Ignoring Rules of Evidence

Ian Josephs, Publisher of Forced Adoption, wrote Punishment without Crime and summarises the following:

Disgracefully in our family courts all the rules of evidence are casually “thrown out of the window”. SHAME on our family court legal system and all those who support it!

Examples of how Rules of Evidence have been discarded in the Family Courts when granting Interim Care Orders.

  • Statements from the local authority are shown to the judge but rarely to parents.
  • Family and friends of parents are routinely excluded from the court but groups of social workers are allowed to stay in the court to listen to their colleagues’ testimony whether they are witnesses or not.

Furthermore:

  1. Parents  representing themselves are denied the opportunity to cross examine witnesses appearing against them.Judgements, reports from experts and position statements are either withheld or given to parents at the last minute (too late to read and analyse them properly).
  2. Parents are routinely refused permission to call for a second opinion when “experts” and Doctors have testified against them.If parents record contacts with their children, or interviews with experts or social workers judges routinely refuse permission for these recordings to be heard yet they always allow recordings and video evidence to be heard if produced by police or social workers.
  3. Parents whose children have been taken are routinely and wrongly told that they may not talk to ANYONE about their case.
  4. Parents are jailed if they protest publlcly when their children are taken.They are also jailed for “breach of the peace” or “harassment” if they dare to trace and then contact their own children after adoption.Parents are therefore” twice gagged” contrary to the Human Rights Act ,Article 10 entitling all persons “freedom of expression”,ie freedom of speech.
  5. Local authority barristers in court often read out statements from absent persons as though they are themselves witnesses but they cannot be questioned.
  6. Most  solicitors refuse to let their clients speak and then agree to all care orders demanded by social services.
  7. Judges routinely castigate parents who wish to speak or who represent themselves even though they have the right to do so. Their evidence and their arguments are usually ignored in the judgements.
  8. Parents representing themselves are often given an hour or two’s notice to appear in court but solicitors are given weeks!
  9. Parents are punished for “risk” ie not what they have done but for what they might do in the future! “Risk of emotional abuse” is favourite because there is no legal definition of this and it is usually impossible for parents to defend themselves against “predictions” by so called “experts”.
  10. Judges give social workers the power to withold parent’s contact with their children” in care” as a punishment for saying they love them and miss them or that they are fighting to get them back .They use this power to gag parents and force them into complete submission.
  11. Parents are in effect condemned for offences against their children on “probabilities” 51% instead of beyond reasonable doubt.
  12. Parents who were themselves in care or who were abused in childhood are often judged unfit to be parents as a result.
  13. Parents often forfeit their children for “failing to engage with professionals”.
  14. Parents faced with forced adoption lose their children for life, without being allowed a hearing by jury.
  15. Under the UN Convention on children’s rights children have a RIGHT to be heard in court but are usually denied that right.
  16. Solicitors routinely tell client parents to agree to interim care orders or they risk never seeing their children again. A lie!
  17. Social workers are legally obliged to place children with relatives if possible but either ignore this or find pretexts to fail them on assessments.
  18. Human rights to free speech and freedom of movement are breached by gagging orders and confiscating passports.
  19. Parents are routinely forbidden to call witnesses on their behalf contrary to human rights.Family and friends are wrongly prevented from entering the court.

The “SS” and family court judges often accuse PARENTS of being paranoid and of believing that there is an absurd conspiracy to take their children. The replyshould always be that in common with so many government employees social workers and experts never like to admit that they were wrong. They therefore are willing to do anything and say anything just to COVER UP the mistakes they have made in nearly every case! Their behaviour is only too often, both dictatorial and shocking as three senior judges confirm!

Extract from “The Times” April 13th 2010 !

“Lord Justice Wall (The Senior family court judge) said that the determination of some social workers to place children in an “unsatisfactory care system” away from their families was “quite shocking”.In a separate case on which Sir Nicholas Wall also sat, Lord Justice Aikens described the actions of social workers in Devon as “more like Stalin’s Russia or Mao’s China than the West of England” !

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7095791.ece

Family torn apart in 15-minute court case by Judge James Orrell

Lord Justice Thorpe said on Appeal

“I am completely aghast at this case.There is nothing more serious than a removal hearing, because the parents are so prejudiced in proceedings thereafter. Once you have lost a child, it is very difficult to get a child back.” The hearing above lasted only 15 minutes after a doctor “expressed the opinion” that bruising in the ear of one of the three children looked as though it was caused by pinching .The parents were not allowed to give any evidence! Their three children had all been forcibly removed until they were ordered to be returned by Lord Justice Thorpe on appeal.

Advertisements

2 Responses to Ignoring Rules of Evidence

  1. towardchange says:

    This article is spot on. I must highlight the fact that certain Judges also use the media to bury all the items mentioned above. The aim, is to humiliate the parent for daring to expose the misuse of corporate power.

  2. These points have been copied from the excellent website Researching Reform by wonderful Ian Josephs who publishes Forced Adoption:

    EXAMPLES OF HOW RULES OF EVIDENCE HAVE BEEN DISCARDED IN THE FAMILY COURTS BREAK MOST OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE WHEN GRANTING INTERIM CARE ORDERS.
    1:- Statements from the local authority are shown to the judge but rarely to parents.Family and friends of parents are routinely excluded from the court but groups of social workers are allowed to stay in the court to listen to their colleague’s testimony whether they are witnesses or not.

    2:- Parents representing themselves are denied the opportunity to cross examine witnesses appearing against them.Judgements,reports from experts,and position statements are either witheld or given to parents at the last minute (too late to read and analyse them properly).

    3:- Parents are routinely refused permission to call for a second opinion when “experts” and Doctors have testified against them.If parents record contacts with their children, or interviews with experts or social workers judges routinely refuse permission for these recordings to be heard yet they always allow recordings and video evidence to be heard if produced by police or social workers.

    4:-Parents whose children have been taken are routinely and wrongly told that they may not talk to ANYONE about their case.

    5:-Parents are jailed if they protest publlcly when their children are taken.They are also jailed for “breach of the peace” or “harassment” if they dare to trace and then contact their own children after adoption.Parents are therefore” twice gagged” contrary to the Human Rights Act ,Article 10 entitling all persons “freedom of expression”,ie freedom of speech.

    6:-Local authority barristers in court often read out statements from absent persons as though they are themselves witnesses but they cannot be questioned.

    7:- Most solicitors refuse to let their clients speak and then agree to all care orders demanded by social services.

    8:-Judges routinely castigate parents who wish to speak or who represent themselves even though they have the right to do so;Their evidence and their arguments are usually ignored in the judgements.

    9:-Parents representing themselves are often given an hour or two’s notice to appear in court but solicitors are given weeks !

    10:-Parents are punished for “risk” ie not what they have done but for what they might do in the future! “Risk of emotional abuse” is favourite because there is no legal definition of this and it is usually impossible for parents to defend themselves against “predictions” by so called “experts”.

    11:-Judges give social workers the power to withold parent’s contact with their children” in care” as a punishment for saying they love them and miss them or that they are fighting to get them back .They use this power to gag parents and force them into complete submission !

    12:-Parents are in effect condemned for offences against their children on “probabilities” 51% instead of beyond reasonable doubt.

    13:-Parents who were themselves in care or who were abused in childhood are often judged unfit to be parents as a result.

    14:-Parents often forfeit their children for “failing to engage with professionals”

    15:-Parents faced with forced adoption lose their children for life, without being allowed a hearing by jury.

    16:-Under the UN Convention on children’s rights children have a RIGHT to be heard in court but are usually denied that right.

    17:-Solicitors routinely tell client parents to agree to interim care orders or they risk never seeing their children again.A lie !

    18:-Social workers are legally obliged to place children with relatives if possible but either ignore this or find pretexts to fail them on assessments

    19:-Human rights to free speech and freedom of movement are breached by gagging orders and confiscating passports.

    20:-Parents are routinely forbidden to call witnesses on their behalf contrary to human rights.Family and friends are wrongly prevented from entering the court.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s