Sara Root was taken to court for contempt by Medway Council
Medway Council took Sara Root to Maidstone County Court for contempt.
A mother who says her two youngest children were wrongly taken into care by Medway Council was given a six-month suspended prison sentence at the end of last month by Judge Richard Polden
Sara Root told Christian Voice her children were taken seven years ago for ‘emotional abuse’.
District Judge Graham Green made a judgment which will concern home-schoolers up and down the land.. Medway satisfied the judge the son and daughter were suffering the said emotional abuse due to home schooling. This had given them, said Medway’s Ian Scrivens, a ‘skewed view of the world’. Despite attending a primary school, playing with other children and going out to the park and the cinema, they were not ‘socialising.’
Legal Statement
Sara Root was found guilty in July, as we reported at the time. But in July we did not feel able to identify the mother. Now that she has been sentenced, the court authorised this legal statement:
In relation to C00ME422. On 30th August 2017, at Maidstone County Court, His Honour Judge Polden sentenced Sara Root to a custodial sentence of six months, suspended for twelve months, for contempt of court. The basis of that sentence was that: (a) she had breached an injunction made under section 12 of the Administration of Justice 1960 on 13th December 2011 on ten occasions; (b) she was in breach of an undertaking she gave to the court on 12th December 2016; and (c) she failed to comply with reporting restrictions made at the same hearing. All of the breaches were occasioned by publishing material relating to care proceedings on Facebook and failing to remove it.
September hearing
Ms Root is now applying to the High Court to remove the injunctions. Her two children are now young adults aged respectively 18 and 19, she told Christian Voice. Therefore they are no longer subject to any care order. Not surprisingly, she would like to make contact with them again. But in a bizarre twist, Medway Council have applied for non-molestation orders on behalf of the two young adults. Their only evidence appears to be hearsay.
Social worker Kelly Hopper had to admit in court she was not even in touch with Ms Root’s children. Meanwhile, ‘support worker’ Lucy Conn has made a statement. We understand this discloses that the young man involved does not even want Medway Council to speak on his behalf. The case will be heard behind closed doors at the Royal Courts of Justice on 28th September.
Contempt removes some secrecy
The family courts are shrouded in secrecy. Those in social services and the child protection industry say this is to protect the children involved. But it also means parents cannot easily bring injustices to the light. The media are also loathe to report cases. Editors fear they may fall foul of contempt of court rules. So in practice, the secrecy rules protect the system.
The only reason Sara Root and Eugene Lukjanenko can be named is because Medway Council brought actions against them for contempt of court, which carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison. Family court judges still hear such cases. Nevertheless, the cases have to be held in open court in the civil court, rather than the family court. This is because the British legal jurisdictions do not ‘disappear’ people. Anyone facing jail must be named. This does not mean the media can then name any children involved, nor do we want to. But we can and shall name local authorities and social workers.
Medway Council rooftop protest
Eugene Lukjanenko was convicted of contempt at Canterbury County Court in January and July 2017
Meanwhile, concert pianist Eugene Lukjanenko occupied the porch roof of Medway Council offices in Chatham last week. He remains in dispute with Medway over access to his son in care. However, above all, he wants his son returned, and his son, who is 14, also wants to come home. With worrying similarities to the Sara Root case, Mr Lukjanenko also says his son his taken away for alleged ’emotional abuse’.
A group of people on the ground also protested against forced adoption & foster care. Two police cars were called to the protest, where four people were spotted handing out leaflets. A spokesman from the police said: ‘Officers have been made aware of a protest on a roof in Dock Road, Chatham. Officers were called to the scene at 7.21am on Tuesday 5 September 2017.’
One protester told the local KentOnline newspaper they were calling on the government to investigate the way in which children are taken into care.
Mr Lukjanenko came down from the roof voluntarily at 7.30pm. He was arrested on suspicion of aggravated criminal trespass and causing a public nuisance.
Earlier this year he was twice found in contempt of court for publishing details of case in social media. Mr Lukjanenko was sentenced to 56 days suspended for a year in January 2017 and again, for a separate offence, in July.
Emotional abuse in Medway Council area
The Government’s most recent figures show wide variations in numbers of children taken into care and reasons given. The discrepancy shows up widely in the contrast between the two councils in Kent. These are Kent County Council and, funnily enough, Medway Council.
Kent County Council took 1,049 children into care in 2015-2016. The population of Kent CC area at the last census was 1,541,900. Under 20’s were 360,605. So a Kent child has a 0.29% chance of being ‘in care’.
Medway Council took 539 children into care in 2015-2016. The population of Medway’s council area at the last census was 263,925. Under 20’s were 74,000. So a Medway child has a 0.73% chance of being ‘in care’.
In Kent County Council, 656 children were taken for neglect, 63% of the total and higher than the national average for England. The Council took 203 children for ‘emotional abuse’. That is 19%, which is lower than England’s national average.
But in Medway, 237 children (44%) were taken for neglect and 257 (48%) for emotional abuse. Given Medway’s far lower population, are we really being asked to accept that children in Chatham and Rochester are suffering ‘emotional abuse’ (whatever that is) over six times more than children in Canterbury and Ramsgate?
Or is something rather odd going on in Medway Council Social Services? And if it is, are we justified, to use the old Watergate expression, to ‘follow the money’?
Maidstone County Court heard Medway’s case against the mother
A mother in dispute with social services was found guilty yesterday of contempt of court. The case has not yet concluded so we shall refer to her as ‘SR’.
Sitting at Maidstone County Court, in open court, Judge Richard Polden held ‘SR’ had breached an injunction forbidding her from naming her children and reporting on her case online.
Furthermore, she gave an undertaking last December to take down the articles and then changed her mind, he said. The articles remained up on her page on social media.
Sledgehammer to crack a nut
Sentence will be passed on 30th August, said His Honour. In accordance with the rules, he must name the mother in public at the conclusion of the case. Barrister Edward Elliott, representing Medway Council, objected to naming the mother even at that stage. He said that would enable the public to join up her case and the details already legally presented about it on this website with her social media page.
But this author, speaking as a journalist and member of the media, invited His Honour to have no sympathy with that argument. Ours is not a jurisdiction which ‘disappears’ dissidents. The rules say clearly that a person committed to prison, even if sentence is suspended, must be named. The Council should have thought of that before employing a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Medway ‘verging on vindictive’
The two ‘children’ Medway took are now nineteen and eighteen. Any orders passed under the Children Act no longer apply. Medway complained about breaches occurring while at least one of the children was still under eighteen. But they do not wish the mother to post anything even now about her treatment by Medway Council. Furthermore, that treatment, on the face of it, appears to have verged on vindictive, as our earlier story detailed. Accordingly, to try to stem the flow of embarrassing negative information about Medway Social Services, they wanted the judge to make a ‘non-molestation order’ in favour of the children.
But Judge Polden was not confident Medway could present such an application on behalf of persons who are now legally adults. The Council even expected him to take merely the evidence of social worker Kelly Hopper in support of it. But when Kelly Hopper gave evidence against the mother for contempt of court, she had to admit she was not even in contact with the son or daughter. She only had a chat with their ‘support worker’. So when she laid it on about the children being distressed about their mother’s actions, that was mere hearsay. Miss Hopper had her speech off pat. She did not even read from notes she might have taken when purportedly speaking to the support worker. Her evidence came across as frankly contrived. So His Honour sent that application up to a High Court Judge to decide in September.
The American civil rights agitator, Saul Alinsky, championed the idea of ‘using the system against itself’.
Using the system against itself
The case exposes the problems faced by local authorities who want to shut parents up. There is a growing number of parents aggrieved by the loss of their children and the injustice they say they have faced in the family courts. They are beginning to gather together in social media groups. And they feel they have very little to lose. SR herself told the judge: ‘I’ve lost everything. Medway have destroyed my life and my family. Send me to prison if you want.’
The truth is, the establishment can only go down its given routes. Suppose a parent (or even this ministry) shares information contrary to Section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960, which forbids publication of ‘information relating to proceedings … under the Children Act 1989’. Or a parent (not this ministry) names their child on social media contrary to Section 97 of the Children Act 1989.
All the annoyed local authority can do is apply for the parent (or journalist) to be sent to prison. They only have that blunt instrument of a weapon. But employing it creates more publicity around the initial injustice.
Additionally, the parent must now be named in public. When a respondent shows no fear of consequences and desires the publicity, such sanctions play into their hands. They are, in the classic expression, ‘using the system against itself.’
A previous Mayor of Medway writes
After emailing our previous story on this case to Councillors in Medway, one Councillor Stuart Tranter responded. Cllr Tranter was Mayor until Cllr Wildey took over this year. What he wrote perfectly illustrates the complacency of those in charge of Medway Council:
‘I always welcome the truth, and if you believe something is wrong I suggest you use the courts and other proper means to have the evidence examined.’
Former Mayor of Medway, Councillor Stuart Tranter
No, Councillor Tranter, we are the media. We are part of the Fourth Estate, holding those in power to account. Those in power include local authorities, social workers, advocates, judges and indeed councillors. We are not going to court, and what ‘other proper means’ are there? Media is a ‘proper means’ and the only court we shall use is the court of public opinion.
He goes on: ‘Cllr Alan Jarratt (current leader) and Cllr David Wildey are good people working hard for our community, yet you imply they are running a council which sets out to harm innocent people. But living in Wales, I doubt you know them or how this council really works. We may be imperfect, but we do our best to get things right with the resources we have.’
Indeed, us humble sheep-rearing folk know nothing of the high-minded ways of the Home Counties. But we can spot an injustice when we see one. Furthermore, a local authority and its councillors should display more humility than ‘we may be imperfect’ and acknowledge their mistakes.
He that troubleth Israel!
Cllr Tranter continues: ‘I found all I read about you and your organisation and your beliefs negative and disturbing, so I must assume you thrive on causing disturbance which reinforces your beliefs and gives you energy. I hope that one day you get the help you need to find peace.’
Wow! When you lose the argument, try the ad hominem attack. Now who was it who said, ‘You are stirring up trouble!’ The idolatrous king Ahab said it to the Prophet Elijah. Here is the full discourse:
1Kings 18:17 And it came to pass, when Ahab saw Elijah, that Ahab said unto him, Art thou he that troubleth Israel? 18 And he answered, I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father’s house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the LORD, and thou hast followed Baalim.
‘Baalim’ were false gods. Israel had departed from the laws of the Lord, just like Medway Council in stripping children from their parents because a house is untidy. Thanks for that, Councillor. And you will only find peace in the Lord Jesus, who told his followers:
John 14:27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
Just click on the buttons below to share this story in your social media network:
A local authority took two children into care because a house was ‘untidy’, a mother has told Christian Voice.
And now, seven years later, Medway Council are trying to send the mother to prison for speaking out about her case. This is despite both children now being over eighteen. Care proceedings end at eighteen.
Medway Council harmed boy with violent video games
Medway Council have a history of such intimidatory tactics against parents who refuse to play by the rules. Last month they brought contempt of court proceedings against a father for naming council employees on social media. Judge Richard Scarratt gave him 56 days suspended.
In January this year Medway Council also applied to send Eugene Lukjanenko to prison for naming his son. Judge Richard gave him his first 56 days, also suspended. Mr Lukjanenko says he was speaking out against the injustice he says both he and his son have suffered at the hands of Medway Council.
According to friends of the family, Mr Lukjanenko’s son suffered horrific emotional abuse at the hands of Medway Council after being taken into care following a one-off altercation with a neighbour’s child.
Medway Council allowed ‘J’ to watch video games which inspired Norwegian neo-Nazi Anders Breivik
If there was ever a case for a local authority working with a parent to keep a family together, this was it. But instead, Medway Council took J into care at huge cost to the taxpayer.
Whether that is down to resources or ideology we do not know.
Edward Elliott has represented Medway Council in at least two contempt of court cases against aggrieved parents.
In the present case, that of the mother, we are at liberty to name all parties, but will wait until next week’s court case before doing so. In the meantime, Medway’s barrister, Edward Elliott, boasts about his involvement in the Council’s committal proceedings against the mother. He calls her ‘SR’ which is how we shall refer to her.
Nevertheless, some disturbing factors of SR’s case should concern all of us. Medway’s case at the final hearing on 4th March 2010 was that SR had harmed her two youngest children by pulling them out of school. Her daughter ‘C’ has special needs, while her son ‘D’ is above average intelligence.
Medway Council hired chartered psychologist Mr Graham Flatman to dig up dirt on the family. His comments should alarm every home-schooling parent in the land. He contended SR ‘had provided (‘D’) only with a limited and possibly distorted social experience’ and had ‘missed the opportunities offered by school for extended social contacts, extra curricular activities and the benefit of experiencing how a society of children and adults can function’. He concluded, ‘He had therefore suffered harm.’ On this point, District Judge Graham Green found otherwise.
It is legal to home-school in the United Kingdom.
Uncooperative with professionals
Expert Witness Graham Flatman. His reports cost the taxpayer around £6,000 each and he can write six per month, so he has every reason to look cheerful.
Having failed on home schooling, Medway turned on SR herself. Mr Flatman said she was ‘narcissistic’. She had ‘no insight into the harm and neglect the children have suffered’. He said she ‘should not have the responsibility of caring for her children unless she progresses through treatment and support’. What ‘treatment’? He did not say. Could it involve keeping SR away from looking glasses and pools of water? Whatever treatment it might be, Mr Flatman will not be providing it. He is far too busy writing reports for the family court.
Mr Flatman also said SR, a single parent, was uncooperative with the professionals. These are people who wanted to remove her children from the family home. Many reasonable people might also be assessed as having ‘distorted and paranoid belief systems about authority figures’ in such circumstances.
Indeed, it seems Medway Council were intent on forcing SR’s children back into school. The mother has a suspicion that Council employees were disgruntled she had chosen to home-school her two youngest children. In her view, care proceedings were a retaliation. Indeed, Medway applied to the family court for an Emergency Protection Order in February 2010. Moreover, the Council did this in secret without SR’s knowledge. Social worker Janet Western-Mullins then ambushed her with the order and a riot van full of police officers at her home.
Social worker ‘had no evidence’
Mark Noble was a detective police inspector before going private as a safeguarding manager. He said the case against SR was ‘laughable’.
Miss Western-Mullins told the court in her statement there was a ‘long history of reported squalid conditions’ at SR’s home. But she then had to admit these were based on one referral from a workman and a report from Medway Housing association in Feb 2008. She had actually ‘gone no further than the front room of SRt’s home’. She apologised for the exaggeration and ‘agreed that she had no evidence to support that assumption’.
But a police officer, Detective Constable Alexandra Smith, gave unchallenged subjective evidence supporting Medway. She said the garden ‘was a mess’, and there was ‘a litter tray smelling strongly of urine in the hallway.’
Astonishingly, and on this scant evidence, and despite SR having raised her three other children without incident, Judge Green found that the conditions of the home were ‘significant’ and ‘harmful to the children’. He made a final care order.
SR tells us that one Mark Noble, then a detective inspector in Kent Police, expressed what we shall politely call ‘reservations’ about Alex Smith’s evidence. He reportedly said the case was ‘laughable’. Mr Noble now offers his services on LinkedIn as a ‘safeguarding manager’,
We shall look back at this with shame
Councillor David Wildey is Mayor of Medway Council.
This is just the latest example of a council’s social services department putting more effort into securing a care order than helping a family stay together. Again a Council uses a ‘hired gun’ psychologist to damn the parent. We see a care order based on the most nebulous crossing of the Children Act ‘threshold’. And yet again we have Medway Council trying to send a parent to prison for exposing what she sees as the injustice she and her family have suffered.
Indeed, in case after case, parents tell this writer stories which speak of institutional, systemic injustice. In years to come, British people will look back at what the family courts did with shame. A senior judge will write a report about the parents who were deprived of their children without committing a crime. Politicians will make speeches of apology to the children condemned to local authority care and its poor outcomes.
Venue and Scripture
Medway Council will try to send SR to prison at Maidstone County Court . The address is Barker Road, ME16 8EQ. Judge Richard Polden will hear the case on Monday 17th July 2017 at 10.00am in open court . The rules say the hearing must be heard in public unless there are ‘exceptional circumstances’.
An embarrassed Medway Council will want to maintain secrecy. Accordingly, we shall expect an application from them to hear the case in private. And we shall expect Judge Polden to dismiss it.
Scripture says: Exodus 23:6 Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of thy poor in his cause. And:
Ezekiel 45:9 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Let it suffice you, O princes of Israel: remove violence and spoil, and execute judgment and justice, take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord GOD.
We were asking Medway Councillors for comments on this story as we went to press.
Click on the links below to share this shocking story:
The Lord used Christian Voice as four children wrongly taken into care by the London Borough of Bexley finally went home.
Four children wrongly taken into care by the London Borough of Bexley have finally gone home.
Four children from a family rent apart by false allegations two years ago have finally gone home.
In early March 2017 Judge Diane Redgrave approved an agreement worked out between counsel for the parents, Hilary Pollock, and the London Borough of Bexley. Bexley returned the children to their parents on 29th March.
The Lord’s hand at work
The Lord’s hand was all over the case. He arranged for Christian solicitor Michael Phillips to instruct Miss Pollock. That proved inspired (of course) as the experienced family court barrister gained the agreement of Bexley to everything beneficial to the parents.
But after the March hearing, Miss Pollock shared with this author that Bexley never expected the parents to get through the process. Nor did they expect overnight stays in the family home organised for the children at Christmas 2016 and New Year 2017 to go as well as they did.
Accordingly, from the threat of a contested hearing, where Bexley would have continued to oppose the children going home, the council changed their mind a week before the date. Behind the scenes, the setting up of a new ‘Back Together Team’ in the Borough in late 2016 possibly had something to do with that.
Bexley took children into care after false allegation
The family’s nightmare started in June 2015. Their eldest boy, in his mid-teens, ran off after being caught out in a lie about his whereabouts.
Upon being picked up by the police, he reported his parents for child cruelty. All four children were instantly taken into care. The parents were charged and sent to the Crown Court. The only corroborating evidence was that of a doctor who saw a photo of a mark on the eldest boy’s body.
Her Honour Judge Diane Redgrave
He thought it could have been made by a metal implement. However, he never examined the boy himself, and none of the other children made any similar accusation. Moreover, the police found nothing resembling such an alleged item in the family’s home.
Bexley social worker Judy Simon even contacted the mother’s place of work, a care home. The call resulted in her being laid off. Secondly, Miss Simon accused the father to his employers, British Transport Police. He was dismissed last year in another miscarriage of justice. He is currently appealing that dismissal.
Judge Redgrave gave the astonishing advice to the parents to plead guilty in the Crown Court. She said this would help them have their children returned. That may have been correct. If so, it raises yet more questions about the system. Nevertheless, father and mother stuck to their guns and maintained their innocence. On the eve of the Crown Court case their eldest son confirmed he had made it all up.
Despite that, the video is still there and has had over 96,000 views to date.
It must be said, in March this year Judge Redgrave could not have been more constructive. Discharging the Care Order, she congratulated the parents, saying they had ‘worked very hard’. She also suggested activities to keep the eldest son occupied. He was ‘Not the only teenager in the world’ to get into trouble, she said.
Prayer answered
Christian Voice members prayed hard for this family and against the injustice they suffered. The father says: ‘Every day I see the smile and joy on my children’s faces I pray for those that helped me be a complete family man again. My children too pray for them when we all have our family prayers together. Help me to say a big thank you to them all.’
If you prayed into this case, consider yourself thanked!
Canterbury Civil Court heard the case of contempt of court against Uegene Lukjanenko
Canterbury Civil Court heard the case of contempt of court against Eugene Lukjanenko
A father in dispute with Medway Council narrowly escaped jail for contempt of court in Canterbury County Court last week for the second time in six months.
Eugene Lukjanenko was charged with five breaches of an order made on 30th September 2015. The Order prohibited him from naming employees or ex-employees of the Council online.
To his credit, said Judge Richard Scarratt, he freely admitted the breaches. But His Honour rejected Mr Lukjanenko’s argument that his conduct was reasonable. Judge Scarratt sentenced him to 56 days in prison, suspended for a year.
The judge said: ‘The local authority may feel that is soft’. Nevertheless, His Honour had taken into account that if he imposed an immediate custodial term, Mr Lukjanenko ‘will be a martyr to his cause, a cause which in my judgment has no substance whatever’.
Previous contempt of court sentence ‘stemmed the flow’
In January, the same judge imposed the same sentence on the same defendant for naming his son online in breach of a High Court Reporting Restrictions Order. But yesterday, he said that had ‘stemmed the flow’ of the prohibited information. He said he hoped the same would happen this time.
His Honour Judge Richard Scarratt
The Order, made in the family court, forbad Eugene Lukjanenko from displaying the Names, Contact Details or photographs of any Medway Council employee any where.
How such an obvious infringement of his Article 10 right to Freedom of Expression came to be made was never explained at the hearing. The judge was solely concerned with Medway’s heavy-handed application to commit Mr Lukjanenko to prison.
Moreover, we are going to commend Judge Scarratt for his patience. He was dealing with an understandably upset father. The father’s first language is Russian. He continually wanted to raise what he sees as previous unjust treatment in the family courts and by Medway. He may have a point. There is little evidence the Council tried to keep this family together. And that is what we all think social workers should be doing, except in the most extreme cases of abuse or neglect.
Did he breach the Order?
The Crown Prosecution Service looked at the case under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and decided there was no case. That should raise a question about double jeopardy. In a convoluted bit of reasoning, barrister Edward Elliott, appearing for the Council, submitted that the CPS only considered one aspect of the case. Moreover, since they took no action, there was no double jeopardy in any case. This court could try the case, a point which Judge Scarratt was happy to accept.
Mr Elliott said: ‘This is not the criminal court’. So it was not about whether the conduct actually amounted to harassment. All the mattered was ‘did he breach the order?’
And of that there was little doubt. Mr Lukjanenko put the names of three social workers with their contact details (where those were in the pubic domain) on his Facebook timeline quite a while ago.
No compromise
The defendant before a similar case in January. Face obscured
The court heard that over the lunch break Mr Lukjanenko discussed the possibility of a compromise with Medway. This fell down when the Council refused to increase contact with his son. Nor would they bring forward a meeting scheduled for September to reconsider the frequency of contact. That seems mean-minded.
But the judge said the two issues, contact and the breaches of the order, could not be linked. Judge Scarratt actually heard the case in the family court. But this was not now the family court, he said. This was a civil court hearing for contempt of court in public.
However, in an extraordinary development, the court heard that Mr Lukjanenko produced a letter in the interval.
In the letter, signed by his son, the son said he wanted to come home. Mr Lukjanenko drafted it and gave it to his son to read and sign in his last meeting at the local authority contact centre. Although these were not family court proceedings, the judge was aghast. ‘Was not the contact supervised? How did that happen?’ he demanded.
Contact centres are intended to be heavily policed by social workers. Parents are not even supposed to tell their children they love them or that they are fighting to get them home. They may certainly not pass pieces of paper to them.
Reporting Restrictions
At the end of the hearing, this author drew Judge Scarratt’s attention to a Reporting Restrictions Order in the family court which forbids the media from naming the father or the son in any report on the case. However, ours is not a jurisdiction that quietly locks people up. If someone faces prison, the hearing must be advertised and the person named. Court Practice Direction, CCR (County Court Rules) 29 on Committal Applications applies. Rule 29.9 says:
9. A committal application should normally be heard in public (see CPR rule 39.2), but if it is heard in private and the court finds the respondent guilty of contempt of court, the judge shall, when next sitting in public, state –
(1) the name of the respondent;
(2) in general terms the nature of the contempt or contempts found proved; and
(3) the penalty (if any) imposed.
Edward Elliott is involved in another contempt of court case brought by Medway Council
Judge Scarratt had to comply with the end of rule 29.9 as he was already sitting in open court. His Honour accordingly ruled we could identify the father by his full name. We are actually reluctant to do so, but the interests of justice require it. The onus is on a local authority pursuing a parent to prison to be aware they are enabling the identification of parents. They normally strive very hard to avoid that. We can only hope this does not lead to identification of the child in the case.
Medway Council pursuing another parent
Eugene Lukjanenko is not the only parent Medway Council are pursuing. We understand they are after a mother, who at the moment we shall refer to as SR. SR has published details about her case on social media. She sees a miscarriage of justice towards her and her children who are now, as we understand it, of majority age anyway.
Curiously, Edward Elliott, Medway’s barrister, boasts on his chambers page about his involvement in committal proceedings against SR for contempt of court. The mother’s case will be heard in July and we shall be there, God willing, to report on the case.
This protest at Edward Timpson's home in May, led to a manifesto commitment on reform of the family courts
This protest at Edward Timpson’s home in May led to a manifesto commitment on reform of the family courts
The Conservative Party promised reform of the family courts in their manifesto following a rooftop protest.
It is of course open to argument whether the manifesto commitment was a response to the protest at the home of Edward Timpson. Mr Timpson was Minister of State for Vulnerable Children and Familiesin the previous government. It follows he had responsibility for social services, child protection and to some extent the operation of the family courts.
Protest
The protest, on 8th May, was carried out by an aggrieved father who has fought a long campaign to be reunited with his son.
Medway Council asked a court to jail ‘EL’ for contempt after he posted a picture of his in-care son online. Instead circuit Judge Richard Scarratt imposed a suspended sentence.
HIs Honour instructed this author that we may only refer to the father as ‘EL’ and the son as ‘J’.
That is because of secrecy rules the family court employs to protect the reputation of the courts and local authorities.
Theresa May published her manifesto ten days after the protest, on 18th May. In it, she said:
‘Protecting vulnerable children and families’.
‘Placing a child under the oversight of social services and taking a child into care are amongst the most serious duties the state may discharge.’
‘We will demand all local authorities be commissioners of the highest-quality family support and child protection services, removing these responsibilities from the weakest councils and placing them in trust.
‘Finally, we shall explore ways to improve the family justice system. The family courts need to do more to support families, valuing the roles of mothers and fathers, while ensuring parents face up to their responsibilities.’
Moreover, the Tories were the only party to commit to any such reform. That in itself lends support to the view that the commitment was a direct result of EL’s rooftop protest.
Laura Smith is the new Labour MP for Crewe and Nantwich, winning by just 48 votes
Mrs Smith overturned a 3,620 majority. She won the seat by 48 votes.
Court appearances
The police placed the father involved on police bail pending a court charge in September. However, Medway Council are taking him to court again this Thursday 15th.
A judge will hear the case at Canterbury County Court. The Council seek to commit the father to prison for contempt of court this time after he named a social worker online. As it happens, he is perfectly entitled to do so under the law.
Click on any of the links below to share this article:
The triple-lock matters to pensioners - and there are almost twelve million of them.
Theresa May has stated Britain will leave the EU’s Single Market. But she could easily lose the General Election.
As the political parties write their general election manifestos, one of them faces a particular challenge.
The Conservatives might think they have an unassailable lead, but they could easily snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. And that would put Brexit in peril.
NHI for the Self-Employed
Firstly., they would dearly like their manifesto to give them fiscal carte blanche. Their previous manifesto promised no rise in VAT, income tax or national health insurance (NHI) contributions. That may have been foolish, but it’s why Chancellor Philip Hammond came unstuck in March.
His March 2017 budget proposed to increase NHI for the self-employed. The Guardian found at least 18 Tory MPs prepared to vote that down. Hammond and Mrs May retreated.
But this time, if they take out the pledge, every Tory candidate will be signed up to the change. It follows they will be unable to object. But they may not have the opportunity. According to National Statistics, there are now over four and a half million self-employed in the UK. The trend shows not sign of slowing down. ONS say: ‘The level of self-employment in the UK increased from 3.8 million in 2008 to 4.6 million in 2015.’
The pensioners’ ‘triple-lock’
The triple-lock matters to pensioners – and there are almost twelve million of them.
Secondly, the Conservatives would love to abolish the so-called ‘triple-lock’ with this general election. The coalition government began this scheme in 2010. It increases the state pension each year by inflation, the increase in average earnings or 2.5%, whichever is the highest. Maintaining the triple lock until at least 2020 was another David Cameron 2015 manifesto commitment.
Labour have already pledged to maintain the triple-lock. If the Tories take it away, they could alienate every one of the UK’s 11.8 million pensioners in one go. Nearly one million over-75s live in poverty, according to the BBC. At April 2014, the basic state pension was around £440 a year more than it would have been if it had been increased only in line with the increase in average earnings. So it matters to people. Almost 2 million pensioners may live in a household with a millionaire, but if self-interest or altruism kick in, Mrs May could be in trouble.
So that is twelve million pensioners and four-and-a-half million self-employed. Fifteen million is a huge voting block to alienate. There are just 44.7 million electors in the UK, according to ONS. You do the maths. The Tories stand to lose the votes of over a third of the electorate. And these are people who actually vote. Lose them and they lose the general election.
LibDem leader Tim Farron is chief of the ‘Remoaners’
The Brexit dimension
The LibDems want to remain in the EU, or at least in the Single Market and Customs Union, which amounts to the same thing. Their leader, Tim Farron, is also promising a second referendum.
Labour’s shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer said today that his party would scrap Theresa May’s Brexit plans. Labour would unilaterally guarantee the rights of EU residents to stay before talks even start. Furthermore, he said the EU single market should be kept ‘on the table’.
Frankly, a general election yielding a Conservative majority is the only way of guaranteeing a full, proper, clean exit from the revived Roman Empire. Without putting trust in princes, Mrs May looks like she could achieve that. More EU jobs are dependent on the UK market than vice versa, but even World Trade Organisation tariffs are not actually that high across most sectors. Trade deals are good for trade, but companies manage to trade with foreign partners without them. There is no EU trade agreement with China, for example.
Pray for the General Election
Ben Gummer MP is writing the Conservative’s General election manifesto. If ever a man needed wisdom…
They may not realise that there is a massive spiritual battle going on over Brexit right now. Behind every material reality is a spiritual reality and we are aware of that.
Pray the Tories do not alienate voters by abandoning the NHI pledge and the triple-lock. The Chancellor will have to wait. The most vital matter today is Brexit. If the Conservatives mess up the election and put Brexit in jeopardy there will be massive public anger.
Easter Message
We also need to pray that Theresa May takes this opportunity to make good her Easter message. She clearly said people in public service should be able to share their faith without risk of losing their job. But they are losing their jobs. So dispel accusations of hypocrisy by making that a manifesto pledge.
She also said the UK should be standing up for Christians overseas. So stand up for the Christians of Syria, and support the Syrian Government which is their only protector. Stand up also for persecuted Christians in Pakistan, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia, for example.
We should obviously like to see measures promised opposing the abortion industry and euthanasia. Reform of the family courts and the scandal of overbearing child protection is overdue. Crucially for the nation’s children, the Tory manifesto should stand against the fashionable transgender scam, especially in schools. That would cause outcry, but not fifteen million voters’ worth of outcry.
Finally, on foreign affairs, let us pray for a manifesto commitment of peace. Pray to have a Secretary of State for Defence, rather than – as we currently have – one for Provocation. Pray for a reset with Russia. Mrs May could pledge in this general election never again to destablise other nations. She could promise the UK will approach diplomacy with maturity. At the moment, Boris Johnson and Sir Michael Fallon seem like a couple of adolescent stags trying to prove their virility. The anti-Russia rhetoric is ludicrous and embarrassing.
Be sure every lobby group will be doing the same. Not the praying bit, obviously.
And do also pray for the other parties. On some matters, their general election manifestos could at the very least change the parameters of debate. Labour and UKIP could be better disposed towards peace, for example. There are plainly other issues attracting attention in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and Wales to some extent. But if you live outside England, or even overseas, please spare some prayer time for the overall UK picture.
Deuteronomy 3:24 O Lord GOD, thou hast begun to shew thy servant thy greatness, and thy mighty hand: for what God is there in heaven or in earth, that can do according to thy works, and according to thy might?
1Samuel 12:23 Moreover as for me, God forbid that I should sin against the LORD in ceasing to pray for you: but I will teach you the good and the right way: 24 Only fear the LORD, and serve him in truth with all your heart: for consider how great things he hath done for you.
1Thess 5:17 Pray without ceasing.
1Tim 2:1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
Theresa May has left herself wide open to criticisms of hypocrisy after this year’s (2017) Easter message. The Prime Minister said ‘Easter is a moment to reflect’. TEXT HERE
In that case let us just reflect how her actions and those of Her Majesty’s Government measure up to what she said. We can go further and measure the actions of Her Majesty’s Government against the principles of the Christian faith itself.
Firstly, let’s just applaud a Prime Minister who talks openly about faith, and her own faith. The days when Alastair Campbell said of Tony Blair’s administration ‘We don’t do God’ seem to be over.
Of course, I’ll sit up and notice when the first British politician says ‘our thoughts and prayers’ are with the victims of a disaster, rather than just ‘our thoughts.’ Nevertheless, the mere issuing of an Easter message declares the UK to be a Christian nation. Which indeed constitutionally we are.
Opportunities and challenges of Brexit
I recognise there are areas in which Theresa May’s Christian faith as expressed in the Easter message appears to be lived out in action. The enthusiasm with which she is leading the United Kingdom out of the European Union’s Revived Roman Empire is commendable. We must pray she sees it through. And she is being positive about it. That is fine. Mrs May also wants to keep the United Kingdom together. There is nothing wrong in that.
In case I am thought to be nationalist and ‘right-wing’, let’s just emphasise workers’ rights. The Bible is clear that workers need fair dealing from employers. Parliament will need to untangle Britiah law from EU regulatons. In so doing ministers must ensure employment rights in an independent Britain are not eroded.
The vulnerable in the heart of God
The Christian faith is clear about the place the most vulnerable have in the heart of God. Christ singled out the poor, the homeless, the destitute, the sick and the hungry. He emphasised the duty of Christian people to nourish and protect them. Should that be individuals, or the state stepping in?
At a practical level, the targets culture of the 1980s built on the expansion of the role of local authorities in the 1960s to the point where people now are paid to care, so anyone calling for more money from the state in response to any deficiencies in provision for Christ’s identified groups can make out a good argument.
The family
This baby at six weeks already has a beating heart.
The insttution of the family used to be a bulwark against too much power ending up in the hands of the state, but gay ‘rights’ and gay ‘marriage’, coupled with no-fault divorce on demand and a bit of laissez-faire condom-promoting sex education have put paid to that.
There are none more vulnerable today than the unborn. The womb is the most dangerous place to be in Great Britain today. Mrs May only voted for the age limit on abortion to come down to twenty weeks last time around. The House of Commons diagreed. It stayed at 24 weeks. But we now know from modern imaging that a baby’s heart is beating three weeks after conception. Neuroscience shows babies can feel pain certainly at 16 weeks and react to a stimulus as 8 weeks. So elective abortion is living on borrowed time.
But to be fair, Mrs May did not raise the matter of the vulnerable, or the importance of the family in her Easter message. She stuck to Easter-time, Brexit, shared values, the importance of Christian witness, sacrifice, the role of Christianity, religious tolerance, freedom of speech and the persecuted church.
So what of my three identified areas of hypocrisy.
Easter message: Freedom of Speech
Firstly, to Mrs May’s confidence ‘about the role that Christianity has to play in the lives of people in our country’. That was coupled in her Easter message with a stated determination to ‘treasure the strong tradition that we have in this country of religious tolerance and freedom of speech’. Furthermore, Mrs May pledged to ‘continue to ensure that people feel able to speak about their faith, and that absolutely includes their faith in Christ’.
Sarah Kuteh
Only last week, Sarah Kuteh was in front of an Employment Tribunal in Ashford, Kent. Sarah has been a nurse for 15 years. Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust sacked her last August (2016) for ‘gross misconduct’. What was her terrible offence? She discussed her faith with patients.
Now those in the National Secular Society would contend that sick people should be insulated from faith. That is precisely how NHS Trusts are acting. That is their clear policy.
‘Comfort and guidance’
But in her Easter message Mrs May implied this was not happening. She gave the clear impression she disagreed with such a policy. She spoke of Christians ‘providing comfort and guidance to many in our country at some of the most difficult moments in their lives’.
So why has she not already told her Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, to issue a directive to NHS Trusts to encourage Christian doctors and nurses to actively share their faith with patients and provide that ‘comfort and guidance’? Why, on her watch, are NHS managers sacking Christian staff?
For that matter, Christian open-air preachers are being hauled before the courts. Why has Amber Rudd, her Home Secretary, not sent a directive to police forces and public prosecutors to tell them to lay off Christian preachers and allow them to ‘speak about their faith’?
Someone who says one thing and does another is a hypocrite.
Embrace the World!
Secondly, the Prime Minister spoke in her Easter message of Christian values ‘of compassion, community, citizenship’. We are going to ‘embrace the world’. She might remember the Bible saying something about guiding our feet into the way of peace (Luke 1:79). Or perhaps castigating those whose ways are ‘destruction and misery’, those with no fear of God who do not know ‘the way of peace’ (Rom 3:16-18 cf Isa 59:7-8).
The Russian corvette ‘Boiky’
Yet our famously Christian PM re-appointed as Secretary of State for Defence a man lacking both the fear of God and the way of peace. In particular, Sir Michael Fallon insults, rather than embraces, that part of the world known as the Russian Federation.
His latest display of petulance was to send out a destroyer to shadow a couple of corvettes, named Soobrazitelny and Boiky, as they steamed through the English Channel from their Baltic port en route to the Mediterranean.
Fallon said: ‘HMS Sutherland is carefully marking these Russian ships as they pass close to UK waters. The Royal Navy maintains a vigilant watch and is always ready to keep Britain safe.’
No doubt it does and it is. But what was he suggesting? That Soobrazitelny was preparing to shell Dover, or Boiky to land an invasion force of marines on Bognor beach? Does he think we are all stupid?
Department for Provocation
A Christian administration would not pretend there are threats where none exist. Its ministers would not think the Ministry of Defence is really the Department for Provocation. They would not be talking up threats from another Christian nation to sell armaments. They would not make bellicose noises every time the ships of that nation pass through the busiest shipping lane in the world (which happens to be near our shores). There was no indication the French or Belgians burned diesel oil putting to sea. The Channel is international water.
In February, Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Defence described the Russian aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov as a ‘ship of shame skulking through the Channel’. It was simply on its way home after helping the Syrian army liberate Aleppo. The defeat of the UK’s favoured and financed jihadists had irritated UK politicians. But why not be magnaminous? Why expose a petulant display of aggression and military impotence which diminished Her Majesty? It drew unwelcome attention to the fact that the UK does not even have an operational aircraft carrier.
To invoke the message of Easter while beating the drum of war is rank hypocrisy.
Persecuted Christians
Churches in Syria have been looted and damaged by jihadists
Thirdly, mention of Aleppo draws our attention to yet another hypocritcal section of Mrs May’s Easter message.
The Prime Minister said: ‘And we must do more to stand up for the freedom of people of all religions to practice their beliefs openly and in peace and safety.’
But the UK continues to support, politically and financially, Syrian Sunni Muslim jihadists whose reason for being is to murder or expel ‘people of all religions’ – except their own.
Speaking of alleged Christian freedom in the UK, Mrs May went on: ‘We must be mindful of Christians and religious minorities around the world who do not enjoy these same freedoms, but who practise their religion in secret and often in fear’.
So why not support Assad?
We should expect ‘being mindful’ to include some measure of support. So why in Syria does the UK not do everything it can to bolster the administraton of President Assad? After all, he has a track record of protecting ‘Christians and religious minorities’?
Instead, she is carrying on the policy of her predecessor of destabilising Syria. That nation had done nothing to us, yet we cheered with the Devil, who loves to destroy, as it was reduced to rubble. If Theresa May really believes ‘we must do more’ to stand up for Christians worldwide, she should order a complete turn-around on Syria, on the Foreign Office’s attitude to Russia, and on aggression against Christians worldwide.
Because right now, when Her Majesty’s Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, tells the Russians they are on the ‘wrong side of history’ by their alliance with Shia Iran and Syria, he himself is precisely wrong. It is the British Government’s support of Sunni Muslim jihadism and our alliance with Saudi Wahhabism which is on the wrong side.
Practising Christianity in fear
Theresa May with Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz al Saud (left)
Going further, Mrs May should be speaking to the Government of Malaysia, to that of Egypt and to the rulers of Saudi Arabia demanding freedom for Christians. In fact, she has only just come back from Saudi Arabia. Did she demand freedom for those ‘who practise their religion in secret and often in fear’? There are many secret Christians in Saudi Arabia, some in high places. Where is any evidence of Mrs May ‘doing more’ for them?
Come to that, when was Pakistan’s High Commissioner last summoned to a talking-to from the Foreign Secretary over his country’s failure to protect Christians from spurious blasphemy charges?
Mrs May is playing mere lip-service to persecuted Christians. She is doing nothing to help them. Homosexuals are more welcome in the UK than refugee Christians. Tragically, for her, trade deals and selling arms are more important. That is yet more hypocrisy.
Three major areas raised by Mrs May in her Easter message from her Christian faith. Three glaring examples of hypocrisy. How Her Majesty’s Government needs our prayer.
Khalid Massod - turned to Islamic extremism after converting to Islam in Lewes prison in Sussex
Khalid Massod – turned to Islamic extremism after converting to Islam in Lewes prison in Sussex
The Government has launched an Islamic Extremism unit, ‘A specialist team of ‘counter-terrorism experts aimed at tackling extremism in prisons’, as the BBC put it.
The announcement comes in the wake of the Westminster terror attacks. But unless they dissuade prison inmates from converting to Islam in the first place, their efforts will have little effect.
The terrorist responsible for Wednesday’s Westminster murders converted to Islam in prison, from information now emerging. He was then radicalised.
Khalid Masood killed four innocent people on Westminster Bridge and around Parliament in London on 22nd March 2017. But he was born Adrian Elms and served time for a string of criminal offences before turning to Islam and becoming a terrorist.
Islamic Extremism books removal plan in August 2016
PC Keith Palmer was photographed with a tourist minutes before he was knifed by Khalid Masood
Last August (2016), the Justice Secretary announced that Islamic extremists would be put in ‘separate units’. The BBC report is in this link. Rt Hon Liz Truss MP also set out plans for the removal of extremist books from prison libraries. She also announced ‘stronger vetting’ of prison chaplains.
The report highlighted: * Muslim gang culture and the consequent violence, drug trafficking and criminality inspired or directed by these groups;
* Offenders advocating support for Daesh and threats against staff and other prisoners;
* Charismatic Islamic Extremism prisoners acting as self-styled ‘emirs’ and exerting a controlling and radicalising influence on the wider Muslim prison population;
* Aggressive encouragement of conversions to Islam;
* Unsupervised collective worship, sometimes at Friday Prayers including pressure on supervising staff to leave the prayer room;
It went to report on:
* Attempts by Islamic Extremism prisoners to engineer segregation by landing, by wing, or even by prison;
* Attempts to prevent staff searches by claiming dress is religious;
* Books and educational materials promoting extremist literature available in chaplaincy libraries or held by individual prisoners;
* Intimidation of prison Imams;
* Exploitation of staff fear of being labelled racist; and
* Abuse of rules preventing searches of communications between prisoners and lawyers.
Books problem identified in November 2015
Liz Truss MP – the Justice Secretary is responsible for protecting the public
But the Justice Department has failed in its primary God-given duty of protecting the public. The BBC reported in July 2016 that five books were regarded as ‘extremist’ by the Prison Service. But they remained in jails in England and Wales for seven months after a review called for their removal.
Ian Acheson’s inspection team first alerted the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to the presence of the books in November 2015. Mr Acheson then submitted his report in March 2016. Publication of his findings was successively delayed.
One or more of the texts promoting Islamic extremism had been found in chaplaincy rooms at nine of the 11 prisons visited by the review team. The BBC found the order to remove the books was only made on or after 20th June.
Mr Acheson gave evidence to the Commons Justice Committee on 13th July 2016. He said his investigation had found ‘numerous examples’ of books that were ‘extremist in nature in prison chaplaincies’.
Mr Acheson said they contained ‘sometimes sectarian, homophobic and incendiary information that was freely available to vulnerable prisoners in many prisons’. He said there was ‘no obvious control over it’.
Government complacency in April 2015
Chris Grayling MP – showed complacency as Justice Secretary
Moreover, two years ago, as the BBC reports, there was a warning that extremists were not properly monitored. The warning came from the former head of the National Counter Terrorism Security Office . Chris Phillips said staff shortages enabled them to recruit others. But the Justice Secretary of the time, Chris Grayling MP, rejected the claim. A ‘very careful watch’ was kept, he said.
Sounding just like Jim Hacker from ‘Yes Minister’, Mr Grayling said: ‘We will never be complacent about the issue’. Growing even more complacent, he added he had found ‘no evidence’ Mr Phillips’ claim was correct. He even went on to rubbish the credentials of the former detective chief inspector.
There are more than 12,000 Muslims in jails across England and Wales and official 2013 data showed more than 100 Muslims in jail for terrorism offences in Great Britain. We have not been able to find a more up-to-date report.
2010: Prisoners convert to Islam ‘for perks’
But back in 2010, Dame Anne Owers, former chief inspector of prisons, said prisoners were converting to Islam because of ‘perks’. More time out of their cell and better food during Ramadan if they become Muslim were among them.
The Daily Telegraph reported at the time on the reasons given by inmates for switching to Islam. These included the opportunity of ‘support and protection in a group with a powerful identity.’ ‘Perceptions of material advantages of identifying as Muslim’ were also cited. Still others were ‘attracted by the discipline, structure and comfort of the religion’. Interviewees stressed the cohesive nature of Islam compared with other religious faiths for converts and ‘group solidarity’.
Dame Anne Owers’ report, entitled Muslim Prisoners’ Experiences, could not rock the multi-cultural boat. It had to suggest Muslim prisoners are driven to Islamic extremism because they are treated as potential radicals while in jail. But it is understandable for prison officers to take such a view. She said, ‘There was very little comment from staff about Islam as a positive force’.
Converts ‘more vulnerable to Islamic extremism’
Dame Anne Owers – very establishment
Thirty percent of the Muslims she interviewed had been converted to Islam in prison. There was ‘an over-representation of black Muslim prisoners compared with black Muslims in the community’. Dame Anne went on: ‘This was reflected in our sample of converts of whom 65% (n=32) were black, 18% (n=9) white and 16% (n=8) of mixed heritage. None were (sic) Asian.’
Dame Anne voiced a particular concern about converts to Islam. The BBC reports her as citing internal research showing they are more vulnerable to Islamic extremism. But she also said suspicion of Muslim prisoners could fuel resentment and cause even more trouble. Of course, an establishment figure would say that.
The Government, she said, ‘sees the influence of Muslim chaplains explicitly as a key part of the strategy for minimising extremism in prisons’. Christian Voice believes the primary objective should be to prevent prisoners converting to Islam in the first place. Much more effort should be put into supporting Christian evangelism in prisons.
Christian evangelism reduces re-offending
Steve Rawlins leads Way4ward – working with ex-offenders
Many of the public do not realise that it is entirely possible to be a Muslim and a criminal. The historic view of the Charity Commission was ‘it is a good thing for a man to have a religion’. Well, not if it is the Mohammedan religion.
It is perfectly possible to run a prostitution ring, a drugs factory or a protection racket and be a good Muslim. Islam does not demand repentance. Its first requirement is to confess the Shahadah, a statement about Allah and Mohammed. Secondly, a Muslim performs the five-times-a-day prayer. He also pays the Zakah (poor-due), fasts during Ramadan and goes on the Hajj.
In contrast, faith in Jesus Christ involves repentance. The Christian faith involves a relationship with Jesus Christ, and a desire to live according to his ways.
The Way4ward Steering Group in Parliament to talk to members of the House of Lords.
The emphasis on turning away from sin is why studies show that Christian prison evangelism reduces re-offending. There should be massive Government support for Christian evangelistic outreach in prison. Possibly fears of Evangelical rejection of sexual sin put the Christian faith at odds with contemporary mores. But peoples’ lives are at stake here. If a prisoner chooses muscular Christianity over Islam it is not just his life which is changed. Innocent people will be protected from his criminality. Crucially, they could be saved from the consequences of Islamic extremism.
Government has a duty to protect its citizens from lawlessness. Ministries like the Prison Fellowship and Way4ward (part of Transformed) should be encouraged and supported by Government. Churches too could become more aware and supportive of these ministries.
Prisoners ‘coerced’
John Shelly’s interview with the BBC is worth a watch. Click on the BBC link opposite
The BBC quoted ex-prisoner John Shelly, who was inside for 15 years. He said prisoners were being ‘coerced into doing that by some of what you might call the more prominent Muslims that are inside for various offences.’
Shelly spent time in more than 40 jails including HMP Whitemoor, a prison with a large Muslim population. Last year, chief inspector of prisons Nick Hardwick said some of its inmates who had been convicted of terrorism offences were trying to influence and pressurise others.
Shelly was released from prison in 2015 after serving a 15-year sentence for armed robbery. He said prisoners would often “join the extremists” because they were promised protection. Worryingly, he claims to have seen prisoners plotting acts of terror as well as endorsing groups such as Islamic State and al-Qaeda.
Not enough staff
He said: ‘Extremism – it’s grown and grown by the day and they’ve found themselves in a situation where they can’t separate anyone because wherever they separate them to, they’re just mixing them with other people who have the same view and same sort of message.’
Mr Phillips said: “The answer is to get into the prisons and to make sure the most susceptible people are kept away from those that might turn those into extremists and, at this moment, we cannot even keep drugs out of prison, we can’t keep mobile phones out of prison, so clearly there is not enough staff to do that.”
Muslim former prisoner Hassan said he had been unfairly discriminated against. But interestingly, he went on to boast about the converts he had made: ‘I was inside for 14 years, and a lot of people became Muslim through me,’ he said. How many of those went on to be radicalised into Islamic extremism?
Converted in prison
All the evidence now points to Khalid Masood having converted to Islam in prison before becoming radicalised.
He was born Adrian Elms to 17-year-old Janet Elms in Kent. The Daily Telegraph reported Miss Elms married one Phillip Ajao in Sussex when Adrian was a small child. In a peculiar twist, Janet and Philip Ajao now live in a farm near Trelech in Carmarthenshire, just four miles from where this article is being written. There is much sympathy for Janet locally, estranged from her son and finding herself the centre of journalistic attention.
Masood/Elms had been jailed repeatedly for violent crime dating back to the 1980s, including grievous bodily harm, possession of offensive weapons and assault. He was never jailed for terrorism offences. In one report the Guardian claimed, ‘Police said Masood had been inspired by Islamic State’.
Former friend Lee Lawrence, who lives in Northiam, said: ‘It was while he was inside that Ade turned to Islam.’
‘He loved scaring people. He got off on being the hard man’ Mr Lawrence went to say Elms ‘wasn’t stupid’ and ‘was very articulate and intelligent’ But when he got angry ‘he would just snap and became a different person. It was terrifying. There was something inside his brain he just couldn’t control.’
Became a Muslim in Lewes prison in Sussex
Adrian Elms converted to Islam and became Khalid Masood in Lewes Prison in Sussex
Childhood friend Mark Ashdown told The Sun the man he knew as Adrian Elms announced his conversion to Islam after serving his first jail sentence in Lewes prison in Sussex. ‘When he first came out he told me he’d become a Muslim in prison and I thought he was joking.’
‘Then I saw he was quieter and much more serious. I gave him some cash-in-hand work for a few months as a labourer. He said he needed time to pray and read the Quran – something about finding inner peace.’
The Independent adds that Mr Ashdown said Masood still showed ‘flashes of the old Ade’, described as an ‘all round nice guy’ but they were few and far between. His friend had become violent and became increasingly ‘religious’.
It is unclear whether Massod/Elms’ radicalisation occurred during his imprisonment at Lewes Prison, Wayland Prison in Norfolk or Ford open prison in West Sussex. However, we also know Elms spent time teaching in Saudi Arabia.
The paper goes on: ‘Masood’s abrupt religious conversion will fuel concerns about the rising threat of criminals being brought under the influence of hardened jihadis while in prison – a pattern repeated time and again in Europe among Isis militants including those who carried out the Brussels and Paris attacks.’
Radicalised in prison
Islamic State hailed Masood as a “soldier of the Islamic State” in a claim of responsibility issued the following day. However, the extent of any involvement by the terrorist group remains unclear. The group has a history of grabbing the limelight in the wake of terror attacks.
Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow at the security thinktank the Royal United Services Institute, said: ‘We have always known that it is exceptionally hard to understand who will become a terrorist. Masood is unusual in that only a minority become radicalised over the age of 30. His criminal record is unsurprising, as some studies show that a significant proportion of jihadists have had prior convictions.’
Mrs May, speaking in parliament early on Thursday, said Masood was ‘not part of the current intelligence picture’. She said: ‘Our working assumption is that the attacker was inspired by Islamist ideology’. The Guardian reported that MI5 has a list of some 3,000 British nationals ‘regarded as potentially capable of committing an act of domestic terrorism’. Massod/Elms was not among them.
What the Government can do against Islamic Extremism
There is a limit to what Government can do to prevent attacks like the one Masood carried out. But preventing prisoners from becoming Muslim in the first place is something they can do by segregation and the banning of extremist literature and books in foreign languages from prison libraries and chapels. Furthermore, they could even consider separating Muslim prisoners into separate jails. Christian evangelism should also be encouraged. Pray the safety of the public is not sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.
Robert Stacey convicted Michael Overd and Michael Stockwell on Tuesday 28th February. He handed down £2016 worth of fines and costs each. He even refused a stay of execution pending their appeal.
But we have discovered the retired laboratory manager holds office in the Royal Arch Provincial Grand Chapter of Gloucestershire and Herefordshire.
The magistrate, 69 this month (March 2017), has also been a director of the Staple Hill Masonic Hall in Shrubbery Road, Downend, Bristol.
Provincial Grand Scribe Ezra
In fact, the man who could not pronounce ‘Catholicism’ is ‘Provincial Grand Scribe Ezra’. In court, Mr Stacey could barely read his own writing. Nevertheless, in January, ‘Grand Scribe Ezra’ managed to send out an invitation to the ‘Annual Convocation of Provincial Grand Chapter’. This will be held at The Crypt School, Podsmead Road, Gloucester GL2 5AE, on Saturday 6th May 2017, at 11.15am. ‘Companions are requested to be seated in the Chapter by 10.50am’, says the invitation.
‘Blue Lodge’ craft Mason apron. But inside the Lodge lies the occultist ‘Red’ Chapter
Royal Arch Freemasons love calling themselves by Biblical names. It is one way in which they invoke the rebuilding of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. So one Paul Diggins is ‘Provincial Grand Haggai’ while Michael Lettey is ‘Provincial Grand Joshua’. You will often find a ‘Zerubbabel’ and a ‘Nehemiah’ as well.
Freemason syncretism
Despite the Biblical allusions, the exclusive claims of Jesus in the same Bible are anathema to Freemasonry. Although Masons have to believe in ‘a Supreme Being’, their ‘Great Architect of the Universe’ encompasses all deities. The Provincial Grand Lodge of Gloucestershire says on its ‘politics and religion’ page, ‘a Freemason is encouraged to do his duty first to his God (by whatever name he is known) through his faith and religious practice.’
The United Grand Lodge of England says: ‘Every Freemason embarks on his own journey of self-discovery when he enters the organisation’. On the first page of a downloadable PDF it says in capital letters: ‘Freemasonry does not discriminate on grounds of … religion’. No, but you must have one, any one. All are equally valid.
Royal Arch Apron and Sash
Royal Arch Freemasonry
It is well-known there are ‘degrees’ in Freemasonry. The first three degrees take a member up to ‘Master Mason’ in a masonic ‘Craft Lodge’. But beyond and inside the Lodge lies the Chapter, the ‘Royal Arch’, with a further four degrees: Mark Master, Past Master, Most Excellent Master, and Royal Arch Mason. Robert Stacey appears in the picture to be wearing Royal Arch Mason Regalia.
There are around 3,300 ‘Craft Masons’ in the Gloucestershire and Herefordshire Lodges alone. It appears some 800 of them have been ‘exalted’ to the entry degree in the Royal Arch. Often the Lodge with its three ‘craft’ Masonic degrees is known as ‘Blue Lodge Masonry’ from its regalia. The Royal Arch is the ‘Red Lodge’ (although it is a ‘Chapter’ not a ‘Lodge’).
Gloucestershire and Herefordshire Royal Arch Banner
Mr Stacey as ‘Ezra’ is keen to help ‘craft masons’ ‘discover the “genuine secrets of a master mason” (and) the companionship of a Royal Arch Chapter’. In fact, he is at the front of an initiative ‘to make all master masons … aware of where the secrets can be found and to introduce the Royal Arch.’
The Bristol magistrate is no less than his Royal Arch Chapter’s recruiting sergeant.
In his book ‘The Brotherhood’, Stephen Knight laid a lot of Freemasonry bare. Of great significance is what happened when the two rival bands of freemasons, the Antients and the Moderns, united in 1813. They became the ‘United Grand Lodge of England’. Knight is quoted on a webpage as saying:
‘The Union’s acceptance of Royal Arch workings is of great importance~ for it completed in all essentials the structure of Freemasonry as it exists today. Just as the Moderns de-Christianised the movement, so with the acceptance of Royal Arch the Antients succeeded in introducing the undeniably occult – notably the invocation of the supposedly rediscovered long-lost name of God.’
‘Inside the Brotherhood’ was a follow-up to ‘The Brotherhood’
There was a follow-up to Knight’s book, ‘Inside the Brotherhood’ by Martin Short. It led to a call from the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee in 1997 for police officers, magistrates, judges and crown officers to publicly register their Masonic membership. Amid obstruction from the Freemasons, including from the United Grand Lodge of England, the initiative petered out.
Indeed, how many other local judges, police officers and prosecutors, not to say council officials and elected members, are ‘brothers’ of Stacey? How many are in the Gloucestershire and Herefordshire Lodge or even the corresponding Royal Arch Chapter? We have found and listed a few names here. If any are recognisable as men in public office please let us know. But there will be many others.
Occult name of God
The long-lost name of God in Masonry is supposed to be Jah-Bul-On. It is regarded as so sacred no Mason is allowed to utter it alone. Like all aspects of Royal Arch Freemasonry it is syncretistic, occult and ridiculous. Jah stands for the Hebrew name of God, ‘Bul’ for the Canaanite deities ‘Baal’, while ‘On’ refers to the Egyptian ‘Osiris’. Being absurd, of course, does not stop Royal Arch from being quintessentially evil. We read this interesting detail:
‘In 1989 it was announced that JAHBULON would soon be dropped from England’s Royal Arch Ritual. ‘Grand Scribe Ezra’ Higham denied this was in response to recent Christian condemnations. Journalists later visiting Freemason’s Hall overheard chortles that junking JAHBULON had invalidated the book “Inside the Brotherhood’ even before it was published. However on 4th March Clifford Longley (The Times religious affairs correspondent) wrote that by replacing JAHBULON with JHVH – meaning Jahweh, the Jew’s Holy Name for God -Masonry may be falling in “deeper waters than the Grand Lodge has yet realised… While to invoke a false God is idolatry, to invoke the Name of the True God falsely is blasphemy”.’
The Royal Arch ‘Triple Tau’ device seen in the Apron above. It is actually a T over an H; Templum Hieroslymoe – “The Temple of Jerusalem,”
Blasphemous invocation of God
A lot of Masonic ritual is now ‘out there’ on the web and has not been denied by Masons. For example: ‘The Royal Arch degree catechism asks, “Are you a Royal Arch Mason?” To which the reply is made, “I – AM – THAT – I – AM.”‘
It goes without saying that to invoke the name of God from Exodus 3:14 is the height of blasphemy:
Exodus 3:13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? 14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Occult identification with Hiram
In another place, we read: ‘Fourth, continuing our tour of ritual, the third degree candidate plays the Masonic hero Hiram Abif (or Abiff) in a dramatic reenactment, wherein he identifies with Hiram in Hiram’s death, burial, and “raising.”‘ That is a complete rejection of the Lord Jesus. Every Christian identifies with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection. To invoke an employee of the king of Tyre who helped Solomon build the temple is a mockery. Furthermore, such a rite is deeply occult.
Freemason Square and Compasses. The compasses describe a circle, part of Freemasonry’s occult symbolism. The square indicates their obsession with building.
In fact, Masons have a special regard for Solomon, king Hiram and Hiram Abif, believing they possessed ancient secrets. Masonic documents show them to be obsessed by ‘secrets’ and believe they have some really important supernatural ones. As it happens, they describe themselves as ‘not a secret society but a society with secrets‘, as if that makes it better.
Incompatible with Christianity
Dr. D. R. Denman, an Anglican scholar, once himself a mason, shows how opposed Masonry is to Christianity. Everyone outside Masonry is held to be ‘in darkness’. But Jesus Christ said his followers are no longer in darkness, but in the light:
John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
Dr Denman wrote: “Christ and the Craft are fundamentally opposed to one another. Well I remember the wave of nausea as I stood an initiate outside the Masonic Lodge and heard myself referred to as a poor candidate in a state of darkness who by God’s help was seeking the light. God’s grace had already shone in my heart to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ: this I knew, and as I stood there listening to the first utterance of Masonic ritual I was aware of rampant evil.
“In vain, I sought for some acknowledgement of the Light of the World in the worship and ritual of the degrees that followed. There was nothing. The sense of blasphemy had become, by the middle of the Third Degree ceremony, so overwhelming that I was moved to protest and to leave the Temple, never to return.”
What is ‘the craft’ of masonry?
And what are those ‘secrets’? Freemason websites speak of their charitable work, of brotherly love, of moral improvement. They speak of their ‘Craft’. But they never say what the ‘Craft’ is that they are learning. It certainly isn’t stone-masonry. That may be the imagery, but Masonic lodges are not teaching their 1st Degree Apprentices how to cut a block of limestone or make a trefoil window out of it.
The Masonic Lodge of Education says: ‘Masonic education helps you attain a basic education in the craft.’ It states ‘much like King Solomon’s wisdom in biblical times of laying a strong foundation for his Temple (edifice); our full understanding of the Masonic Craft becomes necessary to fully embrace its rays of light.’ That sounds esoteric. The ‘Masonic Craft’ has clearly parted company with the building trade. But what has it become?
Occultism and New Age Mysticism?
The website admits: ‘your Lodge Library contains absolutely nothing really helpful with which to train a new brother to bring him up in the Craft.’ Which continues to beg the question: What is ‘the Craft’? No-one ever says. That may be because it is ‘secret’, and that itself is suspicious. Or it may be because it is occult, more to do with, dare we say it, witchcraft than construction. If not witchcraft, we are in the realm of arcane mysteries, with cross-over into New Age ‘revelation’.
It is always better to source from Masonic sites not those opposing it. One Grand Chapter site speaks of ‘ancient rituals’ and admits: ‘There is also an esoteric side of Ancient Craft Masonry’. It talks of symbols having ‘an exoteric meaning’ and ‘esoteric symbolism’. The site admits: ‘Some of the symbolism in Craft Masonry originates in the ancient mystery traditions of the world. Hermetism, Philosophy, Kabalistic, and Alchemical, for example, share many of the same symbols with Freemasonry.’
So Freemasonry encompasses (if the expression does not fall too awkwardly in the context of their well-known symbolism above) occultism, idolatry and blasphemy. Above all it denies Jesus Christ, the only one who can set them free.
Stacey should not have sat
Moreover, it was a Royal Arch Freemason, Robert James Stacey, ‘Grand Scribe Ezra,’ who made criminals of two Christian evangelists. He found them to be ‘abusive’ and ‘disorderly’. Their crime? To contend in public that only by the name of Jesus Christ could men be saved. Such a claim was a great personal challenge to him. Royal Arch Masonry claims itself to be the way, to have the truth and the light and to lead to abundant life.
Stacey should have recused himself over such a blatant conflict of interest. Ironically, a Christian District Judge, legally qualified, declined to hear the case for exactly that reason. But a Royal Arch Freemason, steeped in anti-Christian occultism, would be severely prejudiced against the Christian message. Christ confronts everything he believes in. It destroys all his ‘secrets’. How would he ever be capable of reaching an impartial verdict?
Two magistrates sat either side of him, Josephine Ramsden and Gerard McDermott. It is disappointing they went along with Stacey in the guilty verdicts despite the circumstances and clear case law presented.
A register of Freemasons in public life must surely now become compulsory.
The anti-transgender bus is currently impounded in Madrid
A bus with an anti-transgender message in Spanish has been banned from Barcelona and not allowed to move in Madrid.
And now a judge has supported Madrid’s capture of the bus, reports the BBC. Jose Juan Escalonilla said the bus could not move until the slogans, including “if you are born a man, you are a man”, were removed.
The story made Breitbart, after which the BBC and RT took it up. Secularists, of course, are incensed. RT’s story gives more detail and pictures some anti-Christian slogans photo-shopped onto the original bus image.
Crude cartoon
In fact the slogans go further than that. The bus was painted in response to an advertisement placed by ‘trans’ activists featuring a crude cartoon of two boys and two girls, all naked, in which one of each sex is pictured with the genitalia of the other. In a sop to normality, the ‘boy’ figures have short hair, the ‘girl’ ones long hair. The BBC link above reprints the cartoon.
It said: “Hay niñas con pene y niños con vulva. Así de sencillo”. ‘Hay’ is ‘there are’, ‘niñas’ is ‘girls’, ‘niños’ is ‘boys’ while ‘Así de sencillo’ means ‘It’s that simple’. You can work out the obvious words for genitals.
Anti-transgender response
But is it that simple? The bus disagreed: ‘Los niños tienen penes, las niñas tienen vulva, que no te engañen”. “Si naces hombre, eres hombre. Si eres mujer, seguirás siéndolo”.
To help you translate, ‘tienen’ is ‘they have’. ‘que no te engañen’ means ‘Don’t be fooled’. Breitbart helps us with the rest: ‘If you are born a man, you are a man. If you are a woman, you will still be one.’
The bus was impounded under municipal rules against outdoor advertising. The judge did not find the bus went as far as being a hate crime. However, he said the bus was an “act of contempt”. Moreover, it was meant to “injure” the dignity of people of a different sexual orientation, according to Spanish newspaper El Pais.
Furthermore, Señor Escalonilla said the bus may not move until the slogans are removed.
Make yourself heard
Ignacio Arsuaga
The bus belongs to a Catholic group, Hazte Oir, but it was funded anonymously. The group plans to take it on a nationwide tour of Spanish cities.
Ignacio Arsuaga, the president of Hazte Oir, which translates as “Make yourself heard”, argued the group had a right to protest against “laws of sexual indoctrination” and had the right to freedom of speech, says the BBC.
The group contend Madrid City Council’s “kidnap” of the bus was “clearly illegal”.
Mr Arsuaga claimed the slogan on the bus stated only “a fact of biology that is studied in schools”.
The Mayor of Barcelona said the controversial coach would not be welcome there. He wrote on Twitter: “In Barcelona there is no place for LGBT-phobic buses. We want our children to grow in freedom and without hatred.”
Of course, in the rarified atmosphere of gender identity, anti-transgender people speaking the truth have no defence against a charge of ‘hatred’.
Jackie Evancho struggled to find the bottom note in the Star Spangled Banner
Finally, at least to date, the girl who sang the US National Anthem at President Trump’s Inauguration has chipped in.
Just days ago, Mr Trump overturned Obama-era guidance allowing transgender students to use school ‘rest-rooms’ matching their gender identity. As a consequence, boys in frocks can no longer pop up in the girls’ toilets.
Here’s Jackie and her brotherAnd here they are again
In return, he might bring in a singing teacher to enlighten Miss Evancho on where to find a bottom A flat.
Take a stand
But seriously, as if singing within your range is not serious, we all, from the President down, need to take a stand.
We all need to say very clearly that no amount of hormone drugs and no grotesque surgical mutilation will ever stop a man being genetically a man and a woman remaining genetically a woman. After all, if you seriously and honestly believed you were Long John Silver, would you really expect doctors to cut off your leg and buy you a parrot? Medicine is given because someone is ill. Doctors should heal, not destroy. Of course ‘Trans’ people have issues, but they need help to accept their body at a psychological, emotional and dare we say spiritual level. Some may even need deliverance. But none needs the surgeon’s knife.
Welcome to the Post-Truth World
In the UK of course, the House of Commons started the rot in 2004. Regrettably, they passed the Gender Recognition Act in that fateful year. Under it, men and women can now go back and falsify their birth certificates.
As a result, Parliament legislated a lie. So welcome to the ‘post-truth’ world.
Pray for the truth to triumph. Pray for righteousness to prevail in a world parting company with reality. You could pray the bus is released and continues on its prophetic journey through Spain. Pray it wakes us all up and starts a movement. Above all, never forget always to refer to people by their God-given gender, never by their assumed one!
Psalm 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.
John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
2Cor 6:7 By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left…
2Peter 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
You are welcome to leave a comment, but please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Consequently, comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Dr Mark Porter, BMA Chairman, sorry, ‘Chair’, is responsible for its ‘pregnant man’ guide.
The BMA predicted the ‘pregnant man’ craze by issuing absurd advice to doctors last year banning the use of the term ‘expectant mother’ in favour of ‘pregnant person’ so as not to offend transsexuals.
The document is grindingly politically correct. Doctors, it says, should strive to be ‘gender-neutral’. A meeting has a ‘Chair’ not a ‘Chairman’. That one has whiskers on. So does “use the word ‘partner’ instead of ‘wife’ or ‘husband’.” But “‘parent’ instead of ‘Mum’ or ‘Dad’, and ‘child’ instead of ‘son’ or ‘daughter’?”
What if a woman has twins, one of each? With no access to ‘son’ and’daughter’ must doctors now refer to them as ‘Child A and Child B’? How will a parent cope with that?
The BMA veers off into the plainly fatuous. It seriously suggests to its 160,000 members: “You can also mix up the word order in common expressions, eg instead of saying, ‘men and women’, use ‘women and men’.” There! That will deal a blow to ‘patriarchy’.
Mind your pronouns!
The BMA is even worried by pronouns, previously the preserve of crazy university student unions. Doctors should ‘use the term preferred by the individual’ even if it flies in the face of reality. A ‘trans-female’, which it helpfully explains is ‘ie male to female’, should therefore be referred to as ‘She or her’ and never ‘He or his’.
Gender politics is all over our universities
Similarly, a ‘transmale, ie female to male’ should be ‘He or his’ but never ‘She or her’. Every UK newspaper slavishly follows that dictum already.
Nor should doctors ‘use phases that are reductive and overly-simplify a complex subject. A person’s sex is determined by a number of factors’, they claim. Doctors should not speak of someone as ‘Biologically’ or ‘Genetically male/female’ or ‘Born and (sic) man/woman’. Perish the thought that someone is actually male or female. Now, in the world of medicine, people are said to be ‘Assigned’ or ‘Designated male/female at birth’. If doctors have to worry about student politics will they have any time left to practice medicine?
Feminism runs riot
If it will come as no surprise that feminism runs riot in the embarrassing guide.
‘Gender inequality,’ it moans, ‘is reflected in traditional ideas about the roles of women and men. Though they have shifted over time, the assumptions and stereotypes that underpin those ideas are often deeply rooted.’ That’s because they are God-given.
If it goes on: ‘If it is common to assume a woman will have children, look after them and take a break from paid work or work part-time to accommodate the family. … However, such assumptions and stereotypes can and often do have the effect of seriously disadvantaging women.’ Only in the work place, silly. Not in the home. Stuck in a feminist mindset, the BMA misses the fundamental reality that women and men are not in competition. In the God-given institution of the family, a man and a woman work together for their mutual benefit. They divide up jobs according to aptitude. Watch my video on the ‘pay gap’!
‘A large majority of people that (sic) have been pregnant or have given birth identify as women.’ If it does not matter how people ‘identify’. Every person who has ever given birth has been a woman. But that is not good enough for the BMA:
“We can include intersex men and transmen who may get pregnant by saying ‘pregnant people’ instead of ‘expectant mothers’.”
Intersex pregnancy is very rare indeed.
Caster Semenya
Intersex is a rare condition, affecting at most 0.05% of the population. Those sadly affected have a mixture of male and female organs. The South African athlete Caster Semenya, for example, has external female genitalia but internal testes instead of a womb and ovaries. If it is consequently very rare indeed for someone intersex to conceive and carry a baby to term.
Intersex individuals should be approached with compassion and sensitivity. But that is not to say society should overturn reality. Caster Semenya, for example, is brimming with testosterone. He should not be competing in women’s races even though he has decided he ‘identifies as a woman’.
The overwhelming majority of hospitals, let alone doctors, will never see an intersex pregnancy.
‘Pregnant man’ is always a woman
The Sun newspaper has bought the rights to the story of Hayden Cross. It describes her as ‘the first British man to give birth’ The only flaw in the story is that Hayden Cross is genetically a woman. She has the full set of female chromosomes. Naturally (in every sense of the word), she has a fully-functioning womb and ovaries. She became pregnant by a sperm donor. That was a man.
The Sun absurdly refers to Hayden Cross as a ‘pregnant man’
She has postponed ‘gender reassignment’, which kicks off with massive testosterone hormone injections, to carry her baby.
I am ‘mis-gendering’ Hayden Cross, according to the BMA, but I do not care. The truth is: Hayden Cross is a woman. No amount of male hormone and no surgical mutilation will alter that plain genetic fact. She will never be a ‘dad’ as The Sun ridiculously describes her. She will always be her baby’s mother.
Speaking about the BMA guide and linking to Hayden Cross, even the Daily Mirror said: ‘Some 775,000 women give birth in Great Britain every year – and there are no other known cases of transgender people having babies.’
There is actually another woman, a mother of three, in the United States, going down the same path. Her name is Tracy LaGondino but she now styles herself Thomas Beatie. The Sun idiotically describes her as ‘the world’s first pregnant man’. Even the liberal Huffington Post is putting the expression ‘pregnant man’ in inverted commas.
So that’s one ‘pregnant man’ in the UK and one the US. The BMA is overturning reality and offending real mothers to solve a problem which is non-existent. The numbers are “vanishingly small,” as the person cited below put it.
Too much detail
‘Freddy’ with what appears to be a dog
If you do not like ‘too much detail’, skip to the next heading. The BBC interviewed another ‘trans-male’ woman. She is the self-styled ‘Freddy who has been on BBC4’s Woman’s Hour. ‘Freddy’ has a testosterone injection every twelve weeks. She has already had a mastectomy performed in the States. At the same time they gave her ‘a male, contoured chest’. How much that cost is not stated. Hayden Cross only got on with her pregnancy because the NHS would not pay to store her eggs.
‘Freddy’ would also like to be a ‘parent’. She objects to the term ‘mother’. The surgeons have not been let loose on her internal organs or genitalia, so to become pregnant she will just have to stop the testosterone injections, wait for her menstrual cycle to kick back in and hope she is still fertile. Stopping the testosterone, says the BBC, ‘ is risky for a trans man because it could lead to gender dysphoria’, which is a feeling of depression.
A post-truth world
If it was the Blair administration which started the rot. With the Gender Recognition Act 2004 Parliament legislated a lie. A majority of MPs and Peers voted to allow any individual to go back to his birth certificate and falsify it. (Yes, our masculine usage does include the feminine.) Then the Equality Act 2010 made transgenderism a ‘protected characteristic’ which had to be promoted by public authorities.
Forget post-Christian and post-modern. Our elite are now living in a post-truth world. In discussions about religion, it is common these days for people to talk about ‘my truth’ as opposed to ‘your truth’, let alone ‘the truth’.
Subjective truth does not actually work even in religion and doesn’t work in life and it certainly won’t work in a criminal court. If it is no use the burglar saying ‘his truth’ is that he was in the pub and that his fingerprints being all over the house he has broken into are ‘the forensic peoples’ truth.’ There is an objective truth the court has to agree upon.
It is the same in the Courts of Heaven. And as we are made in the image of God, playing fast and loose with the truth does not sit well with us either.
The BMA can pontificate all it likes, but there will only ever be pregnant mothers.
Find out more about Christian Voice and how to stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Three children taken into care by Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council on the strength of a false allegation of sexual abuse were returned home yesterday.
A High Court hearing later this month will rubber-stamp the decision.
This wonderful result is a massive answer to the prayers of our members.
We have been following and reporting on the case all through this year, and the Lord has used our intervention finally to bring justice.
When this author turned up to cover the case in the family court in February of this year, the judge and the advocates ran around like scalded cats. The judge granted the local authority an astonishing six-week adjournment to consider their position in the light of a journalist turning up. It was that initial six-week delay for Walsall to consider its position that led inexorably to the criminal case finally catching up with the civil case and justice being done. Delay followed delay as the hand of the Lord was heavily on the whole matter.
It is humbling to realise that if I had not turned up that day an adoption order for the children would have been made earlier this year. But my intervention was merely one of the things the Lord used.
So all praise and glory goes to him. Join us in thanksgiving to our mighty God!
Isaiah 56:1 Thus saith the LORD, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Alun Thomas, who joined British Transport Police from South Wales Police in January 2015 and was recently promoted from Chief Superintendent to Temporary Assistant Chief Constable, is responsible for what is alleged to be a miscarriage of justice in a misconduct hearing he chaired.
British Transport Police have been accused of a gross miscarriage of justice in a misconduct hearing.
Temporary Assistant Chief Constable Alun Thomas chaired a tribunal which dismissed an officer whose children were wrongly taken into care last year after their eldest son made a false allegation of abuse against him and his wife.
But the father, who was serving as PC4528, as we shall refer to him below, has been dismissed from the British Transport Police.
A misconduct hearing was held in July and the written decision was passed by the father to this ministry. He was accused of bringing the British Transport Police into disrepute.
But it is the actual ruling and the unjust way in which the hearing was conducted which threatens to demean the force in the public eye.
RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights says: ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.’ Natural justice and Biblical precedent agree.
Contrary to these provisions:
1 Temporary Assistant Chief Constable Alun Thomas and his tribunal decided the care order made by Judge Diane Redgrave in the family court amounted to ‘discreditable conduct’ on the part of PC4528.
2 The PC’s acquittal on abuse charges in the criminal court was not taken into account, or even referred to,
3 The tribunal decided to call no direct evidence of the alleged abuse whatsoever,
(Remember Judge Redgrave even advised the parents to plead guilty in the criminal court. Imagine the consequences for the father had they taken that shocking advice.)
5 PC4528 was not allowed to call any witnesses in his defence or cross-examine those who alleged the abuse – which is now only the social workers, his children having strongly withdrawn their allegations,
6 He says he was not allowed to defend himself properly or speak for more than five minutes in his defence.
7 Alun Thomas and his Tribunal absurdly held that even though the care order was made in the family court to which members of the public are not admitted, and neither the officer nor his wife can be named in public, the officer’s alleged conduct discredited BTP in the eyes of the public because the social worker and children’s guardian who were present in the family court are members of the public.
Paul Crowther, Chief Constable of British Transport Police, is Alun Thomas’s boss.
APPEAL DATE AWAITED
PC4528 has appealed the decision and is awaiting a date for the appeal to be heard.
READ: Deut 19:8; Prov 31:8-9; Isa 1:17; Micah 6:8; John 7:51; Acts 16:20-29; Rev 20:4
PRAY: For justice to sweep like a river through this appalling case. Pray for the police to uphold the same standards of honesty and fairness which they expect from the public at large. Pray for misconduct tribunals to be conducted justly and not like a kangaroo court. Is anti-Christian prejudice at the root of it? Or does the officer’s face just not fit? Should there be an investigation into whether the conduct of Alun Thomas in chairing the tribunal has itself discredited the police?
Watch our video about the case in which the parents tell their harrowing story:
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
A senior family court judge told a court last Friday (9th September 2016) that a ‘Not Guilty’ verdict in the criminal court did not mean the defendants were innocent.
Judge Rosalind Bush said a ‘Not Guilty’ verdict merely meant the jury had not been sure ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ the defendants actually did it.
The BBC were ‘at fault’ for perpetuating the misunderstanding that people found not guilty were innocent, she continued.
Her Honour cited the case of O J Simpson in support. He was, she said, found not guilty in the criminal court but culpable in the civil court.
THE O J SIMPSON CASE
O. J. Simpson
In 1994 O.J. Simpson was apprehended after a famous ‘low-speed’ car chase and charged with the deaths of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown-Simpson, and her friend Ron Goldman. He was found not guilty in 1995 after his expensive high-profile defence team suggested DNA samples had been mishandled. But he was subsequently found ‘responsible’ for the deaths when the Brown and Goldman families sued in the civil court. They were awarded $35million in damages.
Simpson already had a criminal record. Prior to the murders, he had pleaded no contest to spousal abuse in 1989. Subsequently, in 2007, he was convicted of using a deadly weapon to commit kidnapping, burglary and armed robbery, and sentenced to 33 years in prison, where he remains.
This ministry has not been able to contact the defendants in the case to which Her Honour was referring, young men of good character who have never been in trouble with the police, to ask their reaction to being compared to O.J. Simpson.
CHILDREN TAKEN INTO CARE
Judge Bush has presided in the past over criminal cases. She made her comments however in the family court, in a case in which a family’s youngest children were taken into care last year on a social worker’s description of the evidence of a seven-year-old girl that no fewer than four of the family’s siblings had separately and systematically sexually abused her over a period of two years. The local authority, Walsall Council, have applied to have the children adopted.
The girl’s evidence also led to criminal charges against the family’s two oldest sons. Their trial ended in acquittals a month ago when a jury returned not guilty verdicts on no fewer than seven charges, one charge was struck out by the trial judge, His Honour Judge John Wait, and three other charges were abandoned by the prosecution. The young men walked free from court. But, said Judge Bush, that proved nothing in the family court.
Nobody from Walsall Council found time to attend the trial. The Council’s legal department is only now trying to gain access to the police evidence.
EVIDENCE SELF-CONTRADICTORY
Even before the jury heard any evidence, charges of rape, which had been hanging over the defendants for months, were withdrawn from the charge sheet on the opening day. Judge Wait told Paul Spratt, prosecuting, that the evidence simply did not support those charges.
A reasonable man might have thought the Crown Prosecution Service would have spotted that already, but they had not and Mr Spratt was left with no option but to withdraw the charges.
Even then, evidence from prosecution witnesses revealed confusion in the case. Her mother told the court her daughter said she had been raped. Later she told the police she hadn’t. Her daughter, who admitted to watching pornography with an older girl, ‘L’, even changed her story during police interviews.
On one occasion, she described a depraved act which she said was carried out on her. Later, being asked to confirm it, she denied it and said she saw it on a video at L’s house.
CRIMINAL TRIAL ACQUITTAL WILL NOT AFFECT FAMILY PROCEEDINGS
The parents of the accused boys say they were bullied in the family court, even by their own advocates, into admitting that sexual abuse ‘could have happened’ in their home. They say a psychologist, one Dr Helen Rodwell of Jigsaw Psychology, commissioned by Walsall to report on them, told them she could only help them if they admitted at the very least that the allegations could be true.
But called to the stand as defence witnesses in their sons’ criminal trial, both described to the court how the alleged abuse not only did not happen but could not have happened.
On Friday, the mother and father dramatically repeated this robust stance, this time in the family court, contradicting the earlier statements they say they were pressurised into. No abuse happened, they said. Although Judge Bush said she could have held them to their previous position, she allowed the retraction. That meant the case now goes back to square one, with a new ‘fact-finding’ exercise set in motion.
But Judge Bush repeated that allegations made in relation to behaviour were not disposed of in the family court by an acquittal in the crown court. The outcome of the criminal trial would not affect the current family proceedings – even though both involve the same parties and the same evidence.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY
The comments of Judge Bush seem to indicate a system of ‘double jeopardy’ is in place in our law. A person acquitted in the Crown Court, walking free in the immortal words ‘without a stain on your character’, can be hauled before the family court and told on ‘the balance of probabilities’ that they only got away with it in the criminal court and they really did it after all.
Judge Rosalind Bush is highly experienced and respected. Nevertheless, if another family court judge, sitting alone without colleagues, let alone a jury, decides that abuse has occurred on the lower ‘civil court’ standard of evidence, children could be unjustly torn from their family and could be adopted against theirs and their parents’ will. Parents, older brothers, even children, will be tarred with the label of ‘child sex abuser’ on evidence which would never stand up in a criminal trial. Children could be unjustly subjected to the emotional harm of the care system, with all its negative outcomes.
Whether such a system, starkly revealed by Her Honour’s comments, accords with basic principles of justice is something the British public and those who legislate on their behalf might address.
They may take the view that the ‘balance of probabilities’ is a very good standard for deciding whether a fence has been built this side or that side of a property boundary. The standard has indeed been upheld in the family court after a number of cases in the Supreme Court (and previously the House of Lords). But the debate will no doubt continue over whether it Is still appropriate where criminal conduct is alleged and the most draconian penalties of family separation may be imposed on parents and children.
BIBLICAL POSTSCRIPT
Christian theology strongly reminds us we are all guilty before the throne of grace:
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Equally, in a court of law, and in respect of a particular matter, a person can actually be innocent!
Exodus 23:7 Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked.
Society at large and judges in particular have an immense responsibility to dispense justice according to the precepts of God so that the guilty are punished and the innocent acquitted. In addition, people in power must not oppress those below them:
Jeremiah 22:3 Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.
So please pray for all judges and remember in particular to lift up Judge Rosalind Bush. Pray also for the advocates in the case to remember they are to serve the cause of justice. Pray for the social workers to be people of truth. Pray for the family to stay strong in their Christian faith, believing that justice will be done.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Two brothers accused of sexual abuse against a small girl were acquitted at Wolverhampton Crown Court after not-guilty verdicts were entered this afternoon.
One count of sexual abuse was scrubbed on the orders of the judge, and the jury delivered not guilty verdicts on a further seven. Three others were withdrawn by the prosecution.
The acquittals mark over a year of anguish for the family. The girl, now eight, had been staying with them while her father, estranged from her mother, was working night-shifts.
She made her accusations in June 2015 after her father found an obscene video she made of herself.
The court heard she had been watching pornography next door with a twelve-year-old girl, who had touched her sexually. But it was the boys she was staying with she accused.
The family’s younger children were taken into care as a result of the accusations, so the action now shifts back to the family court.
Next month the local authority will continue its quest to have the younger children adopted. It is true their case has been damaged by the acquittal of the older brothers.
But the family court operates to lower standards of evidence than the crown court. Instead of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, itself a long way short of justice as God demands it, the civil court standard of ‘balance of probabilities’ applies, despite the fact that the sanctions available to the family court – stripping parents of their children, depriving children of a family – are draconian.
Previous reports of the trial (contains challenging material):
Psalm 89:14 Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne: mercy and truth shall go before thy face. 15 Blessed is the people that know the joyful sound: they shall walk, O LORD, in the light of thy countenance. 16 In thy name shall they rejoice all the day: and in thy righteousness shall they be exalted. 17 For thou art the glory of their strength: and in thy favour our horn shall be exalted. 18 For the LORD is our defence; and the Holy One of Israel is our king.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
The mother of two young Christian men accused of sexual assault against an eight-year-old girl told a court yesterday that nothing would happen in her home without her knowledge.
ALLEGATIONS OF RAPE
The girl alleges she was assaulted, indeed that she was raped in every possible way, by both defendants and their two younger siblings over a period of two years. This was a time, Wolverhampton Crown Court has heard, when the girl’s parents had split up. Her father had asked his cousin, the boys’ father, for child care for his daughter while he worked night shifts. That was how she came to be in the family’s home.
The girl first made her allegations when her mother confronted her about an obscene video she had made of herself. One of the defendants had caused her to do it, she said. Judge John Wait listened as the mother said her daughter said she was raped by the defendant. In a subsequent police interview, she categorically denied anyone else had been involved. But in a further police interview, she identified his older brother and then two younger siblings as assailants as well. In their statements, all denied any involvement.
MOTHER WOULD HEAR EVERY NOISE IN THE HOUSE
In court, under cross-examination, both young men continued to deny there had been any contact of a sexual nature between them and the girl, that she had ever watched anything on their mobile phones, that they had ever been alone with her let alone that she had been in their bedrooms with them, as she alleged.
Their father in his evidence spoke of ground rules in the house which said the girl was never to go into boys’ bedrooms in their home.
Their mother said that although one of the boys might run a bath for the girl, she would always undress and take her bath alone. She said she would hear every noise in the house, and would be aware of movements such as people going to the toilet, even when asleep. The girl slept in their bedroom. When the family moved to a bigger house, she slept in a bedroom with their four-year-old.
GIRL HAD WATCHED PORNOGRAPHY WITH FRIEND
It emerged earlier that a somewhat older female friend, connected with the girl’s mother, had shown pornography to the girl. Astonishingly, this older girl was never interviewed by the police nor her vital evidence presented in court.
Late in the day, one of the charges of sexual assault was dramatically dropped against the older defendant after the prosecution admitted the girl had made the allegation in one part of her evidence and then denied it in another.
At the start of the case, a doctor’s examination had found her hymen intact and no evidence of the systematic penetration she alleged had happened over the course of two years. This resulted in charges of rape and buggery being dropped on the opening day of the trial.
Forensic evidence was inconclusive. Forensic Scientist Mary Carr told the court in a statement her ‘scientific findings do not assist in to determining whether or not (one of the defendants) engaged in sexual activity with (the girl)’.
The evidence of an expert child psychologist obtained by the defence was not admitted by Judge Wait as he said it would cloud the minds of the jury of five men and seven women.
JUSTICE ACCORDING TO LAWS OF GOD
So the case will come down to her word against his – or theirs. That is not how justice is supposed to operate according to the laws of God:
Deuteronomy 19:15 One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
Whether our lower standard of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ is met will be decided by the jury. They will hear summing-up statements from prosecutor Paul Spratt and defence barristers Michael Edmonds and Victoria Meads on Monday morning before retiring to consider their verdict.
We are not allowed to identify the girl accuser in this case. We have chosen not to identify the defendants for reasons of equity and fairness.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
A case in which two young men have been accused of horrific sexual offences has raised questions about how the police and prosecution operate and how the courts should treat evidence from a child.
FAMILY BREAKDOWN
Wolverhampton Crown Court heard today that the child, an eight-year-old girl, had been staying with relatives. Her father was estranged from her mother.
She was distressed about the separation and wanted them to be reconciled. Her mother was working away and the father had custody. The nature of his work involved night shifts.
On such days as he had night shifts over a period of two years he had arranged for his daughter, the couple’s only child, to stay with his cousin, his cousin’s wife and his family. The family consisted of boys, although a half-sister was living nearby and stayed from time to time.
GIRL MADE SEXUAL VIDEO
His Honour Judge John Wait listened while the girl’s father said that in June 2015 he had found a video which his daughter had made of herself dancing naked in his sitting room and drawing attention to her private parts. He had told his estranged wife about the matter.
The court then heard the girl’s mother say she collected her daughter from school a fortnight later in June 2015. The mother picking her up was a rare occasion. She confronted her daughter with the information about the video. The girl immediately blamed one of the boys she was staying with. He had, she told her mother, put his ‘nunu’ into her ‘nunu.’ It had hurt, she said. Her account became worse. He had put it into her mouth and into her bottom. ‘White stuff’ had come out of it, the girl’s mother reported she said. She had immediately taken her daughter to a drop-in centre and from there to the hospital. At the hospital she was examined by a doctor and the police were called.
DISCREPANCIES IN EVIDENCE
The police woman took the witness stand. She had filled out a Rape And Serious Sexual Assault (RASSO) form. The form showed that when she asked the girl if any of the other brothers were involved, she said categorically ‘No’.
But in a filmed interview, shown earlier today to the jury, the girl said the boy’s older brother had done things to her and to his half-sister. He had lifted up her dress of the latter and put his hands on her thigh. This she had not reported to her mother in the car. In addition, the first boy only put his ‘nunu’ ‘on’ hers, not in it.
As the film progressed, the prosecutor suddenly stopped it and the jury were sent out. In their absence, he explained to the judge the film should have been edited to take out material which was ‘not relevant’.
CHARGES REDUCED – OTHERS DROPPED
Christian Voice understands that only the day before, charges of rape against the two brothers had been dropped and replaced by charges of sexual assault. This happened after the judge told the prosecution that medical evidence could not support the graver charges. So the parts of the video in which the girl alleged penetration were supposed to have been edited out, but stayed in.
As a result of the way the prosecution seemed to be making it up as they went along, the jury spent much of the day walking to and from the jury room to their court benches. What they made of the girl’s mother repeating rape and sodomy allegations which were not now on the charge sheet will remain with the seven women and five men, good and true.
This ministry also understands that the girl also expanded her original allegations to encompass younger siblings of the family. They were interviewed and arrested and only after some time were they told charges would not be preferred against them.
CHILD NOT REALLY CROSS-EXAMINED
The girl was cross-examined by video link to a room in the court building in which she was sat with a court official. She came across as a bubbly and friendly child. But the cross-examination was less than robust on orders of the judge following much case law on this subject. A child cannot be subjected to the rigorous to-and-fro which would normally ensue. All the questions were given to this particular child in advance and after agreement with a court intermediary.
Why had she first said clearly that only one brother was involved and then expanded her allegation to four? Why had she alleged penetration and then back-tracked from that? Why had she recorded a video in which she was dancing naked and suggestively? What did she really think about her parents’ separation? These questions were never asked.
If a child cannot be closely cross-examined and without notice of the questions, how much is their evidence actually worth? Everyone wants to believe a child, but they can be mistaken, they can make things up, they can exist in a fantasy world, they can even tell lies, just as much as any adult.
ALL ALLEGATIONS DENIED
A transcript of an interview with the originally-accused boy was then read out as a dialogue with the prosecutor asking the original questions and a woman police officer replying as the accused. In the interview he denied all the allegations against him.
Out went the jury again as Judge Wait complained to the advocates about police officers putting themselves across as experts and drew attention to the ‘in’ versus ‘on’ discrepancy. ‘Too much material has gone before this jury which should not have done,’ he said.
(Update 22nd November 2016: At the latest hearing yesterday, instead of agreeing to a plan to return the children forthwith, the local authority opposed it. There will now be a contested hearing in early March 2017. So the injustice and the emotional harm being done to the children by Bexley continues, at least until then.)
In an astonishing development, a London Borough Council has told four children unjustly taken into care that they are opposing their parents’ court application to have them returned.
The news, delivered by a Bexley Council social worker last month, resulted in the couple’s eldest daughter trying to commit suicide.
The case is due to be heard on Friday 24th June 2016 at Bromley County Court.
CHRISTMAS RUINED BY SOCIAL SERVICES
The distressing case of how these children came to be in care was the subject of a video we published on YouTube on Christmas Day 2015, entitled Christmas Ruined by Social Services. To date the video (linked above) has had over 93,000 views. It is the second-most-viewed UK YouTube video about injustice by social services endorsed by the family courts.
The family’s nightmare started when their eldest boy, in his mid-teens, ran off after being caught out in a lie about his whereabouts.
Upon being picked up by the police, he reported his parents for child cruelty. All four children were instantly taken into care and the parents were charged and sent to the Crown Court. The only corroborating evidence was that of a doctor who saw a photo of a mark on the eldest boy’s body and concluded it could have been made by a metal implement. He never examined the boy himself, and none of the other children made any similar accusation. The police found nothing resembling such an alleged item in the family’s home.
PLEAD GUILTY, SAID JUDGE
Bexley social worker Judy Simon even contacted the mother’s place of work, a care home, resulting in her being laid off, and the father’s employers, British Transport Police. He was laid off on full pay and was later dismissed in another miscarriage of justice. He is appealing that dismissal.
Judge Diane Redgrave sitting in Bromley Family Court gave the astonishing advice to the parents to plead guilty in the Crown Court. She said this would help them have their children returned. The system, it appears, cannot cope with parents who are innocent. If they admit guilt, ‘experts’ can ‘work’ with them to ensure their parenting lines up with white middle-class prejudices, which crucially, and in flat contradiction to the law of the land, insist on no forms of physical chastisement whatever.
But these parents had not done what was alleged, and on the eve of the Crown Court case, their eldest son admitted he had made it all up. Despite the social worker screaming at him to attend court, he refused to go. In July 2015 his parents were duly acquitted. Lest anyone be in any doubt of what this means, it means they were found not guilty and left the court without a stain on their character.
BEXLEY SHOULD HAVE APOLOGISED
A reasonable man would expect two things to happen. Firstly, he would expect Bexley’s Judy Simon to contact both parents’ place of work at once to tell them all suspicion was lifted.
Secondly, he would expect an apologetic Bexley immediately to reunite the children with their parents. All the children have told the Children’s Guardian they want to return home.
But none of that occurred. Instead, Bexley’s head of child protection, Jacqui Tiotto, threatened this author with contempt of court and told him it was up to the parents to make an application to the court.
That they have now done, but Bexley Social Workers are unaccountably sticking to their line and refusing to let the children go. Such callousness by a public authority resulting in continuing serious emotional harm to the children is nothing short of a national disgrace.
READ: Gen 1:28; Psalm 127:3-5, 128:6; Mal 4:6. PRAY: That the children are returned, the father reinstated and that the mother gets her job back. Thank God that we have been able to help the parents by letting them tell their story. Pray now for a positive outcome to the hearing on Friday 24th June. WATCH: The video: https://youtu.be/CaBczpK7HOM WRITE or Email The Mayor of the London Borough of Bexley, Councillor Sybil Camsey, Civic Offices, 2 Watling Street, Bexleyheath, Kent, DA6 7AT. Phone 020 3045 5280. Email: councillor.sybil.camsey@bexley.gov.uk Stress that Mr & Mrs M have done nothing wrong; they were acquitted last July in the Crown Court. Ask her why Bexley did not return their children last July? Why they did not immediately inform Mr & Mrs M’s places of work that there is not a stain on their character? Ask what possible reason there can be for Bexley still to be causing harm to the children by opposing their return.
Press Release from Christian Voice – Immediate: 12.20 hrs 20th January 2016
The Head of Children’s Services at a local authority has threatened a journalist over a video claiming her department ‘visited injustice’ on a family in her borough.
Jacky Tiotto, Head of Children’s Services at the London Borough of Bexley, has written to Stephen Green of Christian Voice demanding he take down a YouTube video in which he interviewed the parents of four children taken by Bexley and kept in care.
Ms Tiotto says a section in which the parents talk about advice given to them by a family court judge to plead guilty to child abuse in the Crown Court is a contempt of court. So, she says, are three other occasions where the parents say judges and social workers would not listen to the children.
The parents were actually charged by police with abuse following a foolish and false allegation from the eldest son. They were acquitted in July 2015 in the Crown Court when their son vehemently retracted his allegation.
A section in which the parents claim the social worker in the case acted out of religious hatred escapes Ms Tiotto’s wrath.
Despite neither the case nor the children and not even the parents being identified, and despite contesting the accuracy of the information in the video, the highly-paid Children’s Services boss claims Green is contravening Section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960. This prohibits ‘publication of information relating to proceedings before any court sitting in private’ under the Children Act 1989.
Stephen Green, said today, ‘Rather then waste her precious time and council tax on frivolous legal action, Jacky Tiotto should be calling her staff to account over this case and reuniting this family.
‘A section in her letter where she says it is up to the parents to make a court application for return of their children, rather than for Bexley to do the decent and honourable thing and return them voluntarily, displays a callous disregard for justice, for ordinary families and for the emotional harm being done to these children on her watch.
‘In addition, the parents have been punished for doing nothing wrong. Other parents are now contacting me and it seems this case is by no means unique.
‘Jacky Tiotto is responsible for a massive, continuing injustice and it is obviously embarrassing to her and Bexley’s administration that it has come to light.
‘I’ll take legal advice, but my inclination is not to be deterred from giving the victims of injustice a voice by threats from uncaring bureaucrats’.
ENDS
For further information, phone Stephen Green on 07931 490050.