There is an interview on line, between a reporter from the Manchester Evening News Maggie Oliver, the detective portrayed in the drama. I was impressed by her, she described the efforts she made to get CSE properly investigated and perpetrators charged with rape, rather than "sexual activity with a child". She says she believed in the system but now feels she was naive. She followed all the correct procedures because she fully understood them. The suggestion from the chair of Rochdale's safeguarding board was that Sara R and her team hadn't followed 'correct procedure' to escalate their concerns. It's dreadful to see good workers like Maggie and Sara forced to leave the work they love and are so good at because they challenge the status quo. The accusation of being emotionally involved is such an easy one to make and such a derogatory way to speak of professionals who have learned the hard way to manage their own emotions at work.
Granny knot - children who have been as neglected and exploited as Ruby and Amber often behave inconsistently. Amber did speak out, she detailed her experiences to Maggie Oliver but because she was critical of Holly in that first video interview, it was decided not to use the interview as evidence against the abusers. There were 9 barristers involved, all attempting to discredit the child witnesses. We say what happened with Ruby, she agreed when leading questions like "he was your boyfriend, you said you had nice sex with him" were put to her. She had learning difficulties, the barrister no doubt had a first from Oxbridge.
Amber also had learning difficulties and that made it easier for the abusers to manipulate and abuse her. These groups of abusers usually understand the criminal justice system and their own "rights" only too well. They would have known that the girls, especially Amber, would be viewed as unreliable witnesses and done all they could to muddy the waters to their own ends.
