One To Watch...

Police have seized two dogs in Havering following a distressing incident in Raphael Park where a two-year-old girl was injured and required hospital treatment. The incident has caused significant concern among local families and park users, with officers confirming that enquiries are ongoing.

The mutts were initially identified as Cane Corsos, but they turned out to be rottweilers...with a reputation in the area for past attacks. As always, social media fills in the blanks:

Not the usual chav with a vicious dog if he gave his details, though of course he didn't wait around for the police.

Well, well, well. Wonder why the police haven't acted before? 

Oh. Never mind. 

Always The Ones You Least Suspect...

A primary school teacher and a barrister who specialises in children's cases 'routinely neglected' their adopted sons, with the teacher strangling and racially abusing one of the boys, a judge has found.

The couple successfully made a bid at the High Court in London to be anonymised, meaning details including their names, genders, pronouns, and other details, which might identify them or their children, cannot be published.

Of course! The Establishment looks after their own... 

X is a primary school teacher and Y a barrister specialising in children's cases, who also sits as a deputy district judge with authority to sit and hear private family cases.

Families who will not be allowed to know if their case is being heard by a wrong 'un. Though to be honest, in modern Britain, it's probably wise to assume that in any case! 

In a ruling about their anonymity at the start of May, the judge said the parents 'present themselves as victims, yet have then displayed behaviour that demonstrates their position and way of operating has barely changed and shows they can behave in an aggressive and threatening way, similar to the behaviour described by the children'.

But she concluded 'not without some considerable hesitation' that they should not be identified in these 'very unusual and complex set of circumstances'. Mrs Justice Theis said there was a public interest in the parents' professions being published and the 'public knowing that the parents hold positions of professional responsibility in respect of children'.

Thankfully, that's the wrong tense. 

In a statement written in January, the parents said they had struggled mentally since the start of proceedings, had had to sell their family home, and had no intention of returning to their professions.

But no doubt have found others... 

Why Focus On The Familial?

The thought of mothers being abused or killed by their own children – the people they have carried, cared for and nurtured since birth – is something of an underexamined and almost taboo issue in Britain. There is a slowly growing body of research into why children under 18 use violent behaviour towards their parents. There is an even smaller body of research showing why adults – nearly all of them sons – do the same.

Is it because they can get away with it? Or is it because we take the threat from the mentally ill less seriously even than we do the threat from dangerous dogs? 

“It is still incredibly hidden, very taboo,” said Prof Rachel Condry, who along with Dr Caroline Miles has been researching violence towards parents for 15 years. “When we started, practitioners and police officers knew about the problem and had to deal with it, but it wasn’t something that was named, or really talked about. Over the years it has become more of a familiar, known problem, but so much is still hidden.”

But the 'Guardian's' keeping count: 

The Guardian’s Killed women count project, which documented every woman allegedly killed by a man in 2024, identified at least seven cases of mothers alleged to have been killed by their sons. A new Femicide Census report puts the figure at 173 over the last 15 years. Some of the key drivers are clear. Issues around lack of housing, substance misuse and, most often of all, mental health problems are key factors behind many of the tragic stories of the women killed by their offspring.

I think I can guess which of those is the real driver.  

Prof Amanda Holt, the chair of criminology at the University of Roehampton who completed the first national analysis of parricide (the killing of a parent) in England and Wales, said a failure to consider parents as potential victims was leaving people vulnerable. “There’s so little understanding around violence towards parents it’s harder for practitioners to know what the red flags are,” she said. “They tend to see parents as carers, not as potential victims. I think a lot of services are just thinking, thank God there’s someone for this person.”

'Someone for this person to murder instead of us' might be more accurate.

A Likely Story

The former deputy police and crime commissioner for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland accepted responsibility for the posts - but did not agree they would make people think he was biased as a magistrate, the Telegraph reported. He said he did not refer to his judicial role in any of the posts, adding he takes his work very seriously and would never consciously let his opinions affect it.

Sure, sure, and the cheque is in the post.... 

But an investigation found that posting on a 'politically sensitive' matter meant Mr Master had not lived up to the expectations that came with his position. It also found the magistrate had never before been involved in misconduct investigations, 'accepted responsibility for his actions' and 'agreed to reflect' on them. Social media guidance for the judiciary says judicial office holders should be aware of the risk of undermining trust and confidence in the judiciary by expressing, or appearing to endorse, views which could cast doubt on their objectivity. It also says they should also not comment on matters of controversy.

So, should he no longer be a magistrate? Oh, of course not! A few words of censure will get him back on track, won't it? 

A JCIO spokesperson said of the investigation conducted by the Midlands Conduct Advisory Committee: 'Mr Justice Keehan and the Lord Chancellor agreed with the findings and issued Mr Master with formal advice. 'In making this decision, they took into consideration that Mr Master had no previous findings of misconduct against him, had accepted responsibility for his actions and agreed to reflect on the consequences of what he'd done.'

Said reflection no doubt consisting of 'Well, I got away with that!' 

They Look After Their Own....

The independent report, published on Wednesday, found that Calocane had refused to take depot medication – slow-release antipsychotic drugs administered via injection – each of the four times he was sectioned before the attacks.

And why is someone able to do this? 

The report states: “The inpatient teams involved in Calocane’s care were trying to treat Calocane in the least restrictive way and took on board his reasons for not wanting to take depot medication, which included him not liking needles.”

I don't recall that being a good excuse for those threatened with the sack for refusing the covid jab, do you? 

So, didn't they think he was dangerous? Reader, they did - when it was their necks on the line:

The report also found that a risk assessment in February 2022 had urged staff not to visit Calocane at home and if required to do so, not to go alone. The risk assessment notes state that Calocane had a “history of violence and aggression when detained … violence and aggression towards housemates … poor insight [and] does not agree that he has been unwell over the last 12 months”.The report found that the assessment had looked at the risk to staff, but it did not consider how to manage the risk of Calocane not taking medication and the “potential acts of violence” that could follow.

The potential acts of violence that were sadly carried out on innocent members of the public, and not the NHS wasters and sycophants treating this monster in human clothing.  

NHS England said it had decided to publish the report “in full in line with the wishes of the families and given the level of detail already in the public domain”.

Liars. They've published it because they've been backed into a corner and have no choice, plus they've almost certainly been promised nothing will happen to the ones responsible for his freedom.  

Dr Jessica Sokolov, the regional medical director at NHS England (Midlands), said: “It’s clear the system got it wrong, including the NHS, and the consequences of when this happens can be devastating. “This is not acceptable, and I unreservedly apologise to the families of victims on behalf of the NHS and the organisations involved in delivering care to Valdo Calocane before this incident took place.”

A government organisation that seeks to gag those complaining about its actions shouldn’t be trusted anymore.  

'No Consequences' Britain....

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? 

“Don’t Do Your Jobs, Just Do As We Tell You!”

Labour MPs have been warned they must not put down any amendments on government bills and must resolve disagreements privately with ministers, in a crackdown on dissent in parliament. In a private message, seen by the Guardian, Labour whips told MPs they could no longer act as if they were in opposition and said amendments suggested a lack of trust in the government.

The message said MPs should be speaking with “one voice” in public.

MPs are elected to represent their constituencies, not kow-tow meekly to the whips of their party. Aren't they? 

There are a number of bills where there is pressure for the government to go further, such as the GB Energy bill and the employment rights bill. But the whip warned it was “not very helpful” for MPs to be putting amendments against their own government, adding: “We are not in opposition any more.”

They said ministers would be happy to have discussions and “reassure them that their concerns are taken into account”, but amendments “make it look like we don’t trust our own government to deliver”.

Well, at last the MPs do represent their communities, because we don't trust you buggers as far as we can throw you either!  

Labour MPs are in a frenzied jostle for places on select committees, elections for which will be held next week between Monday to Wednesday. New MPs and those who missed out on ministerial appointments have been told there is fierce competition for places on the most prestigious committees, such as those for the Treasury, foreign affairs, home affairs and health.

Ah, seats on the gravy train for all!  

Strange Thing To Find These Days...

A coroner who doesn't want to point out failings, that is:

Norfolk area coroner Yvonne Blake today recorded a conclusion that Mrs Croghan was unlawfully killed but declined a request by the family to highlight failings by the authorities, saying there was no evidence the teenager had posed a threat to his grandmother or father.

Ms Ronen, a nurse who lives in Norwich, said afterwards: 'We believe there were multiple opportunities across the adult safeguarding team, mental health services and the police to identify risk, all of which were either ignored, dismissed or dealt with in isolation.

'Mum's case is an example of a systemic failure to reflect and learn from mistakes made. We are deeply disappointed that the coroner has not highlighted this within the conclusion.'

She's not usually shy about castigating the authorities when it comes to child deaths, but seems pretty laid back when the victims of failings are elderly.

No Wonder The NHS* Is A Basket Case...

Robert Woodruff has been allowed to keep his medical licence despite recklessly getting behind the wheel to gatecrash a female colleague's barbecue while off duty, killing Richard Goodwin, 56.

He'd had ten pints. Oh, and he was a paramedic...  

Veteran NHS paramedic Woodruff had been looking at his phone when he veered across the wrong side of the road and slammed into the father-of-five, in a 'catastrophic' collision.

/facepalm 

Last year Woodruff, of Withernsea, East Yorkshire - who was then 36, was jailed for five years and four months, with a judge slamming him for causing 'unimaginable grief' to Mr Goodwin's family. But now, at a Health and Care Professions Tribunal, a panel has allowed him to keep his licence - suspending him for 12 months rather than striking him off, meaning Woodruff could return as a medic after serving his prison sentence.

Although admitted he never wanted to return as a frontline paramedic, Woodruff does hope to take on a 'health and safety role in the offshore industry', when released from jail.

Who'd employ him? 

The HCPTS panel said it is not their job to 'punish' and that before the incident he 'dedicated his life to saving lives and not to wrecking them'.

Before the incidents, Fred West laid a pretty good patio, I hear...

A tribunal report said: 'He said the criminal charge was not a true reflection of who he is as a person and as a professional.'

I thought the medical profession was good with latin. Haven't they heard the phrase In Vino Veritas...? 

* As my mother is currently (at the time of drafting this) in the not-so-tender clutches of the NHS, there may be another post with this title coming up in the near future.

But I Thought They Had Time Pressures In Schools..?

Children as young as five are having innocent-sounding playground remarks logged as 'racist incidents' by primary school staff, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

For what possible purpose?

Many schools, including those in London, Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Liverpool and Brighton, record incidents on pupils' files which can be transferred when they move to secondary school.

Others use a national database of the incidents for other teachers to access and monitor files.

If only there was such a database for actual misbehaviour. Maybe then genuine threats could be tracked...

School leaders say they are encouraged to report all racist incidents to local authorities, though there is no legal requirement.

There's a saying about journalism:

"One cannot hope to bribe or twist, 

Thank god, the British journalist.

But seeing what the man will do unbribed,

There's no occasion to!" 

I guess we can add 'teachers' to that list!

Adrian Hart, a researcher who uncovered the incident reports at Brighton schools, said: 'The vast majority of the so-called 'racist' incidents we see schools recording are simply evidence of children behaving childishly.'

And these incidents of teachers gleefully recording non-incidents for their fellows is...what? It's not 'childishness', is it? It's something rather more sinister... 

The National Union of Teachers, the National Association of Headteachers, the Local Government Association and Leeds City Council were unable to comment.

I think the word you were grasping for there was 'unwilling'... 

I Bet Jolyon Maugham Opened A Bottle Of Champers Early This Morning...

Because it seems the former UK's most reviled QC has now lost his title - to a woman. 

Specifically, Ms Patterned Leggings, whose dog mauled a seal before she took to her heels and fled back to her £5.8 million pound abode to get on the phone to ensure she'd be protected by the Establishment from any consequences:

The Oxford-educated QC who was in charge of the dog that savaged Freddie the seal says she has spoken to the police and the RSPCA who told her no crime has been committed.

...

On Tuesday, her lawyers said she made contact with police after the attack and was referred to the RSPCA, and was told no offence had occurred.

How long after the attack? Because, as reported that morning, the police were either unaware or this, or lying: 

Earlier, the Met Police told MailOnline that officers were investigating the death and 'looking to identify witnesses and to speak to the owner of the dog involved'.

And...why is she so sure there's no case to answer? Are there no penalties for this sort of thing? 

The person in control of a dog that chases or attacks farm animals can be fined up to £1,000, or £2,500 if the offence was deliberate. Similar fines apply to attacks on wild animals.

Perhaps it's something that never gets applied, because it's hard to prove? 

...earlier this year a dog owner was fined £500 after their Irish setter puppy mauled a deer in Richmond Park.

So her confidence would seem misplaced. Wouldn't it? In a fair world, anyway. 

Oh, Really?

Colour me sceptical, given the zeal with which your members have pursued people up to now:

Police no longer want to break up groups outdoors as Covid restrictions are "unmanageable," a union chief has said.

Ken Marsh, the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said his members had no desire to carry out the law to the letter after Brits flocked to parks and beaches over the weekend.

So, what's changed? What's driving this? Is it the realisation that they are becoming loathed even more by the law-abiding public for their heavy handed tactics against soft targets?

No. Of course not.

Officers say they regularly have to break up flouters, having to breach coronavirus restrictions themselves in order to fulfil their duties.

And Mr Marsh said the Metropolitan Police Federation is now seeking legal action as to whether officers could refuse to break rules in the line of duty unless they receive their vaccines.

Self-interest, of course...and isn't it astonishing that this didn't seem to be an issue at Clapham Common? 

They Look After Their Own, Pt 7832489512

And...how exactly does one lose such an open and shut case? Simples! One sends in the B Team. Or in this case, the Z Team:

There had been no dishonesty, bad faith or personal gain on the part of Batmanghelidjh or the trustees, Mrs Justice Falk said. Nor had there been any inappropriate expenditure on children assisted by the charity.

Sure, whatever. If you believe that I've got a great bridge for sale... 

Failing Upwards....

Deputy Chief Constable Matthew Horne was found to have breached Essex Police’s standards of behaviour earlier this year but is now joining the Metropolitan Police in the role of...

Ah, yes, I remember this one.

So what's he joining them as? Office cleaner?

...Deputy Assistant Commissioner.

*blinks*

He denied all three allegations, but a panel found them to be proven. They recommended he was given management advice, but then-Chief Constable Stephen Kavanagh decided he should face no further action hailing his service record for all but ten minutes of his 28-year career.

Now a spokesman for Essex Police has confirmed he is leaving the force for a new role in the Met.

SNORK!