|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Open Justice UK is working to uncover buried grooming gang trial transcripts in the UK, which have been inaccessible as the courts are charging exorbitant fees to obtain copies; in one instance, the fees were £7,000.
To overcome this, the Open Justice UK team started a crowdfunding campaign and has raised over £100,000. So far, they have submitted 33 court transcript requests; 14 have been partially approved and 5 rejected, including one by Justice Jonathan Rose who claimed releasing the transcript would be “contrary to the public interest.”
Last week, Conservative Member of Parliament Katie Lam confronted Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips in Parliament over Labour’s diluted promises of local grooming gang inquiries. It went viral. Some of Ms. Lam’s revelations came from the transcripts Open Justice UK had obtained.
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe to our emails now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
The Man Forcing Open Britain’s Buried Grooming Gang Files
By JJ Starky
Some may not have heard of Adam Wren. But he and his team have done more for grooming/rape gang survivors in a few months than entire government departments have in years.
Adam runs Open Justice UK, a small but relentless outfit pushing for transparency in the courts. In just a few months, his campaign has triggered the release of dozens of long-buried grooming gang trial transcripts.
His mission began in January, as public anger resurfaced and the Labour government made fresh promises of local inquiries. It was then that Adam noticed something odd: many key court transcripts still weren’t public. So, he started digging. What he found in many cases wasn’t a web of national security concerns or legal gag orders – but unpaid fees.
If you want either all or part of a court transcript in Britain, you must pay for it. The records are accessible – but they come with a price.
Adam highlighted one case in a recent GB News interview: a rape survivor who was quoted £7,000 to obtain a trial transcript. That’s not a typo. Seven thousand pounds – for someone to access evidence of the abuse that happened to them.
So, Adam launched a crowdfunder. It exploded. Within weeks, Open Justice UK had raised over £100,000. Then came the real work.
Adam and his team mapped 450 defendants across 90 separate grooming trials. They cross-referenced names, charges and outcomes, identifying which transcripts had been sealed, redacted or buried.
They’ve submitted 33 transcript requests so far. Fourteen were approved – partially. Five were rejected outright. None have been released in full.
But those five rejections were revealing.
One, in particular, caught national attention last week. Justice Jonathan Rose refused to release the full transcript from a 2016 trial at Bradford Crown Court, where twelve men were convicted for the abuse of a 13-year-old girl in Keighley.
For context, Bradford has long been a hotspot for some of the country’s most insidious grooming/rape gang cases. Underage girls were abused while living in children’s care homes – a place you’d expect to find not just protection, but over-protection, if anything. In another case, a 13-year-old girl was exploited by as many as 100 men.
Rose claimed that releasing the transcript would be “contrary to the public interest.” He added that doing so would be inappropriate “in the context of the public debate now taking place in general concerning cases such as this which are said to be part of a currency of offending in this city and elsewhere.”
It constituted one hell of a word salad. But basically, public debate is apparently a problem. Transparency, thus, is not allowed.
Adam called the decision “ridiculous.” He said the court censored key information. Others suggested Rose did so to control public conversation.
In a recent article, Adam and Melisa Tourt, a policy communications specialist on the Open Justice UK team, revealed more about the issues they’ve encountered with other requests.
Earlier this year, they submitted two identical transcript requests – one to Sheffield Crown Court, and one to the Central Criminal Court (aka Old Bailey) – each relating to grooming gang convictions.
Sheffield approved the request without hesitation. The transcript is now being processed.
But the Old Bailey refused. Their reason? The case “involved child sexual exploitation” and would be subject to reporting restrictions to “protect the anonymity of victim(s)” – despite those same conditions being present in the Sheffield case.
Another obvious refutation: if anonymity is the issue, redact the victim’s name. After all, when these trials were being conducted, any member of the public could sit in court and hear most proceedings in full.
Adam’s team had already assured the court that all reporting restrictions and anonymity protections would be honoured. But it didn’t matter.
The rule the judge cited, Criminal Procedure Rule 5.5, gives courts discretion to block releases where reporting limitations apply. But there’s a provision that sidesteps this if a recipient of a transcript will not break reporting limitations.
In other words, it seems they didn’t trust Adam with the transcripts. This apparent mistrust carries far wider consequences than it first appears.
As Melisa and Adam put it, such discretion creates a postcode lottery for justice: “Whether crucial information can be obtained shouldn’t hinge on arbitrary geographical boundaries or which judge happens to be presiding.”
That arbitrariness matters. Grooming gang prosecutions are disproportionately concentrated in just a handful of Crown Courts – including the Old Bailey, Sheffield, Manchester Minshull Street, Newcastle and Leeds. So, if one of these courts decides to block access, entire regions of information become inaccessible.
They gave an example: if a single judge at Manchester Minshull Street takes a hostile view to transparency, virtually all records related to the Rotherham cases -some of the most significant in the country – could be withheld indefinitely.
What emerges is a system riddled with contradictions. Some courts are blocking access based on vague concerns over “public debate.” Others are openly contradicting each other on basic procedural rules, with some judges appearing to unfairly decide which journalists or campaigners can be trusted.
Some have said this reveals more than just inconsistency; it points to a possible motive: shielding from political fallout. And the force of such fallout was felt again very recently.
Last week, Conservative MP Katie Lam stood in Parliament and confronted Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips over Labour’s diluted promises of local grooming gang inquiries.
She recounted the details of several survivor’s stories to encourage Phillips to do more, including one survivor who said her abuser told her: “We’re here to f*ck all the white girls and f*ck the government.”
She told the story of Anna, a 14-year-old in residential care in Bradford who made repeated reports of rape to social workers. A year later, she was married off to her abuser in a traditional Islamic wedding ceremony. Her social worker was a guest. The authorities then arranged for her to be fostered by the abuser’s parents.
Lam also spoke of another survivor from Oxford.
A 13-year-old girl, who was prepared for gang anal rape by using a pump to expand her anal passage. She was then subjected to gang rape by five or six men. At one point, she had four men inside her. A red ball was placed in her mouth to keep her quiet.
The year before, when she was 12, a court heard how the girl threatened the same rapist with his lock knife. He responded by picking up a metal baseball bat, striking her on the head with it and then inserting it into her vagina.
Lam’s speech went viral – super viral – garnering millions of views. The details she shared? Some of these came from the transcripts Adam and his team obtained.
These transcripts don’t just expose a single party but failure after failure across the system – from social services to local councils to police to Crown prosecutors. They throw the entire justice system back under the spotlight, especially amid growing criticism over two-tier justice and some of the grooming members’ lenient sentences.
That, perhaps, is why some judges don’t want them released.
The truth is too raw, the anger too real, the consequences too unpredictable.
Melisa and Adam quite aptly wrote toward the end of their article: “The common thread has always been authorities that are allowed to mark their own homework, trusting their biased judgments over transparency and accountability.”
It appears some judges are doing the same here with these transcripts. Fortunately, Adam, Melisa, and the Open Justice UK crew seem determined not to let them get away with it.
You can follow Adam Wren on X HERE, Melisa Tourt on X HERE, and access and support Open Justice UK HERE.
About the Author
JJ Starky is a pen name for a former political strategist who is now a part-time citizen journalist based in the UK. His work has been published in The Salisbury Review, Off Guardian and The Conservative Woman. He is the proprietor of the Substack pages titled ‘The Stark Naked Brief’ and ‘Project Stark’.
Featured image: A total of 17 men and one woman have been convicted of offences including rape, sexual abuse, supplying drugs and trafficking for sexual exploitation in a series of trials over the Newcastle case. Source: Grooming gangs abused more than 700 women and girls around Newcastle after police appeared to punish victims, Independent, 23 February 2018 (left). Members of a grooming gang convicted of abusing girls in Huddersfield. Source: Grooming gang review kept secret as Home Office claims releasing findings ‘not in public interest’, Independent, 21 February 2020
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Breaking News
Satanic? When are the good guys goi g to get control and stop leaving it to the bad guys? Get a grip, seriously
How would these clerks and judges fare when scrutinized by the so called “Justice Ministry” and their so called “predictive programming”.
would they be flagged as a bunch of hate filled Islamic supremacists.
They are even bothered about the grooming in the US.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haB0NJQahpI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAGk2mvgBEk
Rotherham is mentioned again for grooming area.
I’ve come to understand the logic when viewed from the perspective of the globalists who desire depopulation. Eventual civil war would further result in a reduction of all affected cultural groups. Grooming gangs, sex trafficking with resultant STDs and sterility, and addictive drug use all reduce population inevitably. Fraudulent elections are probable, given the reality of politicians who ignore their constituents.
“Not in the public interest” – but millions of members of the public are interested, so the judge lied.
They often use the “Not in the public interest” excuse, what they really mean is not in their interest.
The police have two lies they use when they don’t want to bring charges – “Not in the public interest” and “found no evidence”. It is easy to find no evidence when you turn your eyes away from places where you know you are likely to find it.
This cover up of trial documents proves that we don’t really have freedom of information. The so-called Freedom of Information Act is bluff intended to give the false impression that we live in a democracy. Requests under the Freedom of Information Act can be refused, so it allows us to access only information they are prepared to release.
p.s. In the news last week, someone reported Lord Hendy for a driving offence – using a mobile phone whilst driving – and the police didn’t charge him because they “found no evidence”, they said. So Lord Hendy reported himself to the police. Will there be any questions asked about why Plod failed to find the evidence? I doubt it.
Rose and his ilk are a main part of the problem and should be removed from all positions of responsibility immediately, for the safety of children and the public. Our JUST-US system is so corrupted and at the behest of a major criminal enterprise headed by the Rothschilds et al, as are most if not all British institutions. Child trafficking is being protected, silenced and brushed under the carpet, and the MSM are not interested one iota, they are all under the Rothschilds spell and shilling ££
These people are evil. Charlie Staple was falsely accused on assaulting an emergency worker (during lock down) and defended himself in Crown Court. The jury found him unanimously not guilty. The police made admissions of guilt themselves, battering and suffocating him. Charlies suing them in the high court. The whole transcript of the criminal trial is inaudible. This is unlawful BTW. There is no Justice when the state protects itself.
You need to hear this – the media won’t tell you about this.
“Muslims will you continue to DENY this religious HATE crime against WHITE Girls?”
On her channel, “Candid with Lubna”, Lubna, a Pakistani woman, tells the truth about Pakistani men and the rape gangs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDrgqMTvITU