to ask whether you've read the Dear Same judgment from Justice Peter Jackson?

[IdoHaveAName]

And if so, what do you think of it?

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2017/48.html

Personally, I think it appears insightful but it's obviously hard to determine what behaviour he observed in the father in court.

Dear Sam not Dear Same! Gosh.

Thanks for sharing that. I found it surprisingly moving for a court judgement. Obviously I don't know the people concerned, but what comes across is the care taken by the judge in coming to his decision.

Yes, it does read like he cares. He also seemed to pay particular attention to the various statements made by the father. I didn't think judges were generally so meticulous.

An excellent read: very thoughtful and considered. Thanks.

As someone who worked for many years in the Courts I can say that High court Judges always spend a lot of time and consideration when writing their judgments.
Although they get criticised often for their decisions, they have to abide by "the law" (statute) and have to show that they have listened to all arguments and reviewed all the evidence.
I think this judgment shows the difficult job they have to do!

I second HazelBite. I read a lot of family court judgments on my job and on the whole the judges are highly meticulous and 100% committed to the best interests of children and take their views seriously. Media reporting is often very skewed. And judges can of course only apply the law unless in the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court where they have some room to make changes. Judges take their duties very seriously - parents who have not put their children's best interests first, which sadly is all too often the case, are told so in no uncertain terms.

I think it's brilliant. Peter Jackson is an excellent judge

He's essentially saying the father is an obstructive, rude, manipulative twat isn't he?

That's how it reads to me, yes

TheSparrowhawk lol, I didn't want to say but that's what I read between the lines too!

It's like the judgment of Solomon where two mothers claimed to be the parent of a child.
One was quite happy to cut the child in two so that both could each have half.
The other stated that she didn't want the child cut in two so relinquished her claim to the child.
Solomon found the latter to be the legitimate mother. Only someone who truly loved the child would have come to such a decision.

I wish there were more Solomons doing the rounds of courts.

From wiki

Biblical narrative[edit]

The Judgement of Salomon (School of Giorgione, 1500)
1 Kings 3:16–28 recounts that two mothers living in the same house, each the mother of an infant son, came to Solomon. One of the babies had died, and each claimed the remaining boy as her own. Calling for a sword, Solomon declared his judgment: the baby would be cut in two, each woman to receive half. One mother thought the ruling fair, but the other begged Solomon, "Give the baby to her, just don't kill him!" The king declared the second woman the true mother, as a mother would even give up her baby if that was necessary to save its life.
This judgment became known throughout all of Israel and was considered an example of profound wisdom.

I found it moving too. Poor boy sounds very conflicted.

Oh that actually made me cry. It just shows how much vexatious litigation and manipulation damages the child. Bloody well done to the judge.

I hope this judgement can bring hope to the thousands of women who think 'but he's so charming and well spoken, he'll have the judge eating out of his hand'.

I also found it really insightful in helping me to understand the way some of my friends' children behave around their shitty abusive dads - where they acquiesce to their wishes because basically they're being manipulated and the mothers who will not abuse their own children for the sake of petty point scoring are put in intolerable situations. Also profoundly depressing

The Solomon judgement is a great analogy.

Thank you for linking that judgment, it was really interesting.
I feel so sad for children who are caught between two fighting parents who are meant to want the best for their child but can't see that every child needs two parents who get along and don't make them choose between them.

That's not what's happening here Chunky. The mother has the child's best interests at heart, the father doesn't. She has to fight him as it's the only way to protect her son.

Wow. I have my second Judge crush of the week.

Brilliant.

I thought it was brilliant, really reassuring to see how much careful thought goes into these decisions. That poor kid. Yep, Dad sounds like a manipulative, possibly abusive arse.

Wow! That was really moving! Sounds like this judge was trying to save Sam from years of being manipulated by a real piece of work. I hope Sam keeps that letter. He is young but it will make more and more sense to him as he grows older. Well done that judge. He saw shit and he called it!

Also wondering who brought all the previous court proceedings regarding Sam. I'm guessing dad who wasn't getting his own way.

In 2 yrs time he can make his own decision and probably have more maturity to realise he is being manipulated.

Sensible decision, thoughtfully articulated.

If Dad truly wants the best for his son, then he will wait to move till Scandi - wish we could find out the outcome.

I found that particularly moving and I hope Sam finds his peace with both parents.

The Judge certainly got the measure of the dad didn't he?

I Googled Judge Peter Jackson and Mumsnet in the anticipation that there would be discussion regarding him and his family court work. I have come here to say this man is not the man he grooms the world to believe him to be. I have recently had serious abuse from him in a court in respect of reporting domestic abuse. He put my home address and the abusers name in a judgement which was published online, and I now have a police marker on my home. He was horrible, and entirely racist to the bone also (I'm not British). Groomers groom everyone, and Mr Jackson is a man grooming the world around him to buy into the notion that is he a lovely man. He is not. He is exploiting the space he is in, and I would not trust this man in any way, shape or form. How many abusers groom themselves into public confidence? He is not to be trusted.

What I got from this was that this father was able to use the courts for about 12 years to continue the abuse of the mother. It obviously worked well or he wouldn't have returned so many times for so long.

Except one day he got cocky with a Judge and the Judge put a stop to it, being the one with the most power in the situation.