Well, there’s abuse and abuse, you understand?

A leading children’s rights campaigner, who helped governments around the world tackle the issue of abuse, has been jailed for raping a 12-year-old boy.

Former UNICEF consultant Peter Newell admitted three counts of indecent assault and two counts of buggery and was sentenced to six years, eight months in prison.

His concentration upon no one smacking the bottoms of little boys may have had some prurience attached to it, no?

11 comments on “Well, there’s abuse and abuse, you understand?

  1. “Approach received hundreds of thousands of pounds in income from the NSPCC, Barnardo’s, Save the Children and Unicef”

    Why is this not surprising?

  2. Among his numerous roles, he …. was Coordinator of Children are Unbeatable! (CAU!)

    In retrospect that might not have been the best title.

    Look, as far as I am concerned this man is scum. He probably does have some weird obsession with children and corporal punishment. But you have to be a little concerned about this accusation:

    Former UNICEF consultant Peter Newell admitted three counts of indecent assault and two counts of buggery and was sentenced to six years, eight months in prison.
    ….
    The ‘horrific’ sexual assaults took place over a three-year period in the 1960s but have only come to light following a police investigation last year.

    We are talking about a very old and probably a little confused man. Who allegedly committed what? three blow jobs and twice sodomised a child. 50 years ago or more. Why has this taken such a long time to come out (so to speak)? Were “recovered memories” involved in any way? Why didn’t the boy complain 30 years ago?

    If he is guilty then he should hang. But it is odd.

  3. SMFS,

    You could try to accuse a well-connected establishment figure of child abuse in the 70s or early 80s but I doubt you’d get far. Especially if you weren’t well connected yourself. Whilst the witch hunts for abusers of children and now adults go too far, they have had the benefit of making it much more difficult for establishment figures to get away with crimes (or normal, if not ideal, behaviour at the time in some cases). This has to be a good thing, if only we could shut the opportunists and single-issue lunatics up who are trying to make this something more.

    And if recoverable memories were involved, he wouldn’t have been found guilty. Any lawyer would be able to show huge uncertainty around them, and I am not sure they are accepted as evidence by the CPS.

  4. Watchman – “You could try to accuse a well-connected establishment figure of child abuse in the 70s or early 80s but I doubt you’d get far.”

    How long do you think it would take me to find a well connected Establishment figure who was done for this? Being famous did not help Lord Lucan or anyone who came into contact with Christine Keeler. Nor is this man well connected.

    Besides I do not accept there is any significant level of child sex in the UK outside of the Muslim community.

    “And if recoverable memories were involved, he wouldn’t have been found guilty. Any lawyer would be able to show huge uncertainty around them, and I am not sure they are accepted as evidence by the CPS.”

    You would think. Yet recovered memories are still sending people to jail.

  5. Picking up on SMFS’s comment, you do have to wonder why the chap plead guilty. There can’t be any proof; unless there were a dozen other victims around to corroborate the accusation.

    I’ve done the maths: the offences started in 1965 when the victim was aged 12 and the perpetrator 24. Today they are 65 and 77 respectively. Why on Earth has it taken the victim until retirement to come forward?

    I really wish court proceedings were made available online in this country.

  6. Andrew M, Crown Court documentation is now available online, but only to the professionals involved.

    Don’t ask me why the public should not be able to see the same old case papers they were always entitled to ask to see if they pitched up at court, because I don’t know.

    SMFS, I have a slight anecdatal sense that (incestual) child abuse is quite common in at least some Caribbeam communities. I gather there is even a word for it, by which a child might refer to being ‘troubled’ by such-and-such, where ‘troubled’ is supposed to be understood by other adults in authority as the child indicating that they are being molested.

  7. Watchman: Wrong on every count.

    “You could try to accuse a well-connected establishment figure of child abuse in the 70s or early 80s but I doubt you’d get far. Especially if you weren’t well connected yourself. Whilst the witch hunts for abusers of children and now adults go too far, they have had the benefit of making it much more difficult for establishment figures to get away with crimes (or normal, if not ideal, behaviour at the time in some cases). This has to be a good thing, if only we could shut the opportunists and single-issue lunatics up who are trying to make this something more.”

    If you actually have…you know… an actual fucking case you could have gone to court at any time But then you had to PROVE the case not just sling a load of hard evidence-free shite in the air and have “victims” blubber in court. 50 years after the alleged happenings.

    The idea that anyone not from the lowest rung in society somehow had magical influence and protection from prosecution back in the day etc is pure Marxist “privilege” bollocks. Best shown in the “Jimmy Savile” King of the BBC shite. Were Savile was supposed to have wandered around the BBC at will , groping, molesting, commandeering dressing rooms ( which were allocated as needed for shows etc not on a whim) for sex with underage groupies etc . All for years supposedly. When in fact we have documents relating to Savile from the BBC of the 60s where they treated him with contempt. Not because of supposed sex antics but because he was a jumped up Bevan Boy from Yorkshire with long dyed hair and they looked down their patrician noses at him. “Do we need this so-called artist?” is one of their comments. When he finally got a long-term (12 months) contract they tried not paying him and a letter exists to their legal dept saying “Do we have to pay him?” to which the lawdog replies “Yes, I’m afraid we do”. Hardly “King of the BBC”.

    Whenever this “protected privilege ” bollocks appears you can be sure the femmi-marx message is being given.

  8. Come come now. This might be the first recorded instance of a government appointed “expert” actually having relevant expertise. Surely we should applaud not condemn?

  9. SMFS – child sexual abuse still happens among the non muslim communities too.
    I’m in a little village in the west midlands, fairly white area as much of the country is.
    And I can point out 4 houses in the village where a rape by a family member happened in last 20 years.
    In one instance the father got his 11 year old daughter an abortion.

    It happens. Sometimes its many years later before it comes out.
    Out of the female friends the wife and I have there are around a quarter with family sexual abuse. No muslims involved, far as I know the muslim family on my street (white guy with red hair and wife with dark hair) are as normal a family as you would meet anywhere. Most people won’t even see them as muslim, its not as if they plant a big flag in the driveway.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.