Allow me to expand.

Times change. Organisations need to change with them, but often lag behind and sometimes become supportive of crimes - with the best intentions, based on times gone by.

Example - give women the vote. Of course. Obvious. But it took fighting to get there. However, now it has become that there should be more women MPs and Prime Ministers. Not necessarily. Only if they deserve it, as individuals. But gender preference has taken over. Insane though understandable.

Back in the Sixties, being gay was illegal; a crime. Underage sex was also illegal but, wrongly, because of the ludicrous anti-gay laws, it was generally ignored. That was why so many groupies existed; 12 year old fans who wanted to have sex with handsome rock stars. And it went on, smiled at and nodded through by society, the general attitude being "that's life".

The main reason that stopped (as gay sex slowly became legal) was because girls, getting pregnant by their spotty teenage boyfriends, started working out that paternity would be better if a star was named Dad. More money. Child support.

Groupies capitalised.

As society clamped down on that crime (often linked to blackmail) and things like DNA came in, other crimes emerged to take its place (always does).

Police and charities and the CPS had to grow, to cope with the adapted new areas of crime and, like all organisations, the bigger they were, the slower they were to adapt.

And corruption was allowed to creep in.

So you get police, lagging behind, failing to protect the vulnerable (Milly Dowler, Breck Bednar, the kid who jumped in front of a train in Surrey, being bullied) and not only concentrating on easier crimes (historical sex claims - which require no evidence or work) but even, disastrously, assisting and encouraging such crimes ("credible and true"; use the media to get "evidence").

And charities either slipped into similar activity or, sometimes, actually concealed crimes.

Let me provide an example. Suppose someone is an abuser. They set up a charity pretending to support victims of abuse. Which also, of course, provides a stream of potential victims from the sympathetic staff. "Oh how terrible. Let's pop upstairs for a cup of tea and some gentle cuddles and support".

And if or when such behaviour is brought to the attention of police, instead of spotting the signs of corruption, hearing excuses which, often, reflect those made by real abusers (learned through the years) "not my fault; she pushed me into it; she was far bigger and stronger than me; I was drunk and taken advantage of" - are convinced that charity bosses, accused of the very crimes they pretend to be fighting, must be honest and decent and proceed no further (thus allowing more abuse to continue).

Which is why, when I hear that a charity like the NSPCC - busily NOT protecting children who need protection, like those being bullied - gets infiltrated by a clear abuser like Carl Beech, I'm not surprised.

It just confirms everything I've suspected for twenty years.

The time has come for police, CPS, charities to be properly investigated

JK the involvement of charities using "stories" alone has been absolutely appalling.

All blatantly stated in the early Yewtree report see quotes below from the first page - NSPCC clearly involved stating such...

One newspaper stated one phone call was enough to confirm Carl Beech was lying. And not one simple act of checking by the police at all or NSPCC to check anything including the initial five people in the MWT documentary. So yes here from their own report the evidence of their enabling false accusations is stated...

What message are the NSPCC sending to children to just believe any old story and gossip. Not a good example for children or anyone!!!!

Point 1.7 notes "to present this report in as factual a way as possible given that the information provided has not been corroborated."

With no corroboration there is no "factual" anything!!!!!

Report ‘Giving Victims a Voice’
A joint MPS and NSPCC report into allegations of sexual abuse
made against Jimmy Savile under Operation Yewtree

1. Introduction

1.1 An ITV programme broadcast on 3 October 2012 featured five women who
recounted being abused by the late television presenter and charity fund-raiser Jimmy Savile during the 1970s.

1.2 At the request of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), the
Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) took the lead in assessing and scoping the claims made in the programme and in the days and weeks following the broadcast hundreds of people came forward to say they had also been abused by Savile and others.

1.3 Co-ordination has been extensive and police have been working in partnership with the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) and the National Association for People Abused in Childhood (NAPAC).

1.4 The MPS investigation - given the operational name ‘Yewtree’ - brought together officers with paedophile and serious crime investigation experience and has collated all the allegations against Savile, irrespective of where the offences took place. The MPS is grateful for all the assistance provided by police colleagues from across the UK in contacting victims, taking statements and making appropriate referrals.

1.5 A number of reviews relating to Savile’s reported offending at various institutions and whether earlier opportunities to arrest and prosecute him were missed are also underway. These matters have not been investigated by Operation Yewtree and do not form part of this report.
1.6 An issue that has understandably been raised is that as Jimmy Savile is dead there can be no criminal prosecutions against him and the testimony of his victims cannot be challenged in the courts.
1.7 However it is this lack of criminal proceedings - and justice for victims - that has contributed to the MPS and NSPCC view that the information contained in our joint report should be put into the public domain.

1.8 Account should also be taken of the substantial rise in the reporting of nonrecent sexual abuse since Operation Yewtree began and the beneficial impact of this in apprehending other potential sex offenders.

1.9 Not all the victims who have come forward have been interviewed by police. However the patterns and similarities of the offences and behaviours that have come to light so far have given police and NSPCC staff an informed view that most people have provided compelling accounts of what happened to them. It should be recognised that others will also have experienced abuse but have chosen not to speak out.

1.10 We therefore consider it pragmatic to present this report in as factual a way as possible given that the information provided has not been corroborated. Further investigation seeking corroboration of individual allegations, the majority dating back many years, is considered disproportionate when there is no prospect of criminal proceedings.

1.11 This is why the report is entitled Giving Victims a Voice - we hope that those who suffered as a result of Jimmy Savile’s actions can take some comfort that information based on their accounts is being published. We also hope that the data and information will be useful to the organisations concerned as they take steps to ensure that similar offending to that reported is not currently happening or wouldn’t go unnoticed or unchallenged in the future

Yes WJ many of us at the time thought the report should have been called Giving False Accusers A Voice. I'd say the time has come for Police to examine Charities were it not for the fact that we all know - the police are as guilty as anyone at enabling false accusers.

JK2006 wrote:
Yes WJ many of us at the time thought the report should have been called Giving False Accusers A Voice. I'd say the time has come for Police to examine Charities were it not for the fact that we all know - the police are as guilty as anyone at enabling false accusers.

Good one JK - and so true regrettably