Alastair Patterson

Dear Crown Prosecution Service,

1. The DPP appeared on the Radio 4 1 O'Clock News yesterday in an article on FGM.

2. The DPP claimed that "neglect" was a possible prosecution. This of course is the offence of child cruelty under s.1 Children and Young Peoples Act 1933. The offence is the criminal form of child neglect and abuse defined in Annex A of Working Together to Safeguard Children.

3. The charging standard and sentencing guidance anticipate concurrent prosecutions of cruelty and assault, which correspond to physical and sexual abuse in Working Together. Wilful neglect of s.1(1) should be prosecuted by the CPS and deemed neglect, s.1(2) called emotional abuse in Working Together,should be prosecuted by the Department of Work and Pensions, on the advice of the Child Support Agency, as child related welfare benefit fraud.

4. The sentencing guidance references (via UN Article 19(2)) local authority services to families under Part III Children Act 1989 for preventing child neglect and abuse.

5. The offence is the principle child protection measure of deterrence in the criminal law, but has only been rarely prosecuted since 1971 leaving children unprotected. This was when the first edition of Working Together was published and introduced paedophile information exchange as information sharing in child safeguarding when paedophile meant child health remedy.

6. A particular child health remedy was prescription of contraception to, what the court in Gillick later described as, "young women well under the age of consent". The age of consent was lowered 13 for women, to protect them in their best interests, but not for any man who may take advantage of it.

7. The Paedophile Information Exchange formed as an organisation to take advantage of the new opportunity for child sex. They pursued the best interests of the child, later the Fraser Guidance from Gillick for proper consent, as an opportunity for child sex.

8. The Paedophile Information Exchange Manifesto of 1975 contains the essential ingredients of what became the Children Act 1989 where the Fraser Guidance was given statutory form as the best interests of the child in the s.1(3) welfare checklist.

9. Returning the DPP and the BBC news. Later in the article the DPP was asked about information sharing in child safeguarding, the perennial issue in child protection failures for 20 years. Without being specific the DPP gave the very clear impression that the CPS were actively involved in information sharing for child safeguarding and the issue being properly addressed.

10. This is completely untrue. Information is valueless to the CPS unless it is seized in accordance with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

11. In any event, medical information is confidential and requires consent to share. Either from a Gillick competent child or a person with parental responsibility for a child that lacks capacity. (This is confirmed in Chapter 1 of Working Together to Safeguard Children (2013) and s.2 of the Early Years Foundation Stage Order, s.37 Child Care Act 2006).

12. The only agency that has consent to share such information is the Child Support Agency, requesting local authority s.47 enquiries if necessary, which they should do in either prosecuting the offence of child cruelty themselves or passing to the CPS via the police.

13. The CSA failure to share information and the CPS failure to prosecute the offence of child cruelty are the establishment protections for the Paedophile Information Exchange.

FOI REQUEST
Please can you supply reference to all statutory provisions that allow child health and development information to be shared in child safeguarding other than by consent or being seized as evidence.

Yours faithfully,

Alastair Patterson

Freedom of Information Unit, Crown Prosecution Service

Dear Mr Patterson

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 REQUEST

 

I acknowledge receipt of your request for information.

 

Your request was received on 23 July 2014 and we are dealing with it under
the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Please note there is a
20 working day limit (from receipt of request) in which we are required to
respond to requests.

 

The deadline for your request is 20 August 2014.

 

In some circumstances a fee may be payable and if that is the case, I will
let you know the likely charges before proceeding.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Mrs S Walsh

 

Information Management Unit

020 3357 0899

[1][CPS request email]

 

show quoted sections

Freedom of Information Unit, Crown Prosecution Service

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Patterson

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 REQUEST

 

Please see the attached response to your Freedom of Information request.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Mrs S Walsh

 

Information Management Unit

020 3357 0899

[CPS request email]

 

 

show quoted sections

Alastair Patterson

Dear Freedom of Information Unit,

Establishment cover up of child abuse is evidenced is evidenced by a lack of of evidence for acting on child abuse concerns.

The request was,
"Please can you supply reference to all statutory provisions that
allow child health and development information to be shared in
child safeguarding other than by consent or being seized as
evidence. "

You have ignored the request completely. This is compelling evidence of the DPP's role in covering up child abuse that is to be presented to the forthcoming review on establishment cover up of child abuse.

The CPS now has the opportunity of responding and the response, or lack of it, will, of course, be included in the submission to that review.

Yours sincerely,

Alastair Patterson

Freedom of Information Unit, Crown Prosecution Service

Dear Mr Patterson

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 REQUEST – INTERNAL REVIEW

 

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email of 22 August 2014.

 

Your email will be referred for an internal review and assigned to a Crown
Prosecution Service official who was not involved with the original
decision in relation to your FOI request (our ref: 4799).

 

We normally expect to complete internal reviews within 20 working days,
although more complex cases may take longer. We will however endeavour to
respond to you as quickly as practicable.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Mr P Willman

Information Management Unit

Tel: 020 3357 0899

E-mail: [1][CPS request email]

 

*********************************************************************+
This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients.
If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply
e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the
Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for
other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be
monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other
lawful business purposes.
*********************************************************************

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[CPS request email]

Freedom of Information Unit, Crown Prosecution Service

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Patterson

 

Please see attached.

 

Regards

 

Mr P Willman | Deputy Head of Information Management Unit

Communications Directorate | Crown Prosecution Service

Rose Court, 2 Southwark Bridge, London SE1 9HS

Tel: 020 3357 0899

[1]www.cps.gov.uk

 

*********************************************************************+
This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients.
If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply
e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the
Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for
other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be
monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other
lawful business purposes.
*********************************************************************

References

Visible links
1. http://www.cps.gov.uk/

Angela Snodgrove left an annotation ()

You need to complain about that guy! The CPS is worse than police.
You need to escalate it within the CPS first then when they give you the next runaround (which they will), complain to the ICO.

casework@ico.gsi.gov.uk

Please post your complaint online so everyone can see how devious and obstructive ALL these public entities are.

Alastair Patterson left an annotation ()

Don't I know.

Child exploitation, sexual and financial, is a national policy. The government has mislead the UN Joint Human Rights Committee on the UK's implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to allow it.

Nobody is ever going to disclose information that confirms that. I am building an evidence base for a criminal defence in a campaign of violence against state's officials that we are planning. The "Family Jihad".

Regards,

Alastair

Looking for an EU Authority?

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

AskTheEU.org