I have spent a year researching amongst 'survivors' of Keith Laverack’s abuse. I cannot 'feel' the victims feelings personally as i have never been subjected to such treatment in my life but i have been as close to the topic as most would get. It is a shocking subject...it was shocking to those who suffered. He is not the only one in Cambridge’s history and certainly not the only one who was performing his will within Cambridgeshire County Councils Social Services Departments. But Laverack is the epitome and was granted and furnished with all the necessary requirements to enable his practice to proliferate.

Therefore this room is to present constructive feed back from the 55 victims compensated so far, the 30+ new 'alleged' victims and for the countless unknown to be thought of and also for you visiting who may have suffered, this is your room too! It will be supported by documents that have been accepted by both counsels in settlements so far to help us all understand how such a thing can happen in any organisation. Social Workers are not a pre requisite for such activity...they could be a policeman, a teacher, a doctor or even a priest who has a Dowager Duchess willing to defend their innocence right up until proven guilty...beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Wednesday 26th November 2003:

For those who have followed the articles in this room i make no apology for the delay in updates...especially if you are coming from a position of authority or care. In my experience in researching victims of physical or sexual abuse whilst in care...delay...provarication and dragging heels is something they learn to endure when meeting the attitude on offer in general from authorities UK wide whilst dealing with complaints or compensation claims....frustrating isn't it! Fortunately for you in authority...this 'room' is 'interesting'...for victims...it's reality. Now we know we are on 'equal' ground...let's update.

Graham Wrycroft, Assistant Head of Adult Services for CCC:

In May 2003 I wrote an article derived from lengthy discussions and a revision of evidence from a Mr John Goodier. John was a Social Worker who had complained about abuse and irregular activity witnessed by himself done by colleagues and line management. It was clear and has become even clearer that those complaints were stifled to the extent that he felt he was rail roaded out of his chosen profession. Questions arising from some of those allegations have never fully been explored and subsequent articles regarding this have exposed that truth with verification being supplied by respected figures still operating in positions of authority within this County. After writing the article and placing it upon the internet...a robust campaign was launched by CCC through their solicitors threatening me with a libel action with many bullet points highlighted as to where they felt there had been innaccuracies and falsehoods within the article in particular points referencing Mr Wrycroft. I replied to this 'threat' with further comment and information which in effect...made them consider THEIR position very carefully. To date i have received no further threat or communication in this matter although i have continually supplied further comment to the solicitors and directly to Mr Wrycrofts boss Mr Eric Robinson, head of Social Services, none of which was responded too directly...but met with silence which i have come to understand as fear.

Why fear?...Truth hurts...I ask any of you to review the very responses of those who had to deal with the reality of Keith Laveracks activity when it had been exposed 'officially'. I also ask you to read records, documents and memos prior to his being charged as it is clear that truth was avoided, covered up and eventually tried to be managed. No clearer example of this is the contentious issue of the 'infamous' Stockford/Thompson memo which CCC insist was a forgery and are keen to cite the investigation by Suffolk police into the matter as their justification to have such a view. However...no conclusive evidence has come to light to prove either way that this particular memo was or wasn't a forgery and indeed has never been tested in court to establish such a fact...so it's a kind of 'hung parliament'. Fortunately the witness statement of Pat Farrow, the secretary who appears to have typed the memo has been located recently within police archives and will make interesting reading i think. But...whilst the CCC are keen to protect itself on that issue....the inference offered by the memo which leaves the reader to believe that collusion in covering up was at play by line management....review the documents within the Laverack case and there is no doubt that officials and the then system did indeed offer shelter for a paedophile to operate successfully by not dealing with their responsibilities when placed in their lap. So...whilst 1 memo is defended profusely as to its authenticity...sadly its inference cannot be contested when applying to the thousands of other documents supporting the whole situation....that is why the compensation cases so far have been settled in advance of an actual judgement...something that the CCC are happy to deal with in silence...obviously. Perhaps if the same vigour and feeling shown in defending their position on the memo was applied to innocent victims who clearly have been abused beyond doubt...then this 'discussion' would not be taking place still...16 years on.

Since the initial 'Goodier' article there has been rumour mongering as to my intentions and position. Reliable feed back has come to me suggesting that i had homophobic issues, mental illness and even that it was a 'lovers spat'!! Well...throughout the 6 months i have made my position clear as to why i insisted on pursuing my complaints and concerns about Mr Wrycroft. Until a month ago i had never met the gentlemen. I had researched intensely his lifestyle and activities and reviewed his past experiences including his role in assisting police in their investigation of a still unsolved 'gay' related murder. All of which would leave anyone who had a public interest in the matter concerned. Add to that the many documents that show a less than desirable attitude towards helping victims and officials involved in the Laverack case in which he had responsibility and an active role in its conclusion by managing the closure of Midfield after Laveracks imprisonment and again...it falls short of what is expected of a public servant. He has refused to answer questionnaires asked on behalf of claimants as to his assumed 'innocent' role he played. In defense of Mr Wrycroft with regard to his attitude in the Laverack case...it is consistent with ALL operatives in Laveracks line management that they have offered a silence policy even after Judge Blomfield, presiding judge in the claims, endorsed an application asking for a lifting of the apparent 'gagging' policy that prevailed amongst past managers and officials surrounding Laveracks time...so he is not alone...sadly. I do wonder though if he may have a change in attitude when he begins his apparent retirement in March 2004. I find that most people have a change of attitude once they are outside of the environement which may have hindered or supressed their true feelings experienced during their involvement in a profession or organisation...such as John Goodier had. The 'whistle blowing' charter sounds great..in theory...but in practice is not workable i have found.

On the 10th October I attended my first ever meeting as a member of the public at Shire Hall. I had interacted with officials involved in dealing with the current £6 million defecit facing Social Services for the foreseeable future and wanted to see at first hand how they operated in order to gain confidence in their ability to manage such an important challenge on all our behalfs. The way i had been treated via the Wrycroft interaction had left a lot to be desired and therefore was hoping to see a better attitude coming from them when approaching what they perceived as 'real' issues. Unfortunately the reality they presented became clear to receiving Councillors that all was indeed not clear and a bigger reality lay below the surface...£1 million of it was discovered at that very meeting! I also was aware that other issues were underlying factors that affected the potential outcome of succesfully managing the defecit...again which wasn't presented as 'reality' by heads of Departments. The article here underscores such points i am making...SS SCRUTINY COMMITTEE. 2 weeks ago feed back came to me about an impending decision that Mr Wrycroft was stepping down...or asside...or up...to a new role overseeing an apparent important project within SS with discussion ongoing about his retirement in March which is being currently negotiated as to his financial renumeration by his Union and CCC or so i am reliably informed. I have had it confirmed that an internal announcement has been made within Mr Wrycrofts department about his new role but that it has not been made public as there wouldn't be such interest in such a move by the general public. Well...i agree...but i can assure you that individuals from the legal profession...law enforcement...gay community...media...District Councillors...charitable organisations and fellow workers of Mr Wrycroft are indeed delighted at such news locally...regionally and nationally.......so don't undersell the potential interest in such news....as we all know...the public can be hard nuts to crack and please...but there are some that do care about such happenings in this County...and you can gladly add me to any list the CCC wishes to inform on exciting developments and activities within its departments in future.

STONE

LAVERACK CASE:

So the current 'wave' of Laverack victims approach their second Xmas under scrutiny by CCCs solicitors. Thursday 27th November @ 10am sees the continuation of the case via a telephone hearing overseen by Judge Blomfield. Since the last hearing there has been some movement on issues such as Reg Stones file being acknowledged by the CCC as being lost...destroyed or disappeared since it was requested by claimants a year ago. Judge Blomfield has in the past shown concern at the non disclosure of such information or the slow disclosure and certainly has took the CCCs representatives to task in the past in the manner at which their accountability is done with such a casual attitude in the face of Laveracks victims. In Reg Stones case it is particularly disappointing as many references have been made to him by claimants which throw doubt onto his suitability and actions whilst Deputy Warden of Midfield. Another ex operative of CCC, Tony Morgan, has a more succesful outcome when pursuing his file which again was asked for over a year ago as they have been found which includes an important statement from a Mr Roger McKenzie indicating that the CCC knew about Laverack taking children home for the night as early as 1982!...5 years before the apparent forged memo...if anyone cares. There has been an apparent change or mellowing of attitude coming from CCC and its representatives in recent weeks and months and it appears current claimants may well see an end to their situation soon. There also is a sincere wish by the CCC to close this chapter in its history and certainly shriek at the idea of a fourth wave of claimants appearing over the horizon. Well...as research officers in this case i can assure you that not all victims have been accounted for who suffered Laveracks attentions or indeed other members innapropriate actions towards their wards...and like the £1 million discovered at the Scrutiny Committee...it's a fact the CCC SS and their representatives may reluctantly have to face and i can assure you cannot be frittered away with figures on a piece of paper...as offered in the case of the £1million...because like that...they are real!

ELLINDON SCHOOL:

Finally...new proceedings have been issued against CCC on the 7th November 2003 relating to their management of the Ellindon School which was closed shortly after responsibility for it was passed to Peterborough City Council who in their wisdom decided closure of it was in their interests and certainly are not connected to any proceedings and indeed have shown a willingness to pursue justice on claimants behalfs. Several former members of staff have come forward offering evidence on behalf of children resident there and more information is being sort. Currently there are 6 claimants that allege brutal treatment by certain staff whilst managed by CCC. As research officers in this and several cases in other regions nationally...we are aware that this case again is only just touching the tip of another disappointing episode in CCCs history. Hopefully all of the wisdom, experience and mistakes made in dealing with the Laverack victims can be utilised to focus more sensibly in tackling this new claim. As just mentioned...I or my company do not have any personal reason for pursuing claims against CCC...in fact...my attitude is derived from dealing with many cases nationwide involving 11 different local authorities so far the CCC being just one of them. But i do apologise for my frank and direct way in which i relay these matters to you in the public domain...eventually you become desensitised to the realities of abuse...and therefore end up speaking about it in plain terms...it all helps people whether victims..or in authority...to understand the same thing though...which must be a good thing. Thank you for your interest in the issues and points made in this 'room'. I will report back on the outcome of the Laverack hearing in the near future and keep you posted on other developments affecting this County. I must go now...my boyfriend has arrived with my medication to take me back to Fulbourn....only joking...but as Demetrious Panton accused of being 'deeply disturbed' by Minister for Children Margaret Hodge said...so wot if i am...it don't make your problems right......and in my opinion slinging £10k at a charity and apologising for a less than required attitude in managing their responsibility don't deal with it either......ALL the compensated victims of abuse in our region could vouch for that.....when will the system learn?....perhaps generic liability will eventually screen those in authority from having to accept such responsibility...time will tell.

My knowledge base to host this room is backed with practical experience gained by myself during an intense 10 month daily study of 2 paedophiles, Bill Blastland aged 17 and Alan Brockall aged 18 both who were serving life sentences in a psychiatric prison and as you can see, they are not all 'old men in dirty old raincoats'...they only look like that by the time they get caught usually...hence this room. My source material to host this room comes from my research with the Laverack Case along with reviewing the Bridge, Walby, and as far back as the Jason Caeser reports covering this County along with reading a précis of the 'Pindown' and 'Neave' reports and intend to refer to them all in future articles for constructive purposes.

ARCHIVE:

Number	Subject
Introduction	respects to the ultimate victims
Article 1	What does a paedophile look like?
Article 2	Unreliable Records & Information
Article 3	Chronology of Complaints
Article 4	Anne Campbell MP