|
10/12/00
Betrayal
of the carers
Richard
Webster
The
Observer
< color="#000000" size="2">Former care worker
David Jones was cleared last week of child sex charges, after falling victim to
police 'trawling'. The Government must halt this senseless folly now, argues
child abuse campaigner Richard Webster
< color="#000000" size="2">'It was the worst thing
somebody could possibly accuse you of. He said he'd rather be up for murder than
something like this because he's so anti-abuse.' These words were spoken last
year by Ann Jones, the wife of former Southampton football manager David Jones.
She was describing her husband's reaction to the multiple allegations of sexual
abuse he was facing. On Tuesday, in a courtroom packed with expectant
journalists, the long nightmare of David Jones, his wife, and their four
children, came to an end. One of Britain's most popular football managers walked
out of Liverpool Crown Court an innocent man after all charges against him were
withdrawn.
< color="#000000" size="2">A week before Jones's
trial began, relatively few people understood how any former care worker could
possibly be facing more than 20 counts of physical and sexual abuse, all of
which were false. But, by the time the trial collapsed on Tuesday, practically
every national newspaper knew the explanation. David Jones was a victim of
'trawling' - a form of police investigation which has evolved only in the last
10 years.
< color="#000000" size="2">Much credit for bringing
about this transformation in public understanding should go to BBC journalists
David Rose and Gary Horne and their Panorama film In the Name of the Children .
< color="#000000" size="2">In the film, which was
transmitted on the eve of the Jones trial, and in an article which was published
in this newspaper on 26 November, Rose reported on the case of Roy Shuttleworth,
a care worker who is serving 10 years in prison for crimes he could not have
committed. Shuttleworth, too, was the victim of a trawling operation.
< color="#000000" size="2">In such operations police
officers deliberately seek out former residents of care homes and invite them to
make complaints. Some of these complaints are true and have helped convict
social workers who have indeed betrayed the trust placed in them.
< color="#000000" size="2">But there are clear
indications that many of the allegations are false. There is also compelling
evidence, some of it captured on film by Panorama, that one of the main motives
for fabricating allegations of physical and sexual abuse is money.
< color="#000000" size="2">After Jones's trial
collapsed on Tuesday, his solicitor, Stephen Pollard, said that the prosecution
witnesses would have been 'utterly discredited' if the case had continued. He
said that more witnesses than the defence could possibly use had volunteered to
give evidence that the accusations against Jones had been fabricated in order to
gain compensation.
< color="#000000" size="2">David Jones was
fortunate. As the Shuttleworth case shows, other trials where the evidence
indicates that the defendant is innocent have had different outcomes.
< color="#000000" size="2">To investigate such
trials is to enter a grotesque Alice-in-Wonderland world in which convicted
criminals, often with long records of deception, swear solemn oaths on the Bible
and give testimony which sends decent men to prison. It is a world in which lies
are ratified by the court and where honest service to other people is penalised
with prison sentences of up to 15 years. It is a world where political
correctness and the compensation culture have triumphed over justice.
< color="#000000" size="2">Why, if evidence suggests
that individual allegations are fabricated, do juries use them as a basis for
convicting? The answer is simple.
< color="#000000" size="2">In cases where
allegations are trawled, juries are not able to assess individual complaints on
their own merits. The whole purpose of trawling is to try to prove that abuse
has taken place not by finding supporting evidence but by multiplying the number
of complaints against a particular suspect.
< color="#000000" size="2">In fact, the sheer
quantity of allegations does not prove anything. But this method continues to be
used because it works; it usually results in convictions. By launching trawling
operations, and piling up huge numbers of allegations against individual care
workers, police forces have found a way of destroying the presumption of
innocence and obscuring the weakness of individual complaints. Whenever this
happens, justice itself will almost inevitably fail.
< color="#000000" size="2">Without any doubt these
operations are dangerous. But what is truly terrifying is the speed with which
they have spread from police force to police force until, at a cost of hundreds
of millions of pounds, practically the whole country has been covered by a
trawling net.
< color="#000000" size="2">It should be emphasised
once again that some trawled allegations will lead to the conviction of people
who are guilty. But it is precisely the fact that it has a core of
reasonableness that renders this particular witch-hunt so dangerous, and makes
it more likely that innocent men like David Jones will be stretched on the rack
which has been devised for the guilty.
< color="#000000" size="2">The other group who are
already beginning to suffer are those who were abused while in care. For, by
producing large numbers of false allegations, trawling operations have debased
the entire currency of complaints. Tragically, real victims may now find that
their truthful testimony is disbelieved.
< color="#000000" size="2">'If the public knew what
was going on they would be appalled,' said Merseyside solicitor Chris Saltrese
at the beginning of last week. He is right. Except that he was speaking before
the collapse of the Jones trial on Tuesday. By Wednesday morning the public did
know what was going on. Or at least they were a lot better informed.
< color="#000000" size="2">This is crucial. One
reason why the current witch-hunt has spread so rapidly and so silently is that
all democracies depend ultimately on journalists to safeguard their essential
liberties. Yet in this case journalists bear the main responsibility for
creating a moral panic around care homes and, until very recently, for keeping
both politicians and the public in the dark about what has really been
happening.
< color="#000000" size="2">Now that the media
spotlight on David Jones has at last illuminated this darkness, it is time for
the Government to act. Until now Home Office Ministers have responded to
complaints about trawling by saying that operational matters are for chief
constables to decide. But the Government did not say that in the Stephen
Lawrence case, and it should not say it now. When the Government does intervene,
as it surely must, it should not fall into the trap of blaming the police. Its
task should be not to chastise the police but to rescue them from the folly we
have forced them into.
< color="#000000" size="2">For the police did not
create a moral panic about sexual abuse in care homes. We did. By doing so and
by placing intolerable pressure on police forces to investigate non-existent
paedophile rings, we have created a machine for bringing about injustice. This
machine is now out of control and has already led to the greatest series of
miscarriages of justice in British legal history.
< color="#000000" size="2">The collapse of the David
Jones trial on Tuesday gives us an opportunity to bring this machine to a halt.
It is an opportunity which should not be missed.
|