Justice For Families

It is one of the Birmingham ones. Although I have done an FoI on all the authorities about kids sent to Jersey only Birmingham has done a thorough job.

We have two other authority names that I wish to sit on for a bit.

the more I read the more horrific it becomes..
I think there is a lot more to come to light than this...
it seems it is not just a tax haven...

Try asking questions of your own council (Hampshire) and lets see how honest they are.

The key to this is to prove the link to the mainland as well. Stuart, Austin and I have a "meeting" with the Government tomorrow.

"meeting" because Austin and I will phone in. Stuart may also. (He should, but I think he wants to go to London).

johnhemming wrote:Try asking questions of your own council (Hampshire) and lets see how honest they are.

The key to this is to prove the link to the mainland as well. Stuart, Austin and I have a "meeting" with the Government tomorrow.

"meeting" because Austin and I will phone in. Stuart may also. (He should, but I think he wants to go to London).

Good luck for tomorrow.



PS Can anyone tell me the procedure to obtain data under the Freedom of Information?
Is is easy, or fraught with problems? I rather fancy "having a go".

It isn't public liability insurence - which is required for medium- sized firms and above (but not for small firms after Patricia Hewitt ruled) but professional indemnity insurence. The nature of my profession is that I have PII - it indemnifies for about £1.5 million for £350. In particular the insurer will do all they can to ensure they don't pay out - with a top commercial barrister and legal team.

Doctors have a similar setup with the Medical Defence Union scheme.

This does not make sense. How can an MK need professional indemnity insurance when the whole point of an MK is that they are not professionals but lay people. Start giving MKs the title 'Professional' and I agree with John from CGFAP, they will be stopped from entering the court.

Peavy, do you mind me asking how often you attend Court?
This is not asked in a rude or sarcastic way, but because I have read your other posts which seem to have a very upbeat feel that attitudes have changed drastically because of the involvement of thev Council of Europe issue, I haven't seen or felt this great change and personally don't feel too many people will be bothered so I was wondering if you had different experiences.
I do think there are changes (albeit very small) in Judges willing to listen to an alternative view to that of a social worker.

You would be surprised what you might need insurance for.

It depends on the context that it would be needed.

If a MF is assaulted during a court hearing, then this insurance would cover them.

Generally speaking whenever you have a PLC, you need public liability because where there is blame there is a claim! It's protection for MF's in court, I guess travelling to courts and against JFF Ltd. If someone took exception to the advice and guidance given in court, given that we are in the legal arena here, I guess JFF need to be protected for that. MF's from FNF are covered by public liability. Some of these guys get fully paid for the work they do, even though they have no legal status. Up to £60 an hour some get. There has to be some protection against claims made against MF's. Even though technically they are not "professional".

There are lots of "professional" MK's out there that have not been banned from court. FNF also organise training for their MF's - that still does not make them "professional".

Even lay people such as advocates for children, volunteers etc would be covered by public liability insurance. It's quite standard when running a company.

I run a small, not for profit, research team. We don't get paid for anything we do but still have to have public liability because of the places we go to. If one of my team accidentally fell over and smashed some ancient vase we have to be covered for that eventuality.

I do agree to a certain extent Cavvy. I do believe that MK's will begin to be turned away from court more, but not because of over professionalism, simply because there are so many LIP's now and this is something the judiciary would wish to discourage.
That is why they have increased the costs of court applications for example by over 100%.
At the moment as it still stands, there are still no good reasons for a judge to not allow a MF in court, regardless of their background or who they "work" for.

I don't think it's related to being an MK, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Jersey is an immense topic, and hopefully, they can argue that the UK Government has total culpability and accountability for what happened.
We're entering the next phase, and we're locking the front door and locking the back door against the UK government, by having limited liability in situ, before the Jersey issues are tackled. Being a ltd company, means that extra protections are there, as some of us, could be considered, fifth columnists, working against our own government.


I have to say, that Internationally child protection activists are starting to pick up on the UK.

So where ever we think we are in the fight, the other countries seem to think we're the ones with "it going on".
Everyone is expecting the UK to be the one to make the breakthrough.

So I hope you're all really proud - and realise how many are watching us, and how many would love to be us.

I could be wrong here and open to correction...
jersey is part of the channel islands and totally self governing. it is neither part of the UK or the EU, it is however part of the crown pledging its allegiance and therefore the UK has a duty to protect it...
Although we all stand back and gasp at what is going on regarding the current issues and Haut de la Garenne, we also have to take into consideration that asking questions is one thing, actively participating against our own government is in effect treason. you wont be considered fifth columnists you actually will be.
With regards to what we are doing within our own circle trying to open family courts, completely revamping the Social services, losing coram and cafcass, calling for Brown to call a general election is all part and parcel and totally acceptable we are not revolutionaries trying to overthrow the government...
so tread carefully the rest of the world may applaud what you are doing, but don't expect their support if it all goes horribly wrong, the press will have a field day then you will become yesterdays news so fast...
being a limited company wont help any of you and there wont be an insurance company in the UK that will cover you because insuring you will be seen as supporting you..

Alexander Solzhenitsyn:

Justice is conscience, not a personal conscience but the conscience of the whole of humanity. Those who clearly recognize the voice of their own conscience usually recognize also the voice of justice.




I accept your point.

But this point is also true and valid for every man of great conscience from Nelson Mandela to Schindlers List...

There comes a point when you have to chose morality over the state.

If challenging the government over cover ups is treason or insisting they act on clear evidence of murder & abuse, then there needs to be more people guilty of treason & I would be happy to be a guilty one.

Since we are using quotations;

"Even If I am a minority of one, truth is still the truth."

So true for anyone challenging government or taking on any other organisation that targets people like the SS

I asked at the beginning why JFF is becoming a limited company and there has been no response fully explaining this.

Is it because one can apply for expenses for MK's that one couldnt get now.

Ive heard if you make an org a charity then you can't be too political so is that why JFF hasnt gone down that route?

Being a charity is a different thing to the form of legal entity. Most charities are companies some limited by guarantee some by shares.

There are two common entities. Limited Companies and unincorporated associations. There is no merit in JFF being an unincorporated asssociation.

Avenger asked
"I asked at the beginning why JFF is becoming a limited company and there has been no response fully explaining this.

Is it because one can apply for expenses for MK's that one couldnt get now. "

I notice the question still hasnt been answered

What benefits will MK friends get from joining JFF Ltd?

A company operates as its own legal identity.

A MK can be a friend, without any legal obligation.

Or a shareholder in JFF, also gets limited liability - if the paedophile rings decide to sue JFF, (which lets face it paedophiles are obsessive nutters...), the maximum liability would be £1.

MK and JFF are two distinct and mutually exclusive aspects. So JFF and being a MK are not linked.

But if JFF takes on Jersey, then IMHO, they must operate as a limited company.
I've only had limited dealings with paedophiles via youtube. One paedophile battled 3 members of MFJ from around 7 pm to 6 am the next morning - over a video.
Taunting obsessively that paedophilia was not illegal.
paedophiles are maniacs. totally unhinged.
Obsessive about their catalogues.
Use "airy fairy" visionary language. Think they're hiding behind "linguistics" and you don't know what they really mean.

This was dearest Nigella, Nigel the Paedophile. Convicted for 15,000 child porn images... so he's always down the shed, "filing"....for want of a better word.

I'd definitely, from my limited exposure (no pun intended...) to paedophiles would want every single blockage, and legal identity put between them and me.
They're exasperating to fight, even when it's many against one.
Totally unhinged.
They would sue the backside off you, given the chance.
Nigel is also a doctor, he's very bright. Takes on cases for other paedophiles, so he might well be one that JFF will have to come across in the future.
They're so bad, that it stuns you. They honestly believe that they have the right "Sexual attraction to minors" and that there's nothing wrong with it. If you weren't careful, they could almost convince you black was white.
That's why I'd say, even after 24 hours in the ring, get the nukes primed going up against paedophile rings. Trust me, they're warped...

Youtube of one the UK's paedophiles who you're likely to "come" across. (no pun intended).

Nice bloke... listen to this.
WMCrtest - Id courtsey of Absolute Zero

He reserves the right to take pictures of peoples children without consent, and then use them for masturbation if he wishes to.
****

Quote from Dr Nigel Oldfield. And, no, the families, of which you speak would not have a cat-in-hells chance of legal action, even if I had pumped pints onto to their little cherubs (feel free to contact some and let them have my email).

Thanks to Absolute Zero.

He's quite infamous... here's an example of his "debate", and why we will need every kind of protection from a bunch of nutters like this.

WMCrtest - On Trial!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1R_Dnvvj8xA

WMCrtest - On Trial - Part 2
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oXYxh_6rKdc

Enjoy!! lol!

WARNING, Nigella "does your head in"... but it's entertaining, as "he's for real".