Skip to main content

Tahla Ikram

Another non-white child is discharged from care to die at the hands of a step parent.

The link is to the BBC's questions in which they say:
The final decision on returning Tahla to his father was made by a judge.
This is the local authority hiding behind a judge again. The judges basically go along with the recommendations of the Local Authority and Guardian. When you have a particularly good Guardian they may have some independent judgment from the Local Authority.

When I say the system as a whole is corrupt and secretive that does not mean that it does not get some things right. Nor does it mean that all of the people working within the system are corrupt. Some clearly are. Some make decisions for all sorts of wrong reasons. Some, however, work for what they perceive as the best interests of the child. The corruption of the system arises from the failure of the checks and balances.

Comments

saph said…
I have been absolutely devastated to learn about Tahla and his horrific injuries that resulted in his death. How can the authorities have allowed this to happen? how can these people sleep at night particularly the judge who returned Tahla back to his 'home'. The father and the lover of Tahla deserve to rot in hell. I'm heartbroken.
john said…
The judge merely followed the recommendations of the professionals.

The lesson from this is that the recommendations of the professionals are not really that reliable.
mark said…
I wont rest until these monsters are given at least 30 years each with no opportunity for early release, in a world where people are executed for adultery, i find this too much to bear. that beautiful, beautiful, beautiful baby suffered so badly its gutwrenching. If anyone has any ideas of how to sort this out, count me in. its my duty to the little tot
heartbroken

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…