Senior judges are investigating after a dad of three was anonymously sentenced to prison in a battle over his children.
Now his hearing – deep in the sinister bowels of the Family Court system – has been highlighted as a return of the ‘hanging’ judges who are willing to ‘secretly’ take away a parents name and claim it is to protect the children.
The 15-month suspended sentence was handed down to the nameless father despite rules saying that judges they should never give prison or suspended terms without naming the individual.
The judgement came after the man repeatedly defied orders to stop trying to make contact with his sons.
Open justice campaigners have criticised the decision and senior judges launched an inquiry into the suppression of the father’s name.
The ruling by Judge Gillian Matthews QC is said to be against open justice rules from eight years ago that say no adult should be handed a prison sentence in the family courts without being publicly named.
The order that family courts and the linked Court of Protection should stop sending adults to jail in secret was laid down in 2013 after the case of Wanda Maddocks – a woman sentenced to jail anonymously after she tried to remove her father from a care home where she thought he was in danger.
Judge Matthews identified the father only as JE and her ruling is headed: ‘Anonymisation applies.’
She said the ‘judgment was delivered in private,’ and that ‘the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved’.
Officials said Judge Matthews’ decision would be removed from the published roll of court rulings until she had explained why the sentencing was anonymous.
#judge #gillianmatthews #familycourt #jailedanonymous #realmannoname #children #pa
The British judiciary has a long history of legislation that continues at odds with any justice related narrative. Slave trading was fine for centuries so long as the establishment saw profit. Bombing China in the Opium wars was fine so long as the Opium dealers brought profit for the British establishment owners. Family law is much the same as both examples. It is way past sell by. It is a license for the amoral to continue a system that is entirely at odds with Justice, abusing children with every disputed Judgment in family court for nothing more than the profit family court represents for its membership.
A Nuremberg Trial style reckoning for the legislators who continue this exposed system would form a fitting conclusion to the qualified immunity they continue to enjoy.
good on ya mate!
Family law legislators know what they are doing. They know it is as offensive as and criminal behavior motivated by profit. They will keep trying to deny for as long as they can. It will take an event leading to criminal charges and a publicized trial to end this secret court system. Nuremberg is an apposite comparable. The top twenty MOJ related legislators enabling the ongoing immunity for family law members should face charges relating to human rights abuses.
Jail the top twenty in a public trial making plain the extent of the historical offenses in which they have acted with premeditation and full awareness of the crimes they are guilty of. They should be made to face victim apology in court – on live TV. And the new model for dealing with family matters should be implemented without further delay.
Put the two pieces together in one cogent piece and let’s publish on the site … some good points mate!
justice system DISGRACE TO BAIRNS