Skip to main content

Southall - what about the research

My biggest concern about the matters releating to David Southall is that there has not been an independent investigation into his research and the impact it had on the subjects of that research.

That remains a concern notwithstanding the fact that he has now been struck off.

This issue is, however, raising another smokescreen. (with the RCPCH helping to generate smoke).

Paediatricians who report in the Family Court make substantial additional money from reports relating to alleged Child Abuse. If they did not get fees linked to each case I would be more comfortable with the situation.

Obviously some people maltreat children. There are people who Fabricate and Invent Illness, there are also people who do this by proxy.

The key question for a judicial process (be it family or criminal division) is
a) How much evidence is required to initiate an investigation.
b) What standard of evidence is required for findings to be made.

These are not zero sum issues. We are doing badly in this country at preventing the abuse of children. Many children are dying at the hands of abusers. If inappropriate investigations are occurring that are overwhelming the system with work that prevents it concentrating on the more risky situations then that is not helpful in achieving the objective of protecting children.

To get this right needs proper analytical thinking rather than the creation of a false dichotomy between two invalid logical positions.

Comments

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. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

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…