Operation Pallial another massive cover-up by a discredited organisation the British Police who yet again protect Police Officers and ignore child rape and torture.

Pallial  mean Cloak and   Operation Pallial has lived up to its name by  concluding that the North Wales Police  are innocent of  assisting in a cover-up of child abuse in North Wales.   "No evidence of systemic or institutional misconduct by North Wales Police officers or staff in connection with these matters has been identified"  They write in their report Published on the 29th of April 2011.

The Operation Pallial team must have been very selective in who's testimony they took  because Justice Denied knows of a number of people who gave credible testimony to the opposite.

Everyone knows the North Wales police  were kingpins in the cover-up of chld abuse over decades and are now engaged in  the current cover-up.  Evidence has yet again gone missing, victims  and investigator silenced.  Whilst Operation Pallial has simply ignored any evidence and testemony that does not fit into its pre-ordained report.

Shame on all those who are involved in this latest cover-up.  Another cover-up not only  prevents victms from seeing justice done but allows child rape and torture to continue.


Full text can be found here http://www.north-wales.police.uk/pdf/PEnglishfinal.pdf

Mike Polin Chief COnstable of the North Wales Police

One of our readers wrote the following comment which explains exactly what the Operation Pallial  team are encouraging to happen.  Operation Pallial team are the enablers. The sytematic cover-up of child abuse is not historic.

"My child and I have been persecuted by a massive pedophile ring embedded in Scotland's Local Authorities, for around a decade. But nobody wants to know when it's living breathing person saying this, but when they don't know the victim it's a big huge controversy. They are members of the police, social work, health, education, even other stuff like HMRC and phone companies, they can and do tamper with everything when you are one of their victims. I do not know who to trust, I'm fed up, and I feel responsible that people who tried to help my child and I paid for it with their jobs. I don't know who to trust. And I'm sick of how easily people are forced into becoming enablers because they just don't bloody know what they are caught up in and wont hear that there is something very sinister happening. And somehow they can justify it all despite laws being broken right in front of them. And there's the enablers who know exactly what they are doing and wear pedo symbols showing me they on  And somehow they can justify it all despite laws being broken right in front of them. And there's the enablers who know exactly what they are doing and wear pedo symbols showing me they aren't interested in my child themselves because they prefer abusing the other gender of children... I asked a charity "How does one fight a pedophile ring?" I am actually a year later still awaiting a reply. It's crossed my mind to try seeking asylum, only I have no idea if that's really going to help, how does one prove one is being persecuted and in danger when all paperwork has been with held and entire histories have been fictionalised and re-embellished so many times. And what's to stop it happening again. I tried leaving this country and starting a new life for us in a neighbouring European country, and as soon as my child was enrolled in school all hell broke loose there and they pretty much forced us to choose between running away back home or be torn apart in that country... PS the person who was my child's abuser is very high up in her field and job and used to boast about her "darling friends Tony and Cherie".   Please will this reader  now get in touch with us at talkingtous@hotmail.co.uk  we can help



This tragic story is repeated  over and over again by victims and their families all over the united kingdom.  Child abuse is sytematic and  those who should protect children are the very organisations who collude in their abuse

Investigators in Operation Pallial have found evidence of 140 allegations of historical abuse between 1963 and 1992. Seventy six new complainants have also come forward. The claims centre on 18 homes involving offences against boys and girls aged between seven and 19. A total of 84 suspected offenders have been named - 75 male and nine female. Of these, 16 have been named by more than one complainant.

 The Operation Pallial team have  found, what everyone knows and has done for decades that there is "significant evidence of systemic and serious sexual and physical abuse". but  the North Wales Police did nothing then and do nothing now.   Had Operation Pallial actually  told the truth about the previous and current cover-up by the North Wales Police  the Public would  have more confidence in them.

Government gives in to people power and backed down on their plans to snoop on everyone's Internet use

 38Degrees members today celebrate their victory   which helped to stop  the Governments snoopers Charter  which would have allowed  the government to spy on British peoples Internet use.   This shows the power of collective action. Lets do the same with the espose of child abuse!

Great news! We've stopped the government's plan to spy on everyone's internet use. Late yesterday Nick Clegg announced he will not allow the "snoopers’ charter" to go ahead. [1]

38 Degrees members moved quickly when  they  first heard of the plan to collect details of who we call, text, email and which websites we visit.  They voted to work together to stop these intrusive and expensive plans.

Today the  Government gave in to people power and backed down on their plans to snoop on everyone's  Internet

Together, over the past 18 months:

• nearly 200,000 of us signed the petition to stop government snooping [2]


• tens of thousands of us emailed our MPs


• from Dundee to Penzance, thousands of us met up locally to deliver our massive petition direct to MPs [3]


• nearly 19,000 38 Degrees members raised their concerns directly to the parliamentary committee looking at the government’s plans [4]


• and just last week thousands of us got back in touch with our MPs, calling on them to abandon the plans.

38 Degrees members were a key part of a team which also included great campaigning from Liberty, Privacy International and the Open Rights Group. [5] We also got support and advice from a number of supportive MPs - particularly Lib Dem Julian Huppert, and Conservative David Davis. David Davis MP even came into the 38 Degrees office to do a live web briefing with 38 Degrees members! [6]

  A great win for people power!


Take a moment to celebrate what we can accomplish when we all act together.




PS: Was your MP one of the people who helped stop the snooping bill? Could you email your MP and say thank you? Our MPs are used to hearing from 38 Degrees members to raise concerns when things are going wrong. Today we have a chance to prove we notice when things are going right! Click here to say thanks: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/privacy-thank-your-MP


NOTES:
[1] The Telegraph: Nick Clegg blocks Tory plans for a 'snoopers' charter': http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10019365/Nick-Clegg-blocks-Tory-plans-for-a-snoopers-charter.html
[2] 38 Degrees: Stop government snooping: https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/stop-government-snooping#petition
[3] 38 Degrees Blog: Snooping campaign petition hand-ins: http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2012/11/21/snooping-campaign-update/
[4] 38 Degrees Blog: Our voices were heard: http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2012/09/12/snooping-our-voices-have-been-heard/
[5] Liberty: No Snoopers Charter: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/
Privacy International: https://www.privacyinternational.org/
Open Rights Group: Fatal Blow to the Snoopers Charter?: http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/fatal-blow-to-snoopers-charter
[6] 38 Degrees Blog: Government Snooping: Top Tips from David Davis http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2012/06/19/government-snooping-top-tips-from-david-davis-mp/

Scotland Yard investigate IPCC for failure to uphold complaints against the Police Officers who covered up Richmond child abuse

Exaro revealed that  Detectives on 'Operation Fernbridge' are investigating their own watchdog over claims that it failed to examine allegations of child abuse in Richmond.

Scotland Yard is turning the tables on the Independent Police Complaints Commission  by investigating allegations that it failed to act over complaints 9 years ago.

The IPCC  is well known to ignore  valid complaints against Police Officers  especially  when these complaints are connected to child abuse or organised crime. 

But lately the IPCC  has begun to actually criticise some officers and begin to serve the public  such as    the criticism of the former Chief Constable of West Yorkshire  for the Hillsborough cover-up.

 

 

A senior police officer who  engaged in "black propaganda" in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster has been heavily criticised by the police watchdog over his behaviour after the publication of an independent report on the tragedy last year.

Sir Norman Bettison, former chief constable of West Yorkshire police, has a case to answer for gross misconduct over his attempts to influence his police authority to present him in the best light after the damning Hillsborough independent panel report was published last September, the IPCC said.

Bettison cannot be disciplined because he has quit the police service and the IPCC said it was unacceptable that senior officers like him were able to retire to avoid disciplinary action and dismissal.  read more

 Yorkshire  Police   are well known for the  huge amount of paedophiles in  the  forces  and for protecting  Jimmy Saville.   

 

 

 

Macur Review Questions and Answers

The Macur Review – frequently asked questions 

 

What is the Macur Review?

The independent Macur Review was established to examine the conduct and remit of

Sir Ronald Waterhouse’s inquiry into the abuse of children in care in the Gwynedd

and Clwyd Council areas. The Review’s Terms of Reference are:

“To review the scope of the Waterhouse Inquiry, and whether any specific

allegations of child abuse falling within the terms of reference were not

investigated by the Inquiry, and to make recommendations to the Secretary of

state for Justice and the Secretary of State for Wales. 

 

Why has the decision been taken to have a review now, and by whom?

The Review was established following a statement by the Secretary of State for

Justice, the Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP, on 8 November 2012, and in response to

renewed concerns expressed. 

 

I have heard about an investigation called Operation Pallial. Is that the same as

the Macur Review?

No. Operation Pallial is a separate police investigation running in parallel with the

Macur Review. It is investigating new allegations of historic child abuse, some from

victims previously known about and some fr

om victims who have only recently come

forward for the first time. However, the Macur Review and Operation Pallial have

agreed to work closely together on matters of mutual interest. 

 

Who picked Mrs Justice Macur and why?

Mrs Justice Macur was appointed by the Secretary of State for Justice. She is a

judge in the Family Division of the High Court.

How will the Review be conducted?

The Review will have two main parts. The fi

rst will involve an examination of the

Waterhouse Inquiry’s documents. The second will be concerned with receiving new

information from anyone who believes they

have relevant information and wishes to

get in contact with us. 

 

What is the Issues Paper?

The Issues Paper

was published on 8 January 2013 and sets out some questions

about issues that we are particularly interested in, but it is not intended to be an

exhaustive list. If anyone has information that is not explicitly covered by these

questions, but is relevant to our terms of reference, then we would welcome that

information too.

Who do you expect to hear from during the Review? Is there a deadline?

We are asking anybody who has informati

on on, or concerns about, the setting up,

scope, administration and conduct of the Waterhouse Inquiry to contact the Review.

We would like to hear from you by 29 March 2013.

Do I have to submit answers to all seven questions outlined in the issues

paper or can I submit my own views as free text?

The seven questions in the Issues Paper use our Terms of Reference simply to give

an indication of some of the key areas that we are looking at as part of the Review.

But they are not intended to be an exhaustive list. You can submit answers to any or

all of those questions, or comment on any other issues that you think are relevant to

the Review’s Terms of Reference.

Do I have to respond in writing?

No. As well as written responses, we have set up a facility for people to leave a

verbal response. The Freefone number is 0800 313 4139. You will not be charged as

long as you phone from a landline.

Can I submit my response to the Review team in Welsh?

We welcome responses in either English or Welsh.

Will I able to discuss my views in Welsh if the Review team contact me for

clarification?

If you prefer, we can write to you in Welsh, and would welcome in that language any

further detail that you wish to give in writing. Unfortunately, we are not able to

discuss issues by telephone in the Welsh language.

Will I need to travel to London for any reason if I submit a response to the

Review?

If you are invited to meet with the Review team, it will take place at a location

convenient to you wherever possible.

Will I have to be interviewed by someone?

No. We welcome all responses to the Issues Paper, either in writing or verbally on

our Freefone number 0800 313 4139. In some cases, you might be contacted by a

member of the Review team to ask for further information. This might take the form of

a meeting, but it will be entirely up to you whether or not you attend.

If the Judge wants to interview me can I bring someone along to support me?

Yes, we fully understand that you might find it helpful to have someone with you at

the meeting to support you.

If the Judge wants to interview me can I seek legal advice and is there any

financial help if I can’t afford a solicitor?

Whether you seek legal advice in relation to your involvement with the Review is

entirely a matter for you. But the Review will not normally be able to help with any

legal representation costs that you may incur.

If I’ve been interviewed by the Police as part of Operational Pallial will I need to

speak or write to you separately if I want my views heard by the Macur

Review?

Even if you have already spoken to officers in Operation Pallial, we too would like to

hear from you if you have information relevant to our Review.

Can I respond to the Review if I took part in the original Waterhouse Inquiry?

Yes.

Can I respond on behalf of someone else who is unable to respond to the

Review themselves?

Although we would prefer people having relevant information to contact us

themselves, we recognise that there may be some situations

where they are unable

to do so. In these circumstances, and provided they have agreed, you may respond

on their behalf. But you must clearly explain why they have not been able to respond

themselves.

Can I respond to the Review anonymously?

Yes, if you so wish. However, because difficulties would arise if further clarification of

anything said anonymously were needed, it w

ould be helpful if you could provide us

with your name and contact details in confidence. You should also bear in mind that

the Review may not be able to regard anonymous statements as being wholly

reliable.

In relation to what you say about confidentiality in the Issues Paper, what do

you mean when you say that ‘standard form language on emails is not

sufficient’?

Many email systems automatically add a disclaimer at the end of an email to say that

its contents are confidential. This is not sufficient for us to regard it as the writer t

actually having asked us to treat the info

rmation provided as private and confidential.

If you wish it to be treated that way, you must say so clearly in the body of the email

itself and explain why.

Will the report be made public?

The Review’s Terms of Reference require Mrs Justice Macur to provide her report to

the Government. Whether the report will then be made available publically will be

solely a matter for the Government to decide.

Will I be informed ahead of the report’s publication whether any of the

information I provided will identify me despite my requesting that it be treated

confidentially?

The Review will not identify individuals who hav

e provided us with information if they

have indicated in their submission to us that they wished it to be treated as private

and confidential.

But you should bear in mind that the same information might be

available to the Review from a different source who has not asked for it to be treated

confidentially.

Europes slide into authoritatianism if Hitlers dream

Freedom and justice  are lost dreams   as Europe speeds  quickly towards   repression, dissolution and chaos.Europe's slide into authoritarianism  if Hitlers dream

We did not win the war  against the Nazi;s  they flourished and  now dominate  in Europe.  No it is not the fumbling tiny nationalist parties that pose a threat  it is the Government in power wather left or right they march to the same drum beat.

Lest we forget: The neglected roots of Europe’s slide to
authoritarianism

Europe is being torn apart by a titanic clash between (a) the
unstoppable popular rage against misanthropic austerity policies and
(b) our elites’ immovable commitment to more austerity. Precisely how
this clash will play out no one knows, except of course that the odds
do not seem to be on the side of the good. While at the mercies of
this crushing uncertainty, it is perhaps useful to take a… short quiz.
So, dear reader, will you please read the following ten quotations
and, while so doing, try to imagine who uttered or wrote these words?

[1] “Above and beyond the concept of the nation-state, the idea of a
new community will transform the living space given us all by history
into a new spiritual realm… The new Europe of solidarity and
cooperation among all its peoples, a Europe without unemployment,
without monetary crises, … will find an assured foundation and rapidly
increasing prosperity once national economic barriers are removed.”

[2] “There must be a readiness to subordinate one’s own interests in
certain cases to that of the European Community.”

[3] “The solution to economic problems… with the eventual object of a
European customs union and a free European market, a European clearing
system and stable exchange rates in Europe, looking towards a European
currency union.”

[4] “The results of excessive nationalism and territorial
dismemberment are within the experience of all. There is only hope for
peace by means of a process which on the one hand respects the
inalienable fundamental patrimony of every nation but, on the other,
moderates these and subordinates them to a continental policy… A
European Union could not be subject to the variations of internal
policy that are characteristic of liberal regimes.”

[5] “A new Europe: that is the point, and that is the task before us.
It does not mean that Italians and Germans and all other nations of
the European family are to change their spots and become
unrecognizable to themselves or to one another, from one day or one
year to the next. It will be a new Europe because of the new
inspiration and determining principle that will spring up among all
these peoples.” … “The problem of the hierarchy of states will no
longer arise. At least in its usual form, once we have cut off the
dragon’s head; that is, the notion of state sovereignty. Moreover,
this does not have to be dne outright, but can be achieved indirectly,
e.g. by creating interstate European bodies to look after certain
common interests (exchange rates, communications, foreign trade
etc….)”

[6] [Here I shall quote from a well received, at the time, policy
document which recommended the need to] “…put forward a European
con-federal solution based on free cooperation among independent
nations” [culminating into uniting Europe] “on a federal basis” [and
adding that, to see this federation process through], “all that is
required of European states is that they be loyal, pro-European
members of the community and cooperate willingly in its tasks… The
object of European cooperation being to promote peace, security and
welfare for all its peoples.”

[7] “We must create a Europe that does not squander its blood and
strength on internecine conflict, but forms a compact unity. In this
way it will become richer, stronger and more civilized, and will
recover its old place in the world.” “National tensions and petty
jealousies will lose their meaning in a Europe freely organised on a
federal basis. World political development consists inevitably in the
formation of larger political and economic spheres.”

[8] “It is not very intelligent to imagine that in such a crowded
house like that of Europe, a community of peoples can maintain
different legal systems and different concepts of law for long.”

[9] “In my view a nation’s conception of its own freedom must be
harmonised with present-day facts and simple questions of efficiency
and purpose… Our only requirement of European states is that they be
sincere and enthusiastic members of Europe.”

[10] “The people of Europe understand increasingly that the great
issues dividing us, when compared with those which will emerge and
will be resolved between continents, are nothing but trivial family
feuds.” … “In fifty years Europeans will not be thinking in terms of
separate countries.

OK, now that you have read the quotations, you may take a look at the
list of their authors below.

Lest I be misunderstood, allow me categorically to state what the
purpose of listing these quotations is not: It is not to imply that
the European Union we have created since WW2 was founded on
nazi-fascist principles. And it is not to insinuate that today’s
Germany bears similarities with Hitler’s Germany (for why else would I
be calling for an hegemonic Germany?).

No, the reason for relating these quotations here is that we Europeans
have a moral obligation to dispel the dangerous illusion that the
notion of a European Union, within which nationalisms and the
nation-state might gradually dissolve, was an enterprise to be
understood as the polar opposite of plans drawn up by the autocratic,
misanthropic, racist, inhuman war-mongers that rose to prominence as a
result of the mid-war European Crisis.

As the quotations above demonstrate (and however insincere their
authors might have been), the notion of a European Confederation or
even Federation is, in itself, not incompatible with what the Nazis
had in mind. The lesson to be drawn from this is not that the European
Union is totalitarian by nature but, instead, that it is not
incompatible with totalitarianism and, thus, that the current
democratic deficit that grows with every twist of the austerity screw
bodes ill for Europe’s democrats.

In brief, a multitude of evils can hide behind the ideological veil of
top-down European integration, especially when it is accomplished in
the midst of (even by means of) a vicious, asymmetrical recession. So,
I am writing today’s post as a Europeanist who wants to imagine Europe
as our common home but who also fears that Europe is sliding into an
unbearable authoritarianism threatening to turn our common home into a
shared concentration camp.

—————————————————————

[1] Arthus Seyss-Inquart, Minister of Security and the Interior in the
post-Anschluss Nazi government, 1938, and later Prefect of Occuppied
Holland – here he is addressing his Dutch subjects

[2] Walther Funk, Finince Minister in Hitler’s government, 1942.

[3] Memorandum of the Reich Chancellery), 9 July 1940, signed by
Hermann Göring

[4] Alberto de Stefani, Finance Minister in Mussolini’s government, 1941

[5] Camillo Pellizi, editor of Civilita Fascista, in an article
entiled ‘The Idea of Europe’

[6] Cicile von Renthe-Fink, Nazi official holding the diplomatic rank
of minister of state, 1943.

[7] Vidkun Quisling, Norwegian Nazi Collaborator, ‘Prime Minister’ of
Occupied Norway, 1942

[8] Adolph Hitler, addressing the Reichstag, 1936

[9] Joseph Goebbels, 1940

[10] Joseph Goebbels, 1942

West Yorkshire Police Paedophiles and Coronation Street stars

It is quite surprising to be able to make a connection from West Yorkshire Police to alleged paedophiles in the television programme, Coronation Street. Particularly as no-one associated with uPSD would watch that type of programme, unless it was for research purposes.
There has recently been huge publicity surrounding the arrest, and Manchester Crown Court appearances, of actor Michael Le Vell (pictured top right) who plays a garage-owning character called Kevin Webster in the Street, as it is apparently quite commonly known. Le Vell is charged with 19 child sex allegations including rape, indecent assault and sexual activity with a child aged 6, after a Crown Prosecution Service review of charges against him that had ­previously been dropped through lack of evidence.
Even though Le Vell now faces a long wait to go to Court (District Judge Khalid Qureshi bailed him to appear in September 2013) he has told friends he is “smiling through” and has vowed to clear his name. The alleged offences all took place between 2001 and 2010. He split from his wife Janette Beverley last year. Ms Beverley also appeared in the Street which is where the couple first met.
Another high profile Court appearance this week followed the charging last November of Andrew Lancel who played the Street character of scheming lingerie factory owner, Frank Foster. He is accused  of two counts of indecent assault on a child under 14 and two counts of indecent  assault on a child under 15. The offences allegedly took place in Southport between 1993 and 1994 when he was a trainee  actor. A  trial date was set for 3rd June and Recorder of Liverpool Judge Clement Goldstone QC granted conditional bail.
The actor — who for 15 years starred as DI Neil Manson in cop show The Bill and also appeared in Jimmy McGovern’s Hillsborough film — was  charged in his real name, Andrew Watkinson, under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. His solicitor, Stuart Nolan of DPP Law, in Liverpool, insisted the star “strenuously denies the allegations” and a formal plea of not guilty has been entered.
These two cases follow on from the child abuse allegations that lingered around Street actor, Peter Adamson, and ultimately wrecked his career and his life. He was accused of indecently assaulting two young girls, aged 8, at a public swimming pool but subsequently cleared at Burnley Crown Court. Although Adamson (pictured top centre) was acquitted of the charges after securing the services of George Carman QC to defend him, he subsequently gave a drink-inspired interview to a reporter on a red-top tabloid newspaper, during which he both acknowledged and denied that he had been guilty: “I am totally guilty of everything the police said,” he said. “But what I hope you will print – there was no sexual intent.”
Adamson had also sold behind-the-scenes accounts of life on the Street for £110,000 (worth over £1 million in today’s money), and was written out of the series as a result. He had played the feisty womaniser, Len Fairclough, in the soap opera.
The West Yorkshire Police connection comes in the athletic shape of former PC Mick Amos, who served the Force for eleven years. ‘Hollywood’, as he is known to his many police friends, is also an actor in Coronation Street. Having achieved notoriety as the policeman arresting the popular character Tyrone Dobbs, he also appeared in the recent scene that saw the fictional public house, The Rovers Return, firebombed.
Mick Amos, (pictured on the left of the centre picture above) has vowed to confront paedophilia within the police, even though he is no longer a serving police officer, and he will assert all his rights as an honest citizen to fight this child abuse menace, in all its forms and wherever it manifests itself. He will also call in his many celebrity, political and press friends to aid in this fight for justice for children.
As a former Great Britain international at both football and rugby he should have all the necessary stamina and fighting qualities needed in this quest. He also has wide experience of working with children of all ages to draw upon as he was, latterly, a very successful schools and community liaison police officer in the Wakefield area with many commendations for his work.
West Yorkshire Police does, of course, have more known convicted police officer paedophiles than any other police force in the UK (For full list click here). It is, however, uPSD’s belief that there are possibly up to 20 more within the Force and some of senior rank. This is based on the sheer implausibility of paedophilia being confined to mainly younger officers at constable rank.
The officer on the left of the centre picture above is none other than (Sir) Norman Bettison. He was repeatedly challenged by uPSD to denounce paedophilia within the ranks of his own Force. He refused and eventually scuttled off into pensioned retirement, to avoid the sack for gross misconduct, without ever doing so.
In other dramatic developments this week it was reported that a child abuse ‘ring’ had been uncovered that was connected to another popular television soap opera. This time it is the BBC’s East Enders that is at the centre of the paedophilia storm. A six-member police Special Operations Unit has been set up to work full-time on the  investigation — an indicator of the serious nature of the claims. The officers have been seconded from Child Protection units at the Metropolitan Police and Hertfordshire Police.
A BBC spokesman said last week: “The BBC is not aware of this investigation  but we take any allegations of this nature extremely seriously. We will be approaching the police to ascertain the details and to offer our full  co-operation.” Proof of a paedophile ring within EastEnders would be a devastating blow to  the BBC in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal.

reblogged  with thanks from  http://www.upsd.co.uk/coronation-st-paedophiles/

After 10 year legal battle Court ruled Insurance company more important than sexually abused children

 Royal and Sun Allience Insurance Group spent £750,000 pounds  in legal fees to prevent paying out £200,000  to victims of child abuse.  They   spend 10 years tortuing the abused children   The insurance company did not even refund the fees they had been paid by notorious paedophile  John Allen  to the  abused children.   Were members of the Board of the Royal Sun Allience paedophiles?

The State placed the children in Bryn Alyn Community childrens homes  and paid for the children to be abused by Allen  and Staff and VIP paedophiles.  Since then the State, the Courts and all the  people involved have made the children suffer further abuse and relive their  childhood abuse over and over again whilst giving them nothing but grief in return.

 

Homes abuse victims lose damages

Children were abused at Bryn Alyn in the 1970s and 1980s

Six victims of sex abuse at the Bryn Alyn children's homes in north Wales have been told they will receive little of the compensation awarded to them. The victims were awarded £200,000 damages between them in 2001, but did not receive the money because the company that owned the homes went bust.
The Appeal Court has ruled that Bryn Alyn's insurance firm is not liable to meet the compensation awards in full.
In 1995, Bryn Alyn's boss John Allen was convicted of child sex abuse.
The abuse suffered by dozens of residents of children's homes across north Wales emerged in 1995 when the homes' boss, John Allen, was convicted of a series of indecent assaults.
He was jailed for six years for attacks on children which took place between 1972 and 1983.

John Allen served six years in prison for sex assaults

Allen was head of Bryn Alyn Community, a limited company which operated a total of 11 residential children's homes in north east Wales, Cheshire and Shropshire.
These included Bryn Alyn Hall, Cotsbrook Community Hall, Pentre Saeson Hall, Bryntririon Hall and Gatewen - all in and around Wrexham.
Six of the victims of abuse at the homes were between them awarded almost £200,000 damages in 2001.
But London's Appeal Court ruled on Friday that after Bryn Alyn went into liquidation in 1997, its insurers Royal and Sun Alliance Plc were not liable to compensate them for abuse suffered at the hands of Allen or the "principals" of any of the other homes within the group.
'Deliberate acts'
It was ruled that under the insurance policy, the company is not liable to pay compensation for "deliberate acts" carried out by members of the management.
Although the insurance company must still pay the six for any abuse they suffered at the hands of employees lower down the management scale, the Appeal Court's ruling means they will only receive a fraction of the damages they were originally awarded.
One victim who was awarded £37,500 in 2001, will receive a much smaller amount for the abuse he suffered during his three years at Pentre Saeson home because his abusers, including Allen, were too high up the management scale.

John Allen is free now - his victims will never be Victims' solicitor Billhar Uppal

Upholding an appeal by Royal and Sun Alliance, Lord Justice Scott Baker said the company was under no obligation to compensate victims of "deliberate acts" perpetrated by Allen and others at management level.
The judge said "right thinking people would regard it as abhorrent" for the company that ran the homes to be covered by insurers against losses created by the "deliberate acts" of Allen.
Lord Justice Baker said: "Suppose Allen had deliberately burnt down one of the homes - we cannot see that the company could recover under the policy."
Billhar Uppal the solicitor representing some of the victims of sexual abuse at Bryn Alyn said the court's ruling was "a bitter pill to swallow".
Mr Uppal said: "After a 10-year battle it is a sour end. We are very seriously looking at whether we can appeal the decision. "The effect of the judgement and its ramifications in terms of childcare is very serious."
He added: "John Allen is free now - his victims will never be."http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/north_east/6114126.stm

Heartrending Statement from Victim of Bryn Alyn Group to Macur Review

 Emma tells her story in simple and heartrending terms. She asks just to be listened to  she pleads to Mrs Justice Macur  " For myself and many like me my future was and forever will be ‘damaged’ beyond repair, I want public recognition of this, and I look to you to doing this."

 Emma says suffered  sexual and physical abuse  and when she tried to escape the hands of the cruel paedophiles the  State had given her to   she was arrested and returned.  Over and over again.  She was a child held in Police custody   and given  back to be sexually and physically and psychologically abused  "when I rightly absconded from this Institution due to the very real concerns for my own safety, was I on numerous occasions arrested for being an absconder, held in police custody and returned to a place, sometimes under police escort, where sex offenders worked, and the level of violence and punishment placed on those who broke the rules was inhuman, and can only amount to strange and unusual punishment, corporeal punishment and serious assault, both by staff and other residents. I
had committed no crime. "

Emma's story mirrors the stories of other  State child abuse victims.  They all say no-one listened, they all say  they were not believed.  Some little girls  girls suffered further indignity,  sent as innocent children to care homes, approved schools  and remand homes they were  raped and then  examined  and  had it put on their records  they were promiscuous.   

John Allen who served only 6 years for the horrific abuse of children and for defrauding  the tax payers of millions

With thanks to  Kaz Tigger and the Bryn ALyn Victims Blog Spot we publish a report from Emma a child abuse victim to the Macur Review.

FAO: The Hon Mrs. Justice Macur

Further to your appointment to independent review the terms of
reference of the Waterhouse Inquiry 1996-2000, I would like to
respond to the questions for which my views are requested.

At the time I was admitted into the Bryn Alyn Community group of
Homes, I was not under a Care Order or interim care order but a
Statement of Educational Needs, undertook by my home authority
Coventry City Council.



Whilst a fluke of geography places me outside the remit of the
Waterhouse House Report, the ‘Community Home with Education’
I attended was owned and Managed by the Bryn Alyn Community,
which had its head offices in Wexham, Clwyd. Therefore, specifically
for me, my concerns over the Waterhouse Report was its failure
to acknowledge that a school mentioned numerous times within
that report was excluded because of those terms of reference, for
myself my specific concern is the inference that the behavioral
characteristics of those with a duty of care to protect me didn’t lesson
to do spatial, time and space constraints.

For me therefore, and as such a specific concern running through
my response is why was I sent to a ‘school’ for which concerns were
raised historically many years prior to my admittance, my experience
there, and in other ‘care’ homes leads me to conclude that abuse
was a fact of life, it was expected and indeed accepted as the norm.
That as a female I was of course sexually promiscuous, how could I
be anything else? To understand my abuse, it challenges everything
anyone could imagine to be ‘normal’.

Why when I had no care order, when I rightly absconded from this
Institution due to the very real concerns for my own safety, was I
on numerous occasions arrested for being an absconder, held in
police custody and returned to a place, sometimes under police
escort, where sex offenders worked, and the level of violence and
punishment placed on those who broke the rules was inhuman, and
can only amount to strange and unusual punishment, corporeal
punishment and serious assault, both by staff and other residents. I
had committed no crime.

Why were these schools/homes not monitored and regulated, why
were all these concerns ignored, and why did it go on for so long?
Again, I see reason, based on the current ‘looked after’ framework of
tendering out child care to big business that the same will not happen
again, to me nothing has changed in 38 years.

The assumption that North Wales is somehow unique, I find alarming
and distressing. As such I ask that for the 1000’s like me, this review
is just the start of the process of redressing the balance, that tax
paying public of Great Britain who felt that mine and my fellow victims
problems were being addressed at there significant expense, be
allowed to understand what happened, and the damage not only
done whilst in these intuitions, but since by the wall of silence, by
being called liars and to damaged to be believed. My only concern
is that the public wont be able to stomach the truth, they will asked to
think the unthinkable, they will be angry and shocked. For myself this
means publically admitting I was a victim of most unusual child abuse
multiple times across this country when all I wanted was somewhere I
felt safe.

My views

• The terms of reference for the Waterhouse Report were not
sufficiently wide enough. There is enough evidence to conclude
this, my concern is that this question is merely and academic
exercise, and assumes that what happened in North wales
didn’t happen anywhere else, This is the only pubic Inquiry
myself and the many 1000’s of children who were and still
are victim of systemic state sponsored child abuse have had,
and this is Justice? is this closure? Having such narrow terms
of reference as highlighted above, limited the scope and the
investigation, as such Sir Ronald Waterhouse was unable to
exercise any discretion and therefore unfortunately I believe he
acted illegally, thus making the Waterhouse Report merely a
brave attempt to reveal the truth.

• Undue restriction:

I can only, as a mere victim assumes so. The Waterhouse Inquiry
never directly approached me, nor do I believe I ever would have.
I have only ever been asked once did anything happen to me
when I was at Cotsbrook, if you were I, you would to deny it. It is
only now, as I approach 40 that I can accept I was a victim. Its my
understanding that no attempt was ever made to trace many former
residents, to do so would of placed my Local Authority at risk of
legal proceedings, insurance premiums would have risen. It has and
always will be for me to approach the authorities, not the other way
round. I believe victims come of age, so therefore the Waterhouse
report failed as it dealt with my fellow victims who were many years
older than myself, or like me to busy dealing with the ramifications of
my abuse to pick up a newspaper or watch a TV report.

• Covered above in point ii.

• I did attempt in 1999 to raise my concerns with my Local Police
Force, but I was deemed and unfit person. So yes, that was my
experience, I feel I’m not alone in this happening. It was clear
to me Justice, or Justice being seen to be done would have to
wait. The wait ends when these people die. I have no axe to
grind with Sir Ronald Waterhouse; I never met him, or his team
so therefore I cannot give a judgment. However, based on my
experience the answer is a resounding yes.

• Clearly the answer is no, and the situation is no different
today, why would we/I be believed? The cost to me of this is
immeasurable, In 1991 I complained to my Local Authority
about the physical and mental abuse I suffered in Coventry
Children’s Homes, it was ‘Investigated’ and I was told my
allegations were malicious. If they didn’t believe the physical
abuse, they would never believe the sexual abuse? It also
interesting to note that no record of this complaint is recorded
on my Social Services File.

• Only the victims of the Waterhouse Inquiry can answer this.

• No, I was never made aware of an Inquiry, and after my
experience is 1991, why would I put myself through that.

My abiding memory of Cotsbrook Hall is the graffiti that adorned one
of the out building next to Lewis House. It stated in white paint ‘Sin
Bin’ because that’s what Cotsbrook and Bryn Alyn was and felt like
a sin bin. A place children go because they are ‘bad’ so bad indeed
that anyone could do anything to them in the total self confidence that
their victims will never be believed. I’m sorry to report that nothing
has changed, there is and always will be a wall of silence.

The very real point I wish to make Mrs. Justice Macur to you and
the Government Ministers you will report too, is that the very system
designed to protect me, only harmed me and, when I sought ‘justice’
against them the system that very system only protected ‘them’ not
me. I have Human Rights, but mine are deemed less important.

Institutionalized care has cost me my faith in authority, my distrust
of authority, and to not be believed and treated like scum has left a
burning frustration that will never extinguish. For myself and many
like me my future was and forever will be ‘damaged’ beyond repair, I
want public recognition of this, and I look to you to doing this.

My kindest regards

Emma