Wednesday, 15 May 2013

WYP Covering Up More Crimes.

After making my formal statement I believed I would get a formal decision at some point as to what action would be taken in regard to the abuse I sustained in Halifax Children's Homes.
Other victims I know of have, generally, received letters from the relevant Police force a few weeks after making their statement, so I sat back to wait.
Then last month I got a phone call from Halifax Safeguarding Team informing me that there would be No Further Action in these matters as the files on Operation Screen had been sealed in 2000 and could not be unsealed as it had been a joint Operational decision between the CPS and the Chief Inspector at the time.

I requested the decision in writing and was told by the DC that she would ask.
She then rang me back the following day to say it had to be a verbal only decision. I complained bitterly and on the Friday I received a third phone call from the Safeguarding Team. This time it was a D.I Lord who telephoned to yet again inform me that a decision had been made in regard to the crimes committed against me when I was a child, I had been informed of that decision and now needed to move on. I asked for the decision to be put in writing as I felt I hadn't been able to fully take in their reasons over the phone and needed time to read and process that decision. I was then informed that they "don't have time to write letters, there's criminals to catch." and the phone call was abruptly ended.

Rather peeved at this, I contacted my local MP Jason McCartney (Colne Valley) and asked him to see if he could find out why I was getting different treatment to other victims. "Different forces, different policies" he replied "but I shall ask."

Last week I received a letter from Jason McCartney MP, along with his response from the Safeguarding unit.

Dear Jason McCartney MP

Thank you for your correspondence dated 19th April 2013 relating to Karen Gray of  * ****** ******, **********, Huddersfield.

In reply I can tell you that Detective Inspector Lord at Calderdale CID had a lengthy telephone conversation with Ms Karen Gray regarding the decision not to proceed with her case. Also informing her that although the decision had been made not to put the decision into writing he would be prepared to speak to any legal representative should she wish to seek legal advise.

At this stage the decision remains the same.

Yours faithfully
Sharon Hewitt
DS 5120
Calderdale Safeguarding Unit.

Now, as some of you may have noticed..... I'm kinda okay on research. I set my mind on a task and generally keep at it til it's finished or my mind gets bored and wanders off until my feet follow it.

Now, CPS produced a booklet a few years ago "Rights of Women"
On page 42 it states:

A decision taken not to prosecute a serious offence would have to be supported
by very clear reasons. For example, depending on the seriousness of the
offence, it may be decided that a prosecution is not in the public interest if:
● it would have a negative effect on the physical or mental health of the
● the suspect is very old; and/or
● the suspect was, at the time of the offence, suffering from serious mental
or physical ill health.
All these issues are meant to be weighed against the seriousness of the
You should be told by the CPS Prosecutor whether or not the suspect is to be
charged within 24 hours of the decision being made. Decisions in cases of rape
are taken by specialist Prosecutors.

If the CPS decides not to charge him with an offence the suspect will have no
further action taken against him (sometimes referred to as being NFA’d). The
case will then be closed but information relating to the investigation should be
kept in case further evidence is obtained or he commits further offences.
When the CPS informs you that they are not able to charge the suspect, they
should offer to meet with you to discuss their decision. If, following a meeting,

you disagree with the decision taken by the CPS Prosecutor you may be able
to challenge the decision through judicial review proceedings in the High
Court. The time limit for applying for judicial review is three months. You will
need specialist legal advice and representation to do this.

I had to wait three weeks to get my verbal decision as, according to the Officer handling my case, she had been on holiday for two weeks.

Now yes, the decision has had a serious effect on my already unstable Mental Health.
Yes, one of the Accused is 80 yrs old.

I have since rung the CPS who have no record of a file containing my name being passed to the CPS this year. They advised me to either report the matter to the Police or see C.A.B for free legal advise.

There was mention of an "indecent exposure" charge whilst the woman was searching for the name of one of my physical and mental abusers that traded me to a paedophile ring, but she quickly changed the subject on that.

.Further Reading:
Another Brave Victim....Halifax
Skircoat Lodge
Malcolm Osric Phillips

1 comment:

  1. shocking. its time for police to do their jobs and protect the people.


Thanks for your time and interest