It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A mother is threatened with imprisonment for talking to her MP

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
This article, has to be one of the most disturbing things I've come across in a while

A mother is threatened with imprisonment for talking to her MP

It is an offence for me in the UK, as a Broadcast Journalist, to name the woman involved in this even though I know who it is.


Last week a heavily pregnant woman, whose name is known to millions but whom I am forbidden by law to identify, was summoned to the High Court at very short notice to show why she should not be imprisoned. The charges against her, brought by a local authority I cannot name, were that she might or might not have been in breach of a court order restraining her freedom to speak about a matter which, again, I am prohibited from identifying.


This woman has been threatened with imprisonment for discussing a family protection issue with her MP - even though he has traditional Parliamentary privilege to investigate the matter.


The main speaker at the meeting, the theme of which was transparency in the family courts, was Anthony Douglas, the chief executive of Cafcass (Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service), the state body which purports to represent the interests of children. When the woman raised concerns over the conduct of her case – which, as she understood it, was the meeting’s purpose – it was reported back to the council concerned. This contribution was listed among her alleged breaches of a court order which dictates that she must say nothing about her case to anyone outside the system.


Its disgraceful that the woman in question should be treated this way;


The mention of the police referred, inter alia, to a recent episode where the mother, who is seven months pregnant, was arrested and held on and off in police cells over a period of 60 hours. Three times she was rushed to hospital in serious distress due to complications in her pregnancy. She was then dragged from her hospital bed after midnight to spend several more hours in a dirty cell, before finally being released.


You have to ask - what in the world has happened to common sense, and common decency when a woman who is invited to discuss a subject of transparency at a conference gets threatened with imprisonment for doing just that?

And what has happened to the British political system when a court interferes into Parliamentary Privilege in such a way that an MP is effectively censored in Parliament? Disgraceful stuff.




posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
i don't understand your post, are you a broadcast journalist, that's why you can't identify her, or is writer of the link, the journalist and can't identify her.

if you know her name, you should say so, so you can put a face to the article.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Don't you know these kind of people (dogs) need to be beat down like the swine they are....



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by randomname
 


As host of ATS Live, if I mention her name, I can be imprisoned.

The person who wrote the article, who is a British journalist, faces a similar punishment.

Hope that clears it up



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Does this, in effect, mean that any corrupt official(s) can freely abuse the system, the public and/or even an individual, however they so desire, without ramifications whatsoever for their actions, safe in the knowledge that (upon a successful injunction), were anyone to talk to anyone about their acts, all persons concerned would be libel by Law to the maximum punishment of imprisonment?

This is the "Super-Hyper-Injunction", if I'm not mistaken. Although, I damn well hope I've misunderstood and unwittingly exaggerrated the power and scope of it...please tell me I have.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by OptimisticPessimist
 


Unfortunately so, just look at 9/11. This ain't about justice any more, but power and those with it fighting to maintain it. If the courts where truly about justice then there would be no sealed court records, no gag orders and the facts can be shown for what they are. There is a lot of sickness in the system and pretending it is not there is how the system is responding to it.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
yep looks like we all need to get together and kick these parasites out of power. Start with the politicians and work our way down...



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
well I would love to comment here
but I'm afraid I cannot cuz of the
jargon used in the article.

Being a Yank, MP should mean
Military Police. But when I insert my
definition of MP into your story,
it makes absolutely no sense.

So could you please explain to us
stupid Americans what MP stands for?
Thanks ole chap



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
well I would love to comment here
but I'm afraid I cannot cuz of the
jargon used in the article.

Being a Yank, MP should mean
Military Police. But when I insert my
definition of MP into your story,
it makes absolutely no sense.

So could you please explain to us
stupid Americans what MP stands for?
Thanks ole chap


Im impressed you can even read mate

MP stands for Member of Parliament - kinda like a member of congress



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 


Thanks, I was wondering the same thing.
To be honest I am really not surprised by this.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join