Skip to main content

Phil Thompson and some of his family - Great Grandparents Rights

Phil and Family
The picture is of Phil O Gorman, his grandfather Phil Thompson and Sara O Gorman his mother.

Clayton v Clayton changed the law so that identifying parties to a Family Court case subsequent to the case is not contempt of Court. I will, however, not identify the Children in respect of this case.

Phil Thompson has three children, nine grandchildren and six great grandchildren of whom three have been removed from the family by arbitrary state action in order to satisfy government targets. The three were the children of Phil O Gorman and grandchildren of Sara O Gorman.

On 9th May 2006 after a sequence of events that completely confused the family the three children were forcibly adopted by a decision of the magistrates in Walsall Family Proceedings Court.

Since that point the Family have been trying to find out what happened and why the children were adopted and what is now happening to the children. They first contacted me in 2007.

It has not been possible to obtain any detailed reasoning as to why the children were removed from the family. A letter was written on 2nd November 2008 to the Courts and a response on 13th November 2008 indicates that the file has been lost.

Attempts have also been made to obtain a copy of the file from the solicitors without any success. Without a judgment it has been impossible to make any application to the courts for an appeal as to the lawfulness of the decision.

Attempts have also been made to identify what happened in the lower courts, but without success apart from some very vague comments from the local authority.

Phil, therefore, applied for contact with his great grandchildren at the Black Country Family Courts. This application was rejected administratively.

An attempt to appeal the administrative rejection was made to the Court of Appeal on 8th December 2008. This, however, was also administratively rejected.

The administrative rejection was taken to the House of Lords Judicial Committee on the same day who refused to make a comment. A further visit to the Judicial Committee was made by me and administrative rejection letter F resulted.

Today after some more work they posted an application to the European Court of Human Rights. This raises a number of interesting questions not least that as to whether grandparents and/or great grandparents have any rights.

Comments

I have 2 cases like this in Glasgow. No reason was given for removing the children from the mothers and they are being groomed for adoption. The mothers contact is being cut to two months.

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. …

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…

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…