Rotherham; the perfect political storm.

An independent inquiry into child sexual exploitation set up in 2013 by Rotherham Council was published on August 26^th. Its findings have placed a spotlight on the South Yorkshire town the likes of which has never been seen before.   The inquiry found that an estimated 1200 children had been sexually exploited between 1997 and 2013.

Although systematic grooming and abuse by predominantly Pakistani men had been reported to the authorities, the terrible crimes had gone unpunished for two decades. The fact that the men accused of trafficking, kidnapping and rape were of Pakistani origin was largely covered up by social services and the police for fear of accelerating racial hatred in the area.

Members of the Pakistani community condemned both the crimes and the cover up.

South Yorkshire police commissioner Sean Wright has refused to step down from his £85,000 a year job despite being head of children’s services during much of the period when the attacks took place, before being elected in 2012. His deputy, Tracey Cheetham resigned this week, saying she could no longer support him (wright) nor could she continue to be his deputy and called on him to also resign. There is no suggestion that Ms Cheetham had any connection to the appalling scandal but feelings are running so high in the town that a local council meeting was interrupted by locals, furious that the grooming and abuse had continued despite appeals for the local police to act.

Deputy leader of Rotherham council released a statement apologising for the council’s failings, but Mr Wright still refuses to stand down although he has now quit the Labour party.

This not only highlighted the abuse in Rotherham but the ridiculous idea that the man charged with holding the police force to account cannot be held to account.   

A document published in 2012 by the home office called Have you got what it takes to be police and crime commissioner states “as PCC you will have a responsibility to hold the police to account on behalf of the public” it goes on to say “you will provide the link between the police and communities”. It also lists other responsibilities as delivering safety and reducing crime.

It is quite clear that not only is Mr Wright not fit to continue in the post but that he should never have been given the role in the first place.

The position of PCC was widely criticised when it was introduced and voting was remarkably low in the elections. Surely now it is time that all PCC’s were removed. Whoever is in charge of the police force must be able to be held accountable.

Many of the victims in Rotherham were vulnerable children in care; children that were already on the books of social services. As head of children’s services it is implausible to believe Wright knew nothing of the abuse happening on his watch. This means he was either incredibly incompetent or implicit in turning a blind eye – either way a vote of no confidence must passed on him and he should be removed and banned from holding public office again.

Rotherham in recent years has been the scene of many demonstrations from groups such as the English defence league and UKIP. The lack of action by Rotherham council for fear of upsetting the Asian communities has done nothing to help that situation but has helped right wing parties like UKIP gain a foothold in the once labour dominated area.

In the local elections in May UKIP won 10 of the 21 seats in Rotherham, and 3 seats in neighbouring Sheffield.  While many will feel this was a protest vote aimed at the main parties and particularly Labours refusal to offer a referendum on Europe.  What it actual does is paves the way for more extreme right wing parties like the BNP to target the area.

Failing to investigate crimes because they may have been committed by Pakistani men is irresponsible and dangerous. Local councils and police authorities must send out a clear message that these sorts of crimes will not be tolerated by people of any gender, age or ethnicity and anybody or group of people found guilty of these crimes must be punished to the fullest. Boys, girls, women and men have the right to feel safe and be protected by the police and the government.

Mr Wright was forced to cancel a public surgery in Barnsley today due to no members of the public booking an appointment. This sends a blunt message to the commissioner who still hangs on despite calls from the prime minister, the home secretary and leader of the labour party Ed Miliband for him to fall on his sword. Let us hope that today’s message that he is no longer wanted gives him the courage to finally do the right thing and go.

This boy.  

 

Although I generally find political biographies quite tedious and self-obsessed, occasionally I enjoy reading them. I recently spoke to a colleague who had just read This Boy by former Home secretary, Alan Johnson. I have always had a bit of soft spot for Mr Johnson, based almost entirely on the fact that he was General Secretary of the communication workers union, of which I used to be a member when I followed my father and grandfather in to working for the Royal Mail when I left school. The colleague who had read the book had done so on kindle but recommended it so I thought I might purchase it for my holiday book (I always take one on holiday each year). Unable to find it in Asda’s best sellers, I decided to venture online and look on Amazon. I soon found a used copy priced quite reasonably at £2.50 in good condition, only read once.

I’m not suggesting the vendor lied, he may well have only read the book once, but it looked as though it had been well handled more than once. The dog eared pages looked like they had been used as a splatter guard and the corners of the cover were torn. In fact were it not for the British heart foundation 99p sticker on the spine, I suspect the yellowed pages may have fallen out.

 

 

Despite its weathered appearance I decided to keep it and read the first couple of chapters before my holiday just to whet my appetite.

Mr Johnson was born in London in 1950. 1950 was just 21 years before I was born in the wintery January of 1971. As I already said, my Dad worked as a humble postman. We lived in a modest 3 bedroom council house, which my parents still live in (although they took advantage of Thatcher’s right to buy in the 80’s). When I was born the house needed lots of work doing to it. The kitchen still boasted an old fashioned pantry and the three gardens that living on a corner plot gave us, needed hours and hours of attention from my Mum to get them to the state of splendor they offer today. Old steel window frames and single glazing offered little warmth in the days before central heating but we had an inside toilet.

What struck me immediately about Alan Johnson’s book was the huge difference between the working class poorness I grew up in and the absolute horrendous poverty that he described experiencing just 20 years prior. With a father that offered little or nothing in the way of house-keeping or paternal instinct, Johnson early years in the slums sounded like they were a hundred years before I was born. I was amazed to think of how far we had progressed in just two short decades. He talks of having no gas or electric in the house until they were moved and then the way they had to put money in the slot to obtain services we all take for granted today, as we did in 1971. Then there was the emergence of TV, which in 1950 was almost unheard of in a council house. By ’71 almost everyone had a set, even though we only had 3 channels to choose from. He talks of playing in the street safely as there were hardly any cars on the road. Although I owned a car before my father finally got rid of his Honda 90 motor cycle, cars certainly were not unusual by the time I was born. Such massive changes are hard to comprehend now days.

20 years ago John Major was prime minister, Labour leader John Smith died of a heart attack and Fred and Rose West were charged with murder. The channel tunnel was officially opened in 1994 and Wet Wet Wet’s Love is all around us was number 1 in the charts for what seemed an eternity.

A bomb exploded outside the Israeli embassy injuring 15 people and Harry Styles of One Direction was born, as was my first son. All of these things feel like they happened quite recently to me and yet the 20 year gap is the same vast chasm between my birth and that of Alan Johnson.

Fiercely proud of my working class roots, I never considered myself to be fortunate or privileged until I read This Boy.

I wonder how far we will all come in the next 20 years by which time my son will be forty (3 years younger than I am now). Will we still be in austerity enforced upon us by ideological Tory governments or will there be a new party in power?

 It was announced today that Boris Johnson intends to stand once more in next year’s general election. The news came as no surprise really, as many believe he will be the next leader of the conservative party. Whether that will be as Prime minister or leader of the opposition will depend largely on the popularity in the next 12 months of Ed Miliband.

Despite the Tories being consistently behind Labour in the polls for some time, leader Ed is equally as consistent at polling lower than Cameron. This is often credited to Miliband’s geekiness and lack of photogenic qualities. The media would have us believe it is because he is unable to eat bacon sandwich without looking ugly. Others say it due to his links to the trade unions which elected him while others blame it on his brother David, who many still believe would have and should have been a better leader.

Others would say that it is because like the Tories, Miliband is out of touch with the reality facing ordinary people, being paid low wages and living in over-priced properties. Consecutive Labour governments did little to ease the housing crisis, continuing to sell off stock while failing to address the growing waiting lists for social housing. They did even less to repeal the ant- trade union laws that the Tories would strengthen if re-elected in 2015. Prime minister David Cameron insists on referring to trade union pay masters every week in Prime ministers questions in spite of the fact that few of the current crop of Labour MPs have had real jobs any more than the other side of parliament.

Men and women from council estates and trade unions are almost extinct in parliament these days and reading Alan Johnsons This Boy, makes it crystal clear what the current batch miss out on. Alan Johnson understands what it is like to have to have two or three jobs to pay the bills. He understands the needs of council tenants and he knows the issues they face. He understands the community spirit and the pride of working class families.

I have written before of the need for more working class MPs and the need for more trade unionized MPs. Former Labour MP Denis Macshane called for working class shortlists but the amount of MPs who didn’t attend Oxbridge Universities continues to recede. The trade union paymasters of the labour party needs to demand more candidates from a normal background and the system which prohibits all but the wealthy from becoming a politician is in need of a major overhaul. Maybe then, possibly in 20 years’ time I might be able to give a voice back to normal people, stand against Boris and be an MP myself.

 

 

 

Benefit Britain. Life on the dole. What they don’t show:

This time last year I wrote about a TV show called Skint. It focused on a few hand-picked families and highlighted the lack of morals and the lack of willingness to work or even get dressed on our council estates. I argued that the programme did not reflect real life and was by no means representative of the norm.

12 months on and channel 5 bring us benefits Britain; Life on the dole. This week’s episode featured families with lots of children living in workless homes. It focused on the number of children one man had and the number of mothers he had fathered them with. It focused on a single mother with 5 children (all to the same Dad). At one point during the programme, the mother is seen saying that she doesn’t think she should get any more money as the cash she gets buys food and pays the rent but doesn’t extend to luxuries. The narrator didn’t say anything at this point but the camera cleverly panned round to show one of the children sitting playing on an iPad.
There was a separate family on the programme that had so many children that the local council had knocked through into the vacant property next door so that there was sufficient room for the family to live in. The Dad said that he had received hate mail and threats.
Nowhere on the show did it say why any of the people featured didn’t have a job nor did it say if they had tried to get one or indeed ever had one. It did show one dad riding his mobility scooter which he was given due to his ill health. Nowhere did the producers offer any alternatives or solutions; choosing instead to sensationalise and mislead the viewers into believing this is normal. It didn’t give any statistics such as how many families have more than the morally acceptable 2.4 children either.

There was another programme on BBC2 the same night called Police under pressure. This show featured two nearby estates in Sheffield, one which has anti-social behaviour issues and one which has a lot of racial tension. Parson Cross, one of the city’s biggest housing estates, has been the subject of a section 30 order, meaning curfews are in place to stop unruly kids roaming the streets at night, terrorising local residents and businesses. The order has now finished and Police officers are focusing their attention and limited man power on the Page Hall estate, which has had a large number of Romany’s move onto the predominantly Pakistani community. The two groups are at disharmony for several reasons, one of which is the Pakistani resident’s objection to their culture and practice of congregating on the street in large groups. The camera crews interviewed community leaders and Pakistani residents voicing their views, as well as Police officers voicing their concerns that some of the trouble may be racially motivated.

I doubt the programme did much to ease tensions in the area. It briefly glossed over the fact that the Police’s hands are tied by outdated and pointless rules as well as being grossly under manned, due to the government cuts to the force.

It stated that one female officer had been assaulted by a youth on the Parson Cross estate, but failed to offer any explanation as to why the youths had nothing better to do in the evenings.
Why do these shows insist on highlighting the problems and offer no suggestion of a resolution to them? They continue to paint a distorted picture of life in Britain, leading the ignorant viewer to conclude that council estates in Northern cities are awash with feral kids running riot, abusing the authorities at the cost of the hard working tax payer. It is simply not representative of the majority of estates up and down the country. True, there are families like those portrayed on the shows. There are people in this country who are third generation never been employed’s. there are even some people who just knock out children in order to gain child benefit and a home.

 

What does that say about the benefits system and the housing system? Surely if there were sufficient houses built at affordable prices then this would reduce the effects. Like-wise, the very fact that generations of households have never known paid employment is not a reflection of those families but a reflection of the failures of successive governments to address the problem.  

Barely any of our elected members of parliament and none of the current Government is working class. Very few of them have had a job outside of politics. A lot of them are millionaires. I’m not suggesting that this excludes them from having an opinion but it does inhibit their ability to have an educated one. Even the Labour party, the party of the workers, is made up almost entirely of privately educated career politicians- mainly males that have little actual hands on knowledge of council estates.

One simple solution would perhaps be to ask the electorates opinion, rather than passing judgement on it. I have said to several local politicians that no one from any of the main parties have knocked on my door for my views. All of them have denied this accusation.

The conclusion I draw from this is that they come during the day, assuming that as I live on a council estate, I will not have a job. I do.

The main party’s trip over themselves to fight the marginal and the influential seats, but take for granted the vote of people like me. Their assumptions have been instrumental in the rise in popularity of parties like UKIP. In turn the success of UKIP in places like Rotherham opens the doors to even less savoury groups like the EDL and the BNP, who have been travelling around council estates in a mini bus adorned with party propaganda.

Labour leader Ed Miliband plans to stop benefits for young people if he elected to Downing Street next year. While this will no doubt pander to Daily Mail reading, channel 5 watching middle England, but will do little to halt the radicalisation of young people who feel abandoned by politicians and journalists alike. They have no voice, no future, and no respect so what choices do they have? Meanwhile poverty will drive others into crime and further cuts to Police services, not to mention the dwindling respect the force enjoys these days after a sustained attack on them by politicians and news-papers, could see many inner city estates become no go zones.

Our flagship news station the beloved and trusted BBC is quickly becoming the most one sided, biased, censored version of the news available. It refuses to report any demonstrations such as the occupation in London this week end by disabled people. I am not saying I always agree with the methods of these protestors, but surely it is news worthy. Instead the BBC website is dominated by the World cup, which we are no longer involved in and Middle East conflict that we are not yet involved in.

My suggestion is that politicians ask real people what they think and that television producers put out real life documentaries that actually represent real life. It would also help if the press reported news instead of inventing it.

Instead of claiming their utterly rubbish programmes are lifting the lid on life on benefits, they should show random people from a cross section of society and allow its viewers to make an informed decision, rather than a right wing propaganda view.

 

 

 

        The Greatest Show on Earth.

 

If you hadn’t noticed, tomorrow sees the start of the 2014 Fifa world Cup. The anticipation is growing with fans and players alike, wondering if like most people who will read this, we might see our country win the trophy for the first time in our life. Not since 1966 have England won the cup when we defeated arch rivals Germany on home soil. Every year since I have followed the game, the media have built up our chances, convincing even the most realistic of fans, that maybe- just maybe, this could be our year. This year however, seems different. No one gives us a chance this year.

 The expectations of the world are rested on the 22 year old shoulders of Brazilian forward, Neymar.

What is certain, is that for a generation of young fans this will be tournament they will remember forever.

I was too young to appreciate the ’78 competition when Mario Kempes inspired Argentina to victory. Four years later in the summer of 1982 I was an 11 year old football fanatic (and of course expert), that ate, slept lived and breathed Spain ’82. Like many football fans I remember fondly my first taste of world cup magic.

With my Panini sticker book at hand I knew the players of every country in the world, virtually and consumed every shred of gossip, fact and statistic.

Italy’s Paulo Rossi dominated the headlines before the start of the tournament, due to his inclusion in the squad, despite serving two year ban for a betting scandal, which he denied, in 1980. He was initially disqualified for three years, but this was later cut to two allowing his return just in time for the call up even though critics understandably questioned his fitness and sharpness.

In the opening three matches he did little to disprove this being described by one critic as being like a ghost aimlessly wandering the field.

In the round robin against reigning champions Argentina and the strongly fancied Brazilians, Rossi came to life. In the Brazil game he scored a hatrick and went on to win the golden boot and help Italy win the title against Germany.

The tournament for me though was most memorable for silky skills of the Brazilian’s Zico and Eder, and the captain Socrates, according to folk law, a chain smoking hard drinking doctor, who sadly died recently.

My first taste of World cup football left me in awe of players like German, Karl Heinz Rummenigge, French legend, Michel Platini and Norman Whiteside playing for Northern Ireland. Ireland won the hearts of the nation by winning their group, beating hosts Spain on the way.

Four years later, the 13^th Fifa World Cup would be etched in the memory for different reasons.

Mexico ’86 was dominated by the infamous “hand of God” incident that sent England crashing out at the hands of eventual champions, Argentina, or more precisely, the hand of Argentina captain, Diego Maradona, somehow out-jumping keeper Peter Shilton to fist the ball into the net. He followed it up of course with a sublime piece of skill, running from the halfway line before slotting past the hapless Shilton.

Italia ’90 was the lowest scoring tournament in history, averaging just 2.21 goals per game. It was also one of the dirtiest, with a then record 16 red cards shown including one in the final.

For many, the highlight of the tournament was the goal celebrations of Cameroon veteran Roger Milla, who claimed to be 38 but some reports at the time put him nearer 45.  Millar came out retirement for the tournament, at the request of his country’s President, Paul Biya. The tournament was predictably won by West Germany, in their last cup before reunification later that year. England managed to win some silverware though taking the fair play award following Paul Gascoigne’s infamous tears.

1994 saw USA host the world cup. A relatively new Nation to the game the proceedings including much of the razzmatazz one might expect in America. Diana Ross featured in the opening ceremony, missing a penalty before the net felt in half. The tournament was marred by the murder of Columbian player Andres Escobar, allegedly shot dead by a hit men after he missed a penalty.

Argentina captain, Maradona was sent home in disgrace after failing a drugs test. England, under Graham Taylor, failed to qualify.

1998 World Cup was won by hosts France, beating Brazil 3-0 in the final. A strong Brazilian team, featuring the brilliant Ronaldo, were rocked shortly before the game by their star man having a seizure. He managed to get out onto the field but was largely ineffective and the French, dominated by players from Arsenal and Chelsea won easily.

2002 saw the competition held in Korea and Japan. Brazil again won the tournament which saw Ireland captain Roy Keen stealing the headlines, being sent home after telling manager Mick McCarthy to “stick your world cup up your bollocks”.

Four years on and 2006 saw Germany host the competition. Italy ran out winners beating France in the final. French legend Zinedine Zidane was amazingly sent off during the game for a head-butt which was recently voted in one poll as the 4^th most iconic world cup moment ever. I missed much of this tournament as I was in Turkey celebrating my honeymoon, but did manage to witness a Joe Cole wonder goal for England in a Turkish bar.

A rampant Spain side won the 2010 competition in South Africa. Some consider the Spanish team to be one of the best ever and featured several players who may well play a big part in this year’s tournament.

England played a supporting role providing referee Howard Webb for the game.

The brilliant Spaniards will be strongly fancied this year by many, with some believing only the Brazilians can stop them. Neymar da Silva Santos Junior, or just Neymar as he is known could follow in the footsteps of his fellow countryman Pele. The Barcelona player has the hopes of the host nation resting on him, hoping that he lights up the tournament and doesn’t fizzle out like Ronaldo did.

I think he will justify the hype and blow away the opposition, making this one of the most exciting competitions in years. Brazil, I believe will be victorious in front of their home fans despite the strength of the Spanish and the youth of the English. Steven Gerrard will captain England to a relatively successful campaign I feel, surpassing the expectations of the doubting press. The young talent on show such as Liverpool’s Raheem Sterling and Everton’s Ross Barkley and the industrious Arsenal star Jack Wiltshire.  

So sit back and enjoy the show, let’s hope a generation of new fans can watch a first world cup to remember.  

 

  

 

 

 

Veteran BBC Radio Devon presenter, David Lowe was sacked recently for playing a track from 1932 which included in its lyrics the word Nigger. The Sun has got its hat on had the word removed from later versions of the popular song. Mr Lowe, 68 a presenter with the station for 14 years, apologised and said he had no idea the offensive lyrics appeared on that version of the song, but was dismissed.

In contrast, Top Gear present Jeremy Clarkson caused outrage when a pre-recorded show that he asked not to be aired, appeared to include the same offensive word. The clip showed Clarkson repeating the children’s rhyme eeny meanie minie moe. The presented covered his mouth and mumbled a barely audible n-word. Clarkson apologised publicly and was punished with an alleged £12million, three year contract.

Both stories were widely reported in most news-papers and on TV. Almost all of the reports included the phrase N-word but none of the reports used the actual word.

Were they right to not use the word Nigger because its racial implications are so vile and full of hatred that it is deeply offensive and should never be read or heard, or is political correctness gone mad?

There certainly seems to be a belief among some that having an opinion that could be considered by some offensive is absolutely outlawed. While talking to my elderly neighbour recently, she commented on a “coloured” child, and added innocently “that’s been polite, isn’t it- they don’t like being called black these days do they”.  Another neighbour of mine, who lives with and has children with a black Jamaican man was also there and laughed at the confusion the old lady.

We politely corrected her and she went on to ask why then are we not allowed to say black board in schools.

The conversation, which could have come from a 1970’s sit com, was a good example of people being so confused in their fear of offending it hard to know for sure whether one is actually racist or meaning to cause offence or simply ignorant or misinformed. I often hear people at work saying “you can’t say that”.

One could argue also that the English language evolves so much that many once grossly offensive words and phrases are now used as something completely different. Where young people use words like sick and bad when they mean good, is also the case that they use insults as terms of endearment. Sadly I suspect this; to a degree is the case.

A report by channel 4 today revealed that a third of British people consider themselves to either very or a little prejudiced against people from other races.

The Nation centre of social research (NatCen) said that 30% of over 2000 people revealed the disturbing statistic heralded a return to previous levels before an all-time low in 2001 of 25%. NatCen said that racial prejudice has been steadily increasing since the start of the decade.

While the headline of the survey says we are getting less tolerant as a society, the statistics actual show just 3% considered themselves very racist with 27% describing themselves as slightly racist. This from a group of little more than 2000 people, it is impossible to know whether this is representative of the whole of Britain or even what ethnic background the people who answered the survey were from.

Is there a rise or have people just got so entangled in the political correctness web that they are now pre trained to hide any prejudice they may feel. I suspect even the 3% who said they were very racist, would not have readily admitted this if they were to be named or filmed. Anonymity allows ignorance and intolerance to fester and spread underground like proverbial mushrooms.

The tide though seems to be changing, with many people growing frustrated and angry at the lack of debate and lack of representation from political parties. UKIP’s surge in popularity is largely down to angry people seeing angry politicians openly saying they are angry at the number of foreigners flooding our country, steeling our houses and taking our jobs. Of course many of these accusations are absolute nonsense, but because the political elite have been scared to discuss immigration for years, these believers, like my neighbour, are misinformed. The reluctance of Labour to engage in the debate is harmful because the perceived successes of UKIP in areas such as Rotherham and Sunderland opens the door to even more dangerous and extremist groups like the EDL or  BNP. The mainstream parties must put the facts out there for people to make an informed decision before people make a misinformed one and plunge this country into self-destruction.

Unfortunately, Islamaphobia is not uncommon in our country and there are people who are “openly” racist. I use the term openly loosely of course because usually it done with cowardice, hidden behind a shield of anonymity on social networking sites such as Facebook and twitter. Last night I saw some appalling comments aimed at ex-footballer Stan Colleymore, with one tweet saying I will bring up my children to hate blacks you black c@#t. I seriously doubt that the author of those comments would have the bottle to say such things without the armour of twitter to protect him or to Mr Collymore’s face. I do not think however that the moron who wrote the comments should be kept underground and censored. I’m not sufficiently educated to know the origins of the quote but I believe a French politician has been attributed as saying “I absolutely disagree with your opinion but will defend to the death your right to voice it” or words to that effect.

Politicians should not scare monger or downright lie about the consequences of staying in the European Union. They should all engage in the debate and all should agree to a referendum on Europe. Let the people decide in a vote and put the argument to bed once and for all, then we can set about educating the ignorant and the hate filled. What is certain is that while ever the racists, the bigots, the sexists and the homophobes are not allowed to voice their opinions, we cannot begin to confront them and change their beliefs.

So what if they are innocent:

Operation Yewtree is an enquiry into historical sexual abuse allegations involving celebrities. It was launched in 2012 following the Jimmy Savile case.

Today the Crown prosecution service announced that comedian Freddie Starr would not face prosecution after first being questioned in November 2012.

Mr Starr’s lawyers have claimed his arrest was a “flagrant breech” of his human rights due to the length of time it took to reach the decision.

Prosecutors finally dropped the charges due to insufficient evidence in allegations made by 13 people, despite there being enough evidence in a 14^th case for a likely successful prosecution, which the CPS say is not in the public interest. The CPS have faced criticism from some who claim that the arrests of famous celebrities including comedian Jim Davidson, DJ Dave Lee Travis, entertainer Jimmy Tarbuck and Artist Rolf Harris are little more than a witch hunt.

Travis and Harris are yet to face the jury while Davidson was cleared of all charges against him in January before winning Celebrity Big Brother. Veteran comic Tarbuck was also released without charge. Other famous names have faced long trials including Coronation Street favourite William Roach, before being found innocent. There have been calls for suspects to retain their anonymity until convicted as a result of these cases.

So how do the police and the CPS decide what is in the public interest and which leads to simply ignore? They certainly face some tough decisions. It has been said that by suggesting compensation may be available to victims jeopardises the operation as “gold diggers” may tempted to invent assaults. Others claim that by bringing these high profile cases before the judge will encourage genuine victims to come forward.

I think the message has to be loud and clear that people in the privileged circle of show business are not above the law, and any credible allegation will be followed up, and furthermore, anyone found guilty must feel the full weight of the justice system.

Disgraced ex- it’s a knock out sports commentator Stuart Hall is accused of 15 rapes and 5 indecent assaults. He was jailed last year for just 15 months, later extended to 30 month’s for attacks on girls aged as young as 9 years old. He faces a catalogue of further allegations.

PR guru Max Clifford became the first famous name to be jailed last week, after being found guilty of a string of assaults on girls and young women. He was sentenced to eight years.  

The guilt of celebrities abusing not only females but the position of trust fame gives them seems somehow more disgusting than members of the public being charged. They enjoy the trapping and wealth that their position brings and so the deceit and betrayal feels more personal to those who admired them. The fact is that they should be treated exactly the same as any other common criminal accused of similar charges and when found guilty should face the same punishment.

In defence of the actions of these fallen celeb’s people have said that we should bare in mind that culture has changed and things were acceptable in those days. What? Absolute nonsense! In celebrity circles and TV studios it may have been the norm to grope children and young women but even celebrities should know the difference between right and wrong. Jimmy Savile conned the world for decades hiding his filthy secrets behind the public persona he so carefully shaped, even being knighted. The lesson we must learn is that being a famous person does not guarantee decency.

All that said, there is an argument that people should be protected somewhat against malicious accusations.

In 2003 Stars in their eyes host Mathew Kelly was arrested over allegations of child sex abuse. He was eventually cleared but not before losing his lucrative job on prime time TV.

Peter Adamson, who played Len Fairclough in Coronation Street was arrested in 1983, accused of molesting two girls in a public swimming pool. His career was ruined despite him being cleared of the charges and he eventually died a penniless alcoholic in 2002. Soccer manager Dave Jones was suspended by his club Southampton after being accused of sexual assault. He also was cleared of the charges. There is a crude but true saying up north – shit sticks. Many people still remember Len Fairclough being accused of sexual assault with more than a few wrongly thinking he was actually convicted. Sadly, this often the case and the life and career of one can be destroyed by such allegations. The media has a responsibility to remember this when slapping headlines about the accused on their front pages. The police and the CPS have a moral responsibility to not leak these arrests to the press. In some cases the press have been present as the wrongly accused man has been taken away.

One can only imagine how it must feel to be wrongly accused of such awful crimes. Thankfully, I can only imagine how it must feel to be a victim of such crimes and this too should be considered. The more failed prosecutions hit the news the greater chance there is of genuine victims thinking it is pointless publicly reliving the nightmare and putting themselves through the scrutiny.

I suspect that considering all I have said that Operation Yewtree should continue to investigate the accusations, but should exercise a little integrity when deciding who to arrest and whether it is in public interest for a news crew to be present when they reach that decision.

In 1985 Dorothy Cherry Groce was shot by police officers who were searching for her son.  The shooting left her paralysed from the chest down by the bullet and following claims of institutionalised racism within the force, led to the infamous Brixton riots.

Groce was left in a wheelchair for the rest of her life until she died in 2011 at the age of 63.

Pathologists confirmed there was a link to the ’85 shooting and the medical condition which led to her death, triggering an inquest.
The hearing opens in June but the family of Cherry Groce are unable to afford a lawyer to represent them. A 130,000 signature strong petition has been handed to David Cameron, urging the PM to acknowledge that the case is a matter of public interest and one of the grounds for which legal aid can be granted.

An article in the New Statesman in January this year claimed that some of the most vulnerable people in society, including young people in care, the homeless and migrants are being forces to represent them-selves following the Tory government’s cuts to legal aid.

In April 2013 the government announced changes to legal system aimed at cutting £320million from the budget in a year. Despite being defeated 14 times the bill was eventually passed, removing legal aid from a range of housing and benefit cases as well as many immigration cases. The changes were so widely criticised that even Barristers and Solicitors have staged a series of protests.

Nigel Evans, former Deputy Speaker and Tory MP was recently cleared of serious sexual assault charges. Following the court case Mr Evans has said the trial cost him £130,000 which he claims has used his entire life savings. Evans who was paid an additional £30,000 per annum for being deputy speaker has said he will fight for those wrongly accused of crimes to have their legal fees paid. This is all very well and alright for those that have the means to raise the 100s of thousands of pounds needed to defend them- selves in the first place. It highlights once again the huge gulf between the haves and the have not’s, that is growing under the Tories. Their ideological policies including the hated bedroom tax and benefits cuts and attempted attacks on employment law are leaving those at the bottom of the pay ladder cut off, isolated and even more vulnerable than ever before. 

The legal profession has always been dominated by middle class, well educated, middle aged white men but now it seems that they are the only people who can afford to use it too.