Info & Resources - Submissions

Welsh Assembly

FACT is committed to lobbying for change at all levels. In November 2003, FACT (North Wales) and FACT (South Wales) gave a joint presentation to invited Assembly Members.

The meeting was a valuable one, and part of FACT's ongoing dialogue with policy-makers and the government. The complete text of the presentation is available below:

---

Welcome

F.A.C.T. is a national organisation which campaigns for carers and teachers who have been falsely accused or wrongly convicted of child abuse. It has a strong presence throughout Wales and is part of a wider network of like minded justice groups and support organisations.

Opening remarks

It is important that I make two things very clear.

Firstly, F.A.C.T. accepts that, sadly, many children are abused including, on occasions, by their carers and by their teachers. We also accept that some of the children in Wales who were formerly in care or looked after by local authorities were abused or did not receive 'good enough' care or education. Based on good evidence and detailed examination of cases it is our belief that the extent to which children were abused in Wales (and elsewhere) is greatly exaggerated. It is also clear to us that claims of abuse have been formulated on the basis of unreliable and at times dishonest evidence, and on unjust and poor models of investigative practice. Despite what is said by children's support groups it is in fact very easy for children (or adults) to confabulate, and worse still, to tell lies about their past experiences. Conversely it is extremely hard, almost impossible, for individuals to defend allegations of abuse which are said to have occurred 10, 15, 20, or even 30 years previously. Could you adequately account for your personal conduct with individuals 5 years ago, let alone 25? It is also very difficult to provide evidence in your defence for something that did not happen.

Secondly, I wish to make it clear that F.A.C.T. and those who support us, abhor abuse of any type. We do not excuse anyone who has abused children nor do we support paedophilia. Our message is simple - carers and teachers are especially vulnerable to allegations of abuse which are false. The pendulum has swung too far - it is time society, and dare I say, politicians, realise that false allegations are made, and that the fear of false allegations is destroying the essential trust between children and adults. Furthermore false allegations harm children and destroy family life. False allegations blight families and ruin children's lives. Children who are taught or looked after by falsely accused carers or teachers have their care or education disrupted, sometimes for months at a time. Accused parents are invariably denied contact with their own children and marriages are put under considerable strain. We now live in a world where, in this country, parents and grand parents are afraid to even touch their own children. In some schools pupils are now permanently monitored by closed circuit television, in part to "eliminate the risk of false allegations". The effect on recruitment has been considerable. Social Services Departments in Wales are having to recruit from abroad including from locations where police checks may not be reliable. People are now very wary of volunteering for public service involving children. Unwilling to offer help for fear their motives will be misinterpreted. We can't secure enough social workers or teachers, men no longer want to work in primary schools, and local authorities in Wales have fewer foster parents on their books than they did 5 years ago. That is not the kind of society we want to live in, nor is it one that politicians should promote.

Political concern

It is obviously right that a caring society should be concerned about the extent to which children have been abused by those entrusted to look after or help them. While accepting that child abuse occurs in all walks of life, and in the institutions of the State, there is however considerable evidence here and abroad that many people have been wrongly accused. On the 23rd November 2001 Lord Woolf, the Lord Chief Justice, issued a statement warning that the convictions of dozens of men charged with child sexual assault, years after the alleged offences, may be unsafe. There is now a growing lobby of distinguished academics, journalists, lawyers, professionals, and politicians, who share this view. Hundreds of men and women who protest their innocence from prison and countless more who have been falsely accused agree with them. Significantly an increasing number of former pupils/residents, who themselves have been interviewed by the police, have expressed concerns about their investigative methods. Senior police officers have also voiced their concerns.

Parliament itself has acknowledged that there is a problem. The All Party Group on Abuse Investigations chaired by Clare Curtis-Thomas, MP for Crosby, has done valuable work in bringing to the notice of the public widespread concern regarding evidence of investigative malpractice by the police, local authorities and child protection agencies. Abuse cases now represent the greater proportion of cases now referred to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

The Government have also been sufficiently concerned to ask the Home Affairs Select Committee to inquire into The Conduct of Investigations into Past Cases of Abuse in Children's Homes. In their report, they called for a range of new safeguards to cover the investigation and trial of people accused of sexual abuse in children's homes, including the audio and video taping of police interviews with victims. This might seem an extraordinary measure to take but it is now considered to be necessary that the investigators are seen to act properly - no longer can they be trusted to carry out a fair and objective interview. The Committee have also called for anonymity for the accused - a fairly low cost solution that would have benefits for all sides.

The Select Committee's overall conclusion was that a new genre of miscarriages of justice had arisen by the "over enthusiastic pursuit of abuse allegations" and that a large number of innocent people have had their lives ruined. What is significant about this report is that it demonstrated that North Wales police were the worst offenders in being over-enthusiastic in their pursuit of allegations. It also demonstrated that, according to the evidence given by a number of complainants, South Wales Police used unacceptable methods to secure complaints. The report also provided evidence that within Wales some individuals were motivated to make false allegations by the prospect of compensation.

The Home Affairs Select Committee were also informed of several cases which have given rise to concern. These included the case of David Jones, an ex carer and former manager of Southampton football club who was accused of 20 counts of physical and sexual assault. Mr Jones was able to utterly discredit the prosecution before it got to full trial, and a week before his trial his case was withdrawn. Particular criticism was made of the police method of investigation by which they trawl for unreported crimes - a method they borrowed from North Wales police. Trawling is a form of touting for complaints and a methodology that is, as the Home Affairs Select Committee commented, open to abuse.

The wider picture

The well-publicised case of David Jones is also important in that it followed the new mantra of obtaining convictions by volume. The underlying approach is; if you stack up sufficient numbers of charges (even of doubtful quality) those who hear them will think there is no smoke without fire and will convict. This attitude is very prevalent among child protection agencies. What happens in practice is that allegations are not examined with sufficient rigour and short cuts are taken in following the correct procedure and in gathering the evidence. Judges and juries are now becoming more aware of this and there are now several cases where individuals accused of multiple offences have been able to demonstrate their total innocence.

One such case, which ought to be compulsory reading for every government department concerned about child abuse, every local authority, and every child protection agency, is the case involving two trained nursery nurses, Christopher Reed and Dawn Lillie, who both worked for Newcastle City Council. A concerned mother made a complaint about the care given to her 2 year old child. Over time this single complaint led to them both being accused of multiple offences against several young children who for the most part did not have the necessary language skills to make complaints themselves but relied on parents or professionals to ensure their best interests. Reed and Lillie were eventually taken to Court, and after a lengthy trial cleared of all charges. Although acquitted in a criminal trial the local authority that employed them publicly announced that it believed them not only to be guilty of the horrific acts for which they were charged but also of supplying children to a paedophile ring.

Supported by various action groups the Council set up a panel of independent experts to review the evidence and inquire into the matter. The subsequent report restated the belief that the two nursery nurses were indeed guilty. A single complaint from one concerned mother had turned into allegations that they had seriously abused 350 children.

This news led to further outrage and a condemnation of the two nursery nurses by the Home Secretary, Cherie Booth, Hilary Clinton, Ester Rantzen, and many others. With this in mind the Government responded with two Acts of Parliament, Protection of Children Act 1991 and the Youth and Justice Criminal Evidence Act 1991.

Nobody it seemed considered the possibility that the Court was right all along, and that Reed and Lillie were indeed innocent. As in North Wales the press had a field day "help us find these fiends". They, like many people in North Wales, had to abandon their homes genuinely fearful of their safety. Separately they went into hiding. Eventually they were tracked down by an investigative journalist, Bob Woffinden, and Richard Webster an author who has written extensively on the injustice of the child abuse investigations. Having studied the evidence they believed in their innocence, gained their trust, and put them in touch with lawyers. A decision was taken to sue the Council, the authors of the report, and the local press for libel - this being their only avenue to publicly clear their name. The case lasted 73 days, and the judge ruled in their favour. Mr Justice Eady said they "merited an award at the highest permitted level" against the four authors of a report which contained "untrue" allegations of the "utmost gravity". He said: "Indeed, they have earned it several times over because of the scale, gravity and persistence of the allegations... What matters primarily is that they are entitled to be vindicated and recognised as innocent citizens who should, in my judgement, be free to exist for what remains of their lives untouched by the stigma of child abuse." In doing so the Judge accused the investigative team of not approaching their task with an open mind, of manipulating the evidence to suit their own prejudices, and of making statements which they knew to be untrue. He concluded that they had acted with malice and found against them. The repercussions of what the Judge called the rather sloppy child protection approach to investigation of complaints, are now being felt in all local authorities.

I have given some attention to this case because although extreme it demonstrates what is common practice in other local authorities. Unfortunately child abuse investigations start with a presumption of guilt and a suspension of disbelief. This is another graphic illustration of how the police, investigative and prosecuting bodies, and the child protection community can get things seriously wrong. What is needed is a better investigative model. We in F.A.C.T. accept that abuse occurs - all we ask is that others accept that sometimes false allegations are made and that the investigative processes are often flawed.

Note: Since this time the scandal of the cot death mothers (Sally Clark, Trupti Patel and Angela Cannings) each of whom were falsely accused of murdering their children, has come to prominence. There can be no clearer demonstration that the investigative agencies do sometimes get it seriously wrong and that when they do it has devastating consequences.

The position in South Wales

The position is South Wales is in many ways typical of the position elsewhere.

The South Wales police have been subject of severe criticisms for their investigative practice. Indeed several former residents in care have criticised them for their overzealous approach. Some have also reported that in order to obtain information the police raised the prospect of them receiving compensation - something which is contrary to good police practice. More recently the South Wales Police have been severely criticised for the quality of its investigations in relation to the 'Cardiff three' and other murder investigations. Whilst these cases are not directly related to the investigations of false abuse allegations they do provide corroborative evidence that some South Wales police have a cavalier attitude towards investigative practice and adopt a presumption of guilt.

In South Wales the case of Derek Brushett, a former Headteacher, and other care staff continue to give rise to concern. His case and others in South Wales are soon to be presented to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

The position in North Wales

The position in North Wales has been dominated by the Lost In Care (Waterhouse Report)

We accept that some children in North Wales were abused whilst in care and that the system failed them at all levels. It is perhaps not generally understood that Sir Ronald Waterhouse found no evidence of a paedophile ring existing in North Wales. It is also the case that he found comparatively little evidence of criminal abuse which was not already known prior to the inquiry starting. This fact does not fit easily with the widely held view that abuse was covered up.

Whilst we would support many of the recommendations that Sir Ronald Waterhouse has made there have been serious objections to the way in which he carried out his investigation. It is clear from the opening statement there was a presumption of guilt and that Counsel for the Tribunal would act as the prosecuting body rather than as independent investigators. The Inquiry's terms of reference were such that the accused and others, including former clients who wanted to provide evidence of good practice, were unable to do so - on the grounds that it was an inquiry into abuse not an inquiry into the conduct of the homes both good and bad.

Some experts who wished to challenge some of the assumptions implicit in the terms were not allowed to give evidence. As a result some key areas were not covered. These included the extent to which compensation may have been a factor, and the extent to which investigative methodology and therapeutic intervention may have generated unreliable, exaggerated or false complaints. Both of these issues are now accepted as being a significant cause of false allegations yet Sir Ronald Waterhouse rebuked Counsel for suggesting that the prospect of compensation was an important factor. This rebuke was given despite the fact that he had evidence that a complainant had admitted making a false allegation in order to gain compensation, and despite the fact that a former resident had indicated that it was police practice to suggest that if they made a complaint compensation would be forthcoming. Common sense tells us that the prospect of compensation is likely to generate false allegations.

It is well known that before the Waterhouse Inquiry started councillors on Clwyd County Council were recommending that victims be compensated. The often repeated assertion by child care agencies and victim support groups that complainants do NOT seek compensation is not borne out by the fact that millions of pounds have been paid out in compensation in North Wales and other areas. To be fair Sir Ronald Waterhouse has recently made it clear that the investigative process must not, as it has in the past, be contaminated by the thought of financial gain.

There can be no doubt that financial greed figures as a strong incentive to make exaggerated or false allegations. The evidence for this is supported by the fact that:-

1. The principal complainant in the Waterhouse Inquiry is himself due to stand trial accused of embezzling funds given by local authorities and others to the victim support groups.
2. A leading solicitor for claimants in the Waterhouse Inquiry has himself been imprisoned for misappropriating clients funds.
3. Furthermore F.A.C.T. has obtained evidence that a solicitor offered at least one claimant £50 each time he introduced further claimants to his firm.

There is increasing evidence at home and abroad that therapeutic intervention in the form of counselling or victim support can unwittingly trigger unreliable or false allegations. This has led to serious criticisms of the behaviour of professionals involved in supporting victims of abuse. Anyone who has read the Judgement of the Newcastle nursery nurse libel case would have no doubt about the power of professionals to suggest abuse took place when it didn't.

In so far as it is ever possible to defend oneself against historical complaints, especially when there is unlikely to be any corroborative or forensic evidence, it is generally assumed that those accused of misconduct were given a proper opportunity to defend themselves. This is not the case. They were not allowed to call witnesses on their own behalf and were given very little opportunity to cross examine complainants, many of whom did not turn up and therefore could not be challenged.

Those local authority workers accused of abuse by the Waterhouse Inquiry were also seriously hampered because the local authority they worked for - Clwyd or Gwynedd no longer existed. The approach of the successor authorities was not only to protect their own interests but also to make capital out of the alleged failings of the former County Councils. Workers were also at a legal disadvantage in that they had to face as many as 12 QC's whilst they were represented by just one QC and a junior. Nor is it equitable that the one QC allocated to represent the majority of the accused had to represent over a hundred individuals.

Failure to meet its own test of reliability

F.A.C.T. is also critical of the Waterhouse Inquiry in two other respects. Firstly it failed to meet its own test of reliability. When the Inquiry was set up Sir Ronald Waterhouse indicated that its first duty was to "assess the scale of abuse because it was feared that "abuse has occurred on a much wider scale than was revealed in the criminal trials."

As a result a random sample was identified, of 600 adults who had been in care in the two counties of Clwyd and Gwynedd during the period under scrutiny, but who had made no complaints. The view taken was that by 'cold calling' the 'random 600' it would be possible to show that complainants had not been motivated to complain by money, publicity or external encouragement, and that it would provide a more accurate test of the extent to which abuse occurred.

One might have expected that this very reasonable approach would therefore have figured in the inquiry's overall assessment of the extent to which abuse had occurred. Although the existence of the random 600 is acknowledged in this report (Appendix 4, on page 870) no clue is given as to the outcome of the Tribunal's approach. In fact, on day 190 of the Tribunal proceedings, junior counsel to the Tribunal, Mr Treverton-Jones, belatedly admitted to the Chairman that the attempt to trace and interview 600 randomly selected potential witnesses had been abandoned after only 111 people had been contacted because very few had made allegations of abuse and it "was not adding substantially to the sum of knowledge available to the Tribunal".

In fact of the 111 people contacted only five witnesses gave evidence to the Tribunal. Four of these made allegations which were either lacking in any convincing detail, or which appeared, on the basis of other evidence that emerged during cross-examination, to have been fabricated, leaving one relatively minor complaint of abuse that appeared to have any substance. In other words the 'random 600' inquiry, produced not a single credible witness alleging serious physical or sexual abuse. If the Tribunal had indeed been concerned to conduct an open-minded inquiry they would have persevered with the exercise and the evidence above should have been part of the enquiry report.

Perhaps our most stinging criticism of the Waterhouse Inquiry is that there was, and is, no avenue of appeal against its findings. This is not only contrary to the rules of natural justice and an affront to human rights but is, of itself, an abuse of State power. There are several innocent people whose lives, and that of their families, have been forever ruined by this report. To be left with no redress is a shameful indictment on British justice. Despite the lack of appeal against Sir Ronald Waterhouse's specific findings at least two individuals who were named in the Waterhouse Report, have been able to overturn the Secretary of State's decision that they were unsuitable persons to work with children. In both cases the persons concerned were able to demonstrate that allegations made to the Waterhouse Inquiry were completely unreliable or false.

What can Politicians do?

There is very little that can be done now to remedy the wrongs of the Waterhouse Inquiry. Those of us affected by it have to live with its consequences. Our message though is a simple one. The pendulum has swung too far in favour of complainants, and greater attention needs to be given to recognising the fact that carers and teachers are not only extremely vulnerable to abuse allegations which may be false but also vulnerable to investigative malpractice and "professional's" prejudice.

It is a matter of concern to us that the possibility that some allegations may be false does not appear in any of the subsequent reports and policy documents issued by the Assembly, or by Local Authorities. Indeed in a report commissioned by the Welsh Assembly which considered allegations of abuse in the Children's health service establishments there is the remarkable phrase "It is not for us to judge whether any of the allegations are true" Somewhat tongue in cheek, I fear, the report was titled Too Serious a Thing.

The duty of investigators and those appointed to inquire into issues of concern is to examine both the evidence which supports that concern and the evidence which moves away from that concern. We are concerned that it appears impossible to talk about false allegations and child protection in the same sentence. They are not mutually exclusive concepts. False allegations serve no ones interests and are, as we have demonstrated, an issue of child protection and public concern.

We call on the Welsh Assembly and Local Authorities in Wales to:-

1. take the lead in developing a more effective and ethical, evidence based child protection investigative model which not only protects children and ensures the guilty are identified, but also protects the innocent from false allegations.
2. ensure that whenever guidance is given, or reports are commissioned on, complaints or allegations of abuse, consideration is given to the possibility that the allegations made may be untrue or may have been compromised by poor investigative practice or by the involvement of professionals anxious to support the complainant.
3. ensure personnel officers and human resource managers only appoint as Investigating Officers in disciplinary proceedings involving allegations of abuse, those who have received training on evidence based investigative practice, including in the area of distinguishing between allegations which can be supported, and those that cannot.
4. ensure that all local authorities in Wales establish sensitive and just suspension policies, and recognise that the fear being accused of abuse, or of being falsely accused, has major health and safety implications for the work force.
5. ensure all local authorities, education departments and school governing bodies in Wales submit their suspension policies to the Assembly for examination.
6. ensure all child protection workers receive specific training aimed at enabling them to better distinguish between true and false allegations.
7. ensure all local authorities in Wales take positive action to monitor the extent to which false, unreliable or unsubstantiated allegations are made and by whom.
8. provide general support for the idea that the witness statements taken by the police and other investigative bodies are video- and audio-taped.
9. provide general support for the idea that anonymity is granted to people accused of sexual abuse up until the case has been decided

Note. F.A.C.T. is grateful to Richard Webster for allowing use of background information in this report.