In the article in today's Brentwood Yellow Advertiser, Pat
Jones the reporter has identified that the police whilst fully aware
of a miscarriage of justice have prevaricated and referred to
the ' Justices' ruling 2001' for their
inactivity, whilst simultaneously the children face being
adopted on 6 July 2005.
So Essex Police, whilst fully aware that the parents in
the Brentwood case are victims of a suspicious miscarriage of
justice...They have told us so...Whilst aware of such false
information and victimisation, the children are soon to be
adopted.......And our wonderful boys in blue..............
skiddadle !!!!!!!
And Detective Superintendant Simon Coxley thinks that is where
the matter will end. He had better do some more dreaming!
Unless the police investigate and charge those concerned, they
are going to be getting a lot more unwelcome publicity.
The 6th Case alleging criminal activity by social workers has
now been submitted to Essex Police. The 7th is but a week away
and the 8th about 3 weeks from submission. A further 4 cases are
also being prepared, with more to follow.
It should be noted that whilst Essex Police have this
timidity about charging those social workers and others in
documented serious criminal activity, the least of which is
'perjury'; most of the cases submitted to Essex police also
identify' misconduct in public office', 'perverting the course of
justice and 'contempt of court'.
In Portsmouth, the Police must have a very different code of
practise and are possibly in quite a different country. In the
Portsmouth News dated 29 July 2003 it was reported that Christine
Purcell ( social worker ) was charged with perjury ( now isn't that
a surprise ! ) and prosecuted. She was found guilty
and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment.
I am sure you would like to know that Christine Purcell's
perjury, it was disclosed to the court, was not 'significant'.
It had no bearing on the final decision of the court. Nonetheless
the police in Portsmouth took it seriously enough to charge
her...And you will notice disregarded 'the Justice's
ruling 2001'. ( Which incidentally is non-binding on
the Police...The Police have informed us ! )
Essex police are faced with documentary evidence of far more
serious crimes and the offences committed by social workers and
others, and these offences have had a direct bearing on the
decisions of the court, in their conclusions.
What is noticeable in Essex, is that the local authority has
tamed the police. In short, the Police are no match for the
Legal Team of Essex County Council.
The Police might be tamed.......But we aren't!
23 June 2005
CAMPAIGNING parents claim Essex Police are using an obscure legal
ruling to avoid investigating criminal allegations against doctors
and social workers in child care cases. Six families from across the
county - including two from Brentwood asked police to investigate
claims that doctors and social workers had misled Essex courts to
get children placed in local authority care.
After expressing initial interest, the parents' hopes were dashed
when police indicated their hands were tied by a Justices' Ruling of
2001. This, according to Det Supt Simon Coxall of the crime
division, meant an enquiry into the alleged offences was "dependant
upon referral of the case by the officiating court", adding that
their complaints has been passed to the court.
However, the parents claim the ruling - which is not binding on
the Police was made to prevent a flood of perjury allegations
arising from civil cases at Charing Cross County Court, where the
losing party was left out of pocket.
One of the parents, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said
that ruling did not apply because they were talking about offences
other than perjury perverting the course of justice, contempt of
court and misconduct in public office. "We are very disappointed
because the police showed interest at first.We went to them with
documentary evidence," he added.
"The ruling they quote is obviously inappropriate to these cases.
We are not dealing with money here but children's lives." The group
of parents are now considering applying for judicial review of the
police decision. Earlier this week Det Supt Coxall promised to give
more thought to the matter. However in a letter dated June 21 he
said that "all the other potential offences identified have their
basis upon the presentation of evidence before county court
proceedings.
"It is for this reason that I have been and continue to be in
liaison with the County Court to receive guidance in this matter,"
he added. The parents' concerns have been brought to the attention
of the judge and the Attorney General's office.
A police spokesman said: "These allegations are being dealt with
in accordance with our procedures and complainants are being
informed how their complaints are being dealt with. "The civil court
concerned will be advised of the allegations made."
The spokesman confirmed "the matter was ongoing".
The Editor of the Daily Mail makes a judgement on
future articles by the public perception/response of/to such
articles. The feedback is one indication. E-mail Fiona Barton
fiona.barton@dailymail.co.uk
Baby in broken bones inquiry
dies
A three-month-old baby at the centre of a police
investigation at London's Great Ormond Street Hospital has died. The
inquiry began when the boy from Clacton, Essex, was found to have
fractures to his leg, ankles and feet. The hospital said the results
of the inquiry are due in several weeks and it anticipates no
members of staff will be found to have acted incorrectly.
A
hospital spokesman said the boy was born with a complex mixture of
life-threatening conditions. He added: "The child has succumbed to
his medical condition and we are trying to support the family at
this difficult time. "We are confident that the investigation will
show that all staff acted correctly at all times." A spokesman for
the Met police said the child's death does not affect the inquiry,
which is still ongoing. Police had earlier said medical equipment
may have been "tampered" with, and placed the child under guard and
interviewed hospital staff. But the hospital responded saying if his
bones were "unusually weak", normal handling could have caused the
fractures. In a statement released in February, Great Ormond Street
Hospital for Children NHS Trust said it was unlikely the baby had a
"classic" bone disease, but other rare illnesses were being
considered. The statement said: "If the bones are unusually weak,
which could be the result of several causes, then it would be
possible for them to be broken through normal careful handling of
the child." BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4452321.stm
Comment:
It is strange how parents are
automatically assumed to be guilty and the facts twisted to ensure a
conviction. There have been enough celebrated cases to refer to.
Meanwhile, should a baby be injured/sustains an illness or dies in
the care of the local authority, or the hospital, the authorities do
hand-stands to deflect any blame from themselves. Of course, in this
case the police were involved and no doubt they are being prevailed
upon to bring in the 'right verdict'............. "accidental
death".
Again it is Essex ............Surprise!
Surprise!
Continuing with the story about the Clacton baby: (
this from another source )
" In February 2005 a baby boy was
found to have had his legs broken and his drips were clamped whilst
in the care of GOSH ( great Ormond Street Hospital ). Police were
brought in to investigate. The matter has laid dormant for some time
until 3 weeks ago when on national news it was announced that the
poor baby boy had died, a reporter was outside GOSH with the news.
This whole incident has been hushed up, no mention by the media.
Does anyone remember this case and, if so, do they know more about
it than I do? Any information would be greatly appreciated ".
Contact: dave.mortimer@tiscali.co.uk
.gif){kind=logo}
