Den of inequity - the British government houses of parliament
Today Mr Evans, the former Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons, was unanimously cleared by a jury of a string of sex assaults, following a five-week trial at Preston Crown Court.
The jury accepted Mr Evans's defence that his behaviour had been the "high watermark of over-friendly, inappropriate behaviour by a drunken man" but did not amount to any criminal offence.
Now it can be reported that other, mainly Conservative, MPs regularly got drunk, "flirted" and made passes at young male parliamentary workers during Commons drinking sessions.
One researcher described how he was approached to "go to the Gents" with an MP at an event for young political activists while another said he had been subject to unwelcome advances after an MP invited his entire office staff to a gay bar.
One of the witnesses in the Evans case told The Independent that while he did not see himself the victim of a criminal act there should be a "curfew" in parliamentary bars to make it more difficult for inappropriate behaviour to take place.
"MPs are working away from home for three or four days at a time. You add to that the late nights, the drinks, the general sense of power and you can easily see a lot of people crossing over that line," he said.
Another parliamentary worker in his 20s at the time describes in The Independent how a group of mainly Tory MPs would regularly go drinking with staff in the building - which could lead to compromising situations.
"There would be quite senior MPs very drunk - flirting with us and sometimes more," he writes. "No one batted an eyelid. The day after it was always one of those things people would gossip about - they would shudder and say 'Did you see what happened last night?'"
The man said that it was not solely the case of the MPs taking advantage of younger staff. "I think there was complicity on both sides."
Tonight the Conservative Party said it would ask all its MPs to sign up to a new code of conduct setting out their rights and responsibilities as employers. There will also be a new party grievance procedure for staff.
But the scale of the problem was underlined by research by Channel 4 News which spoke to 70 people from all political parties and sexual orientations working in Parliament.
Forty per cent of the men questioned said they had received unwanted sexual advances while a third of those interviewed had personally experienced sexual harassment which they saw as an abuse of power.
One said: "At an event for young political activists I was asked to go to the gents by a certain MP who had always been a nice guy. I just brushed it off. The MP suggested I go to the toilets with him at about 1am, but at 3am I saw him going back to his hotel room with a guy who looked about 18."
Mr Evans, 56, wept in the dock of Preston Crown Court after he was cleared of nine charges, including rape, by the jury. In a statement on the steps of the court the former Deputy Speaker spoke of his "dark and lonely" time going through "hell" as an accused man. "As many of you know I've gone through 11 months of hell," he said. "All I can say is that after [all] that nothing will ever be the same again."
Mr Evans was found not guilty of one count of rape, five sexual assaults, one attempted sexual assault and two indecent assaults.
The verdicts have led to questions being raised about the approach of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to sex cases.
The former shadow Home Secretary David Davis called for the practice of using lesser charges to "reinforce" a more serious one to be looked at.
"This case has highlighted serious concerns over how the police and the CPS bring sexual offence cases to court," he said. "In particular we must now review the process whereby the police and the CPS put together a large number of lesser, subsidiary cases in order to reinforce one serious case when prosecuting sexual offences."
But Lancashire Police and the CPS defended their handling of the case.
In a statement, the CPS said: "The complainants in this case provided clear accounts of the alleged offending and it was right that all of the evidence was put before a jury.
"That evidence could only be fully explored during a trial and the jury has decided, after hearing all of the evidence, that the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. We respect this decision."
Detective Superintendent Ian Critchley, Lancashire Police's head of public protection, said: "We have worked closely with the CPS from an early stage, and all of the evidence was subjected to careful scrutiny before a decision was taken to charge, particularly where complainants did not see themselves as victims.
"Only after that very careful consideration was the decision made to put this before a jury."
It's a slippery, and ever morphing, multi-institutional and global network. Can't pin this down.
It's all connected..
Islington child abuse victim: Why I won’t talk to the Town Hall inquiry into Jimmy Savile link (11.04.14)
by murunbuch
Islington Tribune, 11th April 2014
by Andrew Johnson
VICTIMS of child abuse in Islington are unlikely to cooperate with any new inquiry by the Town Hall into allegations that Jimmy Savile was involved in the abuse scandal which rocked the borough 20 years ago.
Last month, Education Secretary Michael Gove ordered Islington to investigate information uncovered in the historic police inquiry which links Savile to children’s homes in the borough in the 1960s, 70s and 80s.
But former abuse victims say they have no trust in the Town Hall, which has “lost” all the records, and would only speak to an independent inquiry.
It is understood that at least one former victim is “in litigation” with the Town Hall.
Despite recognition that a huge paedophile ring preyed on Islington children’s homes in the 1970s and 1980s no one has ever been prosecuted and all the records of the homes and the names of the children who went to them have been “lost”.
The saga has infamously dogged the former leader of Islington Council, Margaret Hodge, who went on to be children’s minister in Tony Blair’s government. She was criticised for not taking the allegations seriously enough when they first surfaced in the 1990s.
At the weekend she issued an apology, telling the Sunday Telegraph: “I have apologised a number of times over the last 10 years for our failure to understand about child abuse and take children’s voices seriously in the 80s.
"I am sorry. Our naivety was shameful and I’m really glad we’ve learned since then the importance of listening to the voices of children who have been abused.”
The scandal is now haunting her son-in-law, Councillor Joe Caluori, who is in charge of children and families at the council. But Town Hall chiefs insist he will play no role in the new inquiry and that an independent person would oversee any investigation.
Mr Gove failed to state which children’s home Savile is alleged to have been involved with in Islington, and there is some frustration at the Town Hall that they have been given scant information to work on.
One home, Conewood Street children’s home, became notorious when the scandal was first exposed.
Jason Swift, 14, who was abducted in King’s Cross in 1985 and gang raped, is believed to have lived there. He died during his ordeal and a number of men, predominantly based in Hackney, were subsequently jailed for his death, including Sidney Cooke who was given 19 years for manslaughter in 1989.
He is still in prison following further convictions in 1999. It has recently been alleged that Cooke may have provided victims for Savile.
Margaret Hodge, the former leader of Islington Council
The 14 inquiries already held into the abuse claims in Islington have established that paedophiles operated in all of Islington’s then 24 homes.
But no one has ever been prosecuted. Campaigners point out that former staff members who left the Town Hall during the inquiry have never been questioned. Some are still involved in children’s services in other parts of the country.
Dr Liz Davies, a whistleblower in the 1990s who is now a reader in child protection at London Metropolitan University, in Holloway, told the Tribune: “Although there were 14 previous inquiries, attendance was voluntary and no one was called to provide evidence. Some staff left their posts and went abroad and did not return until the inquiries were finished.
“Numbers of staff who have never been accountable went on to gain senior posts in social services and other agencies. They have never provided any account of their role within Islington children’s services at the time when the abuse network was identified.”
Former abuse victim Demetrious Panton, who is now a lawyer, told the Tribune that he would not speak to any Islington-led inquiry.
“The individuals who could have shed light on what happened are either in litigation with Islington over the issue, or far too scared and traumatised,” he said.
He added that he had been told by other abuse victims of Savile’s connection to Islington. But added: “I’d be willing to talk to an independent body but I’m not going to engage with the borough of Islington.
“There are a lot of individuals I know, abuse survivors, who have not yet contacted Islington or the police about what they know. There is a real lack of trust.”
A Town Hall spokeswoman said: “Eleanor Schooling, the council’s director of children’s services, has been asked by the Department for Education to oversee the investigation.
She will appoint an experienced, independent professional from outside the council to lead it.
“Our investigation will follow the clear and detailed guidance provided to us, and we will then submit a draft report to Lucy Scott-Moncrieff, who has been appointed by the DfE to provide the Secretary of State for Education with assurance that all of the investigations are robust and thorough.
“Elected members are never involved in any individual child protection investigations, and this is no different.
“The DfE was not able to provide the name of the children’s home in Islington where the complainant lived – this will be part of the inquiries to be made by the independent investigator.”
'This will not go away’
DR Liz Davies said in a statement this week:
“The investigation into this home must be independent of Islington. Since last week I have received a number of calls from care leavers/survivors and I do not know which authorities to refer them to as no one is currently investigating the historic crimes that took place in Islington children’s homes.
“These survivors need to be able to speak to sympathetic and knowledgeable professionals from the police and children’s services who can investigate all allegations thoroughly.
“An independent, specialist team needs to be established in order to seek justice for these adults who were children in the care of this authority.
“This matter will not go away. It is too vast. Too many children were harmed and now as adults they live with the horrific memories of their experiences in the care system. Their cases have largely remained unresolved and unheard.
“One day something remarkable will happen. I will be invited to speak with an independent investigative team and will be able to represent the interests of those children I worked with in the 90s as well as those care leavers who have contacted me in subsequent years. I don’t think this is too much to ask.”