[QUOTE=grahamhouse;10938778]Part of why this issue is so important if Defence wishes to be relevant....which I offer you here....
1 - When a CO...an allegation of rape perpetrated by a RAF Instructor on a 13 yr old girl when on summer camp on my base was reported to me. My Chain of Command (22Gp) directed me to not entertain the allegation nor initiate investigation (22Gp owned the Air Cadet organisation). The rationale of the CoC being that such an allegation would in itself adversely impact on the anniversary of the Cadet organisation which was imminent. There was then no military investigation despite the military having lead jurisdiction. Not content with this, I went to the civil police, there was an investigation, there was a due process and there was a conviction - the RAF Instructor went to prison.
Graham, I served for 12 years as a WEXO in the ATC/ACO/RAF Cadets (after 34 years in the Real Air Force - I think our paths crossed at Kinloss) and I don't believe for one minute that 22 Group would not take seriously an allegation of rape against a minor so as to avoid an adverse impact on ATC 75. Even if, for whatever reason, the allegation was not forwarded to HQAC (which I find highly unlikely) the responsibility for managing this issue rests with the Police with the reporting timeline being " Immediately to police and/or local authority; info through the chain of command to HQ RAFAC (SO3 Safeguarding (SO3 SG) - see ACP 4 (Safeguarding and Protecting Children). If the reporting timeline wasn't followed, then you as the CO must take a degree of responsibility, particularly as you had a Wg HQ on site at St Mawgan. Once the Police are involved the situation is completely outwith the control of HQAC/22 Gp, until such time the Police investigation has run its course and, in this case, only when the individual had been found guilty would 22 Group take the necessary admin action. The military did not have lead jurisdiction in this case.