Tuesday, 25 August 2009

#SADS013 - Added to The Sunday Telegraph today

Added to The Sunday Telegraph today:


thanks again to the Sunday Telegraph and Booker in particular for their valued and well placed tennacity in this case.

It may interest some that despite Mr. Hendre (MP)'s involvement, that the case was brought to The PM's attention in PMQs several weeks ago and that I have known this couple ever since they first contacted me for help some 2 years ago - NO ONE seems able to obtain honest, straight, simple answers as to WHY was the child effectively kidnapped.

Are East Sussex SS and the Family Court, like the police, no longer answerable to either our elected politicians nor even our Prime Minister?

I was asked by another MP involved to take care NOT to upset the Courts and to refrain from drawing attention to the corruption of The EU 'As our best chance of cleaning up our corrupt system was via Europe'.

This an MP who draws a salary at Westminster wishes to use The Human Rights Courts
to 'clean up Britain' - was that not what MPs used to be paid for?
Further there is some bizarre belief that the corrupt and centralised EU might administer some sort of Justice!

Firstly the EU doesn't 'do' Justice - it doesn't even do Democracy - Note Ireland where they democratically voted against Lisbon as did France and Holland but they are being forced to vote again to get it right!

Yet the killings, intimidation, murders and vote rigging in Afghanistan is pronounced acceptable!

Do NOT look to The EU for Justice, save in its abuse!

May I also remind the MP in question that the European Courts of Human Rights are neither under the control of nor any part of the corrupt EU!

It may further horrify the reader that this morning the Mother in question phoned me to tell me that she was being denied her Court approved visitation.

One can only assume as an act of punishment for the publicity!

Told that her 7 year old who had NEVER refused to see them and who had been whispering please could she have their phone number at the last meeting - the little girl stolen from her parents without even trumpped up cause when she was only 5 at the last meeting said she didn't care if she was adopted as she would just run away and find her way home!

ALLEGEDLY so say the SS had declined to see her parents!!

Advised that there was a letter relevant The Father decided to visit the SS offices to collect the letter, only to find there was no letter but The Guardian, the SS, etc. etc. were all in a meeting when he was told they were not in the building - this he ascertained from the car number plates in the car park.

It does look as if East Sussex are only likely not to lie when in their coffins - may I submit it is time to bury this clearly corrupt organisation and release the children they have stolen - read the case of Legoman whom it seems East Sussex swore on a stack of bibles had deliberately broken his own childs leg, leading to all three of his children being taken prisoner by the SS - it transpires now, long after the event that when investigated by an INDEPENDENT DOCTOR his baby has a bone disease!

East Sussex is still hanging onto his children, no doubt having frantic meetings to dream up further cover stories.

The SS and the State would seem to be some of the worst parents and guardians on record - one need only consider the fact that so many seem to consider the buggery and rape of children in their care to be a perk of the job - read Waterhouse 'Lost In Care' The report of 'Kincorra Boys School' the abuses at QVS in Dunblane, New Labour's buddy on Hackney Council Mark trotter, Tony Blair's constituency agent (Trotter as head of children's services is now dead of AIDS having been sent to prison for servicing too many children!) (Blair's agent is in prison for the rape and sodomy of boys and girls in his care) - the list is long!

However consider TODAY - when 80% of the British born who are in prison were at some stage or throughout childhood in the care of Social Services and over 40% of under age prostitutes are currently in care!

Is it that in the gross cases such children with broken limbs, haunted looks, mal nourished and covered in cigarette burns are hard to place for adoption whilst pleasant cared for children are more easily and more profitably fitted in the quota?
Consider the couple in Plymouth who have had 6 cared for children stolen including from the delivery room - and despite some 90 hearings no reason has been clearly given yet the easier ones have been forced into adoption against the parents will and with no clear reason show!

The entire incident stems from asking for a second opinion before bone marrow tests were done on their eldest! It transpired that the Doctor was a regular witness for the SS and he took umbrage and took ALL the children into care and forced the child to have the test!!

She was found NOT to have any bone marrow defect, merely a condition the parents told him before hand which was familial!

They are still fighting for Justice for their children.

We try to provide self help at:

http://StolenKids-Bloggers.blogspot.com but for us it is early days - one MP we deal with has almost 600 similar cases, of relatively different strength but it is rare that the SS and the courts acting in shameful secrecy prove the best solution.

It is time not just to draw back the curtain on this secrecy but to throw open the windows to let in fresh air and the light of truth to ALL SS and Family Court cases.

Only two thing outside of marriage require closed doors and secrecy and they are pornography and pederasty and what is happening with the Family Courts particularly as identified in East Sussex is both obscene and an abuse of children!

IF you need help just visit the blog!

Greg L-W.

To see the full article CLICK HERE

Many other excellent comments by Ian Josephs and others.

Sunday, 23 August 2009

SADS012 - S.Tel. - 23-Aug-2009 - Christopher BOOKER

Sunday Telegraph - 23-Aug-2009 - Christopher BOOKER

'Secret agenda to score adoptions'

Lord Justice Wall
described East Sussex's behaviour as 'disgraceful?

Photo: UPPA

A judge has condemned the "disgraceful" conduct of social workers over an adoption case, says Christopher Booker.

By Christopher Booker
22 Aug 2009

The revealing of the names of those responsible for the killing of Baby P reminded us yet again of the failure of Haringey social workers to avert the child's death. What a shocking contrast this provides to the behaviour of East Sussex social workers in the case I reported a month ago, which led to their seizure and putting out for adoption of a girl, now seven years old, from a respectable middle-class home, to the anguish of both her parents and the little girl herself.

The chief reason offered by the social workers for abducting the girl two years ago was that her home had been left in an appalling mess after a raid by RSPCA officials and 18 policemen. They ransacked the premises looking for non-existent guns, and released into the house a pack of dogs kept in kennels outside by her father, a professional dog-breeder. The parents were arrested for protesting at what was happening (the mother suffering a miscarriage while in police custody) and the social workers were summoned to remove their daughter.

Everything about this case is bizarre, not least the apparent complicity of social workers, lawyers and the courts in determining that the child should not be returned to her parents, as she wishes, but rather, after two years in foster care, sent for adoption.

I have now been able to read through many papers relating to the case, including the judgments resulting from the 74 hearings in which the parents attempted to get their daughter back. What stands out is the startling contrast between the two totally different versions of the case given by the social workers and the courts on one hand and, on the other, that presented by the parents themselves and by many who knew them. The latter include their GP, who recently wrote that he had never "encountered such a case of appalling injustice".

The most impressive document was a report by an independent social worker, based on many interviews with those involved, including the child herself and the chief social worker in charge of her. In measured terms, this made mincemeat of the council's case. Nothing about it is more suspicious than the contrast between descriptions of the "clean and tidy" home reported by those who knew the family well and the mess allegedly found by the policemen who burst into it mob-handed on the day in question.

The report found an equally glaring contrast between the social workers' insistence that the child was quite happy to have been removed from her parents, and the abundant evidence, observed at first-hand, that the little girl had an extremely good relationship with her parents and wants nothing more than to be reunited with them. The courts seem to have totally ignored this report, whose author last month expressed astonishment that the child had not been returned home.

What has also come to light is a remarkable judgment by Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Wall in the Appeal Court last year, in another case which also involved the apparently ruthless determination of East Sussex social workers to send a child for adoption. The judges were fiercely critical. The social workers' conduct, said Lord Justice Thorpe, could only reinforce the suspicions of those who believe "councils have a secret agenda to establish a high score of children they have placed for adoption".

Lord Justice Wall described East Sussex's conduct as "disgraceful – not a word I use lightly" and also as "about the worst I have ever encountered in a career now spanning nearly 40 years". "The social workers in question," he said, appeared "not only to have been inadequately managed, they do not appear to have been properly trained". As for the barrister who represented East Sussex (and who also appeared in most of the hearings in the "dog-breeder" case), Lord Justice Wall said "her attitude came across, to me at least, as – in effect – so what?" She had demonstrated, he said, "profound misunderstanding" of the council's legal position vis à vis adoption. He ordered his comments to be circulated to family courts and adoption agencies across the land.

Though the circumstances are different, anyone reading the documents could not fail to be struck by how many of the judges' comments are relevant to the case I reported. The same council's social workers have again pushed for a child to be adopted in a way which prompts the family's GP to say "the destruction of this once happy family is, in my opinion, evil". And that barrister who was involved in both cases is now – a family court judge.

To view the original article CLICK HERE

"Nothing about it is more suspicious than the contrast between descriptions of the "clean and tidy" home reported by those who knew the family well and the mess allegedly found by the policemen who burst into it mob-handed on the day in question."

Curiously, in the Baby Peter case, the social workers failed to consider the squalid state of the household, which included human and dog feces and rotting animal residue, as to do so would apparently have been considered "judgemental".
on August 22, 2009
at 10:38 PM

So the barrister who was condemned by the judge is now a judge herself. I doubt Cameron is interested in doing anything, but we need a clear out of these judges. The law already provides a mechanism: impeachment at the bar of the house of Lords. Why not? Our Common Law is a dead letter without it.
on August 22, 2009
at 10:29 PM

"Destroy the family and you destroy society." V.I. Lenin taught us that pearl of wisdom, and Social Services, local councils and by extension HMG have learned the lesson well.
All part of the plan, British pals. Britain�s fast becoming a police state. So hate it and leave it, while you still can.
Jack, Japan Alps.

on August 22, 2009
at 10:29 PM

I have been representing Parents that could easily had their Children removed, Siblings all to be split up, and put into Foster Care, all in the best interests of the Children.
Mother, has been diagnosed with MSBP, a theory that was discredited over ten years ago, a so called medical expert, that is not qualified to make that kind of diagnosis.
The Guardian stated that Mothers personality disorder was having a detrimental effect on the Children.
At Court the Judge, on advice of the Guardian, ordered the Parents to hand over their passports to the Court and the holiday of a lifetime, they had booked over a year ago, at a cost of �3000, would have to be cancelled, on the fear that they would skip the Country.
They were more or less placed on house arrest until an emergency
Family Court hearing last week, they had twice daily visits from Social Workers.
This lovely Family have only managed to keep their Children at home due to the incredible skills of a Children's Panel Solicitor, which we use on a regular basis.
A draft written agreement was drawn up, for the Parents to sign and some of the clauses written into this document was a violation of civil liberties and Human Rights, one clause was that the Local Authority could take pictures of every room in the house, including the loft and that the Parents would have to get permission from Social Workers, to leave their house, for more than a few hours and no GP appointments to be made, without informing the Social Worker.
If they didn't agree, they faced loosing their Children yesterday.
The Solicitors team that represents PAIN clients managed to seal a compromise, with the Court and they would not be allowed to take photographs in the house.
The Family still face months of torment, with Psychological and other assessments without this dedicated team of Solicitors, things could of been a lot different.
Alison Stevens Parents Against Injustice

Alison Stevens
on August 22, 2009
at 10:29 PM

on August 22, 2009
at 09:18 PM


Our thanks must go to both Christopher Booker who wrote of this on page 37 of his 1994 book written with Dr. Richard North 'The Mad Officials' which drew its title from a story by G.K. Chesterton before WWI about a British Court abusing parents and children - Just because they could!

This family is far from alone as you will find at:

which offers help to others with the same plight at:

If you can help or need help this is the place for self help and those who care!

Thanks again to Christopher, Richard & The Sunday Telegraph - these people being abused by the state deserve all the help we can give them.

Greg L-W.

To understand the Concept & Service of StolenKids-
where you can help yourself and others at:

To See The Links Page