After this case, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) attempted a nationwide assessment of child grooming.  The report found that police, social services and charities were failing to properly investigate this "hidden issue" and that a quarter of offenders reported for child grooming since 2008 were Asian, an apparently disproportionate figure, but Peter Davies, the head of Ceop, was quick to clarify that the findings did not provide a national picture because of incomplete data, and cautioned against extrapolating anything from the results. He added that "looking at this issue through the lens of ethnicity does not do the victims any favours."

Again - I'm not sure that this section needs to exist. Also from the outset it is misleading. CEOP constantly monitor for and act upon child grooming  - they didn't suddenly decide to start after this case. 

CEOP has existed since April 2006 and there has been a phased introduction of their work in conjuration with partners ever since - starting it's main recognised operations in 2009, by which time the police were acting. The wording implies that CEOP had not acted earlier to protect the victims - they could not act they did not exist! TTFN