That this decision by Rotherham Council is unbelievable!

[mothertruck3r]

Well, not really unbelievable in this era of craziness but make me furious. It seems like the girls who were victims of these gangs still don't have any value (judging by the subsequent treatment by the Council) and their emotional and physical wellbeing is completely dismissed so that a rapist can see his child. What were Rotherham Council thinking!!??

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-46368991

Am I missing something here? It seems the father's name doesn't appear on the birth certificate, how does he have any rights at all? A change of law is badly needed.

As I put on the thread in feminism, the reporting in the Times is incorrect. This is the correct information from the Transparency Project a group of family lawyers, journalists and academics striving to ensure accurate reporting and greater understanding of the Family Courts

www.transparencyproject.org.uk/was-a-council-acting-perversely-over-its-decision-to-offer-a-jailed-rapist-a-chance-to-see-his-victims-child/

blanche The Council could have applied to Court to be allowed not to notify the rapist
They couldn't be bothered

Just like they cba to stop the rape in the first place

That is why we need a law specifically to protect rape victims - of all ages - and any children produced by rape:

We CANNOT rely on Councils using the existing legal means to do this,
or on the Courts decision if Councils do try

There is institutional bias to favour the interests of men - even rapists - against the protection of girls and women

It's like they are more concerned about the human rights of a rapist than the actual victim!

Of course they are. The rapist is both male and brown.

The thing is it’s something that happens often. Husban/partners who are abusive, have raped the mother, have been physically abusive can still see the child ‘because they haven’t done anything wrong to the child’ and always, always ‘it’s better for the child to have a Relationhsip with their father than none at all’.

Tbh I wasn’t surprised at all.
But that case because of the sheer size of the abuse etc.. makes it obvious how crazy it is.

Oh I agree, Big

Sunglasses have you spoken out lately about crimes committed by your ethnicity?

I agree Bonnie, and how professionals failed to protect these victims, and it took so long to bring them to task, because of a fear of being seen as 'racist'. How they can offer a sex offender and paedophile access to a vulnerable child is beyond me. They don't care for the child or the victim one bit, but trying appease and placate the criminal. Women haters the lot of them.

And child haters too, putting a vulnerable child at risk.

Delta I think it's being male that's privileged

White rapists get privileged too
e.g. "Karen" White and placing his need for his delusions to be validated above the rights of women patients in hospital and of women prisoners not to be raped.

the council could have applied to court to mean that this man did not have to be asked / notified etc

The council chose not to do that.

^ this. The law allowed for him not to be contacted. Council is at fault for not applying for this in these circumstances.

The only people standing up to this abuse appears to be Tommy Robinson or whatever his name is. And then he gets arrested ...

The general view of family lawyers (rarely fans of councils) is that in this instance the council social workers have not got it wrong.

"Practice Direction 12C to the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (paragraph 3.1 to be precise – read it here), which makes it mandatory for a local authority applying for care orders (as it appears this local authority was) to formally notify a father of the existence of proceedings – even one who was not married to the mother and has no parental responsibility – and even one who is as dangerous and unpleasant as this one appears to have been. No ‘decision’. No perversity. No appalling insensitivity on the part of a local authority."

It is for Parliament to change the law , and the M of Justice to look at the practice direction; this is where any ire should be laid

Yes perhaps when we are out of Europe we can get rid of these ridiculous human rights policies and apply a bit of common sense.

Don't blame the EU. This doesn't happen in other European countries.

According to lawyers and reporters on Jeremy Vine:

1. It is a matter of routine to ask a judge for permission to not contact a parent in some circumstances - such as this one!

1. Rotherham Council have repeated that they were simply following the law.

So, it would seem that someone in Rotherham has decided that this man, despite his 35 year sentence for sex crimes against many children, including this child's mother, has a greater right to be a parent than this woman has to be protected from her attacker. As her son has given evidence in court against this mans family Rotherham Council have also decided that this man's parental rights outweigh those of the child!

Not sure how any of that can be made right when there is already a simple, quick and commonplace mechanism in place to prevent any parent or child being forced to have contact with a violent parent.

I was wondering if the council might trying to avoid/minimise expenditure by looking to involve the child's father or famly in the child's care. I didn't used to be so cynical.

Sammy Woodhouse is amazingly brave to waive her anonymity and speak out 💐

We should support her campaign
"to change the law to ensure rapists can't gain access to children conceived through rape"

I hope that the Authorities face a massive backlash as a result of this going public, that they do a U turn.

The only people standing up to this abuse appears to be Tommy Robinson or whatever his name is. And then he gets arrested ... Erm, he tried to report/stream from within the court, breaking the restrictions placed by the sitting judge!

He would have given them a legal loophole to escape justice... which is why he is the Eternal Fuckwit!

Are you serious Gas? TR has only ever exploited these cases for his own gain, jeopardising trials and dragging victims through further time and distress in court. He has never uncovered anything he just waits until the authorities have managed to bring a hard-won case to court and then pops up to shit all over it.

Given that it's actually quite difficult to succeed in a High Court application not to notify, it's a possibility that the reason Rotherham didn't do so is because they had reason to believe it wouldn't succeed. None of us know what their decision was based on. They do have a responsibility not to use public money to make applications that aren't likely to succeed. I can quite see how people don't feel inclined to think well of them, the council itself hasn't done much to deserve the benefit of the doubt, but I'm afraid the fact is that there's nowhere near enough information been given for any of us to be able to ascertain whether they've made a mistake in not applying.

Also, Tommy Robinson was trying to get that trial to collapse, because Asian nonces get off on technicality is much more advantageous to his brand than criminals bang to rights, get banged up. Get a fucking clue gas.

So it's like the rapists/ abusers can't lose. They can rape a child and cause that child to get pregnant. They, or their families, can then get custody of the child that was born from a rape. They will then have ample opportunities to abuse/rape that child also. It's like the state is allowing them access to a never ending supply of children to abuse.