Ramola D | Report | Nov 4, 2020
In the first of a series of News Panels exposing rampant crime, corruption, and fraud in the UK Family Courts and Bankruptcy Courts, several UK mothers of varying socio-economic strata came together recently to discuss the bankruptcies, destitution, loss of custody, and theft of children they have suffered at the hands of the UK Family Courts and Bankruptcy Courts.
What emerges from this discussion is that the criminal actions of highly-placed barristers, solicitors, judges, accountants and financiers appear to be interlinked (via secret-society handshakes and brownpaper-envelope-bribes) and appear to be maliciously focused on targeting women in a vulnerable life-situation: wives and mothers recently divorced or bereaved, depriving them wholesale of all assets, estates, and hard-earned wealth, while shamelessly running abduction schemes in broad daylight to steal, traumatize, often disappear or dubiously farm-out-to-foster-care, force-adopt, and sex-traffick their children.
This situation points to systemic and entrenched corruption, driven by lucrative rewards for participants—not dissimilar to blatant highway robbery or piracy on the high seas, where each thuggish minion gets a share of the bounty.
The only difference today is these are white-collar professionals with a salary, prestigious title, and deceptive badge of authority. Social workers, law enforcement, and psychologists partake in these management-driven “Child Protective Services” crimes, as many police and social worker whistleblowers have revealed, including Carol Woods, Jon Wedger, Melanie Shaw, and others.
Social Workers, Psychologists, Police Become Accomplices to Crime
The tragedy also is that possibly upright and well-meaning social workers, policemen, psychologists associated with the Family Courts then get caught up in the tide of what can only be called outright crime, and end up as accomplices to crime, assisting this now-derelict and cynical system in removing children from good, caring homes and callously ripping babies from the arms of loving, caring mothers.
British mothers in fact are being targeted on a large scale for victimization, often subjected to extreme trauma in removal of their children, refusal of custody, and worse: actual physical assault at the hands of police, wrongful psychological profiling and misdiagnosing by court psychologists for purposes of criminalizing and stigmatizing good mothers and stealing their children.
“It seems to be the majority of women not the minority. Mothers are losing their children in some cases and then losing everything they’ve worked for all their lives with their partners,” says Michelle Young, a mother with a particularly prominent case, who reports the loss of her estates and wealth despite having sunk millions into solicitor-fees, who started a foundation to help destitute women, and is now an impassioned advocate for mothers and helping to publicize the truth of these crimes.
Children too, all over the United Kingdom are being traumatized. “It’s absolutely devastating the effect it has on the children,” says Michelle Young, “it’s absolutely the whole court system. The family court system is not fit for purpose. They are ignoring the law and they are ignoring the evidence.”
SECRET FAMILY COURTS AND INSOLVENCY COURTS SO DYSFUNCTIONAL THEY NEED TO BE ABOLISHED
The failures of the court system, in particular the secret family courts and the insolvency courts are so extreme at this point that what really needs to be done is to abolish them completely, suggests Michelle, who reports hers was “the biggest case in British divorce history” and involved the loss of millions of pounds in solicitor fees, being forced into bankruptcy, and the loss of her estates succeeding her divorce from billionaire Scot Young, whose connections with Russian oligarchs who also met tragic ends have been reported following his tragic death in suspicious circumstances. The story was covered in British mainstream media, including in The Tatler: Did Scot Young and his high-rolling friends really die by their own hands?
Intelligence UK News notes that the bankruptcy Michelle was forced into was engineered and the assets disappeared, all by sleight of hand of high-rolling insolvency lawyers. “Ms Young was awarded a mere £26.6 million out of the vast estate, plus half of the value of the assets of Mr Young’s estate recovered by the bankruptcy trustees. The problem is, none of those assets were ever recovered, they appeared to “disappear” without a trace. Ms Young was very soon stripped of her judgment debt, a case of giving with one hand and taking back with another.” Michelle Young / Scot Young grand corruption and insolvency fraud
Even more terrifying is the systemic stealing of children from mothers and divorced wives.
The either-complicit or indoctrinated social workers who take children from good homes on the flimsy basis of a report from a vengeful ex – and then disappear them, whether into foster homes or sex-trafficking (as many police whistleblowers have alerted lately) – will apparently say anything to stop mothers from being able to get their children back.
Maria, a mother whose 2 year old boy and 10 year old girl were snatched from their beds when in the safe house of their grandmother by police and social workers (videos on Facebook) was told she was never getting her children back because “of the chance of her getting into a new abusive relationship with a man in her future,” a baseless, absurd projection which no social worker or government agency should be permitted to make, given the enormous loss of child and family it then permits.
Worse, this loving mother, whose troubles started after her ex-husband began calling CPS and reporting lies. was glibly characterized by venal social workers as a violent criminal, beaten in jail by police to the extent that her ribs were broken, a new baby removed at birth, and ambushed by a posse of police in 10 squad cars on the occasion her kidnapped daughter ran out of school back to her home and mother close-by.
“I ended a ten year relationship with a quite wealthy man and because he wasn’t getting on with my elder children he instantly started phoning up social services and making false allegations and financially destituted myself and my children–and it went from there really. My children were illegally kidnapped from my mother’s house—We were in a safe place, I’d taken my children out of that environment to put them in a safe place and they came and they took my children illegally. And from there really just constant lies, making up allegations–I was accused of being a drug user, an alcoholic. I’ve done hair strand tests that came back negative and yet it still states in all my children’s documents I’m an alcoholic and a drug user.”
“It’s so traumatizing. I, literally, I had a mental breakdown as soon as they took my children. I lost everything– I lost my home, I lost my job, I was left on the street sleeping on a park bench. I went to every single service possible to ask for help, nobody would help me. Social services were actually telling people that I had hit my son over the head with a hammer, that I had been arrested, did crimes –completely made up stories.
I didn’t even have a criminal record at the time. My first criminal record: seven weeks after they took my children, I hadn’t seen my children for seven weeks and I was completely distraught, crying continuously—my children were ten and two; my two and a half year old is severely autistic, my little girl was ten years old and they took them out of their beds.
My brother video-recorded it and it is on Facebook for people to see my baby being taken out of his bed. She then went into the court on the Monday morning and she told the judge that they came round to check on the children and that I was violent towards the social worker in front of the children. The children were in bed, and you can see them on the video recording going up to the bedroom taking them out of bed, sitting down, having a conversation with my mum.
She told my mum my children would be returned in 72 hours and they refused to allow me any contact for seven weeks, and my solicitor was phoning and I finally went to Contact and I turned up 10 minutes late because I stood outside crying and they told me I couldn’t see my children if I was crying so I sorted myself out and I went inside. I was sat there 45 minutes and then she came out and told me I couldn’t see my children– it was Mother’s Day. She handed me a Mother’s Day card and I snatched it out of her hand, I angrily snatched the card out the hand and I went to jump off the motorway bridge. I left the building and I went to jump off the motorway bridge. And I was arrested that night and taken to the police station, to the psychiatric hospital, they tried to have me sectioned but let me go. And then two days later it was my little boy’s third birthday and I was sat in Contact for an hour and two police officers walked in and they arrested me violently, dragged me out the building. I was locked in the cell for my baby’s third birthday–the social services building, Telford Social Services, Healthcare & Social Services.
I was having the police arrest me every time I left my house for obstructing police. They would phone me up and convince me they just wanted to check how I was because obviously I was distraught and traumatized and they would make me go and meet them somewhere and I’ll go meet them and they’d arrest me, beat me up, because I’m trying to defend all the lies that they’re throwing at me constantly.
I’d been a mum 17 years–at the time I had a 17 year old who was training to be a police officer, I had a 15 year old that was on the gifted and talented register, he could have passed the GCSCs when he was eight. All of my children are very intelligent, very forward, they all went to school, they never had a bad word said about me as a parent until I ended this relationship and he started phoning up social services, and from there I realized that the police was in on it, the police were helping, the police were making up allegations and it was awful, it was a year of complete and utter hell. I had a mental breakdown eventually and I tried to take my life and I ended up in a psychiatric hospital for two months.”
For the whole of Maria’s riveting and tragic testimonial, please watch the video, linked below.
Flagrant Deception and Clear Subjugation of Women in UK as Beefy Police (Mis)characterize Women as Violent Aggressors in Order to Steal Their Children
In addition to concocting stories and false-allegations, UK police and social workers it seems frequently characterize mothers as violent–Maria’s experience like many others indicates that social workers will lie freely–and engage in serious intimidation which includes violence against them. Maria reports that her ribs were broken by police, that she was beaten by police, that she was accused of aggression and obstruction by police when she simply spoke up and used her voice. How is a petite woman with a voice (whose children are being kidnapped and who must necessarily speak) considered violent and aggressive by a group of brawny policemen and women equipped with tasers, handcuffs, and pistols who engage in brutal acts of violence against women–except as a matter of flagrant deception?
Parental Responsibility and Residency Rights Handed to Abusive Ex-Husbands & Partners
Conversely, many mothers report that their children are handed right back to the abuser in the family. Women often lose custody, losing both residency-rights for their children and “parental responsibility” although they are proven to be good and responsible mothers. Why are children being handed back to abusers? Libby, an academic whose case is particularly shocking reveals that her ex-wife was given full custody and parental responsibility for her three year old (now seven) even though she herself was the breadwinner and biological mother.
“I had my daughter on my own– by law, literally by law she cannot have parental rights and they didn’t care at all they just gave her parental responsibility, and the reason was that she lived with us for a year so my daughter knows who she is and I appealed this and I brought also a bunch of other proofs of domestic abuse, lots of police reports – and then my daughter sustained a burn, quite a serious burn that was reported to social services. My ex admitted that it happened because she wasn’t watching my daughter and you know the story changes but she sustained this burn, she also had lots of bruises and she was constantly getting injured – so social services wrote this down and I was told at the appeals hearing that an abusive person or abuse is not a reason that someone shouldn’t get parental responsibility.”
Libby reports that since she has worked with caring people as a child protection officer in South Africa she had believed UK social workers would offer support and justice, yet was shocked that the CAFCASS workers whom she initially trusted neither listened to the child nor chose to act in her best interests, along with lawyers and judges, separating her instead from her mother.
“My daughter has been traumatized, she is terrified now—she used to be the brightest light, now she’s scared to even talk– they wanted to break our bond, they did everything imaginable to do that. And my daughter was just so young –we started court when she was three and a half years old and she just turned seven.”
Libby reports that she took loans to pay the legal fees for barristers, continually appealed earlier court decisions, yet was compelled to do a psychological evaluation (with a psychologist Hessell Willemson who featured in other ladies’ cases as well on the panel, and who has been reported as not being fit for purpose) which accused her of a “borderline personality disorder” and restricted her visits with her child to two hours every other week, which she is once more appealing–while her ex aggressively “drove her nanny off the road, kidnapped the child” and absconded to Greece, her native country, yet has been permitted to keep the child–who seems to have been the victim here of targeted trauma.
Racketeering in Litigation Loan Funding by Solicitors and Loan Companies
Michelle Young makes the remark that “What will happen is they will run Libby until she’s got no money left,” a prediction agreed to by the other women on the panel. Rosie Heys who said she “ended up with a legal bill of half a million pounds that amounted to over a third of the marital assets” points out that solicitors and loan firms never stop milking their clients for funds.
“The minute you employ a solicitor and start going through the court process your money just disappears as if by magic and it doesn’t seem to have any relationship to what work is actually done, it seems to be far more related to what they think they can get. That’s where I begin to talk now about something Shelley and I have in common which is these litigation loans which became legal only in 2011. And these are partnerships between solicitors’ firms and lending companies, high interest lending companies charging up to 29% interest and the solicitors sell these loans.
In my case I went for advice on divorce and the solicitor there I used the same solicitors as Prince Charles used in his divorce from Princess Diana, a firm called Paine Hicks Beach, the first thing that the senior partner told me about was that I should get one of these litigation loans and they didn’t stop until I’d signed on the dotted line. They wheeled me around the corner to their colleagues at another law firm who actually–I was standing up when I signed the documents and that started the whole ball rolling not for any equitable settlement but for the solicitors to walk off with half a million pounds and that’s something–this monetary problem this issue of the finances taints everything…
At my second hearing as a litigant in person…my ex was seeking possession proceedings to get me and the children made homeless and as a litigant in person I managed to get the house transferred into my sole name and walked away from court thinking why did the solicitors never do that why did the barrister, why did no one ever do that in all of these proceedings, why has it taken me going in on my own to achieve that and I think the answer is they had no interest in the house being in my name because if it was in my name all of the loan was secured against the house and they were risking their own chance to get the money.
It’s all about racketeering. When Michelle says it’s a business model I completely agree with her. The first questions they ask you seem very very reasonable–how much money is there, what is there, what’s the equity that you have and then they’ll spend up to that amount–there’s absolutely no justification for that level of legal fees and throughout I kept saying, you know, the spending has to stop, this has to stop this is ridiculous, it starts off with an idea it’ll cost you fifty thousand, within a few months they spend a hundred thousand, then they ask for another on top of which the valuations of the property against which all this lending was secured were exaggerated.
So I put in subject access requests to try and work out what had gone on and that’s when I found out that the solicitors had been corresponding with the loan companies who they’re in partnership with, and had given false and exaggerated valuations for my property– so they had exaggerated the house by something in the region I’m trying to remember off the top of my head but I think it was about thirty thousand pounds, forty thousand pounds—they exaggerated the value of the house by.”
Not merely are women’s savings fully exploited, as Rosie points out, during a time of desperate stress in a woman’s life, the family home is also put at risk by these practices of mortgage fraud which put money directly into solicitors’ pockets. Further, solicitors moonlight as judges in the family courts, as in Rosie’s case where a senior partner at Paine Hicks Beach also sashayed as Judge, a situation of clear judicial fraud which permits exploitative recycling of faulty judgments and fresh funds back to the less-than-adequate solicitors who don’t win cases for their clients. Judges are not regulated independently, notes Michelle, and that’s a big problem. Nor, notes Libby, are social workers and CAFCASS workers–the Law Society, notes Michelle Young, seems to be a Lawless Society and the SRA (Solicitors’ Regulation Authority) does nothing; the whole system is rigged to empower solicitors, judges, social workers, and police to engage in white-collar brigandry at the expense of divorcing wives and traumatized mothers. Not to mention causing infinite trauma for those who suffer most as home, family, and mother are ripped from them: the children.
Reporting a similar case of coerced litigation loan funding (which she reports the family did not need), Shelley also reports being targeted for slander, stalking, and stigmatizing via false labels from the same psychologist Libby has mentioned, Hessel Williamson, while her ex obtained Occupancy of her home (major share of which had actually been awarded by the court to her in equity), and then also obtained Residency rights for her children. Losing custody of her children, she reports not being able to communicate with them and not having seen them for a year.
“I was saying to my solicitors, no no no, I don’t think we need the litigation funding because we have funds. You know he took a golden handshake from a company he had just recently left before the divorce proceedings and that money just went up in thin air–so the house is actually now for sale and the equity from that house would be, the majority of it is is mine, however he’s managed to get an Occupancy order and live in the house that I was awarded, with my children. And from the Occupancy order he then got residency. Now in between all of that, there’s been slander, there’s been stalking, there’s been emotional abuse, there’s been financial abuse–so much so that he’s left me homeless, desolate without my children.
So God only knows how my children have coped – you know if I’m going through grief you know my priority is my children – I don’t know how they’re coping because I’m not able to find that out. He’s stopping all contact with my children, I’ve not seen them for a year – my two boys are of adult age and he coercively controls them through money, he’s told them to block me so I’ve not hardly spoken to them on a personal level. I speak to them once every other week. I don’t see them because they’re too scared of their father.
And my 14 year old, God knows how she’s doing, you know I speak to her on the phone, however he stalks and monitors all the phone calls–he’s obviously told a different narrative to the school as well. The school are not exactly supporting my situation, this is the new school that I found for for her because my ex-husband took my children out of private schooling because he was keeping up the pretense of having no funds.
All of it went to court, all my evidence on the stalking, the bugging, everything else wasn’t even accounted for– all my disclosures; they didn’t even see all my witnesses, they didn’t even hear them even though they turned up at court. The judge just saw his witnesses and mine were left just waiting around, she wouldn’t see them. So I’ve had involvement of CAFCASS social services, NYAS (National Youth Advocacy Services) and psychologists, the whole corrupt court system is a joke, there is no justice and actually you’re paying for a service …you know they’re not really there to support the family in fact if you can avoid social services, avoid at all costs, do not get involved with social services.”
Rosie Heys points out that so much hinged on the fraudulent diagnoses of Dr. Hessel Willemson, who had been foisted on Shelley and the other women as a matter of prescription not choice by the court; in Shelley’s case he appeared to have cut-and-pasted text on a diagnosis used in another patient’s case, one which had the serious repercussions of greatly limiting her time spent with the children, to their own detriment, particularly since they all wanted to live with her.
“The harm to the children as a result is just beyond imagination,” says Rosie Heys.
Audrey’s story of being forced to see a court-appointed psychologist, the same infamous Dutch doctor, Hessel Willemsen, who removed custody for her children from her, handing it over to her ex, a man found provably abusive to the children, has the same overtones of misogynistic denial of the mother’s rights.
I was married to an airline captain. He remortgaged the family home, took ninety thousand pounds out, splashed it on himself and his little partner of foreign origin ie Asia –and then he continued to have a lavish expensive lifestyle. We went into financial hearing, he was ordered then to pay me Spousal – he refused to sell the house so it was back in court, then eventually he accepted an offer for the property.
In the meantime he had abused the children. Being in Aviation I’d phoned the police from Florida to come to the children’s rescue and of course because he’s got four stripes on his shoulders, you know he played the sweet and innocent person that nothing has happened to the children. That was then dismissed and the police obviously left the home.
Then we had the psychologist ordered whilst it’s a Dutch psychologist who practices medicine in the same village as his father, and I contested that, I said absolutely no chance – that was denied. And then I got to final hearing and him and the guardian who was ordered through court sat there laughing and giggling and making jokes whilst I was giving evidence you know, proper intimidating – and then we continued. The household, the children were taken off me. I was allowed to have the children two hours every three weeks until December…Bear in mind I’m the mom that does everything with the children, you know the school uniforms, yeah everything really realistically with the children I’ve done.
He got ordered that he could have the kids through this Dutch psychologist Hassell Willemson–and the father has never really had an interest in the children. The kids then ended up being forced into residence with their father with me having two hours contact for six months with them, with like two hours every three weeks with the children. The children met the judge and said, We don’t want to live with him. My children met the guardian, said, We don’t want to live with him. My oldest was bruised, yanked over bed and bruised, I’ve got doctors’ records, police records.
I had another issue where the child–actually I was in Uzbekistan and the children–the child ran away from home– he was nine years old. In the middle of the night, running away because his father and grandfather threw him to the floor and bruised him again. But now he’s a good father to take care of his kid. The judge dismissed him in Chelmsford, dismissed him on discipline of reasonable grounds and my question goes: since when is bruising and injuring a child reasonable grounds for discipline?
So the children of now like the age of 14 have been forced to live with their father. My oldest now sits in the bedroom day in and day out, doesn’t even eat dinner at the family table, sits in his bedroom. They don’t even communicate, what kind of life is that for a child? So subsequently my ex has you know the spousal payments. I was in court on Monday and he claims that he has no money to pay me my spousal–but then he has 25,000 pounds to spend on legal costs.”
Systemic Injustice, Old Boys’ Clubs, Social Circles, & Stealing Children: Is There Remedy?
“What we all have in common,” notes Shelley, “is obviously most of us no longer have custody of our children, number two we’ve all been asset stripped, number three is financially abused, and number four we’ve been left desolate and homeless.” All through the process as well, the women have been traumatized and left unsupported.
“That’s the main reason, ” says Michelle, “because it’s not just these ladies I’ve brought on the call today, and believe you me this is systemic, as I said we’re working on the frauds across the country and this is the majority– I’m sorry to say, the majority of the judges are unlawfully practicing in those courts and with everything they are doing, the majority of them need removing. I think we should go back, stop the usury of all these law firms and go back to common law which is not usury, which is the people’s law.”
Problems abound it appears, that are glossed over and entrenched: the psychologists foisted on women through courts and solicitors are not qualified, many of them, and seem to have connections with the solicitors and ex-husbands, always favoring the latter. Solicitors and financiers party together, along with the judges who play solicitor and family court judge both, sometimes, in the same social circles, which cements the racketeering bonds they forge together, it appears.
Fraternities, secret societies, old boys’ clubs, Freemason oaths and networked power syndicates have a lot to do with it, Bibi Bacchus, UCC code expert explains in Report #203, when some of the group reconvened to discuss solutions and remedies, after News Panels 2, 3, and 4 examining networked crime and the parts played by police, bankers, and solicitors were aired. “Women need to organize, to learn the law, to get back the Birth Certificates for their children, and to support other women in court.”
Stealing children for adoptions is big business, apparently. Forced adoptions bring 30,000 pounds for each child to Social Services, which gives them the twisted incentive to steal children from good homes, as Maria’s case demonstrates. The spectre of child trafficking into prostitution, of ritual abuse and gory, murderous use for Satanic practice is today a macabre reality that no-one can deny, given the amount of whistleblowing on this subject and continuous surfacing of information we have seen in recent times. Women need to rise up together to stop these crimes, suggests Bibi. When you know the law in certainty–UCC law or contract law, under Maritime or Admiralty Law–and take action to protect yourself and your family based on it, no-one can touch you.
Is it possible for all these disenfranchised women to retrieve their children, their assets, their homes? Yes, says Bibi Bacchus.
Listen in to Report # 203, News Panel 5 for more:
News Panel 2
News Panel 3
News Panel 4