A serving Borough Councillor who is prepared to raise her own grandchildren, being denied , so the state can generate money from Forced Adoption.

The request was refused by Kent County Council.

Dear Sir or Madam,

A friend of mine, who is a serving Borough Councillor, is seemingly about to lose four granddaughters, all under the age of six years to Forced adoptions, in secret Family Court.

I have been a victim myself to this corrupt system, which tears good families apart, to meet adoption quotas and gain government grant funding. Its all about money generation for government agencies rather than " Best Interest of The Child".

Birth Families should always be first considered before children are removed from their birth families. Clearly Sheeena Williams wishes to raise her own granddaughters and has raised her own children , with no problems. Why is she being totally overlooked as an alternative to forced adoption?

Under freedom of information please let me have the following information.

What are you going to do about the above NOW? Not after this family has been destroyed and broken. A good healthy family, I must add.

How many children have been placed for forced adoption, without consideration of extended birth families? Is this the normal practice of Kent County Council, to break up healthy family ties?

How many of Kent County Council forced adoption cases have been overseen by Judge Polden? Does this Judge always exclude placements with birth families and opt instead to steal peoples children for Cash Incentives?

I find the situation to be quite bizare, and totally flawed.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor Retired Town Councillor for Windermere Town Ward. Served for seventeen years.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

I have sent this letter to all UK MP's

Dear MP.

Secret UK Family Courts/ Stealing children form innocent families for financial incentives for Forced Adoptions.

Between Jan 2003 and September 2003 our family were falsely accused of child abuse. At the time I was an elected member of the Windermere Town Council and had served on the Council for over 15 years. We were kept in the Family Court system for exactly eight months, to the day! I was forced to resign and lost my careers as a direct result. The cost to the Tax Payer, cerca 50K Cumbria County Council. Has not answered or dealt with the very serious issues of discrimination surrounding our case, or the huge detrimental affect that this has caused, long term ,to our family. We are not criminals and never have been charged or prosecuted with any offense. I served my community in various capacities for many years in the voluntary and public sectors. We have not recovered from the abuse ,we suffered as a family, at the hands of government authorities, who were heavy handed and punitive in the way they dealt with us and treated us. CAFCASS, POLICE, SOCIAL SERVICES and Family Law Franchise Solicitors are all guilty of abusing our family and more importantly an extremely sick and vulnerable infant. Who was denied a correct diagnosis or treatment by officials, consultants and doctors in the NHS Trust Lancaster. A great injustice occurred to us, and I have been lobbying, campaigning and Complaining for over 6 years. I have good reason to believe the system is corrupt and is following underhanded agendas of human trafficking and Forced Adoptions. MP,s and Ministers as well as The House of Lords are all well aware of the above and similarly to the government,corrupt authorities have done nothing to address my grave concerns about the Child Protection system. It has recently come to my attention, that there are other Elected Representatives across the Country who are also suffering the same injustice, in Corrupt Family Courts at the hands of Judges who remove children from birth families. To meet adoption targets and draw down funding. This is quite unacceptable and a total violation of Human Rights and The Rights of the Children. You cannot deal with mistakes in the past or project how things will be in the future. I accept this. However you can deal with what is happening RIGHT NOW. Sheena Williams Elected and Serving Borough Councilor in Kent is, as I speak, faced with losing four granddaughters, all under six, to Forced adoption. For no good reason, as Sheena and her husband wish to take care of their own grand daughters. They should certainly be considered prior to any adoption. Yet Judge Polden has threatened the Childrens Mother, bullied her. Intimidation of a party to Court. He is adamant that Sheena cannot be represented in court, while decisions are made about her own families future. I know too well how that feels. How much it hurts to see your family torn apart. When I first started to Lobby and raise awareness, my motivation was ,and still is, that this must STOP NOW. No other person should go through what we did. Six years on, and not one of you can say, "I did not know about this"!! My friend Sheena is suffering the same abuse and corrupt system. NOTHING has CHANGED in SIX YEARS!!! My question is this: What are you ALL going to do to STOP THIS NOW and end Forced Adoptions and Human Rights Violations in OUR COUNTRY NOW?? Not in the future, NOW.?? You know about this case, as I and Sheena have brought it to your attention. You MUST ACT NOW to PREVENT ANOTHER MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. I wonder how perspective Local and National Government electives will feel, when this news goes public, that even Elected members are not safe from Government Corruption. NO ONE IS SAFE. NO FAMILY IS SAFE, and YOU AND YOUR FAMILY MIGHT BE THEIR NEXT VICTIMS. DO SOMETHING NOW. Anything less will be a failure.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Mr Watson

Thanks for your email. You need to contact your own MP about these issues. Your
MP is Tim Farron.

Yours

Sara
This is always the bog standard reply. I doubt the MP will even read the letter I sent to him.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

This is the reply to my letter from John Hemming MP

There is another Conservative County Councillor whose daughter is currently a refugees from the family courts with her two children. I know about Sheena Williams.

The adoption targets have now been scrapped, but the system is still broken. I am doing quite a bit about getting things changed, but it would be best to work with Justice for Families to fight the system through the courts up to the Strasbourg Court (which is not involved in the cover up).

Can I ask that you would be willing to act as a volunteer for us in the Cumbria/North West area?

What Sheena should do is to appeal being refused a position as a party to the case.

I hope this is useful information, it will no doubt be , the best response I will get on this.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Mrs Stewart-Taylor

Thank you for this communication. I shall bring its contents to the
attention of Paul Burstow. However as you are not a constituent,
Parliamentary Convention will prevent him from actively taking up your
case which he hopes you are pursuing with your own MP.

Dave Ryder-Mills
Senior caseworker to Paul Burstow MP

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Derek Twigg MP has asked me to thank you for your recent e-mail.

Unfortunately, you live in the constituency of Tim Farron MP. As MPs are not permitted to raise issues on behalf of other MPs constituents I must advise you to contact Tim Farron your own MP.

Yours sincerely,

Stan Hill
Assistant to Derek Twigg MP

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Thank you for your e-mail. My office receives a large number of e-mails, letters and telephone calls every day. I hope you understand that this has to be prioritised and you will be sent a reply as soon as possible.

If the matter you have raised is urgent, please telephone my constituency office on 02920 668558 or my Westminster office on 0207 219 5053.

I am not allowed, under parliamentary protocol, to take up issues on behalf of non-constituents, so please ensure that you have included your name and address.

Many thanks for taking the time to write to me.

Best wishes,

Jenny Willott MP

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

From John Hemming MP to me today.

John sent you a message.

Re: Children being placed for Forced Adoption.

"This needs to be appealed. We have a system to do this, but Sheena needs to
work with it."

Kent County Council

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    RE Freedom of Information request Forced Adoption Family Court Corruption.html

    9K Download

Dear Ms Taylor

I acknowledge your request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. I also note that you sent a similarly worded request
to Maidstone Borough Council who have in turn referred this to us,
obviously we will treat this as one request. Assuming we hold this
information, I will endeavour to supply the data to you as soon as
possible but no later than 19th October 2009 (20 working days from date of
receipt).

I will advise you as soon as possible if we do not hold this information
or if there are exemptions to be considered and/or any costs for providing
the information. Please quote our reference - FOI/09/1053 - in any
communication regarding this particular request.

Best regards

Corporate Access to Information Team, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room 1.94, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 696265 or 01622 694261 - Fax: 01622 694383
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...

show quoted sections

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

22nd September 2009

Dear Yvonne.
Re Family Law Reform.

I now have a written response from Henry Bellingham MP as follows;

" Thank you for your e-mail of 21st September in connection with the above ( Family Law Reform). I appreciate you taking the trouble to contact me and let me know about your own distressing experience and also that of Sheena Williams.

We have been looking into family law court procedure including Cafcass very carefully over the last year, and we are always grateful to recieve case examples and opinions from those who have been involved.

We are certainly keen to improve the system, so that families and children are protected and, in particular, we would like to see a move towards keeping the family unit together as much as possible. This, as you mention, includes the wider family. We hope to encourage more active consideration of grandparents as carers before children are removed entirely from their families, and I am about to table an EDM that will call for the removal of the need for grandparents to gain leave of court before they can apply for contact.

The opening of the family law courts, backed by Conservatives, will make it easier to assess what is taking place in the courts, and protect against corrupt practices or miscarriages of justice.

I certainly agree that we must do everything we can to ensure that families are protected, and that miscarriages of justice are stopped. Thank you again for writing to me on this very important subject, and making me aware of your experiences, which will help me in my work.

Every best wish,

Henry Bellingham M.P.
London Tel 020 7219 8484
Fax 02072192844
E-mail: bellinghamh@parliament.uk

I am happy to say that this is the best ever response, in a six year period of lobbying and complaining YLST.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am hereby requesting and internal review. It has been stated in a letter to me today, from MP Henry Bellingham. In response to my concerns re corruption within the authorities and child kidnap and trafficking by government departments and the legal profession. Secrecy is certainly a big issue.

Mr Bellingham wishes to protect families against corrupt practices and miscarriages of justice.

The above mentioned case of Sheena Williams is clearly a travesty of justice and clearly forms the basis of a vendetta, on the part of Kent County Council department against a genuine Councilor and her family.

Had this not happened to me personally I would never have believed that "so called authorities" could have behaved in such an unlawful, vindictive and malicious form of malpractice and corruption.

It is time for openness and transparency. What is happening here is punitive and is totally unacceptable.

Yours faithfully,

Yvonne Stewart -Taylor.

John Harris (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Looks like you maybe right, although the comments found on this website, shows that all the councillors are aware of this situation and are doing and saying nothing, hoping it will go away or are gutless and frightened of the officers.It is difficult to imagine that these same people are elected by parents to be responsible for ensuring their children are protected from such abuse.

http://nameshamesocialworkers.blogspot.c...

With reference to the idiotic comments placed by an obvious SS plant

Having known Councillor Williams and her family for many years, being also an Elected Councillor, I can assure you , as can many other Councillors from Maidstone Borough Council and beyond ,who gave her references (comprising of deputy mayor, barrister,magistrate etc)for the unfortunately corrupt family courts.

The family court made references to her excellent parenting abilities.Unfortunately the system has been corrupted by incompetent operatives who we as elected members are powerless to stop at present.

It will be down to the efforts of many brave men & women to remove the corrupted officials and restore justice and honour into the council and court system.

Many Councillors are simply to frightened of losing their seats , but many such as in Maidstone do privately back exposure of such an obviously corrputed system run by officers an NOT councillors.

Including Kent County Councillors who are also glad to be seeing the back of Mr Gilroy CEO next May and only wish this could come sooner.He really doesnt deserve to be allowed to leave in a blaze of glory.

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Taylor

The purposes of an internal review are to assess whether the public
authority (in this case Kent County Council) has complied with the Freedom
of Information Act 2000 when handling your request for information. As KCC
has until 19th October to confirm whether it holds the information you
requested or not (and then if it does, supply it to you subject to any
exemptions that may apply), your request that we review the handling of
your request is somewhat premature as the statutory time limit has not yet
been reached and at the moment there is no issue of non-compliance with
the FOIA to investigate.

If however you wish to complain about a policy issue or a KCC decision
with regard to Children's Social Services, then you should pursue KCC's
complaints process
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/SocialCare/gettin...
as opposed to using the Freedom of Information Act.

I should also point out that the Freedom of Information Act only gives you
a right of access to recorded information so if you are seeking comment or
opinion on a particular subject, you will only receive this information
(subject to any exemptions that may apply) if it has already been
recorded. The Act places no obligation on public authorities to CREATE
information to satisfy requests.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room 1.94, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 694383
[2]http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...

show quoted sections

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

I wonder if Ms Caroline Dodge is a common purpose graduate?

John Harris (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Not according to this and Brian Gerrish's reply, although it does seem strange that there is a Caroline Dodge and a Jemila Dodge answering FOI requests, maybe they could be mother & daughter or relatives, or even the same person? Wonder what the policy is on relatives working together? It looks like anyone who asks too many questions is ignored or accused of something or other so they dont have to answer.It makes one wonder if they are being prevented from answering by somebody higher up the food chain?

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pe...

Kent County Council

10 August 2009
Dear Mr Gerrish

Kent County Council will be responding no later than 21st August as I
quoted in my earlier email:

"With regard to the comments in your 24th July email, I will endeavour
to provide you with a response as soon as possible but no later than
21st August".

No, I have not ever attended a Common Purpose training course in any
capacity or for any purpose. Pre-empting your next question, I'm not a
member of the Freemasons (or whatever the female equivalent is) either.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's
Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room 1.94, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 694383
http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...
s/access-to-info.htm
<http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...>
Mr B Gerrish

12 August 2009
Dear Caroline Dodge,

Thank you for your clarification regarding this request.

I had no idea that Kent County Council employed public servants
with psychics abilities, although well aware that many are 'common
purpose' trained.(Those that are normally classed as having
suitable abilities are chosen)

Unfortunately your assumption of my next question was incorrect,
although any first hand knowledge you may have regarding heads of
your legal departments/public sector workers etc , would be most
welcome.

Yours faithfully,

Mr B Gerrish

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Another reply to my letter to MP's for information.

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Thank you for your email to Andrew Dismore MP, Chair of the Joint Committee on
Human Rights. Mr Dismore has asked me to reply.

The Joint Committee is unable to take up or investigate individual cases in any
way so is unable to assist with your case or with that of your friend. You both
may wish to contact your local MPs, who may be able to assist.

As for the systemic issue you raise, I would need a clearer summary of the human
rights contraventions which you claim are occuring: in particular, which of the
UK's human rights obligations are not being met; by whom; and what impact is
this having. If you are able to send me a short paper (no more than 1500 words)
I will advise on whether it raises issues which the Committee can consider.

Yours sincerely

Mark Egan
Commons Clerk, JCHR

S Smith (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Not one of these MP's is prepared to do a dam thing, everything is about what they are going to do.

They should all resign after listening to this, if they dont put an end to this wickedness immediately. Or will they continue to condone abuse of children and families, whilst pretending to protect them?

How can it be right for anyone be arrested under a blanket offense?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp5G_TyMgIA

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

And this is what the Family Courts cost the Tax Payer for their corruption. All the professionals get paid, for causing Human Misery and stealing Human Children.

SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS.

that's what it costs to file care proceedings and drag it through court for ONE CHILD.

FOUR POINT EIGHT MILLION POUNDS.... Read more

that's what it costs to keep ONE CHILD in long term independent foster care (READ: ADOPTION) for ten years.

DCSF ARE BLOWING OBSCENE AMOUNTS OF MONEY, TAKING 6,000 CHILDREN A YEAR FROM PARENTS, AT LEAST ONE THIRD OF WHICH ARE TAKEN ON THE EXCUSE "RISK OF EMOTIONAL HARM".

THE PARENTS ARE LEFT TO ROT IN DESPAIR, THE CHILDREN ARE ABUSED AND MURDERED IN CARE.

A Freeman (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Do you have a link to where these figures come from ?

michael storey left an annotation ()

m.p is Missguided Penis
j.u.d.g.e is jacobean unyoking dissembling gliomal elfin. michael

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

A Freeman

29 September 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

Having been appalled at the amount of abuse I have found having
stumbled across this and other sites, I was rather hoping that
things had changed over the years, sadly it appears not.

Please provide all information that has lead to this decline in
children services and answer the following FOI requests.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a_...

Can you please provide details of how many complaints received
about unlawful practices of Judges and Council SS Legal Team
(children social services) , barrister's etc Cafcass Legal teams
etc , regarding Children taken into ‘care’ by Kent County Council.

Relatives who put themselves forward are considered guilty until
proven innocent, and demands are made that they jump through
assessment hoops, when the House of Lords made it quite clear that
grandparents only have to be good enough parents. The system as it
stands is no better than a 'child trafficking ring.'

It is appalling that in Family Court’s so many children are being
taken into care based on mere opinion of – so-called professionals
and placed for adoption with strangers rather than relatives.

In 2007,local authorities in England applied for 8,173 care orders.
7,624 orders were made. 336 applications were withdrawn, 290 "no
orders" decisions and 21 orders were refused.

In other words, the judgement of the social workers working for the
council was so good, they were only refused by the judge 21 times
(0.27%)

More importantly 93% of the time the judge merely rubber-stamped
the care orders.

House of Lords - Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust.
Baroness Hale of Richmond. Judgement

34. There is, so far as the parties to this case are aware, no
European jurisprudence questioning the principle of freeing for
adoption, or indeed compulsory adoption generally. The United
Kingdom is unusual amongst members of the Council of Europe in
permitting the total severance of family ties without parental
consent. (Professor Triseliotis thought that only Portugal and
perhaps one other European country allowed this.) It is, of course,
the most draconian interference with family life possible.

Although kinship placements are supposed to be the preferred option
in this country, only 1 per cent. of social worker-instigated
placements ended up with kinship carers, compared with 45 per cent.
in Denmark, for example(EVIDENCE given in parliament 16th June 2008
by Tim Loughton MP shadow minister for children)

Thank you.

Peace be with you.

A Freeman

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

ivanataylor

1 October 2009

Dear Freedom Of Information,

A WORD OF WARNING

from Lord Denning, rated (by some) as the finest judge of the 20th
century. In his book ‘WHAT NEXT IN THE LAW’ he wrote about ‘Abuse
of Power’.

“ Whoever may be guilty of abuse of power, be it Government, State,
Employer, Trade Union or whoever, the law must provide a speedy
remedy. Otherwise the victims will find their own remedy. There
will be anarchy.”

I believe Kent County Council Childrens Services and the
Kent Family Courts should take this warning seriously given
that on they are clearly working to achieve targets and gain funding by use of their corrupt practice and underhanded aganda.

Yours sincerely,

ivanataylor

Dear Sir or Madam,

ivanataylor

1 October 2009

Dear Freedom Of Information,

A WORD OF WARNING

from Lord Denning, rated (by some) as the finest judge of the 20th
century. In his book ‘WHAT NEXT IN THE LAW’ he wrote about ‘Abuse
of Power’.

“ Whoever may be guilty of abuse of power, be it Government, State,
Employer, Trade Union or whoever, the law must provide a speedy
remedy. Otherwise the victims will find their own remedy. There
will be anarchy.”

I believe Kent County Council Childrens Services and the
Kent Family Courts should take this warning very seriously given
that they are clearly abusing power and placing children for forced adoptions without necessity, unlawfully, with an underhanded agenda. To meet their adoption targets, no longer required by new government legislation, and gain profit from Human misery and the destruction of healthy families. Shame on you.

Yours sincerely,

ivanataylor

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

A Freeman (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

I am sure that Kent County Council and all other Authorities and Legal Teams of all descriptors.

Are well aware that they are operating completely outside of the Law.The Family Courts have absolutely no power without our consent.Judges take a Common Law Oath of Office and have no right to operate in an Admiralty Court/Statute Law.

They are confiscating children - to steal unlawfully that which is lawfully yours - to penalise (fencing stolen goods)

Mrs Smith (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

http://www.youtube.com/user/thelostpacke...

many are speaking out to make those who have to-date been unaccountable , made accountable

good on them

Mrs Williams (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

WARNING DO NOT LISTEN IF EASILY OFFENDED

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIPSLWCVbQQ

FAMILY COURT INJUSTICES THE TRUTH

Francis.P. (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

https://www.thebcgroup.org.uk/

http://www.tpuc.org/

Find out what rights you really have

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Chris Hawkins
Invariably a judge grants an order based on the recommendations of the SS or CAFCASS and usually the biological parents have no say. A father has no rights if the mother consents to adoption and the wishes of the children and grandparent are never considere. Cumbria County Council ike all local authroites twist and distort the facts and rely on the secrecy of the family courts to push their agendas.

Dear Sir or Madam,

http://protectfamily.ning.com/profiles/b...

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Greg Mulholland MP 06 October at 14:43 Report
Your comments are stupid and offensive. I do not wish this sort of thing posted on my FB page. I am deleting you from my friends list and putting a permanent block on you. Please do not attempt to contact me again for any reason whatsoever.

This is the way MP's think they can respond!! They do not serve the elected, they serve themselves and are very arrogant

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Thank you for your emails dated 21 September to various government ministers about adoption. I hope you will appreciate that due to the high volume of correspondence the Ministers receive they are unable to reply personally to each one. I have been asked to reply.

I can appreciate the circumstances your family has faced must be distressing, however as you are aware the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) is unable to intervene in individual cases as these are best dealt with locally where all the circumstances are known. I would however expect social services to explain to you and your family the reasons for any decision made in relation to your child’s care and to work with you on achieving the best outcomes for them.

Local authorities should issue a ‘letter before proceedings’ to parents. The content of the letter must be explained to parents. It should be written in plain English and avoid jargon. The letter should be written to take account of language barriers, and any learning disabilities parents might have. On receipt of the letter, parents are entitled to bring a solicitor to a meeting with the Social Work team to discuss the local authority’s concerns, and consider what improvements can be made to the child’s care. Parents are entitled to access legal aid. After the meeting, the Social Work manager will send a note of the outcome and agreed plan to the family and their Solicitor so the contents can be explained.

The decision to take a child into care is never an easy one, and it is a decision that is taken by the courts, and not by individual social workers. In every case where a child is taken into care on a care order, the courts will have considered all the evidence and taken the view that the child has been significantly harmed, or would be if they were not taken into care.

In every case concerning the upbringing of a child the court is required to treat the welfare of the child concerned as its paramount consideration. To assist the court, a children’s guardian (who is independent of the local authority) is appointed to advise what is in the child’s best interests. Parents must also be legally represented, and are entitled to legal aid.
Where the court makes an order placing a child in the care of a local authority, the authority will continue to work with the family with a view to the child returning home. However, a stage may be reached when it is apparent that the child cannot return home. It is at this stage that the local authority must make alternative plans to provide the child with a permanent family home, adoption is one way of providing this and is appropriate for some children, depending on the facts of each individual case. The final decision on adoption rests with the courts and before a court makes such an important decision it must be convinced on the basis of the evidence that this is the best way to meet the child’s needs on a long-term basis.

The Children Act 1989 places a duty on Social Services to safeguard and protect children. If you are unhappy with the way in which you were treated by Social Services you have the right to make a formal complaint under the ‘Local Authority Complaints Procedure’. You may therefore wish to consider writing to either the Director of Children’s Services or the Designated Complaints Officer for the authority in which your children have been placed. They must then consider the complaint, appointing at least one person independent of the local authority to take part in dealing with the issues raised and provide you with a written response within 28 days.

If you are unhappy with the council's response, you may request a Panel hearing by writing to the council within 28 days of the response. The Panel should be chaired by an independent person. If you remain dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint under the local procedures and think that a local authority has treated you unfairly as a result of bad or inefficient management ("maladministration"); and that this has caused you injustice (such as loss, injury or upset), you may wish to refer your complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO).

More information on making a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman is available at: www.lgo.org.uk or by calling the advice line on 0845 602 1983.

I am sorry I am unable to help you further.

Yours sincerely

Janet McNamara
Public Communications Unit
www.dcsf.gov.uk

Dear Sir or Madam,
I have already gone to all the government authorities you suggest. Including writing to all U.K MP's and my own MP Mr. Tim Farron. The LGO is an utter waste of time and tax payers money, they have no teeth to stop this above mentioned corruption, neither do they desire to, as they are all professionals looking after each others backs. This has been my experience, over a six year period of campaigning, to get reasonable changes made in the system, to stop systematic abuse of innocent families and false and malicious vindictive vendettas, on the part of Local Councils, against fellow councilors with whom they do not agree politically. Or those who have dug out corruption within the authorities.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Adult and Cultural Services

Library Headquarters  Arroyo Block  The Castle

Carlisle  CA3 8UR  Fax 01228 607299

Tel 01228 227282  Email [email address]

Date: 8 October 2009

Ref: JG/OMG

Dear Ms Stewart

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST FOI 2009- 385

CORPORATE COMPLAINT CCC/03883-09

You emailed Cumbria County Council on 11 September with a Freedom of Information request for information about “Looked after Children who were placed for forced adoption, without the consent of their birth parents, by Cumbria County Council Children's Services in 2008”.

In our response of 1 October you were provided with an answer to the above question and to the supplementary questions you had asked. Our response was based on the statement that forced adoptions do not exist.

You have now challenged the information with which you were provided, your main point of contention being that forced adoptions do exist. I have been asked to review our original response on your behalf.

Having read through the paperwork, I am unable to see how the statistics with which you were provided originally can be challenged. However, it seems that this is an occasion where we will have to agree to differ about what you term a forced adoption.

I am very sorry if our response has inadvertently caused you any distress. The member of staff in Children's Services who provided the answer to your question meant no offence when stating that forced adoption does not exist. That answer was provided in good faith based on the understanding and knowledge that the member of staff has of the adoption system and how it operates in Cumbria. It is important to point out that all of Cumbria County Council's Directorates operate within a legal framework established by the Government of the United Kingdom.

If you have cause to dispute the way in which looked after children are placed for adoption generally, you should take the matter up with your local Member of Parliament and ask that he or she pursues the matter with the appropriate Department of State. Cumbria County Council will continue to operate within the current legal framework for adoptions until such time as that framework is overhauled or altered completely.

Please accept my apologies once again if our original response has inadvertently caused you any distress but I can see no valid reason to recommend that our answer to your request be altered.

Yours sincerely

Jim Grisenthwaite

Head of Culture

Ms Chadwick (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

This may be useful;

Bullying, Bungling, Social Services.

Did you know that they:- Falsify reports and twist facts.

Did you know that they:- Claim meetings have taken place that have not.

Did you know that they:- Alienate children from their natural family to make adoption quicker.

Did you know that they:- Blackmail grandparents into looking after children without support.

Did you know that they:- Have meetings in secret without notifying those involved.

Did you know that they:- Shut out family members who are willing to help.

Did you know that they:- Take control and you have no recourse.

Did you know that they:- Still get away with this despite authorities being made aware of the problem.

Did you know that they:- Remove children from families without good reason.

We continually receive complaints, concerns, worries and fears from families about Social Services and how they operate. We have highlighted this to the UK Parliaments but the damage to children is continuing.

Members of the Equal Parenting Coalition of Scotland England and Wales

www.grandparentsapart.co.uk

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

For all those interested parties. The following link will take you to our story. What we endured in the hands of Cumbrian Child Protection and Cumbria Police and the corruption we exposed.

http://www.no2abuse.com/index.php/articl...

Kent County Council

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    RE Freedom of Information request Forced Adoption Family Court Corruption.html

    11K Download

Dear Ms Taylor

Thank you for your request for information made under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. We have answered your questions in the order they
were raised.

* Paragraph 5. We cannot discuss someone else's case with you as this is
personal to them and disclosure would breach the Data Protection Act
1998. Therefore we are relying upon the section 40 FOI exemption -
Personal Information.

* Paragraph 6. It is KCC policy that all families involved in the
possibility of their children being placed in alternative care
arrangements must have a family group conference, to ensure that all
extended families have been considered as potential carers.

Kent county council and the County adoption service do not recognise the
term, " forced adoption". All care plans where adoption is one of the
alternative family options for a child are considered by the court and
it is a judge who makes the decision as to whether a child should be
placed elsewhere other than with their birth parents.

* Paragraph 7. We cannot comment upon the legal practice of Judge
Polden. There are no cash incentives attached to children being placed
for adoption.

If you are unhappy with this response, and believe KCC has not complied
with legislation, please ask for a review by following our complaints
process; details can be found at this link
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democ...
on our website. Please quote reference FOI/09/1053.

If you still remain dissatisfied following an internal review, you can
appeal to the Information Commissioner, who oversees compliance with the
Freedom of Information Act 2000. Details of what you need to do, should
you wish to pursue this course of action, are available from the
Information Commissioner's website
[2]http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/freedom...

Regards

Michelle Hunt
Access to Information Co-ordinator
Communication & Information Governance
Children, Families & Education Directorate
Kent County Council
Room 2.35, Sessions House
Maidstone, Kent, ME14 1XQ
External: 01622 696692
Internal: 7000 6692
Email: [email address]

show quoted sections

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Mrs Stewart-Taylor,

I am writing on behalf of David Cameron to thank you for your e-mail. I am sorry
for the delay in my reply.

We are grateful to you for getting in touch and for making us aware of your
concerns about the family courts system. I am passing your message on to the
Shadow Justice Minister, Henry Bellingham, so that he can look into the points
you raise.

Yours sincerely,

Lara Moreno Perez
Office of the Leader of the Opposition
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

This is the reply form David Cameron. Maybe they are starting to listen.

Mrs Williams (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Another stolen granddaughter for FORCED ADOPTION

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFsOpJIrGNM

J Webb (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

The only thing they care about is their wallets
this is the only reason children are being stolen and a warning to any poor naive councillor who dares speak the truth.

"The 11 MILLION children and young people in England have a voice"
Children's Commissioner for England, Professor Sir Albert Aynsley-Green

WHAT VOICE ? NOT ACCORDING TO THIS THEY DONT

http://nameshamesocialworkers.blogspot.c...

[A letter a dear friend of mine sent to the Judge in the Family Court,( edited to protect identities) the Judge used paragraph 4 to remove them as party. Yet he failed to answer when asked in Court what would stop children’s services coming after their own children if they failed ‘so-called assessments including a psychological assessment that the Council and Judge were trying to rail road them into.]

After our recent LIP experience of the Family Courts regarding contesting the ICO (at your suggestion), in the hope our granddaughters would be returned to live with their grandparents. We now have ‘little faith’ in either the LA professionals who unfortunately, do not appear to act in the ‘best interests of the children’ or the present system that fails to make them accountable for their actions.

It may just be coincidental that I was standing for election in November 2007 after I had complained to the Director of Children’s Services , on a separate issue and took my complaints to the LGO.

Apparently, we could risk being labelled mad or worse if we go to the press; yet it seems pointless to Appeal without the media.

Regretfully, our stance on being assessed has not changed for the reasons given at the initial hearing; having young children of adoptable ages and no belief in the CSW comment ‘that the SS do not canvas for work’ our family has already been destroyed.

Please do not think us paranoid. A continuous stream of high calibre news articles including award winning Journalists, looking into ‘children’s services’ alongside the UN investigation into our Family Courts, EDM’s signed by numerous MP’s and
Jack Straw’s announcement to allow the press (April2009); all suggest otherwise.

There appears to be a mass of contradictions/inaccuracies and double standards.
Selective incomplete evidence, (mainly opinion based) interpreted as ‘fact’ without the full information requested from September 2002 including ‘notes’ from both the SS and CG. A different criteria/ model supplied (non-relative assessment), which is neither objective nor subjective. And discerning to note that there is no record of us receiving £100 cash from the SS .

Ironically, a Councillor on the ‘Children’s Champion Board’ sort my advice about ‘children’s services’ and is aware of our previous experience.
Although I did not ask him, he seems to have attempted to help; I am not his constituent nor did I ask about kinship care allowance and our children are not known to social care or receive services.

Charles J in Re R [2002] 1 FLR 755 and Munby J in Re L (Care Assessment: Fair Trial) [2002] 2 FLR 730In Re R,

Relatives are expected to jump through hoops and endure fishing trips that were simply not required on the two previous occasions, when XXXX and XXXX were placed in our care, on the second occasion after an interview with CPO.
The LA may have been concerned about a possible Judicial Review and this may have contributed to why an offer of a mandatory referral for (FGC) ‘not best practice’ as suggested in Court, was not forthcoming.

D-v- Southwark LBC [2007] EWCA Civ 182
. Munby J Manchester City Council – V – F (2002) 1FLR 43

What is the definition of better than good enough parenting?

The House of Lords (2008) ‘grandparents only have to be reasonable enough parents’

“Innocent yet presumed guilty unless we comply - On the balance of probabilities?”
We probably have far more experience than many of the professionals involved, having raised 6 children.

Supervisory contact is only required we believe, if there is a danger to the children.
Being a XXXX/CRB checked with no previous concerns, it is insulting and degrading to be only offered expensive supervised contact in an unnatural environment. While our offer of contact in our home (with foster carers if need be) and Cllrs/Corporate Parents offering to be present, is ignored/rejected.
Whilst bizarrely XXXX & XXXX have been transported by taxi virtually on a daily basis from XXXX that is 5 minutes from XXXX, to XXXX approximately a hours drive by their first set of inexperienced carers; all at the taxpayers expense?

Where are our granddaughter’s Human Rights to a family life? Having been placed in foster care, where their well-being has deteriorated after being separated and passed from ‘pillar to post’ and respite care, instead of with relatives.

DCSF – figures suggest that at least 2 children a week die and/or are abused in care.

Research suggests that there are well-evidenced advantages1 for children who cannot live with their parents to be raised by relatives or friends:
Farmer E and Moyers S (2008)‘Kinship Care: Fostering Effective Family and Friends Placements’ (Jessica Kingsley); Doolan et al (2004) Growing up in the Care of Relatives and Friends (Family Rights Group); Hunt J (2003) Family and Friends Care; coping Paper for Dept of Health; Broad, B (ed) (2001) Kinship Care: the placement of choice for children and young people (Russell House; Hunt Waterhouse & Lutman (2008forthcoming) Keeping them in the family (BAAF) Dr Lynne Wrenndall, Charles Pragnell. Lisa Blakemore-Brown, Brian Morgan, Dr Helen Hayward-Brown, Bruce Irvine,
Dr Clive Baldwin, Stephen Clark, Cathy Johnson (2004) Taking the stick away: the service users’ joint statement

It is hoped that XXXX (babies are far more sort after for adoption and a marketable commodity) will be given a Voice Child Advocate, (the CSW rejected this in favour of the CG only).

The FGC Co-ordinator’s comment ‘ holding a FGC at a late stage “energises families” is insulting and worthless when the LA holds all the power and should not be advising family members that I must agree to be assessed.
The joint comments from the LA solicitor and CG who later offered to alter her notes? The LA solicitor told me ‘ the LA only had a duty to consider family members.’
If Human Rights and the PLO can be so brazenly be disregarded/ ignored, is it any wonder that ¾ of children end up adopted or on SGO with strangers instead of relatives.

The CG Solicitor’s remarks outside the Court ‘that LA Counsel could speak for me, or XXXX a passing Solicitor could represent me or they would adjourn and the Court would/could not allow my grandchildren to be placed with us on ICO’ (reiterated the CG comment) and meeting immediately after Court, with the CSW/Counsel, but not us. And the CG & ISW lunching in the Café across the road, all show how cosy the relevant professionals appear to be, hardly independent.

‘ Generally speaking, guardians act as cheerleaders for social services departments. They are entirely compliant, and seem incapable of doing more than being a cheering section’. Eric Pickles MP. (We cannot disagree.)

As Corporate Parents we should act in the way we would if the children were our own. I am appalled at what I perceive to be professionals who fail to act in a professional manner and seem to have no intention of working to reunite children with families. The public would be astonished at the costs involved and outraged that relatives are over looked in favour of expensive foster care.

Totally amazed that such draconian measures of removing children without a mandatory referral for (FGC) can amount to; crystal ball gazing opinion backed up by expensive reports paid for from the public purse.
How is it possible to review a past non event and make a decision based on what may or may not have happened if a FGC had been held, when it could/did not take place?

Children are not mere commodities to be passed around for profit; clearly everyone involved is being paid, (the larger the bundle the more costly?), which could be better spent on ‘real’ child protection and desperately needed front line services to support families to ensure that mandatory FGC referrals are completed; improved services.

I came into politics in order to defend the children of the poor and help make sure that families receive the services they deserve. Councillors are more aware of their responsibility to ‘looked after children’ and the CEO is reviewing the case following a subsequent meeting with the XXXX Leader.

The one simple thing that can never be altered is my granddaughters’ heritage, we are blood relatives, our granddaughters will always be dearly loved and wanted; this can never be obliterated. Hopefully they will be reunited with family members, who if given the opportunity could have applied (if need be) for a RO via private law.

The Court has the power to remedy matters and take the more proportional approach that the LA has not done to-date. Please take into consideration our views and concerns when making your decisions about our granddaughters futures.

Ms Chadwick (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Michelle Chadwick.Grand daughters stolen by Kent County Council & Medway County family court

My Beautiful grand daughters Kianna and Tia my last contact with them 5th December 2008. I miss them with all my heart. Love you both so much where ever you are.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

A letter has just come to me, dated the 12 November 2009 from Bridget Prentice MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.

It is a response to my lobbying MP's re corruption in the Secret Family Court System. She is responding to David Gauke MP the Ref is MC257983

The letter reads as follows.

Dear David

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor , my address is here omitted.

thank you for your letter of 14 October to Jack Straw, about social services and openness in the family courts. I am replying as the Minister responsible for the family justice system in England and Wales. You refer to an earlier letter which my officials have not been able to trace, but I apologise for the delay in responding to you nonetheless.

I am very sorry for the experience that Mrs Stewart-Taylor has had with social services and the family courts regarding her grandchild. In order to preserve the principle of judicial independence, I cannot give opinion on a specific case but I hope that she will find the following general comments helpful.

It has, since 1991, been the policy of successive governments, as set out in legislation, that children should live with their parents wherever possible and that services should be provided to children in need and their families to enable this to happen.

The child protection system is designed to identify families who may be vulnerable and seeks to offer help at an early stage in order to enable children to remain in their family. Social workers must work closely with parents to identify and evidence where change or improvement is necessary in order to enable a family to stay together.

I assure Mrs Stewart-Taylor that local authorities are not given financial incentives to increase the number of children in care or remove children from care of their parents in order for them to be adopted. The decision to take a child into care is never an easy one, and the decision to make a care order is taken by the courts. In every case where a child is taken into care on a care order, the courts will have considered all the evidence and taken the view that the child has been significantly harmed, or would be if they were not taken into care.

where the court makes an order placing a child in the care of a local authority, the authority will continue to work with the family with a view to the child returning home. Happily, the vast majority of children are returned to their parents. for those children who cannot return home to their parents, they have the right to have alternative plans considered to provide them with a permanent home; adoption is only one of the available options of providing this.

The final decision on whether a child should be adopted rests with the courts. Before a court makes such an important decision it must be convinced on the basis of the evidence that this is the best way to meet the child's needs on a long term basis. where the parents/guardians have not given their consent, but it may only do so in limited circumstances. The court would have to be satisfied that the parent could not be found or is incapable of giving consent, or that the welfare of the child requires the consent to be dispensed with.

The Government does not have, and has never had, a national target to increase the number of children being taken into care. the target on adoption reflected the Government's desire to reverse a long-term decline in the number of children already in care finding a permanent home through adoption. The adoption target ended in March 2006. Similarly, the Government does not set adoption targets for local authorities, although authorities themselves may choose to develop targets with central Government through the Local area Agreement/Local Public service agreement process.

Mrs Stewart-Taylor is also concerned about the ability of parents or families to speak out about their case. The extent to which a parent, child or the media can publish information about individual children is complex and determined by a number of different aspects of legislation. The issue is the need to balance the rights of children to privacy, with the rights of other parties, and those of the media, in relation to freedom of expression.

The government has already taken some action to make family proceedings more open- the media can attend most proceedings, and the rules about disclosure of information have been amended to make it easier for people to seek the help and support they need.

these changes do not yet apply to adoption cases.Adoption is the most difficult and life changing decision a family court can make and needs special consideration. There are concerns that the identity of children and adoptive parents might be exposed, particularly in small rural populations or ethnic community areas. we are therefore considering, along with people most involved in adoption work, how best that these proceedings can be made more open but alongside legislation to ensure that identities are protected.

We will also introduce new legislation that will put the reporting and admission regime for all tiers of family court on the same foundation as that for youth courts. This will allow the media to report the substance of what they witness, but not any information that would lead to revealing the identity of the families involved. The Government will revise the law on reporting restrictions as soon as parliamentary time allows.

I hope that this letter is helpful. I am enclosing a copy for you to forward to Mrs Stewart-Taylor, should you wish to do so.

Kind regards

Bridget

BRIDGET PRENTICE

I would be interested in what anyone thinks about this. It has taken 6 years to get to here. I have been lobbying every MP for many years, repeatedly and finally we get this response.??

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

I have written to Bridget Prentice several times in the past, and it is the same reply. Is the woman delusional?

Once a care order has been applied for its granting is almost automatic and children cannot be got out of care without a bitter battle, the policy of children living at home if possible is ignored, children are not listened to and accounts made up of what they want, and adoptions are entirely automatic, the courts ignoring the parent's solicitor's evidence.

Got cases like this at the moment.

perhaps someone should ask for a meeting with David Gauke or Bridget Prentice,

Richard

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Sir or Madam,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK4MqqJ0hnM

I suggest you listen to the above. The truth is now emerging. It is about time too. I have written to every MP in the UK bringing their attention to this MP, who has shown total integrity. An EDM has been promised by parliament as a result of my lobbying and the hard work and efforts of an increasing number of MP's. It is time to stop stealing children for forced adoptions Now.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

FOR THE ATTENTION OF:

Chris Davies MEP
North West

Saturday 19 December 2009
Yvonne Stewart-Taylor
21 Park Avenue
Windermere.
CUMBRIA
LA23 2AR

ivanawatson@aol.com
01539446580

Dear Chris Davies,

I have written to you a couple of times at least and never get a response. Are you interested in the scandal affecting the UK in the secret family courts?

I have been involved in politics since I was 18 when I became a young liberal. I chaired the local party in Windermere for 5 years. Stood for election on Town, District and County Councils. Served 17 years on the Town council.

I have raised the issue of the secret satanic family court corruption for the last 6 years, lobbying and putting the word out, supporting other falsely accused parents( I am a McKenzie Friend working for Parents Against Injustice and Families for Justice with John Hemming MP) Henry Bellingham MP and others are now taking up the challenge to reform the system and attempt to make it decent. You will remember Tim Yeo MP and what he has said. The word is finally out.Parents and grandparents who have had their children stolen by the state to meet adoption targets. Child Kidnap and trafficking, and destruction of healthy families is a multi million pound industry in the UK and USA,where they have a parallel system and has been since 2000. A decade of professional decadent living at the expense of innocent family destruction.It looks like Tony and George have set working class families up to be exploited. This is a social engineering, deliberate program used by the Fabians, in Australia, "The Lost children".

No point Gordon Brown apologizing when his own government are still at it.

Despite my bringing this scandal to the attention of all Mep's at least three times in the last 12 months and all MP's on numerous occasions last 6 years, no one seems to care. so long as their own families remain intact.

I wonder, how many of our "so called leaders" actually care about anything other than their own prestige, power and money. I wonder how many fear or respect their Creator? I know that God made families for a purpose, a divine purpose and that any mortal who destroys an innocent family as part of his career is in for trouble later, as God will not be mocked. I see the whole picture, not a fraction of it.

For humanities sake, can you please do something about the corruption at the top which is stealing children and feeding pedophile rings ? If you do not believe me, their is enough evidence out there. Enough children have been raped by foster parents, abused drugged and neglected. The truth is out and has been for some time.

It is long overdue that decent leaders stand up and be counted and put an end to the human misery that so many corrupt professionals are profiteering from.

My Master is Jesus Christ, NOT Satan. I abhor secret societies and their satanist sinister agendas. All the way to the top goes Corruption and abuse of power. Ordinary people have no say and no way to fight back. Our leaders pay lip service to democracy. We have no human rights and neither do our children. We are socially controlled and indoctrinated by Lucifarian values. The Jesuit Order is at the head of all this and I do not find it surprising that many Catholic Priests sodomize young boys. The purer the better.

I am fully aware that some have lost their lives for saying less, but as I have said. I have one master Jesus Christ, and I serve him and only Him, for Eternity. I cannot sit back, knowing this is going on and remain silent.

Yours sincerely,

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor.

Dear Kent County Council, This is for your information.
To Whom it May Concern.
What you are doing to Sheena Wiliams and her family, my friends is wrong.

FOR THE ATTENTION OF:

Chris Davies MEP
North West

Saturday 19 December 2009
Yvonne Stewart-Taylor
21 Park Avenue
Windermere.
CUMBRIA
LA23 2AR

[email address]
01539446580

Dear Chris Davies,

I have written to you a couple of times at least and never get a response. Are you interested in the scandal affecting the UK in the secret family courts?

I have been involved in politics since I was 18 when I became a young liberal. I chaired the local party in Windermere for 5 years. Stood for election on Town, District and County Councils. Served 17 years on the Town council.

I have raised the issue of the secret satanic family court corruption for the last 6 years, lobbying and putting the word out, supporting other falsely accused parents( I am a McKenzie Friend working for Parents Against Injustice and Families for Justice with John Hemming MP) Henry Bellingham MP and others are now taking up the challenge to reform the system and attempt to make it decent. You will remember Tim Yeo MP and what he has said. The word is finally out.Parents and grandparents who have had their children stolen by the state to meet adoption targets. Child Kidnap and trafficking, and destruction of healthy families is a multi million pound industry in the UK and USA,where they have a parallel system and has been since 2000. A decade of professional decadent living at the expense of innocent family destruction.It looks like Tony and George have set working class families up to be exploited. This is a social engineering, deliberate program used by the Fabians, in Australia, "The Lost children".

No point Gordon Brown apologizing when his own government are still at it.

Despite my bringing this scandal to the attention of all Mep's at least three times in the last 12 months and all MP's on numerous occasions last 6 years, no one seems to care. so long as their own families remain intact.

I wonder, how many of our "so called leaders" actually care about anything other than their own prestige, power and money. I wonder how many fear or respect their Creator? I know that God made families for a purpose, a divine purpose and that any mortal who destroys an innocent family as part of his career is in for trouble later, as God will not be mocked. I see the whole picture, not a fraction of it.

For humanities sake, can you please do something about the corruption at the top which is stealing children and feeding pedophile rings ? If you do not believe me, their is enough evidence out there. Enough children have been raped by foster parents, abused drugged and neglected. The truth is out and has been for some time.

It is long overdue that decent leaders stand up and be counted and put an end to the human misery that so many corrupt professionals are profiteering from.

My Master is Jesus Christ, NOT Satan. I abhor secret societies and their satanist sinister agendas. All the way to the top goes Corruption and abuse of power. Ordinary people have no say and no way to fight back. Our leaders pay lip service to democracy. We have no human rights and neither do our children. We are socially controlled and indoctrinated by Lucifarian values. The Jesuit Order is at the head of all this and I do not find it surprising that many Catholic Priests sodomize young boys. The purer the better.

I am fully aware that some have lost their lives for saying less, but as I have said. I have one master Jesus Christ, and I serve him and only Him, for Eternity. I cannot sit back, knowing this is going on and remain silent.

Yours sincerely,

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor.

Please feel free to reply.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Relocation and Leave to Remove: A Report by The Custody Minefield

Foreword by Sir Bob Geldof. Published December 2009

I can hardly read the literature on Family Law without simultaneous feelings of an awful sadness and profound rage. Sadness at what has been done to our children and their families and deep rage for our Family Courts and the inadequate practitioners that work within it.

In the near future the Family Law under which we endure will be seen as barbaric, criminally damaging, abusive, neglectful, harmful to society, the family, the parents and the children in whose name it purports to act. It is beyond scrutiny or criticism and like a secret society its members – the judges, lawyers, social and child “care” agencies behave like any closed vested interest and protect each others’ backs.

The court is entirely informed by outdated social engineering models and contemporary attitudes rather than fact, precedent rather than common sense and modish unproven nostrums rather than present day realities. It is a disgraceful mess. A farrago of cod professionalism and faux concern largely predicated on nonsensical social guff, mumbo-jumbo and psycho-babble. Dangling at the other end of this are the lives of thousands of British children and their families.

Here is one more report that empirically nails the obvious fact that to remove a child from their father (in the hugely vast majority of cases), their grandparents and other family, their school and friends, is wholly destructive to a child and its family.

How much longer must we put up with the state sanctioned kidnap of our most vulnerable? Because in effect that’s what “Leave to Remove” amounts to. How much longer do we tolerate the vested interest intransigence of the appalling U.K. Family Justice system? How long before just one of them admit they have got it ALL wrong and apologise to their myriad victims?

This report is important, timely and vital. To accept its findings, which could have and should have, been conducted at any time in the past 30 years, is to accept the awful conclusion that rather than Solomon like resolving our tragically human disputes with understanding, compassion and logical pragmatism the courts have consistently acted against society’s interest through the application of prejudice, gender bias and awful impartial cruelty.

This report proves it. May God forgive them. I won’t.

Bob Geldof (December 2009)

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Dear Kent County Council,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

I hope you will find the following informative re the subjects i have raised with you under freedom of information, for which you have not been able to answer.

You know what you are doing is wrong Don't you?

I speak to the council collectively, to whom it may concern. You all know who you are.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Peter Lloyd Jewell My 9 year old daughters name is Judith Lydia Jewell. She was abducted to New Zealand by a group known as the International Church of Christ. I made the UK Court quite aware that this was gouing to happen and they completely ignored it. Hague Convention does not work and NZ is in complete denial of thier problem. Meanwh...ile my poor beautiful girl is have her mind altered by ICC. I wish to begin an internet campaign to have my daughter released from thier clutches. Can anybody help to show me the ropes..a bit.. Please..

Liz R (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Please also view my requests, Liz R

nutty (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Why?

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Can everyone who is working with me on a serious level with real integrity please ignore any comments or annotations made by Nutty. I believe Nutty is vexed with what we are achieving here on what do they know, and has some how managed to try and sabotage all my good work. I believe nutty really is a nut case. so please just ignore nutty and treat nutty with the contempt nutty deserves lol

Liz R (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

'nutty' was warned once. I didn't realise it was just you working hard by the way 'ivan', I must have been doing nothing at all for 17 years.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Why has this website blocked my friend from using this site, fellow councilor in Kent, from posting requests under FOI and annotations, on this site? Are they trying to protect someone and have they been threatened by someone? It seems a bit strange if they have nothing to hide. The serious concerns raised by my colleague and friend with regard to the theft and trafficking of her family members seem to be being COVERED UP, in a blanket of secrecy. Could Common Purpose Graduates in Kent County Council and Free Masons in Kent CC Be COVERING UP SOME SINISTER CHILD ABUSE OPERATION?? I wonder how many other councils nationwide are doing the same?? I am very concerned!! I also wonder if What do they Know have Common Purpose or Freemasons working for them?

Fred Ormerod left an annotation ()

Oh, good grief... Once a conspiracy theorist, always a conspiracy theorist.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Fred, a conspiracy theory is only a theory when it is not actually happening. Sheena and others who have been abused by the state in this way, due to corrupt and unlawful civil servants in elite positions of authority are real victims of terrible abuse.

This is not conspiracy theory, it is actually happening.

Officials in government agencies are committing crimes against humanity and should be held by their employers in gross misconduct charges. they all look after their own perverse asses.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

nutty,

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a_...

I suggest you read all the notations on here, letters etc.

Yours,

ivanataylor

Dear Kent County Council,

Can I ask that you read all the letters etc, and annotations made on this link. I have still not received a satisfactory reply re my friend Sheena Williams and her stolen grandchildren. Why is it that when decent citizens ask informed questions, they are simply ignored?

Why are they then, after asking informed questions, victimized by authorities, who can only be described as corrupt evil vindictive and malicious.

It is time we all received some answers as to why civil servants are getting away with unlawful practice and deliberate victimization of innocent families who dare to speak out against gross misconduct and corruption.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XUks2bEF...

You might find the above link of particular interest.
We know the game, we don't like it and we do not have to play fair if you do not. You are accountable like it or not.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

Kent County Council

Thank you for your email. I am out of the office until Tuesday 2 June.

If your email is urgent please contact one of the following:

Sandra Town, KASS Information Governance Co-ordinator ext 1790
Pauline Banks, EHW Information Governance Co-ordinator ext 6915
Andrew Swan, CMY Information Governance Officer ext 1621
Caroline Dodge, CED Access to Information Co-ordinator ext 1652.

Otherwise, I will deal with your enquiry as soon as I can on my return.

Best regards Michelle

Dear Kent County Council,

The response to your request is long overdue. I would state that, by law, under all circumstances, the authority should have responded, by now, to my serious concerns and FOI requests. I can only assume that there is some kind of COVER UP attempt to protect your Council from serious misconduct charges, unlawful and malicious vindictive persecution of Sheena and her family, please clarify, and does this have any link to Common Purpose training? How many other families have been abused in this way in Kent?

Sheena is not the only unfortunate victim of corporate crimes against humanity. Those responsible will not be able to hide their hands forever after throwing bricks. Exposure is already in place, and thousands of citizens are already aware of this.

I suggest that the children are given back to Councilor Williams and her family, where they belong, with their natural family. Human Trafficking as well as being unlawful is a criminal offense and no authority is above the law, including Kent.

I would also advise that the Judges are not above the law either.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

Fred Ormerod left an annotation ()

You wrote:

"Could Common Purpose Graduates in Kent County Council and Free Masons in Kent CC Be COVERING UP SOME SINISTER CHILD ABUSE OPERATION?? I wonder how many other councils nationwide are doing the same?? I am very concerned!! I also wonder if What do they Know have Common Purpose or Freemasons working for them?"

Come on, seriously???

No doubt you'll be accusing me of being some Common Purpose/Masonic mole next...

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Taylor

Thank you for your email. You are querying why you have not had a
satisfactory reply to your request for information submitted Sunday 19th
September 2009. Your request was:-

Under freedom of information please let me have the following information.

* What are you going to do about the above NOW? Not after this family
has been destroyed and broken. A good healthy family, I must add.
* How many children have been placed for forced adoption, without
consideration of extended birth families? Is this the normal practice
of Kent County Council, to break up healthy family ties?
* How many of Kent County Council forced adoption cases have been
overseen by Judge Polden? Does this Judge always exclude placements
with birth families and opt instead to steal peoples children for Cash
Incentives?

My colleague Michelle Hunt responded to these questions on 14th October
2009 as follows:

* We cannot discuss someone else's case with you as this is personal to
them and disclosure would breach the Data Protection Act 1998.
Therefore we are relying upon the section 40 FOI exemption - Personal
Information.
* It is KCC policy that all families involved in the possibility of
their children being placed in alternative care arrangements must have
a family group conference, to ensure that all extended families have
been considered as potential carers.
* Kent County Council and the County Adoption Service do not recognise
the term, " forced adoption". All care plans where adoption is one of
the alternative family options for a child are considered by the court
and it is a judge who makes the decision as to whether a child should
be placed elsewhere other than with their birth parents. We cannot
comment upon the legal practice of Judge Polden. There are no cash
incentives attached to children being placed for adoption.

Although you have made many annotations to this particular request of
yours on the whatdotheyknow website, some of which include the insertion
of responses to other requests submitted to other public authorities, all
of them appear to simply be yours and others' opinions of Social Services
procedures and protocols and comments on your friend's case. You have yet
to actually clarify why you think your request for information was not
satisfied by Ms Hunt's response.

My colleagues and I have read all your annotations but we cannot access
any of the YouTube links as the KCC network does not permit access to
Social Networking sites in accordance with KCC's policies and procedures.

To reinforce comments I made in my email to you of 25th September 2009,
the Freedom of Information Act only gives you a right of access to
recorded information so if you are seeking comment or opinion on a
particular subject, you will only receive this information (subject to any
exemptions that may apply) if it has already been recorded. The Act places
no obligation on public authorities to CREATE information to satisfy
requests. Likewise, the purposes of an internal review are to assess
whether the public authority (in this case Kent County Council) has
complied with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 when handling your
request for information for example, where exemptions to disclosure
applied appropriately? The fact that you don't believe or disagree with
the information you were provided with is outside the scope of a review.

If you have a complaint about how policies and procedures are implemented,
then the Freedom of Information Act is not the appropriate mechanism for
raising this. Instead, you should follow the complaint procedures of the
authority concerned. For KCC, these details can be found on our website.
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/childrens_social_....
Or, if you have exhausted KCC's complaints process, you can escalate your
grievance to the Local Government Ombudsman
[2]http://www.lgo.org.uk/making-a-complaint/.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[3]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

show quoted sections

James Moore left an annotation ()

This is why over two hundred families are now taking the Family Courts and the Local Authorities of the United Kingdom to the International Courts of Justice for Crimes Against Humanity - do you really, honestly think this Class Action would have even been considered as an option if we thought it didn't have a chance in hell of sticking?

Nobody has ever taken the UK to task over one of its many to-date hidden Human Rights atrocities - until now.
Which is why this is going to work.

The Class Action has been prepared by Freedom Advocacy & Law to help and assist the plight of numerous children, parents and extended family members, who have suffered under various Acts and Statutes that relate to the Family and Child proceedings, both Public and Private, in the United Kingdom.

For too long now, Local Authorities and Family Proceeding Courts have been under scrutiny for serial failings of both children and families alike, in what is now a long line of media highlighted “mistakes”, by various elements of the Family Proceedings Courts and associated multi-agencies. Even though there are now countless cases that have shown detailed mistakes in “children being removed for no reason” and “Local Authorities failure to protect a child”, there has still been no redress to the problems as a whole, and the system is now, as was from the time the Children Act 1989 came in to force on 14 October 1991, just being “patched” instead of being reviewed and reconstructed.

The situation as it stands now is that these families have reached the pinnacle of despair, resulting from constant removal of judicial resolution and the systematic denial of investigation by their Local Authorities, the police, Government and by the once proud foundation of the United Kingdom Legal System.

Turning now to strength in numbers and speaking through one voice in common cause as a Class Action, we are now collectively and individually approaching a higher judicial system – through the International Court of Justice – for rightful treatment and the justice that we as Human Beings deserve and to date have been denied, by other available remedies.
The aim of the Class Action is to bring to the attention of the highest Court the many reasons why constant failings in Law, Statutes, Protocols and Procedures accompanied by governmental neglect to address this problem, is systematically aiding children to be removed for the wrong reasons, resulting in destroyed families, children that do require intervention being overlooked, nonresident parents and extended family members being denied contact with offspring, and what can only be described as crimes against humanity to be allowed to perpetuate unchallenged.

How can this be allowed to continue in a country that takes so much pride in its human rights issues as well as considering itself as a developed “1st World” nation?

And how can this have been allowed to continue for so long, unchallenged?

Is there a hidden agenda to what is going on, that the general public is not allowed to see the dark side of, and if so what is it?

Should there not be a facility available either through judicial appeal or through government approved process, where people embroiled in child and family matters are allowed to address their concerns without criteria and where their case will be reviewed? We would think, as logical and compassionate beings, that there should be.

There is no provision for “true appeal” in the Royal Courts of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights where cases can be heard in their entirety, both failing with unreasonable timescales.

Under such circumstances we have to take our demands for justice outside normal procedure and approach the highest criminal court in the world as a collective and that is precisely what we are doing.

http://www.freedom-advocacy-law.co.uk/Cl...

Dear Kent County Council,

James Moore left an annotation (13 July 2010)

This is why over two hundred families are now taking the Family Courts and the Local Authorities of the United Kingdom to the International Courts of Justice for Crimes Against Humanity - do you really, honestly think this Class Action would have even been considered as an option if we thought it didn't have a chance in hell of sticking?

Nobody has ever taken the UK to task over one of its many to-date hidden Human Rights atrocities - until now.
Which is why this is going to work.

The Class Action has been prepared by Freedom Advocacy & Law to help and assist the plight of numerous children, parents and extended family members, who have suffered under various Acts and Statutes that relate to the Family and Child proceedings, both Public and Private, in the United Kingdom.

For too long now, Local Authorities and Family Proceeding Courts have been under scrutiny for serial failings of both children and families alike, in what is now a long line of media highlighted “mistakes”, by various elements of the Family Proceedings Courts and associated multi-agencies. Even though there are now countless cases that have shown detailed mistakes in “children being removed for no reason” and “Local Authorities failure to protect a child”, there has still been no redress to the problems as a whole, and the system is now, as was from the time the Children Act 1989 came in to force on 14 October 1991, just being “patched” instead of being reviewed and reconstructed.

The situation as it stands now is that these families have reached the pinnacle of despair, resulting from constant removal of judicial resolution and the systematic denial of investigation by their Local Authorities, the police, Government and by the once proud foundation of the United Kingdom Legal System.

Turning now to strength in numbers and speaking through one voice in common cause as a Class Action, we are now collectively and individually approaching a higher judicial system – through the International Court of Justice – for rightful treatment and the justice that we as Human Beings deserve and to date have been denied, by other available remedies.
The aim of the Class Action is to bring to the attention of the highest Court the many reasons why constant failings in Law, Statutes, Protocols and Procedures accompanied by governmental neglect to address this problem, is systematically aiding children to be removed for the wrong reasons, resulting in destroyed families, children that do require intervention being overlooked, nonresident parents and extended family members being denied contact with offspring, and what can only be described as crimes against humanity to be allowed to perpetuate unchallenged.

How can this be allowed to continue in a country that takes so much pride in its human rights issues as well as considering itself as a developed “1st World” nation?

And how can this have been allowed to continue for so long, unchallenged?

Is there a hidden agenda to what is going on, that the general public is not allowed to see the dark side of, and if so what is it?

Should there not be a facility available either through judicial appeal or through government approved process, where people embroiled in child and family matters are allowed to address their concerns without criteria and where their case will be reviewed? We would think, as logical and compassionate beings, that there should be.

There is no provision for “true appeal” in the Royal Courts of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights where cases can be heard in their entirety, both failing with unreasonable timescales.

Under such circumstances we have to take our demands for justice outside normal procedure and approach the highest criminal court in the world as a collective and that is precisely what we are doing.

http://www.freedom-advocacy-law.co.uk/Cl...

I am part of this class action. days are numbered now rest assured heads will roll when all this gets into the public domain and all will be named and shamed accordingly.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

Dear Kent County Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Kent County Council's handling of my FOI request 'A serving Borough Councilor who is prepared to raise her own grandchildren, being denied , so the state can generate money from Forced Adoption.'

You have told me you cannot discuss another case with me, despite me knowing all the details anyway. Give my friend her grandchildren back, they have been stolen from her by use of false evidence. I do hope that those four little girls have not been taken into care to be abused by elite pedophiles. Something is smelling very fishy with the way Kent CC have handled it.

Those who value their positions need to consider the long term consequences of their actions in remaining silent and turning a blind eye to corporate corruption and deliberate fracturing of children from their families. I have grave concerns re the actions of Kent and other nationwide Child Protective services.

It would appear that the only protection afforded by Kent and others is protection of abusive misuse of authority, corporate corruption and fraud. Children are certainly not safe in care.

Nothing less than a full public inquiry will unravel what has really been going on. Disgusting.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a_...

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

Kent County Council

Dear Ms Taylor

Kent County Council does not have written consent from your friend to
discuss her situation with you, but even if we did have her permission to
share her personal information with you, we would not do this in open
forum via the whatdotheyknow website.

Your friend's case involves other family members including her
grandchildren and I should point out that your friend does not have the
authority to give us permission to share their personal information with
you or anyone else as it doesn't belong to her. It would be a serious
breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 if KCC divulged personal
information about other family members, much of it highly sensitive, to a
unauthorised third party such as yourself (regardless of how well-meaning
your intentions might be) let alone the public at large. For the same
reason, this is why the whatdotheyknow website administrators have removed
annotations to this and other requests by you and other people which have
mentioned the names and dates of birth of your friend's grandchildren.

I am afraid that what you are asking for (a review of your friend's case
and to give her grandchildren back to her) is outside of the scope of an
internal review under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The purpose of
such a review is solely to assess whether KCC complied with the Act or
not. As I have said several times previously, if you disagree, you are
welcome to pursue the matter with the Information Commissioner.

If you believe KCC is guilty of maladministration with regard to the
implementation of its Children's Social Services procedures, then you
should pursue your grievance with the Local Government Ombudsman; the
Freedom of Information Act is not the appropriate mechanism for making
complaints.

Any further communications from you on this subject will be considered
both repeat and vexatious and will be ignored.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

show quoted sections

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Kent County Council

15 July 2010

Dear Ms Taylor

Kent County Council does not have written consent from your friend to
discuss her situation with you, but even if we did have her permission to
share her personal information with you, we would not do this in open
forum via the whatdotheyknow website.

Your friend's case involves other family members including her
grandchildren and I should point out that your friend does not have the
authority to give us permission to share their personal information with
you or anyone else as it doesn't belong to her. It would be a serious
breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 if KCC divulged personal
information about other family members, much of it highly sensitive, to a
unauthorised third party such as yourself (regardless of how well-meaning
your intentions might be) let alone the public at large. For the same
reason, this is why the whatdotheyknow website administrators have removed
annotations to this and other requests by you and other people which have
mentioned the names and dates of birth of your friend's grandchildren.

I am afraid that what you are asking for (a review of your friend's case
and to give her grandchildren back to her) is outside of the scope of an
internal review under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The purpose of
such a review is solely to assess whether KCC complied with the Act or
not. As I have said several times previously, if you disagree, you are
welcome to pursue the matter with the Information Commissioner.

If you believe KCC is guilty of maladministration with regard to the
implementation of its Children's Social Services procedures, then you
should pursue your grievance with the Local Government Ombudsman; the
Freedom of Information Act is not the appropriate mechanism for making
complaints.

Any further communications from you on this subject will be considered
both repeat and vexatious and will be ignored.

Best regards

Caroline Dodge
Corporate Access to Information Coordinator, Chief Executive's Department
Kent County Council, Legal & Democratic Services, Room B.48, Sessions
House, County Hall, Maidstone. ME14 1XQ.
Tel: 01622 221652 - Fax: 01622 696075
[1]http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/have...

show quoted sections

James Moore left an annotation ()

Ms. Dodge,

Please pass the following to your Legal Department and to your Chief Executive: Consider yourselves on Notice.
---

Sam Hallimond Esq.
James Moore Esq.
Paul Randle-Jolliffe Esq., as
Freedom Advocacy & Law.

As plaintiff(s) and representatives

for the collective plaintiff(s) of the UNITED KINGDOM (encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND).

To: THE DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
The Rt. Honourable Eric Pickles MP.
The Department for Communities and Local Government
Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU.

To: THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE.
The Rt. Honourable Kenneth Clarke QC MP.
102 Petty France
Westminster
London
SW1H 9AJ.

To: ANY AND ALL OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES

Re: Class Action against the FAMILY DIVISION COURT(S) and
LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) of the UNITED KINGDOM (encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND).

NOTICE OF LIS ALIBI PENDENS
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN and
CRIMINAL LAW EXECUTION

Sam Hallimond Esq, James Moore Esq, Paul Randle-Jolliffe Esq, for Freedom Advocacy & Law, representative for the collective plaintiff(s), sovereign in individual right as recognised by the Crown’s prior obligations, present fact, truth and claim for acceptance or protest before the Entire World.

Our presentation of action requires international notice to be made available to the public, through all mediums of media, in acquiescence of Human Rights, ensuring the collective plaintiff(s) and other(s) receive remedies through judicial process for protection and remedies against the theft of offspring or what seems to be more appropriately titled as “State chattels”, through the apparent actions of the FAMILY DIVISION COURT(S) and the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) of the UNITED KINGDOM.

The UNITED KINGDOM has abandoned the plaintiff(s) and all extended families of the aforementioned plaintiff(s), and obligations of justice to all sovereign beings within the realms of the UNITED KINGDOM. This abandonment of legal and moral obligation voids authority of the UNITED KINGDOM, to affect any sovereign being.

Therefore, we the representatives, having claimed the abandoned obligations to the sovereign beings of the UNITED KINGDOM, and have accepted the obligation to speak on behalf of the plaintiff(s) and all sovereign beings for the protection of our offspring, our rights and fundamental freedoms, and our physical and mental wellbeing.

This will be undertaken within international authorities regarding humanitarian and criminal law, known to be obligations requiring recognition by the UNITED KINGDOM, FAMILY PROCEEDING COURT(S) and LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) encompassed within.

ALLEGATIONS –

1. The UNITED KINGDOM, and the FAMILY PROCEEDINGS COURT(S) and LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) encompassed within, have failed to;

i. Prevent the systematic destruction of the individual family unit, by means of false allegation, perjury, perverting the course of justice, harassment and maladministration.

ii. Prevent serious infringements of human right and fundamental freedoms of offspring, birth parents and extended family unit members during state intervention, through manipulation and reckless abandonment of domestic and international Laws, Statutes, Treaties and Conventions.

iii. Preserve the rights of the extended family during both Private and Public Law, excluding options allowing continued access of extended family members with offspring, and denying obligation for keeping family unity paramount.

iv. Prevent abandonment of fiduciary duties to protect and assist families and extended families during Family proceedings in both Public and Private Law.

v. Consider the imposition on Public Funds regarding costings of Family Court proceedings to remove children to State care or adoption versus support services for families as required by Statute to ensure the continued integrity of the Family Unit.

vi. Disclose any and all conflicts of interest relating to those agents acting for said organisations and consider possible ramifications as to the outcome of Family Proceedings Court cases.

2. The UNITED KINGDOM, and the FAMILY PROCEEDINGS COURT(S) and LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) encompassed within, have wilfully and with aforethought to stated intentions:

i. Sought to withhold information pertaining to individual cases particularly regarding material, recordings and running logs, before during and after proceedings, from the Respondents in those proceedings, here named as collective and individual Plaintiffs.

ii. Committed acts of torture and distress, through action and inaction, against both adults and children in a demonstrable effort to alienate one from the other, dismantle marriage and force removal of minors in the wake of manufactured situations of natural parents' incapability of maintaining themselves never mind a family.

3. It is on the basis of the above and the fact that no blanket settlement can be agreed upon within the jurisdiction of the UK Courts at any level; the fact that no police authority will even consider the possibility that unitary authorities are capable of Crimes Against Humanity; and the fact that the Attorney General herself (Baroness Scotland, as was at the time of enquiry) refused a submission for the DPP to consider in private prosecution against the Local Authorities of the United Kingdom, that we declare the Property in question, that being the children of the United Kingdom, are to be considered contested Property.

It is therefore requested and demanded that this document be taken as read and understood as a Lis Alibi Pendens, that such is clarified and understood throughout the UK Court System until such time as the Class Action is resolved to the satisfaction of the Plaintiffs.

4. Therefore, alternative remedy is now being sought through higher judicial process at the Courts listed below. We would ask that this request for judicial action be accepted and investigated with all measures of justice, preventing further infringements of human rights, crimes against humanity and failings in judicial and local authority procedures and processes in the United Kingdom;

International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
Carnegieplein 2
2517 KJ
The Hague
The Netherlands.

International Criminal Court
Information & Evidence Unit
Office of the Prosecutor
Box 19519
2500 CM
The Hague
The Netherlands.

European Court of Justice
Palais de la Cour de Justice
Boulevard Konrad Adenauer Kirchberg
L – 2925
Luxemburg.

European Court of Human Rights
Council of Europe
67075 Strasbourg Cedex
France.

The Supreme Court
Middlesex Guildhall
Parliament Square
London
SW1P 3BD.

Dear Kent County Council,
Ms. Dodge,

Please pass the following to your Legal Department and to your Chief Executive: Consider yourselves on Notice.
---

Sam Hallimond Esq.
James Moore Esq.
Paul Randle-Jolliffe Esq., as
Freedom Advocacy & Law.

As plaintiff(s) and representatives

for the collective plaintiff(s) of the UNITED KINGDOM (encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND).

To: THE DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
The Rt. Honourable Eric Pickles MP.
The Department for Communities and Local Government
Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU.

To: THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE.
The Rt. Honourable Kenneth Clarke QC MP.
102 Petty France
Westminster
London
SW1H 9AJ.

To: ANY AND ALL OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES

Re: Class Action against the FAMILY DIVISION COURT(S) and
LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) of the UNITED KINGDOM (encompassing ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND and NORTHERN IRELAND).

NOTICE OF LIS ALIBI PENDENS
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN and
CRIMINAL LAW EXECUTION

Sam Hallimond Esq, James Moore Esq, Paul Randle-Jolliffe Esq, for Freedom Advocacy & Law, representative for the collective plaintiff(s), sovereign in individual right as recognised by the Crown’s prior obligations, present fact, truth and claim for acceptance or protest before the Entire World.

Our presentation of action requires international notice to be made available to the public, through all mediums of media, in acquiescence of Human Rights, ensuring the collective plaintiff(s) and other(s) receive remedies through judicial process for protection and remedies against the theft of offspring or what seems to be more appropriately titled as “State chattels”, through the apparent actions of the FAMILY DIVISION COURT(S) and the LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) of the UNITED KINGDOM.

The UNITED KINGDOM has abandoned the plaintiff(s) and all extended families of the aforementioned plaintiff(s), and obligations of justice to all sovereign beings within the realms of the UNITED KINGDOM. This abandonment of legal and moral obligation voids authority of the UNITED KINGDOM, to affect any sovereign being.

Therefore, we the representatives, having claimed the abandoned obligations to the sovereign beings of the UNITED KINGDOM, and have accepted the obligation to speak on behalf of the plaintiff(s) and all sovereign beings for the protection of our offspring, our rights and fundamental freedoms, and our physical and mental wellbeing.

This will be undertaken within international authorities regarding humanitarian and criminal law, known to be obligations requiring recognition by the UNITED KINGDOM, FAMILY PROCEEDING COURT(S) and LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) encompassed within.

ALLEGATIONS –

1. The UNITED KINGDOM, and the FAMILY PROCEEDINGS COURT(S) and LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) encompassed within, have failed to;

i. Prevent the systematic destruction of the individual family unit, by means of false allegation, perjury, perverting the course of justice, harassment and maladministration.

ii. Prevent serious infringements of human right and fundamental freedoms of offspring, birth parents and extended family unit members during state intervention, through manipulation and reckless abandonment of domestic and international Laws, Statutes, Treaties and Conventions.

iii. Preserve the rights of the extended family during both Private and Public Law, excluding options allowing continued access of extended family members with offspring, and denying obligation for keeping family unity paramount.

iv. Prevent abandonment of fiduciary duties to protect and assist families and extended families during Family proceedings in both Public and Private Law.

v. Consider the imposition on Public Funds regarding costings of Family Court proceedings to remove children to State care or adoption versus support services for families as required by Statute to ensure the continued integrity of the Family Unit.

vi. Disclose any and all conflicts of interest relating to those agents acting for said organisations and consider possible ramifications as to the outcome of Family Proceedings Court cases.

2. The UNITED KINGDOM, and the FAMILY PROCEEDINGS COURT(S) and LOCAL AUTHORITY(S) encompassed within, have wilfully and with aforethought to stated intentions:

i. Sought to withhold information pertaining to individual cases particularly regarding material, recordings and running logs, before during and after proceedings, from the Respondents in those proceedings, here named as collective and individual Plaintiffs.

ii. Committed acts of torture and distress, through action and inaction, against both adults and children in a demonstrable effort to alienate one from the other, dismantle marriage and force removal of minors in the wake of manufactured situations of natural parents' incapability of maintaining themselves never mind a family.

3. It is on the basis of the above and the fact that no blanket settlement can be agreed upon within the jurisdiction of the UK Courts at any level; the fact that no police authority will even consider the possibility that unitary authorities are capable of Crimes Against Humanity; and the fact that the Attorney General herself (Baroness Scotland, as was at the time of enquiry) refused a submission for the DPP to consider in private prosecution against the Local Authorities of the United Kingdom, that we declare the Property in question, that being the children of the United Kingdom, are to be considered contested Property.

It is therefore requested and demanded that this document be taken as read and understood as a Lis Alibi Pendens, that such is clarified and understood throughout the UK Court System until such time as the Class Action is resolved to the satisfaction of the Plaintiffs.

4. Therefore, alternative remedy is now being sought through higher judicial process at the Courts listed below. We would ask that this request for judicial action be accepted and investigated with all measures of justice, preventing further infringements of human rights, crimes against humanity and failings in judicial and local authority procedures and processes in the United Kingdom;

International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
Carnegieplein 2
2517 KJ
The Hague
The Netherlands.

International Criminal Court
Information & Evidence Unit
Office of the Prosecutor
Box 19519
2500 CM
The Hague
The Netherlands.

European Court of Justice
Palais de la Cour de Justice
Boulevard Konrad Adenauer Kirchberg
L – 2925
Luxemburg.

European Court of Human Rights
Council of Europe
67075 Strasbourg Cedex
France.

The Supreme Court
Middlesex Guildhall
Parliament Square
London
SW1P 3BD.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

Liz R (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

PS. Also gone to all legal addresses above -

Family law is my least favourite subject but one I know most about.

In 2002, with a friend, Ian, I organised a mailing-list that included both Theresa May and Dominic Grieve- MP's then. Eric Pickles was also involved I remember.

Recently I was asked again for my opinion as to how we can restore justice in the family courts.

Here are my answers:

1. Abolish CAFCASS and Public Family Courts.

2. Use letters (all case in writing) to deal with the entire case except for ONE final hearing in childrens' cases (if necessary) where parents may use video links in order to lessen stress.

3. Use Magistrates courts, solicitors letters and mediation only in order to settle and finalise matters of divorce and contact

4. Depend on the evidence of Doctors, police, family and friends as well as other local professionals to give evidence, they are more likely to know the truth.

5. Where child abuse is suspected, report it to police, allow police only to deal with it, child abuse is a crime and the vast majority of the British public agree it should be treated as such

6. Disallow any parent access to children if they have had convictions for violence or drug and/ alcohol abuse in the last 5 years prior to this issue coming to the attention of authorities

7. Implement above today and return children to safe parents/places without further ado.

8. To continue to ignore common-sense and justice could well lead public protests. I know the MOJ is now looking and listening, please act now to ameliorate the situations and restore justice to families in the UK please.

Liz R

Liz R (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Parents and families are NOT CRIMINALS and ought never have to appear in court. Keep parents and children OUT OF COURT - please.

anon left an annotation ()

I asked for respite of a couple of weeks after 2 bereavements.A simple request you might think. After 3 weeks I had to fight in court under monstrous stress to get my child back. I had excellent reports from profs that knew me,with corrupt social workers who wanted to make a case out of me having no bond with my child. My child became withdrawn due to being scared and feeling abandoned-which any child prof should be aware of. I was made fun of in a room by 2 social wreckers saying that everyone was saying I was a bad mum. In court every statement was glowing. 2 months later I got him back after feeling that I had been to hell and back.

I later learned that this midlands social services had won an award for best practice for meeting adoption targets at around the same town.They all sat in a review saying how they could see how well brought up my 3 year old was and how he was not like other kids in their care. I asked if he was going to be adopted -they said we dont know.

They are family wreckers and all this trype about doing all they can to keep families together is just nonsense. If you have a child who is attractive to adopters then you have a real risk of losing that child.

I also saw a minister on TV saying that children were saying they wanted to be kept with extended family but social services were putting them with strangers. The MP said more should be done for children to go with family so there is an admittance that this wasnt happening even though Its in the childrens act.

4 white granddaughters of a young age are ideal fodder for the waiting list of adopters who like young children who they can manipulate and they hope will forget their birth family.

A Williams left an annotation ()

I'm researching the substantial Fostering Allowances that Foster Parents receive to give Foster Children a high standard of living, in comparison with what Low Income Natural Parents are expected to provide for their children on.

The impression I've gained is that Social Service Departments may be aware that there is a 'storm brewing' - and not just in respect of Forced Adoptions.

RReeve left an annotation ()

@A Williams
Oh my I bet their is a massive, HUGE difference. I knew a single mother who was struggling along on less than £70 per week in benefits. She would get her rent paid also but that was only about £70 per week too so in reality she was awarded £140 per week, £7280 per year or £606 per month.
My mum used to foster children about 15-20 years ago and she was getting about £600 pcm back then so I dread to think how much they get now. I expect that sum to have nearly doubled in 15-20 years.

It's good that your researching this because any attention people can create for this is fantastic because the masses need to know whats really going on. I totally agree EVERY natural parent should get exactly the same amount given to foster parents. It's unbelievably unfair and unreasonable to expect a natural parent to survive on less.

Good luck

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Thank you all for your annotations here. Well appreciated. I wonder if Kent snoops will keep an eye on this and wake up to the fact that their number is up, their hole cards are punched and that as our new Government downsize, they will be dispensable soon. As we stop funding this corporate fraud and corruption, kidnap and trafficking of our children, then the money will run out and we will no longer be paying their obscene salaries. Good riddance when that day comes to them all, and it is my prayer that the day soon comes.
All the child stealing corporations who have a vested financial interest in stealing our children will have to explain themselves to their superior soon. If the government can sack them for misconduct we, the tax payer will not have to fork out for their abundant pensions either.

Lucy Smith left an annotation ()

It would seem that this practice of 'child stealing' is a nationwide occurrence. I have (and still am) going through exactly the same thing regarding my own grandchildren who were taken from their family six years ago and have now been split up and adopted. I won't go into too many details at the moment, suffice to say that the children were not in danger of significant harm from any member of the family. Lincolnshire County Council adopted the same practices as the above mentioned. I (as their maternal grandmother) made a request to become a party to the proceedings, but this request was denied, even though I had looked after them for over three years. I do not have a criminal record and have successfully brought up a family of five children myself. My eldest grand- children who at the time were aged nine and seven, made it clear that they wanted to live with me, but their request was ignored. I was lied to by (the many changing) social workers, who told me that the children had said they did not want to live with me. Contact was granted to me for two hours, once a month, in an obscure location, which meant I had to catch three different trains in order to get there, but I did it. Contact was supervised by someone who sat making notes in a corner and if my grand-daughter needed the toilet, we were accompanied to the toilet because they obviously thought I was going to harm her in some way! My seven year old grand daughter told me that it was because they thought I would steal her! Who put this information in her head?
The children were eventually put up for adoption against my wishes, but I had no say in it, as I am only their grandmother. The two youngest went first - to a couple who promised to write through the letterbox system, but have not honoured their promise. The eldest two were placed with foster carers and then moved to a couple who adopted them. The social worker told me that she would only allow the children to be released to the couple if they were to agree to an open adoption, as it would cause the children significant harm to have no contact with me and their natural family. Again I told the social services that I wanted to look after them myself, and I was told I should ask for an assessment, which I did, but the assessor never turned up. when I rang and enquired I was told again that the children did not want to live with me.
The adopters have not honoured the agreement, refusing all direct contact, even though the children (now aged 16 and 13) have made repeated requests to see me. I have made contact with the children myself, as I found out where they were living, and they were overjoyed to be back in touch with us. My grand-daughter has sent me an email telling me how much she loves me and that she never wanted to go anywhere other than back to me, and my grandson has told me that before we made contact she tried to run away three times.
Since then, the adopters have found out, and have now put a block on the social networking site and intercept their emails. They have also taken their mobile phones from them, and forbidden them to speak to us. I'm sure that once the dust has settled they will be in touch with me again though, as they are clearly unhappy where they are. It is frustrating because I'm powerless against these people who shouldn't have been given the children in the first place.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Lucy

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Another letter to my MP, anyone can copy and paste this and send it to theirs.

Dear ? MP

Question to be asked of Minister of Education Rt Hon Michael Gove on 11 Oct 2010 to be Televised at 2:30pm

I am contacting you as one of your constituents regarding the number of parents that are desperately fighting for the return of their children in a legal maze they cannot understand. It seems we are losing our children due to not knowing court procedure and our legal rights rather than because we are unable to safely care for our children.

Please could you ask the Minister of Education a question. I understand that he will be answering questions in the House of Commons on 11 Oct 2010 at 2:30 which will be broadcast to the public as part of a democratic procedure. The question is “Who is accountable when children are removed from their parents unlawfully and illegally?”

I have watched Tim Yeo MP and John Hemming MP ask similar questions in parliament, the videos of which are available on youtube.

I am disturbed by the number of empty seats in Parliament at the time and wonder why there are so few MPs interested in the matter of children being taken from their parents using illegal and unlawful practices by Civil Servants, paid by the government.

Who will investigate? Will you as my MP or will you only pass my question on to someone else who won't investigate?

It has become clear that the courts don't accept evidence, only professional hearsay. The Council complaints or the Director of Children's Services won't respond to letters, the LGO won't investigate, nor the IPCC or GCSS, nor CAFCASS complaints, nor publicly funded solicitors, nor the LCS, nor LSC, nor the JCC but will my MP?

I appreciate from the case of Margaret Hodge and the Islington abuse scandal that it is impossible to hold an MP, who is complicit in state kidnap and institutional child abuse, accountable. I believe MPs that will take a positive stance against this corruption do so because their conscience tells them that they cannot turn a blind eye, even where asking questions makes them unpopular with many other MPs.

In searching for someone who has the power to put this right, affected parents have written to the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Education, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Prime Minister, 600 MPs and 200 Lords and the Law Commission, but there is no reply!

Appeals to the Royal Courts of Justice are impossible because parents are not given permission to appeal to either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court unless they know the law as well as the Lord giving permission. The ECHR confirm that the Social Workers Practice and the Procedure of the Family Court is against Human Rights but while they can fine the UK if a victim family manages to get all the way up through the levels, they don't have the power to correct things.

As every Government funded solicitor claims that the LSC won’t fund an appeal very few parents are able to make a complaint to the ECHR, the UK therefore prefers to pay the fine than hold civil servants accountable for unlawful practice. Many parents don’t even know what stage they are at in the lower courts, let alone make an appeal!

Who supports the family in getting justice when their children are taken for financial incentive rather than for protection? There are a number of voluntary services but their capacity is limited and they cannot possibly help every one of the eight thousand families that are targeted each year.

Every government funded solicitor in the country refuses to take on the case of a parent who claims their child was taken wrongfully. Instead parents are coerced under duress to admit things they have not done. Quite often proceedings are started because the parent complained about the wrong doing and the Council use the excuse that the matter is now subject to Court proceedings, rather than investigate the complaint of wrong doing.

One of my Facebook friends has a mother who is a retired family lawyer that devotes tremendous time to her case. The mother herself has studied law to postgraduate level and works 17 hours a day on her case. Her work is checked by her mother, Mensa level proof readers and top voluntary lay advisers from PAIN. They confirm the illegalities and the unlawfulness.

This same mother has the same qualifications required by Ofsted to be a childminder. One of the best psychologists in the world has confirmed she is an honest, devoted mother with a good brain with no mental illness. Her children's health was unremarkable and their development was beyond expectation at the time they were taken. They had no emotional or behavioural problems but now, after being alienated from everyone and everything they have ever known in the course of Care proceedings they are said to be suffering post traumatic stress.

This mother has not been allowed to see her children since 28 April 2010 because the judge says it's harmful to the children to have contact with her while she believes they have been taken unlawfully.

Her children are being threatened with forced adoption. Justice is not being done.

While she waits over 2 weeks for a reply to the letter she sent the guardian's solicitor all she gets is threats of committal proceedings for her activity on Facebook. They seem to have plenty of time to search the internet for trace of her and print off and read anything she publishes but they won't reply to the letter she wrote them on 10 September 2010 asking for her children to be properly represented. The children's solicitor seems far more interested in imprisoning her than in the welfare of the children and their complaints partner fully supports that.

If this mother cannot achieve justice, who can? Like many other children, her children should never have been taken. As every MP states in their standard letter sent in reply to parents desperate for help: "The law is clear – children should live with their parents wherever possible and, when necessary, families should be given extra support to help keep them together."

In Re B (children) FC 2008 UKHL Baroness Hale of Richmond stated:

'Taking a child away from her family is a momentous step, not only for her but for her whole family and for the local authority which does so. In a totalitarian society, uniformity and conformity are valued. Hence the totalitarian state tries to separate the child from her family and mould her to its own design. Families in their subversive variety are the breeding ground of diversity and individuality. In a free and democratic society we value diversity and individuality. Hence the family is given special protection in all modern human rights. The child is not the mere creature of the state.

In EH v Greenwich [2010] EWCA Civ 344 Lord Justice Wall stated:

"Social workers are perceived by many as the arrogant and enthusiastic removers of children from their parents into an unsatisfactory care system, and as trampling on the rights of parents and children in the process. This case will do little to dispel that perception.”

The question of ‘who is accountable when the Law that is so clear is not abided by?’ remains pertinent.

I would also like to know if I live in a democratic country where the government works for the governed or are we all just slaves of the government as in a dictatorship, like Mao’s China and Stalin’s Russia? It seems clear to me from the many parents who speak about the torture of care proceedings on Facebook that the EH v Greenwich case is a typical example of what is happening throughout the country.

WILL MY QUESTION BE ASKED IN PARLIAMENT?

Do you work for your constituents or for the Medical schools, Universities, Drugs Companies who require human guinea pigs or do you work for Child Traffickers who supply the sex trade with children? Can you provide evidence that when our children are removed from their parents they go on to live happy lives, free from emotional harm?

Will you represent your constituents in Parliament and take the moral stance that government funded kidnap is inhumane, even where you have no financial incentive to do so? The people of this country want to know which MPs are working for us!

I very much look forward to watching the broadcast of the House of Commons question time scheduled for 11 October 2:30 with Rt Hon Michael Gove answering questions and seeing you in attendance showing your commitment to Justice, democracy and the Protection of Human Rights.

If you are unable to attend please could you send me a copy of your written question which you will be asking the Rt Hon Michael Gove.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sabine K McNeill left an annotation ()

This is just to let you know that I publish http://victims-unite.net and do as much linking as possible to expose local councils involved in stealing children to get money into their coffers from the Government...

APPALLING!!!

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-w...

Open this link and come on mass to this event. this site will give you full instruction as to how to present your evidence.

Now is our chance to bring the monsters down and reclaim our Common law rights, expel corrupt officialdom and expose this mass corruption, treason and tyranny in the UK. Lawful, peaceful, non violent mass non compliance is our weapon against all those responsible for destroying innocent families and abusing OUR CHILDREN. Thank you.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

I am so sorry that the link failed here it is again, sorry for any inconvenience . Hope to see all interested parties at the event, now is our only chance to expose this and get it out to the wider community, in the best interest of all the children who have been stolen from their families and abused in the care system. Please come along to Stoke on the 23rd and support us.

http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-w...

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

In November 2010, the broadcast of Florence Bellona on the problem of the adoption forced Britain had caused the stir. The words "forced adoption" refer to scandals such as that of "l'arche de Zoé" in which Westerners embark foreign children under the pretext of extract to their misery, and without checking if they are really abandoned, for the placing on the market of international adoption.
But the fact that European countries such as the United Kingdom knowingly removes his own children and make them adopt without the consent of parents of birth remains a little-known phenomenon, because the affected families do not have the right to refer their case outside the Court of justice family, still less than in talking to a journalist under sentence of imprisonment.
The United Kingdom has a questionable history in "child protection" since the 19th century. One of the most dramatic episodes lasted 70 years: children stolen from poor families were sent to Australia State program "Migrant Children" to create "a good white strain"! 40 years after the end of the program, the beginning of 2010, Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have produced a public apology in the House of Commons for this historic disaster.
Recognition of forced exile, despite decades of campaign by the families of victims, has virtually been no media coverage and its managers were never punished. Today, the "gagging order" (gagging order) protects the State, the press freedom, but freedom of expression. The parents came to use alternative media to describe their ordeal and above all, to find their children.
In recent years, is more material poverty but the charges of child abuse which precede the withdrawal children by social services. First, Florence Bellone listened to the explanations of MPs wishing to abolish forced adoption, those of associations for the defence of families and the testimony of parents. It soon became apparent it that parents really abusing would pass not 10 or 15 years to find their children and to all courts including the European Court of Justice to obtain their returns… And above all, there are thousands of women accused of "future negligence" or "future emotional injury" of their child, since the early days of the grossesse… It away the infant at birth and were thus removed each new baby, on the sole basis of a psychiatrist paid by social services. Their crime: have been a victim of domestic violence, either by their parents, or their partner, and very often by the family of home or orphanage or themselves were placed. Several hundred mothers, alone or in couple, fled abroad to keep their baby.
Legal records of these families and stories have him know the extent and variety of the tactics used by social services to parents. Subsequently, by becoming "MacKenzie friend" (legal support to which parents are right when they have no lawyer), Florence Bellone was able to attend hearings in the courts as well as the examinations of the parents by social services. Very often, what appears first as the false evidence are only statements not verified the Court and accepted by the judge as compelling facts. The same is true of the legal "guardians" of abducted children, who represent the child in court!

The continuous survey

In a second report on the "stolen children", Florence Bellone gives more speaking parents who have lost their children, but children who were themselves adopted force or at least, force from their families. Some are now adults, others have only 11 to 13 years. A raid of the police to take an infant and a maintenance of a woman pregnant with a social worker will also give an idea of the nightmarish situations generated by "child welfare". Finally we will discuss the issue of foreign children whose families, on the British territory, fell in the trap: Matilde, girl French 11 year removed with his little sister Louison in June, managed to call his father, late August - abusing his family of home - and -surveillance. It says "their life in prison", and especially request assistance to find their father and leave the England…

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org