Skip to main content

The secret imprisonment of Wanda Maddocks

What the secret imprisonment of Wanda Maddocks has shown is that an anonymous judgment does not tell you everything about a case. The Daily Mail wrote more about the case today. I do think the wider issue will also have more attention in the future.

Comments

Gladiatrix said…
According to a comment on the Wanda Maddocks story posted on the thisistaffordshire website, Ms Maddocks is the second person to be imprisoned secretly and without legal representation by Judge Martin Cardinal.

The OJC will not deal with a complaint about case management or a case judgement, which is a clear denial of justice, is there any chance of you raising this with the Lord Chancellor and asking that the judge be charged with abuse of office and disrepute?
Gladiatrix said…
According to a comment posted on this story on the thisistaffordshire website, Wanda Maddocks is the second person to be jailed without publicity or legal representation by Judge Martin Cardinal.

This needs to be raised on the floor of the House of Commons and the Lord Chancellor should be asked to confirm that the judge will be suspended, preferably without pay, while his conduct is investigated and if necessary a disciplinary hearing for abuse of authority and bringing the judiciary into disrepute will be held.
John Hemming said…
This is a judicial decision and is therefore dealt with through the appellate process. Parliament can, in fact, remove a judge. However, I need people to come to me with case details to deal with as appropriate. I cannot simply refer to a comment on a newspaper article without any idea who is behind it.
Jake Maverick said…
it's not dat serious, in the scheme of things....murders, torture, gang rapes....althoug the real motive behind this one appears to be financial/ job cration/ employment, liberating assests far more serious crimes being committed by these nameless psychopaths....non physical entites don't go around attack people, that's absurd!
Stephen Bourne said…
I can only surmise that Mrs Maddocks thought the same as myself that social services were there to help support and protect the elderly.
After probably relentless ignorance towards her farther and her self and god forbid she raised a complaint "Bad Idea"

Her life irrespective of any blame or not will have become a living hell of lies

I have first hand experience of the defamation Staffordshire councils are capable of. It is time for transparency and no secret courts full stop.

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men:

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…