Local authority to monitor children of violent criminal
March 21, 2016 7 comments
The London Borough of Newham has been told it must keep a watchful eye on the three children of a man convicted of violent crimes.
In 2003, the father was found guilty of offences which included attempted rape, indecent assault, actual bodily harm and attempted indecent assault. The victim of all of these crimes was a 15 year-old boy he met at a mosque. When the sexual attacks were reported to the police, the father attacked the young man with a hammer. After a trial he was initially sentenced to prison for six years but was released after only four.
Last year, he was convicted of rape and attempted rape. This time the victim was an 11 year-old girl. The father was still awaiting sentence when the local authority launched care proceedings over his children.
The Borough applied for a care order which would allow them to take the children away from their parents. They decided on this course of action because the man and his wife had told social services that they were going to stay together despite his crimes. However, the story changed when the case reached the Family Court. The mother said she intended to go through with both an Islamic divorce and a legal divorce “when she is in a financial position to do so”.
Her Honour Judge Purkiss heard the application. She said the evidence was clear that the father posed a serious risk to the children’s safety so he should not be allowed to see them even when he is released from prison.
By contrast, the mother would be “well able to meet their emotional needs” and that with appropriate support, she would be “well able to meet their physical and educational needs” the judge added.
Instead of the care order sought, Judge Purkiss made a ‘supervision order’ which would be put in place for a year. This would allow the children to remain in their mother’s care but under the supervision of the local authority. She also ruled that the father would be limited “indirect contact” with the children once a year, meaning he could only communicate with them through letters, emails or phone calls rather than seeing them in person.
Read London Borough Of Newham v BR & Ors in full here.
Photo by meesh via Flickr
March 21, 2016
Categories: Family Law