[Editor’s note: Gumshoe has been making “new discoveries” in South Australia as to the terrible things that happen to protective parents. But Amanda gearing has been following many cases in other parts of Australia for over a decade. With Scott Morrison’s national apology to child sex abuse victims today, Amanda’s article reminds us that children in the Family Court system now are mostly not believed and not protected.]
by Amanda Gearing, PhD
The Family Courts have certain procedures that seem to be aimed against the welfare of the child and the rights of the protective parent. I shall write here about protective mothers, but with the understanding that an identical situations occur where the protective parent is the father.
Thanks to the Royal Commission that ran from 2013 to 2017, the public now knows a lot about the frequency of child abuse. Children, too, know more about it and are more likely to report it. You may think that all of this has made the Family Court eager to protect kids from pedophiles, but you will see that is not true.
Emerging Profile
A new predatory profile is emerging following the systemic clean-up effected by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Assault in Australia.
Predators who once found jobs in the teaching profession, the priesthood or as volunteers in charities, children’s sport clubs and cultural associations are, thankfully, being weeded out.
They are no longer so easily able to gain trusted access to children and relative immunity from prosecution from large powerful institutions. Improved vigilance of parents, improved community awareness of the damage caused by sexual abuse and improved reporting of suspected abuse to authorities have all combined to reduce the availability of children to predators intent upon offending.
As a consequence, children are safer in schools, churches and clubs.
Targeting a Mother
In the cases I have become aware of, the typical scenario is where a man selects a target woman — usually based only on an online photo of her rather than any knowledge of her character, but ensuring she has a good income-earning capacity and/or assets, such as a house of her own.
The women selected are likely to be of late childbearing age, 35-40 years old. The target women also almost always have a faith base, or a secure ethical framework, and are generally forgiving and wanting to believe the best of others. If there are minor incidents of violence early on, the woman dismisses them as atypical.
Within a few months the woman is pregnant and the violence soon becomes more regular and more severe and including gaslighting [manipulate someone by psychological means into doubting their own sanity], physical violence and sexual assault. Shocked, the woman leaves the relationship. Almost all the relationships are very short and in many the couple do not marry and sometimes do not ever live together.
The mother then has little or no contact with the male until he files a custody request via the Family Court for contact with the child. He has usually had no contact and taken no interest in the unborn child, the birth or the young child and has not provided any financial or other support for the mother and child.
The surprise request for access to the child may be met with hesitation but upon seeking legal advice the mother will invariably be told she will not be able to prevent the father having contact. Section 60CC of the Family Law Act stipulates the court must presume the best interests of the child lie in a meaningful relationship with both parents.
Is Her Situation Different from That of Married Women?
In the following part of this article, I describe what that woman is likely to go through in her dealings with the Family Court. The mother is then virtually rejected by the many professionals who should help her (as described by what Dee McLachlan has written).
The women I have interviewed who were impregnated, should be identified by their attorneys. The fact mentioned above — that the male parent had not shown any previous interest in the child — should be a give-away or at least an orange alert. Why does he now want contact with the child? And soon enough, he asks for custody of the child.
The mother then encounters what mothers with more stable families encounter, in the legal system.
Entering the Legal Sytem
Most mothers sign a consent order rather than fight a costly court case – hoping for the best – and believing, somewhat naively, that the violence and abuse they endured will not be inflicted upon the child.
These mothers produce the child for contact as agreed. Over time they notice the child’s behaviour deteriorate. Unsure what is happening they put the child’s distress down to any number of possibilities. When medical symptoms appear such as a regression in toilet training, unexplained angry outbursts from the child, depression or thoughts about suicide, the mother begins to investigate further.
Despite unexplained injuries to the child’s genitals, the mother is reluctant to suspect the ex-partner of sexual assault. Having always been law-abiding, and wanting to comply with the consent orders, she persuades the child to attend contact visits as ordered by the court.
At some point, the child may accidentally disclose accounts of behaviour by the man that amount to sexual assault. The mother is overwhelmed by feelings of betrayal, and perceived failure on her own part to protect the child.
Society Then Lets Her Down
So far, her dilemma has been private. But she is now about to seek help from the various agencies that should be helping her. She will be in for a shock — and as Gumshoe readers have recently become aware, we are all in for a shock.
There appears to be a deliberate barrier built against her getting help.
The mother may audio record or video record disclosures by the child. Armed with what she believes is ‘evidence’ she may decide at this point that she has a duty to withhold the child from contact despite the risk of a contravention order being filed against her in the Family Court.
The mother eventually takes the child to police or reports to a child safety department, fully expecting the authorities to protect her child and herself. She may seek a domestic violence order thinking this will preclude contact between the child and the suspected offender.
Police may interview the child. In all but very rare cases, police will decide not to charge the alleged offender due to the lack of evidence. (Video-taped disclosures of abuse are rarely sufficient evidence “to bring a case that has a reasonable prospect of conviction,” they say.)
If there is no video evidence of the offending and no offender DNA on the child in a compromising location, the police will be most likely to drop the case. Police seem trained to disbelieve allegations brought to them by a mother who has a Family Court case on foot.
Once police cease their involvement, they may pass the matter to a child safety department that will investigate. If the child has a protective parent, the department usually does not intervene.
The mother is then in the harrowing position of believing her child’s disclosures but unable to get police to prosecute, and child safety is unwilling to protect the child.
The Court Itself
The Family Court labels her an ‘unfriendly’ parent if she withholds the child from contact and police blame her for ‘coaching’ the child to make false allegations.
Within the court, court workers such as family report writers, independent children’s lawyers, and judicial officers label her as an alienating parent who is causing ‘emotional harm’ to the child.
Tension between the mother and child then begins to emerge. The kid, having disclosed as best he or she can, is not heard by, or protected by, the authorities. The child generally at this point refuses to attend contact visits. The boy or girl objects by crying, screaming or hiding to avoid contact with the father.
The fathers in this profile group then step up their demands for contact. The child’s symptoms worsen. The child may disclose more or clearer particularisations of offences. The mother may take the child back to police or a child safety department.
Unbeknown to the mothers, any subsequent disclosures after the initial one to police are generally regarded as ‘coached’. The police at this point may warn the mother not to bring the child back to them!
The mother may recount her tale of woe to family and friends seeking reassurance and help, only to be met with disbelief that authorities would fail to protect a child.
Once in court, the mother will be labelled an ‘alienating parent’ and will almost always be ordered to allow contact with the father, at first as supervised contact and then unsupervised contact.
The protective parents I have interviewed thus far, fight for an average of more than seven years in court, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal representation in their attempt to protect their child or children.
Meanwhile the children themselves endure not only the abuse but also the fear — for most of their childhood — of being taken from their protective parent and handed over to the person they say is abusing them.
From the child’s point of view this is a terrifying ordeal and has precipitated suicidality in some children I have seen.
Nearly always the court orders the child to visit or live with the father. (To repeat, in some cases the role is switched: it is the mom who is the abuser and the dad who is a protective parent.)
Need To Change This
Calls for another Royal Commission, this time into the Family Law system, may fall on unwilling political ears, but the recommendations of the existing Royal Commission could well be applied wherever possible to the child protection system, especially to the protection of children in Family Court cases.
From my observations of dozens of cases in the past ten years, the narratives are eerily similar.
The accounts given to me directly by children indicate that the children are frightened to report the abuse because they have been threatened not to speak of it for fear they or their siblings or protective parent will be injured or killed.
One child even described giving their protective parent ‘clues’ about what was happening and observing that the parent did not understand the clues.
A New RC Is Not the Answer
The complexity of the Family Law system means that solutions to better protecting of the children described above make take some time to implement.
There should be some urgency to extract everything of value from the findings of the Royal Commission and apply them to the arena of the Family Law system as soon as practically possible.
Waiting for another Royal Commission to be called, run and the recommendations delivered and implemented would leave another generation of children damaged unnecessarily.
— Amanda Gearing is an investigative reporter. She worked for the Courier-Mail from 1997-2007 based in Toowoomba before becoming a freelance print and radio journalist.
Amanda, thank you.
I have just returned from South Australia, arriving back home a hour ago. I met, once again, with “Darlene”. I can only report, the situation has worsened. In the last week — I have been fielding calls from many people. I hope to report openly on one case as this never reached the court. A grandfather, Graeme, described in detail how the various departments plotted to “steal” his granddaughter — to feed the foster care system. If anyone has seen my film on sex trafficking called THE JAMMED — well, all what I have heard is far worse.
This is so disgusting on behalf of the court system, if it can be called that. I used to think that we were now civilised but I now believe that barbaric is a more apt term. Not only the perpetrators but also those who allow the crime to continue are evil.
Mal I heard yesterday of a Judge berating a mother on the blood evidence she provided — and laughing it off. Shouldn’t they check? I also heard on other cases about social workers plotting to pry the child away from friends and school; of false reports, and a policeman shouting at a child reporting abuse to making up lies. It is debatable whether the courts and the complicit social workers (it seems mostly woman) and police could have more lasting damage than the abuse itself.
Don’t worry this is my comment, unless clarification of it is wanted.
Most never get to court. This story has the target with some kind of financial ability.
How can the perpetrators be organised enough for this modus. I’m assuming they have no financial ability or stores. One reason could be that victims sometimes re-inact, looking for empathy but the story suggests a conspiracy that I am open the entertain
As a consequence, children are safer in schools, churches and clubs.
I hope so, but i’ll just hang around a bit, pesky weeds
I’ve heard that groups such as Parents without Partners & other groups ‘coach’ how to screw over their partner. Sometimes it’s abuse by proxy! Who would spent over a hundred thousand dollars in a court trial assuming that the truth will come out and the children will be protected if it weren’t true? I most certainly could have spent my hard earned dollars elsewhere rather than in legal fees!!!
I’m sorry part(maybe all and then some) of your saved hard work was wasted.
I’m very sorry and ashamed in a way, of the outcomes for your child/children(sorry I can’t remember exactly).
Not sure what you mean by coach. The lawyers also coach on the applicant side. The first free consultation can map a course action and I have wondered if this free service has a technical difference in law.
I am unfamiliar with Parents without Partners, are they a cult like the family(Victoria, Hamilton-Byrne). Couldn’t they call themselves Parents United for the Childrens group safety.
Uber wealthy will spend huge sums at law to hold back the truth.
I’m starting to wonder if this paedophile behaviour is part of the reason why so many children are turning to illegal drugs. Has there been any investigation to see if there is a connection between the two crimes?
It may be that because the child feels so let down by everyone, their situation could not become worse, so two alternatives, drugs or suicide.
You are close to the mark – many come from single parent families and many single parent families are dysfunctional at best.
It is a nightmare that government is not equipped to deal with and government caused the problems in the first place.
why try to disparage all single parent families here?
many single parent families are entirely functional and successful while many two parent families are absolutely dysfunctional.
as youd know if your parents hadnt ran away from home the moment you hatched..
There is no attempt on my part to ‘disparage’ anyone – that is your perception and not my suggestion. I have simply put forward the knowledge that I gained from my own experience of such things as a cop.
Single parent families have generally been made that way – by law. Divorce and the non-commitment of de-facto relationships has been made far too easy by government. Many couples would still be together today if they had chosen to work at the relationship rather than simply walking away from it.
i know many defacto couples that are entirely committed. and as successful as the many single parent families. you need to get out more.
My second eldest daughter and her man have been in a de-facto relationship for over 30 years – but what does that prove?
I know of couples who have been married for over 50 years – but again, what does that prove?
That they are committed yes, but it does not prove one system of living together is any better than the other.
And for your own info – marriage was generally an arranged by family event in all couples lives until the advent of Hollywood and the need to find the right person to ‘fall in love’ before settling down happily ever after.
It is the relationships where both choose to work at it that survives the test of time – that is the original intent of the marriage vows and for why they were in a Church and in front of one’s peers.
And you miss the point entirely of my original comment to Aussiemal – and that is, the greater majority of those who fall victim to drugs come from single parent homes which is usually the mother.
I’ve seen it all for myself – perhaps it is you who should get out more?
Nem, your comments are distracting from the focus of the article. More off-topic comments will be trashed
Thanks Dee. But, it was Fair Dinkum who got it off topic – I hope you sent him a notation as well? I have been all over this site and there are so many off topic comments – yet you single me out?
A good child psychologist would be able to unravel most children’s nightmares – and they can be called as ‘expert witnesses’ by either the Defence or the Prosecution. Women in the situation as described by this article need advice on how best to tackle such an horrendous situation to their advantage.
Any signs of ‘interference’ either physical or mentally, should be proceeded against at the Emergency Department of the local hospital who, and if assessed as being warranted, could make referrals to those who are trained in detecting child abuse – there are special police teams trained to deal with such behaviour who can also make recommendations for further action.
Without corroborating evidence to back up their claims, mother or fathers, are simply treated as complainants and not as victims.
To gain a foothold in the legal system one must first gather their irrefutable evidence.
Nem, we will get to how the system works… but I can assure you it is not just random, system failings or lack of evidence.
It is carefully orchestrated.
Interesting, anecdotally, I heard that the pedo-rings do NOT — repeat do NOT — want the kids of drugged out parents. They have to be more ‘pure’ that that. And intelligent empathetic vulnerable mothers are the target.
I have to admit I was ignorant of the details 6 weeks ago. But after hours and hours of listening to victims, recordings, photographs, solicitors, and helpers… my education was a baptism by fire. I will try impart some of what I learned. But I can assure you, it is not going to be easy.
I spoke to one woman: This is the scenario.
She is in Family Court… her lawyer (deliberately) forgot her 2″ pile of evidence (to save his own skin). (There are few lawyers willing to face been barred from practice). There is the judge. no one else is there to witness what is happening. No recording. Transcripts changed. The mother by this time (separated from her child is distraught). Unseen social workers reporting without supervision.Lying. In the court she is the lone – unrepresented voice. The judge berates her for a number of issues — and then ignores the evidence. He rules — separation. If the mother makes a fuss, or tries to again to prove her case, she faces a chance of forever losing her child.
Part of the family court is nothing more than a CHILD TRAFFICKING BUSINESS.
I do not say things lightly on this site.
Stay tuned.
Thank you for the article, Amanda. Thank you for jumping in, Dee.
Dee, This child trafficking in Australia is organized crime which is run in the same way as the mafia. See my review of Keith Harmon Snow’s book which has the apt title :” In the Child’s Worst Interests”, The subtitle deals with the trafficking aspect. The review includes a relevant commentary on the Australian Family Court. See my (Helen Tastard) Face Book Timeline 7 or 8 March 2018, or email helentastard@ozemail.com.au . It is possible that the recently announced changes to the Family Court arose from government becoming aware of this business organization which had been hiding within the Family Court for several years.
Nem,
Very early on after disclosing sexual abuse I was court ordered that I could NOT take my child to a psychologist or counselor. I was blocked from this very early on after my child disclosed sexual abuse to a psychologist. Then later after my child disclosed to a doctor, and after the trial my court orders specifically say that I CANNOT my children to a doctor!!!
Can you see us protective parents predicament?
Then we have judges ruling that the protective parent must have a psychiatric assessment since the abuser alleges that the protective parent is crazy. In several cases that I am familiar with the psychiatrist documents ‘no mental illness’ but when called to give oral evidence in the court room, he alleges that the protective parent must have been having ‘delusions’ in regards to the sexual abuse. How could he make the assumption that someone with no mental illness is having a delusion?
In regards to the Expert Witness, the Family Court allows for one Single Expert Witness. I called upon Emeritus Professor Freda Briggs to be my Single Expert Witness. The Judge during the trial said “I don’t like her, choose someone else”. I did choose someone else, a child psychologist who was also very well educated in regards to child sexual abuse. The Judge said “I don’t like her either”…….. How could this Judge advise NOT to have such highly regarded experts?
The Family Court does NOT have to abide by the Evidence Act. Thus any evidence forwarded does not necessarily get submitted!!! It’s at the Judges discretion!!! I know of a cases where the Judge ignores the Evidence & goes AGAINST the recommendations of Child Protective Services & Psychologists!!!
It’s absurd & unbelievable to those who have not lived it!!!
The phrase “long walk off a short pier” comes to mind.
eyes wide open– re calling on Emeritus Professor Freda Briggs to be your Single Expert Witness only to have the Judge during the trial say “I don’t like her, choose someone else”–is very familiar to me as a whistleblower–outrageous.
I include a little about Freda Briggs and her work.
https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/unisa-emeritus-professor-dr-freda-briggs-sadly-dies-after-returning-from-overseas-workshops-on-childonchild-abuse/news-story/434a669d12390f6ecab4d94f61b4eaf9
https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/230270540?q&versionId=253544920
“How she made her first discoveries of child sexual abuse cases at Norwich and the role of teachers in educating children. 1980 investigation of programmes. 1985 Institute of Family Studies conference, Freda met Victoria Police officer who took subject further. Her first book on child sexual abuse published in 1986. Official response to her book caused real waves in South Australian Parliament. Australian Family Association targeted her work. Child protection issues”.
“Professor Freda Briggs is a Senior Australian who in her roles as educator, author, scholar and ambassador has ceaselessly worked towards her vision to provide a safer and more caring world for children.”
To Dee and ‘eyes wide open’. My intention with that comment is to keep from being placed into the Family Court system in the first place.
If ever there was a misnomer for a system that has become authoritarian in its outlook, it would have to be ‘Family Court’.
There is no organization or point of call for anyone who finds themselves in the circumstances as described on this thread to gain useful and lawful advice on how to keep one’s molested children out of the clutches of the Family Court system.
And that should be every parent’s priority (to stay out of the Family Court) whenever faced with the prospect of realizing that your child is being molested by the father or the mother.
But that is not the case in 21st Century Australia and the Family Court of this country seems to be tied in with the very thing that Trump signed his executive order of December 21, 2017, against.
Those put into such circumstances become fodder to a system geared into extracting their children away from them – and that is all I will convey in that kind of thinking. Those who find themselves becoming the victim of the system have no where or no one to turn to.
Apart from those who are only too easily labelled as criminals for wishing to assist them outside of the Family Court.
And the key in limiting the effect of such a system on those who through no fault of their own find themselves a victim of such as system is to stay out of it Stay out of the Family Court by first gathering the evidence of such abuse as I have put forward above and then getting the police involved who will then be duty bound to follow through on such concerns as suspected criminal offences.
Get the offenders into a court of law first!
Knowledge is power and evidence is crucial, but educating in how to approach child abuse is priceless.
But, we need to remember that the only remedy to the problem that is pedophila is education on how to directly deal with it without allowing a fascist court system to rob a parent’s responsibility of their inalienable right to remain an innocent parent.
Nemesis, if only it were that easy to stay out of Family Court. Unfortunately when you conceived children to a psychopath/narcissist/paedophile, you really don’t have much choice. I believe in many cases we have been ‘breeders’. Your idea of getting the police involved is what we protective parents are so frustrated about. We’re constantly turned away once it is known that we’re involved in family court proceedings. How many times have I been to the police station and had to demand for them to take my statement? Far too many. When I took my daughter there are she told me about the cameras in the bathroom, the police officer refused to take my statement & told me that I’d better take my child to a psychiatrist! I refused to leave the police station until I was able to make that report, yes it did eventually happen. This is the biggest problem…….that these criminal matters of sexual abuse are being ignored by the very departments that are supposed to be protecting children despite us shouting out for help! Apparently a child’s verbal disclosures are not enough for police to charge the alleged perpetrator. But how can innocent children know about sexual acts without having engaged in them? If you have any ideas I’d be grateful!!! ps suing the police for being complicit would be ideal, but I’m broke!!!
The problem as I see it, is that the first priority for when a parent has deep concerns about her/his partner’s behaviour toward their son/s or daughter/s is to contact police or a lawyer, rather than seek the assistance of a child psychologist who can determine what is going on within that child’s world – and from that assessment – then work the system to their own favor by eliminating lawyers and Family Courts in the initial stages while the criminality of the partner is recorded as not being a fit parent.
That would be the very first thing that I would do in such circumstances and thank God, I have never had to face such a realization as many others have had the misfortune of going through.
The Family Court system is a corrupt system designed that way from the get go and as such, should be avoided like the plague, but as I have suggested in previous posts, the general public is completely ignorant of a such a court system actually being in place that is not designed to serve the best interests of the family – and it is this awareness that urgently needs to be made public.
It is d worse than ironical that the above well-informed advice is to avoid the Family Court altogether, advice that I wholeheartedly endorse. Official figures are unobtainable but the annual cost of this court to the taxpayers may be as much as $11 billion, excluding fees paid to layers and barristers. This means that we taxpayers are expected to support financially a system which overall does great harm, and which leaves honest people (the majority) nowhere to turn in an attempt to help abused children.The corrupt are rewarded while the others (especially the children) suffer punishment from which they may never recover. Our politicians are complicit as they refuse to hold a Royal Commission into this court or otherwise take action to reform or abolish it. Merging it with another court is not the answer as the same people will be running it.. The Federal Circuit Court of Australia seems to have been set up by the former Chief Justice Of the Family COurt, the Hon Diana Bryant, not to streamline the work of the Family Court as claimed but to provide a delaying mechanism. I have yet to find an explanation of why the magistrates of the new court were immediately given the title of “Judge ” when its name was changed to the Federal CIrcuit Court quite soon afterwards.. They do not seem to have even been selected in the same imperfect way as other judges, none of whom seem to be required to have specialized training. .
Great work Amanda!!! Yes, Dee you amaze me!!!
Well Phelps (doctor), another task to get into immediately when you take your seat.
Wentworth will be watching to see if you are fair dinkum…… next election in about 6 months.. go for it.
In gratitude for your work in this Dee and Mary and the Gumshoe Networkers.
“It’s absurd & unbelievable to those who have not lived it!!!” I have “lived it”–am living it- The Tavistock Agenda: Operation Paperclip. MKUltra Monarch Programming dutifully participating in the script playing out the role assigned us. So So unbelievable but so so micromanaged and masterminded a military operation of Star Wars intergalactic proportions..Yesterday’s Apology a piece of theatre.
I again refer to Dr Alison Miller. “Healing the Unimaginable. Mind Control and Ritual Abuse.” and Wendy Hoffman. “The Enslaved Queen. Electricity and Mind Control.”
Recently found the following two podcasts:
The Liminalist # 102: Everything Happens at Night (with Alison Miller)February 18, 2017 by Jasun.
“Conversation with Alison Miller, therapist and author of Healing the Unimaginable, on discovering ritual abuse, meeting inner children, dissociative identity disorders, False Memory Syndrome, how widespread is ritual abuse, the therapeutic community’s awareness of organized abuse, psychologically sophisticated organized crime, Elizabeth Loftus & the agenda to discredit memory, Lori Handrahan & the child porn industry, liminal realities, an innate resistance to unpleasant realities, more than Jesus suffered, compartmentalization of awareness, popular media & violence, MKULTRA children, Ewen Cameron’s babies, Nazi Luciferians, concentration camp experimentation, Mengele in the US, unbonded children, rewiring the brain, creating new circuits, Kabbalah-based groups, electricity, drugs & birth induction, the false impression of a memory continuum, everything happens at night, a place of fragmented identity, cult camps, Daycare Center abuse, multigenerational abuse, altered states of perception, conscious perpetrators, what Lucifer wants, high-level politicians, Wendy Hoffman, Ann Diamond & Leonard Cohen, mass media triggers, The Wizard of Oz and Walt Disney as mind control aids, Shirley Temple & pedophile porn, screen memories, deception-embedded experiences, staged alien abductions, healing process, internal informants, how deep can memories be buried, parallel interpretations of events, dream revelations, the failure of Jungian dream analysis, programmed other worlds, David Icke’s reptilians, intelligence agencies & occult fraternities, natural psychism, mind control & psychic abilities, hijacking people’s inherent abilities, the dreams of the elite, a sense of isolation, the spice of life.”
Liminalist # 110: A Life Unknowing (with Wendy Hoffman)
April 15, 2017 by Jasun
“Conversation with organized ritual abuse survivor Wendy Hoffman, author of The Enslaved Queen, on being fragmented, finding internal structures, connecting to inner parts, a special friend, a pre-existing soul, learning to dissociate, splitting the mind, maternal rejection, landscape layers, remembering, current contact, a foam of a life, a life unknowing, dream and nightmare, mother-beatings, Michelle Remembers, finding the ground, a life of memory retrieval, how integration happens, doubting memories, some of your finest parts, internal structures, Mengele and mind control, neural pathways, psychic ability, infant assessment, creating cultural leaders, hand-signals among the elite, abuse culture programming, ritual sacrifice and the inception of culture, child trafficking and drug mules, the use of psychism for social control, changing perspectives, moving towards self-knowing, rescuing the parts”.
Thanks Diane, we are all on our travels but you help the medicine go down. I’m stubborn and would track this way anyway. I can only imagine your trials, but only imagine(i hope) what this attention means.I love this place(earth), your moral compass is wonderful. I wish to be half as strong. blah blah- but really
“…. but really ” , what Smon?
Happy to clarify Ned.
I said blah blah because some people get uncomfortable with high praise. They don’t like the pedestal, and some are pressured that they have to now live up to that that projected view. The “but really” is my way of stamping high praise without expectation. I’m a bloke so I struggle with identifying “feelings” correctly.
Hope that explained.
I try to reply to any queries(all I know of, I have) about my comments. If I have not it is only because I am unaware.
I have met both Alison Miller and Wendy Hoffman.
Here are the links to the podcasts,
https://boxes.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/wp-content/uploads/AlisonMiller.mp3
https://boxes.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/wp-content/uploads/WendyHoffman.mp3
Diane, what the hell is “the spice of life” doing in there? and i had never known of Ewen Cameron’s babies. Thanks for the helpful list of topics. Pardon me while I retch.
Hey, also thanks for surviving and for contributing majorly, majorly.
Wow. I just listened to the last 24 minutes of Wendy interview. That is, I skipped the first hour. Her interviewer asked excellent questions.
I believe everything she says, except the remote viewing. I think our sensory system, including vision, evolved according to what we needed in the old environment. I think it is that way for all animals. Why would our brain have the capacity to see far away?
Wendy says she is happy with the way things turned out for her, and encourages anyone who has the desire to be a good person, to overcome the external control and manipulation. Yay.
I know I said no more of me one this page, but Mary you must have had significant deja vu, i would assume its part of your personality that drives the “Gumshoe” contrarian (some say Norwegian) view that your articles impart to me anyway Thats bigger than remote viewing in a way. Especially now remote viewers are in most homes.
Thanks Simon for all that you contribute and understand your perseverance is inspiring–just keep going– I hear you as you hear me and that is what matters. Glad you responded to Mary’s comment re Psychic driving–remote viewing- I will respond in due course.
But first back to topic- thank you Amanda and Dee– I know I have important information that will support this thread.
“Even Paedophiles have the RIGHT to a relationship with their Children” – Senior Family Court Judge. Against that kind of ill-informed prejudice, what hope does any child have of being kept safe and protected?. Family Court Judges apply this mantra liberally. e.g. A father with two convictions for child sexual abused was given a Shared Parenting arrangement (joint parental responsibility and share custody) of two small girls and the Judge stated in justification, “Well as long as they stay together at all times and lock their bedroom door on a night, they should be safe!”. In another similar case of a father having convictions for two child sexual abuse offences given a similar Shared Parenting arrangement, the Judge said, “Well his child sexual abuse convictions were committed on little boys, so this small daughters should be safe with him.”. Another case of a father with conviction for child sexual abuse and with HIV/Aids was given sole custody of his 3 yr old daughter because the Judge said, “The child has always been in the mother’s sole care but If custody is given back to the mother, then she wont cooperate in giving the father his rights to contact. All contact by the mother is refused.”. Those are the beliefs and attitudes of FC Judges and Family Court lawyers, so the dye is cast long before a child even begins to disclose that they have been sexually abused. Family Courts have a psychopathic organisational culture. i.e. a complete absence of compassion, empathy, and remorse.
Thank you Charles for sharing your knowledge. You know of the battles I faced over the years. The validation that this nightmare was real & apparently ‘legal’ was what kept me sane!
After reading the article and comments, I could add my own anecdotes about the legal system, but it wouldn’t add anything to what already has been said. I’m just glad to be retired. I never want to set foot in a courtroom again, or have to call someone I hold in contempt – ‘Your Honour’.
The best thing about representing yourself is that you can give grovelling a miss in the knowledge that:
a) you’ve got nothing to lose.
And
b) it cuts to the heart of the entire reprobate shebang
At very worst the magistrate/judge will have a tantrum or threaten to do you for contempt but as he/she has been carefully selected for his/her gutlessness it’s unlikely to happen
Belittling remarks such as “what do you want me to do with it?” can be countermanded with‘’I’m not asking you to do anything with it, that’s not why I’m here”. A few years ago a Noongar Elder purportedly dealt with a mandatory Albany appearance by asking the Magistrate “And what can I do for you today Missee?”
If more people were prepared to deal with the aristocratic posturing like so the whole game would fall flat
Once I knew that I was ending my time at the Bar, my ‘give a shit level’ didn’t get up to my bootlaces. I took delight in calling out the frauds on the bench, if they talked crap, I’d call them on it. I remember a few times where various solicitors and barristers moved away from me as I corrected some BS from the bench – (I’m not with that guy your Honour!).
Since I was representing a client, I couldn’t compromise his/her case, but once the die was cast and the judgement known, the gloves came off.
Morissons Apology –
https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2018/10/25/acknowledgement-and-apology-to-ritual-abuse-victims-from-australian-prime-minister/
Also I found this today or should I say it found me.
Elisa a survivor of MKULTRA mind control—an amazing explanation of what it is like living life after Mind Conrtrol.
Now it is time for our politicians to address all that has been hidden in Australia. The Great Australian Silence. A good place to start–the factual research of Steve McMurray MKULTRA in Australia.
His Brain Map which takes us back to the Tavistock Agenda Timeline 2012. Cathi Morgan Mind Manipulation–