Maureen Spalek
pop.tiscali.co.uk
issue, I can write here that I am certain that she loves her childfren and
must have them returned at the earliest opportunitry. The UK establishment
has proved time and time again that they generally are corrupt and evil. The
time is almost here to deal with them.
Naurice Kellett
http://www.mason-rule.bizhosting.com
http://www.masonsatwork.50megs.com
Sorry last mail did not have the attachment.
This is an update on Maureen Spalek's case. Sordid reading I am
afraid.
Last night Maureen was arrested again, the police have claimed that
she broke her bail conditions, however the bail notice is incomplete signed
by the Clark of the court.
It appears that Liverpool city council legal dept are trying to keep
this story under wraps because Maureen has evidence from Mr Justice Ryder
that her children where taken unlawfully by the SS.
The police appear to be bullying this single Mother, she has now
been arrested three times in the last week on what appears to be� false
charges and a set up.
Please pass on.
Juli
Please Read the following Attached :
Liverpool Social Service Services
Liverpool mother had 3 children stolen by Social Services, now a
further expose' of the outrageous abuse suffered by this mother and her
children at the hands of the Liverpool SS. A situation, either knowingly or
unknowingly facilitated by the court and legal teams and certainly not
helped by Liverpool Chief Executive Colin Hilton, who arrived in the City as
Director of Children's services in 1999. He has been awarded a CBE for
services to Education.
In January 2006, the mother of the two children requested a meeting
with Liverpool SS, as she was finding it very difficult to gain any
information about her children's welfare. During the subsequent meeting the
mother was informed by a Liverpool Council SS official that, "the adoption
placement of her children had broken down and that her children had been
placed back into foster care." The official refused to give the mother any
further information relating to her children's welfare.
Desperate, as any caring mother would be, Maureen instructed a
solicitor to make fresh applications to take the matter back into court.
Placed before Judge Roddy, the judge advised the mother that she would not
allow the application to be heard unless the mother agreed to undergo a
psychological assessment. This advice was backed by the procedural threat
that if the mother did not agree then the application would be dismissed.
With nowhere else to turn the Maureen agreed to the assessment. In contrast
to many other mothers who find themselves falsely labelled as mentally ill.
Liverpool Mum Maureen was given a positive report, which confirmed her as
perfectly normal.
Court pressurises Mother
Allegedly, Judge Roddy did not make any attempt to inform the mother
of the actual details of the adoption breakdown, nor did she re-assure the
mother of the actual welfare of her children. By withholding this
information, which is understood to be against normal legal procedure in
such cases, Roddy would appear to have put further psychological pressure on
a mother, already victimised.
The withholding of the child welfare information also shows, yet
again, the evil secretive nature of our family courts. What is so outrageous
and despicable about the wall of silence is that public money is used to pay
the judge, Social Services and the legal teams, whilst an innocent mother is
forced to pay for her own legal advice. In many cases the barristers and
solicitors collude, so as to meet the government guidelines and make the
most money of course. Put simply and in plain English - the whole family
courts system reeks of greed and vested interest. Christian values of
justice, concern and morality are missing.
Mother again applies for custody.
In January 2007, the mother returned to Liverpool family courts, and
in view of her positive psychological assessment, she again submitted an
application to gain custody of her children. It was at this stage of the
care proceedings that the mother was handed a copy of a report compiled by
Liverpool Social Service, which set out to explain, some 12 months after the
placement of the children had broken down, the details of the children's
abuse, and psychological cruelty at the hands of the adopting family.
Young tots abused.
The abuse endured by the tots of 3 and 4 years included excessive,
and excessively hard smacking. Being shouted at, and being forced to make
their beds every morning. (Remember their ages). At Christmas 2005, they
were forced to collect together all their Christmas presents and put them in
a black bin liner. The two tots were then frog-marched to the dustbin, where
they
were forced to throw all the toys away. Their crime - being naughty.
Judge pressures Mother?
Suffering unbelievable anguish at both the loss of her children and
their abuse in Liverpool SS care, the Judge continued to refuse the birth
mother custody of her children. This was, of course, despite the fact that
she had a psychological assessment saying she was perfectly fit and capable
of looking after her children. In addition, there had never been any
evidence submitted to Judge Roddy's family court that the birth mother had
ever abused, neglected, or harmed her children. In fact, she had been a
perfectly good mother. Refusing the mother custody, and victimising her
further, Judge Roddy then made an order that the two children should remain
with Liverpool SS - the very authority under whose supervision the children
had been abused. During their time with Liverpool SS, the authority had
neglected a range of duties, including the need for regular supervisory
visits to the adoptive parents. Judge Roddy's decision thereby effectively
ensured that this failing authority were allowed the opportunity to repeat
their mistakes without investigation, censure or exposure.
In desperation, and as a last recourse, the mother made legal
argument by sighting that there were a number of orders that could be made
to allow the children back into her care. These included, a Supervision
Order, a Ward of Court, or a Guardianship.
The Court did not take into account the fact that Liverpool SS were
often less than transparent in their handling of the case, and in their
withholding of documents and other evidence from both the Judge and the
mother. All protests and options put forward by the mother were rejected by
judge Roddy, and the children remained with Liverpool SS.
Children lost in Liverpool SS Gulag.
At that time the mother had no knowledge of the whereabouts of her
children. They could be lost in a system, where on the evidence to date they
are more likely to be abused by the Social Service SS system, than
protected.
They are lost in a Family Court Gulag, where the general public is
kept away, denied facts, denied the option to report details in the press
and media, and where Judges can rule without fear of investigation or
disciplinary action for their failings.
Supposedly set up to protect children, the media blackout on family
courts is assisting the willful abuse of children by the establishment.
Since mothers and fathers are forced to fight against a legal system funded
by the taxpayer, they are effectively helpless, whilst the state does as it
pleases.
It now appears from evidence ref: Mr. Justice Ryder that Maureen's
children had been taken unlawfully from their grandparents care by the SS.
The Grandparents where looking after their two grand children, while their
daughter/Mum (Maureen) was in hospital supporting her other child who had
been knocked down by a motor-biker in a local park.
Say a prayer for all the little children lost in the Gulag of the
Family Courts.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS
Masonic judges OUT Juries IN
Members only can post to this group at LJ...@googlegroups.com
All other emails to lj...@bigfoot.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---