After nearly 2 and a half years since it was commissioned, the Home Office’s Grooming Gang investigation has been published in 2 publications. The ‘Characteristics of group-based child sexual exploitation in the community (literature Review)’ report was dated to October, with another version entitled ‘Group-based Child Sexual Exploitation Characteristics of Offending’ dated to December. The latter included a foreword by the Home Secretary, but I will start by examining the former.
The most obvious factor in the entire text is that the word ‘Asian’ is used for offenders, which wrongly leads people to suspect that Hindus and Sikhs were among those convicted. It has been known for well over a decade that Muslim men are primarily involved in the grooming gangs; with White, Hindu and Sikh girls being among the victims.
One source the report uses is police data gathered by the Children’s Commissioner for England from 2013-14, which shows ‘Asian’ people made up 14% of offenders, whilst ‘Black’ people made up 17% of offenders. Yet it doesn’t mention the fact that this means that both groups are both overrepresented, as ‘Asians’ only made up 7% of the population at the time and ‘Blacks’ made up just 3%. On top of that, the data shows that ‘Whites’ made up 42% of offenders, which considering they were 87% of the population at the time means they were massively underrepresented. It is also important to note that the ethnicity of 22% of the offenders is not recorded, which begs the question as to why?
Studies conducted by CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command) are also mentioned, and the paragraph where the 2013 CEOP study is cited is worth quoting in full:
‘In 2013 CEOP found that of the 52 groups they examined that provided useable ethnicity data, 26 (50%) comprised all Asian offenders, 11 (21%) all White offenders, 4 (8%) all Black offenders, 2 (4%) exclusively Arab offenders, and 9 (17%) were mixed groups. Of the 306 offenders in total, 75% were Asian (CEOP, 2013).’
The report also cites the ground breaking Quillium study of 2017, which showed an even greater overrepresentation (84% of offenders were Asian, despite being around 7% of the population).
Now you would think that if three studies conducted by separate official and non-official organisations all reached a similar conclusion of overrepresentation of certain groups, then surely at the very least such a trend would warrant an investigation. Instead, the report tries to explain away such trends by saying that not all the offenders’ ethnicities were listed, and that some data collection might be biased.
It also claims that financial and sexual motivations were the main cause of the crimes, with the motivation of race not being mentioned once. In regards to Islam, the report mentions the misogynistic tendencies in that community, ‘culture of misogyny and objectification’, but doesn’t expand on why members of that religion feel justified in what they are doing. None of the anti-White rhetoric of the offenders, such as the infamous ‘White slag’ comment referenced in a Sunderland trial were mentioned either.
Now as I mentioned at the start, the ‘Group-based Child Sexual Exploitation Characteristics of Offending’ dated to December had a foreword by Priti Patel, in which she correctly states that ‘Some studies have indicated an over-representation of Asian and Black offenders. However, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the ethnicity of offenders as existing research is limited and data collection is poor. This is disappointing because community and cultural factors are clearly relevant to understanding and tackling offending.’
Her comments are welcome, as his her promise to increase the collection of data on such crimes, but as the Home Secretary, why not simply order a new inquiry with a much more wider, politically incorrect scope? The report also makes clear that cases of CSE are drastically underreported, meaning that the true scale of such abuse is still not known.
The most obvious flaw though of the report, apart from the fact it was only released after a typical U-turn, is that it focuses on geographical areas that were not representative of the most serious cases. Operation Retriever (Derbyshire), Operation Brooke (Bristol), Operation Lenten (North Wales) and Operation Warrenton (London) are all extensively detailed in case studies. Yet Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford, Newcastle, Peterborough and Oxford are all only given lesser air time or none at all – despite the severity of the crimes that took place.
Sajid Javid ordered this report into CSE abuse in July 2018, and since then even more cases have been revealed and prosecuted. Political correctness of course does not allow for the cultural change that is needed to help get on top of this problem. The conclusions of this report do not fully reflect the nature of grooming gangs or their motives, and as a result nothing in the short term will change to help stop them.
If you appreciated this article and would like to support us, would you consider a one off small donation?
(any currency can be selected)