I LIKE THE SOUND OF THIS MAN

A maverick mayor elected after promising to slash council spending, clear the streets of yobs and ditch politically correct services is the torch-bearer for how towns should be run.
 
On his first morning as Mayor of Doncaster in South Yorkshire, Peter Davies cut his salary from £73,000 to £30,000 then closed the council’s newspaper for "peddling politics on the rates".

Now three weeks into his job, Mr Davies is pressing ahead with plans he hopes will see the number of town councillors cut from 63 to just 21, saving taxpayers £800,000.
Mr Davies said: "If 100 senators can run the United States of America, I can’t see how 63 councillors are needed to run Doncaster".
 
He has withdrawn Doncaster from the Local Government Association and the Local Government Information Unit, saving another £200,000. Mr Davies said, "They are just talking shops."

"Doncaster is in for some serious un-twinning. We are twinned with probably nine other cities around the world and they are just for people to fly off and have a binge at the council’s expense".
 
The mayor’s chauffeur-driven car has also been axed by Mr Davies and the driver given another job. Mr Davies, born and bred in Doncaster, swept to power in the May election with 24,244 votes as a candidate for the English Democrats, a party that wants tight immigration curbs, an English Parliament and a law forcing every public building to fly the flag of St. George.
 
He has promised to end council funding for Doncaster’s International Women’s Day, Black History Month and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month.
He said, "Politicians have got completely out of touch with what people want".

"We need to cut costs. I want to pass on some savings I make in reduced taxes and use the rest for things we really need, like improved children’s services".

Mr Davies has received messages from well wishers across the country and abroad as news of his no-nonsense approach spreads.
 
Now it’s your chance to spread this most sensible way to run a town council.

Good Man.

Why adoption and fostering goes wrong

 “One leading adoption charity estimates that a third of adoptions break down these days”.

A child doesn't really remember a lot about crisis due to the trauma of being taken away from its birth parents but the child's sub consciousness never forgets and there is always that longing for the mother’s love that can never be satisfied by adoption or fostering. A child should be kept in the family as close to the birth parents as much as possible.

If this is not done a child subconsciously hankers for the love he/she was deprived of when it first left the womb and maybe before that. 

This subconscious yen not being fulfilled along with memories that come back as the child grows up causes frustration/ anger/ resentment and the child becomes bitter and unmanageable.

That is why kinship care should be the very first point of care when children are deprived of their parents.

The care system only caters for the physical child not the emotional or spiritual child because of social services cost policy. Cut backs now will cost the public purse a whole lot more in the future when the children that go through the care system turn out to be gang members.

There is a huge rise of gangs reported in the media lately it would be interesting too research into how many of the gang members were brought up outside their birth family.

Speaker required in Birmingham.

A speaker on the problems that grandparents have on contact with their grandchildren is required at a Pensioners meeting in Birmingham.

Can anyone oblige to cover this please?

MP aims to remove legal hurdles for ‘kinship carers’

We are getting there but need to keep up the pressure.

Staffordshire Social Services

June 26, 2011

Filed under: Secret family courts — nojusticeforparents @ 9:39 pm 

MP aims to remove legal hurdles for ‘kinship carers’ It should be easier for grandparents and siblings to take on parental responsibilities if a parent is unable to look after their child, Labour’s Kerry McCarthy has argued. Under legislation proposed by Ms McCarthy on 7 June 2011, a “kinship carer” would be able to assume responsibility for a child without a lengthy and expensive legal process if the child’s parents agree. She said up to 300,000 children in the UK were being raised by relatives or friends of a parent who could not look after their child. Introducing her Kinship Carers (Parental Responsibility Agreement) Bill she told MPs: “Often these children have experienced tragedy or trauma due to the death or imprisonment of a parent or due to a parent’s alcohol or drug misuse or mental health problems. “Sometimes their parent has simply walked out on them.” She said the carers stepped in when there was a crisis “without pausing to think about practical matters such as what the legal arrangement would be or what sort of support they might need”. The bill was given an unopposed first reading but stands little chance of becoming law without government support.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_commons/newsid_9506000/9506080.stm

MPs take evidence on Munro Review of Child Protection

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/education-committee/news/munro-review/

29 June 2011

The Education Committee explores the recommendations of Professor Eileen Munro’s recently published review of child protection in England on Wednesday 29 June 2011.

·                                 Parliament TV: The Munro Review of Child Protection

·                                 Education Committee

Wednesday 29 June 2011, Wilson Room, Portcullis House

Witnesses

 At 9.45am

·                                 Professor Eileen Munro, Professor of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science

Background

The session will explore the recommendations of Professor Munro’s recently published review of child protection in England. It will consider how the review relates to trends in previous policy and legislation and its implications in terms of early intervention and the role and status of social workers.

·                                 Munro Review of Child Protection website (external site)

I've just been given one of these phones and it is so easy to use.

Loneliness for older people is a big concern and a phone that they can use would be a terrific way for them to keep in touch. 
We would recommend this phone for older people and anyone with impaired faculties as it has big buttons and easy read screen.

Doro PhoneEasy 341 GSM Mobile Phone

Was: £79.00 Now: £69.99 inc. VAT

More info

The Doro PhoneEasy 341 gsm mobile phone makes dialling and messaging simple, with its big buttons and enlarged characters which display on a high contrast display. It also has a vibrating ringer and one-touch emergency dialling for added security.

Ministers urged to shake up care for elderly

http://www.scotsman.com/news/Ministers-urged-to-shake-up.6792877.jp

 Published Date: 29 June 2011

By Eddie Barnes

Political Editor

A MAJOR Scottish Government commissioned report will today call for the break-up of the bureaucratic empires governing health and social care, having concluded that Scotland's public services are "patchwork", "outdated" and "producer-led".

A final draft of the report by the Christie Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services, obtained by The Scotsman, says patients and especially elderly people should no longer be shunted between hospital and councils as they seek medical and social support. 

It says "substantial savings" – which could run into hundreds of millions of pounds – can be expected if health and social care are integrated, so that patients only have one place to go to receive help.

The conclusion is one of several recommendations from the commission, led by former STUC general secretary Campbell Christie, which publishes its full findings today, following a nationwide nine-month examination of the country's public landscape.

The report is expected to play a key role in government decisions over coming weeks, as ministers prepare to handle reductions in their available budgets at the same time as multi-billion-pound increases in the costs of delivering health, social care and education.

In the 113-page report, the commission says the public sector is "in urgent need of sustained reform" to meet what it describes as an "unprecedented challenge", criticising what it describes as a "fragmented, complex and opaque" system which actively hampers the ability of public servants to work together.

In a damning assessment of the post-devolution years, it concludes that despite public spending having rocketed since the onset of devolution, politicians have "failed" to turn around deep-rooted inequalities which, it says, still scar Scotland and have got worse in many cases.

It says the main reason is because far too much money is spent on trying to alleviate social problems rather than keeping an eye on the big picture and tackling them at source – a failure which, it says, is no longer sustainable in the face of tightened budgets. "A radical change in the design and delivery of public services is necessary to tackle the deep-rooted social problems that persist in communities across the country. A cycle of deprivation and low aspiration has been allowed to persist because preventative measures have not been prioritised," the report concludes.

The commission calls for a complete culture change in the public sector to focus on prevention, and says all public bodies should focus on improving "outcomes" for patients, pupils and the public. This requires much more collaboration across different public-sector bodies which, at present, are too focused on their own work to see the bigger picture, it adds.

It concludes: "We call on the Scottish Government and local authorities together with all their partners and stake holders to initiate these reforms. The goal must be nothing less than a thorough transformation of our public services. The prize is a sustainable, person-centred system, achieving outcomes for every citizen and every community."

The report stops short from any specific recommendations on costly Scottish Government policies, saying only that contentious issues such as "free" public services should be considered "openly and transparently". Nor does it offer any recommendations on cutting the number of councils or health boards.

• Analysis: Culture of spending is now a distant memory

However, it does place doubts over key SNP plans to create a single police and fire service, saying that "a number of questions remain to be addressed" as to whether it will lead to improved outcomes for the public.

The report also acknowledges that the call for a shift to preventative spending will be "controversial" as it could lead to spending being cut on existing services, such as hospital care. 

Although the report does not offer details on what these may be, suggestions by other reformers include plans to shift cash from "demand-led services", such as A&E units, to community healthcare which may help elderly people stay out of hospital.

However, SNP ministers have pledged to maintain spending on hospital care, in the face of huge public support for the retention of local acute services.

Nonetheless, the call for more integration in health and social care is likely to be backed by ministers today, who have already said they want to see reform rolled out across Scotland. 

The move is currently being piloted in the Highlands where, for example, GPs will soon be able to prescribe home help for an elderly patient in need of support instead of sending them to accident and emergency.

However, unions are still sceptical about the measures, while local government chiefs have already mounted their full-scale opposition, claiming that reorganisation costs could amount to between £300m and £500m.

Nonetheless, other experts argue that around a half of the annual £1.5bn cost of sending elderly people to A&E could potentially be saved if there was better treatment and care for them at home.

The Christie Commission was appointed by First Minister Alex Salmond last November to see how the public sector could better improve outcomes across Scotland. It comes after another review, led by former Scottish Enterprise chief Crawford Beveridge, also called for major reforms to public policy in the face of the slowdown in public spending and rising costs.

The Christie Commission took evidence from across the public sphere in Scotland, and concluded that there are "serious shortcomings" in the way the public sector is designed. Different bodies "work routinely to different objectives" and frequently duplicate each other's work.

Government-led action "often results in top-down, producer and institution-focused approaches where the interests of organisations and professional groups come before those of the public", the report says. Instead, there needs to be more work done to involve people in the way services are run.

The system also fails to empower people to do things for themselves, which fosters a dependency culture, it says. Ministers should ensure a fundamental rethink of the way the public sector works with voluntary and private providers, it adds.

It also warns that because politicians are constantly seeking election, there is rarely a focus on long-term issues. 

To compel public bodies to work together, the commission recommends that ministers pass new legislation which forces them to concentrate on improving outcomes for people, not targets or on spending money. 

Other specific ideas include beefing up Audit Scotland to crack down on profligacy; piloting a "single public authority" which looks after everything in a given area; and having an annual report costing the long-term financial problems Scotland faces.

John Downie, of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations, said: "The focus on preventative spending is right and that is what the Scottish Government needs to focus on. Scotland has been talking about this for some time now, but we now need to do something about it."

It should be easier for grandparents and siblings to take on parental responsibilities if a parent is unable to look after their child, Labour's Kerry McCarthy has argued.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_commons/newsid_9506000/9506080.stm

Under legislation proposed by Ms McCarthy on 7 June 2011, a "kinship carer" would be able to assume responsibility for a child without a lengthy and expensive legal process if the child's parents agree.

She said up to 300,000 children in the UK were being raised by relatives or friends of a parent who could not look after their child.

Introducing her Kinship Carers (Parental Responsibility Agreement) Bill she told MPs: "Often these children have experienced tragedy or trauma due to the death or imprisonment of a parent or due to a parent's alcohol or drug misuse or mental health problems.

"Sometimes their parent has simply walked out on them."

She said the carers stepped in when there was a crisis "without pausing to think about practical matters such as what the legal arrangement would be or what sort of support they might need".

The bill was given an unopposed first reading but stands little chance of becoming law without government support.

Was David Cameron wrong to attack 'runaway dads'?

Fathers' rights campaigner Matt O'Connor thinks the government is waging a war on fathers; Tory MP Bill Cash defends his party's stance. Emine Saner hosts

• • Share123
  •  reddit this
• Comments (132)

• 
• • Emine Saner
  • guardian.co.uk, Friday 24 June 2011 21.00 BST
  • Article history

Conservative MP Bill Cash and fathers' rights campaigner Matt O'Connor discuss the goverment's record on families. Photograph: Graeme Robertson

Earlier this week David Cameron criticised "runaway dads", saying they should be "stigmatised" in the same way as drink-drivers. Emine Saner brings together the founder of Fathers 4 Justice Matt O'Connor (pictured far right) and Tory MP Bill Cash – fathers of three each – to discuss the government's record on families.

Matt O'Connor: Last year, the Conservative party made a series of explicit commitments with regard to family law reform. Those commitments have been reneged on. That's bad enough, but then for Cameron, who is fighting a war in Afghanistan, is fighting a war in Libya, but at home seems to be waging a war on fathers … I'm outraged. He didn't seek to separate out the fathers who struggle to see their children, who have court orders allowing them to see them but are denied access. He didn't say he recognised that was a problem, he just besmirched fathers and played to the stereotype of the deadbeat dad.

Bill Cash: The responsibility for making sure children are given a fair chance in life is equally dependent on the behaviour of fathers and mothers. Focusing on the fathers is not getting the argument straight, because there are faults on both sides. There is also enormous fault with what used to be the CSA [now the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission]. There is a controversial provision in the bill that wasn't debated– the idea of a contribution towards the cost [of pursuing the other parent: under plans, single parents – mostly mothers – will be asked to pay £100 upfront towards that cost, and the CMEC will take "commission" from future payments]. I'm waiting to see what the House of Lords does with it. But fundamentally, I'll never be able to stand up and support fathers who deliberately shy away from their responsibilities. I believe in families, and I know David Cameron does, too.

MO: He's not showing it. Look at scrapping child benefit [for higher earners]. You've still got a prime minister masquerading under the cover of saying he is pro-marriage and pro-family, while demonising fathers. Doesn't the Conservative party recognise the damage these comments make?

BC: To me, fathers walking away from their children is as bad as it gets.

MO: We never hear you or your party say anything about feckless mothers having children with multiple partners. One in three children in this country are growing up without a father. We've got the highest rate of young offending, we've got a teenage abortion epidemic. We've got boys growing up without a father, who are going to repeat the same behavioural pattern, saying 'dads aren't important'. Cameron's message, demonising fathers, is so profoundly damaging. The Conservatives came in saying you're pro-family, you'll sort out the family courts, and you've done nothing, it's a betrayal.

BC: This is an issue about children. The CMEC actually has a responsibility to get it right, and it's not. That needs reform.

MO: The CMEC can't work because what Cameron is doing, which is what Brown and Blair did, is to give fathers the status of sperm banks and cashpoints. You can abandon your children tomorrow, provided you pay. Child support should be emotional and financial, and until that enlightened approach becomes currency it is never going to change. There is a simple way of recognising the authority of parents and putting fathers back into the family, and that's for this government to give children the right, in law, to see both parents. And grandparents. Explain how it can be in the child's interests to deny access. We have a regime in this country – secret family courts – that is as brutal and barbaric, in my opinion, as any around the world.

BC: It's a moral issue, it's about the most fundamental human rights. I have a problem accepting the idea children should not be allowed to see both parents, except in circumstances where there are safety issues and there is violence within the family. I really do not think it's a fathers-only issue.

MO: What we've been campaigning for is to take the conflict out of the court system. We want a court system that is based on transparency and scrutiny. We have an unelected, unaccountable judiciary operating in complete secrecy. If you put fathers back into the lives of their children, you also make them responsible for the financial and emotional upbringing of their children.

BC: But there are statistics that demonstrate that there are a significant number of fathers who are, as David Cameron put it, going awol.

MO: I do not accept that. A lot of fathers walk away because they know the misery and suffering and living bereavement of not being able to see their children. Why does your leader continue to demonise dads? I have had thousands of emails in the last few days since David Cameron's comments, saying: 'We would love to be responsible for our children, as long as we were given the chance.'

Emine Saner: Bill, do you think Matt is overstating the case of fathers? Only 40% of single parents receive maintenance from the other parent. That suggests there are quite a few feckless fathers …

MO: It suggests there are a lot of children growing up without a father.

ES: It suggests there are a lot of men who aren't paying maintenance.

MO: You have to look at the circumstances. Are those men who have walked away, the stereotype deadbeats? Are they men who have tried to see their children and been denied access? There are a lot of women out there who say a man is superfluous to their requirements, they do not want a father.

BC: Anyone who says that is not looking at the interests of the child.

MO: The state is already the surrogate father. It comes in and provides the benefits. What I want are children to have the love, emotional and financial support from both parents, and until we change the mentality of war on fathers that won't change. Family breakdown is an issue, and we need to find a solution based on reconciliation. David Cameron wasn't attacking single mothers, he was attacking fathers.

BC: I wouldn't call it attacking. You and I agree that there is a recognition that in certain circumstances fathers should rightly be criticised.

MO: So should mothers. Can we stop talking about fathers?

BC: I do agree that this is largely a problem of family law. I think it's a tragedy that we're still having this discussion and it's not a problem that has been resolved.

MO: What we need is justice, to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. I'll tell you how serious I am. I want you to pass a message on to David Cameron. On 10 July, I will be outside his house starting a hunger strike about this issue. That's how strongly I feel.

BC: I'll certainly be under an obligation to make sure that message gets to him.

Cllr Kevin Edwards." Justice 4 Linda Lewis Campaign " Councillor

Councillor Kevin Edwards

SUPPORTING THE" JUSTICE FOR LINDA LEWIS CAMPAIGN. " Link www.cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2009/10/for-few-of-you-who-didnt-know-what.html .Contact Kevin on 07532233571 or email kevinedwards@ntlworld.com

Previous Articles

• ▼  2011 (89)
  • ▼  June (16)
    • "Justice for Linda Lewis." Evidence released under...
    • Three Hundred and Fifty Miles to save The Party.
    • Yes Nick your are right." Something phenominal did...
    • “It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts t...
    • Leadership Challenger Andrew Brons MEP to speak in...
    • I couldn't have put it better myself.
    • The BNP is not the Nick Griffin Party. It never ha...
    • "The Brons Age cometh." Andrew Brons Announces his...
    • Andrew Brons MEP to Stand in BNP Leadership Contes...
    • Griffin insults the intelligence of BNP members vi...
    • " We are a wonderful party. A million people voted...
    • Dictatorial Tyrant Griffin is clearly unfit to lea...
    • VERY NEATH PORT TALBOT-ESQUE. SWEDISH SOCIAL SERVI...
    • East Midlands Leadership Challenge Meeting. Speake...
    • Despite the hypocracy of my fellow Councillors. Pe...
    • Can the BNP be saved from Griffin and his cohorts ...
  • ►  May (19)
  • ►  April (15)
  • ►  March (21)
  • ►  February (14)
  • ►  January (4)

• ►  2010 (201)

• ►  2009 (94)

SATURDAY, 25 JUNE 2011

"Justice for Linda Lewis." Evidence released under Public Interest Law.

Before starting for those of you unfamiliar with Linda's campaign the basic outline of this case can be read by clicking on 

http://justiceforfamilies.freeforums.org/kidnapped-by-the-state-t1884.html#p12371

NO INJUNCTION CAN EVER BE TAKEN OUT TO COVER UP FOR CRIMINAL ACTS.


I am releasing some some of the evidence into the public domain to prove under "Public Interest Law "that Linda's 12 year old daughter was " Illegally Kidnapped " at gunpoint from her hospital bed in America in 1998 by agents from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Social Services to cover up for medical negligence in the United Kingdom.

For those of you who are maybe unfamiliar with the full story of this case please see the links at the bottom of this article.

Below is a list of Common Public Interest Factors that are relevant to Linda's case and the offences that have been committed by Doctors,Politicians,Social Services,Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and Judges to protect their own kind from being accountable to the law. 

By chance a couple of weeks ago entirely by accident Linda and her Mother happened to bump into their daughter/granddaughter in the locality.

Linda's daughter is now aged 25 and by law should have been returned to her mother when she reached the age of 18 even though she should NEVER have been taken in the first place.

The response to seeing her Mother and Grandmother for the first time in many years was like a scene from a "Horror Movie." Linda's daughter was scared , literally terrified.

Such was the impact on Linda's daughter when seeing her mother was that she launched into a fearful tirade,hands gesticulating "Oh No ! Oh no leave me alone."

So what level of "Brain Washing", control and fear have Social Services installed into this innocent victim in the 13 years that they have had her under their control ?

What have they done to the mind of a 12 year old girl who was so desperate to be returned to her family that she smuggled out to her mother the following letter. ( This is only one of many letters that were smuggled out to her family that we have in our possession. )

Click on Thumbnails below to read.

You will see in the second part of the letter that Linda's daughter quite clearly states " Julie Reznicek and the Guardian have told me I'm never coming home."

This is interesting.

At the time of this letter from her daughter Linda had never even been into court in order to present her case and to fight to have her daughter returned to her custody.

The decision to keep the kidnapped child captive and in their care had already been made.

It is blatantly obvious that this case was going to be a state sponsored cover up from day one and still is today.

Nb.Julie Rzezniczek ( correct spelling ) was at the time the Senior Social Worker who along with Alison Paisley another Social Worker went to America armed with an "illegal and false passport" to kidnap Linda's daughter and to return her to the UK.

For your information Julie Rzezniczek is now Head of Children and Young People Services for Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. God help our children.

It is also worth pointing out the extreme and cruel mental pressure that was being inflicted on Linda's daughter at the time.

 What sort of people would stop a child from telling her family that she loves them, was still in pain and was desperate to go home and if she did they would in Linda's daughters own words " STOP CONTACT NEVER SEE YOU AGAIN ?"

The disgusting agents from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Social Services that's who !

No ones child in South Wales can ever be considered safe.

At one point fabricated evidence was submitted into court by North Wales Police stating that Linda was going to enter into a "Suicide Pact " with her daughter. This fabricated evidence was supposedly given to them by a Miss Penny Mellor who was aware of Linda and her daughters fight for Justice.

This false evidence was entered into court without Linda having any knowledge of it's existence.

Is this one example of the way that Linda's daughter has been brainwashed and manipulated by Social Services into turning against her mother,family and friends ?   

This is Penny Mellors response when informed

.

Penny Mellor was indeed correct. In her words " Either way they are all going to get into serious trouble now because they have all lied and fabricated evidence."

Now the cover up starts to get bigger.    

Moving on.

THE PROOF OF AN ILLEGAL KIDNAPPING AND THE ISSUE OF A FALSE PASSPORT.

When someone is to be extradited from an overseas country and brought back to the UK various Government Departments have to be informed and have to be involved by law.

Linda,her daughter and Linda's father legally left the UK on the 21st of January 1998. On arrival all three signed Customs Declaration forms correctly in the name Lewis.

On the 18th of February 1998 Linda's daughter was removed from her hospital bed at gunpoint and returned a few days latter under a false and fraudulent passport ( No 200523701)in the name of Edwards. This emergency passport was requested by Julie Rzezniczek.

UK Law will not allow a passport to be issued to anyone under an assumed or false name. The only name that a passport may be issued to is the name on the birth certificate.

The only name on Linda's daughters birth certificate is Lewis. 

Julie Rzezniczek supplied false and fraudulent to the Foreign Office in order to obtain an emergency passport in a false name.

 So how come Linda received the following replies ?

For Linda's daughter to have been extradited legally and correctly from America Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council  would have to have applied for and have in their possession a valid "Recovery Order or Pick Up Order."

We have proved in a Court Of Law that no document ever existed. In Cardiff Civil Court on the 28th of October 2009 the  Barrister for Neath Port Talbot Miss Sutton did enter into court "false and fraudulent evidence" in a desperate attempt to mislead Judge Seys Llewellyn.

 Being part of the cover up and an instrument of the state and a protector of the guilty Judge Seys Llewellyn ignored Miss Sutton's actions and allowed her to continue despite our correct request that Miss Sutton be arrested for "committing perjury and attempting to pervert the course of justice."

During this facade 5 Councillors,myself and 4 sitting Councillors from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Cllrs John Tallamy, Andrew Tutton, Frank Little and Keith Davies were all to testify that Neath Port Talbot Council had indeed acted illegally by KIDNAPPING Linda's daughter from her hospital bed in America.

Not one of us was allowed to take the stand ! 

Several statements of witnesses ( 4 from sitting Councillors from Neath Port Talbot Council ) supporters and friends who attended this "Kangaroo Court" were sent to Judge Seys Llewellyn and Lord Igor Judge Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales in protest at what took place. No replies were ever received.My statement is printed below.

In my statement I mention that the "Spycatcher Law " was used. It is now widely acknowledged that whenever " Spycatcher " is used it is in order to protect powerful people, lackeys of Government who have acted illegally and outside of the law.

Other points to make on the above "Kangaroo Court."

At the time Linda's daughter was aged 23 an adult and was not allowed into court. Neath Port Talbot Council Social Services testified on her behalf without obtaining any written consent from Linda's daughter. This of course is illegal.

The case was in itself illegal.It was held under the guise of a Family Court and not a Civil or Criminal Court. How can the ongoing case of an adult now 23 still be held in a Family Court ?

Answer. In any other court the procedures would be available to public scrutiny such as the press etc.One thing that guilty people with lots to hide and jail sentences awaiting them would never want or allow !

Moving on again.

A botched and illegal operation. Then a deliberate attempt to murder Linda's daughter by Dr Dewi Evans department of Paediatrics at Singleton Hospital Swansea to cover it up.

In December 1996 Linda's daughter was admitted to Neath General Hospital on a referral from her GP suffering from pain in the upper abdomen.

After a week of tests Mr John Elias the Surgeondiagnosed that he was 100% certain that Linda's daughter was sufferring from appendicitis.This was an incorrect diagnosis.

( Normally when someone is admitted to hospital with appendicitis they are operated on without delay.)

John Elias performed the appendectomy and removed a perfectly healthy appendix. Two days later Linda's daughter was in even worse pain and as a result of this operation contracted an abscess resulting in severe blood poisoning which nearly killed her.

As a result of this the cover up gains even more momentum !

Linda was later to find out from a member of Bro Morganwg Health Authority who if allowed into court would testify that 1- The hospital was not licensed to perform this operation and 2- The anaesthetist Mr Baso had been earlier "struck off " by the NHS in Nottingham. 3- As a result of having no license to perform this operation Bro Morganwg Health Authority had no form of insurance whatsoever.

Mr John Elias was well protected for his mistake as one of his brothers was a prominent Barrister in London based out of the inner temple.His other brother at this time was the Recorder in Swansea Court who is no other than  Mr Gerard Elias QC who was appointed on 17 November 2010 as the National Assembly for Wales Commissioner for Standards.

Below is a copy of a prescription that was given to Linda Lewis. The notes above the prescription are self explanatory.

So why was this prescription given ?

Quite simply.

If Linda had given the above prescription to her daughter she would have been dead.

Linda would then have been arrested for killing her own child and jailed.

If this had happened then there would have been no further case for the guilty to answer. They would have got away with it.

80 milligrams of Oral Morphine given to a then 10 year old child would have proved fatal as confirmed by many Doctors.

One Doctor who confirmed this and we have 5 witness statement to prove it is Dr Brian Gibbons the former Welsh Assembly Member for Aberavon but would not speak on Linda and her families behalf.

Shame on him for ignoring his duty of care to Linda,her daughter and her family as a Doctor and as an elected representative of the Welsh Assembly.

MORE EVIDENCE WILL BE RELEASED SHORTLY. 

Kevin

Other related articles  relevant to this appalling abuse of Justice by criminals in authority.

www.cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2009/10/for-few-of-you-who-didnt-know-what.html

http://cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2011/05/justice-4-linda-lewis-campaign-super.html


http://cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2011/05/justice-4-linda-lewis-campaign-update.html


http://cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2011/02/brian-gerrish-of-uk-column-speaks-on-tv.html


http://cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2010/09/justice-for-linda-lewis-further-update.html


http://cllrkevinedwards.blogspot.com/2010/08/justice-for-linda-lewis-update.html

http://justiceforfamilies.freeforums.org/kidnapped-by-the-state-t1884.html#p12371

http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2008/10/meaning-of-freedom.html


My thanks go out to everyone who has read this article and in particular the team who over the last few months have helped us by downloading all the evidence onto disc.

Over 3000 discs have now been sent to supporters worldwide.

Massive progress is being made in America where the American authorities were duped into allowing this kidnapping to happen.

On behalf of the team and especially Linda and her family thanks for all your support.

Please forward this article onto as many people that you know who may be interested in this appalling miscarriage of justice. and abuse of power.