72 year old Grandmother arrested for hugging her grandaughter

This happened in the UK and here are some links -

www.dailymail.co.uk... uilty-contempt.html

metro.co.uk...



From what I can gather the old woman has now been jailed for three months for this 'crime'. Big brother at its best and social work at its worst. Having worked alongside social workers in the UK I can safely say this is a case of what I call 'flawed humans'.

The secret court ruling is just another example of how our liberties are eroded and always will be unless people wake up and say no.

The old woman was snooped on by social work, only allowed to make a call once a month to her granddaughter which had to be monitored. Where are the privacy rights here? She was spotted hugging her granddaughter and was then arrested at a concert.

The father has also been jailed for waving at his daughter. And also restraining her from running onto a road. Anyone who has a little kid with learning difficulties or ADHD etc will know how hard it is at times to keep them safe with their limited insights into danger being lower than your average kid. Sounds like the dad was just being protective.

The granddaughter in question has been denied access to see her father and grandmother and has ran away from care several times to be with them. She may have mild learning disabilities but is capable of making her own choices.

I know social workers who have large egos and love the power rush they get when they control someone's life like this...and keep controlling it. You may think I'm cynical but I have witnessed behaviours and attitudes from social workers that disgusts me. They are flawed humans and our society will stay a mess if we continue to let it be run this way.

No one is protesting about this and only a few newspapers have picked up on it. You have to ask, why? Vested interests in keeping the status quo?

To all those who work in social care and actually CARE, I commend you.

To all the rest, one word - karma.

a reply to: daftpink

Freaking ridiculous.

I can hear the state apologists now...

Social services like this are out of control. They are taking kids from parents for the most minute infractions. It used to be that agencies like CPS and DCF (in the states) would actually help to educate and reinforced a stable home life for families that were found to require such services, now they just remove the kids, throw them in Foster care and call it a day.

Go ahead folks, keep denying there is a problem.

Interesting articles and story. It leaves me wondering though. There has to be a reason this child was taken away in the first place and neither article addresses that at all....they just say the grandmother said it was for a "spurious excuse".

Is there any other information as to why they took the child away? They also cite that they can't say the father's name in the story due to legal reasons which also does not make any sense.

Odd story that seems to have a lot more behind it than what is being reported.

Wow, unbelievable story. The further I read, the weirder it got. What is a ‘spurious excuse’? Is that all it takes for social services to take children from their parents in the U.K.?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Interesting articles and story. It leaves me wondering though. There has to be a reason this child was taken away in the first place and neither article addresses that at all....they just say the grandmother said it was for a "spurious excuse".

Is there any other information as to why they took the child away? They also cite that they can't say the father's name in the story due to legal reasons which also does not make any sense.

Odd story that seems to have a lot more behind it than what is being reported.

I agree there is not a lot of detail but as far as I can see this woman was convicted (in her absence) by a secret court ruling in April by a court judge and only now has she been arrested. As it was done in secret it may explain the lack of media reports and it looks like the family have gone to the papers themselves. Quite often in these cases decisions are made behind closed doors and before you know it your kid is taken away or your granny's thrown in jail.

This is reality.

The judge is as fault here too. His name is judge Martin Cardinal.

Seriously just Google his name and read the shocking stories.

I agree with Vasa completely.


No one gets arrested for hugs & waves...

I don't care how dystopian the UK can be at times that just wouldn't stand up in Court, including Family Court...




There was a reason the girl was in the Care of Social Services in the first place & it says in the article she was arrested for breaking a Court order...


I'm no fan of Social Services but thats what Family Court is for...
If this family truly feels the reasons are "spurious" they should fight it...
Not go around the system set up to protect the girl.

Actually, Social Workers can take children into Protective Custody, for only a brief period of time. A petition must be filed with the court and a hearing held within 72 hours. If the child remains in custody after that, it is because "the court" removed them after listening to testimony.

This story lacks far too much detail to make judgments about "power-hungry' social workers.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

If that's the case and the gran and the dad are 100% guilty here why is the FAA Scotland and their MP fighting their corner?

Quote from the article -

Eamonn Kelly, from False Allegations Action Scotland, described Mrs Danby’s case as ‘one of the most disturbing’ he had encountered. 

He said: ‘I must have dealt with nearly 200 cases and this is by far one of the most horrific. It is heart-breaking to see what they are doing to that girl.’

Lib Dem MP John Hemming said: ‘I will be asking questions of the Justice Secretary as to whether this is appropriate. There is no question that there is a big problem involving the prosecution of people in secret.

‘And I worry about the way speech is monitored between members of the family. There is no freedom of speech when social services are involved.’

(unquote)

How much direct experience do you have with social work and vulnerable people? Believe me these miscarriages of justice happen all the time. And what of this judge's draconian attitudes and the fact that secret court rulings were supposed to be banned due to issues similar to this happening in the past?

www.dailymail.co.uk...

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Exactly Lady, not to mention that she was taken into care in 2007...

That's nearly 8 years ago now, so this is lacking 8 years of detail and blaming a hug...

I'm not buying it.


Add to the fact that the Daily Mail loves to put their own spin on things, this is fishy.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
Actually, Social Workers can take children into Protective Custody, for only a brief period of time. A petition must be filed with the court and a hearing held within 72 hours. If the child remains in custody after that, it is because "the court" removed them after listening to testimony.

This story lacks far too much detail to make judgments about "power-hungry' social workers.

yes i may be ranting but my post above explains why its not just the social workers at fault its also the judges and secret courts convicting people in secret when they themselves are not even present. Trying to raise awareness here....

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Exactly Lady, not to mention that she was taken into care in 2007...

That's nearly 8 years ago now, so this is lacking 8 years of detail and blaming a hug...

I'm not buying it.


Add to the fact that the Daily Mail lives to put their own spin on things, this is fishy.

Ah...didn't even realize it was since 2007. What is also odd is that it is the grandmother and the father in this case. What about the mother and the grandfather or other family members? I can see how a court order can take away a child from the parents or whatever, but what did the grandmother do in the first place to have this court order extended to her?

a reply to: daftpink

Well, doesn't all this just stink of a witchhunt.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
a reply to: daftpink

Well, doesn't all this just stink of a witchhunt.

Sorry really not sure what you mean by that.

a reply to: daftpink

Given that this started 8 years ago...

I'm not willing to hedge my bets on a one sided Daily Mail article...


I know people personally who have had problems with Social Services, I was clear that I'm no fan of SS, & am fully aware that they've fitted people up in the past...


This seems different imo.

A Coury Order was broken, it's nothing to do with a hug, that's an emotional appeal to the readers...


& like I said, if it truly was "spurious", why 8 years later is this still occuring?


What I definitely agree with is the MP's thoughts on Freedom of Speech, but again, we don't know what this case entails, & the Court stated that the girl's problems exacerbate when in contact with her Family...



So it's too early to decide either way...


What I stand by is my opinion that this is a one sided version of events, & we don't know what has occurred over the last 8 years since this began.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well I don't recall the article mentioning the Mother...

I'd hazard a guess that the girl was in the custody of the Father's side of the family.

a reply to: daftpink
I don't know how true this story is, or what "facts" have been left out, or put in for that matter, but my own up close and personal observations of social workers in the USofA places at least a healthy portion of them in the category of "Evil Incarnate". I have been totally astounded and speechless at some of what I've seen these people say and do.

On the other hand. The good ones are angels of mercy to abused children everywhere. Just wish there were more of the good ones, who have no interest in tearing families apart, and making money for the state.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well I don't recall the article mentioning the Mother...

I'd hazard a guess that the girl was in the custody of the Father's side of the family.

Yeah...It didn't mention her, which is yet another odd omission from the story. Way too many questions here for me. I could speculate all day long, but for the story not to mention the other side of the family and saying that the father and grandmother have had a court order to stay away for 8 years makes me think something seriously went wrong with the parents and their child on both sides a long time ago.

a reply to: Klassified

Sounds exactly like the UK's Social Services too...


As you said, those who do their job properly are a public necessity...


The power hungry will love that sort of job, we've had the same discussion about the Police on here lately, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a necessary public service.

a reply to: Vasa Croe
I agree with you and Charlie. Its kind of scary seeing everyone jump on a bandwagon so blind and fast. WAY too many facts are being left out of this. Anyone with half a brain can tell this story is missing many pieces.

originally posted by: LoverBoy
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I agree with you and Charlie. Its kind of scary seeing everyone jump on a bandwagon so blind and fast. WAY too many facts are being left out of this. Anyone with half a brain can tell this story is missing many pieces.

Loverboy the fact still remains that a 72 year old woman has been jailed for three months for wanting to show affection to or see her granddaughter.

She was convicted in a secret court and she was not present to defend herself. This happens often. These types of secretive court judgements are supposed to be banned but clearly its still going on.

You don't find any of this draconian.?

Wow.