Newcastle’s turn
Another sex grooming case concludes with multiple convictions.
Seventeen men and one woman have been found guilty of involvement in a sex grooming network in Newcastle upon Tyne that plied vulnerable women and girls with drink and drugs before assaulting them.
In a series of four trials at Newcastle crown court, juries found the men guilty of a catalogue of nearly 100 offences – including rape, human trafficking, conspiracy to incite prostitution and drug supply – between 2011 and 2014.
The men befriended more than 20 victims and invited them to “sessions” at properties, mostly in the west end of the city. The girls were lured by the offer of alcohol and drugs, in particular mephedrone (“Mkat”) and cannabis, and were expected to offer sexual services in return for the substances.
The victims, all females between 13 and 25, were targeted because they were vulnerable and because they were less likely to complain because of their circumstances, the prosecution argued. The court heard accounts of young women who were drugged before waking up to find themselves undressed, having been sexually assaulted.
The police investigation that led to the trials was called Operation Shelter.
Operation Shelter has clear similarities to grooming scandals in Rotherham and Rochdale, which featured gangs of British Asian men abusing white girls. The men in operation Shelter are from a wider range of backgrounds, including Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian and Turkish.
Geographically wider, but ideologically just as narrow.
The jury was told that the men had no respect for their victims and that they chose them because they were “easy targets”. The court heard that in April 2014, Badrul Hussain – who was found guilty of providing premises for drug supply – was caught traveling on public transport without a ticket. The female ticket inspector claimed that he shouted at her: “All white women are only good for one thing. For men like me to fuck and use like trash. That’s all women like you are worth.”
That ideology. It’s quite widespread.
In a parliamentary report published in November 2014 into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham, MPs said they had reached “the alarming conclusion” that Rotherham was not an outlier and that there was a widespread problem of organised child sexual exploitation in England.
A spokesperson for the child exploitation charity Pace said: “Sadly we know that child sexual exploitation has been widespread throughout the country and it can affect any child or family. It is good that the perpetrators have finally been brought to justice. There has been immense trauma inflicted on those young people and their families. There will be lessons to be learned.”
Most women have no idea how much men hate them.
Honestly though, how could we get through each day if we really knew? These compartmentalized glimpses, together with our own anecdotal experience makes that hard enough.
Presumably the vermin haven’t been sentenced yet.
“Most women have no idea how much men hate them”.
No, some men hate women others don’t, some women hate men. Some women make sweeping prejudiced generalisations about men, others don’t.
I didn’t hate my wife, I grieved when she died.
@RJW
I’m really sorry for your loss.
One morning, not too long after the recent presidential election, I was bemoaning the fact that I could not understand how Trump had won and Hillary had lost.
My male significant other said to me, “Honestly, I think people underestimated how much men hate women”.
I assumed he didn’t mean all men.
I can’t ask. He’s now dead. Again, I’m sorry for your loss.
cazz,
Thank you. I’m sorry for your loss. I wish I could offer some advice on how to cope, Unfortunately I can’t.
My point was that all encompassing statements about the way ‘men hate women’ are, to say the least counterproductive. I’m 71 and on the usual criteria would be expected to be a mysogynist I wasn’t and I’m not now. I didn’t sexually harass women, however I was naive in regard to the atmosphere of sleaze that many women experienced. I worked in the office of a some manufacturing companies and was ’employed’ as an informal bodyguard whenever any young women needed to visit the factory area. I thought they were overreacting, I was wrong.
I’m not American but I’ve made this comment before. Whatever the role of misogyny in the recent presidential election, the fact is that Clinton won the popular vote. Trump ‘won’ because of a gerrymander, the Electoral College.
Are the reports still ducking the ‘ideology’ issue? These men are, of course, ‘Muslim’ in the same sense that Trump is ‘Christian.’ They can be disclaimed by the ‘mainstream’ while they represent values that they really do share. Especially hatred of women.
It did creep out that in Rotherham, the victims were (almost?) exclusively white. Is that the case here as well?
@RJW
I believe what we have here is a disagreement due to the imprecision of the English language.
My friend says to me, “men hate women”, and I hear, “men hate women”. You read “men hate women” and you believe the writer is saying “men hate women”.
I don’t see the statement “men hate women” to be a blanket one in either case, although I don’t know for sure what the intention of either statement was.
On the other had, I’d be the first to yell “Not ALL!”, when confronted with “girls hate science”. Same construct as “men hate women”, so I get how you read “men hate women” as you did, but what I was trying to say is that there are two interpretations, both potentially valid.
One last note, I believe my other was right, trump won because men hate women enough to carry the electoral vote in enough states.
cazz,
I don’t agree the problem is due to the ‘imprecision’ of the English language. The addition of ‘some’, ‘all’ or ‘a minority’ would have resolved the ambiguity. The statement “Men hate women” is the same grammatically as “Cats are carnivorous”.
Perhaps the disagreement is due to differences in dialect.
John the Drunkard,@5
Of course they authorities musn’t offend Muslims by imposing long sentences, that would be ‘racist’.
Community service perhaps?
RJW that sentence is a quotation.
RJW, one of the things I like about English is its imprecision. It’s ability to create an impression but leave ambiguity.
“All men hate women” is absolute. “Some men hate women” is also absolute, in the sense that we know that some men (inferred to be more than half the total) do not hate women. “Men hate women” is not absolute though. It can be inferred to be so, but equally it can be inferred to b generally so, or so amongst the dominant grouping of men, or men in one or more societies, or as a short hand for “most men hate women”.
Compare the construction against “women do more housework”. Is generally true, but not absolutely so despite the apparent absolute nature of the statement.