alt.support.girl-lovers 2nd August 1999 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Last: 29th July 1999 [ Press-cuttings round-up ] UK: _British men wary of hugging kids because of pedophilia fears_ UK: _Paedophiles held in inadequate conditions_ UK _Prison threat for hiring paedophiles_ UK: _Abusers 'target church youth'_ UK: _'Stranger danger' warning to young - draws criticism_ UK: _Sex crimes 'most likely' from 14 year-old boys_ UK: _Dogs 'could keep order in school'_ Australia: _Child sex charges "a set-up" - Australian_ Eire: _Former nun, man have convictions quashed_ USA: The Guide editorial Hacker news: _Bald Lolitas Take Off Batman's Warez_ Germany: _Cold war returns as Germans strip off on beaches_ UK crypto: _Use encryption, go to jail?_ UK: _Parents asked not to video pupils_ UK: _'Fool-proof' security cameras put the innocent in the frame_ UK: _Boy defends his 'molester' in court_ UK: _Law note_ - major High Court ruling for free speech USA: _Law note_ - State can't infringe on free speech of adults, U.S. court says USA: _Letter to the LA Times_ USA: Bill Gates says his "top public policy priority" is strong crypto USA: _Report says net censors block protected material, fail to block porn_ Science: _Boys like it hot_ UK feature: _How the police trawl the innocent_ Book review - Collusion Movie review - Beau Pere Book notes - The Rise of the Therapeutic State, and Humbertian frottage in Lolita UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 27th 1999 _British men wary of hugging kids because of pedophilia fears_ British men have distorted or negative views about family life because of their obsession with child abuse, according to a study of the lifestyles and attitudes of men across Europe. When shown a picture of a man hugging a mixed-sex group of kindergarten soccer players as they celebrate a victory, men from every country except one responded very positively. "In the UK, the unanimous view was that there was something wrong," said Nick Johnson of the research company RDSi, which this week is publishing the research, based on interviews with 1,000 men. "The response of all the British men was to wonder why a guy would be spending time with children who are clearly not his own," he said. Such is the obsession with, and fear of, pedophilia in Britain that advertisers are being warned off using images of men with children. "It is sad," Johnson said. "It is partly because of all the press attention to high-profile cases, but also because we are not a touchy-feely society. We are only allowed to touch members of our own family without arousing suspicion." Adrienne Burgess, a researcher on masculinity, said the report confirmed the British obsession with child abuse. "The impact of some feminist critiques in the early 1980s, which said all men were rapists, was greater here than elsewhere," she said. "On the Continent, people are much more relaxed about touching children. We don't do it here, which makes it seem abnormal when a man does touch a child, sometimes even his own." ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 1999 _Paedophiles held in inadequate conditions_ The largest concentration of paedophiles in England and Wales are housed in grossly inadequate conditions, says the Chief Inspector of Prisons. Conditions in a separate wing, for non-sex offenders were considerably better, Sir David Ramsbotham said in his critical report on HMP Wymott, near Preston, Lancashire. The report also said that many of the 440 sex offenders are missing out on parole because there were insufficient places on therapy courses, completion of which is a requirement of parole. ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 1999 _Prison threat for hiring paedophiles_ EMPLOYERS could be jailed for five years if they hire child abusers for jobs that allow access to children, under a new criminal offence promised yesterday by the Government. The offence, which will also allow for the jailing for up to five years of paedophiles who apply for such jobs, is recommended in a report published today by a government working party. The Home Office minister, Paul Boateng, said the offence would be made law at the first opportunity. The new criminal offence will have a much wider definition of "working with children" that covers the public, private and voluntary sectors and will be based on the concept of "role" or "position" rather than "office". Offenders will be banned from working in wide areas like leisure, sports and religion. People who will be banned from such work will include all adults convicted of offences against children which result in custodial sentences of 12 months or more. The banned list will be smaller than the Sex Offenders Register. Under the planned new legislation, offenders will escape prosecution if they can successfully argue that they were not aware that the work involved access to youngsters. But Mr Boateng also disclosed that a new Criminal Records Bureau designed to help employers and volunteer agencies identify unsuitable applicants is unlikely to open for another three years. When the Criminal Records Bureau is established, probably in 2002, employers will be charged 10 UKP for an "enhanced check", giving details of the job applicant's criminal record. The introduction of the new legislation, with its wider definition, means the bureau is likely to be swamped with inquiries from employers. The proposals were welcomed by the NSPCC and the Scout Association. But the Scouts warned the cost of checking the 65,000 adults it vets every year could be 750,000 UKP and called on the Government to fund the checks for voluntary groups. Mr Boateng said he was in discussions with voluntary groups, but ruled out free checks. ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 1999 _Abusers 'target church youth'_ The Church of England warned yesterday that paedophiles were deliberately targeting congregations after claiming to have undergone a religious conversion in prison. Vicars and churchgoers are "naively" welcoming sex offenders into their communities out of a Christian sense of compassion, the church said in a report published yesterday. The report - Meeting The Challenge, How Churches Should Respond To Sex Offenders - said that as many as 50 per cent of congregations could already contain a sex offender, and it warned that such people often tried to impress congregations with the depth of their Christian commitment. John Harding, of the church's home affairs committee, said: "Our experience, which is anecdotal, tends to say that the paedophile who is still intent on those purposes would see a congregation as a natural target." The report said paedophiles liked to "groom" their victims by joining families or organisations containing children. It said: "The churches are therefore particularly vulnerable, and although the safeguards already in place should work, in practice sex offenders are so manipulative they do try to 'outwit' the system." ------------------------------------------------------------ [ More, more positively slanted, version of the above report: Church Times (articles expire in a week) http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/index.htm BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_407000/407506.stm ] UK: ----------------------------------------------------------- _'Stranger danger' warning to young - draws criticism_ CHILDREN as young as two should be taught the rudiments of personal safety and advised never to talk to strangers, a children's charity will say today. In a campaign aimed at highlighting "stranger danger", the NSPCC alsos advise parents never to leave young children alone in a car - even for just a few minutes - and never to allow children aged under eight to go out on their own. The initiative has been timed to coincide with the school summer holidays. The charity is also appealing for everyone to keep an eye on children playing outside and to call police or social workers if they see anything suspicious. -- 3rd August 1999 _Paranoid parents 'denying children freedom to play_ CHILDREN are being denied the opportunities for play enjoyed by previous generations because of their parents' paranoia, research will confirm this week. An exaggerated fear of harm from strangers, worries about traffic and unwillingness to let a child do anything with risk attached are blamed for unprecedented over-protectiveness. Concern that children are growing up less independent and without the social skills that come from interactive play was heightened yesterday by child safety advice from the NSPCC. Under the heading "NSPCC warns of risks to children this summer", the charity mounted a campaign that was criticised by other organisations for compounding parents' fears. Jim Harding, NSPCC chief executive, said: "The greatest fear of parents is that their child will be abducted and murdered by a stranger. It is important for us all to alert children to the possible dangers they may face outdoors this summer, without causing fear or panic." [ Translate: 'we need to keep the momentum on our alarmist fundraising drive going, what better way to grab the headlines and keep the funds rolling in during August than this ?' ] Other societies were concerned that the NSPCC campaign would fuel parental fears about molestation by strangers that already border on the irrational. The risk of a child being murdered by a stranger is no greater today than it was in the late Sixties, when children had much greater freedom to play. A child is in much greater danger of being harmed by a member of its family than a stranger. About six or seven children each year are murdered by strangers but more than 80 are killed by parents, carers or someone known to the family. The chances of a child aged one to four being killed by a stranger are less than one in a million, and have fallen by a third since 1988, while the risk to a child aged five to 15 is lower still. Tiffany Jenkins, a founder member of the Families for Freedom group, which campaigns against the over-protection of children, said the NSPCC would worsen people's already distorted impression of the dangers. "They are deliberately scaremongering parents with these fairytale fears when their fears are already way too high." June McKerrow, director of Mental Health Foundation, a charity that has commissioned research on children's well-being, said: "We don't need any more of these messages. If anything, the whole thing has already been taken too far." Tim Gill, director of the Children's Play Council, said there were practical steps that could be taken to improve safety and reassure parents that their children could venture out to play. "The biggest thing that has changed has not been the threat from strangers but the risk from traffic - not merely to playing in the street but to getting around on your own. Death rates for child pedestrians are among the highest in western Europe. The latest figures show that in 1997, 17,000 children under 15 were seriously injured by cars while playing on the street. Of these 133 died and thousands were left scarred with head and leg injuries. More boys than girls, 65 per cent, were run over. -- _What our children really need is a regime of benign neglect_ The message in the new policy is: don't trust anybody because nobody trusts you _Picture this. A man in his mid-thirties, bearded, wearing slightly scruffy jeans, is following two children of about eight and six down a suburban street. They are oblivious to their pursuer - if they seem on the point of turning round to look, he ducks out of sight into a garden. The little convoy turns around the corner. What do you see? A potential child molester tracking his next victims? Actually, it was my neighbour following his children the first time they were allowed to the corner shop by themselves, making sure they were safe crossing the road. We parents labour under a huge burden of worry about our kids in the modern world of car accidents, child abductions and murders, and careless or even violent childminders. No wonder concerned dads follow their offspring around the corner. No wonder mums ferry the kids to school in their four-wheel drive, all but armour-plated vehicles, accounting for two-thirds of the rush hour congestion in our towns and cities. Reports like yesterday's warning on "stranger danger" from the NSPCC can only fuel such parental fears. The charity's checklist of advice is actually completely sensible. But to link basic steps for safeguarding children to the annual toll of six children murdered by strangers each year, as it did, is to move from common sense to hysteria. And we are edging towards a state of mind out of proportion to the - very real - dangers. The typical British response to a photograph of a smiling bare-chested man with a small child, recently shown to people in different countries in a survey, was that it must be a paedophile. Italians were far more likely to see it as father and son. This is the climate which has led to an entirely serious proposal to tag small children in supermarket creches, employing an extension of the scanning technology used to keep track of goods on the shelves. The supermarket concerned clearly believes parents will welcome it, and will be more likely to shop at its stores. In fact, everywhere you look there are new plans to monitor and control children ever more closely. Every hour of our children's time must be observed and must be known. When does this obsession with monitoring childcare spill over from an entirely understandable and commendable concern for children's safety into molly-coddling that undermines their ability to learn how to fend for themselves, or, worse, exercise control of their behaviour? After all, Jeremy Bentham's vision of the perfect utilitarian prison was one where the warder could spy at any time on the activities of any prisoner, like a malign spider at the centre of a web. Our increasingly controlling and utilitarian vision of childhood explains the urge to educate at an earlier and earlier age. Nurseries and schools are in danger of being turned into knowledge factories in which our toddlers are the means of production, transforming gobbets of knowledge into increased national output. The people who care for them, chosen by parents on the basis of trust, will become subject to an authoritarian official inspection regime. The figure of the government inspector is not, in general, a loved or even respected one. The bureaucrat with powers over other people's jobs is all too often a petty tyrant. This is taking the idea of the nanny state all too literally. Obviously a balance has to be struck. We must take care to keep our children safe, to educate them well, even ensure they are happy. The Government has to set minimum standards for childcare. Parents have to take all sensible precautions. And we must accept that there are bad carers and bad parents and bad people out there. But there are costs to micro-managing every detail of children's lives. All those of us who are adults today will have experienced a much freer childhood than our own kids do now. We wandered around alone, caught buses and were sent to the shops at a younger age. We got into scrapes, or even danger. We learnt to cope. Now we are trying to teach our own children to cope at the same time as trying to preserve them from taking any of the risks they are meant to learn to handle. I don't believe it is possible. Experience can not be taught. They will have to cope later, and they will do so less well. This is not to argue sentimentally in favour of the school of hard knocks, but rather to point out that disappointment lies in store in any attempt to escape this trade-off between providing children with perfect safety and giving them the experiences that will teach them to protect themselves. It is an inescapable pain of parenthood that you can not do everything for your children. In fact, the best principle to apply in steering them safely towards adulthood is probably one of benign neglect. As a teenager I kept a notebook in which I listed all the draconian laws I would pass to make the country a better place when I was running it. Luckily for the country, I gave up my youthful ambition to pursue a career in politics. But you get the impression many members of the present government were equally obnoxious as adolescents and, worse, have kept their notebooks. The message in the new policy, like the message in warnings of stranger danger, is the same for parents and children alike. It is don't trust anybody because nobody trusts you. What a sad and dangerous country Britain has become. -- Comment in the Sunday Times... Only last week, it happened that I was walking back from the post office when I heard someone screaming for help. I crossed the road, wondering if it was just a game, and found a young boy hanging by one arm from the balcony where he had been playing. Beneath him was a 12ft drop onto concrete. I caught him but the mother who eventually came out to investigate his howls released a torrent of abuse. Had I been a man, she'd have called the police. Nowadays, the only unpaid adult interested in our children is expected to be a paedophile. ----------------------------------------------------------- UK: ----------------------------------------------------------- July 99 _Sex crimes 'most likely' from 14 year-old boys_ Sex criminals are more likely to be discovered among 14-year-old boys than males of any other age, Government figures have shown today. The official data, believed to be the first of its kind, shows that the profile of sex offenders in Britain is different to that of other criminals. Most crimes are committed by males in their late teens, with cases of violence, theft and burglary most common among boys aged 15 to 18. However, the figures which emerged today show that convictions or cautions for 'sex offences' are most frequent among people between the ages of 14 and 17, with the peak at 14. The numbers, from the Home Office Cautions and Court Proceedings database, have prompted claims that they destroy the stereotype of middle-aged paedophiles preying on small children. Professor Roger Matthews, of Middlesex University and a criminologist, said: "We tend to think of sex offenders as old men attacking young girls or boys, but all the research suggests that the victim and perpetrator are likely to be much closer in age." The figures were released in the Commons in response to a question from Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Alan Beith. In 1997, the most recent year available, there were 6,441 sex crimes recorded on the database. Of these, 248 were carried out by 14-year-olds and warranted either prosecution or a police caution. The percentage of crimes involving force or enticement is not given. The National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles 1990-91 which interviewed nearly 19,000 people aged 16-59, found that 33.8 percent of women and 55.8 percent of men report having had their sexual experience before the age of 15. The Government is sponsoring a pioneering therapy project in Oxfordshire which is working with 11 to 18-year-olds who have displayed "sexually concerning behaviours" such as indecent exposure, voyeurism, and 'obsession with pornography'. ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: Crackpot idea of the month ------------------------------------------------------------ _Dogs 'could keep order in school'_ BIG DOGS should be trained as classroom assistants for primary school teachers, a teaching union said yesterday. Delegates at the Professional Association of Teachers' conference in Southport backed a proposal from Wendy Dyble, an infants' teacher from the Shetland Islands, who said that dogs could round up children and keep them in check: "A big dog would also be helpful for breaking up fights and looking for lost property, like gym shoes or Barbie dolls." A school dog was a fixture in many schools in the 1940s and 1950s, but have now become a rarity owing to pressure on funds, hygiene concerns and a lack of playing fields for exercise. ----------------------------------------------------------- [ Whatever next, barbed wire and watchtowers ? Ooops no, we have those already... :( ] Thailand: ------------------------------------------------------------ _Child sex charges a set-up: Australian_ Australian John Joseph Kosky, sweltering in police cells 200 metres from Thailand's Pattaya Beach, looked distraught and haggard today as he said he had been "set up" on child sex charges. The 67-year-old former private school teacher, who was wearing only a pair of shorts, pulled on a shirt to speak to The Age through cell bars. "I am not guilty,'' Mr Kosky said. "I have been set up. Conditions here are terrible." In linked raids, Thai police arrested a British private school teacher and two Dutch men who are also accused of having sex with under-age boys. The British school teacher also protests his innocence, and claims that police video tapes of the raid on his hotel room will prove him right. Police have alleged that Mr Kosky's apartment was raided after a 15-year-old Thai boy said that he had been paid to stay with Mr Kosky and provide sexual acts with other foreign men. Police in Pattaya have launched a crackdown on suspected foreign paedophiles. However, local child protection organisations have complained that many suspects were able to secure their freedom by paying bribes. ------------------------------------------------------------ Australia: ------------------------------------------------------------ Wednesday 21 July, 1999 The Queensland Council for Civil Liberties is calling for the right of appeal for convicted paedophiles against any decision to publish their names and addresses on their release. The council says it does not support the draft legislation but is pleased at least the Queensland Community Corrections Board, rather than the Attorney-General, will decide on publication. The council's Terry O'Gorman says there is always the concern of political influence. "In 1996 the then Premier sacked the entire parole board because he didn't like a decision they made," Mr O'Gorman said. "Therefore while we accept that if the concept of a Megan's Law is to be implemented, while we're opposed to it, it's better it be implemented by a parole board with a right of appeal to a judge," he said. ------------------------------------------------------------ Eire: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 1999 _Nun jailed for rape of girl, 10 _ A FORMER nun was jailed for life yesterday for the rape of a 10-year-old girl in her care despite claims by defence lawyers that her conviction was possibly a miscarriage of justice. Nora Wall, 51, formerly known as Sister Dominic, was convicted by a majority verdict last month at Dublin Central Criminal Court of helping an accomplice rape the girl at St Michael's Child Care Centre at Cappoquin, Co Waterford. Mr Justice Paul Carney said Wall was "the leader" in the offence, which occurred between January 1987 and December 1989. He said she had been in charge of the home for up to 30 children and was "the only person in the world" responsible for protecting the child at the time. Wall's co-accused, Paul "Pablo" McCabe, 50, a homeless man who had himself been brought up at an "industrial school" at the same location, received a 12-year sentence. Mr Justice Paul Carney said there were some rape cases "so gross and so appalling that the courts must not recoil from the principle of imposing the maximum sentence". -- July 28th 1999 _Former nun, man have convictions quashed_ Disturbing questions raise by conduct of abuse trial Former nun Ms Nora Wall and Mr Paul McCabe have had their convictions for rape quashed by the Court of Criminal Appeal. Ms Wall and Mr McCabe were in court to hear the decisions. This followed an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions to have the verdicts set aside. Yesterday's hearing before a packed court took just 20 minutes to reverse the effects of the trial. Both defendants had been convicted last week of the rape of a 10-year-old girl in the care of the Sisters of Mercy children's home in Cappoquin, Co Waterford, on a date in 1987 or 1988. Ms Wall was given a life sentence for the rape last Friday and Mr McCabe a 12-year term for the same offence. Yesterday, both were freed. Mr Denis Vaughan Buckley SC, for the State, told the three judges he had been instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions to consent to the court's allowing an appeal against conviction. There was a factor relating to the woman who made the allegations which might be considered relevant and of which the defence was unaware, he said. The nature of this factor was not disclosed in open court but Mr Vaughan Buckley indicated the defence had now been made aware of its import. ------------------------------------------------------------ USA: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 99 _Appeals court overturns 30-year sentence in sex case_ _WAUSAU, WIS. A state appeals court Tuesday threw out the sex convictions that landed a man in prison for 30 years, saying there had been "egregious conduct" by Oneida County sheriff detectives. The 3rd District Court of Appeals said James HH's constitutional right to have an attorney was violated in obtaining of evidence and he deserves a new trial. HH repeatedly told Oneida County sheriff detectives that he wanted to contact his attorney but was denied the right, the three-judge panel ruled. At one point, a detective knew HH's attorney was in the sheriff's department but he was also denied access to HH and police questioning of HH continued, court records said. HH's repeated requests to call his attorney "serve to emphasize the egregious conduct on the part of police in denying HH access to counsel," Judge R. Thomas Cane wrote. "Clearly, given the circumstances, a reasonable officer should have known that HH's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was sufficiently asserted," Cane wrote. Oneida County Sheriff Tim Miller declined comment on the appeals court decision Tuesday. HH, 47, was convicted in 1997 of three counts of sexual exploitation of a child, one count of child enticement and one count of possession of child pornography and sentenced to 30 years in prison, court records said. The allegations involved separate incidents with 16- and 15-year-old girls, court records said. Assistant Attorney General Gregory Posner-Weber said the ruling clarifies how a defendant properly invokes his right to an attorney. "It is obviously a victory for Mr. HH." ------------------------------------------------------------ USA: ------------------------------------------------------------ Editorial from The Guide, August 1999: _ABUSING CHILDREN_ A shocking story of children, sex, and police unfolded this past month in York Haven, Pennsylvania. Police there are taking credit for busting up a "sex ring" that involved the "rape" and "molestation" of dozens of that small town's children, age seven to 16. At least six people have been charged with felonious sexual activity involving children, and one person has been convicted of raping an 11-year-old boy. Two of the accused have already been sentenced to jail. All those convicted face possible lifetime registration as sexually dangerous persons, required wherever they go to report their status to neighbors, employers, and police. And investigators fear that they may be dealing with "only the tip of the iceberg." To hear police and prosecutors tell the tale, their actions saved the town's kids from the rapacious sexuality of predatory monsters. But any rational person hearing the uncontested facts of the case would reach a different conclusion. There were no adults involved in the "sex ring." All the participants -- both "victims" and "perpetrators"-- were children. No force or coercion of any kind was ever alleged. All those involved acted voluntarily. None of the children complained about the activities. Problems began only after a participant's mother found out about the shenanigans and went to the cops. The person convicted of "raping" the 11-year-old boy was a 16-year-old girl (who was deemed guilty because she was more than four years older than her "victim"). The "crimes" took place in the woods surrounding town, in various kids' homes, and after a game of spin-the-bottle at a sleep-over. Clearly, the "sex ring" that police crowed about busting up was not comprised of predatory monsters. It was simply kids experimenting with sex the way that kids have always done. But in our insanely sexphobic culture, what used to be called "playing doctor" is now branded child rape. With tragic irony, those claiming to protect children have become their worst abusers. Police have done more than unfairly prosecute a few normal, curious kids. They have jailed them and labelled them "sex criminals" for the rest of their lives. They have instilled sexual fear and loathing and perpetrated the notion that sex and sexual curiosity are monumentally evil. So virulent is their anti-sex crusading, they horribly abuse the children they profess to care for. This abomination is tolerated because of the sexual McCarthyism evident whenever childhood sexuality is involved. Any parent questioning prosecutors becomes an accomplice. Any child denying harm is judged a perpetrator. Any citizen insisting on civil rights for the accused is deemed a suspect. And anyone suggesting that rational, moral laws aimed at regulating children's sexuality must distinguish actions that involve violence from those that don't is labelled a child molester. It takes rare bravery to challenge the prevailing witch hunt mentality. As gay people, we know what it is like to have sexuality unfairly and irrationally demonized. Let us, therefore, find the courage to tell the truth: the real child abusers in York Haven are those police, prosecutors, therapists, and social workers who are willing to incarcerate and persecute kids in order to teach them that sex is wicked. We must demand that curious children not be made to suffer because of adults' insane fears. article from The Guide, August 1999 _PA SEX POLICE NAB KIDS - Child felons convicted_ Did the children think of them selves as victims? Newberry Township police chief Bill Myers chuckles and then pauses. "I would say that they did, once it started it coming to light -- in other words, after the police became involved in it." By the time police and county investigators had interrogated some 24 youngsters implicated in a juvenile "sex ring" in York Haven, Pennsylvania, there were "victims" and "perpetrators" aplenty, but it wasn't easy to tell which from whom. Police say that the sex ring, which they busted last December, involved 17 children, ages seven to 16, who had sex together sporadically for two-and-a-half years in York Haven, population around 750, a down-at-the-heels hamlet on the Susquehanna River between Harrisburg and York. Pennsylvania law does not allow for prosecution of children younger than ten. But York County Assistant District Attorney Marylou Erb charged all participants ten or older -- six in all -- on counts ranging from "involuntary deviate sexual intercourse" and "indecent assault" to "[statutory] rape." One or two of the youngsters have been jailed, police chief Myers says, but details of the punishments have not been released. Juvenile court records are sealed and prosecutors won't discuss the case. A staffer at the York County DA's office who identified herself only as "Randy" said the investigation into the sexual activity was over. But Myers told The Guide that prosecutions against some of the children are continuing. None of the boys and girls had complained to authorities about the sex, which authorities grant was voluntary. "From what the investigators told me, the parents were shocked and surprised, while the kids were more nonchalant because they didn't understand what was wrong with it," says Caryl Clarke, a reporter with the York Daily Record, who covered the story. Participants in the sex ring were students at Northeastern Middle and York Haven Elementary Schools. "Some of the assaults occurred in homes," noted the Daily Record. "Others happened outside, such as in wooded areas." One of the last instances of sex play occurred at a sleepover after the 16th birthday party of one of the girls. Two boys, 11, were present, one boy 13, and another girl, 16. "Supposedly what happened was they were playing spin the bottle and things got beyond that,'' chief Myers told the Associated Press. "The story was the bottle pointed toward one of the males and he had to have intercourse with one of the girls. Well, I guess this turned out to be just the tip of the iceberg.'' After the birthday party, according to the AP, one of the girls told to her mother that one of the 11-year-old boys had sex play with a seven-year-old neighbor, whose mother contacted the police. The tattletale girl was later convicted of rape for consensual sex with the 11-year-old boy. Children were interrogated in their homes and in the local courthouse, according to Myers, with their parents present for the questioning. Parents faced the risk of prosecution or having their children taken away by the state or if they did not cooperate with authorities. District Attorney investigator William "Skip" Clancy, Jr. told the York Daily Record that he had to first allay the children's fears of law enforcement: "We assured them we didn't want them doing this when they are older. We told them the idea behind the juvenile justice system is to get them the treatment and counselling so they will not be in trouble as adults." But after questioning them, Clancy's office sprung felony charges against the youngsters who were old enough to be tried. York County Assistant DA Marylou Erb and Clancy did not return numerous calls from The Guide. When told of the reason for calling, staffers at the DA's office refused to identify themselves. Did anyone in York County question whether childhood sex play should be regarded as criminal? "I spoke to a sociologist or psychologist up at Penn State, and he said he didn't want to be quoted, but he thought that it's the most normal and natural thing in all the world," says Caryl Clarke of the York Daily Record. "He said that society these days frowns upon it, and that may be for the best, but that without education and a lot of watching, it's the normal way [for children] to be. In rural areas with all the farm animals around, it's even more common." Clarke says she has written only one article about the case, partly from concern of the effect of publicity on the children involved. Richard C. Pillard, MD professor of psychiatry at Boston University School of Medicine, told The Guide he was incredulous at the prosecution. "Freud's view of the sexual nature of children was the scandal of his day," Pillard said. "No one argues for unrestrained sexual expression or sexual coercion, but have we not learned something? Have we not learned that the repression, the criminalization, of childhood sexuality, can lead to future neurotic problems for children, their families and the communities in which they live?" ------------------------------------------------------------ Net: hacker news ------------------------------------------------------------ July 1999 _Bald Lolitas Take Off Batman's Warez_ One of the internet's most popular warez [pirated software] sites, Batman, based in South Korea, seems to have been taken down by fellow hacker. Someone, calling himself PUs5y, took offence on seeing that Batman's web site was running a porn banner advert. Such banner adverts are common on warez web sites, but this banner purported to lead to a pay site called Bald Lolitas. Despite the provocative name, the advert featured grown women and led to a site where all models have legal ages. However, PUs5y, made wild threats against the Batman forum, calling Batman a "baby raper". About one hour later the forum was down. Net traffic traces on PUs5y led to the Pacific Stars and Stripes, located in Okinawa, Japan. ------------------------------------------------------------ Germany: ------------------------------------------------------------ 16th July 1999 _Cold war returns as Germans strip off on beaches_ A BATTLE has broken out on Germany's Baltic coast between nudists and anti-nudists in a row that pits prudish tourists from the old West Germany against naturists from the East. In the resort of Prerow, angry pensioners threw sand at Elke Renger, 18, who was sunbathing nude, and demanded to know why she would not retire to one of the 68 beaches set aside for nudists. She said: "That's 18th-century. At the Love Parade" - the pop festival held last weekend in Berlin - "thousands of young girls went topless. Do I have to hide myself?" Miss Renger is from Dresden, in the former East Germany, where people treasured the freedom to take their clothes off almost anywhere they felt like it, a liberty the Communist authorities did not condone but could not prevent. But since reunification in 1990, more and more tourists from the former West Germany have flooded into the former East, and many do not want to be surrounded by naked adults and children when they go to the Baltic coast or to the thousands of inland lakes where bathing is also possible. East German nudists bitterly resented the attempt by the authorities in the early years after reunification to confine them 'like primitive tribesmen to remote reservations' in order to avoid causing offence to wealthy visitors from the west. But this summer the nudists are making a stronger effort than before to recover lost ground, aided by a growing fashion for nude bathing among former West Germans. The authorities in the Baltic coast resorts are being inundated with complaints about nude bathing, but have hung back from imposing permitted fines of up to 3,300 UKP. About a quarter of their 300,000 visitors want to bathe naked, but many others insist that bathing suits should be worn. A spokesman for the resorts said: "We have to proceed with great sensitivity. The nudists are paying guests too." ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: Big Brother Britain ------------------------------------------------------------ July 29, 1999 _Use encryption, go to jail?_ LONDON -- Encryption users could face up to two years in prison for refusing to hand over the keys to their code, according to Britain's proposed Electronic Communications Bill. The bill is causing concern among privacy advocates and opposition parties, who say the bill gives law enforcement wide-reaching power over private Internet communications. Most aggravating, the bill calls for a possible two years in prison for anyone refusing to turn over the encryption key or the message in plain text to law-enforcement officials. It also calls for a five-year prison term for tipping off senders that they are being investigated, according to Caspar Bowden, director of the London-based Foundation for Information Policy Research. Even discussing an investigation in public, such as complaining about alleged abuses of law enforcement to the media, may also be punishable by imprisonment, said Bowden. "Let's say that someone under investigation sends me a message with encryption that can only be decrypted by the receiver. The authorities come to me and tell me that they are investigating someone, but won't tell me who, so they ask for all my private keys," Bowden said. Refusing this request from the authorities could get him two years in prison, said Bowden. In such a case, the authorities would have all of Bowden's private keys, enabling law enforcement to read all encrypted correspondence that was sent to him. Bowden would then have no choice, he said, because by informing anyone of this, or even asking them to change their key, he would break the "tipping off" clause of the bill and in turn and face five years imprisonment. -- PERSONAL bank accounts, confidential medical records and individual tax files are set to be accessed by the Government as part of a far-reaching clamp down on crime being actively considered by Downing Street. The proposal was immediately condemned by civil libertarians last night as a further step towards "big brother Britain." A report sent to Tony Blair by the inter-departmental ministerial group on fraud, recommends drastic changes to the law to give Whitehall departments sweeping new powers to compare files and obtain private information. -- Controversial plastic bullets, which the European Union wants to ban, can now be used in England and Wales. From today, new rules make it explicit that baton rounds, as they are officially known, can be used, Home Secretary Jack Straw said. In April 1997, the European Parliament called for the banning of plastic bullets as they constitute "excessive force" and breach the United Nations code of conduct for law enforcers. ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ 15th July 1999 _Parents asked not to video pupils_ PARENTS at a Yorkshire primary school have been asked not to make videos of their children's sports day because of fears that the tapes could fall into the hands of paedophiles. The move, which comes a year after teachers were told they should not apply sun cream to children because of the risk of being accused of sexual abuse, was described as "a very worrying precedent" by parent-teachers' association leaders. David Grundy, head teacher, asked parents of the 238 pupils at Shay Lane Junior and Infant School, Crofton, near Wakefield, to leave their camcorders at home during the annual two-day competition. The move followed a request from some parents, who feared that the traditional event may be used as an excuse by paedophiles to film children. Several parents ignored the ban, which triggered some complaints to the school governors. One angry parent said: "It's ridiculous. This is political correctness gone mad." But Mr Grundy said: "A couple of sets of parents had told me that their children felt uncomfortable and exposed at being filmed on video." Margaret Morrison, of the National Confederation of Parent-Teacher Associations, said: "If parents cannot take videos of their children at a school sports day because of the fear that the pictures may fall into the hands of paedophiles, then the world is a very sad place. "What will come next? Will parents be banned from filming their children's school play? I would certainly not agree with preventing parents from taking videos of important days in the lives of their own children." A spokesman for Wakefield Council said: "We cannot comment. It is an internal matter for the school." ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 1999 _'Fool-proof' security cameras put the innocent in the frame_ It was hailed as one of the most important modern tools in catching criminals, but research has shown that closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras are just as likely to pinpoint the innocent as the guilty. Research by academics at Glasgow and Stirling universities, presented during a recent psychology and law conference at Trinity College Dublin, has shown that when people are asked to match photographs with images on CCTV footage, they get it wrong almost half the time. Mike Burton, from Glasgow University, said people were found to be "highly error- prone" in making a correct match in 56% of the trials. "CCTV images are tremendously useful sources as evidence, but caution must be exercised in using video images alone to identify suspects," Burton said. Vicki Bruce, from the University of Stirling, said the results could have serious consequences in trials where an innocent person could be wrongly identified as a criminal. "Judges and juries should be warned that apparent resemblance between different face images can be misleading," she said. The academics conducted a series of experiments with 200 photographs, asking participants to match the individuals to figures on CCTV footage. "People who are asked to compare CCTV images of unfamiliar people against candidates' faces make a high proportion of errors - frequently confusing one person with someone else who looks similar," said Bruce. "Error rates are quite high when faces are unfamiliar, even when the image quality is good and comparison faces are matched closely in their viewpoint." Britain has the largest number of CCTV cameras in the world. One million have been installed. -- STREET spy cameras have little or no effect on crime, a Government-commissioned survey has revealed. Contrary to the belief that CCTV lowered crime and led to more arrests, the report, funded by the Scottish Office, concludes that "reductions were noted in certain categories [of crime] but there was no evidence to suggest that the cameras had reduced crime overall". The report, released last week with no announcement, is the largest independent criminological study ever conducted into CCTV. The three-year study, conducted by the Scottish Centre for Criminology, analysed crime figures before and after the introduction of cameras in central Glasgow. It found that recorded crime rose by nine per cent after the introduction of cameras, while detected crime decreased by four per cent. The report's main author, criminologist Jason Ditton, said the findings "have taken the stardust out of our eyes about this technology". -- Two schools near the controversial Nottingham prison detention unit for released paedophiles have been given closed-circuit television cameras after protests by parents anxious about their children's safety. Four cameras will be installed at Seely Infant and Junior Schools, just 250 yards from the prison where paedophiles are held. Linda Robinson, head of the infants' school, said: "This kind of security will help ease parents' minds." ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: ------------------------------------------------------------ Thursday _15 July_ 1999 _Boy defends his 'molester' in court_ A MOTHER of four YM, 23, befriended a young boy and taught him how to kiss before luring him to her bedroom for sex, it was alleged today. Lincoln Crown Court was told that after having intercourse with the boy four times she told a neighbour about the relationship, saying in the child's presence: "Isn't he lovely. Doesn't he look older than he is?" The defendant, a single woman whose children are all under five, denies four charges of indecent assault. The offences allegedly took place at her home in Winthorpe, near Skegness. The boy, now 12, who cannot be named, was ordered by the judge to remove his baseball cap before giving evidence by video link. He told the jury: "I love her. I know I do. I feel it." The trial continues. ------------------------------------------------------------ UK: law note: ------------------------------------------------------------ July 99 A JUDGE yesterday made a landmark ruling championing freedom of speech for "the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and provocative". Ruling that a woman had the right to preach outside Wakefield Cathedral, despite the annoyance she caused, Lord Justice Sedley said: "Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having." The High Court judge, sitting in London with Mr Justice Collins, allowed an appeal by Alison Redmond-Bate of Leeds against a conviction by local magistrates for obstructing police. The conviction had been upheld at crown court. -- _Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions _Before Lord Justice Sedley and Mr Justice Collins Judgment July 23rd 1999. ------------------------------------------------------------ USA: ------------------------------------------------------------ _State can't infringe on free speech of adults, U.S. court says_ DETROIT -- A federal judge invalidated a Michigan law that sought to keep sexually explicit material from minors, ruling that the government cannot infringe on the free speech of adults. In declaring the law unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow joined federal judges in New York and New Mexico that have struck down similar laws. The American Civil Liberties Union and a coalition of nine Internet firms from across the United States brought the lawsuit. "The decision is a victory for free speech on the Internet," said Michael Steinberg, legal director of the Michigan ACLU. "This law would have criminalized a wide array of valuable speech in cyberspace ranging from advice about safe sex and AIDS prevention." Opponents argued that the law was so loosely worded that a person who posted torrid sections of Ulysses by James Joyce or Lady Chatterley's Lover by D.H Lawrence could be charged with a two-year felony. "To comply with the act, a (user) must speak only in language suitable for children," Tarnow wrote in a 31 page ruling. "Even under the guise of protecting minors, the government may not justify the suppression of constitutionally protected speech because to do so would burn the house to roast the pig." The chief sponsor of the law vowed to fight on. Gov. John Engler signed a law in June that would make the use of a computer to disseminate sexually explicit materials to minors a felony punishable by two years in prison and a $10,000 fine. The law was set to take effect Aug. 1. ------------------------------------------------------------ USA: Letter to the LA Times, re the Rind storm: ------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks for publishing the thoughtful commentary by Tavris on the current uproar over the Psychological Bulletin article on the long-term effects of child sexual abuse. The McCarthyesque witch hunt engaged in by religious/moralistic zealots against the authors of that article and the American Psychological Assn. indeed represents a dangerous assault on the process of scientific research in general. The attempt to censor the publication of empirical research findings because they seem to offend some group's religious/moral beliefs (did any of these people even bother to read the last paragraph of the Rind et al. article?) and to abridge scientists' 1st Amendment rights in general is, in my opinion, infinitely more dangerous than some imagined effect of the Rind et al. article on the imagined defense of a handful of pedophiles. (As Tavris points out, pedophilia is still illegal.) [name] Professor of Psychology Cal State Fullerton ------------------------------------------------------------- Crypto snippet: "Hey, Bill, I _always_ liked you!" :) ------------------------------------------------------------- July 99 In a private meeting with House Democrats last month, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates said his top public policy priority was to have Congress lift controls on the export of encryption products. ------------------------------------------------------------- [ Just in case you can't wait for the 'Boy' Bill vs. 'Firestarter' Reno face-off, here are the 128-bit Windows cryptography upgrade patches, downloadable from anywhere on the planet :-) http://www.replay.com/ ] USA: ------------------------------------------------------------- _Report says Net filter blocks protected material, fails to block porn_ 29th July 1999 Bess, the filtering software product marketed to schools across the country and designed to protect kids from harmful online material, fails to block large amounts of pornography, even as it blocks a significant amount of constitutionally protected material, says the latest study by the Censorware Project [http://censorware.org] [http://censorware.org/reports/bess/] is the fifth major report on filtering products issued by the Censorware Project, a group that opposes use of Internet filters in public institutions. The group has previously issued reports on Smartfilter, X-Stop, Websense and Cyberpatrol. The group tested the filtering product for several days in late July. The findings revealed that various non-pornographic materials were barred, including: + The Feminists Against Censorship Web site. + Sex education Web sites. + A gay-owned bookstore's site. + Articles from *Time* magazine's Netly News. The study says that free-speech activists are "seriously concerned about the perfectly ordinary webpages which are blocked by the software." "More shocking than unfairly censored speech, however, is the sheer volume of accessible pornography," says the report. The report lists approximately 50 major pornographic Web sites that the Censorware Project says were not blocked. ------------------------------------------------------------- Science corner: ------------------------------------------------------------- July 22nd 1999 _Boys like it hot_ When soaring summer temperatures put the thermometer in the pink, more baby boys are conceived, a German scientist says. And when winter's chill sinks the mercury into the blue, more baby girls are conceived. Alexander Lerchl of the University of Munster has discovered that more boys are born in Germany between April and June, and significantly fewer in October. Experiments with rats and bats had already hinted that environmental temperatures could affect the sex ratio of offspring, says New Scientist magazine which reports on the unusual study. Dr Lerchl searched German meteorological and birth records over a 49-year period from 1946 to 1995. He found that sex ratio seemed to correlate with temperature about one month before conception. Hot summers or unseasonably warm patches during this period yielded more boys, while unusually cold weather favoured girls. Temperature deviations of just a few degrees centigrade appeared to have an impact. One explanation, says Dr Lerchl, is that temperature affects processes within the testes. He speculates that hot spells may damage sperm carrying an X chromosome more than sperm carrying a Y, so more boys are conceived. He also speculates that the temperature rise that global warming may bring could further increase the ratio of males to females, which already favours boys by a few per cent. However, there could be a more prosaic explanation for the effect - people have sex more often when it is hot. Frequent sex increases a woman's chance of conceiving as soon as she ovulates. Other studies have shown that this results in more sons, possibly because sperm carrying a Y chromosome are faster but less robust than X carriers which stand a better chance if they have to wait for ovulation. ------------------------------------------------------------- [ So now you know - honeymoon in the Antarctic ! :) ] UK feature: ------------------------------------------------------------- The New Statesman Special Report July 1999 _How the police trawl the innocent_ As many as 5,000 care workers may be facing complaints of child abuse. Are they the victims of the biggest witch-hunt in history, asks _Richard Webster One evening in May of this year Brian Johnson, a 43-year-old former care worker from South Wales, telephoned me from a call box in Cardiff. He had been charged on several counts of physical and sexual abuse. But the prosecution had offered a deal. Good-humoured as always, Johnson told me: "If I plead guilty to the physical charges, they are prepared to drop all the sexual allegations and I will almost certainly walk out of court a free man. So what do I do?" I didn't really need to answer. Johnson had already made up his mind. His legal team had collected substantial evidence that all the allegations against him had been fabricated. "I'm going back tomorrow," he said, "and I am going to tell them exactly where they can stick their offer. I am going to fight." For some time, there was no news. Then I found out what had happened. After a three-week trial, Brian Johnson had been found guilty on several counts of sexual abuse. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison. He was led from the court, shouting out that he was innocent. The evidence against Johnson was collected during a new form of police inquiry which has developed only in the past ten years: the trawling operation. First used by Leicestershire police in the Frank Beck case in 1990, the method spread to North Wales, Cheshire and Merseyside. Now it has been used by as many as two-thirds of the country's police forces to convict dozens of alleged abusers. Detective Superintendent John Robbins, of the Merseyside police, has described this new kind of investigation as "the reverse of normal police methods". Instead of starting from a crime and setting out to find the criminal, the trawling procedure starts with the suspect (or an allegation) and then attempts to find the crime. Police officers trace and interview former residents of care homes and, during these interviews, more evidence against the original suspect, or against other care workers, almost unfailingly emerges. These investigations are often said to involve "children's homes". In fact they are usually residential institutions for troubled or difficult adolescents and, since the allegations of abuse usually refer back ten, 20 or even 30 years, those making them are not children at all. They are almost always adults, many of them with long criminal records. In a number of cases they make their allegations in prison or while facing serious criminal charges. It is here that the real dangers of police trawling operations become apparent - or ought to become apparent. If police officers interview hundreds of damaged young people with long records of deception and dishonesty, with the aim of gathering allegations of abuse against those who once cared for them, it would be surprising if they did not succeed in provoking a large number of false allegations - particularly when it is known that such allegations can result in thousands of pounds being paid out by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. Yet police forces up and down the land continue their trawling operations with the full knowledge and implicit approval of Home Office ministers. Lord Williams of Mostyn, for example, recently wrote that there are "no viable alternatives" and that "sexual abuse allegations are too serious not to look for further evidence". Here is an example of how the police do it. In September 1997 former residents of St George's School in Formby, Merseyside, which had always enjoyed an unblemished reputation, received a letter from Robbins, headed "Operation Care". It read: I am the senior investigating officer of the above operation which is currently investigating allegations of child abuse reported to have taken place within a number of residential establishments in the Merseyside area. I am aware from records provided to me that in times past you have been a resident at St George's/Clarence House School . . . I am concerned that there is a possibility that such abuse may have taken place whilst you were in residence there. If you have any information *or if we can help you with any complaint you may have *[my italics], please respond by completing and returning the attached slip using the enclosed pre-paid envelope or by contacting a member of my staff using the above telephone number . . . One man interviewed as a result of this trawl is the Southampton football manager Dave Jones, who worked at St George's for four years during the 1980s, and whose conduct at the time was considered exemplary. His case was leaked to the press because he happens to be well known. But it is believed that 80 former members of staff face allegations, and Robbins recently told a judge that charges would be brought against as many as 50 of them. Yet until recently St George's enjoyed an unblemished reputation. St George's is only one of a hundred institutions that have been investigated by the Merseyside and Cheshire police forces in the past five years. It would seem likely that, in these two counties alone, trawling operations have led to allegations being made against as many as a thousand care workers. The original North Wales investigation produced allegations against 365 different people, and this tally has now risen. In South Wales, according to a report in *Community Care *magazine, an investigation carried out by Gwent police into a single home, Ty Mawr, has already led to accusations against 60 former members of staff. So far, however, the police have interviewed only 200 former residents. According to the report, it is their intention to interview another 6,800 before their investigation is concluded. In another care home, five former members of staff, one of whom is in his eighties, have recently been charged by the South Wales police with more than 200 counts of abuse. Another case involves Derek Brushett, former head of Bryn-y-Don. So well-respected was he that he became a Welsh Office inspector. Yet he now faces 40 counts of sexual and physical abuse relating to more than 20 complainants. None of these complaints was made spontaneously and all were the products of police trawling exercises. At least 50 other institutions in South Wales are under investigation. Meanwhile on Tyneside, Operation Rose has reached such a pitch that Gill Rutherford, a solicitor with Thompson's, has retained the services of five barristers, who meet weekly. About 100 care workers have already faced police interviews; more than 20 have been charged. Given the statistics already in the public domain, it is reasonable to assume that the number of care workers implicated by trawled allegations is now in excess of 3,000 and may well be approaching 5,000. Many of these cases will never come to court. But with the cost of the North Wales tribunal alone estimated at 10-15 million UKP, the overall cost to the public purse of convening inquiries, mounting police trawling operations, co-ordinating with social services, bringing suspects before the courts and holding those convicted in prison must already run into hundreds of millions of pounds. Most people would consider this money well spent if it were indeed contributing to the cause of justice. But many lawyers believe that exactly the opposite is happening. Certainly some of the care workers involved in these cases are guilty of sexual abuse. But from the beginning, solicitors have expressed concern about the alarmingly high level of false allegations that appears to result from trawling operations. Chris Saltrese, a solicitor based in Merseyside, takes the view that at least half the convictions obtained in Cheshire and Merseyside are unsound. He also thinks that, as the investigation in the North-west has gathered momentum, the number of false allegations has multiplied, to the point where as many as 90 per cent of trawled complaints have been fabricated. Chief among the complex motives of those who make false complaints, he believes, is the desire to gain compensation. The principle underlying all trawling operations is, in the words of Robbins, that of "corroboration by volume". Terry Hoskin, the former head of St Aidan's, Widnes, whose appeal against his conviction in 1996 on a number of serious sexual offences will be heard later this year, found himself facing allegations made by no fewer than 40 complainants. All but one had been trawled by the police. Even after the prosecution had discarded the more obvious fabrications, 20 complainants remained. In the face of such multiple allegations it is all but impossible to find judges or juries who are prepared to acquit, however many inconsistencies the evidence contains. The same factor appears to have played a part in the conviction of Brian Johnson last month, even though his own trial involved only four complainants. One allegation against Johnson and his co-defendant Geoffrey Morris (who pleaded guilty to a number of counts) involved a claim of satanic abuse: a black cloak, an altar and the drinking of blood were supposedly used as ritual preludes to sexual assault. Although the jury rejected this allegation, they accepted another from the same man that actually ran counter to the evidence before them. The man claimed that Morris had driven him in a minibus to a venue where he was sexually abused by both Morris and Johnson. Even though Morris could not drive, and even though this was accepted by the Crown, the jury convicted Johnson on this count. Another witness was a woman who claimed that Johnson had indecently assaulted her. Her psychiatric records suggested that she was unable to distinguish between truth and fantasy and that she had made numerous allegations which were not true. Ten years ago, after making an allegation of rape which had resulted in a police investigation, she eventually admitted that she had made up the entire incident. In court last month, however, she claimed that the rape had taken place after all. In spite of a great deal of other evidence, including the testimony of her former foster mother, which completely undermined the credibility of this witness, Johnson was found guilty of indecently assaulting her. In this respect, the trial followed the pattern of countless others involving care workers: the sheer quantity of complainants and allegations leads to a situation where the quality of the evidence offered becomes all but irrelevant. That Johnson - who, in the view of his legal team, is entirely innocent - should have been found guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" on the evidence presented is extremely disturbing. It is tempting to criticise the jury system itself. But the real responsibility lies with those who decided to put such cases before a jury in the first place. For sound historical and evidential reasons our legal system contains safeguards designed to protect both individual citizens and the public purse from unsound prosecutions ever being brought before a court. Since its creation in 1986, the Crown Prosecution Service has played a central role. Its brief is that it should allow prosecutions only if there is a realistic prospect of a conviction and if a prosecution would be in the public interest. A second safeguard has traditionally been provided by the magistrates' court. In cases initiated before April 1997 it is still possible to hold an old-style committal hearing in front of a magistrate. Witnesses can be called and magistrates can dismiss weak cases without them ever going before a judge. Even if this safeguard fails, judges can themselves dismiss cases or prevent unsound evidence going before a jury on a number of grounds. In any sane and reasonable society, no prosecution based on allegations that have been actively sought or solicited by police forces, in circumstances where substantial material rewards may be available to those who make false allegations, would ever be allowed to proceed. The case would be halted by the CPS or the evidence would be ruled inadmissible either by a magistrate or by the judge. The problem that our criminal justice system now faces is that the attitude we have adopted as a society towards allegations of sexual abuse is neither sane nor reasonable. So terrifying has the spectre of child sexual abuse become, so convinced are we that we are beset by some unspeakable evil, that the ordinary checks and balances built into our justice system have been rendered powerless. In recent years barristers have noticed an increasing tendency for the CPS to allow sexual cases to proceed, regardless of the quality of the evidence. At the same time both magistrates and judges seem terrified to use their powers to dismiss unsound prosecutions or to halt trials as an abuse of process. The terror that an innocent person might be found guilty, which has traditionally and rightly been the foundation on which our entire justice system has been built, has been replaced by the terror that a guilty man might go free. In these circumstances, in which both magistrates and judges have in effect relinquished their traditional responsibility to protect the public against ill-founded and dangerous prosecutions, it should scarcely be surprising that juries, misled by the court into believing that the evidence being presented to them is safe, should use this evidence as the basis for convicting the defendant. For juries, too, are susceptible to terror. And they, too, are liable to reach a verdict of guilty not on the evidence but in response to the fear that they might acquit a guilty man. If recent rulings are any guide, even some appeal court judges appear to have succumbed to the terror. When you are faced by an unspeakable evil, the safest course is always to convict, whatever reasonable doubts there may be about whether the defendant has actually committed the crimes of which he or she is accused. We saw that again and again in the cases brought after the IRA terror bombings. In such a climate, the dispensing of justice is replaced by a witch-hunt. And, because police trawling operations have been allowed to develop virtually unchallenged over ten years, we are now in the midst of a witch-hunt of unprecedented intensity. Perhaps the most lavishly resourced witch-hunt in history, taking up thousands of police hours and draining hundreds of millions of pounds of public money, the present one stretches across England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland and involves literally thousands of care workers, former care workers and an increasing number of teachers. One of the reasons that it has spread so rapidly, so silently and so invisibly is that all free societies depend ultimately not upon lawyers or politicians but upon journalists to watch over their essential liberties and to keep them safe. Yet in the present case journalists have themselves been responsible for driving the witch-hunt forward. Although we tend to assume that investigative journalists are among the most sceptical of observers, that is by no means always the case. As at least one former national newspaper editor has noted, journalists are sometimes the most credulous of people. So anxious are they for sensational stories that they are frequently unable to interrogate these stories sceptically or to investigate them properly. It is because the great children's home panic, in the midst of which we now find ourselves, was largely created by apparently responsible journalists writing for broadsheet newspapers (or for *Private Eye*) during the early years of this decade that its true nature has remained, in effect, invisible for so long. It is because it has been virtually undocumented by serious journalists that this particular moral panic has become so vast, so powerful and so dangerous. Much can now be done by politicians, by lawyers and by the judiciary. But whether it is done will depend on whether editors and journalists can wake from their slumberous credulity and begin to document in detail the phenomenon that they have played such a large role in creating. If they do not, it is likely that Brian Johnson, and the dozen or more other innocent care workers who are already serving long prison sentences, will continue to protest their innocence in vain and that the carefully prepared submissions of their lawyers will continue to be turned down by the Court of Appeal. If this should indeed happen, it is certain that they will be joined by many others from among the thousands who have had allegations made against them. Given the scale of the investigations that are now taking place, the number of innocent care workers in prison is likely to rise by the score until it reaches a hundred or more. Such a prospect should not be tolerated in any society that calls itself free. The present situation, where police forces hunt crimes, rather than criminals, should not be tolerated, either. In allowing retrospective trawling operations to develop in the way they have, we have created a machine for producing miscarriages of justice. That machine is now out of control. It has already done inestimable damage to countless innocent care workers and their families. If it is not halted soon, and halted by the very people who have thus far driven it forward, a great deal more damage will be done, and a tragedy that is already grave beyond the power of words to express will become graver still. *Richard Webster is the author of "The Great Children's Home Panic" (1998)* ------------------------------------------------------------- Book review: ------------------------------------------------------------- _Collusion: The Story of a Young Girl and Her Ballet Master_ Reviewed by Gilbert Adair A strange little book, Evan Zimroth's Collusion has a title that doesn't sound like a title, an author whose name doesn't sound like a woman's (which it is), an opening as provocative as an ending and an ending as teasing as an opening. It's a dancer's memoir - or rather, the memoir of someone who was what used to be called a baby ballerina, a 12-year-old dance student. Actually, it's easy to forget her age while one is reading the book, since the narrator's mindset is that of an adult (who happens to be an award-winning novelist) attempting to comprehend, many years after the event, why she colluded so slavishly in a sadomasochistic "gavotte of power and submission" with a despotic Russian ballet master she identifies only as F. One also has a sense, but this is, of course, mere conjecture, that writing of her experience represented for its author a belated act of exorcism. A strange little book, I say, strange and little mostly by virtue of what it leaves out. To take just one example, F's put-upon wife is named as Sonya and the school's pianist as Mr Shurbanov and Alicia Alonso, the Cuban prima ballerina, makes a cameo appearance in the text; so why is F alone designated by an initial, like a character from a Russian short story? Nor are we ever told where it's all taking place (or when, for that matter). It's obviously America, but it's equally obviously not New York, so where? And how on earth did F, Sonya and Shurbanov fetch up in whichever city it is? We're not informed. Do these omissions matter? As it transpires, scarcely at all (unless you feel that a dancer's memoir should be all tights, footlights and first nights). Collusion is no luvvie fest. Although the ballet world's sometimes sweaty and sometimes spangly rigours and rituals are by no means incidental to its fascination, its real subject is the erotic relationship between a pubescent girl and a man - whose teacher's pet she was - old enough to be her grandfather. Having written that incendiary sentence, however, I'm duty bound to add that F touches the 12-year-old Zimroth only to give her a thwack on the thighs with his cane after a graceless movement at the barre or to whisk a forbidden cigarette from her lips. Even when he invites her into his private quarters, it's to chat, pop chocolates into her mouth and, the closest we ever come to criminal paedophilia, show her a snapshot of his younger, sleeker self, naked save for a jockstrap. At one level, then, it may all seem like much ado about nothing, especially by current lurid standards of confessional prose. Zimroth was not raped or abused or even fumblingly "interfered with". Yet the experience was patently the intensest of her entire life, and it forced her, perhaps prematurely, to confront not just her own sexual instincts - as a little girl, she was, she admits, constantly fantasising about F having his way with her, "asking for it" - but that of many a supposedly innocent child. For all that, at first glance, it may strike the casual bookstore browser as innocuous and even slightly staid, Collusion is, therefore, a brave and disturbing book. ------------------------------------------------------------- Movie review: ------------------------------------------------------------- _Beau Pere_ _France, 1981_ _Running Length: _2:03 _Theatrical Aspect Ratio: _2.35:1 _Cast: _Patrick Dewaere, Ariel Besse, Maurice Ronet _Director: _Bertrand Blier _Producer: _Alain Sarde _Screenplay: _Bertrand Blier _Cinematography: _Sacha Vierny _Music: _Philippe Sarde _In French with subtitles_ As I watched Bertrand Blier's *Beau Pere*, I was strongly reminded of the controversy surrounding the release of Adrian Lyne's 1997 adaptation of Vladimir Nabokov's landmark novel, *Lolita*. Because it deals with one of society's strongest taboos - pedophilia - in a straightforward manner, the film was blackballed by American distributors. Only after sitting on the shelf for more than a year did the picture receive limited theatrical release in this country. After viewing the movie, which features nothing exploitative or graphic, I was frankly dismayed at the forces aligned against it. To be sure, this *Lolita* is not without flaws, but its content does not warrant such extreme treatment. In Europe, *Lolita*'s reception was far different. The film was widely shown, and with minimal contention. An obvious inference can be drawn from the contrast between the reaction to the movie here and there. While pedophilia is rightly condemned on both sides of the Atlantic, the puritanical foundation of American society creates so much discomfort about the subject of sex that a movie which intelligently confronts such difficult issues is immediately subject to censure. It's depressing to consider how few people in this country can distinguish between art and exploitation. In a sensitive arena like this, the latter is grotesque and unacceptable, while the former is desirable because of the greater understanding and insight that it hopes to promote. *Lolita* does not seek to titillate; it tries (and mostly succeeds) to present a study of an unhealthy obsession and its pernicious effects on all involved. To classify it as "pornography" or "smut" is to display a shocking degree of ignorance about the material and its presentation. And that brings me to *Beau Pere*, the 1981 French film that tackles the same subject matter as *Lolita*, albeit in a less melodramatic manner. There is no question that this movie could never be made in the United States. It offers a frank and unflinching portrayal of the sexual relationship between a 30-year old man and his 14-year old stepdaughter. So, not only is pedophilia an issue, but the picture also raises disturbing questions about incest. Yet, while Blier is clearly not an advocate of the main character's sexual proclivities, he nevertheless portrays this man sympathetically. He is not a one-dimensional villain, a lecherous scoundrel who lurks in the shadows. Instead, he's a rather pathetic individual who, were it not for his obsession, would easily earn the viewer's pity. *Beau Pere* begins by introducing us to Remy (Patrick Dewaere), a sadsack restaurant piano player whose marriage is falling apart. For the last eight years, Remy has been married to Martine (Nicole Garcia) and has cared for her daughter, Marion (Ariel Besse), as if she was his own. But Martine is fed up with his lack of earning power and ambition and is ready to leave him. Then, as she's going to work following an argument, she is killed in an automobile accident. Remy is left to care for Marion alone. His initial reaction is that the girl should live with her alcoholic father, Charly (Maurice Ronet), but she resists the idea. And, although Charly pays lip service to wanting his daughter with him, he eventually allows her to remain with Remy. It soon becomes apparent, however, that Marion's reasons for wanting to stay with Remy have little to do with the affection of a daughter for her father. He has become the object of her sexual fantasies, and she makes it apparent that her feelings go far beyond what is proper. Equally attracted to her but unwilling to admit it, Remy puts up token resistance, but his attempts to ward off Marion are halfhearted at best. (After all, if he really wanted to put a stop to the situation, he could demand that she live with Charly.) Eventually, he gives in. In the end, Blier does not give us an overwrought conclusion featuring histrionics, threats, recriminations, and police action. In fact, the resolution is handled with chilling civility, and the last scene - which strongly hints that history may repeat itself - is *Beau Pere*'s most disturbing moment. It's clear that both Remy and Marion have been damaged by their sexual encounters, although neither seems willing or able to recognize that any aspect of their personality has been distorted. Marion's social development has been retarded; it is clear that she holds boys her own age in the lowest regard. Meanwhile, by crossing a dangerous line, Remy has taken the first steps down a slope that may lead him to become the stereotypical predator of young girls. One often-neglected aspect of this kind of relationship that Blier focuses on is how the introduction of sex destroys the natural boundaries between father and daughter. Remy loses his place as an authority figure, and, when he tries to assert himself, he is shown to be impotent (even in something as seemingly innocuous as requesting that Marion return home by midnight). Indeed, as the film progresses, it becomes increasingly apparent that Marion has all the power in the relationship. Both emotionally and practically, she pulls the strings. At one point, after being caught in a compromising position with Marion, Remy admits to being scared. It's a natural reaction; one visit from Marion to the police and he would find himself in jail. Marion is consistently shown to be the more mature of the two. In addition to initiating the changes in their relationship, she's the breadwinner and shows a keen intellect. Her outlook on life is surprisingly sophisticated for a girl of her age. Remy, on the other hand, is a loser with little self-respect and less self-control. He can't keep a job and relies on Marion's earnings from babysitting to pay the rent. When it comes to the seduction, her methods are awkward and inexperienced (as might be expected from someone her age); the only reason she succeeds is because Remy is willing. Slightly less interesting, but no less important to the overall plot, is Marion's relationship with Charly. They are obviously not close, but he cares about her. Nevertheless, his every decision is clouded by guilt. He puts on blinders and chooses not to see what is obvious. The best illustration of this comes late in the film, when he observes a passionate embrace between Remy and Marion. He musters the courage to ask whether they're sleeping with each other, but, when Remy feigns outrage and denies the accusation, Charly skulks away apologetically. He lacks the will to intervene, and thus loses his claim to moral superiority. *Beau Pere*'s success results from a combination of a provocative script featuring well-defined characters and a pair of powerful performances. In particular, Ariel Besse is stunning. Her portrayal of Marion is unfeigned; she effectively mixes the innocent girl and the tempting, seductive woman - the perfect Lolita. In fact, she's so good that at times it can be unsettling to watch her aggressive sexual behavior. When this film was released in 1981, Besse received a number of enthusiastic plaudits from critics, all of which were deserved. *Beau Pere* is obviously not for strict moralists. However, for those who are not offended or otherwise put off by this subject matter, *Beau Pere* offers a compelling psychological exploration that is highlighted by two exceptional performances and a script that refuses to descend into melodrama or resort to manipulation. *Beau Pere* is not an easy film to watch, but it is undeniably rewarding. ------------------------------------------------------------- Book note: ------------------------------------------------------------- _The Rise of the Therapeutic State_ by Andrew J. Polsky. Assuming that "marginal" citizens cannot govern their own lives, proponents of the therapeutic state urge casework intervention to reshape the attitudes and behaviors of those who live outside the social mainstream. Thus the victims of poverty, delinquency, family violence, and other problems are to be "normalized." But "normalize," to Andrew Polsky, is a term that "jars the ear, as well it should when we consider what this effort is all about." Here he investigates the broad network of public agencies that adopt the casework approach. ------------------------------------------------------------- Note on Humbertian frottage in Lolita, from a literary discussion web board: ------------------------------------------------------------- The one thing in his favour is that, in the final analysis, it was she (Lolita) who began it all in the Enchanted Hunters Hotel. She was more 'debauched' than he was. When it comes to murdering Charlotte, for instance, Humbert finds that his nerve fails him. It might also have failed him when it came to seducing Lolita -- had the little wanton not taken the initiative. He may *au fond* be a fantasist and nothing more. This ties in with Humbert's larger, quasi-theological belief, that 'nymphets' are succubi, demons sent to torment middle-aged males. They *know* full well what they are doing. With this in mind, I want to look at the first of Humbert's molestations of Lolita, if that is what it is. It is not easy to disentangle from the obliquities of Humbertian prose. It takes place in Chapter 13 (significant number). It is a Sunday morning in June. 'Lo' sits alongside 'Hum' (soon to be her 'dad') on the pretext of reading his magazine. He is in his pyjamas and robe, she in her church frock. She takes the magazine, and throws her legs across his lap. He is in 'a state of excitement bordering on insanity; but I also had the cunning of the insane'. He manages to 'attune' his 'masked lust' to her 'guileless limbs'. Talking fast, he increases the 'magic friction'. Her legs 'twitch' as they lie across 'my live lap'. She is eating an apple (significant detail) and as she throws the core in the fender 'her young weight, her shameless innocent shanks and round bottom, shifted in my tense, tortured, surreptitiously laboring lap'. He imagines himself 'a radiant and robust Turk, deliberately, in the full consciousness of his freedom, postponing... the moment of actually enjoying the youngest and frailest of his slaves'. As he comes to climax, she shows him a bruise on her 'lovely nymphet thigh', which 'my huge hairy hand massaged and slowly enveloped -- and because of her very perfunctory underthings, there seemed to be nothing to prevent my muscular thumb from reaching the hot hollow of her groin'. She twists away, 'while I crushed out against her left buttock the last throb of the longest ecstasy man or monster had ever known' (pp. 59-60). He wipes his brow (and, we apprehend, other parts of his anatomy) with a handkerchief of multicoloured silk, and goes upstairs to take his bath. The technical term for this, I believe, is 'frottage', from the French *frotter*, 'to rub'. Humbert has brought himself to climax. But is it indecent assault, or decently discreet masturbation? Is this crime, or merely 'thought-crime' -- sex in the head? It depends on what Lolita perceives, and to what degree she was conscious, complicit or even provocative. We never know. This episode -- which is, in its way, grossly sexual -- is none the less wholly inscrutable. Certainly, once confessed, it would go into the charge sheet as Humbert's first 'crime'. Whether it belongs there, or in the innocent (because verbal) fantasies of his journal is another question. ----------------------------------------------------------- ends