Not A Welsh Parliament But A Cesspit Of Labour Party Misrule And Corruption.

Above is a youtube recording of a radio interview that I did on Saturday the 5th of December 2015 live on Freedom Talk Radio.

At the end of this article is a transcript of a speech that was to be given by Bethan Jenkins AM in the Welsh Assembly on the 23rd of September 2015 which was cynically sabotaged at the 11th hour.

 Unfortunately certain Welsh Assembly members alleged to be First Minister Carwyn Jones.

Labour Member for Aberavon David Rees AM, Deputy Minister for Social Services and Assembly Member for Neath Gwenda Thomas along with the almost unknown Mike Hedges AM in collusion with the Presiding Officer (Speaker) Rosemary Butler AM ( All of them Labour ) fraudulently claimed that there was still an injunction on this case and managed to stop Bethan Jenkins AM from  speaking in the pleniary debate and getting justice for Linda Lewis which has been covered up by the Welsh Labour Party and others in Public Office for many years.

Here is the speech that Bethan was prevented from making by the corrupt and unaccountable Labour Party.

Short debate

Righting an historical wrong: the case of Linda Lewis

Calls for a fresh inquiry into Linda Lewis, a mother falsely accused

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Let me start this debate by making one point absolutely clear.

This is NOT a child protection issue. It may have involved a child – now a woman. But she will be kept firmly out of this short debate, and will remain anonymous.

No, this debate is about the mother, my constituent, Linda Lewis. This debate is about how she has endured a horrific, 17-year ordeal that no mother should go through, and how we – this country, Wales – owe it to her to rectify this wrong, and bring her the justice she deserves.

To do anything else would shame this nation.

As you can appreciate, this is a long case, and it begins back in 1998, when Linda’s daughter came home from school, complaining of pains in her abdomen. She began vomiting and was admitted to Singleton Hospital for a week's stay.

Doctors couldn’t find a cause and she was discharged. But a few days afterwards, she was readmitted – this time to Neath hospital where, after a week of tests, doctors decided to remove the appendix, in spite of Linda’s concerns that the pain was in a different place.

If anything, this led to greater complications and a burst wound, which required weeks of dressings. During this time, she was prescribed huge amounts of drugs, of very high dosages.

By this point, Linda was convinced the treatment her daughter was receiving was making her worse. She took her to the Royal Free Hospital in London and it was here that the family decided to fly her to America for a second opinion.

Linda flew out with her daughter and father to Florida and were in the waiting room when American police officers burst in, pointed guns at her father and took the child away.

A subsequent court hearing in Florida determined that a care order had been made in the UK, but here is where it all began to get a little strange. No one, to this day, appears to know who made that order.

It certainly didn’t come from Neath Port Talbot council. My colleague David Rees received a letter from David Michael, the local authority’s head of legal services, in December 2013. In it, Mr Michael states: “I can confirm that the papers in my possession do not indicate that the county borough council applied for court orders in the United States of America”.

Linda’s daughter was made the subject of a care order upon her return to the UK – a return journey effected without a passport, as she was included on Linda’s. And yet it wasn’t the council – the authority with direct responsibility for child welfare that initiated the request.

It wasn’t the Home Office. It wasn’t the Foreign & Commonwealth Office. I know this, because I made Freedom of Information requests to both ministries.

I also subsequently made the same request to the Attorney General’s office. The Attorney General at the time was, if you remember, also Linda’s Member of Parliament, John Morris. This FoI turned up similarly empty-handed.

So here is the first reason why Linda deserves a full and independent inquiry. Nobody – nobody at all – can say who it was that initiated the repatriation request that sent two armed police officers to a hospital in Florida.

What we do know is that a Neath Port Talbot social worker called Julie Rzeznicezek (pronounced Rez-na-check) arrived in the US with a court order from Swansea County Court, at which time Linda’s daughter had already been made the subject of a care order in Orlando, and that the pair were able to return to the UK, using an emergency passport, following a ruling made by the Ninth Judicial Circuit in Orange County.

Interestingly, when written to in 2001, that same court could not provide details of this “pick up order”.

But no one who subsequently had a hand in dealing with Linda’s case is able to answer this one very basic question – who asked for the order?

Even more disturbingly, if you can’t answer the how, then it stops the really big question: why?

Why was this child taken? And why was it so urgent that Neath Port Talbot council dispatched two social services officers to Florida to pick up the daughter from US authorities and bring her back to the UK? What set of circumstances dictated this immediate response?

Now Linda Lewis is not a lawyer. Few of us are. Or a child welfare expert. She was not acquainted with the legal system, the courts, social services or anything that concerns itself with taking a child into care. Nonetheless, she returned to the UK and immediately initiated court proceedings in order to have her daughter returned to her.

" Linda's Attorney in Florida had filed  a writ of " Habeus Corpus " but it could not be enforced as her daughter had already been illegally removed (kidnapped ) from the United States without her knowledge or Linda's parental consent. Also evidence provided by Linda's Attorney confirms that a MINIMUM of 28 US laws were broken by Julie Rzezniczek and Allison Paisley the two Social Workers from NPTCBC while in the US."

She failed, but undeterred she continued to pursue legal avenues. After some time, it became apparent to her that she was hitting a large, unidentified roadblock in her efforts.

Then she was thunderstruck to learn from the Guardian Ad Litem report made to court in the UK that a social worker had visited Linda’s home and had found a suicide note from the daughter. Furthermore, the note said her mother planned to take her away and murder her.

In the first and in none of her subsequent court hearing had Linda or her solicitor heard mention of this evidence. This in itself is bad enough, as it denied her the chance to address this very serious issue – particularly as it appeared instrumental in the granting of the care order that took her daughter away.

But even more incredibly, the social worker in question has denied, in writing, several times that she ever saw such a note. Yet its validity is still given credence, even though a judgement in 1998 recorded: “I do not find this is a case of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy”.

Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy is, according to Wikipedia: “A behaviour pattern in which a caregiver fabricates, exaggerates, or induces mental or physical health problems in those who are in their care. With deception at its core, this behaviour is an elusive, potentially lethal, and frequently misunderstood form of child abuse or medical neglect.”

So the court cleared Linda of abusing her daughter. A letter in 1999 from this Assembly to Linda said Neath Port Talbot social services’ “long term plan … is to return (your daughter) to your care”.

However, at this time, the authorities changed their tune and began to say that the daughter did not want to return home. This stands in stark contrast to her diary entries immediately following her being taken into care – seen by myself – in which she speaks frequently of missing her mother.

Another feature of this case worth further consideration or investigation is the general intransigence of any authority here in Wales to deal conclusively with this issue. I should point out that this criticism is not directed at any court or decision, but rather at the local authority, the Welsh Government and its agencies.

When I wrote to the First Minister recently to urge him to look again at this case, this was his reply:

“The records indicate that in May 2000 an Inspector from the then Social Services Inspectorate Wales visited Neath Port Talbot Social Services Department to examine records in respect of its work with the child in question. This was to ascertain whether the records were generally consistent with what would be expected of a social services department in respect of work with a child who is looked after by the local authority. For example, that there is documentary evidence that statutory reviews take place and that appropriate people are consulted. The Inspector’s examination of the records confirmed this was the case.”

All this really tells us is that they were doing their job, not whether they made the right decision. It’s a fine but important distinction.

The inspector may not have inferred that there was any controversy over the authority’s decision from its own records. After all, it was in dispute with Linda. This is perhaps reflected in the fact nothing appeared to be amiss, yet the discrepancies I have raised here are a matter of record.

Furthermore, there has been some suggestion that the police should become involved. Linda has on a number of occasions approached the police, but evidence of criminal wrongdoing – what the police look for – and getting at the truth are two different things.

And anyway, it is more usual these days for criminal proceedings to be triggered by allegations or findings made at public inquiries into historical wrongdoing. Furthermore, there are no injunctions or restrictions in place. I could have used the daughter’s name all the way through this, but chose to respect her anonymity.

Llywydd, Linda’s case is well known across Wales. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of people share her disillusionment with the decision-making process, particularly when it touches on the things we hold more dear. We are committed in this institution to open and accountable governance, and we should never fear to shine lights in dark corners, even if we don’t like the things that we find.

We owe it to ourselves to hold a full and independent public inquiry into this case, because democracy must be seen to be at work. If we reply to the most basic questions with a litany of rules, protocol and techno-babble, we destroy the confidence in our democratic processes.

But, most of all, we owe it to one citizen of Wales – to Linda Lewis, a mother falsely accused.

End.

So much for openess,honesty,transparancy and accountability within the Labour Party Welsh Government ! It doesn't exist.