Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Shadow Justice: Secret UK Courts Break up Families for Profit and Control.

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 27 2013 @ 12:59 AM
link   
I'm just going to say..."WTH is happening to us?". How has it come to this?

Secret Courts?

While I do not pretend to understand every facet of this (what I consider barbaric and even as stated Draconian) I can't sit by for days to investigate and diffuse either.

The vid is enough for me right now and if I'm wrong, so be it.

www.activistpost.com... secret court in the UK has put some people behind bars just for trying to take care of their own relatives. One woman whose father was pronounced 'mentally ill' was locked away. But since the hearings are behind closed doors, it's hard to know why.

To me this is just theft by Govt. and control of the people when they have no way whatsoever of challenging because it's illegal and punishable by incarceration to do so.





posted on May, 27 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Do we have any references for this apart from a youtube video by RT ?

The activistpost article just refers to the youtube video by RT.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 02:17 AM
link   
You lost me when you posted a video from a Russian government-owned propaganda channel run by the Kremlin.

By the way, a closed court is not the same as a secret court.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


So who are these people put behind bars? And if it was secret you wouldn't know about them. Since you do, it's not secret, just closed doors.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Do we have any references for this apart from a youtube video by RT ?

The activistpost article just refers to the youtube video by RT.


Not to difficult to search as many are reporting the same:

inagist.com...

whatreallyhappened.com...

______beforeitsnews/alternative/2013/05/shadow-justice-secret-uk-courts-break-up-families-2662246.html

in-the-news.net...

www.globalreport.org...

sherayx.wordpress.com...

If you want more just type "Shadow Justice: Secret UK courts break up families" into google and follow your nose.

But if you need MSM confirmation...Good Luck.

Read the content, watch the vid, follow the alternative news links...and then decide on who you REALLY believe.

Peace

edit on 27-5-2013 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sankari
You lost me when you posted a video from a Russian government-owned propaganda channel run by the Kremlin.

By the way, a closed court is not the same as a secret court.


You clearly don't know RT.

Please research before you comment.

Peace



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by jude11
 


So who are these people put behind bars? And if it was secret you wouldn't know about them. Since you do, it's not secret, just closed doors.


You clearly did not read the entire article did you?

It's the family and not the actual person making the claims.

Peace



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jude11

Originally posted by alfa1

Do we have any references for this apart from a youtube video by RT ?

The activistpost article just refers to the youtube video by RT.


Not to difficult to search as many are reporting the same:



Too right they're "reporting the same".
Every single one of your "extra" links use the same RT youtube video as their source.

So let me clarify.
When I ask for other references, I dont dont mean just other websites that also link to the exact same youtube video.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by jude11

Originally posted by alfa1

Do we have any references for this apart from a youtube video by RT ?

The activistpost article just refers to the youtube video by RT.


Not to difficult to search as many are reporting the same:



Too right they're "reporting the same".
Every single one of your "extra" links use the same RT youtube video as their source.

So let me clarify.
When I ask for other references, I dont dont mean just other websites that also link to the exact same youtube video.


I'll give a star for that.

But please look at my OP.

I stated that I do not know. And if it's true (I have no reason not to believe...yet)

That's it.

Do your own research if you want to debunk. I am doing my own to prove otherwise because I have no doubt whatsoever.

If you believe that RT would go to such measures to fabricate this then you have clearly not followed their channel and all the truth the have brought forth in spite of the MSM.

If you want FOX or CNN to break this before you actually get a notion of potential truth, you'll be waiting forever.

Personally, I'll go to RT before CNN for anything relevant and even remotely truthful.

Peace



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sankari
You lost me when you posted a video from a Russian government-owned propaganda channel run by the Kremlin.

By the way, a closed court is not the same as a secret court.


Please explain the difference.

Peace



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 03:43 AM
link   
The government wants the Court of Protection to operate with greater transparency:


Chris Grayling has asked one of the country’s most senior judges to revisit the rules covering the Court of Protection, which decides the fate of adults who are judged not to have the mental capacity to make their own decisions.

Created in 2007 under Labour’s Mental Capacity Act, the court has sweeping powers to decide the fate of vulnerable people. Unlike almost any other court it is not required to allow the press or members of the public to listen in to their proceedings, and still routinely excludes any observers.


(Source).

The lord chief justice has taken immediate steps to address this. Note that Wanda Maddocks—the woman referred to in the RT story—was jailed for contempt of court after refusing to obey court orders concerning the welfare of her father:


No one should be jailed in secret, the lord chief justice has said in urgent guidance sent out to judges following the court of protection's imprisonment of a woman for contempt.

The two-page circular, released on Friday, is a swift response by the senior judiciary to concerns raised about the case of Wanda Maddocks, who lives in the Midlands, which emerged last week.

She was jailed last year for disobeying court orders relating to the care of her 80-year-old father but not identified at the time. Maddocks is believed to be the first person sent to prison by the court of protection, which looks after the interests of those deemed unfit to control their own affairs.

The new guidance has been issued by the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, and Sir James Munby, who is president of the family division of the civil courts in England and Wales and the court of protection.

It reminds judges: "It is a fundamental principle of the administration of justice in England and Wales that applications for committal for contempt should be heard and decided in public, that is, in open court."


(Source).

The purpose of the Court of Protection is to ensure that elderly people who can no longer look after their own affairs are not abused or exploited by others. Let's look at what Ms Maddocks did to earn herself a jail sentence:


In the belatedly released judgment on Maddocks, the judge in Birmingham gave reasons for imposing a five-month prison sentence. Judge Cardinal said Maddocks had persistently breached court orders designed to protect her father, who suffers from Alzheimer's.

The judgment said she had taken him out of his care home, discussed details of the case with him in defiance of court orders, caused her father distress and left abusive messages for council staff and the social worker in the case.

The judge added: "In the circumstances it seems to me that there is no alternative other than to commit this lady to prison. I realise, of course, that in doing so I would be punishing [her father] to a degree because in some small way he still appreciates visits from his daughter, although she seems to ruin part or all of most of the visits and telephone calls, but the court cannot allow this situation to continue whereby she abuses [the social worker], she abuses staff at [the care home] and she defies the court order by bringing her father to court.


(Source).

Not surprising she was sent to prison!
edit on 27/5/13 by Sankari because: added quote...



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
You clearly don't know RT.


Oh, I do. I know RT very well.


Please research before you comment.

Peace


Pardon me while I LOL.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!


I'm clearly the one who's done all the research here. You just copy/pasted an RT story without bothering to check the facts. You didn't even know the background details.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by jude11
You clearly don't know RT.


Oh, I do. I know RT very well.


Please research before you comment.

Peace


Pardon me while I LOL.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!


I'm clearly the one who's done all the research here. You just copy/pasted an RT story without bothering to check the facts. You didn't even know the background details.


And what you have posted is nothing but the court (assumed) claims. And we should always believe their statements...right?

You have decidedly taken the side of the accusers by copy/pasting their statements while in my OP I have CLEARLY stated that I am undecided and unaware of the claims of the defendants but am most certainly shocked by the situation.

Your response of AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA...(or however the hell you want to spell a teenage IM) is nothing but an attempt to derail the topic.

Reply with actual facts or not at all because the OP is actually open to it if you take the time.

Jude11



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
I'm just going to say..."WTH is happening to us?". How has it come to this?

Secret Courts?

]


Do you mean Child Protection courts.
These were set up after Lord Lamming and Eileen Munro did massive / excellent reports and asked for closer co operation between agencies when looking at the safety of children.

This came about as a result of seceral preventable child deaths - particularly Victoria Climbie a little African girl who came to live with her Aunt in London, who subsequently died as a result of many many injuries - there were many windows of opportunity to save her.
en.wikipedia.org...

Also baby P who was murdered by his mother father and mothers boyfriend - he had many many injuries and had had contact with health agencies/ police or social servicess 66 times leading up to his death - none intervened and saved him. en.wikipedia.org...

There are many children in dangerous households, who suffer from neglect, emotional or otherwise and general abuse.

Do you think they should stay with their families or be moved to a safe environment ?



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 04:44 AM
link   
I thought RT had managed to embed my location into the video till i saw it was S-o-T

Having had dealing with their social services half of whom are constantly off 'sick' and the other half chasing their tails trying to deal with the case loads which are increasing.

About 4-5 years ago Stoke offloaded all its care responsibilities to the private sector to save money except for a few places for emergency and people who are too expensive for the private to look after normally due to violent behaviour and the social worker probably thought just dump the guy in a home and flog the house/possessions which will probably pay for 3-4 years worth of care as its cheaper/less hassle in the paperwork than having to sort out all the stuff to work out entitlements/care calls/house modifications/regular reviews to ensure everything fine.

Not saying it in this case but from when my mum was a care worker for the same council it was amazing that some old people had not seen their kids for 20 years but the moment there was a mention of taking the house to help pay for care/them having to go into a care home they'd suddenly appear.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maxatoria
I thought RT had managed to embed my location into the video till i saw it was S-o-T

Having had dealing with their social services half of whom are constantly off 'sick' and the other half chasing their tails trying to deal with the case loads which are increasing.

About 4-5 years ago Stoke offloaded all its care responsibilities to the private sector to save money except for a few places for emergency and people who are too expensive for the private to look after normally due to violent behaviour and the social worker probably thought just dump the guy in a home and flog the house/possessions which will probably pay for 3-4 years worth of care as its cheaper/less hassle in the paperwork than having to sort out all the stuff to work out entitlements/care calls/house modifications/regular reviews to ensure everything fine.

r.


Yea it is disgusting - selling the NHS and social services off for profit.

At one time the council used to employ home helps - to help with domestic duties for older / vulnerable people. Not now.

Also care homes/ nursing homes are appalling by and large.

I do not think anyone should be forced from their home. I think they should get the support they need to stay in their home.

The care industry is a big scam.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
And what you have posted is nothing but the court (assumed) claims.


There is nothing 'assumed' here and this has nothing to do with 'taking sides.' It's about with verifiable facts.

You posted a sensationalised report from a Russian government-owned propaganda channel which did not tell the full story and misrepresented the little that it told.

I have provided with two independent sources confirming details of the case which were voluntarily made public by the court. These same sources confirmed that the government has acted immediately to improve the processes of the court and ensure greater transparency.

There is no reason to doubt these details and every reason to believe them. If you believe these details are wrong, please prove it. Until then you are stuck with the fact that you were wrong about this case.
edit on 27/5/13 by Sankari because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


ROFL

secret uk courts are actually an olde tradition


Star Chamber

This article is about the court. For other uses, see Star Chamber (disambiguation).

The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court of law that sat at the royal Palace of Westminster until 1641. It was made up of Privy Councillors, as well as common-law judges and supplemented the activities of the common-law and equity courts in both civil and criminal matters. The court was set up to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against prominent people, those so powerful that ordinary courts could never convict them of their crimes. Court sessions were held in secret, with no indictments, and no witnesses. Evidence was presented in writing. Over time it evolved into a political weapon, a symbol of the misuse and abuse of power by the English monarchy and courts.

In modern usage, legal or administrative bodies with strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings are sometimes called, metaphorically or poetically, star chambers. This is a pejorative term and intended to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the proceedings. The inherent lack of objectivity of politically motivated charges has led to substantial reforms in English law in most jurisdictions since that time.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by jude11

Originally posted by alfa1

Do we have any references for this apart from a youtube video by RT ?

The activistpost article just refers to the youtube video by RT.


Not to difficult to search as many are reporting the same:



Too right they're "reporting the same".
Every single one of your "extra" links use the same RT youtube video as their source.

So let me clarify.
When I ask for other references, I dont dont mean just other websites that also link to the exact same youtube video.

That is getting to be maddening, isn't it? It's happening so often anymore, it's obscene. A wild story will appear on 20 media outlet sites, some large ones too, and look legitimate by sheer numbers alone. ...then a little work show they ALL trace back to single sources that are ....questionable at times, at best.

I think the level of laziness in journalism has reached epic proportions...and it's a shame such work needs done to source or show lack of sourcing.


My interest in things about stops at RT being a source as well, for what it's worth.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
That is getting to be maddening, isn't it?


Even more maddening when ATS users dont even read their own link and see that it cites a previous link to a previous link to a prvious link that goes back to the dodgy source.






top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join