
MP who first blew whistle on child rape gangs was smeared as a racist, says son
The son of a former Labour MP who was the first to raise the alarm about child rape gangs more than 20 years ago has described how she was smeared and attacked for being a racist, particularly by members of her own party.
John Cryer, a former MP who now sits in the House of Lords, highlighted the backlash endured by his mother Ann when she blew the whistle on the scandal in 2003.
Labour peer Lord Cryer said those who were complicit at the time and knew of the child abuse by a group of older men from the Pakistani community, but chose to cover it up, should face prosecution.
He was speaking after a nationwide inquiry was announced by the Prime Minister into grooming gangs following a major review by Baroness Casey.
Her report, published on Monday, found the ethnicity of perpetrators had been 'shied away from', with data not recorded for two-thirds of offenders.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper claimed officials had dodged the issue of ethnicity among the groups of sex offenders for fear of being called racist, even though available data showed suspects were disproportionately likely to be Asian men.
The Government has accepted all 12 recommendations made by Lady Casey, including the establishment of a national inquiry.
Mrs Cryer was MP for Keighley when she was alerted to the problem in her constituency by a group of concerned mothers, who said their young daughters were being sexually exploited by a group of older Asian men and the police and social services were refusing to act.
After going public she faced accusations that she was a racist and also received threatening notes and phone calls, leading police to install a panic alarm in her house.
She stood down as an MP in 2010.
In the years since, a series of high-profile grooming scandals have been exposed, including in Rotherham and Rochdale.
All followed a similar pattern with the large-scale exploitation of mainly white girls by groups of men of predominantly Pakistani heritage, which the authorities failed to tackle.
Responding to a ministerial statement on the Casey review, Lord Cryer said: 'I rise to speak principally because the first person who raised the issue of the rape gangs, in other words the first whistleblower, happens to be my mum, Ann Cryer MP, who started raising this in 2003.
'She was then smeared and attacked, particularly by Labour figures, I've got to say, for being a racist.
'I'm not talking about ministers in the then government, many of whom actually supported her, and in the case of David Blunkett, as then home secretary, went out of his way to make sure that prosecutions happened, which they did.
'I'm talking about councillors, councils and other institutions who went on the attack and lied and smeared about the rape gangs.'
He added: 'I think some of them were complicit. Some of them knew it was going on, and they decided to cover up.
'And in those cases, if there is evidence to that fact, then they should be brought before the courts and prosecuted.'
In reply, Home Office minister Lord Hanson of Flint said: 'Can I pay tribute to his mother. I served in Parliament with Ann and I know she raised these matters and faced extreme difficulties locally as result, and took a very brave stand at that time.'
Stressing the need to address the issue, he added: 'My party hasn't been in government for 14 years, but we have been in control of some of the councils.
'My party wasn't in control of government when a lot of these issues happened, but I have still got a responsibility to look at making sure we deal with these in an effective way.'
Earlier, he told peers other recommendations made by Lady Casey would be implemented 'in very short order'.
These included making it mandatory to collect ethnicity and nationality data of all suspects in child sexual abuse cases, a change in the law so all adult sex with under-16s would be considered rape, and a review of the criminal records of exploitation victims.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sky News
33 minutes ago
- Sky News
UK attorney general concerns over Iran-Israel war
The UK government's top legal adviser has raised questions over whether Israel's actions in Iran are lawful, according to a source familiar with discussions inside the government. The source suggested to Sky News that Attorney General Richard Hermer's thinking, which has not been published, complicates the UK's potential involvement in the Iran-Israel conflict. If the attorney general deems Israel's actions in Iran to be unlawful then the UK is restricted in its ability to help to defend Israel or support the United States in any planned attacks on Iran. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source said that the attorney general's concerns limit UK involvement in the conflict "unless our personnel are targeted". US President Donald Trump is currently weighing up his options for Iran and has repeatedly suggested the US could get involved militarily. This would likely involve the use of US B-2 bombers to drop bunker-busting bombs to destroy Iran's nuclear facility built deep into the side of a mountain at Fordow. These B-2 bombers could be flown from the UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, strategically close to Iran. The US could also choose to fly them the far greater distance from the US mainland. Under a longstanding convention, the UK grants permission to the US for the base to be used for military operations. The US military could also request the use of the UK military base in Cyprus, for refuelling planes. Any refusal by the British could complicate US military action and, diplomatically, put pressure on the trans-Atlantic relationship. Israel's justification Israel has justified its war by claiming that Iran poses an "imminent" and "existential" threat to Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has cited his country's own undisclosed intelligence claiming Iran was on the brink of obtaining a nuclear weapon. The Israeli government also claimed, without publishing evidence, that Iran was planning an imminent attack on Israel. They also cited the recent International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report which concluded that Iran had been "less than satisfactory" in "a number of respects" on its international compliance over its nuclear activities. It is not clear what aspect of Israel's justification for military action the attorney general has concerns over. The Attorney General's Office has told Sky News: "By long standing Convention, reflected in the ministerial code, whether the law officers have been asked to provide legal advice and the content of any advice is not routinely disclosed. "The Convention provides the fullest guarantee that government business will be conducted at all times in light of thorough and candid legal advice." The UK armed forces have previously rallied to help defend Israel from Iranian missile and drone strikes when the two sides engaged in direct confrontation last year. 34:31 In April 2024, RAF typhoon jets shot down drones fired from Iran. The UK military was also involved in efforts to defend Israel from a ballistic missile attack in October 2024. But the UK has not been involved in the current conflict, which began when Israel targeted Iranian nuclear facilities and scientists as well as more definitive military targets such as missile launchers and commanders. The UN's nuclear watchdog has previously raised concerns about any attack against nuclear facilities because of the inherent danger but also the legality. A number of resolutions passed by the IAEA's general conference has said "any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency". Israel believes that Iran's nuclear programme has a military use, which makes it a legitimate target. It believes the regime is aimed to enrich uranium to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran, however, has always insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian use. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has also condemned Israel's use of armed force against Iran as a violation of the United Nations (UN) Charter and international law. Interpretations of International Law Different countries adopt varying interpretations on the use of force in response to future attacks. The first legal position is that nations can act preventatively to deflect threats. The second is that they can act to deflect future armed attacks that are imminent. The third is that states can only act to deflect attacks that have occurred. That third position is generally considered to be too restrictive and the first as too broad. The grey area lies with the second position, and it rests with the definition of "imminent". The concepts of 'proportionality', 'necessity' and 'imminence' are key considerations. International law scholars have told Sky News that Israel may pass the 'proportionality' test in its actions against Iran because its targets appear to have been military and nuclear. But whether there was the 'necessity' to attack Iran at this point is more questionable. The attorney general would likely be considering the key legal test of the 'imminence' of the Iranian threat against Israel - and whether it is reasonable to conclude that an attack from Iran was "imminent" - as he weighs the legal advice issued to UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer. There is always nuance with legal advice, judgements rest on a variety of factors and advice can evolve. In the run up to the 2003 Gulf War, the US and UK justified their action by arguing that Saddam Hussein possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction - a claim that turned out to be wrong. The then-attorney general's advice, which evolved, was central to Tony Blair's decision to join President Bush in attacking Iraq. The concerns of the attorney general emerged from enquiries by Sky News about whether the UK would help Israel to defend itself from attack by Iran. A separate source told Sky News that they would not steer us away from the claim over the attorney general's views. But the source said there is always nuance with legal advice and that it likely included other factors.


Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Autistic schoolboy hooked on trendy snus after being forced to buy vapes for other kids
A mum, from Wishaw, spoke out as a leading advice charity warned of a worrying surge in reports of young people experimenting with nicotine pouches - widely used by sports stars and celebrities. A mum has told how her 13-year-old autistic son got hooked on trendy 'snus' after being forced to buy nicotine products for other teenagers. The healthcare worker, from Wishaw, spoke out as a leading advice charity warned of a worrying surge in reports of young people experimenting with the nicotine pouches - widely used by sports stars and celebrities. The 'devastated' mum said her son had been 'coerced' by other youngsters, some who carry knives, to buy vapes - even though he is clearly underage. Now he has been caught stealing to fund his own habit for vapes and white tobacco pouches, which users place between their upper lip and gum. The 41-year-old, who has turned to Advice Direct Scotland for support, said: 'It's like living with an addict now because that's what these things are - addictive. 'His personality has changed. He used to be quite calm but now he goes into a meltdown if he can't get a vape or snus. 'I'm absolutely devastated. My son is only 13. He's autistic and vulnerable and yet he's been coerced and manipulated by older kids who should know better. 'Some of these kids carry knives. They saw his kindness, his eagerness to fit in, and they exploited it. They coerced him into buying vapes for other underage kids, knowing full well he wouldn't say no. My son looks 13 so there is no doubt that he's underage and he's going in there with his uniform on. 'It is terrifying. He stole £170 from us and that is so out of character. It is unbelievably stressful and yet nothing is being done.' Earlier this month, new data emerged suggesting that young people under the age of 18 are now more aware of nicotine pouches. Sports stars like ex-Celtic boss Neil Lennon and ex-England forward Jamie Vardy have been known to use snus, along with former boxer Mike Tyson and late superstar DJ Avicii. A survey commissioned by charity Action on Smoking and Health (Ash), found the percentage of 11-17 year olds who said they knew of the pouches grew from 38% in 2024 to 43% this year. Nearly 4% of children in this age group had tried the pouches, equivalent to 210,000 young people. Hazel Knowles, consumer lead at Advice Direct Scotland, said: 'We have noted increased concerns from people about the rising use of nicotine pouches among young people. 'There are fears that marketing strategies that include sweet flavours, trendy packaging and social media promotion are seen as targeting youth and non-smokers. 'Many young users are unaware that nicotine pouches contain addictive substances. 'Open, non-judgmental conversations and access to educational resources are key to prevention. 'People can reach out to us if they have any issues about the sale of these pouches to youngsters or any other consumer issues relating to this growing phenomenon.' Concerns over snus were raised after the charity logged more than 100 reports of kids - many still in their school uniforms - being sold vapes in the last year. It says enforcement is failing to stop rogue traders from selling vapes to children - some as young as 11 years old. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. From June 1, it became illegal to buy or sell disposable vapes. Only devices considered to be reusable are legal. Knowles added: 'We have noticed the growing prevalence of underage vape sales - a trend that threatens the health and wellbeing of children. Vaping products are finding their way into the hands of children with disturbing ease. 'Every sale to a child is a breach of trust, a moment where profit is placed above protection. We urge anyone with any concerns to contact us so that we can work to counteract this worrying trend.' For free advice, go to or call 0808 164 6000.


Sky News
3 hours ago
- Sky News
Crucial evidence in Post Office scandal found in garage of retired computer expert after 30 years
A damning report into the faulty Post Office IT system that proceeded Horizon has been unearthed after nearly 30 years - and it could help overturn criminal convictions. The document, known about by the Post Office in 1998, is described as "hugely significant" and a "fundamental piece of evidence" and was found in a garage by a retired computer expert. Capture was a piece of accounting software, likely to have caused errors, used in more than 2,000 branches between 1992 and 1999. It came before the infamous faulty Horizon software scandal, which saw hundreds of sub postmasters wrongfully convicted between 1999 and 2015. 1:49 The 'lost long' Capture documents were discovered in a garage by a retired computer expert who came forward after a Sky News report into the case of Patricia Owen, a convicted sub postmistress who used the software. Adrian Montagu was supposed to be a key witness for Pat's defence at her trial in 1998 but her family always believed he had never turned up, despite his computer "just sitting there" in court. Mr Montagu, however, insists he did attend. He describes being in the courtroom and adds that "at some point into the trial" he was stood down by the barrister for Mrs Owen with "no reason" given. Sky News has seen contemporaneous notes proving Mr Montagu did go to Canterbury Crown Court for the first one or two days of the trial in June 1998. "I went to the court and I set up a computer with a big old screen," he says. "I remember being there, I remember the judge introducing everybody very properly…but the barrister in question for the defence, he went along and said 'I am not going to need you so you don't need to be here any more'. "I wasn't asked back." Sky News has reached out to the barrister in Pat Owen's case who said he had no recollection of it. 'An accident waiting to happen' The report, commissioned by the defence and written by Adrian Montagu and his colleague, describes Capture as "an accident waiting to happen", and "totally discredited". It concludes that "reasonable doubt exists as to whether any criminal offence has taken place". It also states that the software "is quite capable of producing absurd gibberish", and describes "several insidious faults…which would not be necessarily apparent to the user". All of which produced "arithmetical or accounting errors". Sky News has also seen documents suggesting the jury in Pat Owen's case may never have seen the report. What is clear is that they did not hear evidence from its author including his planned "demonstration" of how Capture could produce accounting errors. Pat Owen was convicted of stealing from her Post Office branch in 1998 and given a suspended prison sentence. Her family describe how it "wrecked" her life, contributing towards her ill health, and she died in 2003 before the wider Post Office scandal came to light. Her daughter Juliet said her mother fought with "everything she could". "To know that in the background there was Adrian with this (report) that would have changed everything, not just for mum but for every Capture victim after that, I think is shocking and really upsetting - really, really upsetting." The report itself was served on the Post Office lawyers - who continued to prosecute sub postmasters in the months and years after Pat Owen's trial. 'My blood is boiling' 3:09 Steve Marston, who used the Capture software in his branch, was one of them - he was convicted of stealing nearly £80,000 in September 1998. His prosecution took place four months after the Capture report had been served on the Post Office. Steve says he was persuaded to plead guilty with the "threat of jail" hanging over him and received a suspended sentence. He describes the discovery of the report as "incredible" and says his "blood is boiling" and he feels "betrayed". "So they knew that the software was faulty?," he says. "It's in black and white isn't it? And yet they still pressed on doing what they did. "They used Capture evidence … as the evidence to get me to plead guilty to avoid jail. "They kept telling us it was safe…They knew the software should never have been used in 1998, didn't they?" Steve says his family's lives were destroyed and the knowledge of this report could have "changed everything". He says he would have fought the case "instead of giving in". "How dare they. And no doubt I certainly wasn't the last one…And yet they knew they were convicting people with faulty software, faulty computers." The report is now with the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the body investigating potential miscarriages of justice, which is currently looking into 28 Capture cases. A fundamental piece of evidence Neil Hudgell, the lawyer representing more than 100 victims, describes the report as "hugely significant", "seismic" and a "fundamental piece of evidence". "I'm as confident as I can be that this is a good day for families like Steve Marston and Mrs Owen's family," he says. "I think (the documents) could be very pivotal in delivering the exoneration that they very badly deserve." He also added that "there's absolutely no doubt" that the "entire contents" of the "damning" report "was under the noses of the Post Office at a very early stage". He describes it as a "massive missed opportunity" and "early red flag" for the Post Office which went on to prosecute hundreds who used Horizon in the years that followed. "It is a continuation of a theme that obviously has rolled out over the subsequent 20 plus years in relation to Horizon," he says. "...if this had seen the light of day in its proper sense, and poor Mrs Owen had not been convicted, the domino effect of what followed may not have happened." What the Post Office said Sky News approached the former Chief Executive of the Post Office during the Capture years, John Roberts, who said: "I can't recall any discussion at my level, or that of the board, about Capture at any time while I was CEO." A statement from the Post Office said: "We have been very concerned about the reported problems relating to the use of the Capture software and are sincerely sorry for past failings that have caused suffering to postmasters. "We are determined that past wrongs are put right and are continuing to support the government's work and fully co-operating with the Criminal Cases Review Commission as it investigates several cases which may be Capture related." A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said: "Postmasters including Patricia Owen endured immeasurable suffering, and we continue to listen to those who have been sharing their stories on the Capture system. "Government officials met with postmasters recently as part of our commitment to develop an effective and fair redress process for those affected by Capture, and we will continue to keep them updated."