Posts tagged ‘June Venters’
This is the approved Judgement of Mrs Justice Pauffley in the case of Ricky Dearman
This is a summary of Mrs Justice Pauffley’s findings –
Neither child has been sexually abused by any of the following – Ricky Dearman, teachers at Christchurch Primary School Hampstead, the parents of students at that school, the priest at the adjacent church, teachers at any of the Hampstead or Highgate schools, members of the Metropolitan Police, social workers employed by the London Borough of Camden, officers of Cafcass or anyone else mentioned by Ms Draper or Mr Christie.
The children’s half brother, his father and stepmother – Will and Sarah Draper – are likewise exonerated of any illicit or abusive acts involving the children.
There was no satanic or other cult at which babies were murdered and children were sexually abused.
All of the material promulgated by Ms Draper now published on the internet is nothing other than utter nonsense.
The children’s false stories came about as the result of relentless emotional and psychological pressure as well as significant physical abuse. Torture is the most accurate way to describe what was done by Mr Christie in collaboration with Ms
Both children were assaulted by Mr Christie by being hit with a metal spoon on multiple occasions over their head and legs, by being pushed into walls, punched, pinched and kicked. Water was poured over them as they knelt semi-clothed.
The long term emotional and psychological harm of what was done to the children is incalculable. The impact of the internet campaign is likely to have the most devastating consequences for P and Q.
After Winning her award in 2009 for Legal Business Woman of the Year, June Venters QC now has the pleasure of being part of the Judging panel this year.
Venters wish all who are nominated the best of luck and look forward to seeing you at the awards on 9th October
I am currently researching how effectively the courts are properly investigating allegations of domestic violence when considering applications for contact having had a recent experience where a court’s failure to do so caused a mother and her children three years of emotional turmoil as she struggled to convince the professionals involved that she was not implacably hostile to contact but had genuine and legitimate child protection concerns. She was only vindicated when some three years later the Fact Finding Hearing was listed and determined. I am reminded of what Dame Butler Sloss said in Re L  2FLR 334 at 341-2
‘If the allegations might have an effect on the outcome, they must be adjudicated upon and found proved or not proved. It will be necessary to scrutinise such allegations which may not always be true or may be grossly exaggerated…In cases of proved domestic abuse, as in cases of other proved harm or risk of harm to the child the court has the task of weighing in the balance the seriousness of the domestic violence, the risks involved, the impact on the child against the positive factors (if any) of contact between the parent found to have been violent and the child. In this context, the ability of the offending parent to recognise his past conduct, be aware of the need to change and make genuine efforts to do so will be likely to be an important consideration.’
I am in contact with Dr Danya Glaser consultant psychiatrist who was instructed by the Official Solicitor at that time to prepare a joint report with Dr J.C. Sturge, to advise on the four appeals with a view to considering the situation further.
If anyone has any similar experiences where the courts are either not listing cases for fact finding hearings in such circumstances or who are accepting “watered down” admissions so as to change significantly the nature of the allegations made thus making them less serious I should be grateful if you would send me details.
June Venters QC