Skip to main content

Whats the name of the secret cat?

This case has been reported in the media today. I have linked to the judgment for the case.

To give a summary of the recent timescales:
On 18th August 2016 Mrs Teresa Kirk was sentenced to a 6 month suspended sentence for not signing over man in his 80s to an anonymous council (one presumes in England or Wales given the jurisdiction of the court).
She was arrested on Sunday 25th September at around 10am and taken to prison.
This week the Daily Mail started asking questions as to where the public judgment was for this process and surprise, surprise, one popped out of the system. On Monday this week Mrs Kirk was lost somewhere in the prison system, but she managed to get a note passed out with another prisoner who told people where she was.

The judgment makes it potentially contempt of court to Name M's cat.
More importantly the judgment makes it potentially contempt of court to name the local authority. If I were still involved in running a council (as I was for 22 years) I would be very unhappy not being told what was being done in the council's name. (even if all of the human parties were anonymous).
It is clear from the judgment that the official solicitor is involved. This raises the question as to who is paying for the official solicitor and how the official solicitor is to be held for account for whatever involvement they may have.

I do know more about this case and it worries me how the courts act as enforcers for local authorities. The court of appeal recently claimed that these proceedings (as with forced adoption) are not "adversarial." I am sorry, but they are wrong. The proceeding are clearly very adversarial. One side wins the other side loses. However, normally only one side is allowed to present expert opinion. It is not surprising that things go badly wrong. Many of the so called "independent" experts are effectively (or actually) on retainers to local authorities. This means that people do not have a trial that can be considered to be procedurally fair.

This story in the Telegraph quotes Mrs Kirk's solicitor as saying: “There has been a vast amount of public money wasted on this case without achieving anything that is going to be beneficial for this man. Any move at this stage is likely to result in his death.”

Watch this space.

Comments

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…

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…

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: