Monday, 28 November 2016
T-27hrs
27 hrs to go before I set off to the iiCSA seminar in London.
THIS is what they are putting survivors of child sexual abuse through.
Friday, 25 November 2016
Open Letter To Prof Jay.
Professor Alexis Jay OBE –
Chair Independent Inquiry into Child sexual Abuse
Milbank Tower London
Our ref: DE/IICSA
25 November 2016
Dear Professor Jay
Open letter
We, (the Forde Park Survivor Group, the Stanhope Castle Survivor Group and the Comboni Survivor Group, Survivors of Organised and Institutional Abuse, F13, F25 (Karen Gray) and F35) wish to raise with you our shared concerns regarding this Inquiry, its apparent lack of direction, lack of discernible progress and its failure to allow and support Survivors in participating in this Inquiry.
Together we represent over 20% of Survivor core participants in the IICSA. Our voices matter and we will be heard.
We start by saying clearly that we want the IICSA to continue, to work effectively and to succeed. But that support is not offered blindly or unconditionally. Thus far, we feel that the IICSA has seriously and repeatedly failed to live up to its promise to put Survivors at the heart of this Inquiry.
This Inquiry was set up by the former Home Secretary Theresa May, now Prime Minister, who described the Inquiry as a "once in a generation opportunity" to expose what went wrong in institutions and public bodies and to prevent it from happening again. In opening the Inquiry it was said that Survivors of child sexual abuse should be “at the centre of this Inquiry” and that "their views would inform the Inquiry throughout”. Survivors need to be allowed to take their place at the "centre of the Inquiry."
Our wish, which we believe is shared by all Survivors, is that this statutory Inquiry achieves its aims of discovering the true extent of child sexual abuse that was permitted to take place in the past and ensuring that children are properly protected in the future. To do this, the Inquiry has to thoroughly investigate what happened in the past, as it is only by recognising and acknowledging the past that we as a society can move forward and implement the lessons learned from the past so that children can be protected from organised and institutional abuse in the future.
However, despite the Inquiry having been established over two years ago, we have not seen or felt
any progress. The Inquiry seems to be under constant threat and constant criticism. Rarely does a
day go by without resignations of lawyers and comments in the press stating that the Inquiry is not
fit for purpose or suggesting that it is falling apart at the seams.
Let us be clear, the members of our groups, and those who look to our groups to represent their
experiences, are ready and willing to participate. Our lawyers have not resigned despite working
without funding for up to a year. Our groups are not falling apart at the seams, despite the heavy
stresses that this Inquiry has placed upon our members.
Survivors have been waiting for years, if not decades, for an inquiry such as this to take place; and
once established, for that inquiry to start tackling the issues of enduring concern; to determinedly
seek out the lessons from the past and begin to put into place the measures that will protect
children from abuse in the future.
We have been told that you, the Chair, are conducting a review of the Inquiry and have promised
that the views of Survivors will be taken into account before any changes are made to the
investigations.
We wish to confirm that, as regards any proposed changes to the Inquiry, whilst Survivors will listen
and consider any review of the Inquiry, we will not agree in advance without full and proper
consultation to any modification or reduction in scope of the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference or Scope
of investigations.
The Inquiry has been besieged by criticism and beset by resignations from many lawyers working
within the Inquiry. To all intents and purposes the Inquiry appears to have stagnated. The press and
the media coverage all point to problems with management, systems and engagement.
Neither Survivors nor their lawyers are being kept up to date as to any progress or about the
possible future shape of the Inquiry. For many of us, this repeats the way that the police and the
civil and criminal justice systems treated us after being abused. For many of us, the on-going
problems with the Inquiry bring back the memories of the way we were abused and the way that
we were treated after reporting that abuse.
All of us have been abused and then ignored or side-lined. The apparent mess being created by this
Inquiry and the constant suggestions that the Inquiry is too broad or too unwieldy, with a stream of
Chair appointments and resignations as well as lawyer appointments and resignations, is adding to
our pain and the pain of other Survivors. ‘Here we go again’ we say and with good reason.
The press appear to be fascinated with the drama from within the Inquiry and the House of
Commons seems to be treating the Inquiry as a political football.
Indeed, on 21 November 2016 in the House of Commons, Sarah Newton, a junior Home Office minster, was forced to reiterate that she was “confident, as is the prime minister, as is the home secretary, in the ability of Professor Jay to lead this inquiry,” and that “She [you] has a distinguished career in social work and a longstanding dedication to child protection” after urgent questions were raised by other MPs regarding the current state of the Inquiry. The Home Affairs Select Committee continued its criticisms of the Inquiry yesterday.
Occasionally there is a statement from the Inquiry stating that Survivors are integral to the Inquiry
process when in fact we are being left in the dark about what is happening and what will happen in
the future. So we say, with good reason, that we are being ignored and side-lined once again.
Assertions that the Inquiry is taking on board, and will take on board, the opinion of Survivors have
so far been nothing more than words. We ask you to make that sentiment and intention real and
not just a platitude.
What we require is a firm and clear statement from you, and the Inquiry team, setting out what has
gone wrong and laying down a clear path for the future progress of this Inquiry.
Conclusion
Professor Jay, we know that you have only been in the post for a short time, and that the task
before you is a very large one. We want you to succeed, we are willing you to succeed, we want
nothing more than to support you, but you must urgently give us reasons to have faith and for that
support to continue.
What is required is a full hearing where the Chair of the Inquiry can properly address the criticisms
that have been made and set out the scope and future dates of the Inquiry’s work. Such a meeting
would allow Survivors and their representatives a chance to publicly state our concerns, in the
clearest terms, and to have those concerns heard and addressed.
We are not happy, we are not satisfied, and we want to say so publicly.
However, we also want to say publicly that we want to support you. We want to give you the
chance to show us that you understand why we are unhappy and to demonstrate to us that you
have a clear road map and are determined to get to the destination of uncovering the truth and
previous failings to start the process of healing and to protect children in the future.
We ask you to urgently schedule a hearing at which all of us can attempt to lance the boil of
dissatisfaction and thereafter to recommit ourselves to the shared goals of truth, recovery and
future child protection.
Signed on behalf of
Forde Park Survivors
Stanhope Castle Survivors
Comboni Survivors
Survivors of Organised and Institutional Abuse
F13
F25 Karen Gray
Chair Independent Inquiry into Child sexual Abuse
Milbank Tower London
Our ref: DE/IICSA
25 November 2016
Dear Professor Jay
Open letter
We, (the Forde Park Survivor Group, the Stanhope Castle Survivor Group and the Comboni Survivor Group, Survivors of Organised and Institutional Abuse, F13, F25 (Karen Gray) and F35) wish to raise with you our shared concerns regarding this Inquiry, its apparent lack of direction, lack of discernible progress and its failure to allow and support Survivors in participating in this Inquiry.
Together we represent over 20% of Survivor core participants in the IICSA. Our voices matter and we will be heard.
We start by saying clearly that we want the IICSA to continue, to work effectively and to succeed. But that support is not offered blindly or unconditionally. Thus far, we feel that the IICSA has seriously and repeatedly failed to live up to its promise to put Survivors at the heart of this Inquiry.
This Inquiry was set up by the former Home Secretary Theresa May, now Prime Minister, who described the Inquiry as a "once in a generation opportunity" to expose what went wrong in institutions and public bodies and to prevent it from happening again. In opening the Inquiry it was said that Survivors of child sexual abuse should be “at the centre of this Inquiry” and that "their views would inform the Inquiry throughout”. Survivors need to be allowed to take their place at the "centre of the Inquiry."
Our wish, which we believe is shared by all Survivors, is that this statutory Inquiry achieves its aims of discovering the true extent of child sexual abuse that was permitted to take place in the past and ensuring that children are properly protected in the future. To do this, the Inquiry has to thoroughly investigate what happened in the past, as it is only by recognising and acknowledging the past that we as a society can move forward and implement the lessons learned from the past so that children can be protected from organised and institutional abuse in the future.
However, despite the Inquiry having been established over two years ago, we have not seen or felt
any progress. The Inquiry seems to be under constant threat and constant criticism. Rarely does a
day go by without resignations of lawyers and comments in the press stating that the Inquiry is not
fit for purpose or suggesting that it is falling apart at the seams.
Let us be clear, the members of our groups, and those who look to our groups to represent their
experiences, are ready and willing to participate. Our lawyers have not resigned despite working
without funding for up to a year. Our groups are not falling apart at the seams, despite the heavy
stresses that this Inquiry has placed upon our members.
Survivors have been waiting for years, if not decades, for an inquiry such as this to take place; and
once established, for that inquiry to start tackling the issues of enduring concern; to determinedly
seek out the lessons from the past and begin to put into place the measures that will protect
children from abuse in the future.
We have been told that you, the Chair, are conducting a review of the Inquiry and have promised
that the views of Survivors will be taken into account before any changes are made to the
investigations.
We wish to confirm that, as regards any proposed changes to the Inquiry, whilst Survivors will listen
and consider any review of the Inquiry, we will not agree in advance without full and proper
consultation to any modification or reduction in scope of the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference or Scope
of investigations.
The Inquiry has been besieged by criticism and beset by resignations from many lawyers working
within the Inquiry. To all intents and purposes the Inquiry appears to have stagnated. The press and
the media coverage all point to problems with management, systems and engagement.
Neither Survivors nor their lawyers are being kept up to date as to any progress or about the
possible future shape of the Inquiry. For many of us, this repeats the way that the police and the
civil and criminal justice systems treated us after being abused. For many of us, the on-going
problems with the Inquiry bring back the memories of the way we were abused and the way that
we were treated after reporting that abuse.
All of us have been abused and then ignored or side-lined. The apparent mess being created by this
Inquiry and the constant suggestions that the Inquiry is too broad or too unwieldy, with a stream of
Chair appointments and resignations as well as lawyer appointments and resignations, is adding to
our pain and the pain of other Survivors. ‘Here we go again’ we say and with good reason.
The press appear to be fascinated with the drama from within the Inquiry and the House of
Commons seems to be treating the Inquiry as a political football.
Indeed, on 21 November 2016 in the House of Commons, Sarah Newton, a junior Home Office minster, was forced to reiterate that she was “confident, as is the prime minister, as is the home secretary, in the ability of Professor Jay to lead this inquiry,” and that “She [you] has a distinguished career in social work and a longstanding dedication to child protection” after urgent questions were raised by other MPs regarding the current state of the Inquiry. The Home Affairs Select Committee continued its criticisms of the Inquiry yesterday.
Occasionally there is a statement from the Inquiry stating that Survivors are integral to the Inquiry
process when in fact we are being left in the dark about what is happening and what will happen in
the future. So we say, with good reason, that we are being ignored and side-lined once again.
Assertions that the Inquiry is taking on board, and will take on board, the opinion of Survivors have
so far been nothing more than words. We ask you to make that sentiment and intention real and
not just a platitude.
What we require is a firm and clear statement from you, and the Inquiry team, setting out what has
gone wrong and laying down a clear path for the future progress of this Inquiry.
Conclusion
Professor Jay, we know that you have only been in the post for a short time, and that the task
before you is a very large one. We want you to succeed, we are willing you to succeed, we want
nothing more than to support you, but you must urgently give us reasons to have faith and for that
support to continue.
What is required is a full hearing where the Chair of the Inquiry can properly address the criticisms
that have been made and set out the scope and future dates of the Inquiry’s work. Such a meeting
would allow Survivors and their representatives a chance to publicly state our concerns, in the
clearest terms, and to have those concerns heard and addressed.
We are not happy, we are not satisfied, and we want to say so publicly.
However, we also want to say publicly that we want to support you. We want to give you the
chance to show us that you understand why we are unhappy and to demonstrate to us that you
have a clear road map and are determined to get to the destination of uncovering the truth and
previous failings to start the process of healing and to protect children in the future.
We ask you to urgently schedule a hearing at which all of us can attempt to lance the boil of
dissatisfaction and thereafter to recommit ourselves to the shared goals of truth, recovery and
future child protection.
Signed on behalf of
Forde Park Survivors
Stanhope Castle Survivors
Comboni Survivors
Survivors of Organised and Institutional Abuse
F13
F25 Karen Gray
F35
Thursday, 10 November 2016
Counselling - An Honest Response.
I attended an assessment appointment on 9/11/16, so they could decide whether or not I needed counselling for the trauma' I have encountered throughout my life thus far.
My needs are too complex for KRASACC (Kirklees Rape and Sexual Assault Counselling Centre) to even contemplate my case, she thinks. That was 10 mins into the appointment!!! My appointment lasted an hour and a half.
It took the remaining hour and twenty minutes for her to actually build up the courage to admit they don't have the manpower, training or understanding to deal with me.
But that is OK.
At least she accepted her limitations.
Dr Peter Wells put in place everything I needed to sort out my persons. All I need is somebody to help support me while I deal with all the shit done to each of them before somebody gets us deaded. Then I can carry on representing survivors of bryn alyn community in iiCSA, like they should be.
One of the things she kept repeating was how high functioning i am. WTF??
My multiple persons are quite content co-existing tyVm, and considering you all communicate with the one that was artificially constructed to stop the world triggering my death wish, the very fact that some want to reduce me down to just one person, I find abhorrent. Tantamount to murderous intent to be perfectly honest.
I need sexual and emotional and physical and psychological abuse counselling.
I need somebody, One person, to sit and listen to my full tale, start to finish, without judging me, and without abandoning me, or silencing me.
Not some wanker that will sit there texting their other half, throwing in the occasional "Oh, that's awful, you must feel terrible."
Well, must I??
How about I feel unjustly treated, misrepresented and abandoned?
Unjustifiably deserted by those supposed to be looking out for me?
But terrible.....nah..... that's what you feel when the guilt is eating away at you. When you know you are to blame.
Well I'm telling you all..... I done nothing to feel shame for.
I don't feel terrible.
I don't feel sorry for myself.
My needs are too complex for KRASACC (Kirklees Rape and Sexual Assault Counselling Centre) to even contemplate my case, she thinks. That was 10 mins into the appointment!!! My appointment lasted an hour and a half.
It took the remaining hour and twenty minutes for her to actually build up the courage to admit they don't have the manpower, training or understanding to deal with me.
But that is OK.
At least she accepted her limitations.
Dr Peter Wells put in place everything I needed to sort out my persons. All I need is somebody to help support me while I deal with all the shit done to each of them before somebody gets us deaded. Then I can carry on representing survivors of bryn alyn community in iiCSA, like they should be.
One of the things she kept repeating was how high functioning i am. WTF??
Despite all this, I actually fail to see what was inaccurate in what the woman said, to be honest.
I went there knowing that would be the response because that is the response I have had every time I have presented myself to the people offering "help".
The help that other people insist is available is NOT available in Kirklees,
I do NOT need mental health support,
I went there knowing that would be the response because that is the response I have had every time I have presented myself to the people offering "help".
The help that other people insist is available is NOT available in Kirklees,
I do NOT need mental health support,
My multiple persons are quite content co-existing tyVm, and considering you all communicate with the one that was artificially constructed to stop the world triggering my death wish, the very fact that some want to reduce me down to just one person, I find abhorrent. Tantamount to murderous intent to be perfectly honest.
I need sexual and emotional and physical and psychological abuse counselling.
I need somebody, One person, to sit and listen to my full tale, start to finish, without judging me, and without abandoning me, or silencing me.
Not some wanker that will sit there texting their other half, throwing in the occasional "Oh, that's awful, you must feel terrible."
Well, must I??
How about I feel unjustly treated, misrepresented and abandoned?
Unjustifiably deserted by those supposed to be looking out for me?
But terrible.....nah..... that's what you feel when the guilt is eating away at you. When you know you are to blame.
Well I'm telling you all..... I done nothing to feel shame for.
I don't feel terrible.
I don't feel sorry for myself.
I am certainly not the one at fault.
I feel manipulated, used, abused, abandoned and bloody angry as hell!!!!
I feel manipulated, used, abused, abandoned and bloody angry as hell!!!!
Friday, 4 November 2016
Gordon Anglesea 12 Years in Prison
There is a large public presence at the sentencing for Gordon Anglesea.
Jez Hemming ✔ @DPJezHemming
Defence counsel Tania Griffiths says Anglesea did not have a fair trial and it is "fit for appeal" _ shouts from the gallery at that point
2:24 PM - 4 Nov 2016
Tania Griffiths, defense QC in the Gordon Anglesea told the court there were "many reasons why her clients conviction was unsafe" and went on to call the verdict perverse.
She also said "publicity prejudiced a fair trial for her client Gordon Anglesea."
Anglesea staring straight at Judge Walters. Still expressionless in the dock flanked by one female guard.
Judge listening to a long list of submissions from the defence. He dismisses one point to cries of approval from the public gallery.
Tania Griffiths makes application for bail pending appeal : "I invite your honour to say that there are substantial grounds for appeal"
Judge Walters: "complainants subjected to a no holds bar attack" by cross examination
2:50 PM - 4 Nov 2016
Judge Geraint Walters stated “There is nothing in this case that leads me to believe these convictions are unsafe”
Tania Griffiths rejecting assertions made in impact statements by victims
2:56 PM - 4 Nov 2016
Defence arguing that offences are mitigated because they are not as serious as prosecution says
2:59 PM - 4 Nov 2016
Defence counsel Tania Griffiths QC talks about the effect on Anglesea’s family “It could well be financial...it could affect his police pension” (He should already have lost that!!)
Defence now comparing previous sentencing of other convicted paedophiles as mitigation in Anglesea's sentencing
3:04 PM - 4 Nov 2016
Tania Griffiths QC finishes mitigation saying: “Custody for this man will be extremely difficult”.
Judge Walters is reading through his summary and sentence... any minute now.
Anglesea looks at the floor as Judge Walters goes into graphic detail about his crimes.
3:17 PM - 4 Nov 2016
Judge Walters went on "You were the man who was in charge and that would have been transparent to all”"
"A boy who needed sanctioning would be sent to you."
Anglesea has been sentenced to 12 years behind bars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)