We've seen Elon Musk sticking the boot into Keir Starmer about the governments woeful response to the scandal around paedophile gangs running grooming rings and raping children in the UK over the past few days. Whilst I 100% agree with Mr Musk that the situation is totally wrong and that the Police and CPS should have been on this from the first moment that it reared it's ugly head, I find it somewhat odd that he seems to be stacking all of the blame on Keir Starmer, who was head of the CPS from 2008-2013 and has been Prime Miniter for six months. Even if you subscribe to the idea that for that period Starmer was 100% to blame for what went on, we've had Seven different Prime Minister since Blair appointed Starmer and five of them, over an eleven year period were from the Conservative Party. We've had three different Directors of Public Prosecutions in that period. It is a Civil Service role, not political, which is why Starmer served most of his term under under Tory Prime Minister David Camerons. Since Starmer left, we've had Alison Saunders (2013–2018), Max Hill (2018–2023) and Stephen Parkinson (2023–present). All are culpable.
It seems rather odd to me that Mr Musk has not apportioned blame amongst all of them, although I suspect that has more to do about his personal agenda than who he actually thinks is to blame. All of them would be fully briefed on the situation and presumably could have acted if so minded (or directed to by any of the five Prime Ministers who have ultimately been their bosses. It has been noted on Mr Musk's own X platform that he has had far less to say about paedo rings run by rich and powerful white people in America, such as Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell (who there are photo's doing the rounds of with Mr Musk). It is something that Mr Musk has not chosen to address in his deluge of tweets on the subject. I really think some sort of explanation would be a very good thing.
What I find really odd about the current ire against 'Asian grooming gangs' running paedo rings, is that it completely ignores the fact that the vast majority of victims of paedophiles in the UK are the victims of the white, indiginous population. That in no way excuses the gangs, but what we need to do is see a strategy that addresses Paedophiles of all colours and creeds. I suspect the reason that the gangs that we currently see highlighted are seemingly acting with such impunity is as much to do with the law being totally deficient in dealing with paedophiles in general, as it is about ignoring people from ethnic minorities to be woke.
One of the most disturbing conversations I had on the subject was with a friend of mine, Duncan McLaughlan, who was the governor of the Maze Prison in Northern Ireland for 17 years, through the troubles. Duncan was a friend of mine and I recall a conversation about whether paedophiles can be reformed. Although the Maze had political prisoners, it also had run of the mill criminals incarcerated, including paedophiles. I asked Duncan if he thought paedophile men could be rehabilitated. His view was that they only stopped offending when they were physically incapable of doing it and all convicted paedophiles were a permanent risk to children whilst they were able bodied. Furthermore, he told me that they would exchange information and tips on how to procure children and evade detection whilst in prison. When they were released, they were far more effective and dangerous as child abusers than when they first went in. The most disturbing thing of all, is many consider themselves to be superior to non child abusers as they see the non abusing population as idiots who are missing out. Duncans view was that every time an offending paedophile is released, children are put at risk. His comment was that most criminals get fed up with being locked up eventually and try and get back on the straight and narrow. Paedophiles simply see jail as an unfortunate break in their activities, but also a chance to learn new ways to carry on their business. He would have been quite happy to lock them up permanently, as he felt child safety was more important than their human rights. I have to say that I agreed with him, having heard his logic. He was a man with relatively liberal views on most things, but it was clear that experience of offenders had taught him that there are some things where being lenient simply does not work.
Another comment was also rather disturbing. He said that when Judges, of whom he knew a fair few, sentenced such people, they knew that they would invariably start offending at the end of their term, but had to follow "sentencing guidelines". You may wonder what these are? They are the reason that Huw Edwards did not go to prison for being part of a child porn sharing ring. What you can be absolutely sure of is that every other paedophile who does a similar thing to Edwards will avoid prison, as he's set a very unfortunate precedent, supported by the guidelines. UK lawmakers set terms for what they think is an appropriate sentence for the crime.
Then there are the offenders who commit more serious abuse. Sadly I saw at first hand how indadequate the law is in the respect. A teacher in Mill Hill, who abused his position to molest a 14 year old girl and her 7 year old sister was given eight years. He served just under three years, as he 'behaved himself' in prison. At the end of their sentence, they returned to Mill Hill and even got a role in a local community group, videoing events featuring young children, until their conviction was revealed and they refused to undertake a DBS check. Rather sadly, the Police showed no interest at all in the matter, when local residents raised the issue. Sadly, I can say no more for legal reasons, but the response of the Police left me horrified and I realised that the safety of children is not a policing priority in Barnet.
It is clear to me that prison service, the parole service, the police and the lawmakers in the UK fully understand the nature of child molesters. They know that the law if wholly inadequate and has been for years. New online platforms have been a huge enabler of child molesters, allowing networking opportunities that they could never have dreamed of 30 years ago. In France recently, we've seen how a very sick minded man used such tools to allow dozens of strangers to abuse his drugged wife. She is clearly a strong and intelligent woman. Just think how like minded men may use the same tools to exploit vulnerable children?
Anyone who understands they way the internet has developed over the last quarter century will know that the process of legislation of the internet and keeping it safe for everyone almost needs to be done in real time to keep up with all of the developments. I've seen first hand how a relatively IT savvy dodgy individual was able to exploit the complete lack of regulation to do all manner of dodgy things and the Police were either unwilling or unable to lift a finger. It is clear to me that abusers target weak, vulnerable people. What concerns me most, are the more well connected and powerful people who are able to exert power and influence to abuse. A good example of such people is former MP Cyril Smith, who used his stature as a local MP to abuse boys at a childrens home in Rochdale. What is truly disturbing is that in 1988, Margaret Thatcher was made aware of the allegations before he was given a Knighthood, but chose not to act. Thatcher was also on good terms with the likes of Jimmy Savile. The more you lift the carpet, the more you wonder whether the reason that all of these people, from the gangs that Musk is ranting about, to Cyril Smith, Jimmy Savile and Huw Edwards can get away with it because the people who run the Country and make the laws want them to. And when we talk about Islamic paedo gangs, what about the Christian gangs in the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church. It really is time for both organisations to turn their files over to the police and compensate victims.
It couldn't be clearer to me, that if the Government properly legislated, followed Duncan McLoughlan's advice and locked up child molesters until they could no longer offend and made the Police properly investigate claims, then the number of children being molested by dirty old men would fade into insignificance. One other thing that should be considered is that many offenders, were themselves victims and the behaviour they were subjected to was normalised. Of course most victims don't go on to offend, but I believe that if we took serious action to lock up offenders and protect children, then we would see a lot less children being taught that such behaviour is OK. So in short, the awful truth is that the reason we have grooming gangs and other forms of paedophile activity on such a large scale is because both Labour and Conservative governments think it absolutely fine. And until you see the UK and other Western countries building new, purpose built prisons to lock up such people, and more police resources dedicated to catching paedophiles, nothing at all will change.
No comments:
Post a Comment