The Hampstead Case verdict "That'll be the Russian mother and the Irish boyfriend"

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=%2Few%2Fcases%2FEWFC%2FHCJ%2F2015%2F26.html&query=ZC14C00315&method=boolean


B e f o r e :
MRS JUSTICE PAUFFLEY
____________________

Re P and Q (Children: Care Proceedings: Fact Finding)

____________________
Hannah Markham for the London Borough of Barnet
Ella Draper, the mother, did not appear and was not represented
June Venters QC for the father, Ricky Dearman
Justin Ageros for the children by their guardian
Hearing dates: 17 – 20 February, 3 – 6 and 10 – 12 March 2015
____________________
HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT ____________________
Crown Copyright ©




 Summary of the significant points made;

 

16. I am able to state with complete conviction that none of the allegations are true. I am entirely certain that everything Ms Draper, her partner Abraham Christie and the children said about those matters was fabricated.

64. The law in this area is well-known. There is only one standard of proof, namely the simple balance of probabilities. The burden of proof is on the party who makes the allegations: Re B [2008] UKHL 35.

65. In our legal system if a judge finds it more likely than not that something did take place, then it is treated as having taken place. If he finds it more likely than not that it did not take place, then it is treated as not having taken place. He has to find for one side or the other. He is not allowed to sit on the fence.

66. As the then President, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, said in Re T [2004] 2FLR 838, "Evidence cannot be evaluated and assessed in separate compartments. A judge in these difficult cases must have regard to the relevance of each piece of evidence to other evidence and to exercise an overview of the totality of the evidence in order to come to the conclusion whether the case put forward by the local authority has been made out to the required standard of proof."

100. To believe that children who demonstrate curiosity about and touch their own, the dog's and their sibling's genital areas must have, or probably have, been sexually abused is plainly ridiculous. It either shows alarming ignorance about normal childish behaviour or, as is much more likely here, wilful determination to distort innocent activities into something sinister and depraved.

105. Even in the presence of Jean Clement Yaohirou, Mr Christie's relationship with the children, at times, was harsh and coercive. He had known their mother by then for about four months, had assumed a quasi parent role and taken it upon himself to enforce discipline.

117. There did not appear to be any emotional connection with what they were saying except that they seemed energised.

118. The other significant deduction is that material supplied by P relating to the physical abuse of both children by Mr Christie in order to get them to talk should alert any sensible observer to the potential for false reporting.

121. In relation to both children, Dr Hodes concluded there were physical signs which supported the children's allegations of physical and sexual abuse.

124. In relation to Q, Dr Hodes "confirms the physical findings of a scar in the anus from a healed fissure, consistent with inflicted injury from a blunt penetrating force that he has alleged."

126. In her concluding "Summary", Dr Hodes states that both children have physical signs of sexual abuse that support their allegations; they have symptoms of post traumatic stress; and it is her opinion "the extensive and detailed accounts given by both children, repeated to different professionals, contain details of sexual acts that such young children would need to have had some sort of direct experience (sic)."

130. Dr Hodes' very last report – of 5 February 2015 – was written in response to written questions. She states that "the overall situation is such that it is my view that the allegations / accounts need to be taken very seriously despite the confusing picture." Dr Hodes' view is that whilst it is a matter for the court to decide, she recommends "a series of more detailed observations and assessments over a longer period of time by a psychiatrist or psychotherapist with a particular interest and expertise in child maltreatment including sexual abuse."

137. I was perturbed that Dr Hodes was prepared to conclude and then confirm the presence of fissures when subsequent peer review resulted in them being described as a normal variant. Similarly, I found it curious that even although the physical signs had reduced in number to a single finding of RAD in P, nonetheless Dr Hodes adhered to her view saying that lubrication was used which "added to the probability of abuse."

138.   When confronted, in cross examination, with the evidence about Ms Draper's treatment of the children with enemas, Dr Hodes did not pause before saying, "No, it does not affect my conclusions. It's another possible cause of trauma."

139.  I was bemused by Dr Hodes' suggestion of further psychiatric or psychotherapeutic intervention when she knew that Dr Clare Sturge – one of the leading and most experienced child and adolescent psychiatrists in the country – had already supplied two reports, the first arising out of her assessment of the children after interview.

146. Q responded immediately to Dr Sturge's question as to whether he knew why she was seeing him. He said, "cos Abraham said something I never did and he forced me to say it, he was really mean to us." Abraham had accused him of touching his sister in the private parts which he "never, ever did." And he forced them to say their Dad touches them. Abraham had also forced them to say they kill babies. Q said he had wanted Abraham to stop hitting him, "I was scared for him to hit me." At that Q's face creased up and he began to cry quietly. "He kept asking us questions again, and again and again." His mother had started to believe him. Q said, "It upsetted me" and he became even more distressed.

147. He hates Abraham, describing him as "the worst person I've ever met."

149. Q was distressed again when talking about having to stand when cold water was poured on him – "(dressed) just in our pants – he thought we was lying – when I cried and said my Mum never touched us, he said, 'If you're crying you're lying.'" By then, according to Dr Sturge, Q was crying in a very distressed way.

151. It seemed to me that on 17 September P in particular was relieved to be unburdening herself and revealing the truth. Some of the ongoing and quite complex processes in Q's mind were manifest. At the outset, it seemed as though he was still confused but gradually he, too, became clear in saying he had been forced to make untrue claims. There was none of the frantic scramble to provide answers to questions as in the earlier interviews. Both children were a great deal calmer.

156. I have no doubt but that the physical injuries described by the children as having been inflicted by Abraham Christie were, indeed, caused by him. I reject as baseless Ms Draper's suggestion that instead Mr Dearman was responsible. A straightforward conclusion given that neither child had seen him for about three months at the time of Dr Hodes' examination and subsequent police photography. Those photographs clearly show recent rather than healed injuries.

158. It is hard to imagine how any parent could deliberately expose a child to an illegal drug. But it may have been part of Mr Christie's and Ms Draper's plan so as to gain the children's compliance. I need hardly say now profoundly damaging it was to administer illegal drugs to a child.

159. The posting of film clips featuring the children speaking about sexual matters has exposed P and Q to the potential for very serious embarrassment and humiliation in the years ahead maybe, even, throughout the whole of the rest of their lives. Doubtless they will grow and develop so that their visual appearances will alter. But it may be difficult to shield them from unwelcome interest and reputational damage unless radical steps to divert attention are taken.

161. The individuals who have watched online film clips, read online articles and believed in the allegations would do well to reflect that 'things may not be what they seem' and that it is all too easy to be duped on the basis of partial information. There are many campaigning people, sadly, who derive satisfaction from spreading their own poisonous version of history irrespective of whether it is true or not.

•    The children's false stories came about as the result of relentless emotional and psychological pressure as well as significant physical abuse. Torture is the most accurate way to describe what was done by Mr Christie in collaboration with Ms Draper. 

(That is the children’s Russian mother & her Irish boyfriend!)

The Law Gazette 12th March 2015 - Legal Aid Cuts

MPs lambast civil legal aid reforms

12 March 2015By John Hyde

Topics: Civil justice,Family and children,Legal aid and access to justice,Government

inShare

• 

The government’s civil legal aid cuts were badly researched and implemented, and have impeded access to justice, an influential committee of MPs reports today.
The House of Commons justice committee says that the speed with which the Ministry of Justice sought to save money resulted in the department failing to meet its objectives for the reforms.

Advertisement

The consequences have been a ‘substantial’ increase in litigants in person, growing pressure on the courts, a fall in mediation and troubling reports of ‘advice deserts’.
Since the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act took effect there has also been an underspend because the MoJ did not ensure those who could still access civil legal aid were able to get it.
The cross-party committee of MPs says government’s savings were ‘potentially undermined’ by an inability to show value for money for the taxpayer. In particular the cuts generated ‘knock-on’ costs for courts costs and local councils.
The MPs also criticise the government’s ‘safety net’ of exceptional case funding, which has not worked as intended, denying funding to deserving cases. The report concludes that the Legal Aid Agency failed to give sufficient weight to access to justice in deciding which cases merited funding, which may have resulted in miscarriages of justice.
Lib Dem Sir Alan Beith, committee chair (pictured), said making savings of £2bn from the departmental budget of £9.8bn was ‘clearly a very challenging target’ which was successfully achieved. But the savings were rushed through too quickly to understand the full consequences and prepare for the knock-on effects.
The criticisms are contained in a report on the impact of changes to civil legal aid introduced under Part 1 of LASPO.
‘Many of the issues which we have identified and which have been identified to us could have been avoided by research and an evidence base to work from, as well as by the proper provision of public information about the reforms,’ the report concludes.
‘It is therefore crucial that, in addition to the various remedial steps which we recommend in the short term, in the longer term the ministry work to provide this information and undertake the requisite research so a review of the policy can be undertaken.’
The committee recommends that the MoJ undertake a public campaign to combat the widespread impression that legal aid is ‘almost non-existent’.
MPs want staffing changes for the exceptional case funding scheme, having been ‘surprised’ that applications are not currently determined by officials with specialist knowledge.
On domestic violence, the committee cites concerns about the 24-month time limit for producing the evidence necessary to qualify for legal aid. MPs recommended a new amendment to give the LAA discretion to allow evidence if domestic violence happened more than two years ago.
The committee did not accept the ministry’s assurance that it was monitoring whether vulnerable people can still access legal aid, as there was ‘ample evidence’ that funding was not reaching those most in need.
The committee also urges the government to drop its appeal over the legality of its residence test, which limits legal aid to people with a ‘strong connection’ to the UK.
The report adds: ‘We question whether pursuing an appeal in the “residence test” case is a good use of public money. It seems to us that the residence test is likely to save very little from the civil legal aid budget and would potentially bar some highly vulnerable people from legal assistance in accessing the courts.’
An MoJ spokesperson said the government worked closely with organisations that provide advice and offer early intervention in disputes to ensure they have the full information they need to help people, and there is a dedicated 24/7 online service to help people understand if they qualify for civil legal aid and where advice is available if they do not.
He added: ‘We are keeping these reforms under close review and have already made changes to address issues raised. We are also undertaking a comprehensive research programme to better understand why people choose to go court and how they deal with legal problems.’
Law Society president Andrew Caplen said: ‘We support the justice committee’s call for an urgent review. The Society has consistently warned the government of the dangers of its civil legal aid policies. This report adds to the growing dossier of evidence proving that the legal aid changes have failed to meet the government’s own objectives.
‘There is no doubt that people are being denied access to justice. Recent research has shown that many domestic violence victims are being failed by the system as they face tough evidence requirements before they can even receive advice and assistance under the legal aid scheme. This goes far beyond what parliament ever intended.
He added: ‘The report highlights that even for cases where parliament intended that legal aid should be available, the system is not working, and people are being denied the help they need. This is having a significant knock-on cost for the public purse, as well as a devastating personal impact on people who cannot get help.’

Poor Law - Kenneth Clarke has he really got away with it? The Magna Carta say's all people are equal in the eyes of the law - The abuse agenda cover up was hard to watch!

FAO: Mr Jackson of Panorama - My statement on a programme you say you are doing on Chris Fay

On 21 December 2012 I was forced to put a set of documents on www.legalaidcuts.blogspot.com. The documents consisted of court exhibits from a 1982 court case regarding a raid at Elm Guest Hse.

The documents were namely: a signing in book, a receipt book, a book where the names of guests and the rooms they stayed in were clearly marked out and some evidence of VIP business bookings.

Aside from this 1982 court evidence, I obtained while working as development officer of the National Association of Young People in Care, I did not have my own notes on the case apart from what I had already published on www.youthparliament.co.uk on many of the cases, as NAYPIC had been raided in 1993.

During the seizure of the NAYPIC files, and contents of the organisation’s Camden office, most of my casework notes were taken by unidentified men arriving in unmarked vans. I did, however, retain a number of files as I arrived during the raid of the office and seizure of documentation. 

Among these were the notes of a former volunteer, a Labour councillor for Greenwich, Mr Christopher Fay. These were more elaborate than my own in that Fay named abusers and how they were allegedly connected, according to pieces Fay had put together with his journalist contact, John Oakes, and were based on meetings between Carol Cazier, owner of the Elm House Guest House, held at NAYPIC where she spoke to me in my office, and where Mr Fay had access to her.

I believe the information I was told by Carol Cazier is responsible for the demise of the organisation. It led also to the drugging and rape of one of its workers and perhaps the killing of two others.

By 2012 it had been some time since these events and I had meanwhile established two successful art galleries. I could not understand why so many years later the issue had raised its ugly head again.

In 1990 I had asked Christopher Fay to leave NAYPIC following a conversation with a senior colleague official, about his untrustworthiness. During this exchange I was advised in the strongest terms to disassociate NAYPIC from Mr Fay.

Christopher, an adult advisor, Sarah a NAYPIC management committee member and I had co-written a NAYPIC publication called, Abuse in the Care System, and another document called, The Therapy of Fear, the compilation of which had offered him unlimited access to the organisation’s case files.

Mr Fay was bitter when I sacked him and I believe remains so, due to events that have later transpired. He has appeared hostile towards me. I do not know Fay, Tom Watson, Exaro or those sensationalising these events without due process or presenting of evidence in a court of law. 

I did not have the permission of my clients and service users, to whom I have a duty of confidentiality under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, to give the NAYPIC files to the police.  I believed that the files were of public interest and that the files contained some evidence that may be helpful to substantiating allegations of abuse. Due to my duty to protect the confidentiality of victims named in the files I objected to the files being taken from me.

I am saddened that Elm Guest House victims have not had justice.  The raid by police on my house, during which my files were removed, has so far not proved helpful in achieving justice for victims.  I have worked tirelessly to give these people justice as you can read on Youth Parliament website. I feel that I have been hijacked at a point when there was an opportunity to establish a class action.

Further information:  ITV News UK Editor, Lucy Manning, interviews Mary Moss about child abuse that took place at Elm House Guest House, which is currently the subject of a police investigation. http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-02-06/elm-guest-house-child-abuse-ring-investigation-arrests/