Monday 29 April 2013

A Masterclass

Now that we know the full extent of the historic sex offence charges that have been levelled against ace media publicist Max Clifford, it shouldn't come as any surprise that his prepared statement to the assembled media throng was an absolute masterclass both in damage limitation and appeal to public sympathy. 

He did stray from the script though, as this ITV interview shows and in answer to an inaudible question from a reporter said "None of this would have happened without Savile."

I thought that was quite revealing and it will be up to each individual to make of it what they will, but I'm fairly sure he's absolutely right. It is only because of the whole sad sorry Savile affair that many, many victims of sex offences now feel able to come forward in the more confident knowledge that their stories will be heard and believed. 

Yet another result of the Savile affair has been the new investigation into historic child sexual abuse at North Wales children's homes and reported here. Amongst other things, we are now entitled to ask exactly as to why the previous investigation by Sir Ronald Waterhouse failed so miserably? Is it a case of piss-poor work, or more alarmingly, evidence of a cover-up? I would remind readers that we are still awaiting the results of police investigations into exactly what went on at Elm House, a certain west London guest house frequented by lots of politicians of all political parties in the 70's and 80's.  

Ever since the Savile story first broke, I've been becoming increasingly concerned regarding siren voices from all sorts of quarters, basically casting doubts upon the direction of travel as a result. To be honest it's made for some very uncomfortable comment by people I normally have high regard for and has just a whiff of the weasel words normally associated with holocaust denial.

It ranges from references to a possible 'witch-hunt', to a suggestion that the passage of time somehow invokes the notion of a statute of limitation. I've heard questions raised of the ability of the accused to have a fair trial, to the 'difficulty' of overlaying our current attitudes towards appropriate sexual conduct, with the practises and mores of the past. From notions of 'victims' just wanting compensation, to 'false memory syndrome.' 

To probation officers, all this and a whole shed-load of other stuff is very familiar indeed on the part of many of our clients found guilty of sex offending. Such denial, minimisation, obfuscation and distorted logic are pretty common in my experience as a way of explaining rape and indecent assault, and I suspect it's partly because of these traits that so many perpetrators have never been brought to justice. It's also partly down to 'apologists' as well though.

To be honest I think the pendulum has at last swung in favour of any victim of a sexual offence being able to feel confident that their complaint will be treated seriously both by the police and Crown Prosecution Service. In the end it will be up to the legal process and a jury to consider the evidence and come to a judgement, but at least there is now a better chance that victims will get their day in court too. 

As an aside, both the police and media now find themselves in somewhat of an embarrassing quandary regarding the passing of information from the former to the latter. With so many police officers and former police officers finding themselves being charged with basically selling information in the past, together with nervousness on the part of the media post Leveson, I notice the suggestion by CC Andy Trotter of ACPO is basically to say nothing in future. 

Readers will recall it took months for the news about Rolf Harris being interviewed by the police to emerge officially and only when The Sun decided to bite the bullet. We could soon be in the position of having secret arrests. Makes you think, doesn't it?     

9 comments:

  1. I suppose the problem is the pendulum: it now swings towards the victim, but where will it be next year? I am not so confident that police practice has improved in its fundamentals. I think of the fanfare that accompanied the so-called Sapphire unit intended to herald a new beginning in dealing with female victims of sexual crimes. From what I read Sapphire has been a catalogue of errors, indifference and incompetence since it's inception. The 'brand' is so damaged they are thinking of renaming it.

    We know the police and CPS abjectly failed in respect of Saville. The fact that we are now seeing prosecutions of alleged historic offences has little to do with great improvements or cultural shifts in police practice. When the spotlight is on you tend to perform because you are being watched.

    I have some sympathy with those who are subject to police inquiries. Why should their name be dragged through the mud by the mere fact of an arrest? It becomes a diferent matter if charged as there should be no right to anonymity, especially concerning alleged sex crimes because, as Saville reaffirms, publicity may give other victims the confidence to come forward.

    'On New Year's Eve 2010, the day after Jefferies was erroneously arrested on suspicion of the murder of 25-year-old Joanna Yeates, a tenant in the building he still lives in and owns, and from where he talks today, the Sun reported its take on "The strange Mr Jefferies". Similarly, the Daily Mail splashed with "Murder police quiz 'nutty professor' with a blue rinse" and the Daily Mirror told its 1.2 million readers: "Jo suspect is Peeping Tom". The stories in the Sun and the Daily Mirror explained how the retired English literature teacher scared children and was obsessed with death; one paper, in the words of the Leveson counsel, Robert Jay, linked him with a past murder and a paedophile.'
    ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/24/christopher-jefferies-leveson-press-inquiry)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, just as attitudes changed about domestic violence, so they are changing in relation to sex offending. There's further to go, for instance in recognising that men can be victims of domestic violence and that women can be sex offenders. To a certain extent, the police have always been a bit behind, but have made enormous progress in recent years.

      The public are in for a big shock in the coming months as they learn just how prevalent sex offending and child sexual abuse has been for many years, but mostly swept under the carpet for a whole host of reasons. The pendulum has to swing a bit further in my view in order to clear a vast historic backlog.

      Delete
  2. I think that an important reason for failure to take victims' accounts seriously in years gone by, is that there was an assumption that paedophilia was so repugnant to people that it MUST be a very, very rare form of sexual deviance. Therefore, these things could not be happening, and therefore did not merit proper investigation.
    A person I know was a member of an all-female Child Protection Unit (women's work after all) in the 80's. They uncovered an extensive network of a users, but were simply not believed; they were dismissed as over-emotional women with vivid imaginations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ian,

      I agree, but the public had better brace themselves for some truly shocking revelations concerning the sheer scope and amount of historic cases yet to emerge. Quite a few public figures are going to be sleeping uneasily in the coming months.

      Cheers,

      Jim

      Delete
    2. I shan't lose any sleep over them sleeping uneasily, Jim, but perhaps we are finally waking up to the fact, that no only are there far more abusers than previously imagined, but that they are drawn to those occupations where a) they will have ready access to children whilst b) enjoying sufficient power and prestige to discourage anyone looking too closely into "slanderous innuendo", and to cover each other's backs.

      Delete
  3. Another high profile celebrity arrest today. Must have messed up in a previous life.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lot more to come yet Rob, especially politicians. It seems to be taking more time, but the shit will have to hit the fan eventually.

      Delete
  4. Much has been made elsewhere of the age of these alleged offences and the difficulty of ensuring a fair trial. I think that the reaction of Stuart Hall points to what may well be the pragmatic way forward. By the very nature of things, those at present being investigated or awaiting trial, have no previous experience of standing in the dock, or of going through the prison gate as a "nonce". When faced with the fact that their victims WILL attend and give evidence, they may well follow the advice of their advocate that if the charges are well-founded, it is better to admit them and avoid the heavier penalty that conviction after trial would inevitably bring.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ian,

      Yes I'm sure that in the end it was the sheer number of victims that made Stuart Hall change his mind. But they only felt able to come forward because they knew he'd been arrested, and it looks like post Leveson the police are moving the goal posts.

      Delete