ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
PRINCIPAL REGISTRY OF THE FAMILY DIVISION
His Honour Judge Cryan
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
|Re A (A Child)|
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice McFarlane:
a) Final Submissions, dated 6th August 2011;
b) Addendum Skeleton Argument (prepared by Mrs JH as his McKenzie Friend);
c) A medical report on Mr E's health from Dr Simon Crawley;
d) A letter from A addressed 'To The Judge' and dated 24th June;
e) A psychiatric report by Dr Jan Falkowski, dated 24th February 2011.
Application for permission to appeal fact-finding judgment
a. although Mr E is a bully and a selfishly demanding partner, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that his sexual conduct towards Miss MM amounted to rape;
b. Mr E is a violent, controlling bully and no doubt used violence from time to time, but there is no police or medical evidence which is directly supportive of the level and nature of the physical violence alleged against him by Miss MM;
c. The evidence is not sufficiently compelling to make a finding that Mr E forced Miss MM to have sex with other men;
d. Mr E harassed Miss MM in a mass of different ways but it is not clear whether she left the family home out of fear resulting from any particular danger or simply based on the cumulative effect of this highly intolerable conduct;
e. Allegations made by Mr E against Miss MM regarding telephone accounts and false benefit claims were not proved
f. Allegations that A was present whilst her mother engaged in inappropriate communications with men over the internet could not be believed.
Permission to appeal: interim care order
(2) No Judgment or Order to assess if the process is correct;
(3) Excessive use of force with police presence at my home on Tuesday 24 May 2011….
(6) No listing of a prior directions hearing.
a) the basis of the fact-finding conclusions to which he had come;
b) the potential for current emotional harm arising both from:
i) the father's reaction to the fact finding judgment;
ii) the father's withdrawal from a position of co-operation with the local authority, and;
iii) the impact from the process of assessment that was then being set in train.
There is no potential, therefore, in my view to criticise the Judge's finding that the interim threshold criteria were proved.