Judge named in Sara Sharif case.

[CarefulN0w]

Warning- This is a hard read. It includes details of multiple episodes of horrific violence towards Sara, her mother and other women.

It is truly shocking. How on earth anyone - let alone a family court judge - reach the conclusion that her monster of a father was the best person to have custody of her beggars belief. It's a complete failure of safeguarding.

Sara Sharif judge is named as Alison Raeside after appeal

www.thetimes.com/article/bc217e06-99df-4db8-9343-a79546f9823b?shareToken=1488f0221835b2db111d4a24100f2fca

I honestly think she needs to be investigated by the police.

There HAVE been cases of judges being bribed. I'm not saying she was, or that it's common, but it has happened (In America, admittedly).

I'm glad this happened.

Of course she has been promoted since.

Her remarks and suggestions in this case are outrageous. Never mind the decision.

She should be suspended. Who would want this patronizing paper shuffler on their custody case? A liability

Sadly parents are given a pass to commit acts of violence against dc purely because their dna is the same.
If a dog had bitten this dc even once it would have been removed from the home.
Why are dc in the UK still treated like personal belongings.
It’s beyond tragic.

I would like to think the judge has felt sick about this since Sara died.
Unfortunately she will probably justify her decisions as appropriate at the time.

I wonder if she has any idea of what a violent household is like for a dc. My dm was volatile and being hit was normal. That was bad enough but this level of violence by Sharif is abuse at the worst level which is why it ended in death.

I don’t know enough about her role, or that of her colleagues. From what I read, the father had a known history of abuse. The mother had also been violent towards the children. The mother agreed to custody being award to the father.

Would they have had the power to step in? If their role was to assess any potential risk to the children, how did they reach their decision? What other options would have been considered?

It’s utterly heartbreaking. I can’t put it in to words. I’m not sure how any judge could have drawn the conclusion that the children were safe with either parent. It requires an understanding of what exactly their role and responsibilities were. Did they have the power to remove the children? If so, why didn’t they.

I am sure she has no idea. And she seems have had some very naive reasons as to why people end up in court.

We should all remember that judges like these are paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to exercise their critical judgment for the benefit of children.

Her comments are so revealing of her mindset.

The Family court system is a shambles. The judges knew that Sharif had been abusive to three women and a child. I have no idea what any of them were thinking. Sara's back was broken 10 times.

I couldn't read it all. This person needs to explain herself , and then she needs to rot in hell.

A report prepared for that hearing detailed Sharif’s four arrests for suspected violence against three Polish women, including Sara’s mother. The report detailed that Sharif had been accused of holding women against their will, threatening to kill them with a knife and punching Sara’s four-month old sibling.

On what evidence did the local authority decide not to pursue their application to take the children? The outcome could have been so different.

The local authority initially applied to take the children into care but changed its application to a supervision order, allowing the children to remain at home with “a high level of support from professionals”. The application was signed off by Raeside.

I have no idea why Sara wasn't taken into care but there are so few care options available.
A Social Worker said to me a couple of weeks ago when discussing an 11 year old boy that his home situation might be awful but its better than any available care options at the moment.

She absolutely fucked up and I’m sure regrets it every day. I don’t know what naming her achieves though and it puts her in danger. The family courts system is in a terrible state and legal aid is severely underfunded. Scapegoating a few judges is not the way to fix this.

The judge can only decide based on what is in front of them. Even if she thought both parents were terrible and Sara shouldn't be with either of them, she couldn't make that decision on a standalone basis without a request from the local authority - she could either approve the local authority's request or decline it, not substitute something else.

From my reading of the reports, the parents jointly asked for residence to be transferred to the father. The Judge refused that request and asked for a report from social services. That report also recommended that residence was transferred. Literally everyone in this case including the mother and the social workers asked the judge to transfer residence to the father.

Judges must be accountable for their decisions. The home secretary should review the case and if deemed appropriate, she must be dismissed. What will likely happen is she will quietly retire on a big fat pension.

Slightly OT but wouldn’t a broken back require hospital treatment? Did all of those times her back was broken happen after she was withdrawn from school and they didn’t take her to hospital? Otherwise how was that not flagged that she was in hospital multiple times for such serious injuries?

Family courts give abusive and violent fathers access to their children all the time. Mothers who oppose it are accused of “parental alienation” and risk losing their children entirely. It’s disgraceful and hopefully if any good is to come out of this tragedy, it’s to protect children in the future from this utter negligence by the state

The vengeful part of me thinks "yep, a bit of fear in her life might help her see the error of her ways"

Less vengeful me wants to know why the decisions were made. How could being in care be worse than her home life? What was the calculation there?
And why are violent men not in prison?

Just wow. 'On three occasions during Sara’s life, Sharif was required to sign an undertaking not to chastise or be violent towards Sara, at least one of which was signed off by Raeside' If you have to sign something saying you won't be violent towards your own child even once, you are a danger to everyone. Unbelievable.

I don't think for a moment the judge should have a target on her back, but she should be accountable for her decisions. As should the council/Social workers if it is true they recommend Sara could be placed with her sperm donor.

This Judge refused to give him Sara unless social services did the necessary checks. Upon those checks being completed and social services recommending a move what other choice did she have?
This case is an awful one but I don't see what purpose dragging this judge through the mud is serving, except for giving him a direction to people's (very understandable) rage about the fate of that poor girl.

On three occasions during Sara’s life, Sharif was required to sign an undertaking not to chastise or be violent towards Sara

Oh well, at least he promised

I mean, even if you think that's a reasonable way of ensuring safety, the fact he had to sign it three times suggests a lack of efficacy.