The Children 2

During his frantic attempts to rescue these children from the custody of their father, the person whom the children identified as their abuser, Dr Pridgeon wrote to anyone who might be in a position of power to assist these children: NOBODY DID ANYTHING.
 
They all knew, but nobody did anything.
It is important to understand the new reality: in Australia, the de facto reality is that INCESTUOUS CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE IS NO LONGER A CRIME….
 
Dr W. R. M. Pridgeon
 
Mr Stephen Bennett, Shadow Minister of Child Safety
Ms Rosslyn Bates, Previous Shadow Minister of Child Safety 
 
11/6/2018
 
Dear Mr Bennett and Ms Bates,
 
I have been copying you both into the correspondence between myself and Hon Dianne Farmer, while I have been trying to draw the attention of the Minister to the appalling plight of the (the children), abducted by their mother (the protective mother) in 2014 after every other means of protecting these children had failed: for more than two years (the protective mother) only had supervised contact with her children and during her supervised contact, she was forced to hear their ongoing disclosures of sexual abuse, while being completely helpless to protect her children: she had lost custody of the children and the father, whom (the children) had disclosed was abusing them, was awarded sole parental responsibility.
 
The circumstances of this abuse, as detailed in the brief summary below, defy belief. Nearly two weeks after my first email, and despite follow up phone calls to the Ministers office, and three further desperate emails, also copied to you, I have have had a single phone call from a person in the Department of Child Safety, advising me that the Minister did not have the power to intervene.
How should I believe this?

The Children

This is the first letter in a long chain of correspondence between Dr Pridgeon and the Queensland Minister of Child Safety, while he was desperately trying to rescue these children from the custody of their abusive father.
This letter has been widely cc’d to any person who may have been in a position to help these children: THEY ALL KNEW BUT NOBODY DID ANYTHING. 
Minister Farmer’s sole response was to block Dr Pridgeon’s emails.
 
A commonly heard response was: “why didn’t you just go the Police/Child Protection/the courts?”. The answer is: because they use any excuse NOT TO ACT.
 
Criminal lawyers will tell you, in unguarded moments, that in practical terms, incestuous child sexual abuse is no longer a crime. Considering the terrible life long consequences for the abused child, this statement seems appalling, but a moments reflection will create realisation that it is a realistic and true statement: it is a nearly impossible task to prosecute the perpetrator of incestuous sexual abuse in Australia.
Australians might ask: who brought this about?
 
 
 
Dr W. R. M. Pridgeon

Dispelling the myth of gender bias in the family court system

Below are a few stats from a Pew Research Center analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) released in June of 2011.

Married Fathers:

According to the report, a married father spends on average 6.5 hours a week taking part in primary child care activities with his children. The married mother spends on average 12.9 hours. Since two-income households are now the norm, not the exception, the above information indicates that not only are mothers working, but they are also doing twice as much child care as fathers. 

It only makes sense that mothers who have a closer bond due to the time spent caring for a child be the one more likely to retain primary custody after a divorce.

AFP dead wrong! Statistics prove jilted mothers not lying and caselaw proves family courts protect paedophiles

It's a shame that mainstream medias’ (so-called) journalists followed suit like a bunch of lackeys, when they all jumped on the "criminal syndicate kidnapping children" bandwagon - instead of doing their own homework.

Though we are sick of hearing both women and men actually believing the rubbish mainstream media dribbles, it is a tad frustrating when people aren't smart enough to consider for one moment that what they're being told is a blatant lie, or refuse to budge from their perception of "it's another nasty woman getting back at her ex-husband".

While you're considering not reading the end of this article because it doesn't suit your current thoughts on things, here's a few points to mull over whilst the real story gets hidden.

  1. One mainstream media wrote “Pensioners and professionals are believed to be part of the syndicate, which allegedly used encrypted messages in order to avoid detection”.  "Syndicate"?  Really?  If the family court sent your children to live with or have unsupervised access with a paedophile, what would you do to help them?  Any decent human being would help, and criminalising the good guys and covering for the real criminals is an absolutely gutless act. 
  2. If mainstream media weren't so pathetic, they would do the research the staff at Alecomm have and discover, that the Australian Government and Family Law Courts routinely give paedophiles and convicted sex offenders access to their child-victims. [1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6].  And let’s not forget Abbey who commit suicide after her father was charged for sexually assaulting her friend – That man had been convicted and jailed for molesting her friend - but had proclaimed his innocence and had been granted regular unsupervised access to Abby, in which he was able to repeatedly rape her. [7]

AFP linked to family court paedophilia, as concerns amongst the community grow.

Operation Noetic is not about a "Criminal Syndicate Abducting Children".  It is about paedophilia and the family court supporting it, instead of keeping our children safe. It's about magistrates and court experts and independent independent children's representatives continually making recommendations that a child spend time with a person who has been convicted of child sex abuse, or where the court has found overwhelming evidence of it, or where the paedophile has already admitted it.

It's about placing children in hostile situations, where they have already disclosed being sexually abused, and the protective parent told that if they do not encourage the relationship between the paedophile and their child-victim, that they will be seen as an uncooperating parent - and lose custody of their child.

It is about the public ignorantly believing, that after all these royal commissions, that the government actually cares about children and would never put them in harms way.  It is about children being disbelieved and called liars or kids with great imaginations, because the magistrate has an overwhelming desire to place the child in harms way with a good chance they will be repeatedly sexually assaulted by those in power purporting to care and protect them.

The reason we are still having royal commissions and apologies these days, is because we ignored the children those adults once were.  We called them liars and punished them for making up stories about such wonderful people (priests, scout-leaders, nuns etc).

The Australian Federal Police arrests of Patrick O'Dea and Dr William Russell Pridgeon and the protective mothers’ is an absolute abomination. 

Patrick and Russell have risked everything including their freedom to help prevent children from being sexual assaulted.  They're not a criminal syndicate, they're wonderful human beings acting with much humanity that our governments have never ever shown it's victims.  NOBODY I mean NOBODY would risk a 25 year prison term just to get back at asomeone else's ex.

What is the law and penalties for child abduction and kidnapping charges in NSW?

Last week, the Australian Federal Police cracked an underground parental abduction ring following a two-year investigation into the group that allegedly helped jilted mothers to abduct and hide their own children across Australia. Three men and a woman were arrested and charged for their alleged role in the kidnapping syndicate, which organised and financed the children’s snatching with plans to even use a yacht to smuggle them to New Zealand. The network managed to evade detection for a decade.

Among those charged include William Russell Massingham Pridgeon, a 64-year-old doctor from Grafton in NSW who is reported to have founded the Australian Anti-Paedophile Party. The party ran senate candidates in the 2016 federal election.

Prime minister will apologize to institutional sex abuse victims

Family Court “Infinitely Worse”: “Small Army of Kids…Helpless to Escape”

“[E]ven while [Prime Minister Morrison apologizes], there is a small army of children who…are living with someone of whom they are terrified...[T]here are systemic failures [in Family Court] that break the chain of protection around each child, leaving them not only vulnerable to sexual abuse but also helpless to escape it.”
- Amanda Gearing, journalist and broadcaster

On Monday, October 22, 2018, six years after parliament decided to hold a Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Australia’s new prime minister, Scott Morrison, is going to make an apology to the many victims.

However, even while he is speaking, there is a small army of children who even today are living with someone of whom they are terrified.

Ten years ago, a child of seven left a phone message on my answering machine, delivering a plea so heart-breakingly desperate that it still resonates in my ears.

Family law system may need royal commission scrutiny, Chief Justice John Pascoe says

royal commission into family law should be considered if reforms currently underway do not address serious failings in the system, according to the outgoing Chief Justice of the Family Court.

Chief Justice John Pascoe has told the National Family Law Conference in Brisbane family law had become increasingly complex.

Earlier this year, Attorney-General Christian Porter announced plans to merge the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court, promising it would ease the significant delays and costs for people stuck in the system.

The M List

The M list referred to by the family Court is not about truth or justice. It is not about protecting abused children. It is a game, designed to create money for the people working there.

The court is the meeting place that hand delivers children to abusers and pedophiles.

The court is like an ocean, the independent children's lawyers, barristers, judges are sharks 🦈 They look for the small fishes, the ones who are bleeding and devour them.

If a child is under the age of twelve, it doesn't matter how much faith you have or how hard you fight to protect them you can't. Our law does not allow protective parents to protect their children.
This is a game you can't win.

If I didn’t witness what happens behind these corrupt walls, I wouldn't of believed it.

Wolves do hide in sheep's clothing.   And their lair is the courtroom.

Mothers labelled as delusional by courts

COURTS are giving alleged sex abuser fathers custody of their children in Tasmania, a child protection expert says.

Mothers alleging such abuse are being declared mentally ill or delusional and to be the "dangerous parent", according to Professor Freda Briggs, a former Scotland Yard child protection officer who visited the Coast in September.

"Having recently spent time in Tasmania, I am concerned that no-one appears to be protecting very young children from father-child incest when there is a case pending in the Family Court or a Family Court order is in place," Prof Briggs said in a letter to Premier Lara Giddings in December.

Mothers 'labelled dangerous'

The high price mothers pay when filing for divorce

There is a very frightening reality these days for moms considering divorce. It’s a reality that numerous women assembled at the Monmouth County Superior Courthouse in New Jersey today are determined to raise awareness about, in hopes, of inciting change while calling the competency of judges such as Judge Paul Escandon in question.

Like Judge Paul Escandon, a number of judges are on the hot seat for being allegedly biased against mothers and ruling in the favor of fathers in divorce and custody proceedings. And whereas, in some cases, such rulings are warranted, in others, they are not.

The peaceful protest rallying together in Monmouth County Monday was doing so to protect “Abused Children Of Divorce and Separation.”  These moms are seeking to have courts dig deeper into cases and become more educated in determining divorce and custody rulings that meet the optimum needs of the children involved. The claim is that the manner in which Family Court handles these cases is not only archaic but in certain “high conflict” situations, the manner is barbaric. High conflict cases comprise many meanings, folks, including granting custody to documented abusers and pedophiles.

Turnbull government orders first ever review of the Family Law Act

Pauline Hanson's One Nation party went to last year's federal election with a policy of abolishing the Family Court and replacing it with a tribunal of "mainstream Australians".

The Turnbull government is expected to shortly commence the biggest review of the Family Law Act since it was introduced in 1976, amid pressure from Pauline Hanson to address the rights of fathers under the Act.

Questioned by Senator Hanson at a Senate committee hearing on Friday, Attorney-General George Brandis indicated the terms of reference for a review by the Australian Law Reform Commission would be released shortly, saying that the government wanted to hold the widest possible review of the workings of the Act.

'Rest in peace, my special little man': Father of boy killed by mother was in bitter custody fight

The heartbroken father of a boy murdered by his mum on the Yorke Peninsula has told 7 News he was locked in a bitter custody battle.

VIDEO Father of boy murdered by mum on Yorke Peninsula in custody battle. Source: 7 News

He claimed he had raised serious concerns about the boy's welfare to authorities but says it fell on deaf ears.

'We've got some bad news for you': Jacob was killed by his mother before she took her own life. Photo: 7 News

When police officers knocked on Mick Clarke's door yesterday, his heart sank.

Child protective services visited mum and kids hours before murder

Social workers performed a welfare check the morning the Adelaide family was killed.

Adeline Rigney-Wilson and her children were visited by child protective services just hours before her partner allegedly killed them.

My child did exist

The price for a mothers own safety and freedom in 1996 was an imposed, unnatural and unwanted separation from my eight children, including my nursing infant. The injustice committed against her is not just the physical separation from her children, but the willful desecration of the mother-child relationship and bond, a sacred spiritual and emotional entity.

Many mothers who seek safety from abuse are routinely prohibited from having even the most basic contact with their own children, not because they were unfit parents, but because they were outspent, out represented, and out-maneuvered in a court atmosphere that seems to favor those who inflict domestic violence.

Evidence that Newcastle family courts erase parents

These orders were made by a Newcastle Judge against an innocent man who just wants to spend time with his children and who made it quite clear that he has no faith in our court systems ... Gee, I wonder why.  Loughnan gave everybody reason to be scared of injustice in our family courts after seeing this :

You see, for the lovely little chump to do this, he can then prevent the father from bringing any more matters into the court without a Legal Appointed Guardian, who is at no obligation to do what he asks.  This man MAY pay for his own lawyer but Loughnan has prevented him using anything but government paid crooks which will not help him.

But wait ... and to add insult to injury, there's more :

 

UK judges change court rules on child contact for violent fathers

Reforms aim to end presumption that a father must have contact with a child when there is evidence of domestic abuse

Senior judges are taking steps to end the presumption that a father must have contact with a child where there is evidence of domestic abuse that would put the child or mother at risk.

Cries of child abuse bounce back on mums

CHILD protection campaigners say women who accuse their former partners of sexually abusing their children are being unfairly labelled as mentally ill in the Family Court.

Child sex abuse researcher Freda Briggs and child protection advocate Charles Pragnell say recent cases show the emphasis on shared parenting responsibilities is putting Professor Briggs and Mr Pragnell are part of the Safer Family Law campaign and argue that amendments to the Family Law Act in 2006 were geared towards the rights of parents rather than those of children.

Mother dies of stress and lies from family court

​We are sick and tired of the family courts making statements without evidence, or proof.  Sadly most people by now have forgotten about Hayley Gascgoine, the young mother who died five minutes before the judge gave the verdict. Many professionals said her death was not caused by stress, it was other factors, or something else, - or even down to using drugs because she went to the toilet, previous to her collapse.
 
The toxicology report proved that she was clear.  Our professionals cannot be trusted, not in any aspect, not one word.  No one who has not witnessed, or been a part of the family court process has a clue about just how abusive these environments are.