Discussion:
Incest inquiry - fathered six children by his daughter
(too old to reply)
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-17 18:11:06 UTC
Permalink
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3663878.stm
Quote

An inquiry into how a man went undetected as he fathered six children by his
daughter is taking too long, according to an expert.
Child protection specialist Dr Michele Elliott has condemned the 18-month
investigation, which has not yet reached any conclusions, as too slow.

The 52-year-old man, from Swindon, was jailed for 15 years last August for
raping his daughter.

She was sexually abused over a period of more than two decades.

Three of the six children he fathered have genetic disorders and
disabilities.

Quite frankly, this should have have been done and dusted in eight or nine
months at the most

Dr Michele Elliott, Kidscape

The case led to a review after it emerged Swindon Social Services were
unaware of the incest allegations until shortly before the birth of the
sixth child.

An initial investigation, which ran from April to December 2003, failed to
discover how the oversight occurred.

A second inquiry by an independent consultant began in December 2003 and is
still going on. Its findings and recommendations are due to be made public
at the end of this month.

But Dr Elliott, director of national charity Kidscape, says this is too
late.

"The point of the inquiry is to find out what went wrong and fix it," she
said.

"Quite frankly, this should have have been done and dusted in eight or nine
months at the most, not 18. You can write a novel in 18 months.

"In the meantime the issues about children's safety continue. Are they
hoping they will go away?"

Jean Pollard, assistant director of Social Services at Swindon Borough
Council, who is chairing the inquiry, said: "In any serious case review it
is always difficult to predict what needs to be investigated or how long it
will take."

End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Clough
2004-09-17 19:04:15 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 19:11:06 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
An inquiry into how a man went undetected as he fathered six children by his
daughter is taking too long, according to an expert.
I bet they're great banjo players.

Clough
C D
2004-09-17 19:08:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clough
I bet they're great banjo players.
Because of having eight fingers per hand?
Jack
2004-09-18 09:44:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by C D
Post by Clough
I bet they're great banjo players.
Because of having eight fingers per hand?
technically.. theyd be worse if they had more fingers, but theyd have to
potential to be better
Ancient One
2004-09-17 20:55:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Nutteing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3663878.stm
Quote
An inquiry into how a man went undetected as he fathered six children by his
daughter is taking too long, according to an expert.
Child protection specialist Dr Michele Elliott has condemned the 18-month
investigation, which has not yet reached any conclusions, as too slow.
The 52-year-old man, from Swindon, was jailed for 15 years last August for
raping his daughter.
She was sexually abused over a period of more than two decades.
Three of the six children he fathered have genetic disorders and
disabilities.
Quite frankly, this should have have been done and dusted in eight or nine
months at the most
Dr Michele Elliott, Kidscape
The case led to a review after it emerged Swindon Social Services were
unaware of the incest allegations until shortly before the birth of the
sixth child.
An initial investigation, which ran from April to December 2003, failed to
discover how the oversight occurred.
A second inquiry by an independent consultant began in December 2003 and is
still going on. Its findings and recommendations are due to be made public
at the end of this month.
But Dr Elliott, director of national charity Kidscape, says this is too
late.
"The point of the inquiry is to find out what went wrong and fix it," she
said.
"Quite frankly, this should have have been done and dusted in eight or nine
months at the most, not 18. You can write a novel in 18 months.
"In the meantime the issues about children's safety continue. Are they
hoping they will go away?"
Jean Pollard, assistant director of Social Services at Swindon Borough
Council, who is chairing the inquiry, said: "In any serious case review it
is always difficult to predict what needs to be investigated or how long it
will take."
End Quote
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
I suppose they are awaiting "deliverance" of the report...no Burt reynolds
in sight either.

Seriously though, Swindon are rated as the bottom of the barrel, I am in
contact with their whistleblower and what I have seen from this viewpoint is
scary and yet Swindon remain resolute that they are doing a good job.

Watch the news as we are planning some actions in the zero rated SSD's areas

AO
RPSSUK
http://www.the-real-picture-of-uk-social-services.i8.com/

Coming Soon...

Unity Injustice
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-17 22:44:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient One
I suppose they are awaiting "deliverance" of the report...no Burt reynolds
in sight either.
Seriously though, Swindon are rated as the bottom of the barrel, I am in
contact with their whistleblower and what I have seen from this viewpoint is
scary and yet Swindon remain resolute that they are doing a good job.
Watch the news as we are planning some actions in the zero rated SSD's areas
AO
RPSSUK
http://www.the-real-picture-of-uk-social-services.i8.com/
Coming Soon...
Unity Injustice
If you've got a corner on your site for mention
of this film based on true story -well made film as well,
unusually for based on fact films.

http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0113421/
"The real-life Peggy McMartin Buckey, imprisoned for two years while
awaiting the outcome of the most protracted U.S. criminal molestation case
targeting her family's preschool, died December 15, 2000. She, her mother
Virginia McMartin and her son Ray Buckey were charged, with four others,
with 100 counts of child molestation in 1983. The case lasted seven years
and cost Los Angeles County $13 million. Peggy was acquitted in 1990 after a
three-year trial; Ray, incarcerated for five years, was acquitted of 40
counts. Critics said the case pinpointed the danger of basing criminal
charges solely on the testimony of young children."

http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/sat17.htm
"The KABC reporter who first disclosed the McMartin accusations, Wayne Satz,
later entered into a romantic relationship with Kee MacFarlane, the social
worker at the Children's Institute International. MacFarlane interviewed
scores of the children and elicited the charges of child molesting from them
"

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Ancient One
2004-09-18 02:31:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Nutteing
Post by Ancient One
I suppose they are awaiting "deliverance" of the report...no Burt reynolds
in sight either.
Seriously though, Swindon are rated as the bottom of the barrel, I am in
contact with their whistleblower and what I have seen from this
viewpoint
Post by Paul Nutteing
is
Post by Ancient One
scary and yet Swindon remain resolute that they are doing a good job.
Watch the news as we are planning some actions in the zero rated SSD's
areas
Post by Ancient One
AO
RPSSUK
http://www.the-real-picture-of-uk-social-services.i8.com/
Coming Soon...
Unity Injustice
If you've got a corner on your site for mention
of this film based on true story -well made film as well,
unusually for based on fact films.
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0113421/
"The real-life Peggy McMartin Buckey, imprisoned for two years while
awaiting the outcome of the most protracted U.S. criminal molestation case
targeting her family's preschool, died December 15, 2000. She, her mother
Virginia McMartin and her son Ray Buckey were charged, with four others,
with 100 counts of child molestation in 1983. The case lasted seven years
and cost Los Angeles County $13 million. Peggy was acquitted in 1990 after a
three-year trial; Ray, incarcerated for five years, was acquitted of 40
counts. Critics said the case pinpointed the danger of basing criminal
charges solely on the testimony of young children."
http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/sat17.htm
"The KABC reporter who first disclosed the McMartin accusations, Wayne Satz,
later entered into a romantic relationship with Kee MacFarlane, the social
worker at the Children's Institute International. MacFarlane interviewed
scores of the children and elicited the charges of child molesting from them
"
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
I will make a liitle space if need be after reading this very sad case of
state extremism, have you seen the american forensic specialists report on
my site that pretty much blows away many medical findings as he has proven
that apart from fluid residue from the male, ninety nine percent of all
abuse tell tales such as anal winking, broken/perforated hymen etc can and
does exhibit in children not abused, a broken hymen is more often or not
torn by a bicycle saddle yet many doctors have claimed exclusively that it
from digitus penetration.. In fact the earlier scottish abuse thing when 57
kids were removed was based on a rare but natural phenomena that doctors
assumed was post sodimus indicators, even though the government had to get
heavy with the SSD, the SSD were convinced otherwise and tried still to
retain the children.

AO
RPSSUK

AO
RPSSUK
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-18 06:51:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient One
I will make a liitle space if need be after reading this very sad case of
state extremism, have you seen the american forensic specialists report on
my site that pretty much blows away many medical findings as he has proven
that apart from fluid residue from the male, ninety nine percent of all
abuse tell tales such as anal winking, broken/perforated hymen etc can and
does exhibit in children not abused, a broken hymen is more often or not
torn by a bicycle saddle yet many doctors have claimed exclusively that it
from digitus penetration.. In fact the earlier scottish abuse thing when 57
kids were removed was based on a rare but natural phenomena that doctors
assumed was post sodimus indicators, even though the government had to get
heavy with the SSD, the SSD were convinced otherwise and tried still to
retain the children.
AO
RPSSUK
AO
RPSSUK
And questionable/discredited evidential value of eye-bleed
to diagnose "shaken baby" deaths
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3564605.stm
Quote
Last Updated: Friday, 26 March, 2004, 00:00 GMT
Doubt over shaken baby diagnosis

Injuries may not mean abuse
Scientists have cast doubt on the theory that certain eye injuries are a
sign a baby has been violently shaken.
Experts believe that bleeding behind the eyes probably indicates that an
infant has been physically abused.

However, a team from the US's Wake Forest University says there is little
hard science to support the view that this alone proves abuse.

Writing in the BMJ, members say assumptions about shaken baby syndrome need
to be challenged.

False allegations of child abuse could exist

Dr Patrick Lantz
Other experts said that bleeding from the eyes could suggest a baby had been
shaken violently - but the evidence was only compelling if there were also
signs of brain damage and bleeding in the brain.

The researchers focused on the case of a healthy 14-month-old child who was
brought to hospital with a severe head injury after a television fell on him
at home.

Despite the father's repeated, detailed, and consistent account of the
incident, Child Protective Services removed the child's three-year-old
brother from the home because the baby had injuries to the retina of the
eye.

Only after a careful investigation by a paediatrician and a forensic
pathologist was the child's injury deemed to have been an accident.

The Wake Forest team searched the medical literature on the eye injury
observed in this case.

Members found no valid scientific studies to indicate that this particular
eye injury could only result from shaken baby syndrome - echoing the
findings of another recent study into the same topic.

No proof

Lead researcher Dr Patrick Lantz told BBC News Online: "It is important to
remember that this theory has been based on observations but has never been
proven.

"Also, no studies have been done comparing the presence of this eye injury
in shaken baby syndrome and serious accidental head injuries in young
children.

"If some doctors believe that this eye injury can only result from shaking
and haven't critically reviewed the medical literature, false allegations of
child abuse could exist."

In an editorial in the same edition of the BMJ, forensic pathologist Dr John
Plunkett and brain damage expert Dr Jennian Geddes argue the research
suggests that the criteria used to diagnose shaken baby syndrome require
re-assessment.

They say it is not unusual for shaken baby syndrome to be diagnosed on the
basis of signs of bleeding from the eyes alone.

"If the issues are much less certain than we have been taught to believe,
then to admit uncertainty sometimes would be appropriate for experts.

"Doing so may make prosecution more difficult, but a natural desire to
protect children should not lead anyone to proffer opinions unsupported by
good quality science."

In a second editorial, Dr Brian Harding and Dr Anthony Risdon, two experts
at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, UK, argue that a
conclusion about a baby being violently shaken should only be based on a
careful examination of all the features of an injury.

However, they say that if all three elements - brain damage and bleeding,
and bleeding from the eyes - are present, this is powerful evidence that
undue force has been applied.

"Damage to the neck or spinal cord is further useful confirmation, and the
presence of gripping injuries, while often absent, can provide further
weight."

Disturbing findings

The Five Percenters, who support parents who say they have been wrongly
accused of shaken baby syndrome, said the findings raised "disturbing
questions" about the opinion of medical experts given in court.

Director Rioch Edwards-Brown, who was wrongly accused of shaking her own
baby son, said their study of parents' accounts of child injuries supported
other reasons for bleeding behind the eyes.

She said: "In approximately a third of cases their child's injuries followed
a minor fall, but both birth trauma and difficulty in breathing can also
cause bleeding under the skin and at the back of the eyes.

"Doctors have been so convinced that these injuries could only be caused by
shaking, they have simply ruled out the possibility that the parents might
be innocent after all."

End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Martin Davies
2004-09-18 19:56:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Nutteing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3663878.stm
Quote
An inquiry into how a man went undetected as he fathered six children by his
daughter is taking too long, according to an expert.
Child protection specialist Dr Michele Elliott has condemned the 18-month
investigation, which has not yet reached any conclusions, as too slow.
The 52-year-old man, from Swindon, was jailed for 15 years last August for
raping his daughter.
She was sexually abused over a period of more than two decades.
Three of the six children he fathered have genetic disorders and
disabilities.
Quite frankly, this should have have been done and dusted in eight or nine
months at the most
Dr Michele Elliott, Kidscape
The case led to a review after it emerged Swindon Social Services were
unaware of the incest allegations until shortly before the birth of the
sixth child.
An initial investigation, which ran from April to December 2003, failed to
discover how the oversight occurred.
A second inquiry by an independent consultant began in December 2003 and is
still going on. Its findings and recommendations are due to be made public
at the end of this month.
But Dr Elliott, director of national charity Kidscape, says this is too
late.
"The point of the inquiry is to find out what went wrong and fix it," she
said.
"Quite frankly, this should have have been done and dusted in eight or nine
months at the most, not 18. You can write a novel in 18 months.
"In the meantime the issues about children's safety continue. Are they
hoping they will go away?"
Jean Pollard, assistant director of Social Services at Swindon Borough
Council, who is chairing the inquiry, said: "In any serious case review it
is always difficult to predict what needs to be investigated or how long it
will take."
End Quote
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Fathered 6 kids on his daughter?
Just suprising he got found out really.

Martin <><
Greg Hanson
2004-09-19 09:00:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient One
I will make a liitle space if need be after reading this very sad case of
state extremism, have you seen the american forensic specialists report on
my site that pretty much blows away many medical findings as he has proven
that apart from fluid residue from the male, ninety nine percent of all
abuse tell tales such as anal winking, broken/perforated hymen etc can and
does exhibit in children not abused, a broken hymen is more often or not
torn by a bicycle saddle yet many doctors have claimed exclusively that it
from digitus penetration..
In fact the earlier scottish abuse thing when 57
kids were removed was based on a rare but natural phenomena that doctors
assumed was post sodimus indicators, even though the government had to get
heavy with the SSD, the SSD were convinced otherwise and tried still to
retain the children.
By the way, has your Doktor Sir Professor who FABRICATED the
idea of Munchhausens had his Knighthood removed yet?
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-19 12:05:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
I will make a liitle space if need be after reading this very sad case of
state extremism, have you seen the american forensic specialists report on
my site that pretty much blows away many medical findings as he has proven
that apart from fluid residue from the male, ninety nine percent of all
abuse tell tales such as anal winking, broken/perforated hymen etc can and
does exhibit in children not abused, a broken hymen is more often or not
torn by a bicycle saddle yet many doctors have claimed exclusively that it
from digitus penetration..
In fact the earlier scottish abuse thing when 57
kids were removed was based on a rare but natural phenomena that doctors
assumed was post sodimus indicators, even though the government had to get
heavy with the SSD, the SSD were convinced otherwise and tried still to
retain the children.
By the way, has your Doktor Sir Professor who FABRICATED the
idea of Munchhausens had his Knighthood removed yet?
No , he is too well respected by his fellow academics for
that to happen. More likely - the whole of that section of paediatrics will
implode because the whole lot are tarred with the same brush.

Wiltshire Social Services exposed
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/nutteing3.htm
or nutteing3 in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-21 17:24:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient One
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
I will make a liitle space if need be after reading this very sad case
of
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
state extremism, have you seen the american forensic specialists
report
Post by Ancient One
on
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
my site that pretty much blows away many medical findings as he has
proven
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
that apart from fluid residue from the male, ninety nine percent of all
abuse tell tales such as anal winking, broken/perforated hymen etc can
and
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
does exhibit in children not abused, a broken hymen is more often or not
torn by a bicycle saddle yet many doctors have claimed exclusively
that
Post by Ancient One
it
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
from digitus penetration..
In fact the earlier scottish abuse thing when 57
kids were removed was based on a rare but natural phenomena that doctors
assumed was post sodimus indicators, even though the government had to
get
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Ancient One
heavy with the SSD, the SSD were convinced otherwise and tried still to
retain the children.
By the way, has your Doktor Sir Professor who FABRICATED the
idea of Munchhausens had his Knighthood removed yet?
No , he is too well respected by his fellow academics for
that to happen. More likely - the whole of that section of paediatrics will
implode because the whole lot are tarred with the same brush.
Wiltshire Social Services exposed
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/nutteing3.htm
or nutteing3 in a search engine
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
More on the anticipated implosion
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/story/0,,1308945,00.html
Part quotes
The experts run for cover
<...>
Doctors' fears that they could suffer the same fate as the paediatrician Sir
Roy Meadow, a prosecution witness in all three cases, and the pathologist
Alan Williams, who carried out the postmortems on Clark's two sons - both
vilified in the media and facing charges of serious professional misconduct
at the General Medical Council - are causing them to think again about
giving evidence in child abuse cases.

England's top family judge, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, and other senior
judges have held crisis meetings with the chief medical officer, Sir Liam
Donaldson, and the heads of the royal colleges for paediatricians and
pathologists. A bulletin from her office in the latest newsletter for family
law barristers says the judgment in the Cannings case is causing her "acute
concern".
<...>
But the effect of the Cannings case has been "keenly felt at a broader
level, in terms of the detrimental impact it has had on the willingness of
expert witnesses to risk participating in child injury cases," the bulletin
adds.

Professor Alan Craft, president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and
Child Health, confirms: "Solicitors are having enormous difficulty [in
finding experts] and the college is rung up on a daily basis by solicitors
saying 'Can you provide us with an expert?' A lot of people who were doing
expert witness work have said, 'It's not worth the candle, I'm not going to
end up being pilloried or referred to the GMC or being the subject of a
campaign on a website. It's just not worth it.' The problem is that children
will suffer then because if there is nobody to do the expert witness work,
these cases will not be taken forward and children will not be protected."

For paediatrician Chris Hobbs, the case of Dr Ruby Schwartz, who had
misconduct charges against her dropped by the GMC this month, reinforces the
message that failing to spot child abuse is less risky professionally than
raising concerns. He contrasts the opprobrium heaped on Meadow with the
limited media coverage given Schwartz, the consultant paediatrician whose
failure to diagnose that Victoria Climbie was being brutally abused led to
the eight-year-old's return to the carers who were eventually to kill her,
in one of the UK's worst child abuse cases.

"The professionals have got their backs to the wall. It's very difficult now
for them to come out and say when they're concerned," says Hobbs. "That
means going to court and I think people are just increasingly anxious about
that, and much more likely to back off and take a softly, softly approach,
rather than have to deal with the difficult issues. They're very frightened
that they're going to be attacked and their professional position put under
threat."

Hobbs, a consultant at St James's Hospital, Leeds, has cut back on his own
forays into court. "I've thought much more carefully about expert witness
work because you're looking for the ambush. I'm very much more cautious and
wary and I want to know the ins and outs of the case."
<...>
Fewer paediatricians are going into child protection work anyway and "a lot
of people going into it want to do it as a bit of their work; very few
people are prepared to take it as a major part. So you don't become an
expert then."

End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Paul Robson
2004-09-21 18:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Nutteing
Doctors' fears that they could suffer the same fate as the paediatrician Sir
Roy Meadow, a prosecution witness in all three cases, and the pathologist
Alan Williams, who carried out the postmortems on Clark's two sons - both
vilified in the media and facing charges of serious professional misconduct
at the General Medical Council - are causing them to think again about
giving evidence in child abuse cases.
England's top family judge, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, and other senior
judges have held crisis meetings with the chief medical officer, Sir Liam
Donaldson, and the heads of the royal colleges for paediatricians and
pathologists. A bulletin from her office in the latest newsletter for family
law barristers says the judgment in the Cannings case is causing her "acute
concern".
It doesn't seem to occur to these people that there are alternatives
between (i) judging people guilty purely on a TV programme, and (ii)
ignoring all signs of abuse.

The line seems to be, if we aren't allowed to guess and smear, then we
can't do anything.

Why ?
Ancient One
2004-09-21 20:38:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Robson
Post by Paul Nutteing
Doctors' fears that they could suffer the same fate as the paediatrician Sir
Roy Meadow, a prosecution witness in all three cases, and the pathologist
Alan Williams, who carried out the postmortems on Clark's two sons - both
vilified in the media and facing charges of serious professional misconduct
at the General Medical Council - are causing them to think again about
giving evidence in child abuse cases.
England's top family judge, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, and other senior
judges have held crisis meetings with the chief medical officer, Sir Liam
Donaldson, and the heads of the royal colleges for paediatricians and
pathologists. A bulletin from her office in the latest newsletter for family
law barristers says the judgment in the Cannings case is causing her "acute
concern".
It doesn't seem to occur to these people that there are alternatives
between (i) judging people guilty purely on a TV programme, and (ii)
ignoring all signs of abuse.
The line seems to be, if we aren't allowed to guess and smear, then we
can't do anything.
Why ?
Because it good ol' blighty innit...

What is missing there though in the texts is the bare fact that these Dr's
stated "without a doubt" that bad things were occurring, they could have
said, I am not sure, or there is an outside chance but no it had to be 100%
occurance.

These Doctors could have temepered their own testimonies by stating that in
all likelihood it is abuse but there is an outside chance that is could be
something else, eg the Anal Winking cases.

The old adage, of if you live by the sword springs to mind, these people
professionally cocked up and should pay, it makes me wonder though how many
other judgements on these testimonies of experts were based on similar
brainstorms of TV shows.

I sympathise in one area in that there are two mothers that in all
probability did kill their children and I think this is what is sticking in
the govts craw because if they did then HM Govt are releasing and endorsing
two murderers of children, so yes I can see why they are concerned.

But this all again comes down to the example by HM Govt and Social Services
who tap the rhythm that all have to dance to, if there were more trust and
better workmanship and less corruption and behind doors dealings then these
experts would not need to fear, they should turn away from the SSD's way of
doing things and re-assert themselves as the superior entities in child
protection, if I were a Dr and some poxy social worker told ME what to do, I
would show her the door via the window...

AO
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-21 21:21:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient One
Because it good ol' blighty innit...
What is missing there though in the texts is the bare fact that these Dr's
stated "without a doubt" that bad things were occurring, they could have
said, I am not sure, or there is an outside chance but no it had to be 100%
occurance.
These Doctors could have temepered their own testimonies by stating that in
all likelihood it is abuse but there is an outside chance that is could be
something else, eg the Anal Winking cases.
The old adage, of if you live by the sword springs to mind, these people
professionally cocked up and should pay, it makes me wonder though how many
other judgements on these testimonies of experts were based on similar
brainstorms of TV shows.
I sympathise in one area in that there are two mothers that in all
probability did kill their children and I think this is what is sticking in
the govts craw because if they did then HM Govt are releasing and endorsing
two murderers of children, so yes I can see why they are concerned.
But this all again comes down to the example by HM Govt and Social Services
who tap the rhythm that all have to dance to, if there were more trust and
better workmanship and less corruption and behind doors dealings then these
experts would not need to fear, they should turn away from the SSD's way of
doing things and re-assert themselves as the superior entities in child
protection, if I were a Dr and some poxy social worker told ME what to do, I
would show her the door via the window...
AO
I would say it is a more general problem with
the whole "expert witness" thing.
He who pays the piper plays the tune.
The powers-that-be have money to burn,
generally the defense does not.
There are big compendiums of contact details
for people who put themselves forward to be hired
as expert witnesses in all sorts of specialist fields.

I know an academic mechanical engineer who has
been head-hunted to be an expert in court but he has
too much integrity to get involved.

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Greg Hanson
2004-09-23 23:14:01 UTC
Permalink
A lot of people who were doing expert witness work have
said, 'It's not worth the candle, I'm not going to end up
being pilloried or referred to the GMC or being the subject
of a campaign on a website. It's just not worth it.' The
problem is that children will suffer then because if
there is nobody to do the expert witness work, these
cases will not be taken forward and children will not
be protected."
It's interesting that this comment does not seek to
balance child removals based on FALSE information
as harmful and against removals based on actual abuse.

An early American said (I would rather that 10 guilty
men be found innocent than ONE innocent man be
found guilty).

Apparently the person quoted above in the article
would rather that ten innocent men be found guilty
than one guilty man be found innocent.

He probably BENEFITS from the prosecutions somehow!

Do not overlook the HARM that wrongful prosecutions do.
Cynic
2004-09-24 08:03:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Hanson
A lot of people who were doing expert witness work have
said, 'It's not worth the candle, I'm not going to end up
being pilloried or referred to the GMC or being the subject
of a campaign on a website. It's just not worth it.' The
problem is that children will suffer then because if
there is nobody to do the expert witness work, these
cases will not be taken forward and children will not
be protected."
It's interesting that this comment does not seek to
balance child removals based on FALSE information
as harmful and against removals based on actual abuse.
It is. It echos the trend in UK society in general to seek revenge
and punishment at almost any cost rather than wanting to stop or
reduce the crime. Our invasion of Iraq in order to "punish" Saddam
being an extreme example of that mentality.

When I complained about false convictions regarding child pornography
in the past, quite a number of posters said in effect that the
objective must be to catch & punish all those that use such material,
and if some innocent people get convicted as a result of the way the
law is worded and implemented, then tough - it's a price worth paying.

I consider it a reprehensible trend.
--
Cynic
Alan G
2004-09-24 17:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cynic
When I complained about false convictions regarding child pornography
in the past, quite a number of posters said in effect that the
objective must be to catch & punish all those that use such material,
and if some innocent people get convicted as a result of the way the
law is worded and implemented, then tough - it's a price worth paying.
I consider it a reprehensible trend.
It's a trend I first noted in the eighties. It has got worse since
then. Restrictions put in place that apply equally to innocent and
guilty alike but are more likely to result in criminalising the
innocent. The money laundering laws being a god example. The curfew
for young people is another where the state thinks mass punishment in
order to get the few guilty is a price worht paying.
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-24 18:03:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan G
Post by Cynic
When I complained about false convictions regarding child pornography
in the past, quite a number of posters said in effect that the
objective must be to catch & punish all those that use such material,
and if some innocent people get convicted as a result of the way the
law is worded and implemented, then tough - it's a price worth paying.
I consider it a reprehensible trend.
It's a trend I first noted in the eighties. It has got worse since
then. Restrictions put in place that apply equally to innocent and
guilty alike but are more likely to result in criminalising the
innocent. The money laundering laws being a god example. The curfew
for young people is another where the state thinks mass punishment in
order to get the few guilty is a price worht paying.
If it was not for s82 of 2001 CJPA
(retention of DNA profile information and samples
from innocent people )
no one in forensic
'science' would have ever heard of me let alone me upsetting their
applecart.

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Alan G
2004-09-24 18:12:22 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:03:05 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
Post by Alan G
Post by Cynic
When I complained about false convictions regarding child pornography
in the past, quite a number of posters said in effect that the
objective must be to catch & punish all those that use such material,
and if some innocent people get convicted as a result of the way the
law is worded and implemented, then tough - it's a price worth paying.
I consider it a reprehensible trend.
It's a trend I first noted in the eighties. It has got worse since
then. Restrictions put in place that apply equally to innocent and
guilty alike but are more likely to result in criminalising the
innocent. The money laundering laws being a god example. The curfew
for young people is another where the state thinks mass punishment in
order to get the few guilty is a price worht paying.
If it was not for s82 of 2001 CJPA
(retention of DNA profile information and samples
from innocent people )
Yep.
That's another one and one the police did quite illegally.
Yet instead of prosecuting the police the bastards changed the law.
Now they wonder why so many ordinary people walk away from the police
and no longer trust them.
Post by Paul Nutteing
no one in forensic
'science' would have ever heard of me let alone me upsetting their
applecart.
Kane
2004-09-27 02:58:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Hanson
Post by Alan G
Post by Paul Nutteing
I have unilaterally declared myself a psychiatric
expert and this behaviour comes under my
self promulgated analysis
Deluded Professional Syndrome
that can be observed in a number
of different professions.
You can be accepted as an expert witness
simply by having written a book on a subject
that is little researched. I know someone who
although a highly qualified and respected
engineer was called as an expert witness
solely on the grounds he had written a book
on his hobby.
I think it was the Wenatchee witch hunt where
the caseworkers had just watched a Television
Movie of the Week and taken a one hour seminar
on ritualized child abuse, and based on this
""expertise"" proceeeded to imagine it behind
every closed door!
Please..you don't "think" at all. You simply guess and hope no one
will ask you to prove your assertions. I can't recall you ever
responding by prove any of your claims when challenged to do so.

You simply ad hom, or otherwise attempt the question the credibility
of the one requesting your proof. Typical immoral and unethical
reaction from the looney fringers in the anti CPS crusade of limp,
impotent, hilarious dodgers.

What you just described above is the reason law enforcement is in on
nearly all sexual abuses cases, and in some jurisditions, such as
Yavapi Co in AZ, any kind of abuse cases. It is required that both
agencies, CPS and Police maintain contact on the case, and at various
points one or the other will have primary responsibility for a
portion......interviewing being the LEO part.

This isn't isolated to AZ.
Post by Greg Hanson
But that isn't very surprizing since almost
none of the caseworkers in the USA are licensed
or qualified.
Oh?

That's why upon any evidence that appears credible they are in so many
states required to report to the police and they are more trained
usually. On the other hand I knew two workers, I believe at least one
was an MSW, that from 1980 (and they had been doing sex abuse
investigations interviews before met them) not only were highly
qualitifed, but taught others and were instrumental, and eventually
staff a CARES unit in a hospital...though still state employees.

The just retired from the CARES unit three years ago. Would you say 20
years of experience was sufficient? They garden now, and one reports
heeding some tune up psychologically, because after all those years of
day after day interviewing children that had been brutally sexually
assaulted, but having to maintain professional decorum, and NOT
influence the child's response, and NOW free of that, it all started
coming back at her, hard. You should do such painful horrible work to
start a child's healing.

Do you know what a CARES unit is and does?

Want to know how many of them there are in the US. Want to continue to
claim there are almost no caseworkers qualified or licensed?

Considering it harldly matters since they have specialists to DO the
actual investigation.
Post by Greg Hanson
Most of the contracted Social
Workers are not licensed SW's either,
Well you be so kind as to prove that? It's a much repeated lie, but is
no truer by that than when it first was claimed. In fact if anyone
connected to child welfare is more likely to be a licensed SW it would
be exactly that group..the contracted social workers that do
investigative work in sexual abuse cases. .
Post by Greg Hanson
and
even the few who ARE licensed are so BEHOLDEN
to the less qualified caseworkers from the
government agency that they will even do things
that they KNOW violate ethics, best practice or
even law. Unfortunately for them, they are
NOT cloaked with any immunity.
I would be happy to introduce you to many of the people you are
slandering and have them ask you face to face to explain what you mean
and prove it.

Care to participate?
Post by Greg Hanson
Police in a few cases
Then why are you bothering to bring up the rare to prove what you seem
to be claiming is the rule? or are you just babbling to entertain?
Post by Greg Hanson
got CONNED by caseworkers
regarding forced entry into homes.
Nonsense.


Workers are required in many, probably most, areas to report abuse
allegations to the police...that would hardly be "conning" them.

Please pick a case, call the principals involved and give them your
opinion they lied and were lied to. I'm sure they'll give you a job,
theirs.

The worker can only tell the officer the information he or she has
that has been transmitted to the worker from the abuse hotline call.
The officer knows perfectly well, unless brand spankin' new, that the
information is limited......and nothing stops the officer from asking
questionw of the worker, as most police officers are trained to do, to
establish credibility.
Post by Greg Hanson
The resulting law suits and Judges rulings
have taught cops far and wide that caseworkers
DO indeed lie, and NOT to bet your career on
caseworkers assertions of their right to search.
Please cite case and number, with appropriate clickable links from
this ng to your sources.

I'll happily cite mine that show you to be a liar, or fool, or
ignorant and dangerously slanderous...and misleading the public....who
could make decisions about their own circumstances that cause them
lose or harm by believing you.

http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/acainfo/protocol/yavapai.pdf

This is one state, and there are plenty more, that require close
cooperation between LE and CPS.

For instance, referring to the cited URL above, many states have gone,
years ago, to a more victim friendly model that requires a team
approach....and not all persons interviewing, but observing while one
trained interviewer conducts the facc to face....

"8. We are currently establishing a Forensic Interview Team to reduce
the trauma to children caused by multiple interviews. The Forensic
Interview Team will conduct a videotaped interview that will meet the
needs of both criminal and CPS investigations. Law enforcement
investigators, CPS social workers, and prosecutors will observe the
interview behind a one-way glass. (See Forensic Interview Team
Protocol.)

You, and others here take great risks with other people's safety by
the misleading way you direct attention to low risk, or very rare
events of questionable practice in child welfare.

Now it may serve the various purposes you each bring to the forum, but
that does in no way excuse you from putting vulerable families that
have come here for what they hope is thoughtful and correct
information.

You and others will do anything you can to muddy the waters, driving
people away from good information that would be helpful by trying to
do such things as you have always done here.......lying to attack the
credibility of knowledgable posters. Lying to pretend to events,
intents, outcomes, processes, that do not exist or do NOT mean what
you in your delusional fantasies need them to mean for your comfort
and catharsis.

YOU, boy, are sick. Very, and you are perfectly happy to indulge
youself at their expense. I'm not willing to let you do that

The vast majority of child sexual abuse cases will be investigated by
trained and capable investigators, each doing their portion of the
work as they are mandated to do.

The initial contact with CPS, usually a call and or follow up written
report (if a mandataed reporter) will be seen or heard by a screener.
They are very good at determining is an allegation is from a credible
source, and if the contents of the allegation support the need for
further action.

Next a hotline worker will ask for details, with some explaination of
various things, such as the inability for them to gaurantee anonymity
(another of the lies of you sick people), and get enough information
to determine if the report needs to go to an intake worker.

This worker will report, if the allegation, and state law requires, to
a police officer for investigation and coordination. And the nature of
the case will determine who takes the lead, and who the supportive
role in the ensuing investigation.

You have lied, Greg, and lied repeatedly in this ng and you do great
harm to people that might believe you and misunderstand CPS practices.

YOU are so stupid and self involved you assume everything CPS has done
in your case is an attack on you personally...you remain oblivious to
the protocols of investigation, casework required practice, even
policy matters you could understand if you did not have your own sick
biases and agenda.

You simply want to fuck people in the brain that come here, like you
fucked a mother out her child, and the child out of her.

CPS didn't move that child away three years ago, and it's time you
owned up...YOU did it. You simply used CPS to carry out YOUR plan that
has left you sitting on your ass for three + years, doing nothing but
taking up resources you do not pay for in any way.

If I were religious I would wish for you to burn in hell for what you
have done and what you do here.

Kane

Phil
2004-09-24 19:18:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Nutteing
More on the anticipated implosion
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/story/0,,1308945,00.html
Part quotes
The experts run for cover
<...>
Doctors' fears that they could suffer the same fate as the paediatrician Sir
Roy Meadow, a prosecution witness in all three cases, and the pathologist
Alan Williams, who carried out the postmortems on Clark's two sons - both
vilified in the media and facing charges of serious professional misconduct
at the General Medical Council - are causing them to think again about
giving evidence in child abuse cases.
The utter rubbish spouted by Si Roy Meadows attempting to be a statistician as confirmed by the royal society of staticians means that this part of the evidence was not as an expert at all but about as vaild as evidence given by the man who sweeps the floor.
At least if you are going to appear as an expert try to behave like
one

Incedently WTF was the defence barrister doing not to realise the
situation? HTH Phil
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-24 22:31:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil
Post by Paul Nutteing
More on the anticipated implosion
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/story/0,,1308945,00.html
Part quotes
The experts run for cover
<...>
Doctors' fears that they could suffer the same fate as the paediatrician Sir
Roy Meadow, a prosecution witness in all three cases, and the pathologist
Alan Williams, who carried out the postmortems on Clark's two sons - both
vilified in the media and facing charges of serious professional misconduct
at the General Medical Council - are causing them to think again about
giving evidence in child abuse cases.
The utter rubbish spouted by Si Roy Meadows attempting to be a
statistician as confirmed by the royal society of staticians means that this
part of the evidence was not as an expert at all but about as vaild as
evidence given by the man who sweeps the floor.
Post by Phil
At least if you are going to appear as an expert try to behave like
one
Incedently WTF was the defence barrister doing not to realise the
situation? HTH Phil
I have unilaterally declared myself a psychiatric
expert and this behaviour comes under my
self promulgated analysis
Deluded Professional Syndrome
that can be observed in a number of different professions.

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Alan G
2004-09-25 07:53:16 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:31:41 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
I have unilaterally declared myself a psychiatric
expert and this behaviour comes under my
self promulgated analysis
Deluded Professional Syndrome
that can be observed in a number of different professions.
You can be accepted as an expert witness simply by having written a
book on a subject that is little researched. I know someone who
although a highly qualified and respected engineer was called as an
expert witness solely on the grounds he had written a book on his
hobby.
Paul Nutteing
2004-09-25 08:18:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan G
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:31:41 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
I have unilaterally declared myself a psychiatric
expert and this behaviour comes under my
self promulgated analysis
Deluded Professional Syndrome
that can be observed in a number of different professions.
You can be accepted as an expert witness simply by having written a
book on a subject that is little researched. I know someone who
although a highly qualified and respected engineer was called as an
expert witness solely on the grounds he had written a book on his
hobby.
I must rush into print with my treatise
Folie à Deux, Dissociative Identity Disorder and Crime
presently on
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/nutteing4.htm
I could do with a nice little earner

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email ***@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.
Alan G
2004-09-25 11:21:52 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 09:18:08 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
Post by Alan G
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:31:41 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
I have unilaterally declared myself a psychiatric
expert and this behaviour comes under my
self promulgated analysis
Deluded Professional Syndrome
that can be observed in a number of different professions.
You can be accepted as an expert witness simply by having written a
book on a subject that is little researched. I know someone who
although a highly qualified and respected engineer was called as an
expert witness solely on the grounds he had written a book on his
hobby.
I must rush into print with my treatise
Folie à Deux, Dissociative Identity Disorder and Crime
presently on
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/nutteing4.htm
I could do with a nice little earner
If you can get it published and a case comes up where you can be
quoted as the only published authority on the subject..........
Greg Hanson
2004-09-27 00:47:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan G
Post by Paul Nutteing
I have unilaterally declared myself a psychiatric
expert and this behaviour comes under my
self promulgated analysis
Deluded Professional Syndrome
that can be observed in a number
of different professions.
You can be accepted as an expert witness
simply by having written a book on a subject
that is little researched. I know someone who
although a highly qualified and respected
engineer was called as an expert witness
solely on the grounds he had written a book
on his hobby.
I think it was the Wenatchee witch hunt where
the caseworkers had just watched a Television
Movie of the Week and taken a one hour seminar
on ritualized child abuse, and based on this
""expertise"" proceeeded to imagine it behind
every closed door!

But that isn't very surprizing since almost
none of the caseworkers in the USA are licensed
or qualified. Most of the contracted Social
Workers are not licensed SW's either, and
even the few who ARE licensed are so BEHOLDEN
to the less qualified caseworkers from the
government agency that they will even do things
that they KNOW violate ethics, best practice or
even law. Unfortunately for them, they are
NOT cloaked with any immunity.

Police in a few cases got CONNED by caseworkers
regarding forced entry into homes.
The resulting law suits and Judges rulings
have taught cops far and wide that caseworkers
DO indeed lie, and NOT to bet your career on
caseworkers assertions of their right to search.
IanAl
2004-09-19 08:57:09 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 19:11:06 +0100, "Paul Nutteing"
Post by Paul Nutteing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3663878.stm
Quote
An inquiry into how a man went undetected as he fathered six children by his
daughter is taking too long, according to an expert.
Child protection specialist Dr Michele Elliott has condemned the 18-month
investigation, which has not yet reached any conclusions, as too slow.
The 52-year-old man, from Swindon, was jailed for 15 years last August for
raping his daughter.
Q. How do you circumcise a Swindon man?
Loading...