ABOLITION of Adoption without Parental Consent – our Requests to the EU Parliament

3 Replies

13 05 31 EU PetitionAs long as the Secretary of State for Education, Edward Timpson MP, thinks that 50 children dying in ‘care’ a year is a low figure, we clearly must educate him about other ways of thinking / feeling and looking at the situation.

As Chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) of Looked After Children & Care Leavers and Vice Chairman of the APPG for Runaway Missing Children, he knows about their report about 10,000 children going missing from care every year. Does he care???

I heard him brag about ‘our system’. He gave evidence before the Education Select Committee, when it was investigating child ‘protection’. We had submitted our portfolio of nine cases. Edward Timpson MP said that the UK system was so good that he wanted to export it to Barbados of all places!

Well, there are a LOT of people out there who don’t think so. Above all, the parents and grandchildren whose children and grandchildren have been taken, those who are imprisoned on top of it and everybody who has a heart and the ability and willingness to see through the myths and obfuscation beyond the secrecy – as a cloak to criminality?

Trying to assist victims is a long and arduous process. But when we hear one drama after another, we obviously have to try to ‘change the system’. Of course, lots of people will say that it’s not worth it. But we’ll only know after having tried!

So, here’s the link to the text.

And here’s the link to the petitions that you are invited to sign / share / like / tweet, if you feel like supporting our efforts and show to MEPs that not everybody knows, but LOTS of people view petitions and less than 10%.

Eventually, we need a McKenzie Friend associated with every law firm to turn victims into starfighters and compensate for Now it’s a social worker for every child – in Scotland!!!…

Related articles

A NEW SITE as a growing resource for [McKenzie] Friends and [Public Interest] Advocates

11 Replies
We love Friends!

We love Friends! (Photo credit: eilonwy77)

The road from ‘victim’ to starfighter, campaigner, McKenzie Friend and Advocate, Litigant’s Friend or Public Interest Advocate is paved with LOTS of shocks as ‘waking up therapy’ or ‘truth emergency’ as Global Research calls in this recent article.

This website is an admirable ‘fledgling resource’ – with the following ‘take away messages’:

  1. we need Friends to ‘process’ the shocks we’re experiencing, as we’re waking up to the fact that the authorities are NOT here to help
  2. we need to know what is our REMEDY, i.e. which legal form needs to be sent to which authority; the library of forms is here
  3. the most effective process is a Judicial Review in your local County Court, for £25.
  4. In practice, we need
    • C100 to apply for CONTACT with our kids
    • N244 to apply for ANY kind of ORDER
    • an Appellant’s Notice, if we want to APPEAL an Order
    • N461 to apply for a Judicial Review.

This means we now have to learn to help each other writing Judicial Reviews. It implies using LEGAL ARGUMENTS and often referring to ‘precedent cases’.

Related articles

SECOND VIDEO of House of Commons meeting with Austin Mitchell MP

1 Reply

It’s so good to be able to capture on video what happened in meetings. We each remember different things and when looking back, we’ll think of yet something else.

Here’s the morning meeting with John Hemming MP on 15th January 2013:

and here’s the afternoon meeting with Austin Mitchell MP:

McKENZIE SUCCESS: Permission to Appeal an Adoption Order GRANTED

7 Replies

It was only thanks to a major team effort that this could happen today:

And then:

  1. travelling to the mother whose two daughters were taken by… I shall refrain from naming and shaming the Council for now; they know who they are…
  2. submitting an Application for Contact (form C100 – obtainable from your local court or online here!!!)
  3. digging into her life story and building trust – despite all her bad experiences
  4. attending a ‘Directions’ hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice
  5. reminding Social Services to comply to the order made
  6. learning to use Google docs to co-author a ‘skeleton argument and amended grounds for appeal’ and submit it in time
  7. getting ready for a hearing about the Permission to Appeal
  8. visiting Social Services who had not complied to the Order
  9. producing a ‘Position Statement’ – just in case – for ‘the other side’ were going to produce something…
  10. submitting the McKenzie CV and asking for ‘right of audience’ which was granted. [Since it's up to the discretion of the judge, one never knows...]

The mother came out crying with, I presume a mix of joy and relief, for “she got it”: the permission to appeal. The Appeal will be heard in nearly 3 months: in May 2013.

The key is the precedent case made by Judge Munby, the current President of the Family Division who had said [para 44, iv]

to take a baby at birth is a dreadful thing: dreadful for the father, the mother and the baby…

It refers to this case in the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg which emphasised at paras [116], [131], [133],

that the removal of a child from his mother at or shortly after birth is a “draconian” and “extremely harsh” measure, requiring “exceptional justification” and “extraordinarily compelling reasons” under Article 8.

PS. Our meeting with Austin Mitchell MP in the afternoon is on this blog post.

Related articles

McKenzie Friends @ the House of Commons – as Public Interest Advocates

2 Replies

McKenzies for FairnessPress and Multi Media Release

Mind the Gaps – between Online and Mainstream Media, Government and Public

Tuesday, 15th January, House of Commons, Committee Rooms,
11am – 1pm and 2pm – 4pm

Globalisation strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski[1] recently identified accelerating social change driven by “instant mass communications”, which have been cumulatively stimulating “a universal awakening of mass political consciousness[2].” In the UK, the consequent gulfs between public opinion and government, and between online and mainstream media are widening precariously: poll after poll details public trust plummeting[3][4][5] all round while many political activist websites have grown as busy as mainstream e-commerce and media outlets.

As public interest advocates, the Association of McKenzie Friends seeks to acknowledge and address these gaps as a matter of urgency. In the wake of debilitating systemic failures such as Hillsborough, Savile and Leveson, we will be presenting an evidence-based analysis of “Seven Deadly Syndromes” that infect public life. Panel members are:

Continue reading →

Riding the Hillsborough and Savile Tide or Seven Deadly Syndromes and Seven Media Cover-Ups

1 Reply

It is not easy to make sense out of shocking stories that question everything we are made to believe. But thinking our own thoughts and following our own feelings is part of learning to be alive as a free-standing individual.

In a ‘summit’ meeting of McKenzie Friends, we tried to make sense together and collated the following seven deadly syndromes and seven media cover-ups.

Here is an Executive Summary  and here are the seven syndromes:

1. Secret Societies

The Private Lives of Public People

2. Mainstream Media Cover-Ups

Strategies for Gagging, Controlling and generally Dumbing Down

3. Crimes against Children and Families

Paedophilia, Child Snatching and Premature Sexualisation

4. Reporting Fraud and White Collar CrimesReporting of Fraud

Public Services as Perpetrators and Non-InvestigatorsEnforcement of Bank of England Act 1694

5. The Illegality of Usury and Wars

How Successive Governments Ignore National Law and International Treaties

6. Policing

Who Guards the Guards?

7. CONTEST

How the Counter-Terrorism Strategies Drive Miscarriages of Justice

The full document is here. Continue reading →

How to Assist Litigants in Person – our Strategy Meeting on 6th Sept 2012

1 Reply

Today we came together as a group to strategise where we want to go. Before we decide to take cases on behalf of victims of white collar crimes They tend to have to act as Litigants in Person due to lack of funds. We need to assess it according to certain ground rules:

  1. we need to decide whether the person is fit enough to be in court or requires some counselling, before representing themselves as a Litigant in Person
  2. we need to produce a chronology of the case as a summary for trained legal professionals
  3. we need to decide on the desired outcome of the legal remedies and procedures available. Continue reading →