1400 children sexually exploited in UK town Rotherham: report

[JockPieandBeans]

Saying that opportunity was the main criteria for picking victims, rather then religious affiliation may be correct.

Sorry Morch.

When an atrocity of this scale is carried out over the course of years and at least 1400 victims. That cannot be construed as opportunist. that comes under the category of systematic, targeted abuse.

As well as Rotherham. You can add, Bristol, Rochdale, Derby, Oldham and Bradford.

There is nothing opportunist about it. There is 1 common denominator in all these cases.

Dewsbury, Batley

Mosha,

I do hope I have not caused you offence by omitting the atrocities that were also carried out in Batley and Dewsbury.

It is now getting to the stage that there is that many of these atrocities being carried out, it gets hard to remember them all.

[H1w4yR1da]

The question I am asking is why were these young girls and boys (in one case one offender had sexually assaulted 70 boys) so vunerable to abuse; what were the contributing factors? Sure failure of duty of care by a number of government agencies was a real issue, but what about their own social / family environment. There appears to have been a breakdown in the social / family fabric of many in the non Muslim community in the areas where the offences occured e.g. many children in care; why?

No.

All you're doing is trying take the blame off the Muslim child rapists and place it onto the victims and their families.

Similar to local police arresting the fathers of the abused instead of their rapists.

Is exactly your type of thinking that was used by the local authorities in Rotherham which enabled these crimes to go unreported and unpunished for do long.

[jacky54]

Lies are not facts. How can anyone take you seriously, you admit to never having read the Koran, but then pose as an expert on Islam and it's wicked history.

So the child marriage figures I posted previously, which are sourced from UNICEF, are lies?

This Hindu, Indian girl is lying?

I am certain that I have read as much of the Koran as you; however all my assertions about what it says have come via scholars who have not only read it but studied it carefully.

Yours come from Islamaphobic websites who cherry pick and edit to suit their agenda.

I could do the same with the Bible were I so inclined; but as I do not wish to demonises a whole religion due to the actions of a minority who are perverts I wont.

You carry on denying the truth.

JPB, in every country where child marriages occur, with the possible exception of Saudi Arabia, they are illegal. Yet, as the figures show, this abomination does not only happen in Muslim countries.

You and your mates can deny that and say the figures are lies as much as you like; but it wont change the facts.

Come on man you can do better than this surely? How old is the girl in the film, it does not seem to say but looks like a teenager and certainly not 9 or 10 which is often the age in some Muslim, countries, following the prophet's example of course. We are not talking about marriage to girls of this age, but to pre pubescent children.

I don't see how you can be certain you have read as much of the koran as I have as you stated clearly before that you have not read it all, just parts of it, sounds like 'cherry picking' to me. I have read it three times since 1974 and t does not get any better!

[7by7]

The method of all these vile creatures is essentially the same. They target children that are the most vulnerable and available to them. Whether they be grooming gangs, paedophile rings workers in children homes or individuals. Indeed, most abusers are known to the victim and their family; even a family member!

What is the biggest myth around child sexual abuse

Very often the TV, radio and newspaper cover stories about children who are abused, abducted and even murdered, usually by strangers but it is important to know that these are not typical crimes. Sexual abusers are more likely to be people we know, and could well be people we care about; after all more than 8 out of 10 children who are sexually abused know their abuser. They are family members or friends, neighbours or babysitters – many hold responsible positions in society. Some will seek out employment which brings them into contact with children, some will hold positions of trust which can help to convince other adults that they are beyond reproach, making it hard for adults to raise their concerns.

Is child grooming and sexual abuse a race issue?

The idea that these are criminals striking when the opportunity arises, regardless of race, is given credence by the leader of the grooming gang in Rochdale. Shabir Ahmed was jailed for attacking a young Asian female as well as young white females. His case suggests opportunity, not race, was the major factor in whom he attacked.

From the NSPCC

Gender, age and ethnicity of perpetrators

The Children's Commissioner's study found that:
72% of abusers were male
10% of abusers were female
in 18% of cases gender wasn't disclosed (Berelowitz et al, 2012).

The evidence indicated that the age range of abusers was from 12 to 75 years.

Where ethnic group was recorded, the majority of perpetrators were White and the second largest group were Asian.

[7by7]

<snip>

How old is the girl in the film, it does not seem to say but looks like a teenager and certainly not 9 or 10 which is often the age in some Muslim, countries, following the prophet's example of course. We are not talking about marriage to girls of this age, but to pre pubescent children.

She is one girl, married in year 9, in year 10 when she made the film. Which would have put her at 12 or 13 when she married. OK in your view?

Also, children in India, the country with the highest rate of child marriages in the world, are married at younger ages.

But you dismiss that as lies!

I have read it three times since 1974

Really? All of it? You really must like it!

Of course, I wont fall back on your oft used tactic of calling everything which disproves your assertions lies.

[JockPieandBeans]

The idea that these are criminals striking when the opportunity arises, regardless of race, is given credence by the leader of the grooming gang in Rochdale. Shabir Ahmed was jailed for attacking a young Asian female as well as young white females. His case suggests opportunity, not race, was the major factor in whom he attacked.

Do not try and compare 1 Asian female against a backdrop of AT LEAST 1400 white victims.

The Children's Commissioner's study found that:

72% of abusers were male

10% of abusers were female

in 18% of cases gender wasn't disclosed (Berelowitz et al, 2012).

The evidence indicated that the age range of abusers was from 12 to 75 years.

Where ethnic group was recorded, the majority of perpetrators were White and the second largest group were Asian.

On individual cases, I would expect the majority of perpetrators to be white. After all, the UK is still, at this time a predominantly White Christian Country.

Wonder why you did not copy the figures. Too close for your liking ?

What about grooming gangs ? Asians, Pakistani in particular are in a league of their own.

[7by7]

I copied exactly what is on the NSPCC page.

Previously posted figures show that the majority of grooming gangs are exclusively white; although Asians are disproportionately represented.

The reasons for this have been gone over at length, but dismissed as lies by certain posters.

But, as you now seem to admit, the majority of child abusers in the UK are white.

How does that fit in with your oft repeated claim that the men in Rochdale and other cases abused children because they are Muslims of Pakistani origin?

Are you now saying that white abusers do so because they are Christians of British origin?

Both assertions are, of course, as ridiculous as each other.

[JockPieandBeans]

She is one girl, married in year 9, in year 10 when she made the film. Which would have put her at 12 or 13 when she married. OK in your view?

Also, children in India, the country with the highest rate of child marriages in the world, are married at younger ages.

But you dismiss that as lies!

India is 80% Hindu.

I do not see or hear of gangs of Indian Hindu's carrying out atrocities in the UK. So why mention Indians ? Nothing more than a diversion of course.

It is notable that you decided to ignore the information provided about Pakistan. Which totally blew apart your assertions about legal age limits etc.

I do see or hear about gangs of Pakistani Muslims carrying out atrocities in the UK. Which is probably why you decided to ignore, deflect and deny.

Edited December 10, 2014 by JockPieandBeans

[JockPieandBeans]

50% Asian offenders. It would be interesting to know how much of that % is Muslim.

21% were White. There are white Muslims in the UK. I wonder what %, if any, were Muslim ?

17% were Mixed. What % of this group, if any, were Muslim ?

8% were Black. There are Black Muslims in the UK. What % of this group, if any, were Muslim ?

4% were Arabs. Were they all Muslim ?

Have another read Mohammed. The stats for gang abuse.

In any country in the world. the indigenous population will be the largest group when it comes to individuals who commit rape.

The UK is bucking the trend. Asians are only just behind the indigenous population. Which is some going considering that Asians are only 12% of the population.

[7by7]

She is one girl, married in year 9, in year 10 when she made the film. Which would have put her at 12 or 13 when she married. OK in your view?

Also, children in India, the country with the highest rate of child marriages in the world, are married at younger ages.

But you dismiss that as lies!

India is 80% Sikh.

I do not see or hear of gangs of Indian Sikhs carrying out atrocities in the UK. So why mention Indians ? Nothing more than a diversion of course.

It is notable that you decided to ignore the information provided about Pakistan. Which totally blew apart your assertions about legal age limits etc.

I do see or hear about gangs of Pakistani Muslims carrying out atrocities in the UK. Which is probably why you decided to ignore, deflect and deny.

Dear, oh dear.

India is 80.5% Hindu! Sikhs are just 1.9% of the population. (Source)

I did deal with information about illegal child marriages in Pakistan; that you choose to ignore that is your problem, not mine.

I have never ignored, deflected or denied that there are gangs of Pakistani Muslims carrying out child abuse in the UK. You oft fall back on this when you have no argument; so show me one single post where I have done so.

Grooming gangs: what we know about the perpetrators and victims

It found that 36% of perpetrators of gang or group related sexual violence were white, 27% were asian, and 16% were of an undisclosed ethnicity.

0/10; must try harder.

Engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent is all to easy and does become tedious after a while, so I'll leave you to play with yourself for now.

[jacky54]

I have read it three times since 1974

Really? All of it? You really must like it!

Of course, I wont fall back on your oft used tactic of calling everything which disproves your assertions lies.

Well it's not a lie to repeat that you have not read the Koran, so you are a pretty unarmed opponent yourself. No matter how much you twist, distort, deflect and point the finger elsewhere we are talking about the mass abuse of mainly white children by Muslim men. Why? clearly because the rapes committed against children and unbelievers by the prophet legitimised rape and paedophilia in the minds of these men. Why have there been no Sikh, Hindu or Chinese gangs raping and torturing 1400 kids in the UK? Must have been the odd one or two but it's the Muslims that are the real problem here and the problem is not going to be tackled by describing them as Asians, blaming the cops and social workers and ignoring the underlying beliefs that motivated them, and still does.

Edited December 10, 2014 by jacky54

[JockPieandBeans]

Quote

Intazar Medhi, a lawyer based in Lahore, tells IPS that the Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929 – which prohibits girls under the age of 16 and boys under the age of 18 from being legally wed – is one of the least invoked laws in the country.

Quote

For instance, he tells IPS, girls in rural areas are often given in marriage in order to settle disputes, or debts. Some are even ‘promised’ to a rival before they are born, making them destined to a life of servitude for their husband’s family.

How nice. However, have the audacity to fall in love with the wrong person and its stoned to death.

Quote

When the Sindh government announced its plans to extend the marriage age, CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Sherani denounced the move as an effort to “please the international community [by going] against Islamic teachings and practices.”

Seems like another Mohammed likes them young.

Quote

Experts say Pakistan has the highest school dropout rate in the world, with 35,000 pupils leaving primary education every single year, largely as a result of early marriages.

And thats just the ones that actually get to go to school.

http://www.ipsnews.n...hild-marriages/

" Pakistan has almost 5.5 million children that are out of school, the second highest number in the world only after Nigeria. Pakistan also has the highest number of illiterate adults in the world, after India and China "

http://tribune.com.p...-unesco-report/

Which member of this forum was shouting loud about the legal age for marriage in Pakistan ?

Yet another assertion blown clean out the water.

The hits just keep on coming.

Read the 1st article in its entirety. It spells out exactly what Pakistani Muslims think about females. I have a feeling you already know that Mohammed.

[Morch]

I copied exactly what is on the NSPCC page.

Previously posted figures show that the majority of grooming gangs are exclusively white; although Asians are disproportionately represented.

The reasons for this have been gone over at length, but dismissed as lies by certain posters.

But, as you now seem to admit, the majority of child abusers in the UK are white.

How does that fit in with your oft repeated claim that the men in Rochdale and other cases abused children because they are Muslims of Pakistani origin?

Are you now saying that white abusers do so because they are Christians of British origin?

Both assertions are, of course, as ridiculous as each other.

The majority of grooming gangs, pedophiles, rapists and other criminals being White in a country which is predominantly White is hardly surprising. The issue is more with the runner ups. Some attempts to explain this over-representation were suggested - not accepting them as gospel does not equate with them being dismissed as lies. They could have simply been unconvincing, lacking or just not plausible in the face of this

disparity.

[wilcopops]

I copied exactly what is on the NSPCC page.

Previously posted figures show that the majority of grooming gangs are exclusively white; although Asians are disproportionately represented.

The reasons for this have been gone over at length, but dismissed as lies by certain posters.

But, as you now seem to admit, the majority of child abusers in the UK are white.

How does that fit in with your oft repeated claim that the men in Rochdale and other cases abused children because they are Muslims of Pakistani origin?

Are you now saying that white abusers do so because they are Christians of British origin?

Both assertions are, of course, as ridiculous as each other.

The majority of grooming gangs, pedophiles, rapists and other criminals being White in a country which is predominantly White is hardly surprising. The issue is more with the runner ups. Some attempts to explain this over-representation were suggested - not accepting them as gospel does not equate with them being dismissed as lies. They could have simply been unconvincing, lacking or just not plausible in the face of this

disparity.

Over representation? Only if you make the criteria.

Edited December 12, 2014 by wilcopops

[Morch]

I copied exactly what is on the NSPCC page.

Previously posted figures show that the majority of grooming gangs are exclusively white; although Asians are disproportionately represented.

The reasons for this have been gone over at length, but dismissed as lies by certain posters.

But, as you now seem to admit, the majority of child abusers in the UK are white.

How does that fit in with your oft repeated claim that the men in Rochdale and other cases abused children because they are Muslims of Pakistani origin?

Are you now saying that white abusers do so because they are Christians of British origin?

Both assertions are, of course, as ridiculous as each other.

The majority of grooming gangs, pedophiles, rapists and other criminals being White in a country which is predominantly White is hardly surprising. The issue is more with the runner ups. Some attempts to explain this over-representation were suggested - not accepting them as gospel does not equate with them being dismissed as lies. They could have simply been unconvincing, lacking or just not plausible in the face of this

disparity.

Over representation? Only if you make the criteria.

There were figured cited on previous posts regarding ethnicity and grooming gangs, there were similar figures cited for the relative numbers of said ethnic groups in the overall population. Hence over-representation. So far, at least on this topic, it does not seem that the figures themselves were much contested.

[JockPieandBeans]

Probably does not fall under the category of child abuse. Although her mental age must be called into question.

Mohammed Rafiq, 80, guilty of acid revenge attack on teenage ex

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-30448641

It does highlight another worrying trend that has been imported from a certain region of Asia, that is on the increase.

Experts say they believe many of the cases involving acid are linked to Asian communities, with women attacked by their husbands and punished for refusing forced marriages, while men were attacked during disputes over dowries.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10238174/Number-of-UK-attacks-involving-acid-and-other-corrosive-substances-soars.html

1. Women attacked by their husbands.

2. Refusing forced marriage.

3. Disputes over dowries.

Truly amazing.

[Jay Sata]

The problem with some people who want to defend the Pakistani community and indeed those supporting India,Banglashe etc is they have never been there.

It is all well and good to sit in front of a tv and computer in the UK and get an impression of the subcontinent but until you have spent some time there you might as well be discussing nuclear physics from reading Wiki.

The culture in some communities is light years away from what we in the west regard as normal.

Speaking from my time there I would suggest some of the defenders of the culprits in this case spend a week or two visiting Pakistan and especially the poor country regions from where a lot of UK migrants have come from.

My experience of Pakistani men is they regard women as subservient.

Modern western women are in some sectors of the Pakistani male community regarded as Kaffirs or non believers and as such fair game.

Hence the judges remarks in his summing up.

I suggest those who are trying to suggest this Rotherham case is anything other than uneducated Pakistani Muslim men exploiting naive vulnerable white girls should get a ticket to Islamabad or Karachi and spend a few weeks discovering the truth.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Jay Sata

[jacky54]

Or spend a few weeks in Rotherham, Luton or Leicester and save the airfare!

[H1w4yR1da]

I've noticed the resident Islamic apologists are trying to deflect the importance of Islam and race in these crimes by disgracefully placing the onus on the victims and families.

Just as happened on the 'Poppy Seller Attacked' thread which was derailed by Islamists insisting on bringing up the irrelevant issue of the number of Muslims who died fighting for the British Army, the end result being the thread is locked by mods.

Personally I believe this is the end result Islamists here would like for the numerous threads on TV which discuss Islamic atrocities.

[7by7]

The above post is, unsurprisingly, a complete distortion of what has been said.

But it is the usual tactic of those here whose arguments rely purely on prejudice and who ignore all facts which conflict with that prejudice.

This topic long ago became a forum for the prejudiced to demonise all Muslims for the crimes of a few.

It is noticeable that the vast majority of them live in Thailand; so I wonder how they would like the tables turned on them?

For example:

• Some Europeans in Thailand are sex tourists, therefore those posters here who live in Thailand are sex tourists.
• Or worse; some Europeans in Thailand are paedophiles looking for under age sex, therefore those posters here who live in Thailand are paedophiles looking for under age sex.

Those two statements are, of course, absolutely ridiculous; as ridiculous as blaming all Muslims for the crimes of these men.

But the blind haters wont see through their prejudice to acknowledge that; to them all Muslims are the same. So I stand by for some more accusations of being an apologist for child rapists, wife beaters, etc. etc.

BTW, there is absolutely no evidence to show what religion, if any, the man who attacked the poppy seller was. But that wont stop the prejudiced from making their assumptions.

[Morch]

The above post is, unsurprisingly, a complete distortion of what has been said.

But it is the usual tactic of those here whose arguments rely purely on prejudice and who ignore all facts which conflict with that prejudice.

This topic long ago became a forum for the prejudiced to demonise all Muslims for the crimes of a few.

It is noticeable that the vast majority of them live in Thailand; so I wonder how they would like the tables turned on them?

For example:

• Some Europeans in Thailand are sex tourists, therefore those posters here who live in Thailand are sex tourists.
• Or worse; some Europeans in Thailand are paedophiles looking for under age sex, therefore those posters here who live in Thailand are paedophiles looking for under age sex.

Those two statements are, of course, absolutely ridiculous; as ridiculous as blaming all Muslims for the crimes of these men.

But the blind haters wont see through their prejudice to acknowledge that; to them all Muslims are the same. So I stand by for some more accusations of being an apologist for child rapists, wife beaters, etc. etc.

BTW, there is absolutely no evidence to show what religion, if any, the man who attacked the poppy seller was. But that wont stop the prejudiced from making their assumptions.

When it comes to these sort of crimes, are foreigner offenders in Thailand over-represented in the same way exhibited with reference to the current topic?

[jacky54]

The above post is, unsurprisingly, a complete distortion of what has been said.

But it is the usual tactic of those here whose arguments rely purely on prejudice and who ignore all facts which conflict with that prejudice.

This topic long ago became a forum for the prejudiced to demonise all Muslims for the crimes of a few.

This is a bit rich coming from the number one apologist, twister and ignorer of facts. Why do you still have to cling to the distortion, to put it mildly, that posters here are 'demonising Muslims', they are just as much victims of Islam as those they abused. You never ever comment on the crimes committed by the prophet that legitimise such abuse in the eyes of these criminals and are very fond of excusing the rape of 1400 children as the work of a 'few'. It may be the work of a few, but that does not make it any less evil or any less inspired by the fictional work of the Prophet and his followers.

Were these the attacks on poppy sellers you referred to?

Taking their marching orders from the Islamic State, Muslims in the UK have gone after military targets and symbols. In the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand

http://pamelageller.com/2014/11/muslim-poppy-jihad.html/

Lets see how will you spin this one, not real Muslims, a Christian did the same in 1959 or it's justified due to western acts in Muslim lands? or when all else fails, unreliable source

Edited December 13, 2014 by jacky54

[7by7]

The website you have linked to assumes, as you do, that because the attacker was described as 'black or Asian' that he must be Muslim!

Considering the biography of the founder of that organisation, it is hardly surprising she leaps to that conclusion without any evidence at all to back it up.

No reliable source has made that suggestion; not even the Daily Mail!

BTW, I have commented at length on what you describe as 'the crimes of the prophet' quoting Muslim scholars and historical records. You and others merely dismiss those comments as distortions, lies or excusing and apologising for the horrendous crimes committed by Muslims in Rotherham and elsewhere.

Yet again, you show that you have no real argument.

Yet again, your dismissal of the fact that the horrendous crime of child abuse is also committed by non Muslims shows that in reality you care nothing about the victims of this crime. You claim these men were motivated by the Koran and Islam for the crimes of these men; yet cannot find such motivation for non Muslims who commit it. You don't care when the abusers are not Muslim; you only care when they are.

The only conclusion that can logically be drawn is that you are using the suffering of these children to further your Islamaphobic agenda.

That, In my opinion, places you beneath contempt; just above the abusers themselves.

Edited December 13, 2014 by 7by7

[jacky54]

The website you have linked to assumes, as you do, that because the attacker was described as 'black or Asian' that he must be Muslim!

our Islamaphobic agenda.

That, In my opinion, places you beneath contempt; just above the abusers themselves.

Having been shown up as wrong yet again it's no surprise you have to stoop to personal abuse. Have you ever bothered to count up the likes you have on these Islamic related threads?, should tell you something about how others see you and what you post.

[7by7]

^^^^^^

It is you and your Islamaphobic source who have been shown to be wrong about the man who attacked the poppy seller. You have both made an assumption based upon your prejudice without any evidence to back that assumption up; a favourite and oft repeated tactic of you and those like you.

Another of your favourite tactics is to stoop to personal abuse when your arguments, such as they are, are shown to be built on prejudice rather than facts.

That this thread has now been taken over almost exclusively by you and those of your politics, it is hardly surprising that you have received more likes than I. Not that it's relevant; I doubt that my views would be much liked at a BNP or EDL meeting ether; whereas yours would be greeted by them with cheers!

Unless anyone has any constructive and reasoned comment to make, I will not be responding any further. Considering the type of person now inhabiting this topic, I don't see that happening.

Edited December 13, 2014 by 7by7

[H1w4yR1da]

BTW, there is absolutely no evidence to show what religion, if any, the man who attacked the poppy seller was. But that wont stop the prejudiced from making their assumptions.

Usual apologist BS!

And the assumptions are well-founded.

Especially after the awful behaviour by Muslims demonstrating during Remembrance Day commemorations, screaming obscenities during the moment of silence.

Also various war memorials vandalised with Islamic slogans and the burning of poppies by Islamic groups

All this leads one to think the attacker in that case was naturally a Muslim. Nothing prejudiced about it. Plain common sense.

[H1w4yR1da]

Unless anyone has any constructive and reasoned comment to make, I will not be responding any further.

Usual 'spit the dummy from the pram' BS we seem to read in many of your posts when things don't go your way. Edited December 13, 2014 by H1w4yR1da

[jacky54]

He'll be back, he once said he was leaving this 'cesspit of hate' but it only lasted for 20 minutes!

[JockPieandBeans]

"In Pakistan, love is a big sin. Centuries have passed, the world has made so much progress - men have reached the heavens. But our men are still following age-old customs and traditions from the dark ages," he explains.

It is these traditions and customs - which focus on denying women freedom - that have growing acceptance in Pakistan and are encouraged by hard-line religious scholars.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30400690

BTW, I have commented at length on what you describe as 'the crimes of the prophet' quoting Muslim scholars and historical records.

Just 1 example, I could post many more. Seems as though Pakistani religious scholars do not agree with your way of thinking.

[Jay Sata]

^^^^^^

It is you and your Islamaphobic source who have been shown to be wrong about the man who attacked the poppy seller. You have both made an assumption based upon your prejudice without any evidence to back that assumption up; a favourite and oft repeated tactic of you and those like you.

Another of your favourite tactics is to stoop to personal abuse when your arguments, such as they are, are shown to be built on prejudice rather than facts.

That this thread has now been taken over almost exclusively by you and those of your politics, it is hardly surprising that you have received more likes than I. Not that it's relevant; I doubt that my views would be much liked at a BNP or EDL meeting ether; whereas yours would be greeted by them with cheers!

Unless anyone has any constructive and reasoned comment to make, I will not be responding any further. Considering the type of person now inhabiting this topic, I don't see that happening.

Can I ask you a couple of questions 7by7.

Have you ever been to Pakistan?

Would you be happy for your daughter to be placed in a bin bag and be subservient to her husband who has a right to do whatever he wants to do?

Would you be happy to have a child from a broken home multi raped day by day as happened in Rotherham?

Did the judge make a big mistake pointing the finger to the obvious ?

Let me quote you this from the enquiry.....

Abuses described by the report included abduction, rape and sex trafficking of children.[5] The inquiry team found examples of "children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone".[4] The report further stated that "one child who was being prepared to give evidence received a text saying the perpetrator had her younger sister and the choice of what happened next was up to her. She withdrew her statements. At least two other families were terrorised by groups of perpetrators, sitting in cars outside the family home, smashing windows, making abusive and threatening phone calls. On some occasions child victims went back to perpetrators in the belief that this was the only way their parents and other children in the family would be safe. In the most extreme cases, no one in the family believed that the authorities could protect them."[2] The report highlighted the role of taxi drivers in the town in facilitating the abuse.[27]

While the majority of perpetrators were known to be Asian or of Pakistani heritage, several council staff described themselves as being nervous about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others, the report noted, "remembered clear direction from their managers" not to make such identification.[28] One Home Office researcher, attempting to raise concerns with senior police officers in 2002 over the level of abuse, was told not to do so again, and was subsequently suspended and sidelined.[29] The researcher told BBC Panorama that:

...she had been accused of being insensitive when she told one official that most of the perpetrators were from Rotherham's Pakistani community. A female colleague talked to her about the incident. "She said you must never refer to that again you must never refer to Asian men. "And her other response was to book me on a two-day ethnicity and diversity course to raise my awareness of ethnic issues."[14]

The report noted that the police showed lack of respect for the victims, who were deemed "undesirables".[29]

Edited December 13, 2014 by Jay Sata