Of the 28 member states of the EU, only the UK does not have a Statute of Limitation on sexual offences. However, if the Goddard Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) turns into a national disaster, which is likely, Britain may decide its child abuse witch hunts that make so many people so much money have finally gone too far.
Like Australia before it, Britain has now embarked on a ‘moral’ (some would say ‘immoral’) crusade which actively invites allegations of sexual offences from 30, 40 or even 60 years ago. The Goddard Inquiry is about to drive a poisoned blade through the heart of British society, destroying individuals, families and institutions in the process.
Cases such as those of Cliff Richard and Paul Gambaccini have caused the public to ask MPs how such cases can be allowed to proceed, when the only ‘evidence’ is the memory of often disturbed, vulnerable, anonymous and sometimes opportunistic complainants.
Unsurprisingly, calls from members of the public – and even some MPs – for a Statute of Limitations on sexual offences, are now beginning to grow.
Populist, expensive, politically correct madness
This latest CSA inquiry is the inevitable result of populist ministers, ambitious policemen and sycophantic judges working together with weak, self-serving, broadly feminist MPs, all attempting to clamber onto the historical CSA bandwagon for entirely selfish reasons.
Meanwhile, profit-hungry law firms offering accusers financial compensation are shamelessly luring cash-seeking individuals into making historical allegations, often as part of a profitable ‘class action’. Some law firms have become so large on the back of historical abuse that they are now quoted on the Stock Exchange.
Whilst abuse charities and the authorities constantly repeat the mantra, “…false allegations are rare and compensation plays no part’, none of the ‘evidence’ to support these assertions has ever been tested or peer-reviewed, most of it having been produced by the groups themselves.
Some years ago however, the German government removed payment of compensation to sexual assault complainants, except where such payment is paid directly for recognised therapy or official certified counselling. The result of this change in the law was a massive drop of 80% in the number of allegations of historical sexual abuse, suggesting that many so-called ‘victims’ are indeed actually far more interested in financial gain, rather than obtaining ‘justice’ or therapy.
Many outside of the child protection industry believe the Goddard Inquiry to be politically correct madness which denies the obvious truth that most people cannot factually remember the past with any accuracy, whilst tragically also ignoring the potential damage that the inquiry will cause to the social cohesion of the country.
Families of those accused, distinguished individuals, along with respected institutions, will all suffer damage or complete destruction. All because of the words of anonymous individuals who, even if they lie, are promised by the police and CPS, ‘…you will be believed’ – and get paid.
The financial cost of the Goddard Inquiry is huge with a budget of £18-20 million/year, for what may realistically be 10 years. Good news for the 17 barristers hired by the inquiry; and Justice Goddard herself, who currently receives £500,000 per year from the taxpayer.
For the elderly individuals prosecuted and later convicted, as they will be, it now being almost impossible to defend such cases, add another £40,000 each/year for prison and health costs. According to the policeman in charge of Operation Hydrant, Simon Bailey, there may be tens of thousands of such individuals.
A moral crusade based on no real evidence…
Viewing the past through the prism of the present is never a good idea, particularly when there is a moral crusade involved. The Goddard Inquiry is a classic example. The only people to benefit will be the politicians who set it up and the rich lawyers who run it.
Moral crusades also always lead to disaster. They never end, cost a fortune, hurt everyone and achieve little. If you need proof, look at the Chilcot, Hillsborough or Bloody Sunday inquiries.
Such crusades create injustice too:
As part of the child abuse crusade, the highly populist Sentencing Council of England and Wales, led by Lord Justice Treacy, last April effectively trebled sentences for historical sexual offences by forcing trial judges to impose consecutive rather than concurrent sentences. In most cases, the total sentence is now completely out of proportion to what would have been imposed at the time the crimes were allegedly committed.
This cynical and highly dishonest way of getting around the long-standing legal rule that a maximum sentence cannot exceed that in force at the time the offence was allegedly committed, was promoted by the child protection industry.
Justice Goddard’s inquiry is likewise an attempt to force today’s thinking on yesterday’s crimes. This may delight charities, lawyers and ‘survivor’ groups that rely on CSA for their financial survival, but will do nothing to help genuine victims of current abuse.
An inquiry into the past but founded on today’s values, is also an open door to fantasists and those seeking financial gain, attention or revenge. They know full well that the only ‘evidence’ required is their accusation, whether true or not. Statements of one ‘victim’ are used to ‘corroborate’ that of the other. Such ‘corroboration’ is of course, utterly worthless. Hearsay is not real evidence and should not be allowed; but it is used to convict in almost every historical CSA case.
The fact that there may be more than one complainant should be irrelevant, yet is relied upon by the CPS. However, in the Savile report co-authored by Operation Yewtree’s Peter Spindler and the NSPCC, it is admitted that nothing was ever proved against Jimmy Savile and that a ‘pragmatic approach’ had been taken to the allegations of so many alleged victims. No allegations were ever corroborated, but ‘victims’ still got paid.
The above demonstrates an obvious truth about human nature:
Put easy money or the promise of attention within the reach of people, and many will take what they can.
Nevertheless, despite the appalling lack of provable evidence and the inevitable reliance on ‘hearsay’ testimony, the police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) still go ahead and prosecute in almost every case involving alleged abuse, frightened of the adverse media coverage they will receive if no prosecution takes place.
Many people are unaware however that unlike in the rest of Europe, guilt or innocence is not a consideration when the CPS decides whether or not to prosecute alleged sex offences. Post-Savile, the only consideration is whether a jury (often emotional and prejudice-driven) can be persuaded to convict (CPS Code for Crown Prosecutors). The so-called ‘public interest’ safeguard test is largely ignored.
The flawed argument against a Statute of limitations
An argument often put by CSA charities and ‘fem-vic’ groups (including Goddard) against a Statute of Limitations, is that there are no time limits on war-crime prosecutions; so the same should apply to ‘historical’ sexual offences.
In fact, ‘historical’ abuse allegations are clearly not, and never have been, the same as allegations of war crimes. There is one very good reason justifying the distinction:
With allegations of war crimes, one at least has the factually correct evidential starting point of the war itself. With historical abuse however, there is only the complainant’s word that any wrongdoing actually occurred at all.
Speaking the truth is political suicide…
Despite the rhetoric put about by self-interest ‘survivors’ groups – and the government – the hurt, damage and inevitable miscarriages of justice created by the Goddard Inquiry will be significant. Nevertheless, UK politicians, judges, police and prosecutors consider it political suicide to go against today’s PC ‘victim’ culture; no matter how disingenuous that culture may be.
There has never been a better justification for a Statute of Limitations on sexual offences than the Goddard Inquiry. Indeed, the fallout from Goddard may actually force legislators to introduce such a time limit. A 10 year inquiry will cause enormous damage.
It is apparently better to spend unknown millions on a pointless inquiry chasing dead and elderly men, than to do something about the abuse taking place today. Goddard is flawed and relies on the gullibility of many British citizens, sucked into another victim-fest for which they will end up paying a huge cost, in many more ways than they may expect.
Meanwhile, the Children’s Commissioner and NSPCC say that child sexual abuse occurs mostly in families; but the government are and always have been afraid to go there. Perhaps they should set up another inquiry?
Better still, introduce a Statute of Limitations like every other civilised European country and leave a pointless past that helps nobody where it belongs.
(Have your say in our Forum}