Baroness Butler-Sloss, who was very briefly Chair of what is now the Statutory Inquiry Into Child Sexual Abuse, has made a series of critical comments about the Inquiry, at a recent Chatpolitics event.
Speaking at the event, Butler-Sloss, whose statements were recorded, said:
“The real problem about this inquiry is the victims have now been given a false view that they’re all going to be heard.
“There are an enormous number of victims out there, and of course they won’t all be heard. I am absolutely sure that they will not be pleased with the result.”
At first glance, the comment appears to be a rather poor show of sour grapes. Butler-Sloss was forced to stand down as Chair for the Inquiry after it emerged that her brother Sir Michael Havers was Attorney General at a time when some of the worst alleged abuses in the 1980s took place. Her less than sensitive communications with survivors and her passionate defense of the Church, were conflicts which also caused concern.
The pointed attack on the Inquiry though, is clear. Butler-Sloss accuses the Inquiry panel and the Home Secretary of giving victims false hope that their voices will be heard and their cases looked at. Quite how she comes to this conclusion is not clear, but if our Inquiry is set to be anything like Australia’s own investigation into child sexual abuse, there should be plenty of forums for victims and survivors to speak out.
The sentiment that victims and survivors won’t be pleased with the result is yet another muddled thought that makes it virtually impossible to tell whether she’s referring to all victims, the ones she thinks won’t be heard, the Inquiry itself or the possibility that all those with cases won’t all be able to speak out.
The report also suggests that Butler-Sloss considers the Inquiry will be doomed to fail. Quite whether this was something she actually said, or has been inferred from the above statements is not clear, but there is some truth in that.
The Inquiry is going to need to offer something new, radical and brave in the face of an ever-growing list of Inquiries and repetitive recommendations, which no one wants to see appear in print again.
The only way this investigation can make a difference, is if it gets to the very heart of child sexual abuse and our seeming inability to shield our children from it.
Diana Smith said:
Teresa May and her Office chose to deny my Human Rights for the reporting and seriousness of criminal rape / stalking / physical assaults / threats of physical assault, apparently working together with [edited] Constables. Then my reporting a sexual assault on me , from my childhood by a employee at the BBC was also being covered up by Police and Victim Support [edited] when it was [edited]Police who were meant to be investigating. Then with the involvement and setting up of the present panel, I have been written to and assured there will be investigation. I guess l want to believe that Teresa May will have to be seen to address at least one serious crime against me. However in my book Teresa May is far from suitable in her attitude to human misery and her track record does call into question why she has not been removed from her role as the head of The Home Office.
Hi Diana, thank you for your comment, and I’m so sorry to hear about your ordeal.
Apologies, but I’ve had to edit your comment for legal reasons.
Reblogged this on tummum's Blog.
Maggie Tuttle said:
The truth is always with the Nation, and if them so called DO-GOODERS such as Butler-Sloss knew the thruth it would not make the slightest difference to their thinking because they do not want to accept the truth all they do is to put blame on parents for this that or other take the kids into care and thats it, I have for more then 40 years of working with my own money to help the poor people to try and get a life I have sent my research and findings to many people in governments but all goes no where, so do we really think the Butler-Sloss lot will ever listen to the poor victims, dont be silly, the victims have always been since dot and the abuse of kids in care it will continue, is any one aware that dear old Boris Johnson made a law a few years ago that homeless people before they can claim a benifit must first prove they have lived in a certain borough for at least 3 months, what of the BIG charities for the homeless who receive 100% funding and yet they will not give a bed for the night to a homeless person unless that homeless person has the money to pay for the bed for the night, for this reason so many thousands are sleeping on cardboard boxes in the streets begging for food, and for many they are from the care system and been abused, so what of them in governments doing sod all, only getting their wages going to meetings staying in 1st class hotels for meetings living in big houses with servants many got shares in the adoption and fostering agencies so why should they care for the people that Governments make into the victims and have done so since dot, the only time the governments give a little respect to the nation is when they want to send the nation to war to fight for the so called British Empire so that they can continue to try to rule the world and sit in comfort with their millions. shame the nation does not march to war on parlement then our kids would have a chance and not at the end of the day put down as liers of abuse.
Maggie Tuttle said:
on one of my recent comments I wrote that I recently was told of the vaccinations being given to kids in care but then kids in care have been used for drug experiments from dot and yes it all goes back to long before Hitlers days, but then we also have a Nation of gunnie pigs via the national health, and should people question their GPs many are struck off.
Forced Adoption said:
The” Characteristic “of any government sponsored enquiry into sexual abuse of children or the wrongful separation of children from their parents is that victims should never be given the opportunity to be heard and critics of the system such as Christopher Booker(telegraph),Sue Reid (mail) ,and John Hemming (ex M.P) must never be consulted at any point !
The only surprise is that anyone should be surprised !
Sabine Kurjo McNeill said:
Reblogged this on National Inquiry into Organised, Orchestrated & Historic Child Sexual Abuse.
Maggie Tuttle said:
Natasha, I think what i wrote as in the link for the web page says it all PENSIONERS RULING WESTMINSTER AND WHEN THEY ARE BROUGHT TO ACCOUNT OH I GOT DEMENTIA
Natasha, I should imagine BBS has more insight into the inquiry than most and how it was to proceed bearing in mind she was originally asked to chair the investigation, so what she says can be believed, the victims voices are not going to be heard and they are not going to be pleased with with the result!
But what exactly does she mean when she says that not everyone will be heard as there are too many victims? The whole point of the inquiry is to investigate historic abuses so surely it follows that the victims, all the victims, need to put forward their story.
I understand there was a selection process but how does that work? Would all victim statements be read and separated into catagories, then an example of what relates to each catagory be given for the sake of brevity? This appears to be what happened in the Rotherham inquiry. Whilst there were case studies A-O there was also a conservative estimate of 1400 victims and an overall general description of what had occurred was noted.
The Rotherham child abuse inquiry took cases from 1997-2013 but there was a cut off point which Alexis Jay defines in her opening statement, along with her brief on how she was to proceed.
The independent inquiry in child sexual exploitation in Rotherham
I have a problem with the last part of BBS comment, that they (the victims) are not going to be pleased with the result. As the inquiry has barely got off the ground it raises the question does she know something that we dont!?
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
Pingback: Child Abuse Inquiry To Release Progress Reports And Interim Recommendations | Researching Reform