The Guardian
'Open or shut case'
Wednesday April 19, 2006
The government has delayed a
consultation on opening up the family courts by allowing cases to be heard
in public.
Is more transparency required?
Society Guardian Interviews by Mark Gould
Fassit UK Press Response Re - 'Open or shut
case in Guardian UK'
Our Correspondent - Pressbox.co.uk Fassit UK:
Press Release
'Notice the fear
factor creeping in here.'
It should be immediately acknowledged that such
is the corruption within the Family Court that even those parents
awarded costs against the local authorities are not allowed to tell
their stories to the press...So who but someone who has something to
hide would have such rules in place. Why are parents who had cases
effectively dismissed, not allowed to provide all the details to the
press. I refer to those non sexual cases.
And moving on to some of the contributors named
above.
Ian Johnston
Director, British Association of Social Workers
states:
“ I have some sympathy
with the objectives of removing barriers and sharing information, but
this is a sensitive area and more openness raises serious questions.
Children have a right to be protected from information being
inappropriately shared with others. There are anomalies in the family
court system. If it seems reasonable to be able to complain to the
General Medical Council when an expert witness's conduct has been
questionable [in the criminal courts], why can't you complain to the
General Social Care Council about a social worker"
Ian Johnstone, we wouldn't be complaining to the
smarmy General Social Care Council ( GSCC ) the social workers
regulator, more an apologist and protector of dysfunctional and
delinquent social workers……The presence of the press will reveal to the
police and Attorney General that perjury is a regular occurrence in the
Family Court. Forget the GSCC. Currently the GSCC is aware that there
are social workers employed in one local authority who were sacked for
'GROSS MISCONDUCT' in a neighbouring local authority. Some social
workers are 'using other names' with the approval of the GSCC. Some
social workers arrested for child abuse have given evidence in Family
Court cases. None of these cases has ever been reviewed. The presence of
the press will alert the public to the scandal and will put names to the
social workers and paediatricians who have been engaged in such
activities.........This is the real fear of those engaged in the secret
industry of the Family Court gulags.
It is the Crown Prosecution Service and the
police that will become involved with social workers and paediatricians
providing false evidence against innocent and vulnerable parents and
children.
Social workers and others share information in
the Family Court. We want the press to share their observations with the
public.......What are you afraid of....The end of the game....Game up.
Eh! The first essential point is that the press should publish from the
courts and the public will be able to see just what has been going on.
Glyn Farrow
Chief executive, Children Law UK states:
” There may be some
cases where it would be suitable to include the press and public, but
for others it would be disastrous. It is terribly delicate and we need
to get it right. To do that we need more research."
Really! What cases are so bad Glyn Farrow that
all the details concerning those who brought the case to court cannot be
revealed. If the press can report from the criminal courts and can
manage to report the most heinous crimes ( child murderers etc ) ,
whilst yet keeping the identity of the child/children secret……..Why
cannot the same be done in the Family Court.
Glyn Farrow is
trying to appear ‘concerned’….He states “It is terribly delicate”…..You
bet it is. It is even more delicate when social workers and
paediatricians have presented false information to the judge and are not
being identified. The parents are being assaulted on all sides, but
those doing the assaulting are being well paid by the state and are not
identified! ….Those providing the false evidence don’t want their
identities or their reports published.
You bet the social workers and the paediatricians
are worried. Now we will know just who said what and how often the same
Dr. Harold Shipman has made the exact same statement, sometimes even
without seeing/meeting the child/parent.
Anthony Douglas
Chief executive, Children and Family Court
Advisory and Support Service states:
” The real question is:
do the family courts make the right decisions for individual children?
Outcome studies of family court decisions are fewer than for other parts
of the justice system. The test of a decision is whether an individual
child is more secure, safer, happier, healthier, better educated, and
has stronger, lasting attachments."
Without the press being involved to report, there
can be no independent collection of information. Neither is the test of
a decision whether an individual child is more secure, safer, happier,
and healthier, better educated, and has stronger, lasting attachments.
The reason that cases are brought to the Family
court is because of neglect or abuse....Not whether my children could
have a better life if they were looked after by Bill Gates. This just
shows how Tony Blair's Nanny State has
insidiously planted the many social workers to clandestinely arrange
social engineering. And all those involved in this labyrinthine plot are
inter-connected and very well paid by the state........But Schhh! You
are not to know who they are. What they are doing and what dosh they are
getting...All secret!
However, in a democracy 'justice must be seen to
be done’. In the gulag of the Family Court, a huge industry is in
operation, in secret. And almost all of the ‘workers’ in this secret
industry are paid by the state.
The presence of the press will identify which
social workers have given false evidence so that they can successfully
remove children from their parents. Some social workers have links with
adoption and fostering agencies. Some social workers are simultaneously
directors and trustees of adoption and fostering agencies. We will also
learn which social workers have written books that have been bought by
tame local authorities.
So, we have a situation that those making the
allegations against the parents and children are not identified. ….Those
providing reports are not identified. Their reports remain unknown to
the public. The same small group are lifting their skirts and walking
into any one of a number of other Family Courts. They are doing all of
this and getting handsomely rewarded by the state. Their payments are
unknown. The number of times they have given their false evidence is not
known.
How on earth can Anthony Douglas be in any doubt
that the wrong decisions have been made?
None of the Family Court procedures, processes,
individuals and the payments they receive comes under ANY INDEPENDENT
SCRUTINY.
This is not a court……………………….Stalin didn’t even
have anything that approximated to the Family Court.
…END…
Fassit UK Correspondent
Jack Frost
author of 'The Gulag of the Family Courts...Book1'
ISBN 9 781430 316350
http://www.gulagofthefamilycourts.com/
Please read...
Public awards for dishonourable conduct
Why social workers remove babies from their mothers
Grandmother faces year in prison
Confidentiality and Openness in Family Court
Fassit response to BASW
Adoptions cannot ever be undone?
DCA Phoney Conciliations
New DCA announcement - Social Workers
Harriet Harman the Response
The Labyrinthine links of the 'Little Hitlers'
Open or shut case - NO
The Political Social Workers
Time limits for Compensation in Child Abuse Cases
Adoption Fraud is under challenge
