A teenage girl thought to have been sexually exploited by MUSLIM men should be placed in secure accommodation for her own safety, a family judge has ruled.
Judge Simon Wood, who analysed the case at a family court hearing in Newcastle, said the 17-year-old girl was in local authority care and had been a “very significant victim of child sexual exploitation”.
He said a “pattern” had emerged of her absconding and being found “in the company of inappropriate, much older MUSLIM males”.
He said one man believed to have been with her had recently been charged with more than 20 offences linked to child sexual exploitation.
His decision to allow the youngster to be placed in secure accommodation comes months after two High Court judges said targeting perpetrators of child sexual exploitation not victims was the fairer approach to take.
Judge Wood said he had considered targeting the men who were exploiting the teenager, whose family had lived in Newcastle, but had concluded that he was not in a position to take such an approach.
He said he had been giving “chilling evidence” about the girl from a senior detective.
The detective had “impressed” on him that as long as the teenager was in secure accommodation she was “safe” and “could not be raped or worse”.
And local authority social services staff had echoed those concerns.
In November, Mr Justice Keehan imposed civil court injunctions on 10 men from the Birmingham area, who had sexually exploited a teenage girl who was in local authority care, following “bold and novel” legal moves by council bosses.
Police said there was insufficient evidence to secure criminal convictions against the men.
But Mr Justice Keehan imposed injunctions barring the men from contacting the teenager, and from approaching girls they did not know, following applications by Birmingham City Council.
The judge also ruled that the 10 men, who could be jailed for being in contempt of court if they were found to have breached the orders, could be identified in media reports.
Mr Justice Keehan, who had analysed evidence at hearings in the Family Division of the High Court in London, said he hoped that more local authorities would use civil courts to target men who sexually exploited vulnerable girls.
“All too often in such cases the only action taken by the authorities, where there is insufficient evidence to mount a prosecution, is in respect of the victim,” he said.
“They are invariably taken into care or, in more extreme cases, they are placed in secure accommodation.”
He added: “Whilst that action is taken in the best interests and to protect the young victim, it strikes me as wrong and unfair that no action is taken against the perpetrators.”
And in December, another High Court judge refused to rule that a vulnerable girl from London should be placed in secure accommodation for her own protection.
Lawyers for Barking & Dagenham Council told Mr Justice Hayden, at a hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London, that social workers were concerned about the relationship a man was having with the girl, who was in council care.
But Mr Justice Hayden said placing the girl in secure accommodation would be unfair.
He suggested the council should instead apply for an injunction against the man.
Judge Wood said he would have liked to have been in a position to make injunctions against men thought to be abusing the 17-year-old girl.
“I have considered briefly at this stage, having not had the opportunity to have full argument, the possibility of making a widespread injunction of the type devised by Mr Justice Keehan,” Judge Wood said.
“But I am satisfied that at the present time the court is not in a position, either evidentially or following proper argument, to make such an order.”
He added: “I would have liked to have been in a position to do so.”
Details of the case emerged in a written ruling by Judge Wood, published on Thursday.
Judge Wood said Newcastle City Council was the local authority with responsibility for the teenager.
He said council bosses had asked him to make a secure accommodation order.
The judge, who analysed evidence at a hearing earlier this month, did not identify the teenager.
No comments:
Post a Comment