Nope, she doesn’t disappoint! You might have included the next sentence in that quote, TDF:

“I do not think it is the role of the interviewer to ‘believe’ the survivor. This does not mean that I think a survivor might be lying.”

Well that’s all clear! There are however a couple of good points: the exclusion of non-sexual abuse from the inquiry & also that it has “conflated child sexual abuse within institutions with the failure of institutions to respond effectively to sexual abuse.” But she soon seems to forget this point & disappears down the rabbithole. And I had to laugh at this:

“I was invited to a surreal, lengthy conversation with the Home Office just prior to Goddard’s appointment and I still don’t know what that was about but they did ask me a lot of questions about how I might envisage an Inquiry best working.
I suggested purchasing a large, comfortably furnished house with experienced, trained professionals conducting interviews in a super-relaxed way avoiding at all costs the severity of a court environment. I didn’t hear any more from them.”

Much is made of the information & dossiers she has handed over to the police and others which goes missing or is not acted upon:
“Also, I know for certain that they could not possibly process the complex information [given to the police] accurately without my involvement.”

She hasn’t heard back (a recurrent theme) and this can only mean either a cover-up or lack of interest in protecting children; the notion that her information – so ‘complex’ that without her to explain it it cannot be understood – might not really be quite the powder-keg she believes it to be never pops into her mind. Let’s have a look to see if we can gauge its quality, and why not start here:

“…and yet Islington children were sent on holiday to the Jersey home Haut de la Garenne…”

Whoa, nelly! Where does THAT come from? If you recall we had a discussion not so long ago about Davies’ fascination with a postcard supposedly sent from Jersey by a boy in care; she thought this was the ‘proof’ of something or other. That boy – now a man – had NO memory of abuse & yet after being therapised & forming a campaigning group with Davies remembered that he most definitely HAD been abused and was even to name an abuser – a long-held target of Davies (who from memory was indeed a child abuser).

I think we were in agreement that this ‘un-earthing’ of abuse ought to raise an eyebrow. And we were also in agreement that Davies’ daft observation that the photograph on the postcard – a famous castle – was spookily ‘close’ to HDLG was absurd: Jersey is so small that it would be difficult to imagine a postcard featuring a well-known landmark that WASN’T ‘close’ to HDLG.

I have no way of knowing whether or not Davies has dug-up more information but have the sneaking suspicion that the bold statement – “Islington children were sent on holiday to the Jersey home Haut de la Garenne” – is based on ‘proof’ of a similar calibre. Has that ‘castle closeness’ transmogrified into ‘he was at HDLG!!!’?

[She links to an old article: children’s remains, “innocent-sounding sailing trips”, etc. I had enough of this the last time around…]

Carrying on in a similar vein:
“We know why abuse has continued over the decades and who profits from it [grubby bastards flogging images on the dark net?]. We know it is a remunerative industry which continues to thrive on the suffering of children and their families. We know that it cannot continue without colluders and facilitators procuring and delivering vulnerable children into the hands of perpetrators.”

You know what she’s on about – that nationwide high-powered ring she thinks exists: “I have met survivors adopted by rich people who abused them and networked them to other abusers.” Did you see that interview/discussion with Matthew Parris (Channel 4?), already a few years old? He was unimpressed with these claims of high-powered networks & she wasn’t in a position to prove them then; has anything changed?

Surely the following is not referring to who I think it does? “I think of an Islington survivor who since the 60s has been worried sick about his friend from care who disappeared and still no-one has investigated this.”

The ‘missing-link’ between Billy Cotton’s Ragtime Jazz Band, Leon Brittan & Ted Heath… oh, for God’s sake. The friend with whom he lost touch (or who ‘disappeared’) in the 19fucking60s is probably sat on a beach enjoying his retirement! What possible investigation could take place here? Don’t the Salvation Army help with this sotrt of thing?
(Anyway, he’s a full-on supporter of ‘Nick’, has spread so much baseless rubbish & libelled innocent people and his site was set-up & his story written there by another nasty stirring ‘campaigner’ of whom Mark Williams-Thomas seems unaccountably fond. I can no longer find the story on said site…)

One last thing – Davies was only one of very many people working in the field of child protection. She seems to think her ‘dossiers’ have all gone missing and that the police & other authorities are not taking her claims seriously: it’s an uphill struggle. Shouldn’t we wonder where are all the other social workers who must be aware of her claims being true, if indeed they are? Why do we not hear their voices? Are they ALL in on it?

Reply