Because of the secrecy in the family courts no names can be used or case numbers. This is the law which reasons that this practice protects the child. In this case you will see that the very opposite is true.

This account should be a warning to all fathers although the background of my marriage will be different; it is the outcome which has a bearing on all of us. My story is a little unusual in that I married a woman who I knew was suffering some form of mental illness. I was 52 and she was 45 years of age, we both have grown up children from previous marriages. I married her because apart from finding her attractive she told me insecurity was a main source of her problem. I am Caucasian and she is Black British of West Indian parents. After the marriage she left her council house and moved in with me, I had a beautiful country cottage on a mortgage. During the first year of marriage I was verbally and physically attacked. All my possessions from lampshades to carpets were destroyed, the Police were called many times but as she was my wife the contents of the house were now in both names so criminal damage was not an offence. My MP contacted the Lord Chancellors office to see if the law that states you cannot get divorced in the first year should be altered in such circumstances but this was refused. Social Services were called many times but instances like finding mackerel down the suite cushions was dismissed as perfectly normal.

To cut a very long story short it should be sufficient to say that I endured six years of domestic violence also racial abuse and this was cited as grounds on the divorce I was granted. Her parents informed me that she had been mentally ill for twenty years but they could not get professional help. She used cannabis since she was a teenager. She abused her two children who are now in their twenties, but was never reported or arrested.

We had a daughter born January 2005, she wasn’t planned but I could not force an abortion so decided to take great care of the child. The first year of my daughter’s life was wonderful it was as if the baby had been the miracle cure the mother’s parents had sought. Suddenly after a row with her elder daughter she changed back to the abuser and abused both me and our new baby. I contacted Social Services, who because they did not witness any abuse in the hour and a half they were at the house decided it was just a bust up between parents. They never examined the baby because she was asleep so they didn't  witnesses the baby's legs covered in blood from abuse. The next day mother and my daughter disappeared. The elder children of my wife decided to break their years of silence and told Social Services of their horrific childhood, which involved being forced to watch their mother prostitute herself with groups of men as punishment for not tidying their rooms, the mother selling her daughters virginity to a client when she was just ten years old. Moving house every few years as the mother had destroyed them, one to the point of collapse by removing all internal walls. Their mother collecting her faeces in their toy boxes to throw out the window at neighbours. Still Social Services did nothing.

Now the Tricks start.

My solicitor requested a deposit to get started without the delay of waiting for legal aid and I gave him a VISA cheque for £450. About a month later the solicitor resigned from the company I was using. As this company did not have another family law solicitor I had to transfer the case to another company. I had to pay the first solicitors bill before he would release the file to the new solicitor. The new solicitor also requested a deposit before commencing any work. By paying the solicitors I had unknowingly forfeited my right to Legal Aid as one of their rules is that no payment must be made if an application for public funding is requested. Another reason I was refused public funding was because I am self employed. If I was in employment earning up to £23,000 I can be funded. Although the Inland Revenue accept my tax return stating earnings of only £8000 I was refused on the grounds, I quote, "Self employed people are not treated the same as employed people as we know that all of you earn cash in hand which you don't declare"

My solicitor successfully applied to the court for the mothers whereabouts to be disclosed by the D.W.P. the mother was now living 80 miles away in Nottingham, who, having received papers from the court then instructed Nelson’s Solicitors in the city centre. My solicitor asked many times for contact between me and my daughter but this was always refused. Having seen my daughter abused and having eczema which the mother neglected to treat I had heightened concerns for my daughters safety and welfare.

MISTAKE ONE. I continued to use my local solicitor in Bedford instead of transferring the case to a solicitor in the same area as the court. You will later understand how important this is.

MISTAKE TWO. Receiving a letter from Nottingham Social Services stating their involvement with my daughter finished on 23^rd April 2006, yet knowing she only arrived in Nottingham on that day raised my concerns. I received a telephone call from the mother who had a new mobile number and she deliberately allowed her number to be displayed. I telephoned the mothers mobile to say I was in Nottingham and could we meet. She refused and two days later I received an ex parte non-molestation order. My solicitor and I compiled a defence and I attended court as litigant in person to counter the false claims in the non-molestation order, one of which was that she accused me of murdering a previous wife and my father. A rather stupid lie as I could bring my ex to court as a witness and surely I would have this on a Police record. Unfortunately my father is dead but not by being murdered. Outside the court the mother’s barrister came to me and made an offer, which was. Either I give up my claim for residency and accept one hour contact per month in a supervised contact centre or she would go into chambers and tell the Judge that I was just here to play “Perry Mason”. I refused and she carried out her threat. The Judge put a date in the diary for a full hearing for me to counter the non-molestation order but would not grant any contact until that application had been heard. I decided to instruct counsel.

I went to the unusual length of paying £750 to speak to my counsel in chambers at Nottingham in order to make it quite clear that I was defending the false claims in the non-molestation order. On the day of the hearing I spoke to my counsel, all was set to counter her allegations. My counsel told me to take the two witnesses I had brought with me to the canteen and she would send for us when ready. After an hour I decided to leave the canteen and find out what the delay was, only to find my counsel had done a deal with the mothers counsel out of court. I was to accept undertakings in exchange for two hours supervised contact per fortnight. I was livid but told I must accept the offer as the Judge had already been informed and if I refused the Judge would be displeased and it could go against me. I took undertakings not to harass the mother and after this the mothers counsel announced that the contact could not take place for another month as the mother was moving home. The mother’s solicitor looked over at me and laughed in my face. The trap was set. I firmly believe that my counsel earns a lot of money each year from the local solicitor and would not damage that by defending me who was using a solicitor they had never dealt with.

MISTAKE THREE. Concerned for my daughter and worrying about the great risk of her being abused I waited up the road from the refuge to see her as the mother took her out shopping. I was seen and this was a breach of the undertaking. I sent an email to Women’s Aid at the head office in Bristol. The content was that I asked them to keep my daughter and her mother in the refuge as other people would be there so reducing the risk to my daughter and in return I would disclose the loopholes in their security. The email was forwarded to Nottingham to the refuge the mother was in and thereby I had broken undertakings a third time, the Judge took the view that my disclosure of loopholes was threatening behaviour towards Women’s Aid. The mother would telephone me and ask me to call back without withholding my number, which I never did but was accused of, a third breach of undertakings. I found out the new address of the mother and went to inspect the area. At the front of the house is the red light district and actually in the alley at the end of the back garden drug dealers dealt 24 hours. I took photos of syringes and discarded drug bottles. A neighbour saw me and wanted to know what I was doing photographing the area. I told him I was building evidence to help my case for residency. He conveyed this to the mother so yet another breach of undertakings. I contacted the local council about the syringes and they sent in bulldozers and flattened the disused pub and I informed both the Police and Crimestoppers and the drug dealing (I’m told by the mother) ceased, so I had hoped to get my daughter relocated but instead had the area cleaned up.  I was summoned to court to give reasons why I should not be imprisoned for breaching five undertakings. Prior to the court hearing  contact started. The first time the staff locked the mother and my daughter away in a staff room as they felt she was unsafe to be near any other visitors. After half an hour she calmed and contact proceeded for the remaining 1½ hours. The second contact lasted 5 minutes as the mother changed her mind.

I went to court to give my reasons. My explanation that all my actions were as a father concerned for his daughter’s safety in the hands of a woman who has previously caused mental disturbance on two elder children      ( they both have a mental age ten years lower than their actual age due to the mental harm they received) fell on deaf ears. I was found guilty of all five charges and given six suspended sentences. Yes six, I believe the Judge threw in one for good luck and stopped all contact. The court clerk told me afterwards that she is a feminist and no man has been known to win with her sitting in judgement. CAFCASS were to be informed of my new criminal record, courtesy of the mothers perjury, aided and abetted by her solicitor. 

By the time of the final hearing I had sold my house and used twenty thousand pounds fighting false allegations, a deliberate tactic of the mothers' solicitor who had a bottomless budget from public funds. I ran out of funds and had to appear as litigant in person, which meant that as the mother was the only party with legal representation they must make the bundle of documents for the hearing. This allowed them to falsify evidence by, on two occasions, removing a page from three page Police reports and submitting only two pages to make the mother appear as a victim when in fact it was I who had called the Police as I was being attacked. A total of 112 Police attendances in twelve months were disregarded as the Judge does not believe a man can be the victim of domestic violence. Anyone planning to be a litigant in person should be aware that you will be questioned in the dock by the mothers counsel to bring out any negativity but you have no-one to question you to reset the balance by bringing out the positive. The mother’s father came as my witness to give evidence that his daughter had ruined other men due to her mental condition. (The MIND organisation were aware of her and breached confidentiality by telling me she has a dangerous personality disorder) Her father being 77 years of age, an ex police officer who was twice commended was asked if he had ever spoken to the Social Worker involved, he replied correctly that he hadn’t. Later he stated he had spoken to two social workers and the Judge jumped on him calling him a liar. I realised he was referring to health visitors and tried to lead him to remember this under my cross examination but being elderly he became confused. He went out of court so upset he had a heart attack, luckily surviving due to my prompt actions. When it came to me to cross examine the mother, the Judge refused to allow me to raise any questions about her and told me I could only speak about my daughter. It was obvious that as he had heard I broke undertakings he had made up his mind. A McKenzie friend that came with me didn't attend for the second day of the hearing as he knew the Judge had preconceived his judgement without listening to me or reading any documented evidence.

When I tried to cross examine the mother the Judge told me to only ask questions related to my daughter as he wanted to go home! His verdict was that apparently the mother had been the victim of domestic violence, yet it was me who was the victim and was granted a divorce on these grounds. He then concluded I was a manipulative person who had tried to engage the services of other professionals to discredit the mother. The manager of the local MIND organisation had actually stated that as she was aware of the mother she would put her career on the line as she knew my daughter was at risk of harm and write to both the child’s doctor and my solicitor. I also managed to get copies of letters from both Kent Social Services and Northampton Health care proving she has mental problems.

The Judge awarded residency to the mother and after a plea by the mother’s counsel added the draconian Rule 91 that allowed him to delay contact until after a set period. He ordered that I could have no contact for two years and after which I could not apply through any district Judge save himself. My daughter was 22 months old and I among others have already witnessed her being abused. Whether it is a mistake or not I stood up and addressed the Judge. “Your Honour I will save you time writing such a long transcription. I will never see the mother again or my daughter, I have sacrificed everything to protect her from harm and by doing so am at ease in my mind that I gave 100%. I can now go away with my head held up and grieve something I cannot do if I believe there is still hope of saving her, but I among others have seen abuse starting and she will suffer mental scars at your hands. One day she may come looking for family and hear the truth but until she is 18, whereby I will be 70, I hand over my parental responsibility to the state. You have decided she will be the victim of abuse with little chance of a good education and by your actions have possibly created a delinquent of the future for the court to deal with”. I then turned my back on him both as a sign of contempt but also I broke down emotionally while he continued with his astonishing findings. Some of you may feel I am stupid and not caring to give up but in the early days I received the following remarks.

From my daughter’s doctor: “Due to the long history of problems on the mothers file, your daughter will suffer a life of mental and physical cruelty so you must think of your own life and health and forget her”.

From the legal representatives I engaged: “She is playing at a good mother in front of CAFCASS and until she is seen abusing the child in front of them no-one will believe you”.

From Social Services: “We heard from two elder children how they were abused but in our meeting with the mother, which lasted unusually longer than normal at 1½ hours we did not witness any abuse, except the mother twice attacked the father in our presence and was arrested, but he probably provoked her”.

I have an elder daughter who at the age of eight her mother and I separated. We never used solicitors and it was agreed I could see my daughter every weekend, so if the mother is sensible a break up between the parents can have little effect on children and when this daughter married I was sat at the head table next to my ex wife and her new husband.

I fought this case as the mother is not safe and has a record of abusing children but the court was more interested in making me look bad by breaching undertakings. The welfare of my daughter was never considered. The moral is no matter how the mother’s solicitor winds you up; remember they are setting a trap. The mother is their client not your child. Solicitors have no moral responsibilities.

I have suffered health problems due to the stress and need time to strengthen my body and mind but I will fight on, I will never apply for contact in a supervised contact centre, having experienced it. Why should the mother be able to tell the child,   “Daddy is a bad man and must be locked up while seeing you for our safety”? 

Two years after the end of this case the mother had another boyfriend beaten up as once again she said she was a victim of domestic violence. In her life she has falsely accused five men of rape and four of being violent yet all her oral evidence have no documented proof.

Documented proof when made available to this Judge was completely ignored. Thus allowing the mother to commit perjury and accepting every word she said as truth.

This Judge ignores the UN Convention on the rights of the child.

This Judge ignores the rights of the child under the European Court of Human Rights.

This Judge ignores the Child Welfare Checklist

This Judge is a danger to children

This Judge is ................... who sits in the Nottingham Court and not to be confused with a District Judge of the same name who presides in the south west of England.

This Judge gets away with this appalling behaviour because the family court is secret and therefore he is unaccountable.

Hopefully my daughter will be strong enough to live through the cruelty inflicted on her by her mother with the backing of this Judge until she uses this site or Facebook to contact me.

In this case the mother lives on benefit so she is automatically entitled to public funding under the legal aid scheme without means testing. I sold my house to pay legal fees and although I lost my career and am managing to live on £8,500 per year from self employment I can't have public funding, hence MONEY is the true Law in this country and living on state benefit is beneficial to doing an honest days work.

The Prime Minister has received petitions to change this system but he refused citing that a man can fight on through the appeal courts. He lives in a different world to the normal father. How having already lost everything can I pay for an appeal?

Why should an appeal court be necessary. Only because of the secrecy in the family courts.