#ITV #EXPOSURE and #BBC: #forcedadoption – on the agenda in Brussels on 11/11

Originally posted on No Punishment without Crime or Bereavement without Death!:

These two videos are thanks to veteran McKenzie Friend and helper of mums and families from Monaco, Ian Josephs who publishes www.forced-adoption.com:

1) ITV Exposure:

2) Inside Out was broadcast on BBC One South East on Monday, 6 October 2014. Rachel Royce reports. http://forced-adoption.com/#insideout

In Brussels, I have been invited to address the Petitions Committee again on the Systemic Patterns of Child Snatching and Forced Adoptions in the UK.

After my 6 minutes of passion in March 2014, I shall present 3 minutes of rationality on 11 November and ask this question: who will enforce 

View original 288 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

PRAGUE Conference #ChildRemovals: CoE member states ought to respect their obligations #forcedadoption

Originally posted on No Punishment without Crime or Bereavement without Death!:

Green: Founder States Blue: Later Member States

Dear colleagues,

On 3 October 2014 the international Conference on the Child Removal Proceedings in the Council of Europe Member States and Related Human Rights Issues was held in Charles University in Prague, organised by the European Institute of Law and Forensic Engineering.

During the ceremony in the Old Town Hall, before the conference, documentary films about concerned families were projected and participants had an opportunity on an informal level to share their practical experiences in the field of child removal and thus to establish the base for their further cooperation.

During the conference, interventions were made by

  • Mr Ján Kuklík, Dean of the Faculty of Law of Charles University in Prague,
  • Mr John Hemming MP, member of British Parliament,
  • Ms Jitka Chalánková, member of Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic,
  • Ms Marica Pirošíková, Agent of…

View original 685 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

PRAGUE CONFERENCE on International Child Removal in Council of Europe Member States – in a Nutshell

14 10 03 EUPSIThis is the logo of the Institute of Law and Forensic Science sponsoring the Conference at the Charles University in Prague.

Since many conference presenters mentioned how hard it is to fight an institution, we hope that the academic institution of a small country will be more successful than our various efforts across Europe who came together – thanks to Dr Marica Pirosikova, Agent of the Government of the Slovak Republic before the ECHR and Erik Bihary of the European Institute of Law and Forensic Science.

Support included Czech MPs, Ministers and the Mayor who offered the historic town hall as the opening venue.

That’s where the tone was set with the film produced by two Slovak film makers about the two Boor boys who were returned after 920 days in captivity: Not without out My Children.


Slide1Slide3Slide4Slide5Slide6Slide7Slide8

Slide9Slide10As a first step, a Scientific Committee will take things forward and we are waiting for the recordings made. Meanwhile, here are my slides and the full programme as published before.

What was new for me was:

  1. that the Nordic Committee for Human Rights – driven by the legal profession in Sweden – has embraced the issue of fake child protection for 18 years already and is thus even more motivated and experienced in the problem as a whole and the challenges of getting children returned; the cruelty with which Social Workers claim that separating a child from its parents is “in its best interest” went as far as a 7-year-old girl lying down in a street, hoping that a bus would end her life;
  2. that spiritual communities have been invaded to have 40 (in Germany) or even 100 (in the US) children removed with police force;
  3. that the traumatisation of the separation between child and parents, especially mother, is virtually irreparable: while everybody cites the Boor case as a victory, which it is in political and legal terms, the older boy is still far from having his speech impediment healed, besides wetting his bed; the obnoxious things the foster parents expected him to do is only gradually coming out;
  4. that there are concerned lawyers – also at the European Court in Strasbourg – who are watching the trend and need our support to STOP it!

PS. The ‘red banana’ on slide 3 is the father’s penis that his son was given as the only food when he vomited from the ejaculation. The boy had to be operated at 2 months because his anus was injured…

Here’s the programme to illustrate the fantastic level of expertise:

CONFERENCE on The CHILD REMOVAL proceedings in the COUNCIL of EUROPE MEMBER STATES and related human rights issues

 Prague, Charles University, 3 October 2014

 Morning session

 08:30 – 09:00      Registration of the participants           

09:00 OPENING  General remarks. Presentation of the objectives of the Conference.

09:00 – 09:10 Representative of Charles University

09:10 – 09:20 Erik BIHARY, European Institute of Law and Forensic Engineering

09:20 – 09:30 Marica PIROŠÍKOVÁ, Agent of the Government of the Slovak Republic before the ECHR 

9:30 – 10:30         THEME 1: Child removal cases in the United Kingdom -Description of the current situation – organisation of the system and its deficiencies, statistics, victims, description of the proceedings before the family courts, possible third party intervention from other States if the parents are foreign nationals, Sir James Munby´s judgment dealing with the court’s approach to care proceedings concerning children from other European countries.

09:30 – 09:50 Mr John HEMMING, member of British Parliament [only for 3 minutes via videolink unfortunately]

09:50 – 10:10 Ms Helen NEWMAN, solicitor

10:10 – 10:30 Ms Marie-Claire SPARROW, barrister at Holborn Chambers and at European Family Law Chambers

10:30 – 11:00      Coffee break 

11:00 – 13:00 THEME 2: Child removal cases in the Nordic countries -Description of the current situation – organisation of the system and its deficiencies, statistics, victims, description of the judicial proceedings.

11:00 – 11:20 Ms Ruby HARROLD-CLAESSON, president of the Nordic Committee for Human Rights

11:20 – 11:40 Dr Johan BÄCKMAN, adjunct Professor of Sociology of Law, University of Helsinki – who couldn’t attend

11:40 – 12:00 Mr Søren Bernhard LINDEGAARD, attorney, Denmark

12:00 – 12:20 Ms Venil Katharina THIIS, attorney, Norway

13:00 – 14:30      Lunch

Afternoon session

14:30 – 15:30      THEME 3: International standards concerning child removal cases – the relevant ECHR case-law, the execution of the ECHR judgement, the PACE resolution 1908(2012) adopted on 30 November 2012, activities at the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament.

14:30 – 14:50      Mr Grégory THUAN Dit DIEUDONNE, attorney, former senior lawyer at the ECHR

14:50 – 15:10     Ms Lucja Miara, lawyer, Department for the Execution of Judgements of the ECHR

15:10 – 15.30      Ms Sabine Kurjo McNEILL, Association of McKenzie Friends

15:30 – 16:00      Coffee break

16:00 – 17:00      THEME 4: Practical experiences

16:00 – 16:15      Ms Norika STUDENCOVA, Slovak grand-mother (Boor case)

16:15– 16:30       Ms Zuzana Cartwright, interpreter (Boor case)

16:30 – 16:45      Ms Laila BRICE, Latvian single mother 

17:20 – 17:40 Closing remarks and conclusions

Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, International Conference | Tagged , , , , | 8 Comments

CHILD SEX ABUSE – 02/09/14 – Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Kilburn) (Lab) – Theresa May (Home Secretary)

14 09 12 Glenda Jackson MPDear Ms Jackson MP

Once again, you were terrifically efficient and effective in your communications – both in the House and with the Minister.

However, I’m afraid I must enlighten the Minister for Crime Prevention a little, based on the many unfortunate stories I have heard personally and researched otherwise. I wonder whether he should familiarise himself with victims of crimes, if he is charged with preventing them?

 

14 09 10 Norman Baker p1Remember that I am a system analyst by training: a computer scientist who uses facts and logic rather than emotions and arguments to paint pictures of processes and structures.

Remember that I presented the Petition to Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent in six minutes of passion to the EU Committee in Brussels.

In that vein, I have also watched the evidence of the witnesses regarding the Rotherham abuse before the Home Affairs Committee.  Continue reading

Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, HM Government, House of Commons, Local Councils, Paedophilia, Public Events, Public Interest Advocacy, Select Committees | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

FEEDBACK re Commitments to Victims from McKenzie Friends and Victims Unite!

Dear Rebecca Gough @ the Ministry of Justice,

OPEN EMAIL

This is just to let you know that I welcome the good intentions published in the Government’s Commitment to Victims, but I’m afraid it’s too little too late.

Please note:

  1. As published on Victims Unite in March 2012: The Royal Commission into New South Wales Police established in 1997 that Corruption, Reform and Paedophilia were its findings.
    1. The parallels with Savile and Rotherham are blindingly obvious!
  2. ThankstoSavile and Rotherham, #paedobritain has become ‘topical’ in the mainstream media of the UK.
    1. However, more and more people are realising that a regular supply of children is not only policy with adoption targets for Local Authorities, but that #childsnatchuk feeds #paedobritain.
    2. In fact, Channel IV publishes that a child is taken every 20 minutes!
  3. It would thus be far more effective if Local Authorities were given new ‘marching orders’ to stop #childsnatchuk before children become victims:
    1. As admitted and published by Ed Timpson MP: 50 a year die in care, 10,000 go missing and run away.
    2. Other statistics regarding children in care are appalling. There are enough victims who need ‘ReportMyCrime’ before a ‘TrackMyCrime’ Tool!
  4. Thereareenoughhigh profile cases going on NOW that are indicative of #paedobritain being alive and kicking so that waiting for an inquiry and an organisation in 6 months and more is simply not good enough.
    1. See When the System of Institutions is afraid of whistleblowers, challengers and ‘dissidents’ – just as in USSR
    2. In particular, the question Who Polices the Police?to be tackled effectively, e.g.
      1. Haringey Police in the Nigerian Musa case
      2. Lincolnshire Police in the Portuguese Pedro case.
      3. Barnet Police and Interpol in the Melissa Laird and Audrone I case.

Continue reading

Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, Public Interest Advocacy, Stolen Children of the UK | Tagged , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

TARGETING McKenzie Friends – with money as their ‘tool to kill’

14 09 04 Law SocietyThe Chairman of the Legal Services Board published a caution against the growth of paid McKenzie Friends.

I wish he and his board members were asking themselves:

  1. what are the reasons for the growing need for McKenzie Friends?
  2. are there not highly noticeable gaps between the ‘standards’ and ‘consumer protections’ he advocates and the realities of victims of the ‘legal services market’, as he calls it?
  3. how many solicitors have reversed forced adoptions?
  4. how many barristers got the children back from ‘care’?
  5. how many bankruptcies have been overturned and compensated for?
  6. how many fraudulently imprisoned prisoners have been released with compensation?
  7. how many ‘professionals’ in the courts and prisons have apologised for their wrong-doings?

Continue reading

Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, Public Interest Advocacy | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

WE WHO KNOW what is at stake, our children and the future of our species, train in Common Law

English common law courts before 1830

English common law courts before 1830 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Map of the countries with anglosaxon legal sys...

Map of the countries with anglosaxon legal systems (in red) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Once again, truth is more shocking than fiction:

    • the evidence of indigenous people given on camera of the horrendous slaughtering and abuse of children in Canada

    The general procedures and protocols of a Common Law Court are summarized in the following outline, which must be followed by anyone seeking to accuse and try other parties.

    English: Cover of the first edition of The Com...

    English: Cover of the first edition of The Common Law (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

    Step One – Compiling the Case

    Dark blue: Common law jurisdictions. Light blu...

    Dark blue: Common law jurisdictions. Light blue: Jurisdictions with mixed systems using elements of common law (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

    A Statement of Claim must be produced by those bringing a case, known as the Plaintiffs. Their Statement sets out in point form the basic facts of the dispute, the wrong being alleged, and the relief or remedy being sought.

    Next, the Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim must be accompanied by supporting evidence: documents and testimonies proving their case beyond any reasonable doubt. This evidence must be duly sworn by those not party to the dispute in the form of witnessed statements; and it must consist of the original documents themselves, and not copies.

    As well, anyone whose testimony is used in this body of evidence must be willing to come into Court to testify and affirm their own statement.

    Step Two – Seeking the Remedy of a Common Law Court: Filing a Notice of Claim of Right

    After gathering his case, a Plaintiff must then seek the aid of a Common Law Court and its officers. Such a Court can be brought into being by publishing a Notice of Claim of Right (see Appendix B, “Court Documents”), which is a public declaration calling for the assistance of the community in the asserting of the Plaintiff’s right under Natural Justice to have his case heard through the Common Law, by way of a jury of his neighbors and peers. Continue reading

    Posted in Common Law, Common Law Courts | Tagged , | 1 Comment

    PETITION ADMISSIBLE in Brussels: Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent

    14 07 03 Brussels petitionThe Petitions Committee of the EU Parliament has examined the material I presented on 19 March 2014, as I got in writing in July 2014:

    They considered it ‘admissible’, i.e. it falls within their ‘remit’ and they will take responsibility – contrary to our petition to the UK Parliament, where nobody has responded:

    As a first step, the Committee has requested the European Commission to conduct a preliminary investigation. The Commission consists of permanent civil servants, whereas the Committee consists of elected MEPs. Following the MEP election, the Committee has just been newly formed.

    Secondly, the Committee felt that it is important to contact UK national authorities.

    Thirdly, the Commissioner Mrs Viviane Reding was to be contacted.

    Hence I wrote to the new Chair Cecilia Wikstrom MEP:

    Dear Cecilia Wikstrom MEP

    OPEN LETTER

    Please find attached the letter from your predecessor Erminia Mazzoni MEP regarding the petition that I presented on 19 March 2014, together with a delegation of 30 desperate parents of various nationalities residing in the UK: Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent.

    This is to ask whether the Committee has had answers from

    • the UK authorities
    • the European Commission
    • Commissioner Viviane Reding.

    Please note the repercussions of our ‘pilgrimage to Brussels:

    • Our delegate from South Wales tries to assist a village which wants to set itself up as a ‘Social Services free zone’, after 10 mothers got together whose 16 children were taken, including one who is 16 weeks pregnant and was told that her baby would be taken at birth.
    • The Welsh father was penalised such that John Hemming MP tabled this Early Day Motion about Petitions to the European Parliament: http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2013-14/1239
    • Upon returning from Brussels, the Portuguese couple was first arrested but eventually promised that the children would be transferred to a Portuguese institution. However, Lincolnshire Council wants to go ahead with the adoption and treats the parents now as criminals when they attend their bi-monthly ‘contact sessions’.

    As McKenzie Friends (lay legal advisors and public interest advocates), we have also assisted a Lithuanian mother whose 6-year old boy is supposed to be handed to his abusive father by Brent Council, following a 34-page judgement by HHJ Million which ignores the judgement of the Lithuanian Supreme Court:

    Therefore please hear our cries for help on behalf of the children in the UK:

    • Channel IV publishes that a child is taken every 20 minutes!
    • Can you ensure that the topic is dealt with URGENTLY?

    At the 19 March meeting Committee Members also referred to a fact finding mission as has been carried out in Germany and Denmark before. I notice that the next meetings are scheduled for 24 September and 07 October 2014. Since the new Committee has now been formed, could you please let me know how we can give hope to all these parents?

    With many thanks in advance,

    Sabine K McNeill
    __________________
    Co-Founder, Association of McKenzie Friends
    Public Interest Advocacy while assisting Litigants in Person

    Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, Brent Council, EU Parliament, Forced Adoption, HM Government, Lincolnshire County Council, Local Councils, Paedophilia, Parliamentary Petition, Petition, Public Interest Advocacy, Stolen Children of the UK | Tagged , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

    REPORTING PAEDOPHILIA to the Home Office whilst #childsnatchuk leads to #paedobritain

    English: Anti-paedophilia logo from the Nation...

    English: Anti-paedophilia logo from the National Revival of Poland (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

    Dear Home Secretary

    OPEN LETTER

    This is to draw your attention to related aspects that we have experienced as the Association of McKenzie Friends, set up to practise voluntary public interest advocacy.

    Besides the initiators of the National Inquiry into organised Child Sexual Abuse, I Cc the members of the Home Affairs Committee, trusting that they will take an interest.

    As it is our duty to report a crime and NOT reporting paedophilia is going to be a criminal offence, we would appreciate answers to the following questions:

    1. Who will protect a Lithuanian boy in UK care from his paedophile father?
      • His mother and grandmother fled the father’s persecutions in Lithuania, but he was forcibly removed by Brent Police on 23 September 2013;
      • Social Services failed to investigate the father’s medical and criminal records;
      • HHJ Million gave residence of the boy to the father, contrary to a judgement of the Lithuanian Supreme Court. His judgement twists reality and evidence in a way that turns black into white and white into black. Unfortunately, the mother has reached a state of mind that makes her incapable of presenting the case, let alone appeal it appropriately.
      • When refusing permission to appeal Justice McFarlane said “This is not the end of the road for the boy.” But who will make sure that he WON’T be handed over by Brent Social Services???
      • We alerted Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe with this email and published our witness statement in this blog post.
    2. Similarly, who will undo the damage done to these five Portuguese children?
      • After an accusation by the oldest son which he retracted, the father was arrested and all children were removed on 23 April 2013 by 2 Social Workers and Lincolnshire Police – under Emergency Police Protection Orders.
      • The oldest son wrote desperate letters to the judge fearing ‘bum rape’ by the Social Worker, but HHJ Simler wouldn’t admit a question in court relating to this violation of the UN Convention of Child Rights which the UK has ratified.
      • In the secrecy of family courts, she decided that all children need to be put into permanent care and the two youngest ones ought to be adopted.
      • The parents’ desperate attempts to get their children back eventually led to negotiations with Portuguese authorities on 17 April 2014. But they have not been handed over to a Portuguese institution, as agreed. Instead, the siblings have been separated and two of them are supposed to be adopted. Lincolnshire Council have still not sent copies of the Minutes of the meeting either. Furthermore, the parents are treated as criminals for their contact sessions every two months.
    3. Who cares about this American boy who has not seen his mother since 12 December 2011, when he was 4 and snatched by Barnet Council?
    • Having assisted American mother Melissa Laird whilst in HMP Holloway, we tried to ensure that she gets the oral hearing that had been scheduled to take place on 05 December 2013.
    • However, as John Hemming MP announced: she was deported whilst her child was kept for adoption.
    • Her attempts to get a Skype connection or videolink failed due to the ancient technology used here compared with what is available in the US.
    • This is clearly not only a violation of UK laws but also Convention laws ensuring a fair trial.
    • To top the miscarriage of justice turning into perversion, we, as pro bono McKenzie Friends, have been ordered costs by the Treasury Solicitor’s Office and have to become litigants ourselves!

    Continue reading

    Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, HM Government, Local Councils, Paedophilia, Public Interest Advocacy, Social Services, Stolen Children of the UK, Treasury Solicitor's Office | Tagged , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

    OPEN LETTER to the Met regarding internationally protective paedophiles – at the cost of a Lithuanian boy

    English: Anti-paedophilia logo from the Nation...

    English: Anti-paedophilia logo from the National Revival of Poland (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

    Dear Sir Bernard

    As the Association of McKenzie Friends we are ‘public interest advocates’ and follow white collar crimes associated with organised child sexual abuse and child snatching closely, as we are getting more and more requests for help.

    Hence we alerted you about a crime in HMP Holloway which resulted in a US mother being deported whilst her child was kept for adoption.

    This is to report a crime against a Lithuanian boy who was forcefully removed from his mother and grandmother, after they escaped his father’s persecutions in Lithuania – despite a judgement in the mother’s favour of the Supreme Court. Fortunately, the mother recorded the removal on video.

    Unfortunately, however, Brent Social Services and HHJ Million operate in the father’s interests rather than those of the boy who needs to be protected from his ‘red banana’, as he calls it which we attach and publish on www.audrone.wordpress.com. Continue reading

    Posted in Acting as McKenzie Friend, Brent Council, Paedophilia, Public Interest Advocacy, Social Services, Stolen Children of the UK | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments