A 'veil of secrecy' was placed over the Sara Sharif scandal yesterday after a court banned the naming of a judge who placed the little girl in the custody of her murderous father. A High Court judge ordered that none of the professionals involved in the family court proceedings could be named, including social workers, experts and guardians.Of course, they look after their own. They always have done...
They also included the family court judge who made the fateful decision to give Urfan Sharif custody before he beat the ten-year-old to death.
It should surprise no-one, of course, but there's room for some appalling chutzpah from our disaster of a prime minister:
The extraordinary ban sparked a secrecy row yesterday as Keir Starmer said questions must be answered about the appalling case.
Really, Starmer? Now you think questions are warranted?
The anonymity ruling effectively prevents full public scrutiny of those responsible for the key decisions which culminated in Sara's death on August 8 last year.
Rather like an injunction does. You know what an injunction is, don't you Starmer?
Not that he's the only failed politician to decide the public have forgotten all about their previous screw-ups. Lady Dogshit decided to open her trap too:
Yesterday, former victims commissioner Dame Vera Baird KC said: 'This has placed a veil of secrecy over this case. I think it's appalling that we cannot know who was responsible for this obviously extremely damaging order which played a key role in the horrible death of this child.
'This is the judiciary protecting the judiciary. How can the public be confident that the family courts can protect future children if the public are denied the knowledge of who is making such decisions... The judiciary needs to be held to account for the decisions they make. This is an awful case, people got it seriously wrong and the public need to know the truth.' She added: 'It is sinister.'
Bit of a stretch to insist the judiciary should be held to account when you've never been, eh, Vera?
2 comments:
I wonder if this will lead to a series of appeals to family court decisions, based on the possibility that the deciding judge was the one who sent Sara Sharif to her death?
Penseivat
I hope it does, frankly, - god only knows what bonkers decisions have been made in other cases.
Post a Comment