SFA's Independent Report on Sexual Abuse in Football

[Uilleam 5,394]

Well, it's out, although I thought that it was being held back due to pending court cases. 

Maybe it's been bowdlerised instead. Perish the very thought!!

 

I'll try to find an Executive Summary, if there is one (which I doubt.)

 

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/7516/independent-review-of-sexual-abuse-in-scottish-football-final-report.pdf

[Frankie 8,114]

I've moved this as it's relevant to our club as well.

 

As I said on Twitter, Rangers is a club that I've taken immense pride in since I was a small child. I hope they do the right thing by apologising to any abuse victims and compensate them accordingly. We must lead by example in such matters: legally and morally.  Then, Now and Forever.

 

With specific reference to this thread and forum, I would of course caution people to be extremely careful what they post/share in terms of contempt of court.

[Gonzo79 13,541]

Interesting wording in the BBC article.

 

Senior clubs including Rangers, Hibernian, Motherwell and Partick Thistle were all named in the testimonies.

Celtic Boys Club also featured in often distressing personal accounts of sexual abuse.

[ian1964 10,372]

 

[Frankie 8,114]

I would of course caution people to be extremely careful what they post/share in terms of contempt of court.

[Bluedell 5,329]

Some points that stood out to me:

 

"The Review is not concerned with attributing culpability"

 

" we are clear that the direct responsibility for the alleged abuse of these young people and the consequent harm lies with the men who perpetrated or are said to have perpetrated these acts"

 

"The Apology (Scotland) Act 2016 however explicitly removes any perceived impediment to issuing an apology as such an apology “is not admissible as evidence of anything relevant to the determination of liability in connection with that matter, and cannot be used in any other way to the prejudice of the person by or on behalf of whom the apology was made”."

 

 

[Bill 13,717]

Predictably worthless.

[Bluedell 5,329]

The Chair of the committee also said the following 12 months ago: “On the specific reference to Celtic FC, one of many clubs referenced in the final report, the Review in actual fact states clearly that the club has gone to great lengths to address any past contacts between the club and Celtic Boys Club - and have done so effectively. This is welcomed by the Review and welcomed within the review."

 

and the following was said about the interim review

"The report by the SFA Independent Review of Sexual Abuse in Football is over a year late. Mr Henry has put out an interim report and leaks which leave a lot to be desired and he appears to be priming the footballing public for disappointment in holding both Celtic FC and the SFA itself for 4 decades of abuse at Celtic/Boys Club.

 

In the Interim SFA report, Mr Henry thanks Celtic 3 times and won’t even deem it appropriate to mention Celtic Boys Club as the youth feeder team of Celtic by name.

 

I don't know if that he still refused to name Celtic Boys Club in the current report.

[Uilleam 5,394]

Here is a first take from The Times

 

The Report seems to be at pains to stress equivalence betwwen clubs; ie one serious assault, here, is the same as several dozen/score, there.

I don't think that holds water. 

 

Scottish football clubs must offer compensation to victims of historic sexual abuse

Marc Horne

Thursday February 11 2021, 12.00pm, The Times

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scottish-football-clubs-must-offer-compensation-to-victims-of-historic-sexual-abuse-p6v7gbzp7

 

Scottish football clubs, including Celtic, Rangers and Hibernian (Hibs), must offer compensation and a “clear, unreserved and public” apology to victims of sexual abuse that blighted the national sport, an official report has said.

The Scottish FA’s Independent Review of Sexual Abuse in Scottish Football, ordered in 2016, has today finally published its devastating findings. Dozens of survivors who endured “incalculable” suffering came forward to give evidence against paedophiles who preyed on vulnerable young players over three decades.

The review authors were shocked at how easy it was for these men to use their status and “good standing” to infiltrate Scottish football and gain unfettered access to children, who received little or no support from those tasked with protecting them.

“The price they have paid has often been lifelong, frequently serious and sometimes catastrophic,” the report said. “The collateral damage caused to their relationships, their employment, their physical and mental health and their social wellbeing is incalculable.”

The review also found that:

* Former senior figures at Celtic FC were likely to have been aware of the historic abuse taking place with its feeder club but the authorities were not alerted.

* No evidence could be found to corroborate Rangers FC’s claim that they contacted the police after sacking a paedophile youth coach in 1991.

* The Scottish FA turned its back on a man who confided that he had been raped as a boy by a top-flight assistant referee and sought help in seeking justice.

* Known paedophiles worked together to groom boys and trafficked them over UK and international borders for abuse.

* An abuser took boys to a hostel in England where they were forced to barricade themselves in a room after being presented to a group of naked men.

The review stressed it was not able to attribute culpability or liability — saying that was a matter for the courts — but insisted those who failed to protect the young should now be held accountable.

It said: “Although we are clear that the direct responsibility for the alleged abuse of these young people and the consequent harm lies with the men who perpetrated or are said to have perpetrated these acts, we are also very aware of the accountability which lies with clubs and organisations in football since these shared a duty of care to the young people in their charge.”

It called for all clubs and organisations involved to make a “clear, unreserved and public acknowledgment and apology” to the survivors of sexual abuse.

“This apology should be on behalf of the club/organisation itself as well as the wider football family,” it said.

“Furthermore, clubs and organisations concerned should openly acknowledge the impact of these events on those affected and the enduring effect this has had on them (and their families) into their adult lives.”

“Acknowledgement and apology do not eradicate the harmful events or the pain that has resulted.

“But for many this will be a starting point for reconciliation and for healing and this is of vital importance.”

However, it concluded that simply saying sorry was insufficient and that a “more concrete response”, involving financial compensation, is required.

It said: “To support people who have experienced sexual abuse in Scottish football is an emphatic and constructive testimonial to their experiences and a tangible way of making reparation.

“The Review concludes therefore that Scottish football should consider how this can best be done, including consideration of the creation of a fund which might underwrite support and assistance for those who have been personally affected by sexual abuse in Scottish football and indeed those in Scottish football who are experiencing other mental health challenges and issues.”

The authors suggested that commercial donors or sponsors might also be “contributed to or underwritten by commercial donation and sponsorship”.

The findings will put further pressure on Celtic and Rangers, as well as other senior clubs — named in the report — including Hibernian, Motherwell and Partick Thistle, to accept responsibility for historic sexual abuse.

While expressing “regret and sorrow” for the victims, Celtic FC has insisted it is not legally culpable for abuse at Celtic Boys Club, insisting it was an “entirely separate organisation” with which it had historic connections.

However, the review concluded that senior clubs could not distance themselves from past abuse at “inextricably” linked feeder clubs.

It states: “In those days the ties between those community-based youth football clubs and the senior professional club were clear and strong.

“The relationship was strongly established to the point that officials of both clubs often knew each other well and interacted; officials of the senior club were often involved in the activities and profile of the community football club; the senior club would allow the youth football club to freely use its premises and facilities; branding, badging, colours and strips were often similar or identical.

“The Review is of the view that, if the relationship and history between the youth football club and the senior club was so shared, so close, and so inextricable, then when sexual abuse of young players formed part of the history of one then it too formed part of the history of the other.

“A shared heritage is not confined to trophies, victories and celebration; it also extends to defeats, failures, and deficiencies.”

A number of men who held senior roles with the boys club have been convicted for sexually abusing children and teenagers. Among them are Jim Torbett, who founded Celtic Boys Club in 1966, who has twice been imprisoned for attacking young boys between 1967 and 1994.

Testimony from his victims appears in the report.

Torbett had two stints at the club, the first from 1966 and 1974 and the second from 1978 to 1996.

Hugh Birt, a former boys club chairman gave evidence at Torbett’s first trial in 1998 that he was kicked out by Jock Stein, Celtic FC’s manager, after allegations of abuse emerged.

The report records it concern about the circumstances, stating: “The Review concludes, from the accounts received that it is possible that a number of people in Scottish football may have had some suspicion regarding (Torbett’s) alleged activities at the time including former managers at Celtic Boys Club; a former senior manager and a former board member at Celtic FC at the time; and a group of young players at Celtic Boys Club.”

The authors said they had been unable to confirm whether the police had been informed, adding: “The Review finds it concerning that (Torbett) was permitted to return to Celtic Boys Club in another capacity after only a few years.

The report also makes it clear that clubs should not attempt to use changes of commercial ownership or status to evade responsibility.

In 2018 an alleged victim of paedophile Gordon Neely, who worked as head of youth development at Rangers’ ground, Ibrox, between 1986 and 1991, was told he should pursue his complaint with liquidators.

The former youth footballer was told by lawyers that Rangers were owned by a different company when the abuse took place and that duty of care was not with the current owners.

An email sent to his solicitors said: “The company which owned Rangers Football Club . . . which you refer to as owing duties of care to your client will have been the company then called The Rangers Football Club PLC and now called RFC 2012 Limited.”

The review challenges this type of stance, stating: “The Independent Review considers it inadequate for clubs or organisations to avoid this issue because, in the intervening years, they have changed their governance, their name or their company status or ownership.

“The ethical obligations remain and are uninterrupted irrespective of intervening administrative, constitutional or commercial changes.”

Although the review panel possesses no legal authority to enforce its findings, clubs will find its conclusions difficult to dismiss.

The report notes that Neely, who died of cancer in 2014, was immediately dismissed by Rangers in 2011 after a parent complained after he pulled down his son’s underwear and pulled him over his knee. Rangers have repeatedly insisted they also informed the police, but investigators were “unable to confirm” whether this was the case.

Two other former Rangers youth players came forward to state they were sexually abused by Neely at Ibrox, but did not tell anyone at the time.

The report also contains testimony from a man who was raped by Neely at Hibernian’s stadium and training ground. It said parents had raised concerns about his conduct but there was no evidence that any action was taken, or warnings issued, before he went on to join Rangers.

The report criticised the Scottish FA for failing to do more to help Pete Haynes when he came forward to report that he had been sexually abused by Hugh Stevenson, a former youth coach and assistant referee, in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Mr Haynes, who waived his right to anonymity, asked for assistance in getting justice for the abuse that blighted his teenage years and later life, but little was done.

The report backed him and concluded the Scottish FA’s actions “fell short of the appropriate action that could have ensued from such a report or concern being raised”.

The report also contains allegations that Jim McCafferty, a former Celtic FC kit man and boys club coach, who is now serving a lengthy jail sentence, smeared toothpaste and boot polish on to the genitals of a naked boy as part of an “initiation ceremony” during a trip to Austria with the junior club Fauldhouse Juveniles.

The review confirmed it had received reports that abuse was carried out by paedophiles who worked together to abuse and traffick boys.

“The contributors provided information concerning possible organised sexual abuse and sexual exploitation,” it said. “This included allegations concerning the introduction of young players between adult men for sexual purposes across borders under the guise of football activity.”

It added: “The Review heard accounts from more than one contributor of a team visit to England where the boys stayed, with a coach, in a hostel. The boys were taken to a swimming pool where a number of adult men were present and who were walking about naked.

“Later, when these boys had returned to their sleeping accommodation, some of these adult men attempted to enter their room and the boys, all young teenagers, were forced to barricade themselves in to protect themselves.

“This was a very frightening and disturbing event and can also be seen as part of a process of desensitisation of these young men. “

The review noted that it was aware of circumstances where “adults involved or alleged to have been involved, knew other adults who were subsequently charged and/or convicted or named in allegations concerning sexual abuse in football both in Scotland and England.”

It concluded by calling for the introduction of “consistent and continuous measures to improve the protection of young people and the reduction of risk”, adding: “These accounts alone should be enough to inspire and motivate change without question or inertia.”

Rangers have strenuously denied any wrongdoing.

The club previously issued a statement which said: “It is understood the individual was dismissed immediately and that the police were informed.

“All employees adhered to the strictest codes of conduct.”

Celtic FC and Rangers FC have been approached for comment.

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by Uilleam

[Bluedell 5,329]

6 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

* No evidence could be found to corroborate Rangers FC’s claim that they contacted the police after sacking a paedophile youth coach in 1991.

Not unexpectedly. I'm not sure what evidence there would have been at the time and it's unsurprising that it can't be found 30 years later.

 

8 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

The former youth footballer was told by lawyers that Rangers were owned by a different company when the abuse took place and that duty of care was not with the current owners.

An email sent to his solicitors said: “The company which owned Rangers Football Club . . . which you refer to as owing duties of care to your client will have been the company then called The Rangers Football Club PLC and now called RFC 2012 Limited.”

The review challenges this type of stance, stating: “The Independent Review considers it inadequate for clubs or organisations to avoid this issue because, in the intervening years, they have changed their governance, their name or their company status or ownership.

“The ethical obligations remain and are uninterrupted irrespective of intervening administrative, constitutional or commercial changes.”

I'd agree with the report. We should not be using the events of 2012 to try and evade responsibility in matters such as these.