Opening Statement to Court Final Access Hearing 2009

Your Honour,

We have been focused on this matter now for just a month short of 4 years. In that time I have spent over 3 weeks in Court, been sentenced to two weeks in jail for contempt of court and a further 3 whole months in lost time in court and associated proceedings. In cost terms I have spent well over 100k. In lost earnings and lost business it has cost me much much more. I have lost my home, my life savings, my inheritance, my family and many friends.

The taxpayer has spent a fortune on legal aid, NYAS and Court time. I cannot imagine how much has been spent by my ex wife and where she has funded it from. All I can say with total certainty, is that divorcing L has massively impacted my daughters long term well being which is heartbreaking and I will forever regret.

I have been asked many times why I have not walked away. I have been told in no uncertain terms by some who have believed everything my ex has told them that I should simply disappear. I have not and I never will. Why ? Simply because my daughter means the World to me. She means more than any money or time and I will never stop hoping that what is right and good will prevail and justice for her will prevail.

I will do anything and everything in my power to protect her and stop the abuse she has been subjected to. You might say that my actions have caused her harm over the last 4 years. I can and do accept that. Whether unthinkingly / or unknowingly I have added to the trauma she has experienced is my deepest regret.

By way of context. I stayed married to L despite being deeply unhappy with the relationship, despite huge pressure from my own family and friends many of who despised her; in order that I could be the father to my child I never had and to provide balance in her deeply coseted life.

Despite being surplus to requirement and spending much of the last years of our marriage as purely a meal ticket; I stayed married. I never wanted to abandon H or have her go through the pain I went though at the hands of my own parents as a young child. Had I known how things would pan out or or known earlier; the impact on an older child was greater than that of a younger child as I do now, I would have left the marriage sooner.

I didn’t because I knew the woman I married would ensure I never saw her again. I have spent 4 years locked in battle with a tyrant; through a broken court system that has led to ridiculous delays, because my child needs both parents. To know she has two parents who love her unconditionally and care for her more than anything. H needs to know I am not the ogre she believes me to be. She needs to know I will not kidnap her and never let her see her mother again as she apparently believes!. Is it not interesting that the thing H fears most is what has already been done to her by her resident parent!

4 years on I think the court has seen a little of the controlling and narcisstic personality that dictates every move that my daughter and I have made. It was this controlling behaviour that led to me to escape for my own sanity, health and well being but as this case has shown L is not someone you can escape. Her web stretches far and wide.

In a psychometric questionnaire called OPQ we both completed many years ago, L came out as a 'Sten 10' / that is off the scale in the top 1% on COMPETITIVENESS. This suggests this type of personality will seek to win at all costs.

I have experienced this and with respect your honour so have you; with every tactic possible being used by L to destroy me, to discredit me and to delete me, from H's life. L will attack and destroy anyone or anything that she deems to have crossed her. How many lawyers has she had in the last four years? How often have you had to remind her she is under oath? Examples that come to mind are her continued problems with employers and Bosses, that have led to her leaving or being fired from many jobs. Her relationship with my family and friends and her own family. L will always dictate terms that are hers and hers alone. They are not and can never be seen as in the best interests of our child.

We have seen clearly that L will not accept any view except her own be it expert or not. Your own reference in this court to the parallels with Heroin addiction were completely dismissed by L. Experts book on parenting and the effect of divorce I sent to her were rejected and used to allege harassment on my part.

So where does this leave our daughter– an innocent who has been led to believe her father does not love her . Who has been led to believe her father left of his own free will who abandoned her without notice to quote" spend more time with his girlfriends". A Father who I quote again "must be a very bad man because he has been sent to prison"; a father who in the eyes of the Jersey Court is so bad he cannot set foot on the island an order made in my absence with not a shred of evidence. and whose teachers believe him to be a child abuser an accusation removed by L following your challenge prior to the previous hearing along with the other accusation that I never provided financially. Lies used to cause smoke and do irreparable damage to our child and my reputation.

H is a child whose idea of the truth and what has happened is so far removed from the reality. A child who has no idea her mother spent 4 years lying to anyone who would listen including her closest friends, her own siblings and even my clients, A mother who would intercept my email and online activities who would steal my inheritance and has on every single occasion in this court lied openly and unashamedly.

With that background accept it or not let us look at the suggestion that CAFCAS and the JPS and NYAS has put together.

Mr H from CAFCASS recommended direct contact – It was ordered by the court and has been proved beyond the bounds of probability to have been interfered with and undermined. We have heard from Messrs D, E and Mrs W and even Mr L that contact worked and despite the interference H warmed to contact and thawed as contact went on. So we can conclude that contact did work partially despite the efforts of L which finally with the help of the formidable Mrs L were brought to a deliberate end by intimidating H into telling me she never wanted to see her again. Interestingly despite being proved a liar Mrs L is back in court tomorrow. Why? I do not know.

,

Next we had Mrs F's report which is full of holes inconsistencies and omissions. It is based almost solely on the information and assertions of the Mother. My only discussion with Mrs F was over my supposed alleged mental health problems Her recommendation, based solely on the wishes of the child of 11 are that there should be no contact. It has been established by this court that H is not mature enough to make that decision and that she has been "significantly and negatively influenced by her Mother".

Finally Ms N in what is a very good and well balanced report suggests indirect contact only. I like and admire Ms N and will happily work with her on an ongoing basis. I do however think that her suggestion is unworkable given the behaviour of the mother and the inability of the law to protect my child from the behaviour of the resident parent. I would very much like to understand therefore how indirect contact is expected to work given that

a) H wishes no contact and

b) the Mother throughout has made any contact impossible and has not allowed letters to reach the child (even complaining they are sent with different hand writing on the envelope!

c) You requested that the school were informed of the legal position at the fact find. Despite continued requests this has failed to happen. In fact I requested a copy of the letter be made available to the court this has not happened. A school report is offered as evidence It is the first I have seen of it. I have requested information from the school it is not forthcoming proving that L has and is continuing to stop any contact whatsoever.

Christmas is an excellent example in that every year I appeal either directly to L or indirectly via her solicitors as with this year to tell me what my daughter would like for xmas and how I can deliver it. I am met with silence.

It is also suggested by Ms N that I am perhaps putting my needs ahead of H. I refute this and I can assure this court that my only wish throughout these proceedings has been to re-establish a relationship with my child not through a selfish desire to see my child at all costs but because I know better than anyone in this courtroom the long term damage caused to the child. The guilt the child carries or more often is forced to carry and the skewed view of relationships they take with them into adult life. I was that child 40 years ago.

H has brought me the greatest joy in the 8 years I was part of her life. She was the most wanted and loved child having spent years and much on fertility treatment. If I had known the damage caused to her by our divorce I would have put up with the abuse I had to deal with to protect her and bring balance to her life until she had flown the nest and was at University. My wishes are not selfish. I am not putting my needs ahead of our daughters. I cannot as a Father stand by and allow the abuse she has been exposed to continue . All my letters to L, , the books I have sent and my affidavits to this court over 4 years are consistent in this.

My position statement is clear in what I believe it is in the best interests of my daughter that she has direct contact over a prolonged period without interference from the resident parent. This could and should be chaperoned by Ms N or another suitable qualified guardian or professional. Both to support H and to ensure that it takes place without further interference. I cannot see how indirect contact can ever work.

Further we know that body language is over 2x more effective than tone of voice and 8x more effective than the written word in conveying a message. How can my daughter ever believe I love her and I am not a threat to her or her Mother if she cannot look me in the eye and observe my behaviour to judge for her self.

I am totally supportive of H being assessed and seen by a psychotherapist and will pay for that and attend any sessions with her I am required to. I do not support family therapy sessions as suggested by L where she H and I would be assessed together. For the simple reason we are no longer a family and it has been proven that L cannot behave in a decent way in front of our child it would be ridiculously stressful for all parties not least H who might get the completely wrong idea from them. I think this suggestion is a clear example of a mother playing games. I am fully supportive of L having a psychological assessment as all the evidence I have and the behaviours I have witnessed are not the behaviours of the sensible loving and thoughtful woman I married in 1988 but those of someone completely obsessed and someone I do not know. If I had to swear on my daughters life I would say that she is mad.

The Guardian suggests, at this time, the Father is not fully able to meet Harriet’s emotional needs [para 4.68] and that there is some way to go before direct contact could be said to be in Harriet’s best interests [para 5.5].This statement is not backed up by evidence and whilst I do not wish to question in any way Ms N professional opinion and caution I would like to better understand her reasons and evidence for this statement so that I can understand what I need to do to prove myself fully able to meet those needs. I am willing to undergo a psychological assessment if that is required.

To summarise your honour. You must make a decision based on what is in the best interests of the child Which is quite right. You have stated clearly in this court the best interests of the child are to have contact with both parents.

It has already been proven indirect contact is not being followed through by the resident parent and it clearly is a sub optimal solution if it is in fact a solution at all.

Contact on the other hand has been interfered with by L on every occasion. Either not happened, shortened or rescheduled for impossible times and even directly interfered with against the explicit order of the court by Mrs L.

Based on the Children's Act The child should not be brought into conflict. It is clear H has and continues to be. Not by me but as you said yourself and I quote 'due to the implacable hostility of the resident parent" The mother has and continues to flaut this court and deliberately creates a situation where H is brought into a conflict situation both mental and physical as in the incident in my office. As the non- resident parent I am powerless to stop this. I therefore ask that you make a decision to allow contact but that you apply a penal order to it such that where the mother deliberately interferes or seeks to cause conflict it is subject to a penal order and she can be sent to prison.

This might seem excessive but given the tactics this court has witnessed from Mr R and from his client and given you were more than happy to order contempt of court proceedings in my case based on 'misleading information' I recall you subsequently discovered and were somewhat agitated by; For me it was a valuable learning experience and something I am not keen to repeat. Perhaps this last resort may be what is needed to end this stupidity and stop this pattern of behaviour designed to get around the law, make a mockery of the family court and destroy the future chances of my daughter. Thank you.

Post script

The court ordered

Indirect contact only Father allowed to write 4 x per annum until child aged 16 years old

Mother to write to father 4 x a year with news on the child

No direct contact.

To this day the court system is being abused by the legal profession profiting out of the destruction of families and the long term mental damage of children.

Using contact as a weapon in financial proceedings and worse still using the Children's Act to stop over 4 million fathers having contact with their children is a national disgrace.

It is now over 18 years since I had any contact with my daughter.