Watching the Watchers

Threats to the protector for telling the truth

“These orders are barbaric, cruel and wicked, this Judge should go to jail.”

The words from a grandmother. After reading through her answers, and how many people clearly disregarded the law: police, social workers, the ICL (Independent children’s lawyer), court reporters, a psychiatrist —  it looks like many “should go to jail.” (More of that in Part 4.)

Several of the Survey questions will be covered here in Part 3, but it is essentially about how the protective parent is entrapped and punished by the system via “road-blocks” that have been put in place to defy justice — which in the end protects the pedophile.

Some of the road-blocks are:

  • Police inaction — “It’s now a Family Court matter”
  • The accuser “is mentally unstable”
  • The accuser is trying to “alienate” the other parent
  • Child being required to confront the abuser with the allegations
  • No recordings at interviews or in court, allowing reports to be MODIFIED
  • Deliberate falsification of reports and documents
  • Advice from legal counsel: “Don’t report any sexual abuse”
  • THREATS to those who try again to report abuse, and
  • Punishing the accuser by removing CONTACT with the child.

In simple terms, the system turns the “protector” into a perpetrator: calling them the “emotional abuser”.  It is thoroughly dishonest and extremely DEVIOUS.

Police Inaction

Before conducting the survey, I saw a common factor emerging from the phone calls I received.  Namely, the police stopped investigating the alleged perpetrator because the matter was before the courts. And so, the Family Court becomes, by default, a protector of pedophiles.

This goes against our general understanding that if a crime is committed, the police investigate, and then the accused may be prosecuted. I wrote to the AFP Media Unit asking, “At what point will the police investigate a case in front of the family court?” I did not get a reply.

To my Survey question, “Did the police, at any time, REFUSE to investigate abuse claims because the matter was before the Family court?” As I write this, there are 58 responses to this question.

In 47 cases the police REFUSED to investigate claims.

Parents are told, “Don’t Report”

When this was screen-grabbed, there were 58 responses

I asked the question: “Were you told by your legal representative NOT to report abuse — as you could be at risk of losing custody?”

80% said YES.

I guess these responders ignored this advice, at least to the extent that they are answering this Survey — and many have paid a terrible price for wanting justice, and for being “protective.”

The next question asked: “During or after court proceedings, did anyone warn you to NOT REPORT any further abuse?”

The police (to 16 people), CPS (14), ICL (15), the Judge (16) and others (28).

If the police don’t investigate, who does investigate?

The court says it cannot investigate the claim, as it is not equipped to analyse anything forensically. So what happens when the police stop, and allegations are NOT investigated? By default, two things seem to happen:

  1. The mental state of the accuser (the protective parent) is put in question, or
  2. The protective parent is accused of parental alienation — or in modern terminology, “one parent deliberately undermines the relationship between a child and the other parent, causing the breakdown of a previously healthy parent-child relationship.”

There is a general understanding among those representing people in the Family Court: reporting sexual abuse leads down a dark and expensive track for the accuser – presumably because of the two items just mentioned.

“Did you have to undergo MENTAL HEALTH assessments?”

Of 60 responses to this question, 32 said YES.

Isn’t that outrageous! Following through on the Protector’s allegations would in most cases have obviated the need for that.

To, “At any point, was your child removed from you, because you were/are labelled an “ANXIOUS PARENT”?

11 said YES.

In the accounts I had been told, several protective mothers said the court was describing them as “anxious parents”. Firstly, would anyone NOT be anxious if their child was being sexually abused? And secondly, the court’s threat to remove your child and put him or her into foster care would be terrifying.

Blackmailing a Protective Parent

To the next question, “What ‘punishment’ would be put on you, if you did bring forward more accounts or evidence of abuse?”

A sample of the text answers:

To, “SUPERVISED VISITATION: Have you in the past, or are you presently in an arrangement of supervised visitation?”

33 said YES out of 60 responses.

(Imagine it! Imagine it! With your own offspring!)

To the follow-up question, “Were THREATS ever made by supervision personnel that you could lose visitation rights, or your child altogether?”

24 said YES.

It seems most people with supervised visitation are threatened (emotionally blackmailed) in some way. ‘Darlene’ was warned to not be too affectionate with her daughter, otherwise she would not be able to see her again. Even bringing the child a gift or clothing was a no-no.

Actions against the Child

Did the court ever PREVENT you from seeking medical or psychological assistance for your child?”

Of the 60 people who answered this question, 40 (66%) said YES.

I had many accounts of how the protective parent was prevented from seeking medical assistance — claiming the “emotional abuser” was further harming the child. Just utterly extraordinary. In no other circumstances would this ever be acceptable.

Then, “Was your child asked to reveal their disclosures in an interview — with their abuser present?”

Of 54 responses, 24 said YES.

I recalled Dr Rikard Bell’s account of how children might act when faced with questions in front of the abuser: “if abuse has occurred, generally, there is an awkwardness… if there is no substantial sign of abuse… there will be a good rapport…” I have been a film director for decades, and as part of my craft, I study the variations of how people react in hostile or situations or adversity — and his answers dangerously naive.

It is mostly likely that some children in that situation would “pretend” all is fine — as a defensive safeguard. As Rachel Vaughan describes of her years of abuse as a child: Max, her father, threatened to harm or kill her if she spoke out.

“Did your child undergo ‘therapy’ ordered by the Judge to ‘make them understand that the abuse NEVER happened’?”

12 responded YES — they were ordered to therapy. I wonder what kind of therapy? 14 chose Other.

To, “Did the ICL (Independent Children’s lawyer) speak with the child they were representing or rely on information given to them”?

Only 9 responders said YES, and 28 said NO.

How can anyone adequate represent someone without speaking with them?

The Father Alienating the Mother

I will have to condense this account dramatically (I will write it up in more detail later), but it demonstrates the culture of the Family Court perfectly — that it prescribes the the “alienation” theory, by DEFAULT.

A father (I don’t know if he is a Survey responder) contacted me a few days ago with his account of how the court accused him of “alienating” his children from their mother. He was in a 50/50 shared arrangement and then lost custody altogether after bringing up claims of abuse. His ex-wife had moved in with, and then married, another younger man, a refugee. The children started to refuse to return to their mother’s house. The father went to DHHS with the children’s allegations of abuse. The result: the father lost custody, (and I think all contact).

Constant Threats 

To the question, “Anything to add for advice and threats”?

A small sample of some of the text answers:

“Treated me like a criminal.”

“I was told to redirect conversation if kids spoke of abuse… or I’d not get any more visits”

“refused visitation… never saw my children for 6 years whilst I proceeded through the court [won appeals]”

“they LIED when my daughter was bashed there… did not call police or ambulance and destroyed the CCTV footage.”

“ICL told me I was going to lose my daughter continuously if I didn’t do what I was told.”

“I was put on a good behaviour bond for 12 months because my children [ages redacted] we’re refusing to go with their father, and running away from him.”

“…my daughter was dragged crying and pleading.” [A very common note.]

“If you continue or contest the finding of Dr X you will lose her.”

[Grandson arrived injured.] “The only way to gag my grandson was to extinguish all contact for my son.”

“I was told by a new lawyer that I should never had reported CSA (after the final orders) and that was the reason I lost custody.”

“I was threatened by the judge and my ex’s legal team that my daughter (12-years-old), who did not want to stay with father, would be handcuffed and taken to father with no contact.”

“You will lose all contact.”

We love our children. They are everything to us. How dare those representing authority, law and order, and the judicial system behave so disgracefully — using emotional BLACKMAIL, instead of the law. Many officials threaten to remove all contact from one’s child — and for most this is the worse thing that could happen in one’s life. And then they have the audacity to say the parent is now “anxious” — forcing some to undergo some form of “corrective” treatment.

Do you remember the film, Sophie’s Choice?  I didn’t want to use a WW2 concentration camp example, but I can’t think of a better demonstration of a child being torn from a parent. The film uses the public’s hatred to underscore the brutality of the Nazis.

But this scene in the film reminds me of an almost IDENTICAL one described to me by Darlene (here in Australia). It took not one, but two burly officers to physically subdue the 8-year-old kicking and screaming child, and drag her away from her mother. You see, the court has deviously deemed Darlene to be an “emotional abuser” — so now she has the “privilege” of seeing her daughter for one hour a week, SUPERVISED. And if she transgresses in any way, they have threatened to place the kid in foster care. All her kid wants is to come home.

It is truly disgraceful, and I have no words to describe the disgust I feel.

 

–There still more Parts to the analysis of this Survey to come.

Source : https://gumshoenews.com/2018/11/26/family-court-survey-part-3-threats-to-the-protector-for-telling-the-truth/