Rapist given access to son

RC didn't ask him to apply for custody.

“Please don't cross over the line into defending this situation on a feminist chat site.”

This is unfair. Not has been clarifying the law in a factual sense, and quite clearly said they believed the law to be wrong.

Gawd they asked him to apply for custody

I understand he was sentenced to 35 years - how does that work then?

The whole thing beggars belief.

Saw it this morning on Victoria Derbyshire.

Brave brave woman to come forward and make herself known to the public.

Thanks for the clarification NotANotMan

I’m very familiar with courts ordering contact with fathers even when there’s a history of DA but when they’re serving 35 years for being a paedophile????

She said it was with family members of the rapists, not the rapists themselves. Which makes the whole thing more difficult. If the mother isn't able to look after the child herself, someone else has to do it. I can certainly envisage situations where it wouldn't be at all desirable to have family members of the rapist father do it, but it's also perfectly possible that it would be someone like a cousin who's not had any input into his upbringing and who doesn't support what he's done. It's not like the care system does a stunning job of protecting children who are placed within the foster system either.

Anyway, I'd say the one thing this whole thing has made clear is that we could do with a law change. The current system does provide a framework for applications to be made, but contrary to some of the claims made, it's not some commonplace box ticking exercise. It's also not guaranteed to be successful either: the Transparency Project pointed out that we don't actually know whether the council did apply or not. They have said themselves that they welcome the debate, which is quite significant in itself actually.

Also, MN should probably change the title of this thread because it's just wrong.

is “custody” even used these days? I thought that we now say residency

Residency is out of use now. Custody doesn't exist in law. Legal orders are made to outline arrangements for a child (child arrangements order) to include where the child will sleep on what nights, who the child has contact with, who can make decisions about medical treatment and under which circumstances, who can take the child out of the country etc

Furthermore, there was never a question of the child, then a teen, going to live with a father who was in prison. Talk of custody is completely inappropriate. I have already explained why he was contacted, it would have been to have the opportunity to share his views and potentially put forward family members for assessment, not to have care of the child himself.

Thank you for clarifying what most women already know - that the law is not on our side, is deeply misogynistic, and that for women there is no such thing as justice in this country

Please don't cross over the line into defending this situation on a feminist chat site

That is NOT what I have been doing.

So when I write to the MoJ what am I saying/asking for?

What is it Sammy wants?

Personally I think PR should be terminated if you’ve gathered a child via rape, convicted of a crime against a child or their mother and/or been sentenced to more than x years in prison.

Obviously what I’d really like to write is sort your shit out you bunch of misogynists, but what would actually be constructive?

I have just had a big row with DH over the reporting of this case and some of the terminology used. He watched the Victoria Derbyshire programme and both her and the woman involved used the term “custody”. I said that this is the wrong term and that they should have used parental responsibility instead. Also is “custody” even used these days? I thought that we now say residency. As the “father” will hopefully be in prison for a long time, residency wouldn’t happen anyway, would it? So we are talking about PR.

Sorry to nit pick in this way. I know that the issue here is huge, but I want to resolve our rather stupid argument. We are both too stubborn for our own good!

Not - having read mine back through, can I clarify that I think you're walking a delicate line well so far.

The law has been more shit in the past Repeal. I think we're expected to be ever-so-grateful for the short reprieve while they roll it backwards nowadays (nothing doing).

Someone on another thread has posted that there are other cases in the area where the rapists families have the children and the mums have to see them at the access centre.

WTAF

Has the law always been this shit or is it due to campaigning by the F4J arsewipes?

I’m very familiar with courts ordering contact with fathers even when there’s a history of DA but when they’re serving 35 years for being a paedophile????

NotANotMan

Thank you for clarifying what most women already know - that the law is not on our side, is deeply misogynistic, and that for women there is no such thing as justice in this country.

Please don't cross over the line into defending this situation on a feminist chat site.

It’s all the papers and the news channels as it should

No, her video went out yesterday/today. She has just waived her right to anonymity in order to try and raise awareness. Newspapers SHOULD be printing this and the good ones are printing the full details, including the timescale and reasons!

This isn't happening now

Ah... newspapers desperately seeking things to write about.

I think that is what is causing some confusion!

It happened last year and she has just now chosen to waive their rights to anonymity!

During a hearing last year the boy's mother was told that the convicted sex offender would be allowed to attend court and make legal representations.

This isn't happening now

Instead what she got was a letter to his father asking him if he wanted to take on parental responsibility!

Just what every troubled young person needs - visiting their rapist father in prison.

Why are there care proceedings in the first place. At his mother's request. She says he is a very troubled kid and she was/is trying to get him all the help that is out there. It is common to push for this as a child gets closer to 18 as some adult help is more easily accessed if there is existing provision / history of need.

Instead what she got was a letter to his father asking him if he wanted to take on parental responsibility!

I believe the incident happened a few years ago when he was a young teen.

Hearings to do with child welfare, including in divorce proceedings and in this case care proceedings, are private. Judgements are also private unless there is a point of law or precedent which means they are made public. Even then names are anonymised (although I imagine the details would make the people identifiable to those who know them).

I do not know if you are in contempt of court if you speak out about what happens in a hearing, I will be asking my lawyer that.

But it is a forum for abuse to continue to happen - and for the judges to also abuse the lawyers and the litigants behind closed doors (my solicitor said it is the only forum where you are allowed to be insulted in professional proceedings). There is little awareness of domestic abuse and coercive control - although in the case of this thread, the background should have been a huge red flag. But the law prioritises a child’s contact with their non-resident parent and the burden of proof that this is unsafe is on the resident parent, even if there has been police and family protection involvement.

In care proceedings as above, the issue I think revolves on the fact that both parents have a chance to make representations and be involved in decisions. PR gives them that right.

Convoluted post, I am sorry, very tired.

NotANotMan

Am I missing something - is this child almost 18 years old ? Why are there care proceedings in the first place.

ineedacupofcoffeedesperatley wheres that from?

God I didn't know that. It is absolutely chilling

So this can be used as an extra threat

If you report me
Everyone will know I am father and I will have rights
You will never get away
I can have access to the kid and if it's a girl well that's excellent
The law will be on my side

Chilling. The law needs changing. Also, what the hell is going on in Yorkshire? I wouldn't want to be raising children there.