About

This site is about:

1. The crimes by Walsall Council;
2. The efforts by one great-grandfather;
3. This summary as one of our portfolio of nine cases presented to the Education Committee when it investigated child protection.

The Thompson Family: great-grandparents whose three great-grandchildren were taken
by Walsall Council for they were supposedly at “risk of significant harm”

 1.       Nature of the Case / Background

The Thompson Family[1] is an example of “threshold criteria” being used wholly inappropriately – to abduct three children. Without any substantiation or evidence, the Council claims that this ‘risk of significant harm’ is due to

• failing to attend school regularly
• failing to have attended health appointments
• their father has failed to co-operate with Social Services
• the children have been seen to be dirty and unkempt.
• The behaviour of Walsall Social Services does not differ from other councils where victims of child snatching have suffered cruelty and injustice for the sake of cashing in on foster money (on average £400 / week per child). Social Services do NOT have the interest of children at heart and are wholly ineffective when dealing with complaints of negligence that are voiced during supervised contact.

2.       Submissions of Fact

When his wife stopped medication from a condition prior to the marriage, the grandson left his home to live with his mother nearby. Due to the mother’s condition, Social Services brought the children to that home of father and grandmother, where they thrived for eighteen months. When the eldest child was eligible for school, the father was prosecuted by Aldridge Magistrates Court and fined for his daughter not attending school regularly. Within the same month, Social Worker Garnet Gray instigated another charge against the father and told him to attend Dudley Court. However, at Dudley Court, he was told that he was in the wrong court. At the other court in Dudley, he was told there was no case in his name. It appears as if the court made decisions in the father’s absence, without any legal representation. Meanwhile, the court files have “gone missing”. When wanting to pick up his daughter from the Principal’s office, his daughter was screaming behind closed doors for two hours, before she was handed back. Together with his other children they go to play in the park opposite the home. Later that evening, Garnet Grey and two women snatched the children from their father’s arms and nothing has been heard from them since.

3.       Points of Law and Procedure

The grandfather and great-grandfather Phil Thompson keep challenging Walsall Council to take him to court for this accumulation of abuse of process and power – to hit adoption targets and raise OFSTED ratings? In the children’s best interest??? Applying the right “levels of threshold”? Because one child was supposedly not regularly at school, all three are not just taken into ‘care’ but irreversibly adopted without parental consent???

4.       Summary

As John Hemming MP says in his 2-hour interview with Edge Media TV: there are no checks and balances on what Social Services are doing. Furthermore,

• Schools, court staff and lawyers are colluding with Social Services
• Judges sanction what Social Services are doing
• Prisons enforce even more Draconian conditions, e.g. by treating parents on remand as if they were criminals.

---

[1] http://victims-unite.net/our-cases-as-stories/social-services-stealing-children-all-over-the-country/the-thompson-family/

And here’s the story in six pages addressed to the Family Court: