INSTITUTIONALISED CHILD SNATCHING in the UK
Systemic Aspects for the Petitions Committee of the EU Parliament
I MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE with CHILD SNATCHING
I am a retired systems analyst who used to diagnose software at CERN in Geneva. Since 2004 I have been an independent web publisher and was given the story of ‘Baby Harley’ for Victims Unite but received a ‘gag’ by Swansea Council in February 2011. Based on my experience with fraudulent bankruptcies, I recognised the falsificiation of official documents. A ‘gagging order’ was repeated by Doncaster Council when I published a website for Vicky Haigh, the first gag removed by John Hemming MP in Parliament. The third gagging order came from Haringey Council who are responsible for the worst of all child snatching cases – a Nigerian family with seven children – imprisoned for seven years while the youngest children are to be adopted and five kept in permanent ‘care’.
Individually, I built websites for
Collectively, I have assisted some fifty cases on various levels and built these sites:
I also published the following petitions:
II CHILD SNATCHING as a SYSTEMIC ISSUE
1) ‘Child snatching’ and child ‘protection’ system are the terms that Christopher Booker uses in his weekly column in The Telegraph. He covered the Nigerian Musa case in 14 articles. Here he calls the child ‘protection’ system an international scandal. 1,000 children a month are taken from their birth parents and children are screaming to be heard.
2) McKenzie Friends have assisted the Musas since their first 5 children were taken in April 2010. They take the view that their case is the worst of all cases: in terms of crimes committed to cover up the initital crime – besides imprisoning both parents for seven years, refusing consular visits and imposing terribly cruel prison conditions.
3) The need for the Association of McKenzie Friends arose from the impossibility of innocent prisoners not being able to get a fair trial, while their rights to family life were violated and they experience torture in prisons: Articles 6, 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
4) Their appeal against conviction and sentencing was recently refused with “nothing in the grounds for appeal”, even though the Police had ‘lost’ the initial letter of evidence. The case is also worst due to falsified Police reports regarding bail appointments where supporters attended. The defendants were also not able to get their papers returned from their solicitors, despite help by supporters.
5) The Musa case is like a ‘template’ for the Portuguese Pedro case: Lincolnshire Council took 5 children, also without paper work. In both cases, the oldest child was subsequently used to make false allegations against the parents. Both parents were ‘gagged’ from complaining about their punishment without crime and the Consul has so far not had consular visits either.
6) John Hemming is the only MP who consistently stands up for parents in Parliament. His campaigning organisation Justice for Families has over 2,000 cases on file. In June 2013 he convened a meeting with 59 representatives of over 30 embassies and consulates which resulted in the Early Day Motion International Concerns about UK Law. He is critical of Governmental adoption targets and management.
7) Ian Josephs is the veteran of all observers: a former local councellor in Kent with a law degree from Oxford, he has been running a language school from Monaco where he publishes Forced Adoption and helps parents as a McKenzie Friend. He receives some 6 – 10 phone calls a day.
10) In the UK, the mainstream media don’t report anything. Only occasionally do serious scandals appear in the press and on TV, as family court hearings are held in secret and parents are gagged with threat of imprisonment. The Association of McKenzie Friends has published Child Snatching is one of Seven Deadly Syndromes and Seven Media Cover-Ups.
III WHAT is UNIQUE in the UK
a) The UK is the ONLY State in the WORLD that gags parents whose children have been taken by Social Services, i.e. threatens them with prison if they dare to complain about their pain. And these threats are enforced in the case of 200 parents a year, at least.
d) The UK is the ONLY State in Europe taking children for “emotional abuse” and worse still “risk of emotional abuse” – on the basis of predictions from overpaid ‘experts’ that one day parents just might harm their children. A commissioned report revealed that 20% are not even qualified.
e) The UK is the ONLY State in Europe to censor conversations between parents and children in care. Children are left wondering what they have done wrong, as parents are forbidden to explain the situation, or discuss the court case in any way. Phrases such as “I love you and I miss you” are also forbidden under the threat of contact being stopped immediately if the parents “transgress.” Children naturally begin to think their parents might not love them or want them back any more.
IV THE PATTERNS THAT CONNECT CHILD SNATCHING CASES
13) Children, especially of foreigners, are being snatched by Local Councils in the following manner:
a) Schools, hospitals and housing services are used as ‘honey traps’ where Social Services become aware of vulnerable parents and children.
b) With the aid of Police, they are being physically removed – generally without any paperwork.
d) Subsequent allegations are fabricated to justify the removal and to keep parents busy with contact arrangements and court procedures. In this process, marriages, jobs, financial and housing situations tend to get ruined.
f) Should parents resist any of the conditions and restrictions imposed, they risk being criminalised with the ultimate aim of deporting the parents and keeping the children. This explains the many cases listed for ‘disposal’.
14) Social Workers invent the wildest of lies and allegations. 84 out of 100 parents questioned by Stolen Children of the UK [S.C.O.T. UK] said their children were taken due to “risk of future emotional harm.”
15) Every criminal court operates on the basis of ‘innocent until proven guilty’. But family courts rely on hearsay and operate on the balance of probabilities. Comparatively few cases result in criminal proceedings such as the Musas’. The real victims are the children whose wishes should be heard in an open, fair and appropriate manner.
16) Recent research focusing on non-UK Kids in Care revealed that Croydon alone accounts for over 1,118 children of foreign nationals. But hardly any council informs the responsible embassy or consulate.
17) In official Social Services meetings and secret family courts, the following international agreements that are in force, are routinely being ignored:
18) At the end of a week-long protest outside Downing Street by the largest campaigning group Stolen Children of the UK [S.C.O.T. UK], a petition was lodged before the House of Commons: Children Placed in Foster Care – without any response so far.
20) In the spirit of the Munby Reforms, courts should consider the judgement that resulted in the Daily Mail headline UK Courts must not decide the fate of foreign children, says top judge, but judges treat their court rooms as their domain of rule and they tend to be in cahoots with barristers, solicitors and social services.
Based on the above experiences, the UK Delegation of petitioners and supporters is making the following requests on behalf of all parents and children who have become victimised by the UK child ‘protection’ system:
The Association of McKenzie Friends will gladly assist the Petitions Committee which will hopefully organise an investigation into the institutions of the UK. John Hemming MP consistently blames the Government and management for policy such as adoption targets. Similarly, the Police have even ‘crime targets’.