Previous
Fassit UK Press Response Re - 'Open or shut case in Guardian UK'
Added: (Thu Apr 20 2006)
Fassit UK Press Release in response to the Guardian article on Wednesday April 19, 2006 entitled 'Open or shut case' Link: http://society.guardian.co.uk/societyguardian/story/0,,1755965,00.html
It should be immediately acknowledged that such is the corruption within the Family Court that even those parents awarded costs against the local authorities are not allowed to tell their stories to the press...So who but someone who has something to hide would have such rules in place. Why are parents who had cases effectively dismissed, not allowed to provide all the details to the press. I refer to those non sexual cases.
And moving on to some of the contributors named above.
Ian Johnston
Director, British Association of Social Workers states:
� I have some sympathy with the objectives of removing barriers and sharing information, but this is a sensitive area and more openness raises serious questions. Children have a right to be protected from information being inappropriately shared with others. There are anomalies in the family court system. If it seems reasonable to be able to complain to the General Medical Council when an expert witness's conduct has been questionable [in the criminal courts], why can't you complain to the General Social Care Council about a social worker"
Ian Johnstone, we wouldn't be complaining to the smarmy General Social Care Council ( GSCC ) the social workers regulator, more an apologist and protector of dysfunctional and delinquent social workers��The presence of the press will reveal to the police and Attorney General that perjury is a regular occurrence in the Family Court. Forget the GSCC. Currently the GSCC is aware that there are social workers employed in one local authority who were sacked for 'GROSS MISCONDUCT' in a neighbouring local authority. Some social workers are 'using other names' with the approval of the GSCC. Some social workers arrested for child abuse have given evidence in Family Court cases. None of these cases has ever been reviewed. The presence of the press will alert the public to the scandal and will put names to the social workers and paediatricians who have been engaged in such activities.........This is the real fear of those engaged in the secret industry of the Family Court gulags.
It is the Crown Prosecution Service and the police that will become involved with social workers and paediatricians providing false evidence against innocent and vulnerable parents and children.
Social workers and others share information in the Family Court. We want the press to share their observations with the public.......What are you afraid of....The end of the game....Game up. Eh! The first essential point is that the press should publish from the courts and the public will be able to see just what has been going on.
Glyn Farrow
Chief executive, Children Law UK states:
� There may be some cases where it would be suitable to include the press and public, but for others it would be disastrous. It is terribly delicate and we need to get it right. To do that we need more research."
Really! What cases are so bad Glyn Farrow that all the details concerning those who brought the case to court cannot be revealed. If the press can report from the criminal courts and can manage to report the most heinous crimes ( child murderers etc ) , whilst yet keeping the identity of the child/children secret��..Why cannot the same be done in the Family Court.
Glyn Farrow is trying to appear �concerned��.He states �It is terribly delicate��..You bet it is. It is even more delicate when social workers and paediatricians have presented false information to the judge and are not being identified. The parents are being assaulted on all sides, but those doing the assaulting are being well paid by the state and are not identified! �.Those providing the false evidence don�t want their identities or their reports published.
You bet the social workers and the paediatricians are worried. Now we will know just who said what and how often the same Dr. Harold Shipman has made the exact same statement, sometimes even without seeing/meeting the child/parent.
Anthony Douglas
Chief executive, Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service states:
� The real question is: do the family courts make the right decisions for individual children? Outcome studies of family court decisions are fewer than for other parts of the justice system. The test of a decision is whether an individual child is more secure, safer, happier, healthier, better educated, and has stronger, lasting attachments."
Without the press being involved to report, there can be no independent collection of information. Neither is the test of a decision whether an individual child is more secure, safer, happier, and healthier, better educated, and has stronger, lasting attachments.
The reason that cases are brought to the Family court is because of neglect or abuse....Not whether my children could have a better life if they were looked after by Bill Gates. This just shows how Tony Blair's Nanny State has insidiously planted the many social workers to clandestinely arrange social engineering. And all those involved in this labyrinthine plot are inter-connected and very well paid by the state........But Schhh! You are not to know who they are. What they are doing and what dosh they are getting...All secret!
However, in a democracy 'justice must be seen to be done�. In the gulag of the Family Court, a huge industry is in operation, in secret. And almost all of the �workers� in this secret industry are paid by the state.
The presence of the press will identify which social workers have given false evidence so that they can successfully remove children from their parents. Some social workers have links with adoption and fostering agencies. Some social workers are simultaneously directors and trustees of adoption and fostering agencies. We will also learn which social workers have written books that have been bought by tame local authorities.
So, we have a situation that those making the allegations against the parents and children are not identified. �.Those providing reports are not identified. Their reports remain unknown to the public. The same small group are lifting their skirts and walking into any one of a number of other Family Courts. They are doing all of this and getting handsomely rewarded by the state. Their payments are unknown. The number of times they have given their false evidence is not known.
How on earth can Anthony Douglas be in any doubt that the wrong decisions have been made?
None of the Family Court procedures, processes, individuals and the payments they receive comes under ANY INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY.
This is not a court���������.Stalin didn�t even have anything that approximated to the Family Court.
From our own correspondent'.
Kindest Regards
Fassit Team
http://www.fassit.co.uk/