By Tony Nixon
[b] an excerpt from my email to Julia Mulligan of 18/9/14
The bells in my head weren't just ringing but clanging at a deafening volume for what Greater Manchester had been through during the relevant period when it was a hot spot for Muslim rape, paedophile and trafficking gangs.
In this context, the career of Dave Jones, the Chief Constable of North Yorkshire Police, is an interesting one.
He started out with the Greater Manchester Police in 1986. (The force covers towns such as Bolton, Bury, Oldham, Rochdale, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, Wigan, and the cities of Manchester and Salford.) Greater Manchester is the third largest police force in the country. During his time there, he held a number of uniform and CID jobs in the position of Detective Superintendent. This included leading on homicide investigations, "diversity" and intelligence management projects.
In 2002, he was promoted to Chief Superintendent, Head of Crime Support. And in January 2004 he was responsible for merging the Crime Support and Crime Investigation branches. He subsequently became head of CID with responsibility for the investigation of the most complex and serious of offences in the area. From February 2006 until April 2007 he became Temporary Assistant Chief Constable, with responsibility for tackling serious and organised crime, counter- terrorism and scientific services.
Having held senior positions within Greater Manchester Police (not only in the CID but as Temporary Assistant Chief Constable), it's inconceivable that Mr Jones wouldn't have been fully conversant with the problems surrounding Muslim, rape, paedophile and trafficking gangs in his area. Indeed it's likely to have been one of the most pressing - if not the most pressing issue - he would have been expected to deal with.
As you are no doubt aware, the recent Rotherham enquiry covered the 16- year period of 1997 to 2013. Thus let's compare the position re Greater Manchester and Rotherham, both of which are Muslim rape, paedophile and trafficking gangs hotspots.
The potential number of lives ruined in the Greater Manchester area?
A simple mathematical calculation and projection.
If we take the 1,400 victims in Rotherham (population: 257,800) and then extrapolate this figure to the Greater Manchester area (population: 2,700,000), and at the same time assume that for each named victim there are at a least two other victims (i.e., the parents, then the potential number of people who may have had their lives ruined: bear in mind that other family members will also have been affected), then the number is as follows:
Rotherham: 1,400 X 3 = 4,200.
Greater Manchester: (10 times the population) so 10 X 4200 = 42,000.
Looking at the figures above (as well as remembering that the original figure of 1,400 is a conservative one), it's quite conceivable that 42,000 individuals in the Greater Manchester area alone might already have had their lives ruined by Muslim paedophile, rape and trafficking gangs; as well as by the inaction of Greater Manchester Police. (Please note that my figures don't include the girls siblings, grandparents or close friends.)
A staggering number of young white girls have already been sacrificed on the altar of political correctness, anti-racism and multiculturalism by those they trusted and by those whose (not insubstantial) salaries the British taxpayer is on the hook for.
Too many families have been ripped apart and damaged beyond repair.
Too many parents have had their lives ruined with no hope of justice or relief, until now that is.
Now, Mrs Julia Mulligan, I respectfully request that you answer honestly the following simple questions:
 How likely is it (in percentage terms) do you think that Dave Jones was well aware of these Muslim gangs in Greater Manchester during the period he worked there? 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, 70%, 90% or 100%?
 In view of the fact that the CPS uses a 50%+ test, do you think Dave Jones should be thoroughly investigated (though not by his colleagues!)?
 Assuming that there is sufficient evidence for Dave Jones to be successfully prosecuted, do you think he should be brought before the Court or should he be given a gong?