"Historic" Abuse? A Guest Posting From Tom Perry.

For those readers who have not yet watched the BAFTA Award Winning Documentary "Chosen" you might not have heard the names Tom Perry, Mark Payge or Alistair Rolfe.

BAFTA for Chosen from True Vision on Vimeo.

These three men, with the help of multiple Award Winning "independent" Television Production Company "True Vision" and Director Brian Woods, brought the taboo subject of Paedophilia to the world of mainstream media thanks to the courage of Channel 4.......Notably not ITV or BBC.


Their story is humbling, heart wrenching, educational, emotional, frightening, graphic, sad, inspirational, courageous, and for those who have read "The Sharp Report" the private school talked about in their story could quite easily have been Jersey's very own Victoria College.


This is a story that cannot be covered in a single Blog posting and one we shall be returning to in the near future. The guest posting came about after we received an e-mail from Mr. Perry where he brought to our attention the (mis)used word "Historic." We subsequently replied and asked if he would consider a "Guest Posting" and thankfully he agreed.

From Tom:

I am writing to Voice for Children as someone who in 2001 filed a police complaint about the sexual abuse I experienced as a child. The Case was stayed in 2003 using a pre-trial "abuse of process hearing grounded on the Selwyn Bell precedent which was established just a few months earlier. It says - "as a result of the passage of time the defendant cannot receive a fair trial." This meant that the man I accused of abusing me did not have to answer the question in court, and no stayed criminal case has ever returned to court. Following the ruling I approached an independent television production company and four years later the BAFTA award winning documentary Chosen was broadcast.

When in adulthood I finally managed to face the abuse I’d experienced as a child, even I referred to it  as ‘historic abuse.’ The police did the same and media reports on similar cases were and continue to be  peppered with the adjective and just look at the Voice blog and others that do such sterling work on the Jersey child abuse cover up, all of them describe child abuse complaints made in adulthood as: ‘historic.’

People wishing to see truth and justice for abusees should cease using this offensive description. Why?

It is  prejudicial and serves to discount, denigrate and dismiss the crimes that abusees have experienced. “Oh that was all in the past, things are different now.” In reality little in safeguarding has changed since the 50’s. There is still no mandatory requirement in England, Wales or Scotland to report allegations of child abuse or actual rape to the police or social services.  Just in case you don’t believe 

it:http://www.nspcc.org.uk/inform/research/questions/child_protection_legislation_in_the_uk_pdf_wdf48953.pdf - see page 3 or search key word ‘mandatory.’ 

Regrettably the appalling description “historic abuse” entered the lexicon sometime ago unnoticed and to the detriment of complainants.  It needs to cease.  The mainstream media on Jersey are addicted to this offensive description and here is just one example from the BBC with their latest effort. In England the recent conviction of Father Nick White for child abuse when he was teaching at Downside was reported by all parts of the media in the default ‘historic’ format despite the abuse on which the trial was predicated occurring only nineteen years ago.  Nineteen years!

Would Mrs Doreen Lawrence consider her son Stephen’s murder nineteen years ago ‘historic?’ For her, just like me and other abusees who have not had the benefit of having their cases heard in court, it is all too current. Yet the media do not use the ‘historic’ word to describe Stephen’s murder. Why not?  Take a few other serious crimes such as aggravated burglary, grievous bodily harm,  drug smuggling, or assault,  and all are free of the dismissive adjective ‘historic.’ I have also never seen the crime of rape described as historic. So what is it about child abuse?  

For authorities, care homes, schools, young offenders institutes that knowingly and unknowingly employed pederasts to work with children and then concealed  discovered crimes, the use of the adjective ‘historic’ helps dismiss, discount, and consign to history a scandal they wish no one had noticed and which the employer does not  wish to address. The same authorities delight in this self-harming description being consistently applied to crime  they wish would  vanish, but which remain all too current for all Jersey’s abusees.

Its child abuse.