Dear “Don’t Create More Orphans” Team
“Don’t Create More Orphans” is a wonderful initiative. Long overdue!
Could I make a suggestion? Before I do so I should place it in context:
I am currently in close contact with 23 very poor Cambodian families that either have had or do now have children in institutional care at an ‘orphanage’ or de-facto orphanage. All 23 families have at least one living parent, usually the mother. They all have extended families.
In my many years of contact with these families I have never seen any member of one of them reading a newspaper. Most can neither read nor write.
I find it hard to think of a way in which these families, most in need of your assistance, could become aware of your “Don’t Create More Orphans” initiative. It is highly unlikely that any member of the 23 families I am in contact with will know that help is available to them if they need it.
There is a very easy solution to this problem, however:
The “Don’t Create More Orphans” Team, through the Ministries of the Interior and Social Affairs, could (and I believe should) request of all NGOs with children in residential care that they provide copies of all contracts and/or agreements entered into between themselves and the parents of these children.
I find it hard to believe, after all these years, that such a simple initiative has not been implemented, if only so that the relevant members of the Ministries of Social Affairs and Interior can assess whether or not NGOs are abiding by Cambodian law when they remove children from their families!
As you will be aware, there are some NGOs, such as the Cambodian Children’s Fund, that refuse to even allow parents of the 700+ children in CCF’s residential care to retain copies of such contracts. This results in parents having only CCF’s word for what rights they have given over to the NGO.
I can think of no good reason why contractual arrangements between parents and NGOs should not be totally transparent. In instances when there is a good reason for doing so, the names of the parents can be redacted.
Such an initiative would not only provide the Ministries with a data base of all parents with children in residential care but a simple means whereby they can be contacted by telephone or, preferably, a visit to their homes.
The creation of such a data base would make it possible to access 100% of families with children in NGO residential care – regardless of whether they can read or write or have any other way of becoming aware of the existence of your initiative.
During informal visits the parents could then be asked:
- What circumstances led to your children being placed in residential care?
- Was this decision initiated by yourselves or was the decision made by someone else?
- Have you entered into a contractual arrangement with the NGO caring for your children?
- Were you aware, when you placed your thumb print of the contract/agreement with the NGO of its terms and conditions?
- Did the NGO give you an opportunity to show the contract/agreement to someone who could advise you as to whether or not it was fair?
- Do you have a copy of the contract/agreement?
- Has the NGO honoured its side of the agreement?
- Does the NGO allow you regular access to your children? How often?
- Does the NGO caring for your children provide the rest of the family with any assistance? If so, what form does this assistance take?
- Have you requested that the NGO return your children to the family? If the NGO has refused to do so, what reason did it give? Is there anything in the contract that gives the NGO this right?
- Do your children attend a Christian church or are they obliged to engage in any form of non-Buddhist religious practice? If so, have you agreed to allow this to occur?
These questions (and others similar to these) will reveal a great deal about the nature of the relationship between parents of children in care and NGOs caring for them; about whether parents are generally happy with the arrangements they have entered into.
A representative sample of children in care should also be talked to informally without any representative of the NGO in question being present. Such informal conversations should be conducted by trained professionals with no vested interest in what such conversations might reveal. There must be no perception that conversations with children have been tainted by bias of any kind.
Whilst I believe a central data base will go some way towards identifying parents who are unhappy with the arrangement they have entered into with an NGO, there is a further problem to be addressed: intimidation.
Poor and powerless people are, as you know, very easy to intimidate. Add to this a lack of knowledge of their rights and it is easy for unscrupulous NGOs to tell parents that if they speak out, complain or in any way voice their dissatisfaction with an NGO they will be punished for doing so.
Given that many of these parents know of other parents that have been punished for speaking out, they may well keep their complaints to themselves our of fear of retribution. Many of these parents have good reason to distrust seemingly well-meaning NGOs – even those representing the “Don’t Create More Orphans” initiative. Better the devil you know than the one you don’t know, may be their response if no viable alternative is presented to them that makes it unnecessary for their children to remain in the care of the NGO in question.
Mr Ricketson
ReplyDeleteAnother question to add to your list of those that should be asked of children in 'orphanages':
"Has any member of the staff ever touched you in a way that is wrong or made you feel uncomortable?"
A pertinent quote from today's Phnom penh Post re orphanages:
"Tim Huon, investigation manager of APLE, said in a statement yesterday that Vibol’s arrest was the 21st of a person involved with an institution dealing with children.
“It is very complicated to obtain evidence in such cases, since orphanages are often closed settings. But APLE must pursue cases like these when they come to our attention, given the large number of potential victims and their dependence on the institution’s staff,” he said.
Those running 'orphanages' should be monitored and be accountable. The data bas you are suggesting is a good place to start.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThere shouldn't be any orphanages because Cambodia doesn't have any orphans.
DeleteI am so happy to see that abuse in orphanages is being dealt with. We all know that children inside orphanages are very vulnerable for abuse in closed settings like orphanages. Couldn't be more happy with the fact that organizations like APLE are willing to investigate this, even if the suspect has been linked with their own organization. Lets hope they continue their great work and everybody here for once thinks about the children involved!
DeleteThis is a wonderful idea James, and a great project started by ChildSafe Network. I think that these two organizations should be copied in on this suggestion: Deputy Governor in charge of NGOs and Director of the Anti-human Trafficking Unit.
ReplyDeleteHow does APLE get away with trafficking Yang Dany to China? Perhaps someone familiar with APLE can share their process.
APLE is getting away with anything, so it seems. The only true step forward for Cambodia would be to close APLE, put its suicidal alcoholic peadophile founder behind bars along with Director of Deceit Seila Saylies and Gestapo officer Tim Huon and start funding the wonderful initiatives of Friends International and their ChildSafe programme.
DeleteYou really think that anyone takes a person serious who changes the name of someone into Seila Saylies? You sound like a twelve year old who is unable to make a real argument.
DeleteDirector of Deceit is even more sad....
DeleteThere is another part of this Phnom Penh Post article that is worth paying some attention to:
ReplyDelete“The former country director of prominent child-protection NGO Action Pour Les Enfants (APLE) was charged yesterday by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court over allegations that he sexually assaulted at least nine residents at an orphanage he ran in 2013 and 2014.
According to current APLE executive director Samleang Seila, the organisation participated in the investigation against Our Home orphanage director Hang Vibol, who served as APLE’s first country director in 2003 and 2004. Vibol left the organisation to found Our Home, Samleang added.”
And where does Hang Vibol get the bulk of his funding from? Anres Torres of Globalhumanitaria.org – close friend of Thierry Darnaudet. And what have Anres Torres Thierry Darnaudet been up to this past few years? Exporting Darnaudet’s "Protect" Program to other parts of the world – a program that makes it possible (if Hang Vibol is in fact guilty and has not been set up) for APLE funds to provide opportunities for crooked NGOs running phony orphanages to sexually abuse kids in their care.
The Phnom Penh Post article is just another example of the media printing APLE press releases without looking to see what might be going on behind the scenes.
Are you suggesting that Darnaudet & Torres are in fact peadophiles?
DeleteYou're not the first one to make this suggestion.
Suggestion yes. Do you do anything else then making suggestions? Just give me one tiny bit of evidence.......
DeleteDear Mr. Ricketson,
ReplyDeleteWould'nt it now be the right time to investigate Thierry Darnaudet and his involvement in ACTT, Calcutta India (and all the other childprotection institutions where children are kept and he is involved ) ?
Hang Vibol, the Head of "Our Home" , the globaluhmanitaria.org (Andres Torres) sponsored Orphanage in Phnom Penh is a perfect example who runs Aple.
Hang Vibol worked for Licado as a juvenile rights officer - proving yet again what kind of people run not only Aple but also Human Rights Organisations like Licado.
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/former-aple-chief-arrested
https://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/police-close-orphanage-over-child-sex-claims-79194/
Thierry Darnaudet claims that all his employee's are carefully screened, vetted and their criminal records checked. Obviously this does not include Khmer that work in his Organisation and of course himself. And perhaps it was Darnaudet himself who hung Vibol!
The Cambodian Daily quotes Mr. Sophea of Our Home Shelter: “The person is a French national, who has had a dispute with our rector before,” he said, declining to name the individual.
The victims of all this are again the children. More than 20 children were also sent back to their families. They are the lucky ones !
Any comment from the Donors or even one of the 2400 NGO in Cambodia ? Nope..... .utter silence !
So, Hang Vibol worked for Licadho and for Aple! Naly Pilorge (head of Licadho) was one of the founders of Aple, along with Thierry Darnatudet. Are there any other Aple/Licadho connections we should know about?
DeleteSo, are you saying that Andre Torres helped finance the Out Home orphanage?
DeleteOkay. Interesting! So how plausible do you think it is that Torres and Daurnaudet had an argument and today's case is a result of it all???
Please contact us! Mr.Ricketson has our contact details.
Interesting, Ricketson writes about how orphanages should be closed... APLE is involved in a case in which they assist to bring a child sex offender to justice and close an orphanage, but the comments are focusing on how APLE is still bad. APLE's press release seems to be the source of the fact that the suspect was linked to them so looks like they were being honest about this - not covering it up. Can't you recognise a good thing when you see it? In my opinion, APLE did well in this case. Also, what is Theirry's role in APLE nowadays anyways?
ReplyDeleteAlso, Anonymous 11.24, background checks only stop those who have a criminal background. Maybe the suspect didn't have a previous history of abuse.
What's Theirry's role in APLE nowadays anyways?
Delete“The person is a French national, who has had a DISPUTE WITH OUR RECTOR BEFORE,” he said, declining to name the individual. Mr. Sophannara at the Social Affairs Ministry confirmed that a French national was behind the complaint, but said he could not provide any more information."
Why is French national Thierry Darnaudet not named here??? What other French national would have had a vendetta with an ex-APLE employee?
"APLE is involved in a case in which they assist to bring a child sex offender to justice and close an orphanage, but the comments are focusing on how APLE is still bad."
Please read this new article with your eyes open:
https://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/police-close-orphanage-over-child-sex-claims-79194/
As he spoke inside the orphanage grounds, staff and European volunteers shepherded TEARFULL children with trash bags full of belongings into the vehicles. As they helped the children into the vans and trucks Thursday, Spanish, French and Swiss volunteers, as well as staff at the orphanage, said they understood the need to take action against the allegations but were upset by how quickly the children had been removed. “You can see, they have treated them like animals,” said one enraged senior employee, whose French was translated by a 20-year-old Swiss man who arrived at Our Home five days ago and, like all of his colleagues, declined to be named. “It is not right to treat them like this, to take them away from their brothers and sisters without telling them where they are going or letting them say goodbye.”
Deportieren die Kinder! Heil Hitler!
It's all about 'protecting children' and 'finding justice for the victims' isn't it, but nobody seems to care when 62 children are being arrested, detained and traumatized for life for this 'Good Cause'.
"In my opinion APLE did well in this case"
How would you feel if an army of police came to take your kids away and put them in a minivan to deport them to an unknown destination? And all because your father has a dispute with a suicidal alcoholic, named Thierry Darnaudet, leading an orphanage in Calcutta, India?
Thank you for pointing out Thierry's POSSIBLE link to this case, but that's not what I asked. Reread the question.
DeleteIt's difficult to read with your eyes closed, but you seem quite good at it so let me know if you have any tips.
You are saying that the children should not have been "arrested, detained" (which they weren't, according to the article you just asked me to read with my eyes open), so they should have been left at the orphanage? Are you now defending the institutionalisation of children, most of whom have parents, in a home where volunteers have access to them?
So taking these children to safer places is now traumatising? How would you feel if your child was living with a suspected child sex offender? That's not traumatising at all... Living in a residential care centre has been proven to be traumatising for children, whether they are sexually abused or not.
If anyone has a personal vendetta here, it's you with all your rantings against APLE and Thierry.
Dear Anonymous 12.12
DeleteUnless there is a second APLE former employee that is under investigation, APLE has been investigating Hang Vibol for quite some time. By its own admission, in CAMBODIA'S CHILD PREDATORS, Action Pour les Enfants had evidence of Hang Vibol's in at least Nov 2014. Why then did APLE wait until March 2015 to act? And why did it act in such a dramatic way? And in a way guaranteed to cause (a) maximum distress to children and staff alike and (b) to give rise to maximum publicity. APLE has achieved both goals but it may well be that the publicity will draw attention to aspects of this case that APLE would rather not be exposed to public view.
It is to be hoped that journalists will piece together the various parts of this jig-saw puzzle and find answers to the various questions raised here.
What was dramatic about how APLE acted? APLE acted the same as normal. Someone got arrested and they wrote a press release. The children were removed because someone was charged with abusing at least some of them. However, the POLICE arrested Vibol and DOSVY moved the children, not APLE. APLE is just an NGO, in case you forgot. Ricketson, I would assume you've had enough experience with authorities in Cambodia to know it often requires money to persuade them to act in your favour. If APLE had that kind of money (a) their budget would have to be bigger and (b) they would not get donors as their expenses would be questionable to say the least. Have you ever worked for NGOs? Donors are the strictest of the strict when it comes to reporting and funds management, much more so than the Cambodian government at least!!
DeleteDear Anonymous 4.46
DeleteClosing down an orphanage at such short notice is pretty dramatic! Certainly very dramatic for the children.
If the orphanage was closed because Hang Vibol was charged, why was it not closed in Nov 2014 when, according to CAMBODIA'S CHILD PREDATORS, Hang Vibol was already under investigation - presuming that there is not another former APLE employee under investigation.
What new information came to the attention of the police and APLE in the past week that they did not have in their possession in Nov 2014? this is one of many questions that require an answer. If the police and APLE believed Hang Vibol to be abusing children in Nov 2014 but had to wait until march 2015 to act this is certainly suggestive of a failure to protect the children from abuse. And shouldn't this be the top priority of both the police and APLE?
It is not uncommon for allegations to be made about people in positions of power and authority. The standard (and appropriate) procedure is for this person to step aside whilst an investigation is conducted. Why could this not have occurred here?
As for donors being strict in how their money is spent, this is simply not true. Ask the donors to the Cambodian Children's Fund how they feel about CCF claiming, in an income tax return, that the NGO spends $4,000 per child in institutional care each year and I doubt that any of them would be aware of this.
Most NGOs are engaged in marketing themselves to garner as much money as they can to maintain and grow the programs they are engaged in. They all have a vested interest in telling sponsors and donors what they want to hear. This is not necessarily the truth.
It is the job of the fourth estate to look at what all NGOs say, at how all NGOs present themselves to the world, with a critical eye. It is also the job of the fourth estate to look, with a critical eye, at what other members of the fourth estate do. Just as I question both the PhnomPenh Post and the Cambodia Daily for their lack of investigative journalism, so too am I questioned here about a variety of matters relating to what I write. This is how it should be. I should be held as accountable for what I write as other journalists.And I should be held accountable for what I don't write if this constitutes self-censorship.
Oh Ricketson, you just don't get it do you?
DeleteIf closing down the orphanage at such short notice was dramatic, blame DOSVY for being dramatic! Also, how do you know it was short notice? Maybe talks had been going on for weeks. Nothing about the real timeframe has been published.
"What new information came to the attention... in the past week"... Is this something you know about every police investigation in every country? Even in the West, it is not common for police to disclose this. It is, after all, a police investigation and information cannot be shared freely at that time. (I'm sure you've heard the line: "We cannot comment on an ongoing investigation"). Have some faith that there was motivating circumstances to lead to his arrest. Or don't, I could care less.
You always say "police and APLE" like they're one entity, but they're not. It seems like you have a lot of questions for the POLICE actually, so maybe you should start contacting them (i.e. why did it take so long to act, why could the suspect not just step aside, what evidence came to light to cause the arrest and orphanage closure, etc. - all good questions for the POLICE).
It's funny that you mention the CCF budget... What started as an honest question by you (i.e. Is it true that the income tax form says they spend $4000 per child?) now seems to have become a fact. As far as I know, you have never posted about receiving confirmation of whether this is the case from CCF, so how did you verify and find evidence to prove that these funds are solely spent in the way you assume they are? I advise against turning assumptions into fact, Ricketson. By all means ask the questions, but their silence and your assumptions do not mean you can move on with an unfounded statement and use it as if it is true.
IF it is true, it is highly concerning, their whole budget is concerning to be honest. But without true knowledge and understanding, one cannot make judgements.
I agree that NGOs market themselves, this is necessary; however, most donors have a vested interest in not engaging in controversial/suspicious organisations as well. How would CCF, APLE, LICADHO, etc. maintain any type of funding base if they were really corrupt? Perhaps they are merely bad at openly sharing how money is spent with the public.
Dear Anonymous 5.05
DeleteThere is clearly an expectation on the part of some who comment here that I have nothing else to do in my life other than answer questions. In fact, I have a whole other life and my days are full. If I do not respond immediately it it because I have this other life and other demands on my time.
As I have stated already, no-one knows where the truth lies vis a vis Hang Vibol and the closure of the orphanage. All there can be right now are questions - to which answers will, hopefully, be provided in the fullness of time. It is the role of the media (one of the media's roles) to ask such questions.
As for the relationship between APLE and the police APLE makes a big deal about the fact that it works closely with the police so it is not unreasonable to see them as a team. I would like to think that APLE is not the tail wagging the dog but there is a good deal of evidence to suggest that APLE plays a major role in determining how the police respond to cases it has brought to the police's attention.
I have written to the police. I have written to various ministers over the years. On only one occasion have I received even an acknowledgment of my letters.
Vis a vis CCF's $4,000 per child this is a fact according to CCF's US tax return. Go back to the relevant blog entry, find the address and check for yourself - $2,000 per child for accommodation and $2,000 for education. These are CCF's figures, not mine.
The notion that NGOs could not maintain a funding base if they were corrupt is naive. With great marketing an NGO can convince well-meaning sponsors and donors that they are doing a good job, a vital job. Given that there is virtually no independent monitoring of NGOs to determine whether or not they are achieving their stated goals, sponsors and donors have only the word of the NGOs themselves to go on to determine if they are doing a good job or not.
Anonymous 5.05
DeleteHere is the website address you need to go to to find out how much CCF claims to spend per annum per child - embedded in words of mine from a recent blog entry:
"The Cambodian Children’s Fund 2013 “Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax” is to be found at:
https://www.cambodianchildrensfund.org/images/stories/financial/CCF_990_Form_2013.pdf
In Line 4a the figure of $1,603,309 appears alongside a list of educational programs servicing 760 kids.
Simple mathematics reveals that CCF claims to be spending roughly $2,000 per child per annum for education.
Does this figure seem realistic, Heather, in a country in which the per capita income of most Cambodian families is below $1,500?
In Line 4b the figure of $1,423,298 appears alongside:
“Childcare – CCF provides housing and transportation to over 700 impoverished Cambodian children.”
CCF claims to be spending roughly $2,000 per child for housing and transportation per annum and yet these children sleep in dormitories, often 3 and 4 to a bed!
Given that the cost of transportation within Steung Meanchey would cost very little, it is fair to assume that the bulk of the $2,000 CCF claims to spend per child in institutional care is for ‘housing’.
How and why does it cost more to house and educate one Cambodian child in a CCF institution for one year than it costs for an entire Cambodian family to live for one year?"
Oh, I'll let someone else do it Anonymous 12:12!
ReplyDeleteYeah, if I had no answer I would not reply either.
DeleteLooks like you've already been buried.....
DeleteI have not responded earlier to this blog, but now I feel the need to raise some questions to Team Stop APLE. As I understand, you think that the arrest of the orphanage director is the result of an argument between APLE and the orphanage director? Could you provide any evidence for this? I mean, real evidence?
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I know this was not for me to answer, but I do want to respond to this quote: “how would you feel if an army of police came to take your kids away and put them in a minivan to deport them to an unknown destination?” As a matter of fact, I would be very happy if the police came to take my children out of an orphanage if there were multiple children who had claimed the orphanage director had sexually abused them. I would want them to be taken out of there immediately, wouldn’t you? In addition to this, the destination of the children is not unknown (“Mr. Sophannara added that 62 children—42 boys and 20 girls—were removed from the orphanage and placed into the care of three child-protection NGOs—Pour un Sourire d’Enfant (PSE), Enfants d’Asie Cambodia (ASPECA) and the M’lup Russey Organization. More than 20 children were also sent back to their families”). Could you please tell me what is unknown about their destination?
I am well aware that the whole process of removing the children may not have been up to the International Standards we all hope, but to leave these children in an orphanage after so much evidence of abuse has been brought up (“Police Colonel Eang Chanlon, chief of the juvenile protection program in the Ministry of Interior, said Vibol was arrested on March 2 based on complaints from children living at his orphanage that he habitually abused at least six boys and three girls living there.”) breaks my heart and I honestly don’t think you really want to do that with these children, do you? Again, if you have any evidence (again, real evidence) to dispute the fast that this orphanage director has abused children, please let me know. At this moment, I think what is most important is to make sure that these children will get a safe place to stay and counseling to deal with the suffering they had to undergo in the shelter.
@John BatesMarch 6, 2015 at 7:47 AM
DeleteI personally do not believe that Hang Vibol is guilty of the charges laid against him. Mind you, he was APLE's former country director, a organisation that snoops, gangstalks,monitors and openly supports vigilantism.
The fact that the arrest was triggered by "a french person in the Organisation" raises a hell of a lot questions and even though we cannot cough up the "hard evidence" you request, the whole story has a bad odor to it.
The fact that the rest of the staff at "Our Home" seems to also believe that this is a fabricated issue points to the conflicts between this "French Person" does not automatically mean that a whole Orpanage has to be closed.
Why for example a qualified Khmer Person of the Ministry of Social Affairs cannot be a temporary Director ? Why the rush to close the center down and make the staff jobless?
I believe we see a pattern here, yet again of APLE trying to cut off any communication between those that would like to get real answers (facts) like they did in David Fletcher's case when they rushed Yang Dany off to China !
When will the Cambodia Daily and the Phnom Penh Post do some proper journalism by asking questions and not only publish Aple press releases?
@ AnonymousMarch 6, 2015 at 2:39 PM
DeleteI see, so there is no hard evidence at all? To be honest, that is the feeling I had already. I would like to know why you personally don't believe that he is not guilty of the charges? Is this because you know him, have information I don't have about him, or you would never believe someone's guilt as soon as APLE is involved in a case?
In addition, could you show me the evidence that APLE is an "organization that snoops, gangstalks,monitors and openly supports vigilantism." You state this like a fact so I assume you have overwhelming evidence for this and since I have not seen anything yet, I would really like to see it.
"Why should the shelter be closed"? Well, if there was abuse in the shelter, it is really questionable what kind of child protection measures they had in place. Where staff allowed to be unsupervised with children? I would question if the orphanage is a safe place for children to begin with. Furthermore the fact that "the rest of the staff at "Our Home" seems to also believe that this is a fabricated issue" would even make me more worried. They (staff) take the side of the alleged offender, instead of the side of the possible victim. For caretakers of these children to openly question the statements given by the children is unacceptable and again all child protection standards. All children should be removed to a safe place, so they feel no longer scared for the director or any other staff and further investigations can be carried out.
Finally, your quote "I believe we see a pattern here, yet again of APLE trying to cut off any communication between those that would like to get real answers (facts) like they did in David Fletcher's case when they rushed Yang Dany off to China!" What do you mean by this? As I can see from the newspaper articles, APLE was willing to provide answers to the questions and the orphanage director and his lawyer could not be reached for question. What do you really expect now? APLE sent out a press release and they have answered questions from journalists. What would you like to see?
The whole story has a very bad smell indeed. Firstly, staff at Our Home says that the accusations have been fabricated and a result of a dispute with a French guy. This fact sounds very suspicious and raises a lot questions about APLE's involvement.
DeleteSecondly, the story also features in the documentary Cambodia's Child Predators. The footage was taken no later than late 2014, meaning that APLE and their partners were leaving the children in a situation they believed was not safe. All these months they didn't do anything about it, other than 'collecting evidence'. This once again proves that APLE's main goal is NOT to prevent abuse, but to collect evidence of it in order to make a heroic arrest.
Thirdly, witnesses say that the children were treated like animals. Why the rush? Did APLE just want to secure their witnesses, those who they'd convinced to testify against Vibol.
Apart from 20 children, most children were deported to an unknown destination. Unknown, yes, because it's yet another location where they don't know anybody and don't know if they'll be safe there. And knowing APLE, the children will for sure all be questioned and pressured into making accusations against Vibol. We should not underestimate the impact on children of being taken away by police, without exactly knowing why and whereto. We should also not underestimate the traumatizing effect of being questioned over and over again. Children will for sure remember these events just as much as the abuse that occurred / did not occur.
If Vibol is guilty, he deserves a long jail sentence, but the problem with most APLE cases is that it's almost impossible to ever find out the whole truth. There's always these questionable circumstances.
I am really starting to wonder what the motives of this blog are. Don't get me wrong, but it feels like child protection is not the first priority of all the persons commenting on this blog.
DeleteFirst, yes there are some questions that should be answered in this story. But do you really want an answer? It seems that you already have your conclusion ready and are not open to anything else? So far, APLE has been answering all the questions that were raised to them so I am sure we will get more information as the story is continuing.
Secondly, the documentary, I have seen it. I really feel you don't understand the situation in Cambodia completely. The only thing APLE can do is push the police to take action. Would you want APLE to take children out of the orphanage themselves? This is a crime punishable with jail. The crime is called "unlawfull removal of a minor". Please study the situation in Cambodia and you will find out that APLE has less power than you really think, they depend on the police and ministries for action to be taken.
You third point, again study the situation in Cambodia. Children are removed from orphanages by the Ministry of Social Affairs and police, not by APLE. It is very had to discuss cases if you do not take these point into consideration at all.
Fourth, "We should not underestimate the impact on children of being taken away by police, without exactly knowing why and whereto. We should also not underestimate the traumatizing effect of being questioned over and over again." Really? You should not underestimate the impact on children when they are being sexually abused!" The first priority if to bring all possible children (which are all the children in the orphanage) to safe places and provide them with counseling if needed. This really makes me wonder what you find more important. There are international standards to take the children out of the possible abusive situations, but according to you it would be a good idea to let them stay there? First see whether all allegations are correct? Do you have any idea how scared children may be in this orphanage? Again, what is your real priority here?
"the problem with most APLE cases is that it's almost impossible to ever find out the whole truth." As far as I know, APLE works in many cases with the FBI, CEOP, Australian Federal police, etc. These agencies find there work thus not so questionable. What is your point now. That all these foreign agencies are also corrupt? Or is your point that APLE is so malicious that they even know how to fool these foreign agencies?
John
DeleteThis blog has evolved into something quite other than what I expected it to be at the outset. I have no problem with this. Apart from a very few people making stupid and offensive comments the discussion seems to be civil for the most part.
I can't speak for other but for me it is the welfare of children that is foremost in my mind. I spent six years trying to get returned to their family two girls illegally removed from it by an Australian based NGO by the name of Citipointe church - which runs a 'Rescue Home' in Cambodia by the name of 'SHE Rescue'.
I am well aware of the laws relating to the removal of children from their families and have often cited the relevant law - which I will cite again:
Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation
Article 8:Definition of Unlawful Removal
The act of unlawful removal removal in this act shall mean to:
1) Remove a person from his/her current place of residence to a place under the actor’s or a third persons control by means of force, threat, deception, abuse of power, or enticement, or
2) Without legal authority or any other legal justification to do so to take a minor person under general custody or curatoship or legal custody away from the legal custody of the parents, care taker or guardian.
Article 9: Unlawful removal, inter alia, of Minor
A person who unlawfully removes a minor or a person under general custody or curatorship or legal custody shall be punished with imprisonment for 2 to 5 years.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7259345/Law-on-Suppression-of-Human-Trafficking-and-Sexual-Exploitation-15022008-English
The fact is that there are many NGOs, some with very high public profiles, that remove children from their families illegally and retain custody of them regardless of the expresses wishes of their parents that they be returned to their families.
The Cambodian Children's Fund, for instance, will cite the 'contract' the parents have signed agreeing to allow CCF to keep their children in residential care. The parents, for the most part illiterate, have no idea what they have agreed to when they placed their thumb-print on a 'contract' with CCF. They are not allowed to retain a copy of this 'contract' and so cannot show it to anyone and ask if their rights, as parents, are being breached.
If pressed, CCF will insist that it has entered into an agreement with the Ministry of Social Affairs that supersedes any arrangement they have entered into with the parents. When asked to produce a copy of this agreement CCF refuses. In other words once CCF has kids in residential care the NGO can keep them for as long as it likes regardless of the wishes of the parents.
As for whether or not I really want an answer to the questions I have asked (along with others), the answer is , "Yes, I would love an answer. A straight-forward answer that makes sense." None has been forthcoming to date.
As for the relationship between APLE and the police and the amount of real power APLE has, a couple of observations.
APLE claims to be working in conjunction with the police and so it is not unreasonable to think of them as a team. In this and other instances 'the team' is letting down children by allowing abuse to occur before stepping in to prosecute the offender or alleged offender.
If APLE does not like the way its team member is behaving (waiting for the crime to occur before busting the sex abuser) it should come out and say so. If you, John, were in partnership with an NGO seeking to protect children from harm and you discovered that your partner was more interested in catching the criminal than preventing the crime, would you remain in the partnership? If you were thus complicit in the sexual abuse of the very children you were seeking to protect?
...to be continued...
Your third point, John, that it is it is only the Ministry of Social Affairs and police that remove children from orphanages is only true in theory. This was the reason given by Citipointe church for why it could not return to their family the two girls I have mentioned above. This, they claimed, absolved them of all responsibility. It is not our call, the church said.
DeleteIn reality, what happened was that within a couple of days of being threatened with a lawsuit in Australia the NGO in question literally turned up with the girls (after 6 years) and dumped them back with their family.
I have been travelling to Cambodia for 20 years and have had a good deal of experience with the ministry of Social Affairs. As is the case throughout the Cambodian government generally there are members of MoSAVY that can very easily persuaded to do the bidding of NGOs. I am trying to be polite here. If you know Cambodia well you know this to be true.
Two years ago there was a lot of talk about closing orphanages. Two years ago it was common knowledge that half of Cambodia's 'orphanages' were not registered and that 75% of the children in them were not orphans. Two years ago half the 'orphanages' could have been closed down as a result of their being illegal. They were not. Why do you think this is?
As for closing the orphanage on the basis of allegations, is this a good idea? Given that by its own admission APLE was investigating Hang Vibol back in Nov 2014 at least why, if APLE has strong suspicions (if not overwhelming evidence) did it not persuade its partner (the police) to ask Hang Vibol to stand aside until the allegations had been thoroughly investigated? Why resort to high drama when a cool, calm and collected approach could have caused no trauma at all for the children resident in the 'orphanage'?
I will not address the question of APLE's partnerships with the Australian Police, CEOP etc just now as I have other matters to attend to.
I will not go into the whole orphanage industry in Cambodia since I never claimed to support such an industry.
Delete"APLE claims to be working in conjunction with the police and so it is not unreasonable to think of them as a team." Well as a matter of fact that is a bit unreasonable. APLE is an NGO and police is a law enforcement agency. APLE is only authorized to assist police and has limited influence on police actions. Despite that police action is still slow and not nearly perfect, I would encourage APLE to keep assisting them as police action has improved significant in the last years, partly due to APLE. Do you really to suggest not working with police and letting down all the victims of sexual abuse that should be rescued? In the end, police should do this work, they are just not able yet to do it alone. For now, NGOs should encourage police to undertake more pro-active investigation and to take action earlier. This is also done by APLE as I read on their website that they give training to police. You really want APLE to stop having a relationship with police and work solely?
Then your point about MoSVY. I don't claim that some of the points mentioned in this blog may be correct, the only I said is that it is good that this specific orphanage was closed down. There was allegedly widespread abuse taking place in the orphanage and a staff member openly defended the director in the newspaper. If the abuse is occurring, the children are not safe and therefore they only manner to deal with this is to place them in a safe environment. In any other country in the west the same would have happened.
"I will not address the question of APLE's partnerships with the Australian Police, CEOP etc just now as I have other matters to attend to." Maybe you have time to respond to this now?
"Given that by its own admission APLE was investigating Hang Vibol back in Nov 2014 at least why, if APLE has strong suspicions (if not overwhelming evidence) did it not persuade its partner (the police) to ask Hang Vibol to stand aside until the allegations had been thoroughly investigated? Why resort to high drama when a cool, calm and collected approach could have caused no trauma at all for the children resident in the 'orphanage'?" Who says that APLE did not try the police to take action? Can I see your evidence for this? In addition, one staff member has said that he or she did support the suspect, you really want the children to remain in this situation? Please Ricketson, lets put the interest of the children first. "resort to High drama" was needed since so many children being sexually abused is a serious drama in my opinion, maybe you disagree.
John
DeleteI trust that it is apparent from the sheer volume of correspondence on this blog (this one in particular) that it is not always easy for me to find the time to answer every query in detail immediately.I do have another life and it demands a lot of my time and attention. Please excuse me if I answer in point form.
My own experience with APLE and the experience of others who have had dealings with both the police and APLE suggests that there is a strong co-dependent relationship between the police and APLE. The case of Liam Miller is a good example of this. See earlier blogs.
I am not suggesting that organisations like APLE should not work with the police. I do suggest, however, that there are many instances in which APLE has used its power, its influence, its money, to interfere with the administration of justice in Cambodia. I have no argument with the proposition that APLE has been involved in the productive pursuit and prosecution of pedophiles. At the same time, there is a lot of evidence that APLE also pursues men who are not pedophiles and manipulates witnesses and the courts to secure the outcome the NGO desires. The case of David Fletcher is the one I know of best but there are many other instances that have been cited here on this blog.
Please don't put words into my mouth and then expect me to respond to what you claim I have said but have never said. For example, "You really want APLE to stop having a relationship with police and work solely?"
As for closing down the orphanage at short notice it remains to be seen what evidence is presented in support of the need to do so. Given that it seems APLE and the police had their suspicions about Hang Vibol in at least Nov 2014 a ore logical course of action, a less disruptive course of action, would have been for the police to declare that certain allegations had been made against Hang Vibol and that until such time as they had been investigated an interim director would run the home.
This course of action would not be appropriate if it was discovered, very recently, that many members of staff had been involved (and not just Hang Vibol) and that the only viable course of action was to close the orphanage immediately. Hopefully, answers to such questions will emerge int he fullness of time.
re APLE, the Australian Police, CEOP etc:
(1) The Australian polie had no involvement with David Fletcher's case.
(2) APLE was, by its own admission, very deeply involved in having Fletcher deported to Cambodia to face rape charges - despite knowing that Yang Dany remained a virgin after she had been allegedly raped. APLE has also been deeply involved in recommending to the Phnom Penh Municipal Court that David Fletcher be denied the fair trial the same court had promised him three weeks earlier.
(3) CEOP presented no evidence at all in the secret trial that David Fletcher was guilty of rape. Nor did SISHA. Indeed, other than Yang Dany's statement to the police (which she did not write herself) no evidence was presented to the court in support of the proposition that Fletcher had raped Yang Dany.
I have gone to some lengths to find out from both CEOP and SISHA what evidence they have that David Fletcher is guilty of rape. Neither will answer any questions.
FYI (in you are interested) I will past below my latest letter to CEOP - to which I received no response.
Finally, of course the interests of the children are paramount. And it is for this reason that I believe Hang Vibol could have been forced to step aside last year whilst an investigation took place - unless, of course, there is evidence that has not come to light as yet.
Debbie Chisholm
DeletePress Officer
National Crime Agency
1-7 Old Queen Street
Westminster
London, SW1H 9HP
3rd Nov 2014
Dear Debbie
re David John Fletcher
Your email of 31st. Oct, far from being helpful, raises more questions:
“What are the names of the ‘partner agencies’ that led CEOPS investigation into Mr Fletcher?”
Is CEOPS happy with the way in which these ‘partner’ agencies’ have used the results of CEOPS’ investigations in legal proceedings?
These questions are pertinent both to Mr Fletcher’s forthcoming court case and to my own desire, as a journalist/writer and documentary filmmaker, to be in possession of as many verifiable facts as possible regarding this matter; to give all involved an opportunity to present their side of the story.
CEOPS investigators came to Cambodia in 2010 with the express intention of investigating allegations made by Scott Neeson that Mr Fletcher was ‘grooming’ young girls. In none of the court documents can I find any reference to CEOPS having uncovered evidence of Mr Fletcher’s being guilty of doing so. This leads me to believe that CEOPS did not find anything illegal or untoward about Mr Fletcher’s behavior towards young girls. Is this correct?
As CEOPS is well aware, Mr Fletcher was not charged in Cambodia with ‘grooming’ but with rape. As CEOPS is also aware (and has been since September 2010) the ‘rape victim’ was found by an examining doctor to be a virgin after the rape. And, as CEOPS is also now aware, the ‘victim’ has recently admitted, both to my camera and to other journalists, that no rape took place.
Whilst evidence pertaining to ‘grooming’ was not, in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure, admissible in Mr Fletcher’s secret rape trial, Scott Neeson’s allegations (not backed up by any hard evidence) were aired in court and these played a role in the judges finding Mr Fletcher guilty of rape! (If you trace Scott Neeson’s allegations back, you will find that they begin with Peter Hogan, the owner of a Cambodian blog by the name of Khmer440; they began with a man who, by his own admission, spent 4 years pursuing Mr Fletcher with the intention of having him imprisoned.)
If CEOPS is in possession of evidence that Mr Fletcher was guilty of ‘grooming’ (or of any other offence against children) he should be charged with such offenses. He has not been. In flying all the way to Cambodia to investigate Mr Fletcher, and making your investigation publicly known to Peter Hogan, CEOPS cast a shadow of doubt over his behavior – raising in the minds of the general public the legitimate question: “Why else, readers of Andrew Drummond’s June 2010 article would quite legitimately ask, would CEOPS be in Cambodia investigating Mr Fletcher if there was nothing to investigate?”
The appropriate course of action for CEOPS to have taken, once it had completed its investigations in June 2010, would have been to announce: (a) We have found no evidence of Mr Fletcher’s guilt or (b) We have provided the Cambodian authorities with the results of our investigations.
...to be continued...
....
DeletePerhaps this is what you mean with your reference to ‘partner agencies’. If (b) be the case, the question arises:
“Is CEOPS happy with the way in which these ‘partner agencies’ have used the results of its investigations to have Mr Fletcher imprisoned for 10 years for rape?”
I am trying to place CEOPS’ involvement in a time line, Debbie, and I hope you can help me.
At some point in June 2010 CEOPS completed its investigation into allegations that Mr Fletcher had ‘groomed’ young girls. CEOPS had not come to Cambodia to investigate allegations that Mr Fletcher had raped Yang Dany. Indeed, at the time CEOPS completed its investigations (June 2010) no such allegation had yet been made. It was not until after Mr Fletcher had left Cambodia that the rape allegations were made.
Shortly after their return to the UK (June 2010), CEOPS investigators familiar with the case would have learned that Mr Fletcher had been charged with rape. Given that there had been no talk of rape a few weeks earlier, surely this must have caught their attention and made them wonder how this rape allegation could come out of the blue as it did, after they had left the country. And by September 2010, when a doctor’s report was prepared for the court, these same CEOPS operatives would have become aware that Yang Dany remained a virgin after her rape. Did no alarm bells ring for these CEOPS investigators? Did it not occur to them that Mr Fletcher may have been set up on fake rape charges to extort money from him? The CEOPS investigators could not fail to be aware that Cambodia is amongst the most corrupt countries in the world!
“Did CEOPS, in September 2010, ask any questions of its ‘partner agencies’ in Cambodia regarding Yang Dany’s intact hymen after her alleged rape?”
“If so, did CEOPS accept the proposition, endorsed by the judges in the secret trial, that Yang Dany’s hymen must have grown back?”
If CEOPS does not accept the ‘hymen-grown-back’ explanation for Yang Dany’s remaining a virgin after her rape:
“Has CEOPS made any representations at all to its ‘partner agencies’ – asking for more information? Particularly now that Yan Dany has admitted that no rape took place?”
...to be continued...
....
DeleteOr has CEOPS washed its hands in the investigation and is prepared to see Mr Fletcher die in jail on the basis of evidence that would not stand up in any court of law in any country that actually abided by the rule of law?
By now, I think you will agree, CEOPS had been identified in a very public manner as being very much involved in both the investigation into Mr Fletcher’s activities in Cambodia and his conviction for rape. Refusing to answer any questions at all is not, from a moral point of view, an option.
Whilst I am primarily concerned with Mr Fletcher’s right to a fair trial, I am also interested (as both a journalist/writer and filmmaker) in the question of his ‘grooming’ of young girls. If he has done so, if there is evidence that he has done so, he should be charged with this offence.
This brings me back to my original question:
“Does CEOPS have any evidence at all that Mr Fletcher is guilty of ‘grooming’?”
If you simply refuse to answer this question, as I suspect will be the case, this will leave Mr Fletcher in a no-man’s land vis a vis his guilt or innocence. Some readers and viewers will conclude that CEOPS must have evidence of his guilt. Others will conclude that CEOPS found nothing and draw their own conclusions from CEOPS’ silence, in Nov 2014 - now that Yang Dany’s post-rape virginity and her denial that any rape took place are in the public arena.
One last question:
“If CEOPS found no evidence that Mr Fletcher was guilty of ‘grooming’, will CEOPS testify to this effect at Mr Fletcher’s forthcoming trial?”
I passed your email on to Mr Fletcher. He wrote an email back to me, asking that I pass it on to you. It reads:
Dear Debbie,
A recent communication from CEOPS to Mr James Ricketson has come to my attention that suggests and implies you have evidence of unsavoury acts with children by myself.
I officially request from CEOPS, as my right under the F.O.I. act that you supply me with copies of all documents you hold pertaining to me.
I attach a copy of my drivers licence as I.D. and i am very sure you are aware i am known by the the British Embassy in Phnom Penh. I do not have a valid passport as this was destroyed ' by mistake' by the fco in Bangkok, according to their unsubstanciated explanation.
Furthermore, i request a fully itemised receipt and the return of my personal property that was in store and stolen in Phnom Penh in 2010 by CEOPS personell.
I also request the percentage of funding you receive from the fco, as an ngo this information should be freely available to the public.
This letter, your reply, or lack of may be published.
Regards,
David John Fletcher.
On a final note on my return to the UK i shall be paying CEOPS a visit for an explanation of their agenda.
I have attached a copy of a document signed by David Fletcher giving me the right to ask questions on his behalf. My question is: “What must Mr Fletcher do to make an FOI request to obtain copies of documents relating to his ‘grooming’ of girls held by CEOPS and relating to his forthcoming court case.”
best wishes
James Ricketson
For those who haven't seen the recently broadcast documentary about Cambodia's child predators, (Jan 2015), it can be found here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.channelnewsasia.com/tv/tvshows/undercover-asia-s2/cambodia-s-child/1575012.html
I am not, currently, in a position to watch it again but, as I recall, a reference is made in this documentary to the fact that APLE is currently (Jan 2015) investigating a former APLE employee. Was this Hang Vibol?
I remember at the time thinking it odd that APLE would be sending such strong signals to any person under investigation! This is the case with more than one other case under investigation mentioned in the program.
Now the question is this:
If the person being investigated by APLE, a former APLE employee, was Hang Vibol, why was he allowed to remain in the position he occupied until this past week?
Allowing for editing, this documentary must have ben shot no later than Nov 2014, which means (if Hang Vibol is guilty) that APLE and others had strong evidence of his guilt 3 months ago but did not act on it. Is is alleged that any children in his care were abused in the past 3 months? If so, why has APLT (yet again) stood by and allowed such abuse to occur when it could, so easily, have stepped in and prevented it from occurring? The haste with which all this has taken place suggests that the closing of the orphanage was either grand theatre to place APLE in the media spotlight or was the result of something very bad that had happened in the few days prior to the orphanage's closure!? Which is it?
Why don't the Cambodian media (Khmer and English language) ask such questions? Why do they simply report what is told to them by APLE?
I have no idea where the truth lies here but there are certainly some questions that need to be asked (and answered) before any of us can pass judgment on either APLE's actions or on Hang Vibol's guilt or innocence.
Interesting point. I hope it's the same individual they are referring to, otherwise there's another one. But what exactly was APLE supposed to do? In their press release, it says they contacted the police as soon as they suspected abuse. I don't know for sure, but I, like many, hope that APLE does not have the power to arrest people so they contacted the police to do this immediately. Once they contacted the police, it would have been an open police investigation and intervening in anyway would have been obstruction of justice. It seems then, maybe it is the police that were slow to do something - they don't seem the most motivated group in Cambodia.
DeleteIn terms of acting to prevent abuse: to intervene in an orphanage as an NGO would probably mean attempting to take the children, or is there something else you suggest? As you can relate from your experience with CCF, if a director does not want to give you access to the orphanage or children, you don't get it. So how could APLE have intervened? Again, as an NGO, APLE cannot unlawfully remove children from any setting, so it would have been only the police and Ministry of Social Affairs that had the power.
APLE shouldn't be doing police work in the first place, especially not when the investigation involves an ex-APLE employee. How can they possibly be objective?
DeletePolice work should be done by police, not by NGOs. APLE has a vested interest in the outcome of every investigation, especially in this case. They've probably been looking forward to send out their press release for months. Seila Samleang says he's happy with the outcome of the investigation, but what's there to be happy about? Another arrest? There really is nothing to be proud of and there's nothing to celebrate if it turns out that Vibol truly is guilty.
The Department of Social Affairs has full authority to enter any orphanage whenever they wish. Social Affairs should've entered that orphanage as soon as they heard about possible abuse. The focus should not be on nailing the director but on protecting children from abuse. Hopefully all pro-APLE supporters can at least agree on that point.
In terms of acting to prevent abuse: All orphanages in Cambodia should be closed and all 'orphans' should be returned to their families. That would effectively decrease all institution based abuse at once.
"The focus should not be on nailing the director but on protecting children from abuse. Hopefully all pro-APLE supporters can at least agree on that point."
DeleteYes, I fully agree with this. Hopefully we can also agree that if children testify that they have been abused, they, and all other possible victims, should be removed out of the abusive situation?
Or do you now think that they should stay in an orphanage ran by at least one staff member who supports the alleged abuser? That wouldn't be fair for the children, would it?
Hé APLE Team, you have already posted a new post, could you answer the question above or is that too difficult?
DeleteEvery solution is fine as long as it's in the best interest of the children, as long as their feelings are being respected and as long as they're not being treated like animals.
DeleteImportant in this particular case is also that the children should be protected from both Mr. Vibol and APLE, as there's also the alleged involvement of APLE founder Thierry Darnaudet that cannot be denied.
If Police and/or the Department of Social Affairs believe there's a risk of intimidation of the children by other Our Home staff members, those staff members should also be denied access to the children. Children are very sensitive to abrupt changes. An independent interim manager would've been the best option.
So the children were being treated like animals? Were you there? Or do you just base this on an unknown bystander's opinion? If anyone within APLE has an opinion you don't seem to accept it as a fact, so why is this different with an unknown bystander? Do you know whether this is a credible source or does this just fit your story? Please answer!
DeleteWhat is in the best interest of these children is to consider this case without your hate towards APLE. Just look at it from a neutral point and consider the evidence. You, as well as me, know that it is best to take the children out of that orphanage since we don't know how many of the other staff also support the alleged offender. In addition, even if they don't support the alleged offender, this is still the location where many children where allegedly abused and to have them stay in this environment is against all child protection rules. "Children are very sensitive to abrupt changes"... that is true.... do you what children are even more sensitive to? People sexually abusing them!!! Can you just consider this for one second and stop thinking about your personal hate towards APLE?
Haha good debate question! Why is the random volunteer who commented children were being treated like animals more trustworthy than the multiple quotes by APLE?
DeleteRiddle me that bloggers.
Because APLE has a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation and a random volunteer not.
DeleteAnd their vested interest is what? The protection of children? Everyone should have that as their priority. A volunteer also has a vested interest in the orphanage not being shut down, did you consider that?
Delete@APLE TEAM - your IQ levels continue to drop closer to 14 every time you post a comment. Do everyone a favour and run away and play with your toys and let the grown ups have a debate based on facts and evidence, and not baseless dribble that you continually write.
ReplyDeleteJust taking my morning shit and I ran out of toilet paper. Ricketson, can you please send me a hard copy of your blog? I have a use for it!!
ReplyDeleteGiven the number of words being written here about Hang Vibol and APLE I found the time to watch CAMBODIA'S CHILD PREDATORS again, just to make sure I had not remembered incorrectly. I had not.
ReplyDeleteTwo possibilities exist:
(1) Operation X was not an investigation into Hang Vibol.
(2) Operation X was an investigation into Hang Vibol.
If (1) be the case it seems that there are two former APLE employees who have, allegedly, been involved in the abuse of children. This should be a matter of enormous concern to the Ministries of the Interior and Social Affairs, along with human rights organisations such as LICADHO.
If (2) be the case why on earth was APLE signalling to Hang Vibol that he was under investigation and give him an opportunity to escape detection or to coach children to deny that any abuse had taken place?
If (2) be the case it is hard to imagine that Hang Vibol was not aware that he was being investigated. And yet, it seems, he continued to work at the 'orphanage' with no thought that he needed to protect himself. Why? Most crooks who know that they are about to be busted take evasive action.
If (2) be the case it means that APLE and the police were aware at least in Nov 2014 that Hang Vibol posed, at the very least, a potential threat to the children in his care. This being the case, why did the police and APLE not act to remove the children from danger in Nov. 2014? Hang Vibol could easily have been persuaded (through a court order, if need be) to step aside until an investigation had been conducted. In this way the 'orphanage' could have continued to function until the truth had been discovered.
If (2) be the case and if Hang Vibol is found to be guilty of abuse, how will APLE and the police explain their having exposed the children to risk since at least Nov 2014 without making any effort to intervene and protect the children?
The very dramatic way in which this has been reported suggests the possibility that it has been orchestrated by APLE and the police to garner maximum media coverage. Alternatively, Hang Vibol may have committed a crime agains the children in his care so damaging that APLE and the police had to move fast. If this be the case APLE has exposed the children to great risk this past 3 months. Why?
There are clearly more questions here than answers but it is unlikely that answers will be found if the media does not ask the questions in the first place!
I trust that at least one intrepid journalist from either the Phnom Penh Post or the Cambodia Daily is going to ask these questions and report their findings and not merely wait for the next APLE press release to publish.
Ricketson, one question. What authority does APLE have to go in an orphanage and take children out? You keep raising the same questions but you never explain the situation fully. APLE is no police and no Ministry of Social Affairs. Would you like APLE to have the power to take the children out or do you want APLE to take them out without any authority to do so?
DeleteAPLE formally has no authority at all. All they do is bias evidence to make it fit in their press releases. They have a moral obligation to prevent sexual abuse when they suspect it though, but they don't prevent anything. One doesn't need authority to warn authorities, children and their parents about possible abusive situations.
DeleteWith regard to the inhumane deportation of the children: That was not APLE, but the authorities involved. However, APLE knows how Cambodian authorities often not treat humans with the respect that they deserve, but they seem to accept this as collateral damage in their fight for 'Finding Justice for the Victims'
Those victims, by the way, now need protection more than anything. If it's true that Thierry Darnaudet was involved in the story, than the victims need to be taken away from the claws of APLE as soon as possible. APLE will put enormous pressure on the children to coerce them into making consistent statements. The case is high profile for them.
If it turns out that Vibol truly is guilty, the victims also need immediate protection. This case is so high profile for APLE that they will put a lot of pressure on the victims. It will be another hell on top of what they've already been through.
One way or the other it's ridiculous that APLE got involved in the first place and that they most likely still have access to the children. APLE should be removed from this case immediately and an independent NGO / govenment body should, for the sake of children, take over from here.
"All they do is bias evidence to make it fit in their press releases." Evidence please...?
Delete@APLE Team
DeleteSuspicions can exist about a lot of things, but they are only suspicions at the end of the day. Can you imagine a situation where every single suspicion was acted on? I once suspected my landlord of lying about electricity costs, but I didn't accuse him and make a scene. As it turns out I was in the wrong - lucky I hadn't embarrassed myself with a blow up over nothing! But maybe you prefer that APLE acted on every tiny suspicion reported to them? Pretty sure you'd also be pissed about that too. You don't seem easy to please.
Also, "inhumane deportation"???? What country are they in now?! And here I was thinking they had simply gone back to their families or to another NGO in Phnom Penh. Cleary I missed the overwhelming evidence that they are now in a foreign country, having suffered from "inhumane deportation". I'd love to see you first hand evidence of this crime when you have time.
Yet another interesting article about highly respectable child protection NGO Action pour les Enfants:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/orphanage-director-claims-child-sex-case-fabricated-79241/
"The former chief of anti-pedophile NGO Action Pour Les Enfants (APLE), who was jailed Friday by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court on charges of indecently assaulting children, claimed the allegations were fabricated by APLE founder Thierry Darnaudet as revenge for reporting his ex-boss to authorities over similar allegations in 2013."
Thierry Darnaudet is the French guy that tipped Social Affairs? Wow, that's a real surprise! Who would've thought that?
But outside the courtroom yesterday, Mr. Vibol said Mr. Darnaudet was taking revenge on him after Mr. Vibol attempted to report the Frenchman to authorities two years ago for VIOLANT AND SEXUAL ASSAULT AGAINST CHILDREN “Thierry Darnaudet was angry with me because I sent a report to the Ministry of Social Affairs and the Ministry of Interior in 2013 asking them to ban the APLE president from running an organization in Cambodia,” Mr. Vibol said.
Mr. Vibol’s legal team—Suy Sokhon and Huy Phap—said on Friday that Mr. Darnaudet tried to force their client to forge documents accounting for $450,000 from the Spanish NGO Global Humanitaria after an attack on a child at a separate NGO Mr. Darnaudet operated in India. But Mr. Vibol had refused.
Now, all you pro-APLE supporters will probably have your own theories, but one cannot deny that there's more to the story than it just being a regular investigation into alleged sexual abuse at some orphanage, can you?
"Mr. Seila did confirm, however, that Mr. Vibol filed a report with the government and that Mr. Darnaudet had flown from India to Cambodia in 2013 to defend himself against the accusations in front of representatives of the Interior Ministry, the Social Affairs Ministry and the Foreign Affairs Ministry."
Darnaudet had allagedly beaten a child (Malik Katoon) so severe that it had to be sent off to the hospital for treatment, but that's just a rumour of course.
Further:
"The original complaints [against Mr. Vibol], he said, were made by NGOs Friends International and First Step Cambodia, with police conducting their own investigation after they carried out preliminary interviews with children." First Step could not be contacted Friday. But Sebastian Marot, executive director of Friends International, said Mr. Seila’s account “was not quite how it happened.”
Sebastian is being very polite here. Seila Samleang is a liar.
Licadho president Pung Chhiv Kek said she was shocked at hearing of Mr. Vibol’s arrest, as she remembered him as a very diligent young man who fought to protect children. But irrespective of his innocence or guilt, she said, the case was too serious for the investigation to involve an organization with such close connections to the suspect.
“This investigation should have been carried out by police and an independent group of NGOs who are in no way involved,” she said. “I hope it was carried out correctly and that he will receive a fair trial so that it is proved beyond doubt if he did wrong.”
100% agree!
Looks like the shit finaly starts to hit the fan!
Interesting article. APLE seems to reply to all questions that are being raised, this completely contradicts what many people here say.
DeleteAlso, it is the normal response of all pedophiles to say they are being entrapped, it seems that is the only way they can defend themselves. I mean, you should also know that some of the pedophiles caught in the last years who were clearly guilty also used this defense. Lets just have the court take a good and independent look at the evidence in this case and come to a final decision.
Also, interesting response about Licadho. I though you all said that APLE and Licadho were the same and working together as a corrupt coalition? Are you now retracting that earlier statement?
My final comment. So the first report came from Friends International who reported this to the ministries? They say there was no evidence, but the allegations must have been serious enough to report it to the ministries. So the first allegations did not come from APLE, but from Friends International. What do you want to respond to this?
You're being hypocritical APLE Team. You claim the Cambodia Daily and Phnom Penh Post are just the PR arm of APLE and publish their press releases without question. When it suits you though, you use their articles to support your argument.
DeleteThe problem is that in most cases with APLE involvement their is no 'clearly guilty' or 'clearly innocent' anymore from the moment they get involved and in the cases where there is absolute evidence APLE just let the crime occur before taking action.
DeleteWe've reviewed more than a dozen cases over the years. We're aware of the fact most offenders will blame the NGO for setting them up in order to clear themselves, but it's shocking to see how much evidence there is of APLE manipulating families, coercing children into making false accusation, offering $5000 compensation, falsifying birth certificates, etc.
About Licadho, the word 'conspiracy' has even been mentioned on this blog, but not by us. We've only expressed our frustration about the fact that Licadho kept silent for so long and turned a blind I towards all evidence presented. It's only to be encouraged that Dr. Pung Kek. is finally breaking the silence and comments on the work of APLE. We sincerely hope she'll continue doing so.
"So the first report came from Friends International who reported this to the ministries? They say there was no evidence, but the allegations must have been serious enough to report it to the ministries. So the first allegations did not come from APLE, but from Friends International.So the first report came from Friends International who reported this to the ministries? They say there was no evidence, but the allegations must have been serious enough to report it to the ministries. So the first allegations did not come from APLE, but from Friends International."
The case was allegedly initiated by APLE founder Thiery Darnaudet as a result of a dispute. It would've been to obvious when APLE would've initiated the case, so it had to go through other channels first. As for the involvement of Friends International: Sebastian Marot, executive director of Friends International, said Mr. Seila’s account “was not quite how it happened.”
@Anonymous March 6, 2015 at 9:18 PM:
DeleteThere's a lot more going on behind the scenes than you realize my friend.
And there are more surprises to come . . .
What kind of surprises? The fact that you are a pedophile and want APLE out of the country so you can continue your behavior? You are disgusting!
DeleteWow, a lot of stuff is happening. Sad to see that there are many people on this blog who are only interested in bashing child protection organization APLE, but have no consideration at all for the victims who have been traumatized for life my an orphanage director who should have protected them. I really hope you people don't have children. APLE did the right thing. Children should be protected, no matter who the offender is. APLE, if they are smart, knew very well how much problems this case would bring to them, but they decided to fight for justice anyway. They put the children's interest above their own. Once again, they have shown to be one of the leading child protection organization in Cambodia!
ReplyDeleteA lot of stuff happening indeed. Sad to learn that the Child 'Protection' Industry of Cambodia gave an entire new meaning to word 'Protection'.
DeleteIt's not true that many people on this blog are only interested in bashing APLE. We fully support every NGO that genuinely protects children by preventing sexual abuse, such as Friends International and their ChildSafe programme. Friends staff and the ChildSafe logo are well visible and recognizable for both children as potential abusers. It sends the message: "In Cambodia we look after our children. Don't even think about hurting them". It's a clear and strong message! However, we despise NGOs like APLE, that turn Child Protection into a corrupt industry.
That their'd be no consideration at all for the victims who have been traumatized for life by an orphanage director who should have protected them is also not true. First of all Mr. Ricketson is a fore-fighter to get rid of orphanages in the first place. Reducing the number of orphanages to zero would dramatically decrease the number of institution based abuse cases in Cambodia. Secondly, who says there's evidence that Mr. Vibol is guilty? Who has evidence that there are real victims in this case?
The strong connection between APLE and the the accused, Darnaudet's involvement, the fact that Mr. Vibol reported Darnaudet to the ministries and the dispute as a result of this makes the whole story stink like a garbage belt.
Huh? Well there is evidence that he has abused children, as many children have given a statement to police that indicates this. Then I have also read about a witness in this case. What is your evidence that he is innocent?
DeleteNobody claims the guy is innocent. Based on the information available that's impossible.
DeleteProblem is that APLE is involved and that it's founder Thierry Darnaudet innitiated the case out of revenge. The involvement of Darnaudet cannot be denied here.
Because of APLE's involvement in the case and because they most likely still have access to the children, it will be close to impossible to ever find out the truth about what really took place and what is fabricated.
That's why APLE should be removed from the case immediately and an independent NGO / government body with no ties to APLE whatsoever should take upon them the protection of these children.
Dear Anonymous 12.43
DeleteThe reason why any judicial system exists is to prove a person guilty of a crime. It is not up to the accused person to prove that he or she is innocent.
The fact that you have read about a 'witness' and that there have been reports of alleged abuse in the newspapers is not evidence of a crime. It is evidence that the allegations need to be looked at impartially by police and the courts.
Herein lies the problem that led me to start this blog in the first place. Allegations were made on Khmer440 and by Scott Neeson (duly reported by Andrew Drummond) that David Fletcher had 'groomed young girls'. No evidence has ever been presented to any court of law in support of this proposition.
And Samleang Seila claimed that David Fletcher raped Yang Dany - despite her insistence that she was not raped (backed up by her mother, Sekun) and by the doctor's medical report that revealed her to be a virgin still after her alleged rapes.
Despite these facts there are still those, such as yourself, it seems, who believe that if a newspaper or blog has made reference to evidence, that the evidence must exist that the accused is guilty. This is not so.
I have no idea if Hang Vibol is guilty or not. And nor do you. However, given the 'bad blood' between Vibol and Darnaudet and given that Vibol is a former employee of APLE it is entirely reasonable to request of APLT that it step aside and have no more to do with this investigation; that it not represent in court any of the children and, indeed, that it have no contact at all with the children. This is standard procedure when there is a conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest.
So it's up to the judicial system, but in Fletcher's case, it's not? The judicial system found him guilty - whether you agree with the way the case was handled or not. It is Cambodia after all. But if you do disagree, why then would you trust the judicial system to find the truth in this case?
DeleteEvidence certainly exists outside of a court, it is merely up to the court to decide whose evidence is stronger.
I like this quote though: "Despite these facts there are still those, such as yourself, it seems, who believe that if a newspaper or blog has made reference to evidence, that the evidence must exist that the accused is guilty. This is not so." So people should not believe your blog, right? Because, from your own words, we should not believe you when you state the evidence exists.
I agree with your conflict of interest point, but who else would have done this? I'm sorry, but 20 years in Cambodia is not enough if you think the police could have handled the case 100% on their own. I really don't know of any other NGOs that could have helped in the way APLE has. I'm sure APLE knew the attacks it would get when it agreed to help, but they did so anyways and now they're unfairly paying the price. I am honestly surprised they didn't just refuse the case to cover their own asses. I support anyone willing to wade into certain controversy and try to do the right thing regardless.
Anonymous 5.56
DeleteThe Cambodian Judicial system should, in theory, abide by the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure. In the case of David Fletcher, virtually every part of this code was breached. Fletcher did not hear about his trial until it was over. He had no opportunity to present a defence, to call witnesses. He wasn't even in Cambodian when the trial occurred. And during this secret trial (the press was banned) it nonetheless emerged that the alleged victim's hymen was intact after two alleged 'brutal rapes'. Surely these facts alone (and they are 'facts' and not opinions) suggest that Fletcher did not receive a fair trial?
If if was you who had been tried under these circumstances, would you simply accept a 10 year jail sentence without complaint? And if the alleged victim and her mother insist that no rape took place, after more than four years in jail, how would you feel?
I could go on but I would be repeating what I have written already.
I do not understand what you mean by 'evidence certainly exists outside a court'? What evidence are you referring to? Are you suggesting that some evidence does not need to be presented to a court" That an accused person has no right to even know of the existence of certain evidence and hence no opportunity to defend himself or herself in relation to this evidence?
Yes, it is up to a court to decide which evidence is stronger but in order to do so with any credibility the court needs to hear all relevant evidence and not just that evidence that supports one side - be it the prosecution or the defence.
As for not believing my blog, you are right. You should not take anything I write at face value. My7 opinions are just that - opinions. When it comes to matters of fact,however, there can be no argument. There is a court document that declares Yang Dany to be a virgin AFTER being allegedly raped. This is a fact. If you need me to prove this provide mw with a name and address and I'll send you a copy.
Likewise with Yang Dany and her mother's denial that any rape took place. This is a fact. They told me and my camera and two other journalists that no rape took place.
It could be argued, quite legitimately, that I offered Tang Dany and her mother some inducement to change their story. If I were a Prosecutor this would be an angle I would consider in my prosecution of Fletcher. Yang Dany and her mother would be cross-examined in court. I would be cross-examined in court and it would be up to the judges to decide who was telling the truth and if I had offered some kind of inducement.\
And so it goes. This is what courts are for - to sift through allegations to separate the truth from lies. David Fletcher is quite happy for this process to occur as he feels that he has nothing to hide and that there is no evidence that he raped Yang Dany. APLE's lawyers do not want such a trial to occur - as they made quite clear in Nov 2014 when they suggested to the judges that Fletcher was not entitled to the trial thew same judges had promised him three weeks earlier on the grounds that certain paperwork had not arrived at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in time.
The point is, each and every person accused of a crime is entitled to defend themselves in a fair trial. Fletcher has been denied any trial at all that adheres to even the basics of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure.
Anonymous 5.56
DeleteContinuing.
Why are the Cambodian Police not able to conduct investigations on their own? When do you think it is likely that they will be able to do so? Is there any cut-off point where the NGO community says,"OK, you guys are on your own now. We've given you all the help we can and its time for you to take responsibility for seeing to it that pedophiles and other sex offenders are brought to justice?"
Or is Cambodia to be, for the foreseeable future, a basket-case country in which the Cambodians, like children, need to have their hands help by we adult Westerners?
Re the pros and cons of APLE investigating Hang Vibol at all would you agree that it would ow be appropriate for APLE to step aside and have no further involvement in a case in which there is a clear conflict of interest?
ANd I would like to know what you make of the fact that APLE, by its own admission, was investigating Hang Vibol back in November last year? (Unless there is a 2nd former APLE employee also under investigation!). Why did APLE and the police wait until this week to act? And to act in such a dramatic way?
One possible answer to this question is that something of a particularly dramatic (and highly illegal) nature took place just days before the closure of the orphanage. What this event was will emerge, it is to be hoped, in any court case that transpires. If there was no such dramatic (and illegal) event it is to be hoped that APLE will be asked to explain why it acted as precipitously as it did.
The more appropriate court of action, once evidence of abuse was available, would have been for the police to charge Hang Vibol and give the NGO the opportunity to appoint an interim director to take his place.
The counter argument to this might well be: "The abuse was so great, so endemic, that no member of the staff could be trusted. It was essential that the 'orphanage' be closed immediately. Time will tell if this was the case.
There are certainly enough questions surrounding this case to keep a small team of investigative journalists busy for the next few weeks. And this is what investigative journalists do. They do not accept any official version of events at face value but dig deeper to find out if the official version is true or a fabrication.
Wow, just wasted an hour of my life reading this blog.... People against child protection organizations.... I really thought that nowadays people understood sexual abuse better and are able to put the interest of the child first. My heart goes to the victims in the orphanage! Hopefully they are getting the care and protection they need from now on and the child protection organizations continue their important work!
ReplyDeleteNobody is against organisations that genuinely protect children by preventing abuse, but we despise NGOs that turn child protection into a corrupt business.
Delete"Hopefully they are getting the care and protection they need from now on "
Don't count on that too much. This is a very high profile case for APLE. You can count on it that they will pressure those poor children in any way they can to get them to make consistent statements in court. Those 9 alleged victims will not see the light of day until, you count on that too.
As long as APLE has access to these children, they'll be under constant pressure. If Vibol truly is guilty, the pressure of APLE will at least influence the statements of the children. As a result, the real truth might never be found and statements might even become worthless in court. If the allegations of Vibol and other Our Home staffs are true, this would mean even more pressure on the children.
APLE should be removed from this case immediately and an independent NGO or goverment body should take upon them the protection of these children. Even if just a tiny bit of the 'rumour' of Thierry Darnaudet's involvement in the case is true, APLE should be removed from the case.
Children are worth protecting. APLE is not protecting them, simply because they have an interest in the outcome of the case. Please help protect these children. Please, in the best interest of the children, support our lobby to have APLE removed from this case.
"Please, in the best interest of the children, support our lobby to have APLE removed from this case." What do you mean by this? The case in now in the hands of the investigation judge, not APLE. Do you even remotely understand the legal system in Cambodia?
DeleteThe case is now in the hands of the investigating judge, but APLE still has either direct or indirect access to to children because they provide 'free of charge ' legal assistance to the victims. In order to get unbiased statements from the children and a fair trial for all players involved, APLE should be removed from the case immediately.
DeleteYou claim that APLE has so much influence in cases. Why are then not all of their cases successful? Why is that some cases end in a release instead of a conviction, even if the case clearly indicates child sexual abuse. As you are highly involved in discrediting APLE, I will assume you know about all cases APLE is involved in. Let me ask you one question. If APLE is so powerful, why was S. R., the Dutch national in Siem Reap, twice arrested, but never convicted? Explain me that!
DeleteApparently their was no evidence in this case.
DeleteI thought you said that APLE creates the evidence so how can their be no evidence?
DeleteAs a Dutch national, I am particularly interested in this case. This man is a quite well-known pedophile (Bas R., the famous pedophile sailing teacher) in the Netherlands who has sexually abused an underage boy over an extended period of time. He got convicted and was no longer allowed to teach children of a certain age to sail. But he did give children sailing lessons again. He got caught and not much later he fled to Cambodia to start an "kind of orphanage" were children were living together with him.
Two questions:
1: As you hold child protection so high, you must think it is absurd that this convicted pedophile was allowed to be around children in Cambodia?
2: What do you think in general about convicted pedophiles coming to Cambodia and starting organizations working directly with children?
3: He was running a sort of an orphanage? Are you against this?
It's absurd that anyone can just enter Cambodia and start working with children, without further questions asked, without a proper background check and without decent protocols in place.
DeleteI am glad we agree about that. So in the specifically mentioned case, there were good reasons to investigate for APLE, we can agree on this too? Or you think APLE should have left the suspect alone to do horrible things to children?
DeleteAfter the investigation, if I remember it well, five victims were found. The suspect was arrested, but released on bail. The suspect went back to live with some of his victims and the victims started to retract their statements (how surprisingly?). Then the man was released What is your opinion on this? To me it seems that this man was clearly guilty and I think the rest of the world understands this well. You have investigated APLEs cases, do you agree that this man was clearly guilty?
APLE did what it should do, but the man was never convicted. How is that possible if APLE controls the courts and controls everything?
Dear Mr. Ricketson,
ReplyDeleteThe headline of the Cambodia Daily should have read: "And then the Shit
of Thierry Darnaudet hit the fan !"
https://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/orphanage-director-claims-child-sex-case-fabricated-79241/
What many readers of your blog may not be aware is the fact that a few
years (2012/13) ago Andres Torres, Director and CEO of globalhumanitaria
all of a sudden cut all financial support to APLE which made them
scramble for funds which they received from other NGOs in Cambodia. The
writing on the wall could be read even back than.
As for Samleang Seila, current country director of APLE in Cambodia, he
has become as teflon coated as his boss Thierry Darnaudet. No criticism
is ever accepted.
Now it would be wonderful if Sebastien Marot of Friends Intl. and
childsafe-cambodia.org who claim that Mr. Seila's account of what
happened was in fact "NOT QUITE HOW IT HAPPENED" led to some questions being asked. If Mr Marot knows the details why does he not come out and speak what "REALLY HAPPENED" by his own account ? Why the secrecy ??
Come on journalists from the Daily and PPP, you can do it.Ask some questions of Darnaudet, of Seila, of Marot. If they do not respond, write "XXX declined to comment."
Let's find out who believes in transparency and who does not.
Dear Tom,
DeleteThe GlobalHumanitaria logo still shines bright on APLE's website. Do you have more information about this. Please drop an email.
About Sebastian Marot and Friends: Sebastian is a smart guy. He knows when it's better to speak out and when it's better to remain silence for the time being. Of course he has his opinions and for sure he'll speak out when the time is right.
When it comes to it, no NGO really wants anything to do with the criminal activities of Seila Samleang's APLE, but nobody can speak a bad word about them without the risk of being accused of sexually abusing children. For now it's positive enough to learn that Dr. Pung Kek from Licadho finally gave a sharp opinion about the role of APLE in this case. Hopefully she will continue to do so.
About The Post & The Daily: Maybe you've noticed a small change in reporting on APLE recently. Hopefully that will continue too.
APLE is a criminal organisation that needs to be brought down and it's founder, current director and other staff guilty of severe violation of child rights should be brought to justice and sentenced to the full extend of the law.
This requires a well designed strategy and patience, because you see what happens when one tries to report certain serious allegation with regard to APLE's founder to the ministries. Cambodian National Police has started an investigation into APLE and ministries want to get rid of them, so dices are rolling. APLE will go down, but please be patient. We're working on it.
So APLE is a criminal organization? APLE Team, when are you going to provide any evidence of that? The only one who does not seem to take children's rights into account are you, stating that the orphanage should not have been closed, the allegations are false anyway (where is the evidence?), and the fact that your most important priority is discrediting APLE. If child protection is so important to you, why is your name focused on APLE? Why is your name not "Child Protection"?
DeleteAPLE prefers to let the crime occur before taking action. The following video proves this:
Deletehttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/sickening-moment-suspected-british-paedophile-4349558
This video shows British national Michael Glyn Jones taking an 11 year old girl to his rental house where he allegedly abused her on at least 3 different occasions while APLE was waiting outside the house filming the events. Please notice that he young girl is wearing a blue shirt in the first fragment and a white shirt during the second time she's brought upstairs, meaning that APLE filmed the event on at least two different occasions without warning the girl, without intervening at all!
Is this Child Protection?
Do you understand the difference between an NGO and police? This difference is quite big actually. An NGO has no authority to intervene and no power to arrest or to go inside someones house. APLEs role is to assist police, inform them about cases, and advocate for action. This is what they have done. And as a result of that, this man was arrested. A great relief for me, one more pedophile in jail.
DeleteBut you probably think it is better to run to the girl on the street, tell her to go to her parents and by doing that informing the man that he is being investigated? What would the results be? You think then this girl will not be abused? You don't know, the offender might not conduct himself so openly anymore but still abuse the child. Only now he will do this aware of the investigation. You also give the offender time to instruct the girl what to say when police is taking action. In addition, you would allow the offender the time to go to another country to abuse children there? In Cambodia, where many children on the streets are very poor, it is highly unlikely that a child will go away from the man who is giving her money. These children are being groomed. They are being manipulated with money and gifts. Many of children, even those who have already been abused, consider their offender a good man. They don't know what abuse is and that they are being victimized. Walking up to the girl in this case, would have no effect besides the fact that APLE would give away that they are doing an investigation. Is this child protection?
"But you probably think it is better to run to the girl on the street, tell her to go to her parents and by doing that informing the man that he is being investigated?"
DeleteExactly ! ! ! Do you seriously defend we should just sacrifice a child in order to catch a pedophile? That so f*cking immoral ! ! ! You probably also think that not informing the mother of the girl about the fact that her daughter is being used as bate in order to catch some foreigner is a good idea? How would you feel if you were the mother of this girl and found out?
"You think then this girl will not be abused?"
This particular girl would not have been abused on these particular moments. It would have been prevented. Honestly, it's highly disturbing to watch this video knowing that inside the room a girl is being raped and nobody takes action. And it's even more disturbing to learn that some people defend this unethical approach under the flag of 'Child Protection'.
"An NGO has no authority to intervene and no power to arrest or to go inside someones house."
One does not need authority to intervene. It's every citizen's obligation to act upon suspicion of child abuse, especially when one claims to be a Child Protection NGO. They could've walked up to the landlord, who most likely has a spare key, to ask him to check on the girl, but they didn't. APLE just let the abuse occur!
When the suspect knows that he's being investigated, he'll think twice before he'll approach a child again. Community members should be aware of the investigation too, so they can keep an eye on the guy and approach him every time he acts suspicious or inappropriate towards children.
On top of that, the local police and/or village chief could have a chat with him, letting him know that in Cambodian culture we look after our children and that approaching children will have serious consequences for him.
This is the purest form of REAL Child Protection: No victims ! ! !
And yes, there will be no more need for APLE's unethical modus operandi. How sad. All of APLE's funding can go straight to Friends International's ChildSafe programme.
Maybe you should investigate APLEs methods a bit better. There have been many in cases in which parents of possible future victims were informed about the possible dangers of there children being involved with a suspect. Also the children involved with suspects do receive awareness about child sexual abuse from APLE in order to prevent them having future contact with the suspect and possible becoming victimized. This is public information, how can you not know this? Have you any real interest in knowing what APLE does to prevent sexual abuse?
DeleteThe only thing I have never heard is that APLE runs to suspects walking with children on the street and I can see many reasons for this.
"it's highly disturbing to watch this video knowing that inside the room a girl is being raped and nobody takes action." Who knew she was being raped? You think that if a man takes a girl inside his room the only possible explanation is that he is raping her? Come on. He may be giving her food, allowing her to watch TV, etc. Your really don't understand this? A girl being inside a house is not prove that a girl is being raped. APLE needs to report the possibly dangerous situation to police and ask for intervention. That is what needs to be done and as far as I know, that was done.
"When the suspect knows that he's being investigated, he'll think twice before he'll approach a child again." Yes, he will go to another country or take extra measures to prevent the investigation to be continued. This is not child protection. Pedophiles have a desire to abuse children that doesn't just goes away when you inform them you are investigating them.
"This is the purest form of REAL Child Protection: No victims ! ! !" Yes, and this is exactly what APLE has tried. However, sometimes abuse does take place and then they are the ones who make sure the police takes action. Luckily someone feels responsible I don't think anyone else was busy with these cases were they? So if APLE was not there what would have happened in this case, explain me that?
"All of APLE's funding can go straight to Friends International's ChildSafe programme." I love Friends International, but they are not doing anything specifically for children who are abused. There is a need for Friends International and for APLE as they complement each other and together work in the front-line of child protection!
Who you're trying to convince here? Yourself? You're using a lot of words to convince yourself, but there simply is no excuse for what APLE did and does!
DeleteRicketson, I think you can have a great blog about the closure of orphanages, and you would have my support. Why do you involve good organizations and agencies in this blog by disseminating false information about them? Please get to the topic that is really important!
ReplyDeleteWhat information have I disseminated about 'good organisations' that is false?
DeleteWhilst it is understandable, this week, that attention is focused on one particular 'orphanage', I hope that this does not distract from the larger question: Should children with living parents be brought up in orphanages? Or would they be better off being assisted, by NGOs, within the context of their family and community?
It is not just unscrupulous NGOs running 'orphanages' that should be the focus of attention. Attention should also focus of faith-based 'orphanages' in which NGOs, with the very best of intentions, remove children from their families to bring them up (for the most part) as Christians. Chab Dai, for instance - a Christian NGO umbrella group - endorses the removal of children from their families to be indoctrinated into the Christian faith.
All 'orphanages' should be under the microscope. And so too should those NGOs that are not, strictly speaking, 'orphanages' but which have children in residential care. The Cambodian Children's Fund is not an orphanage but yet has 700+ children in residential care. Citipointe Church's 'SHE Rescue Home' is not an 'orphanage' but, once the NGO has tricked parents into thumb-print signing a 'contract' treats the children in care as though they were orphans.
Perhaps it is not 'orphanages' that should be the focus of attention but the very concept of institutional care.
I believe that with rare exceptions all children should be brought up within their families and communities. This would be a far cheaper option for NGOs, making it possible for them to assist entire families and communities and not just individual members of these.
"What information have I disseminated about 'good organisations' that is false?" Maybe the fact that CEOP, CNP and NGOs are involved in one big conspiracy?
DeletePlease point out to me, Anonymous 12.12, where I have stated that "CEOP, CNP and NGOs are involved in one big conspiracy."? Just one sentence will suffice.
DeleteRicketson, what is wrong with you? You are going to victims to interview them about their abuse? Are you out of your mind? This is so sick and against all common sense, do you have any idea of the damage you can do to these victims? I bet not, but I have some questions for you. Since it is hard for people on this blog to answer questions, I will state them very clearly:
ReplyDelete1: What are your qualifications to interview possible victims of child sexual abuse?
2: How much experience do you have interviewing extremely traumatized children?
3: Do you know the specific steps to take in a child forensic interview?
4: Is there a social worker present during the interviews?
5: How do you obtain consent from victims to interview them?
6: Do you interview children who have been victimized by a male?
6a: If yes, do you understand how detrimental this is for the rehabilitation of the child?
7: Do you know that randomly interviewing victims about alleged abuse would lead you to be arrested in many countries?
Please answer the questions.
My answers to your questions, in a nutshell, is that I have conducted no interviews with with "possible victims of child sex abuse." I have conducted interviews with adults in their 20s who were, as children, involved in cases of alleged sexual abuse.
DeleteThe point you raise about the qualifications required to conduct such interviews s an important one, however. I have written about this in earlier blog entries. I believe that only trained professionals should conduct such interviews and that they should only occur once and be videotaped by these same trained professionals - who should have no vested interest in the outcome of any case that might arise from what is revealed in the interviews.
So you don't answer any of my questions. I sort of expected that. Can I conclude from that that you are not a trained professional? So why are you interviewing these individuals then? Normally they should have been interviewed by trained professional as you say yourself, but you instead conduct the interviews yourself? I start to believe that you think you are god! Leave these victims alone!
DeleteAs a matter of fact, you have interview a victim of sexual abuse. Did you not interview the victim of Fletcher? As far as I know, Fletcher was convicted for this and thus she should be considered a victim of child sexual abuse. You do not decide whether someone is a victim or not.
DeleteAnonymous 8.22
DeleteI did not answer your questions because they were all predicated on the proposition that I had interviewed children. As I made abundantly clear, I have not interviewed any children. I have interviewed adults in their 20s in my capacity as a documentary filmmaker. I have been doing this for more than 40 years so I suppose (though I have never thought of it in these terms) I am a trained professional when it comes to interviewing for documentary films.
As for Yang Dany being a victim, I wonder how many time sit needs to be pointe out to you, before the penny drops, that Yang Dany herself says she was not raped - a fact that is borne out by the doctor's report to the court.
Anonymous 12.08
DeleteIn the case of Yang Dany I did not interview a victim of sexual abuse. I interviewed an adult woman - 22 years old - who insists that she was not raped by David Fletcher. That she was not raped is borne out by the doctor's report to the court - as you know full well.
Think about what you are implying here - namely that once someone has been labelled a victim of sexual abuse he or she may never again be interviewed by anyone - even if there is clear evidence that she was not a victim of sexual abuse!
I did not decide whether Yang Dany was a victim or not. I read the doctor's report to the court which declared her to be a virgin after the alleged rapes and did what any journalist should do - ask the alleged victim if she had been raped. Yang Dany said no. It was, to use your own terminology, Yang Dany that decided she was not a victim; not me.
Well actually I just hope someone who interviews victims of child sexual abuse has some experience with this. Especially since you are actually trying to put pressure for a re-trial for Fletcher don't you think this should be done by a professional so the statement given can actually be taken serious? As far as I know, Yang Dany has never retracted her statement and Fletcher is still convicted and in jail, so Yang Dany is still a victim, whether you like that or not.
DeleteIn addition, don't you think these victims should be interviewed by neutral persons? Not people who have already claimed time after time that they have not been victimized and seem to have an interest in them retracting their statements?
DeleteAnonymous 3.20
DeleteAccording to the logic you are applying here, any woman who claims to have been sexually abused can never be interviewed by anyone, ever - not even when there is cogent evidence that she was not (in this instance) raped and not even when she is an adult and capable of making her own decisions as to whether or not to participate in an interview! I did not not twist Yang Dany's or her mothers arms to acquire an interview. They could quite easily have decided not to be interviewed. Their choice, not yours.
Let's just say I was not a documentary filmmaker/advocate but a lawyer trying to separate facts from allegations. Would you still deny me the right to obtain as many facts as I could in my attempts to secure my client a fair trial?
As for my 'putting pressure for a re-trial' you can use the word 'pressure' if you like but the appropriate word is 'advocating'. And what is wrong with my advocating for the right of David Fletcher or you or anyone else to receive a fair trial?
As for Yang Dany not retracting her statement, she was whisked off to China by APLE before the trial slated for Nov 2014 so, even if the judges had not changed their minds about allowing Fletcher a trial, she would not have been in the country to testify.
In my last conversation with Yang Dany and her mother they expressed their desire to tell the truth in court but also their fear that if they did they might go to jail for having lied about the rapes.
The proposition that Yang Dany is a victim if she claims she was not and if medical evidence suggests she was not makes it quite apparent that you are not going to let the facts get in the way of the narrative you wish to stick with.
As to the second part of your comment, this is pure nonsense. I am a documentary filmmaker. I came upon evidence pertinent to a case. The evidence (doctor's report) suggested that there had been a miscarriage of justice. I spoke with the alleged victim. She said no rape had taken place. I then began to advocate for Fletcher right to a fair trial. You can change the sequence of events if you like but your sequence is not borne out by the facts - which are readily available to anyone with an interest in the facts.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteWhy did you delete my response Ricketson? Here it is again.
Delete"According to the logic you are applying here, any woman who claims to have been sexually abused can never be interviewed by anyone, ever - not even when there is cogent evidence that she was not (in this instance) raped and not even when she is an adult and capable of making her own decisions as to whether or not to participate in an interview!" I have never said that. The only thing I have said is that I would prefer a person who is qualified to do an interview with a rape victim. Then there would still be thousands of qualified experts who can do the interview. You, a white male (same as the offender) would definitely not be my choice for the interview, no. I take child sexual abuse and the consequences very serious and the fact that the victim in this case is now overage does not mean I think she does not deserve any protection anymore.
"Let's just say I was not a documentary filmmaker/advocate but a lawyer trying to separate facts from allegations. Would you still deny me the right to obtain as many facts as I could in my attempts to secure my client a fair trial?" No, and again, I have never said that. In this case as well, I would like to see a qualified person do the interview. Again, rape is a very serious crime to undergo and I don't think the victims should talk with just anyone about such a horrific event.
"And what is wrong with my advocating for the right of David Fletcher or you or anyone else to receive a fair trial?" Point out where I say that? I have no problem at all with you advocating for someone’s rights, but I challenge some of the methods used by you and the conclusion you draw from your investigation. What is wrong with that? Are we here for a discussion or should everybody just agree with you and otherwise you start deleting their posts?
"As for Yang Dany not retracting her statement, she was whisked off to China by APLE before the trial slated for Nov 2014" Please, could provide me with evidence for this?
"The proposition that Yang Dany is a victim if she claims she was not and if medical evidence suggests she was not makes it quite apparent that you are not going to let the facts get in the way of the narrative you wish to stick with." I actually look at the facts. The girl has given an official testimony of her rape and the court has decided that Fletcher was guilty. I have no indication that she wants to retract her statement. She is officially a victim, this is not a label I have created. Do I just have to believe you for what you say or am I allowed to draw my own conclusions?
Firstly, I did not delete your comment. Clearly someone has. Or else it is one of those strange things that often occur here. I have had two entire blog entries deleted and many comments simply disappear. I do not know why this is and can see no real pattern.
DeleteI am a documentary filmmaker and over the past 40 years have interviewed 100s of people about a whole range of subjects. In this instance, my interviews have included young women (in their 20s) who were involved in cases involving alleged sex abuse (and rape) this past decade. What special qualifications do you think I need, after 43 years of doing this, in order to be able to conduct a documentary interview?
You write, "I would prefer a person who is qualified to do an interview with a rape victim." How do you know that Yang Dany is a rape victim? Her original evidence has never been tested in court. The opportunity that arose for her evidence to be tested, in Nov 2014, was stymied by APLE's sending her to China and by the judges deciding to go back on their promise of a trial.
So, what evidence do you have that she is a 'victim'? Do you have evidence that trumps that of the doctor's report? That trumps that of Yang Dany herself?
Let's follow through on the logic of your argument. Imagine this:
An underage girl, 14 say, is offered a quite substantial amount of money to say that X raped her. She accepts the offer despite the fact that X did not rape her. Her alleged rapist, Y, goes to jail on the basis of her false testimony. Y dies in jail, a broken man.
According to your logic there is no way that anyone other than a 'qualified' interviewer can ever speak with this young woman in an effort to determine whether or not Y did in fact rape X. So there can never be any investigation into the veracity of allegations of sex abuse by documentary filmmakers!
This is what you are suggesting. So, X is never held accountable for her lies. The notion that X, as an adult, is deserving of protection from any scrutiny by a documentary filmmaker is nonsense.
As for rape being a 'horrific event'', yes, it is, but Yang Dany by her own admission was not raped. And her contention is supported by forensic evidence. Your insistence in treating Yang Dany as a 'victim' - regardless of evidence to the contrary - is perverse.
....to be continued...
....
DeleteVis a vis ‘advocacy’ versus ‘pressure’ lets not get involved in an argument about semantics but please do let me know which methods of mine you wish to challenge and what conclusions I have drawn? David Fletcher has a right to a fair trial? Which other conclusions?
As for people agreeing with me or not as you can see many people do not agree with me and hurl abuse of all kinds at me. I do not delete these comments. I believe in freedom of speech. The only comments I have ever deleted (and I have only done this on one occasion) were comments that defamed someone else; not myself.
Yang Dany in China evidence:
(1) Yang Dany tells me that APLE lawyers have told she and her mother not to appear in court in Nov 2014; that she should leave the country.
(2) Yang Dany has no money and no passport.
(3) A week later, a few days before David Fletcher’s ‘trial’, Yang Dany leaves for China. She now has a passport.
(4) APLE gives Yang Dany’s mother to relocate to a new home so that she cannot be contacted by myself or any other member of the media. APLE lawyers tell Kheang Sekun that any future support of her is contingent on her not speaking with the media.
You might respond to this with: “That’s not proof.” You are right. It is evidence, not proof. Just as the allegation that Yang Dany was raped is evidence, not proven. This is what properly constituted courts are for – to test evidence. In a properly constituted court Yang Dany might be able to demonstrate that she won a lottery and account for her newfound wealth (comparatively speaking) in this way. She might be able to prove that she applied for a passport six months earlier. Etc.
Your final comment is worthy of dissection. You write: “The girl has given an official testimony of her rape and the court has decided that Fletcher was guilty. I have no indication that she wants to retract her statement. She is officially a victim, this is not a label I have created. Do I just have to believe you for what you say or am I allowed to draw my own conclusions?”
Do you believe that there is no possibility that Yang Dany lied in her original testimony because (a) her mother had pressed charges (not she, herself) and (b) because Kheang Sekun had been told that she could receive $30,000 in compensation if she pressed charges?
When I interview Yang Dany and her mother they both wanted to retract their statements, whilst simultaneously being fearful of going to jail for having lied.
Yang Dany is not ‘officially’ a victim until her evidence has been tested in a properly constituted court. She is not official a ‘victim’ until David Fletcher has been provided with an opportunity to conduct a defense and present evidence of his own innocence. Such a trial would need to be conducted in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure. No such trial has occurred and so the label ‘victim’ does not apply as yet.
No, you are under no obligation to believe anything I say but if you have any respect at all for the law you will base your opinions on facts, on evidence, and not merely on the notion that once someone has been labeled a ‘victim’ no more questions may be asked of her – even if she declares herself not to be a victim!
Again, according to your logic, once any person has been labeled in a particular way (‘victim’ in his case) no-one may ever question this lable. Fortunately, in courts of law in countries in which there is rule of law there are several layers of courts whose purpose is to correct mistakes that may have been made by lower courts. Hence, appeal courts of one kind or another – right up to a Supreme court.
There is something is fishy about APLE.
ReplyDeleteHang Vibol and Katherine Keane, both former country directors of APLE left.
Circumstances in case of Katherine Keane point to the fact that Thierry Darnaudet, APLE's founder and president forced her to write reports which did not reflect the truth.
Perhaps now would be the time for the media to interview Hang Vibol (now in jail and therefore unlikely to happen) and the children of former "Our Home" (all of them rushed out of the facility so the media cannot interview them ?)
All this provides enough evidence that the modus operati of Action Pour les Enfants is not only questionable but also moraly wrong.
It was reported by a blogger some time ago that Malik Katoon, a boy in one of Thierry darnaudet's Home for streetchildren at Lake Garden, Calcutta was beaten so severely by Darnaudet that he had to be treated in hospital. No charges ever were laid against Darnaudet. Now, that is India in reality and perhaps another reason he likes to stay there instead of Cambodia.
Former victim and convicted pedophile David Makhout, who had friendly email exchanges with Darnaudet, claimed that he knew what the reason behind the beating was.
In order to protect Malik Katoon I will not publish his conversation with Darnaudet at this point here. Makhout was arrested in 2009 in Sihanoukville and charged with rape of a girl he adopted. The examination report of the Sihanoukville Hospital showed: Hymen intact !
3 Month later the girls was hauled to World Hope Shelter of World Vision in Phnom Penh where they draged her in yet another hospital and ..... bingo Hymen not intact ! Makhout went crazy in jail where he could do nothing to defend the adopted kid. Instead he was extradited to France.
Any similarities to other APLE cases are obvious !
APLE, ICE and CEOP.... Hypocrits all !!
As far as APLE's connection to the FBI is concerned I would like to point out the fact that even there we're dealing with 'child porn people' as the arrest of the former ICE Chief of the Child Protection Unit in Florida showed in 2011
(Proof that perverts are even heading the ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), responsable for combating pedophelia have been reported in Sept 2011 when the Head of the Florida ICE Office got indicted for childporn charges.
Head of ICE arrested on childporn charges!
Their other Police Force, FBI falls into the same category, Donald Sachtleben a 25 year veteran of the FBI just recently got busted on child porn possession.
Jim Gamble of British CEOP has a reputation that caused the British government to get rid of him.
So there you have it: All these clean government paid child protectors are as evil as the one's they claim to get behind bars !
It just occurred to me that I should have made it clear in my email to Simon Henderson that I was referring to the article published in the Cambodia Daily on 6th March. People may get confused and think that I am writing about the next article published on 7th March. There is a day or two delay before I get the link.
ReplyDeleteThe comment above from Nick Griffin refers to a post that has mysteriously disappeared.No, I do not think that there is a conspiracy afoot! I think it is merely some wierdness occurring in cyberspace. Here it is:
ReplyDeleteDear Simon
I am writing to you as a concerned member of the public but also someone who has a lot of experience of the actions and motivations behind APLE.
I am very grateful you have reported on this but must say that I am left confused because your article does not go far enough in explaining exactly what happened with this allegation. There are many unanswered questions. I am sure you will be aware that APLE has become an extremely controversial organisation and it is therefore very important that details are looked at when they are involved in a case so that they can be held to account for their actions.
At one point in your article you say that the reason Vibol was arrested was because a child’s guardian made a complaint, but then later a comment is made that it was a French national who made the complaint. Was the guardian a French national? This seems improbable, you would expect the guardian to be Khmer would you not? Or am I misreading this?
It appears there was only one allegation and I assume this is recent. As Vibol has been working with children for over 20 years were there no previous allegations? If this is a man with a long clear record the present actions appear to not fit the circumstances and be somewhat heavy handed or motivated by other reasons. My experience is that APLE are usually the one who instigate investigations and through their high up contacts force the police and ministry of social Affairs to become involved even when they ( the CNP and Ministry) feel there is no case to answer. In the article it says the police asked APLE to investigate. This is the total opposite to what experience shows. Did you manage to speak to the police at a lower level to check if this was in fact true or did you just rely on an official statement?
As you will no doubt be aware the official line is often different to what actually happened.
The other point with APLE is to keep an eye on the allegations made. It is their normal practice to constantly change allegations and is a tell-tale sign that things are not above board. They have been known to make a public statement of what someone is alleged to have done effectively discrediting that person and then once the damage is done changing the claim.
There also seems to be quite a French connection with this story. I note children have been moved to several other NGO’s two which have French names. Has anyone checked out the background and funding methods of these organisations. i.e. do they share directors, staff or funders between themselves or APLE? Could there be advantageous reasons for APLE to favour these organisations? What will happen to the children? As the investigation had been conducted over many months at what point did they draw up the closure plan and what are the details? How were the children’s best interests incorporated? Can we see a copy of this plan? I would be surprised if it exists.
Surely on the basis of law that a person is innocent until proven guilty one would expect that the orphanage would remain open until Vibol has either been acquitted of the charges or found guilty by a court! Suspicions must be raised into why they rushed to close it as there was apparently only one, so far unproven, allegation. Surely they must be accountable to the public for explaining in detail all the reasons and the law under which this was carried out. Bearing in mind that such a rapid closure would also have been extremely traumatic for the children, staff and volunteers. This is not the first time they have done this.
You would be doing the general public and society a great service if you could investigate more deeply what’s going on here.
Also I wonder if you know the contact details of Vibol’s lawyer and could let me have them?
Many thanks.
My name is Liam MillerI birth name William Mathieson Miller . I am a Victim of the criminal organization APLE .please check the blogs on this site starting at Jan"4th/ two / Jan 6th and 9th . APLE who were behind the whole investigation published on their website that I had been charged with rape and sexual assault, lies that were taken up by The Phnom Penh post and published ..I was charged with sexual harassment all the police had against me were statements obtained with APLES involvement , that were proven to be obtained , by lies,coercion and promises of financial gain . After 4 months the Prosecutor and Investigating Judge finally were able to question the witnesses , The court document that I have provide to James Ricketson and has been published in part here shows APLES involvement with the police in providing statements for the girls to sign/ thumbprint
ReplyDeletewhich they had never read or knew what was in them . / one girl could not read or write.. The charges of sexual harassment subsequently were dropped tt never went to trial and I was completely exonerated . I am still paying the price for APLES corrupt , criminal activities as are many other innocent men
This is such a sad story Mr. Miller, that you have been screwed over by the ignorance of the Phnom Penh Post and the stupidity of their incompetent Editor, CHAD WILLIAMS! Are there no defamation laws that make the PPP or the Editor, liable for their actions?
DeleteThe more these blogs keep going, the more it shows how sick and delusional Ricketson is. The guy is seriously a fucking moron and exemplified by the great questions of @anonymous 7 March 8.52am.
ReplyDeleteAs for @Aple Team - you are either a low life sex offender or a disgruntled ex staff member. No other other reason why you would constantly attack them with baseless accusations. Time to put up some evidence or grow some balls and put your name to the comments.
Hey delusional fucking moron Anonymous 8:20! What part of his answer are you having trouble understanding?
DeleteAnonymous 8.20
DeleteYou mean the kind of balls you display with your anonymous verbal abuse?
About as much balls as you have you fucking little cocksucker. Sounds like you are a sleazy little child sex offender as well.
DeleteDear Mr. Ricketson,
ReplyDeleteFirst i would like to direct you to a new shelter beeing build for up to
8 sexually abused children in Kampot. The Name is Reddirtroad. I will
get the website info shortly.
Expats in Kampot raised already some questions about this NGO. We don't know if it is even registered as an NGO in Cambodia. Its run by an American/British couple who live a very luxury lifestyle apparently.
This could be a great opportunity for you to interview this couple and find out if the NGO is registered, if they are qualified in any way and so on.
Others:
APLE and Tourist Advise
==================
Seila Samleang is the director of Action pour les Enfants (APLE), a
local NGO dedicated to tackling child sex tourism in Cambodia. He
advises anyone who might have suspicions to call their 24/7 hotline
If you fear that someone is abusing children, it is extremely hard to
put aside the fear of making a false accusation. After all, unless you
catch someone red-handed, how is it possible to really judge what is
grooming of a child for sex, or normal affection?
According to Seila, if anyone sees anything that they feel is irregular
behaviour towards children or could put them at risk they “should not
fear that they’ll be in trouble if they wrongfully accuse or report
somebody’s behaviour. APLE agents will work out to determine what
happened in a professional manner and in accordance with their code of
ethics and respect for human rights”. APLE has a large team of trained
investigators.
The info from this Tourist Advise of APLE is part of the travelfish.org
website.
http://www.travelfish.org/orientation_detail/cambodia/western_cambodia/siem_reap/siem_reap/89
Re:closing Orphanages
It's 2011 and the assessment of UNICEF points to the problem go
unscrupulous people running orphanages which in fact are not orphanages at
all, but a way to attract tourists and make money. In 2011 the Social
Affairs Ministry knew of 269 Orphanages in Cambodia, more than 60 of
them in Siem Reap alone.
http://www.voanews.com/content/unicef-concern-prompts-cambodian-investigation-of-orphanages-118493469/136916.html
The question is why in 2015 we still have this problem ?
Tom Selig
Get a fucking life Tom Selig you fucking worm. And learn how to spell - 'Beeing build'? IQ = 28
DeleteIs there anyone on this blog that can provide any comments based on fact and not emotive, baseless dribble. It sounds like stale piss and wind from a bunch of jealous 'has beens'.
ReplyDeleteAnd well said anonymous March 8 11.51. - @ Ton Selig your reputation in Cambodia leaves APLE looking like Choir Boys.
To Anonymous,March the 8th 4.57 and in particular John Bates and all the defenders of APLE
Deleteare you serious and prepared to make your comments in a fair and unbiased way? you ask for facts , the blog March /8th 4.57 AM posted by Liam Miller provides clear legal proof of APLES modus operandi and criminal activities . THESE ARE FACTS,, THESE LEGAL DOCUMENTS CAN NOT BE DISPUTED . I await your reply. "There are none so blind as those who will not see"
Oh dear! Just when I thought that the trolls had lost interest in this blog and that a civil discussion could take place, they arrived back in force!
ReplyDeleteWhy, oh why, Anonymous 11.51, do you bother to read this blog if your opinion of any and everyone with a different point of view to your own is a fucking moron, a worm etc.? Have you got nothing better to do with your life than to vent your anger online?
To those others who have stuck with the facts and expressed their views in an adult fashion (regardless of whether I agree with them or not) I trust that in all the excitement of an online argument about the pros and cons of the sudden closure of one orphanage that the larger question of orphanages in general is not forgotten.
Hopefully time will tell whether or not this particular closure was justified or not. Regardless of whether Hang Vibol is guilty or not questions remain about this orphanage and all orphanages:
Are the children living in them better off being brought up in institutiuons or with their parents?
Would it be more cost effective to use the money spent on institutionalising children on assisting these materially poor kids in a family and community context?
I am receiving a number of emails from people who have not been able to post comments on this blog or who have found, when they have been posted, that they disappear. I have had this experience myself.
ReplyDeleteThe comments that disappear are often quite ‘harmless’ so it is hard to imagine that someone is deleting them. Perhaps it is just that there are so many comments on this thread and the blog can’t cope!
I will start a new blog entry soon and hope that this solves the problem.
Mr. Ricketson, since you are the moderator of this blog, is it perhaps a good idea to remove some of the comments from trolls, drunk people and other lowlife from this page? It would dramatically increase the quality of the discussion and might hopefully also bring the subject back on-topic again.
DeleteDear Anonymous 4.35
DeleteI am opposed to the very idea of censorship but I can see the logic of your argument.
At present there seem to be only three 'trolls' and their visits are relatively rare. I ignore them now and skip over them if they have nothing to contribute to the debate. I suggest that you do likewise. I do think that a lot of interesting points have been made here and that the occasional troll comment has not affected the debate too badly.
Lets flace the truth Richardson you are a lowlife kiddie fiddler youyrself and are just qwiritning thei blog to give you cover for your rock spidler desires. Fuck off out of Vambodia and stop delying yourself youyrself, cunt.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 2:44--Drunk so early in the day doesn't help your opinion, vocabulary or typing.
DeleteMate, there are some issues that you need to share at your next AA meeting and spelling is the least of your problems! Look for help now before its too late!
ReplyDeleteTo John Bates and all the defenders of APLE , you ask for facts!
ReplyDeleteAre you serious and prepared to accept facts and evidence in a fair and impartial way?
I was detained and imprisoned on a charge of sexual harassment. All the Cambodian authorities had were statements. None of the girls were minors .
APLE was behind the whole investigation and published on their website that I had been charged with rape and sexual assault. This was a lie. What APLE wanted was to use my case, distorted with lies about me being charged with rape, to get donations !!
You want facts and evidence ?
Is a court judgment enough for you showing APLES criminal involvement?
Despite being completely exonerated, the Phnom Penh Post has refused to retract its original article that I was charged with rape. I was never charged with rape. My life has been destroyed by this. Not so much by the original charges (which did not include rape) but by the fact that the Phnom Penh Post article can still be found through google – even though the editor, Chad Williams, has been asked to take this defamatory article down. Why, Mr Williams?
Mr. Miller, I think that you are unnecessarily polite to that prick, CHAD WILLIAMS. Why?
DeleteWell if you are so innocent why haven't you taken civil action against the PP Post and/or APLE. Why are you wasting your time on this useless blog telling insignificant individuals like Ricketson about how persecuted you are? Go and get a good lawyer and do something about it!!
DeleteDear Anonymous 10.21
DeleteI know from my correspondence with Liam Miller that he has been rendered unemployable as a result of the article in the Phnom Penh Post. Or, to be more precise, as a result of its being available to potential employers through google search.
Liam Miller does not have the money needed to commence civil action against either APLE or the Phnom Penh Post.
In any event, even if Liam Miller could afford to do so, it should not be necessary to take the Phnom Penh Post to court. The Post has clearly published an article that is factually incorrect and one that has caused enormous damage to Liam Miller. The right, the decent and the professionally ethical thing for the Post to do is apologise and remove the article from circulation so that it cannot be found through google.
Chad Williams and the Phnom Penh Post have demonstrated that they have no professional ethics. The Post has obviously entered into some kind of agreement with Aple not to look too closely at what Thierry Darnaudet and his lackey Samleing Seila are up to with Aple!
DeleteIf the PPP is so deep in APLE's pocket, why do they write things like this, which you frequently use to support your claims that APLE is bad?
Deletehttp://www.phnompenhpost.com/mothers-say-children-unwilling-witnesses
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/separation-anxiety
I found another article:
Deletehttp://www.smh.com.au/world/give-my-boy-back-weeping-mother-refuses-to-believe-australian-teacher-abused-her-son-20150216-13f312.html
Not by PPP ;)
Beware The Phnom Penh Post , if APLE should ever fall , it will be like the Hounds of Hell scraping at your door,
ReplyDeleteTo anonymous march the 9th 6pm Re '' Chad Williams I really don"t think the man has any scruples or honor so with people like that to abuse them or ridicule them , would only play into his hands and would not be productive. I have tried reason given him the court documents , he does not have the testicular adornment needed to make a tough moral and ethical decision ,
ReplyDeleteTo do the right thing
So all women are immoral, unethical, and unable to do the right thing because they lack 'testicular adornment'? A sweeping generalisation for the ages... Most pedophiles are male so maybe the issue is that men have 'testicular adornment', which makes them immoral, unethical, and unable to do the right thing.
DeleteOh my God! A feminist with possible incest history and deep hatred towards men found this blog!
DeleteMost of the commenters here are pedophiles masquerading as do-gooders unmasking dark deeds of child rescue missions. It is obvious to me that you have a need to try to justify your addiction thru this blog charade.
Deleteto Anonymous March 10 6.18 PM, referred to CHAD WILLIAMS I thought he was a man, perhaps you know more about him than I. The colloquial term balls as I am sure you are well aware balls refers in most case to a man who lacks guts , courage . I did not invent it and to to infer that it in any way had an anti femminist slant is pedantic in the extreme
ReplyDelete