Almost Half Of Seven To Eleven Year Olds Don’t Know Why They’re In Care.

Severing birth ties and gagging parents and children is wrong, especially those removed under a care order on the imprecise basis of potential emotional harm thus enabling the corporate parent to INFLICT emotional abuse with impunity by harming the child’s identity and developmental needs!
Time for a class action by wrongfully removed and commodified children on the basis of FUDGED (ie false, misleading and inaccurate) reports at court, for little more than corporate profit.

Researching Reform

A new survey produced by the University of Bristol and Coram Voice, reveals that of the 3,000 children interviewed, 49% of 4-7 year olds and 33% of 8-11 year olds did not understand why they were in care.

Other findings conclude that over a quarter (27%) of 11-18 year olds had three or more social workers over the last year and a fifth (20 %) of 4-7 year olds didn’t know who their social worker was.

The survey, which has not been made publicly available, is part of the organisations’ ‘Our Lives, Our Care’ study.

While the survey is nothing more than a marketing opportunity for Coram – Brigid Robinson, Managing Director of Coram Voice, makes that clear in the press release for the survey when she says, “For us to improve outcomes for children and young people in care it is vital that we understand their experiences and learn from…

View original post 36 more words

Advertisements

Evidence in family proceedings: recent case law and comments

dbfamilylaw

20160419_170156Burden of proof in family proceedings

The law of evidence is mostly defined by the common law. The common law can only be changed by statute or by higher common law authority. Court rules may define the common law, but they cannot change it (see eg British South Africa Co v Companhia de Mocambique [1893] AC 602). This article considers a few recent case law and other developments in the law of evidence in relation to family proceedings.

First the burden of proof: as is well-known, this generally falls on the party who asserts facts in issue. The burden must be established to the civil standard: that is that a fact is more likely to have happened than not. In Re A (Children) [2018] EWCA Civ 1718  the issue before the Court of Appeal was ‘whether the judge [below] fell into error in the findings he made in relation to…

View original post 2,604 more words

#MbS: #Saudis Defend #Khashoggi Murder By Deifying Young Pr*ck Prince!

Quote

Saudis Defend Against Khashoggi Murder By Deifying Young Prick Prince

[Saudi Arabia Says Calls for Internationalization of Holy Sites ‘A Declaration of War’ ]

Saudi Arabia Is Misusing Mecca

In the aftermath of the Jamal Khashoggi murder, the kingdom has exploited the podium of the Grand Mosque in Mecca by using its imams to praise, sanctify and defend the rulers and their actions.

By Khaled M. Abou El Fadl

Mr. Fadl teaches law at the University of California, Los Angeles.

CreditCreditChristina Hägerfors 

The rulers of Saudi Arabia derive much of their legitimacy and prestige in the Muslim world from their control and upkeep of the Grand Mosque and the Kaaba in Mecca and the mosque of Prophet Muhammad in Medina. King Salman, like the rulers before him, wears the title of the “Khadim al-Ḥaramayn al-Sharifayn,” which is translated as the “Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques” or, more precisely, “The Servant of the Two Noble Sanctuaries.”

Despite the humility of the royal title, the Saudi monarchy has a long history of exploiting the podium of the Grand Mosque in Mecca by using its imams to praise, sanctify and defend the rulers and their actions.

In the aftermath of the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, as the world’s accusatory gaze was transfixed on Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi monarchy has again used the Grand Mosque to defend and deify the crown prince in a manner that makes its legitimacy and control of Mecca and Medina morally troubling like never before.

On Oct. 19, Sheikh Abdulrahman al-Sudais, the officially appointed imam of the Grand Mosque and the highest religious authority in the kingdom, delivered his Friday sermon from a written script. Friday sermons at the Grand Mosque are broadcast live on cable networks and social media sites, watched with great reverence by millions of Muslims and carry a great deal of moral and religious authority.

Imam Sudais delivered a troubling sermon, violating the sanctity of the sacred space he occupied. He referenced a saying attributed to Prophet Muhammad that once every century, God sends a mujaddid, a great reformer to reclaim or reinvigorate the faith. He explained that the mujaddid is needed to address the unique challenges of each age.

He proceeded to extol Prince Mohammed bin Salman as a divine gift to Muslims and implied that the crown prince was the mujaddid sent by God to revive the Islamic faith in our age. “The path of reform and modernization in this blessed land … through the care and attention from its young, ambitious, divinely inspired reformer crown prince, continues to blaze forward guided by his vision of innovation and insightful modernism, despite all the failed pressures and threats,” the imam declared, from the podium where Prophet Muhammad delivered his last sermon.

Invoking the debate following the Khashoggi murder, Imam Sudais warned Muslims against believing ill-intended media rumors and innuendos that sought to cast doubt on the great Muslim leader. He described the conspiracies against the crown prince as intended to destroy Islam and Muslims, warning that “all threats against his modernizing reforms are bound not only to fail, but will threaten international security, peace and stability.”

He cautioned that the attacks against “these blessed lands” are a provocation and offense to more than a billion Muslims. Imam Sudais used the word “muhaddath,” or “uniquely and singularly gifted” to describe Prince Mohammed. “Muhaddath” was the title given by Prophet Muhammad to Umar Ibn al-Khattab, his companion and the second caliph of Islam. The imam implicitly compared the crown prince to Caliph Umar.

Imam Sudais prayed for God to protect Prince Mohammed against the international conspiracies being woven against him by the enemies of Islam, the malingerers and hypocrites, and concluded that it was the solemn duty of all Muslims to support and obey the king and the faithful crown prince, the protectors and guardians of the holy sites and Islam.

Muslim Hajj pilgrims circumambulate around the Kaaba, Islam’s holiest site, located in the center of the Grand Mosque in the holy city of Mecca, Saudi Arabia.CreditMustafa Ciftci/Anadolu Agency, via Getty Images 

When an imam of the Grand Mosque calls upon Muslims to obediently accept Prince Mohammed’s incredulous narrative about the murder of Mr. Khashoggi; to accept his abduction, jailing and torture of dissenters, including imprisonment of several revered Islamic scholars; to ignore his pitiless and cruel war in Yemen, his undermining the democratic dreams in the Arab world, his support for the oppressive dictatorship in Egypt, it makes it impossible to accept the imam’s categorization of the crown prince as a divinely inspired reformer. The sanctified podium of the prophet in Mecca is being desecrated and defiled.

The control of Mecca and Medina has enabled the clerical establishment and the monarchy flush with oil money to extend their literalist and rigid interpretations of Islam beyond the borders of the kingdom. Most Muslims will always prefer a tolerant and ethically conscientious Islam to the variant championed by the crown prince and the acquiescent Saudi clergy.

By using the Grand Mosque to whitewash acts of despotism and oppression, Prince Mohammed has placed the very legitimacy of the Saudi control and guardianship of the holy places of Mecca and Medina in question.

Khaled M. Abou El Fadl is a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the author of “Reasoning With God: Reclaiming Shari‘ah in the Modern Age.”


Correction: 

An earlier version of this article misstated a term that Sheikh Abdulrahman al-Sudais used to describe Prince Mohammed bin Salman as a divinely inspired reformer. The word was “mujaddid,” not “mujtahid.” The earlier version also misspelled one of King Salman’s titles. It is Khadim al-Haramayn al-Sharifayn, not Khadim al-Ḥaramayn as-Sarifayn.

 

via Saudis Defend Against Khashoggi Murder By Deifying Young Prick Prince

Cultural #Imperialism: Linguistic Perversion and #Obfuscation of #Empire Building!

Cultural Imperialism: Linguistic Perversion and Obfuscation of Empire BuildingProf. James Petras | Global Research | November 13, 2018

SOURCE: Cultural Imperialism: Linguistic Perversion and Obfuscation of Empire BuildingProf. James Petras | Global Research | November 13, 2018

The Plan: Why Israel Is Bent on Supporting Arab Division

The hidden costs of the global human refugee crisis point to the bubble finally bursting in the chaos and destruction wrought by Israeli hegemony – together with its neocon and bankster enablers.

Astute News

During many meetings with senior members of the Syrian opposition in various European cities in 2013-2014, I would remind them that Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United States, amongst others, host and finance the opposition due to their own self-interest and agendas; and not out of love for Syria. I would note that there is no disagreement among us Syrians about the brutality, corruption and exploitation of the Ottoman Empire during its four-century rule of Syria; we don’t want history to repeat itself. As for Saudi Arabia, I would remind the opposition of the contributions Syrian professionals made in the development of the Kingdom in past decades. We say to the Saudis “Blessed be your Wahhabism for you, but not for Syria”; Syria is a cultural and societal mosaic of ethnic, religious and sectarian components. As for the United States, we all agree that Washington supports Israel and views Syria…

View original post 856 more words

Disgusted by Mike’s Kangroo Court Trial

“RIP, Stan Lee, a true titan of the four-colour funny papers.

It’s disgusting that Mike, and so many others have been treated this way by a party that should be defending people like him and the others against a predatory, Conservative establishment. Rather than propping up it up with lies, smears and derisory pretence at justice, presided over by faceless bureaucrats and cynical, moral cowards.

Mike’s made it very clear that he will fight on to clear his name and redress this gross injustice. I wish him all the best, as I do everyone else, who has been smeared by these bullying moral vacuities.”

Beastrabban\'s Weblog

Yesterday Mike had his hearing before a Labour party tribunal in Wales to decide the charge against him of being an anti-Semite. As is clear to anyone who reads anything Mike has actually written, rather than lies put out by a corrupt, mendacious press and the Israel lobby, an anti-Semite is the very last thing Mike is. He isn’t at all racist or prejudiced, as a gay friend of his tried to make clear to three men, who suspiciously approached him last week wanting to talk to him about the charge. Mike found that encounter extremely suspicious. They knew him by name, though he’d never met them, and claimed that they’d read about him in the papers, although as Mike wrote on his blog, he only featured in them in May last year, 2017. That’s a long time ago. It could all have been perfectly innocuous, but Mike wondered if…

View original post 1,587 more words

Case Law: Price v MGN, “Disgraced” chief constable’s libel claim not an abuse – Mathilde Groppo

“This case is also interesting in the wider context of the Supreme Court’s hearing of the appeal in Lachaux (UKSC 2017/0175). When Mr Justice Warby gave judgment in Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2015] EWHC 2242 (QB), he put forward an interpretation of section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 which involved a substantial change to the existing law of defamation, affecting the extent to which the bar had been raised from the Thornton threshold of substantiality, the presumption of damage and the date on which the cause of action accrues. The Court of Appeal disagreed with this interpretation, which it said entailed a radical change in approach and practice which had not been contemplated by Parliament when enacting the 2013 Act. Mr Justice Warby has clearly taken the Court of Appeal’s comments on board in the present case, in which he rejected the Defendant’s suggestion that the serious harm threshold may have affected the existing rules on meaning and the pleading of a truth defence, thus adopting a conservative approach to the ramifications of section 1(1).”

Inforrm's Blog

On 8 November 2018, Mr Justice Warby handed down judgment in the case of Price v MGN Ltd[2018] EWHC 3014 (QB). The proceedings relate to three articles (copies of which are annexed [pdf] to the judgment) which made serious imputations about the Claimant’s alleged participation in the illegal accessing of the mobile phone records of journalists who were investigating him when he was the Chief Constable of Cleveland Police (the “Interception Meanings”).

View original post 2,062 more words

“I likened it to arriving at the scene of a car crash”.

To the fifth column of antisocial workers who practise family apartheid by commodifying children for corporate profit, make no mistake, the game is up – justice is coming!
“Questions remain as to why the council failed to follow the law, and removed the newborn to put him in a foster placement. The case is likely to arouse suspicion amongst families and activists inside the child protection sector, who have long argued that councils are abusing fostering and adoption placements for financial gain. The fostering sector in the UK is currently worth £1.7 billion, and appears to be thriving despite austerity driven budget cuts and pre Brexit uncertainty. A sharp rise in the number of children being removed from parents in the UK with no clear indication as to what factors are causing these removals, is also deeply concerning.”

Researching Reform

Welcome to another week.

An independent social worker involved in a case where a council placed a baby into foster care without telling the child’s grandparents, likened the handling of the case to a car crash, as she gave her testimony in court.

Judge Lazarus ordered the judgment to be made public after she criticised the social workers, lawyers and the child’s guardian for serious failures within the child protection investigation. Lazarus joins a growing number of judges raising concerns about problems inside the child welfare sector.

The case involved a baby who had been the subject of a care order by Kent County Council before being born. The mother’s parents did not know about the baby until after he had been born, and were not made aware of the application to have the baby fostered.

The child was sent to live with foster parents and remains with them today…

View original post 916 more words

UNIVERSAL CREDIT; WELFARE REFORM – OR A TOOL OF STATE OPPRESSION?

“I have observed that great psychological & physical harm towards the most vulnerable individuals & families, at their times of greatest need, is purposefully encrypted into the Universal Credit claim process. This is 21st century Britain. Given my dreadful experience with Dd’s UC claim, it’s not too dramatic for me to say that my experience is that the DWP is as cruel as medieval Europe in its attitude to the poor & incapacitated, at the least, & as sinister in its destructive intent, to the disadvantaged groups it targets, as mid-20th century Nazi Germany, at the worst.”

AM Word

I make no apologies for the length of this testimony. From direct experience I can confirm that the UC claim process induces heart-stopping fear & prolonged & extreme mental, emotional & financial distress on the claimant from the outset. Such is its power to destroy a claimant’s resilience & options for mere survival, that few UC experiences can be voiced in their full personal & social contexts. This is Dd’s story of being forced onto UC, I hope that it serves to expose the dishonesty of the DWP about the devastation the UC process inflicts on already fragile lives. The DWP perhaps didn’t make account though for impaired & highly vulnerable people like Dd being given a lucid voice. I have all the online journal transcripts & documentation to back the following up.

With love, hope & solidarity

————————–

Dearest Dd turned 20 on 10th December 2017. Of course, this…

View original post 2,792 more words

Car crash, Hot Tub, (wish they had a) Time Machine

“There’s a long and careful analysis of the principles with sources (which I’d recommend as vital reading for any lawyer or professional grappling with the issue of whether to consult with family members where the parent is dead-set against it but where adoption appears a realistic outcome if suitable family members are not found.) But here are the conclusions.”

suesspiciousminds

I’m sure there are boring cases that come into the list of Her Honour Judge Lazarus, but I’m yet to read one.

She opens this cracker with the line

  • “ I likened it to arriving at the scene of a car crash, and wondered what one could do about it. This situation should never have arisen. It’s caused huge tension, including within any recommendation, and I’ve tried to keep X at the centre of it. ” This evidence from the independent social worker effectively summarises the key issues in this case.

 

Which, you’ll agree, is a belter.

Perhaps this opener is better

“Once upon a time, in a place now known as Montana, dinosaurs roamed the land. On a fateful day, some 66 million years ago, two such creatures, a 22-foot-long theropod and a 28-foot-long ceratopsian, engaged in mortal combat.”

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/11/06/16-35506.pdf

 And this might be my favourite line…

View original post 4,338 more words