Removed from family home by Police & Children Services

[heartbrokenfather]

ange301126: Thanks again for your time and your replies.

I have just had a quick look back over my emails to my solicitor regarding the defence witnesses, I can see an email at the start of July stating that I wanted the solicitor to contact said witnesses.

CPS is calling my wife to be a prosecution witness. and as such my solicitor is not able and or willing to contact / interview her.

From memory and without going over all my notes. But I be leave that each time the court has ordered the CPS to serve said items, paperwork, etc. the CPS has failed to serve by the stated date. Some of the orders have not been complied with a month past the given date.

My solicitor more then aware of the CPS serving past the dates ordered by the court, and they stated it's not just my case.

Each time I receive any letters / paperwork, I always stamp the date on them.

Suzie seems to be very picky about giving out dates, So I will just say that my Trail starts the last week of November.

In 28 days time, it would have been a year that I have been removed and refused to return to my family.

As you might remember from my 1st post that I was told it would be for the night.

[ange301126]

Dear HBF,
Unfortunately you have still told us nothing more about the general nature of the allegations.

[heartbrokenfather]

ange301126: I would like to be able to give more detailed information regarding my case so that you and other would be better able to help and advised, But as I have previously stated, the police and solicitors have told me I can not disclose details with regards to my case otherwise I risk prosecution. They have not stated what I can and can't talk about, they just have stated the case. I know full well I can not and will not give out names, addresses, etc.

I will say that the children are definitely not starving, having beatings, not being sent up the chimney, not sleeping on the floor and or in the cellar, or being enslaved in anyway (besides being told to tidy their rooms and pick up after themselves).

You asked regarding the CPS serving documents, I do not know the dates that the items where served to my solicitors so I can only go on when I received the documents, and having a quick look over my notes I have the following.

Case papers (11 days beyond deadline).
Witness interviews and transcripts (21 days beyond deadline).
Final Indictment (36 days beyond deadline).
Summary guide (29 days beyond deadline).

So depending on how quickly my solicitor forward on copies to me the above time might be out by a few days.

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather, I went to court in a parking case the other week .I protested to the judge that the complainants had sent me their evidence one week after the directives and the judge threw it out immediately.
I know your case is much more serious but the same principles should apply.

It just takes someone to argue your case with the judge who has the discretion to admit the evidence or not to apparently. You will probably find the court received the evidence late too!

Best of luck.I hope the vain attempt to persuade you to plead guilty was their last ditch effort to win the case and it gets thrown out.

[heartbrokenfather]

ange301126: I think something you have said started something ticking in the back of my mind.

As said before I have been told by the police and the solicitors that I can not talk about my case, and I do remember the judge saying about a section something, and when I asked my barrister about it he said it was related to not being able to name the children ect.

I do not remember what section or what act the judge was referring to, and I can see nothing regarding this in my paperwork.

So I may way be completely barking up the wrong tree but my mind is working overtime.

As I am being charged under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, I thought this would be the best place to start.

Section 39: Power to prohibit publication of certain matter in newspapers.
Section 49: Restrictions on reports of proceedings in which children or young persons are concerned.

Below is a quote from Wikipedia

Section 39 and 49: information for journalists
Sections 39 and 49 are used to protect the identity of children and young people who appear in court as witnesses, victims and suspects. Journalists may not give the following about the accused:

Their name
Address
School
Still or moving image; or
Any particulars likely to lead to the identification of any person aged under 18 concenerned in the proceedings.

As said before the local papers gave out my full name, age, and address, so all this is now public knowledge.

I need to try and find out and confirm what section and act the the judge was enforcing.

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather, Well,we all know you haven't given away any details thus who did?
Either someone leaked the details to the press or they picked the information up from the court bulletin boards. If it is the latter then the newspaper editor is solely reesponsible for contravening the court order.
If either the Police or ,the CS leaked information then they could face prosecution just as you would have done,I guess.
The rules are strict and you should e-mail the Court immediately to inform it of the contravention.If you know the Judge's name,it might be possible to write to him directly.That, I presume, would instigate an enquiry and prosecutions.You should also report your suggestions that the involvement of the cs has unfairly influenced the evidence of both your wife and the children.

Who else would know the full details of all the cruelty charges? No-one else,not even your wife.

AFTER you have submitted your complaints to the court,you can contact your solicitor to see which court protocol was broken and get further advice.It may be section 38,39 or section 101 Dalmatians for all I care. Whichever it is ,the tight procedural rules are broken.You should be dogged and resolute that you want to object strongly about what has happened.Clearly, it potentially damages the case beyond repair now the court order is broken provided your sols object most strongly!.I advise that you personally search the internet for past precedents and find out what has happened in other cases when these orders have been contravened.As in my parking case,the judge has the discretion either to admit evidence or not.Their barrister asked him to and the judge asked me for reasons why the late production had affected my ability to respond.I gave one or two good reasons and he agreed with me.Had I not done so,he would have admitted it. It is important ,however,that the judge gets to hear of it straight away.If you can't find past precedent then your barrister must do so and if there is no past precedent than I can come up with reasons to object for you.
Did the newspaper publish the details before you found out the details of the charges yourself or after? The answer to that question could be crucial to the case because if it was before then it absolutely absolves you of any responsibility for the illicit leakage of information.

It is also important that you haven't seen the ABE videos yet.Look into it!
Good luck.

[heartbrokenfather]

I have this morning spoken with the court in question, It has now been confirmed that a Section 39 order was indeed granted by the Judge.

Children and Young Persons Act 1933 - Section 39

39 Power to prohibit publication of certain matter in newspapers.

(1)In relation to any proceedings in any court . . . , the court may direct that—
(a) no newspaper report of the proceedings shall reveal the name, address or school, or include any particulars calculated to lead to the identification, of any child or young person concerned in the proceedings, either as being the person by or against or in respect of whom the proceedings are taken, or as being a witness therein:
(b)no picture shall be published in any newspaper as being or including a picture of any child or young person so concerned in the proceedings as aforesaid;
except in so far (if at all) as may be permitted by the direction of the court.

(2) Any person who publishes any matter in contravention of any such direction shall on summary conviction be liable in respect of each offence to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

I am just not sure what I can do about it. It's not like I can unpublish the paper.

Please let me know your thoughts on this.

Thanks again.

Best Regards.

[ange301126]

Dear Heartbrokenfather,

You say you don't know what you can do about it.
I have already suggested that you e-mail the Judge directly to inform him the s39 order has been broken and that the children's identities have been disclosed publicly with the result that the evidence against you should be inadmissible in the coming trial.

Trawl the internet for reasons why the contravention will potentially,definitely or may theoretically render your children's and your wife's evidence unsafe.

You have said there is no physical evidence and the case will hinge on their evidence.

Also point out to the Judge your belief that the CS have interfered with the case and influenced their evidence particularly ( by threats) that of your wifes. After it is all over it will be interesting to find out what rubbish tales they have told her about you.Also when social workers go to interview children at school, the children will have been put under peer-pressure which may have caused them to invent tales and embellish their evidence. Matters being made public will have potentially put them under even more pressure and make it impossible for any fair cross-examination of your wife, or any of the children on video-link. While you are at it you can also report to the judge that the evidence was not provided to you on time as per the court orders and that the video evidence still hasn't.
Just because your solicitors think it acceptable because it 'happens all the time ' doesn't mean the judge will accept it. You should object strongly.

Hope this helps.

[heartbrokenfather]

ange301126: I have tried emailing the courts in question, In the email I gave the case number, and the date that the judge gave the Section 39. I also gave details on why I feel this is a breach of the Section 39, I also did a copy and paste of the Section 39 from the legislation.gov.uk website. I also attached a copy of the news article in question.

Within half an hour I received the following reply.

Dear Mr ----------

Unfortunately the Court cannot comment on this matter and you will need to direct your query to the Editor of the ----------.

They can be contacted on ----------

Regards
Criminal Team Manager & Crown Court Clerk

So the court does not seem interested in the breach of the Section 39 Order, but instead wants me to contact the Editor of said news paper.

With regards to contacting the Judge directly, I do not know who the Judge that will be over seeing the Trial, and I have found no way of contacting the Judge or any Judge directly.

I did also send an email to my solicitor with more or less the same details, but as of yet I have not received a reply.

[heartbrokenfather]

Since my last post I have also contacted the local paper in question via email. Stating that they are in Breach of the Section 39 Order

Below is the response.

Thank you for your e-mail regarding our report.
Our report makes no mention of the children concerned being the defendants own; a stance we will maintain throughout the proceedings, in line with Section 39 guidance not to identify the children.
As far as the reader is concerned these children could have been under the defendants supervision in a professional or voluntary capacity; there is nothing to suggest they are the defendants own children.
There are two courses of action for a newspaper in such a case. Name the defendant but keep out the evidence identifying the children; or protect the defendant's identity and give full details of the cruelty (if proven). Our policy is the former course.

Kind regards,

I have also been asking questions regarding this on "thelawforum"

My post can be found here: Press Reporting - CYPA S39 & S49

Unfortunately I still have not received a response from my solicitor.

Best Regards.