Justice For Families

The LA do print stuff off.This has been documented since forums started. Even on one case forcing the papers under the judges nose. As long as children arent named I cant see them being able to use this against you. It seems to be a desperation tactic by the LA.

Getting an order from a Judge so as to speak with media about your case, isn't the same as discussing your case on a site (without an order).

The law states we are to be anonamous. Thats that!

As some of you may know I got an order allowing media to attend my hearings before it was changed recently.

When the Judge asked me" was I not concerned that the media would report all my personal business?

I simply replied," BEEP County Council and BEEP police departments sloppy business, is not my personal business".
I was also cross examined about Fassit. lol.

The principles as to why the SS and GAL's print and read members posts is down to desperation, clutching at straws methinks, lack of evidence will mean they will use these boards to quote "ther're against the professionals" and the likes. it is obvious that parents who enter their cases onto websites like this one and fassit is out of sheer frustration at levels the SS and Gals will never know.

If the CP system was fair, balanced, unbiased, and worked to protect children we would most certainly not be here.

I can remember a Judgement last year when the stop injustice website was mentioned in a case, the Judge quoted "if the parents feel they have been wronged by the system and feel they have suffered a serious injustice then the parents have every right to protest their innocence by what ever means they see fit".

In my own opinion I am glad our SS and GAL's are reading these boards, hopefully they will use what ever wisdom they have and conclude that there's serious problems within the CP system, I have found that whenever I am questioned about every bleeding site like JFF and fassit, on the web, the judge and the rest think I am "on one", they feel the system works fine, well they would, they haven't lost their own children to it though, all they have to do is to read the media stories on this site to find out otherwise, the SS want us to bow down to them and kiss their feet, they want the public to respect them, (communitycare.co.uk), they don't just want it, they demmand it, well like us we demmand they do their jobs right, you earn respect, you don't get it by demmanding it.

It is clearly upto the parents how they go about protesting their innocence, they must be responsible to what they post, Look at my own thread, I haven't named our children and secondly I have never named our SS,(no idea why though) even though the entire case is on there, only the people in our court room could deduce that it is actually me, no other member of public who doesnt know me could possibly know, they wouldn't know which part of the country I was from either, a few of the responses name me personally, thats okay.

I speak to the media all the time, almost on a daily basis, I know as much like the rest of you there's leaglities surround disclosing to the media, even they go see lawyers to make sure it is fine to go to print.

I feel not enough local authorities and GAL's (and their sols of course)are named and shamed these days, Look at the Bath case released only a few weeks ago, the SW manager tried to have her name removed, It was refused, people in public office should expect some critisisms and be held to account, they are public servants not public masters.

How do SS acquire your email address etc? Surely it's illegal? What does it say in the privacy law act? What valid reasons do they give before a judge for hacking into your personal emails etc?

Princess, Do the SS do anything these days thats legal?, they get the email address from when you email them.

In the last few months, I was having problems with my email, now its obvious I cannot tell who was hacking my account without tracking IP's, I was composing an email when my account went to inbox and appeared a new email which was being read by someone, also there were many occasions when I would log in and the system told me I was already logged in, the funny part of it was when who ever was reading my emails would take the time to read my deleted emails, move them to inbox, even to the point reading new mails before I had the chance to.

Cynical maybe but I know someone had hacked my emails, since being involved in the SS I have never faced as many problems as I do these days, even our computer hates it when I do anything regarding the SS, it has a dickie fit and shouts at me all the time.

From what I know the fine is £40,000 for breaking this law,
a journalists degree also has a year of law in it tho as I undertstand. I would think that the journalists would have to talk with the lawyers everytime they print. The judgement where a Judge said those things about parents seeking extra help is their right is a very useful judgement for lots of people here. Otherwise ss or cafcass can keep using it against us.

mobaldy2005 wrote:Princess, Do the SS do anything these days thats legal?, they get the email address from when you email them.

Hence the reason I have changed my email address on my membership here, and it is not the same email they use to contact me with. Just a precautionary measure

If they want to know anything about my online activities why don't they be assertive and ask me, I do not have anything to hide.

The above mentioned case

http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed1092

The couple's children had been placed for adoption in 2007 after it had been found that one of them had suffered a non-accidental injury. The LA then discovered that a website called Stopinjusticenow.com contained pictures of the children and a statement dissuading anyone from adopting the children as the medical evidence in the care proceedings had been flawed. They consequently applied for orders restraining the parents from seeking to identify the prospective adopters, contacting the children or publishing the names and addresses of the children.

In this judgment Sumner J concludes the parents were deliberately trying to deter prospective adopters from pursuing any adoption. Therefore, the matter does not require a balancing of Article 8 and 10 rights as the "court has to intervene after proceedings are concluded to protect the children's welfare." He therefore granted the orders requested but did add that "The parents have important rights. Care orders and placement orders do not silence them. They believe they are the victims of a miscarriage of justice. They are entitled to express their views about this. But there are limitations."

44. I do not propose to define the parents' rights. It is sufficient to say that they can air their grievances, probably identify the local authority, though not the evidence at the hearings, the names of the children, nor the doctors who gave evidence. As it is I approve the proposed injunctive relief sought by this local authority

im pretty certain that our ss are getting hold of the private e-mails that i send to my daughter still you know who she is j but i wont be able to prove it until i get hold of her again i know that im not being paranoid because im like the rest of you i know whats going on i smell a rat and a cover up going on still but ive just spoke to the leader of the council so i just hope that it will help our case and get it closed because its about time that it was hope that you j and c are alright just one more thing what is a cp im stupid i dont know what it is if our ss want to read this go ahead because i dont care less about you ive got nothing at all to hide

im pretty certain that our ss are getting hold of the private e-mails that i send to my daughter still you know who she is j but i wont be able to prove it until i get hold of her again i know that im not being paranoid because im like the rest of you i know whats going on i smell a rat and a cover up going on still but ive just spoke to the leader of the council so i just hope that it will help our case and get it closed because its about time that it was hope that you j and c are alright just one more thing what is a cp im stupid i dont know what it is if our ss want to read this go ahead because i dont care less about you ive got nothing at all to hide

Hi DMG

CP = Child Protection

hi loving mama thank you for telling me what cp was i thought that it was but as i said im stupid just like my daughter but dont tell her when you do meet her i want you all on here when ive got hold of her to meet her then the fun will start id just like to say that im sorry that my posting before this posting was duplicated its because my first post which i wrote vanished when i tried to submit it and i got the message that the site was undergoing maintenance spookiy or what? i put it down to them hacking in

Always thought at the conclusion of a case you were still free to speak
out , providing you remained anon. Suspected this has been going on
for a while.

how sad that they cannot find anything better to do with their time
energy and effort, suspect there will be many cases of eyestrain and
shortage of paper supplies in SS offices, with all the printing of emails.
tut tut.
Assumed that as we all log in with our own individual usernames and
passwords this would offer a modicum of security, this thought shows
a sense of nieviety on my part, amazing what they get up to, and why
we have to be one step ahead of them.

The Clayton V Clayton law changed that in 2006 so that identities of the child even could be revealed after the case had finished.
However you dont read of any cases , do you? Apart from Simon Claytons thats the fiorst and last I ever heard of.......forgive me if Ive missed hundreds.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... ather.html

Plus thinking about it that was a divorce case, as if they are going to let us tell the country what a bunch of lousy, lying, lowdown, no good sheisters some of them can be