One of the most predictable developments following a violent outrage, or exposure of abuse or wrongdoing, is the slew of subsequent new stories reporting on how authorities knew about the potential threat posed by perpetrators in advance but did nothing.

Al Qaeda had long been on the radar of western security services prior to the events of 9/11, and the CIA even had detailed, specific forewarning that passenger jets would be used in a terrorist attack.

MI5 director-general Ken McCallum issued a public apology following the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing, admitting his organisation knew about the threat posed by terrorist Salman Abedi, who detonated an explosive device, killing himself and 22 others as they were leaving an Ariana Grande concert.

Read more by Carlos Alba

Last week, a long overdue report into the actions of prolific serial abuser John Smyth revealed that he was able to continue with his horrific, brutal attacks on children for more than 30 years after his behaviour first came to the attention of senior figures within the Church of England.

Whether it is in national government, police, security services, churches, social work departments, schools, private companies, or any other organisation with access to privileged information about potential perpetrators, we see failure after failure to stop, expose and prevent bad actors from continuing with abusive and dangerous behaviours.

The reasons for this institutional inertia are numerous and complex. They can include communication failures, determination to avoid reputational damage, cultural sensitivities, lack of funding, or because........

© Herald Scotland