate serving or former police officers implicated in abuse. And it said it had simply not been able to address some areas including the suggestion that public figures had been involved in abuse."

"Complaints that there had been a cover-up over Jillings led to an inquiry headed by the late Sir Ronald Waterhouse, which concluded in 2000 that there had been appalling mistreatment at homes over a period of 20 years."

"At the time of the McAlpine controversy last year some former victims and politicians came forward to claim that the Waterhouse inquiry had been flawed and demanded that the Jillings report be finally published."

"A police investigation ordered by David Cameron at the height of the McAlpine scandal is under way. So far more than 140 people have told police they were victims of abuse at children's homes across north Wales between 1963 and 1992."
"A legal expert in abuse in residential care, Alison Millar, from the law firm Leigh Day, said: "The refusal to publish this report in full is tragically short-sighted. We are in an Alice in Wonderland situation whereby an independent panel is commissioned to investigate what went wrong and why. The report remains unpublished for over 15 years and then, when it is finally published, the report is effectively gutted so that important sections dealing with the very issue of what the panel found did go wrong are specifically excluded."

"The panel found that almost 4,000 statements were taken by police investigating abuse at children's homes during the period they looked at."

"But the report said: "Of the many statements taken, it is unclear how many were forwarded to the Crown Prosecution Service for consideration."

Monday, 1 July 2013

A Focus on Wellbeing

For its part the Scottish Government is focusing its efforts on children`s wellbeing which is defined as safe, healthy, achieving, nurtured, active, respected, responsible, and included.  When they break these categories down into sub-components, this covers just about everything in a child`s life.  Recently the Scottish Government celebrated the endorsement of the wellbeing indicators by those who were consulted on the Children and Young People Bill. But really what is there to celebrate? Since we are no longer dealing with the risk of significant harm, how are concerns about a child in terms of any of these wellbeing indicators supposed to trigger an early intervention? It`s almost as if the Sate is to become the parent fussing over every little detail in a child`s life. 

It stands to reason that, if that is their level of commitment, then practitioners are going to have to do a massive amount of work in order to maintain a child`s wellbeing at an optimum level and most of it will be unnecessary because children have their ups and downs as part of ordinary life. Theoretically every `down` could trigger an investigation. Yet presently there are children in great need who cannot get the services they require because they do not exist. For instance, an autistic child will need a lifetime of support but often a parent has to carry on without respite for years. Something does not add up.

Isn`t it more likely that the wellbeing indicators, the holistic approach, is going to be the pretext which allows a sweeping data gathering exercise to take place on every child and his family?  All ready parents are being secretly judged on their views about race and diversity while in a Lanarkshire hospital with their newborn babies.

Ridiculous as this might be, this Big Brother exercise will lead to serious consequences. In the first place because `concerns about wellbeing` are so imprecise it will be left to the vagaries of the named person to interpret the wellbeing indicators and it can be imagined that many crazy referrals to social services will result, of which there are many examples all ready all over the internet. On the other hand, those cases where a child is seriously at risk of harm might more easily be missed in the flood of data which is all ready swamping the system and being lost in dustbins even before the Bill becomes law.

The Scottish Government Response To ‘A Scotland for Children: A Consultation on a Children and Young People Bill'

A Focus on Wellbeing

The Scottish Government believes it is essential that services take a holistic approach to a child's wellbeing. The consultation proposed making clear this approach by providing a definition of wellbeing that should underpin all Bill provisions.  [And the definition is so wide it is unworkable.]

What You Said

Emerging from the consultation and engagement activity was an overwhelming sense of support for the proposal that the Bill would define wellbeing and that this definition would underpin all relevant Bill provisions. 84% of consultation respondents agreed with the definition of wellbeing as set out through the consultation.
[We are not talking about 84% of the population, but 84% of the respondents to the consultation - those charities and local authorities who were AWARE of the consultation whilst the public at large remained ignorant. That`s a fix]

The most common reasons for this agreement were that the definition was holistic and captured a wide range of factors, and that the SHANARRI Wellbeing Indicators were already being used by practitioners, were well recognised, provided a common language and understanding and promoted consistency in approach. 90% of respondents agreed that a wider understanding of a child or young person's wellbeing should underpin our proposals, mainly because it avoided a narrow consideration of children's needs by a single service, and it helped services/agencies to realise their impact on children and their responsibilities to them. [Capturing a wide range of factors. That`s our private data.]
Everywhere you look the State is getting closer to children; it`s just that Scotland is at a more advanced stage.

Mail Online MESynon`s blog

24 September 2012 7:34 AM

The terrifying power of the State over families: Ireland beware

This is my column from Monday's Irish Daily Mail. It covers plans by the Irish Government to introduce a so-called children's rights amendment to the Constitution by way of referendum in November.

Before you wrap yourself in virtuous intent and go off to vote Yes on this amendment, stop and look at it again: it is dangerous on many counts, and ought to be defeated.

The vested interests who are selling this thing have wrapped it in pious phrases such as ‘the legacy of failing our country’s children’ and leaving behind our ‘legacy of neglect, abuse and inequality.’ They hope you will not think to question what those phrases hide.

What the people using such phrases – in this case, the phrases are from Frances Fitzgerald, minister at the department of children – never say is exactly who it is who has been ‘failing our country’s children.’

Answer, in almost every case: the agents of the State.

Yet this amendment is geared to give the agents of the State even more power over children.

Back in Scotland:

PARENTS are being secretly judged on their views on race and diversity while in hospital with their newborn babies under the SNP Government's latest assault on family life.

During-the-scheme-parents-are-secretly-monitored-by-maternity-staff-to-judge-their-parenting-skillsDuring the scheme, parents are secretly monitored by maternity staff to judge their parenting skills
In a further twist, the same health board is asking children - some of them still at nursery school - to rate their parents or carers on a scale of 1-10.

The project is part of the sinister Big Brother-style system of state meddling called Getting It Right For Every Child (GIRFEC) which is being quietly rolled out across Scotland.

Last week, this newspaper exposed the "scary" plans for all children to be given a state guardian - or Named Person - who will have the legal right to tell parents how to raise their offspring.

GIRFEC also includes proposals to store a child's personal details on a series of databases, which can be accessed by social workers, teachers and other officials.

The "parental capacity to provide wellbeing" assessment forms have been introduced in Lanarkshire under a joint programme involving the health board and local councils.

Under one part of the scheme, parents are secretly monitored by maternity staff to assess their suitability for raising children.

If they are deemed to be worthy of further investigation, another form then asks whether or not they "respect and value diversity" and give "due prominence to their racial, ethnic and cultural heritage".
Emma Carr, deputy director of Big Brother Watch, said: "Why is the Scottish Government so suspicious of parents? Midwives shouldn't be lumbered with acting as social workers and parent monitors when they already have important jobs to be getting on with.

"This sort of heavy handed bureaucracy smacks of treating every new parent as a suspect and the NHS should get on with providing new parents with the best health care and support available, not policing forms about parent's views of diversity.

"Asking nursery aged children for their 'official' views on their parents is a disaster waiting to happen. What happens when children don't receive the toy that they wanted for Christmas? Public authorities should think about what it is they are trying to achieve, rather than sending out intrusive forms to young children and attempting to create a generation of sandbox snoopers."

Meanwhile, despite claims that personal details will be not be stored centrally, Lanarkshire's own GIRFEC newsletter - published in March - states that "core data about a child's wellbeing and wider world" will soon be available to teachers at a "click of a button".

GIRFEC is also at an advanced stage in most other council and health board areas across Scotland. 
A spokesman for NHS Lanarkshire said most mothers and fathers would get a one-part assessment, looking at health concerns and "parenting skills".

However, a "small proportion of families" would be subjected to a "more detailed assessment" by the midwife.