It's Not Just The Sex Of The People They Are Looking For....
...it seems they are fully prepared to gaslight the public about the age now too. If he's really 16, he must have had a very tough paper round...in Afghanistan!
I’ve seen a couple of reports recently which provided food for thought; firstly, the driver (without licence and insurance) who caused that police car pile-up on the A1 is described as being 20 years old although looking rather older - apparently he arrived in the UK ‘aged 15 or 16’ so it would appear that the original assumed birth date applies for life despite the presumed absence of any proof of age.
Secondly - and this may not be an isolated instance - the local paper recently mentioned a grooming gang who were sentenced here some years ago. At the trial, despite their older appearance, their ages were given as ranging between 18 and 22, meaning that, at the date the abuse began, most of them of them would have - officially - been 14, 15 or 16 and the youngest, at 12, a year younger than their first victims.
Although the news story didn’t mention whether they are native born and bred, all their names suggest otherwise; did they arrive as ‘children’ and, thanks to state policies, attend local schools as pupils alongside the girls they preyed upon?
The human rights people continue to be violently opposed to dental and bone checks to establish the age of child migrants - the rights of school pupils come a poor second by comparison - so we can probably expect to see much, much more of this.
2 comments:
I’ve seen a couple of reports recently which provided food for thought; firstly, the driver (without licence and insurance) who caused that police car pile-up on the A1 is described as being 20 years old although looking rather older - apparently he arrived in the UK ‘aged 15 or 16’ so it would appear that the original assumed birth date applies for life despite the presumed absence of any proof of age.
Secondly - and this may not be an isolated instance - the local paper recently mentioned a grooming gang who were sentenced here some years ago. At the trial, despite their older appearance, their ages were given as ranging between 18 and 22, meaning that, at the date the abuse began, most of them of them would have - officially - been 14, 15 or 16 and the youngest, at 12, a year younger than their first victims.
Although the news story didn’t mention whether they are native born and bred, all their names suggest otherwise; did they arrive as ‘children’ and, thanks to state policies, attend local schools as pupils alongside the girls they preyed upon?
The human rights people continue to be violently opposed to dental and bone checks to establish the age of child migrants - the rights of school pupils come a poor second by comparison - so we can probably expect to see much, much more of this.
That's a horrible thought! I'll keep my eyes open for more such cases.
Post a Comment