On this day of remembrance - ID cards would be welcomed here, as they are in Europe and in the USA - let's DEFEND - not fight

I think it was 2008-10 when I petitioned the governmentt to introduce ID cards- at the time, oddly,  Harriet Harman was the only one making any sense in this area - the cards would out paedophiles and criminals galore - let's help our police and other services today and introduce ID cards for residents of less than 8 years.

That way we can ID where the worst offenders are and detect what they've been up to. We need to do this 10 years ago - would have saved lives and helped everyone good.

Sadly - it only serves corruption and criminals not to have them at this time. Let's get them in overnight - and review them in four-five years - for the sake of YOUR security - let's say YES to ID (as the no's argument holds no water at all, not when implemented in this way)

  Number 10 are aware they are coveting criminals with their hedge funds and illegal spending - UKIP will put this right -

meantime, I sent this to Larry at LBC just now:

'Hi Larry, great show - ID cards- the government have removed my petition to introduce ID cards - from 2010 - my friend Marlene from California - was the only person to sign it - now - people would sign in droves - the thing is - people who have been resident here for over 8 years, need not carry a card - it is reason and logic - thanks, Liz Robillard'

Day-Glo Danger of UK Gov spam-brained narcissists + OLIVIA NEWTON JOHN

 Ward writes with best of British fervour: (SING 'LET'S GET RID OF EM' TO THE TUNE OF OLIVIA NEWTON JOHN'S 'Physical' (and dig the purple wallpaper)

The draconian Coalition proposals for dealing with 'non-violent extremists' can no longer be described as the Writing on the Wall. This is nascent dictatorship written in Dayglo on a barrage balloon above the Palace of Westminster. The Slog makes a final appeal for concerted and tenacious opposition.

A few days back, the Daily Telegraph obtained a leaked letter written by George Osborne, as a follow-up to the unwise and unacceptable non-violent extremist (NVE) definition put forward by the joint ignorance of David Cameron and Theresa May. This is a brief extract from the quite astonishing letter: (my emphases)

'the ultimate objective would be to eliminate extremism in all its forms....[including] those who spread hate but do not break laws...the new orders will extend to any activities that justify hatred on the grounds of religion, sexual orientation, gender or disability.."

These orders are to be called Extremism Disruption Orders or EDOs. They have already attracted strong criticism from dangerous revolutionaries like Keith Porteous of the National Secular Society and Colin Hart of the Christian Institute.

Proving within hours that he hadn't actually read the draft laws, a spokesman for the Conservative Party rejected the criticism, saying, "We have never sought to restrict peaceful protest or free speech, provided it is within the law." The Osborne letter quite clearly contradicts this. Even before the process has got beyond the drawing board, Camerlot sloppiness and/or dissembling is apparent.

I have two serious, substantive issues with these ideas, and the time has come for people of all beliefs and political views to remove backside from sofa to take a stand about them:

1. The minute a Government wants to silence the views of those acting within the law is the moment at which nobody can deny any longer the proposal is unconstitutional. Although it is in scattered bits and pieces from 1215 onwards, there are very obvious parts of our Constitutional conventions or 'Gobbits' that would declare these proposals pejorative to the retention of Citizen Rights.

2. The problem with the Osborne letter, the May statement and the Cameron statement of intent about NVEs and EDOs is that none of them make the slightest effort at any point to define 'extreme'. If you can't discern that this is an open door to dictatorship, then it's time to drag your knuckles back into the cave, there to live on a TV diet of Simon Cowell and pizza. read more (that's not just rhetoric or link) 

So sorry to hear of the shootings today - listen to LBC Radio for updates (best resource here in UK) - meanwhile remember to PLAN for Halloween

Mother 4 Justice - Elizabeth Robillard blogs and shares truth and information

The shootings are a devastating blow to service providers everywhere. Keep up with events here

Halloween is huge in the west - it's great fun for all the family and we love to make the best of a bad situation - so - do it the Canadian way and have the best Halloween ever, don't let the stupids grind you down!  

mother 4 justice: Huawei & UK

mother 4 justice: Huawei & UK

mother 4 justice: Why Libertarians are more sexy and love better tha...

mother 4 justice: Why Libertarians are more sexy and love better tha...: Think on. Free love is free for whom? Pimps? The Stockholm Syndromed?  And free love in a polluted high rise (see Beijing pic, and there...

Moble Smartphones used by CEO's and other Bosses include

The Blackberry z30. You won't find much about it. It's a beautiful 'phone with 5 inches plus (always a help is this size) and best, it has 18 hours of life. What a dream. Of course bosses like to use the O2 Network in the UK as it has best practice to support custom, O2 is simply the most reliable service, despite our love of great names like Three and Orange, their services just don't live up to empty promises and spin. Shame
Specs

How will mobile provider Three UK - solve this awful crisis?

Mother 4 Justice Three is a company working with Hong Kong. It's very sad their policy is neglectful and harmful, what could that purpose be?

UPDATE How are we supposed to have a sim card that's been lost for over a year? How to do anything without a phone? Horrible service, have been in touch with policy and CEO's via contacts. Heads should roll a lot Three, you are excessively negligent - where else does this negligence reflect? Wonder what my Canadian friends and family in England friends will think of this?

Hi there,

As promised I've responded as soon as I have received your email. However I will need to ask you to provide me with your full name as for security reasons we cannot accept EC. We will also need the last 6 digits on your SIM card please; again this is in place for your own security.

Once I have these details I will be able to provide you with the information requested and get this matter dealt with for you.

Many thanks,

John

Accenture and Three UK [a problem] 

Three Customer Complaints
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd.
PO Box 333
Glasgow
G2 9AG

18/09/2014

Re: Accenture and Three UK


Dear Sir

As a very good friend to some of the world's most influential investors, I am sorry to see Three has such a horribly poor service when it comes to technical issues like mine. The staff find it amusing that huge things are lost and harmed? What sort of NPD mindset are you purveying by proxy? What is the purpose, what does it serve, that you do not respond with a fix to emergency emails? How do you know that many thousands of lives may have been lost due your negligence?

Your service is leaving sick people without access to a phone. I have needed my PUK code for 48 hours, [snipped detail], your staff are disgustingly negligent mickey-takers, your service should be stopped and I have been forced to be in contact with OFCOM about this awful service, are you part of Accenture still? Awful, negligent show

Yours sincerely

E.C.Lucye Robillard

[snip]  http://mother-4-justice.blogspot.ie AYE

Earl Howe and Lord McNally will sort this out - GMC corruption

Mother 4 Justice

Wednesday 17 September 2014

Elizabeth Lucye Robillard
<SNIPPED>
W87NX

[SNIPPED]

Dear Lord McNally,

FYI - thanks!


Dear Lord Howe,



Trust this finds you well. It's been a while since we spoke.


I've been looking at your overt interest in the GMC. Having had complaints against Dr.Simon Murch there, that are very valid but yet not been investigated by Police nor media, to my knowledge, I am requesting you please voice my personal concern at the lack of probity at the GMC and it's associations to recent Paedophile crimes in the news please?

Clearly the lack of probity and transparency is not of to benefit anyone but criminally guilty parties and it does appear the GMC acts as a lone voice in the world of justice, I know how that feels. I also note there are good and bad Freemasons, what type of masonic lodge do the GMC governors inhabit? I know nothing about such things.

Please visit my blog and see my copious amounts of hard evidence, ignored and trashed/not addressed by the GMC. Awful poor show.



Yours sincerely,

Elizabeth Lucye Robillard http://mother-4-justice.blogspot.ie

Chinese Smartphone Torture - don't do it - CUBOT and White Star review

I love a bargain and when I first saw 

White STAR N9770 - 5.08 inch  I thought 'yes, an iPhone for a friend' but - severe alopecia later - 1. Charger didn't work. Both batteries tried (the 'fix' suggested was to leave it longer = niet) Awaiting new charger - will keep trying, come back for updates

#2. Dual sim = for which alien planet? Neither sim card ports fit British sims? Not the one the 'phone I got - but I could be doing it wrong - video's not helped so far.

2. CUBOT is a  bit smaller than above - Cubot C9W Unlocked 4.0 inch Android 4.2 3G Smartphone MTK6572 Dual Core Dual SIM - initially very nice looking but 1. Weird! Seems to have a program that locks the case/back/battery cover? You can't remove it sometimes - it takes throwing to get the back off - smashed screen problems and no replacements from China yet (searched Ebay too) not for delicate hands nor hearts.   Then the best bit! Crazy Chinese torch displays of lights! The thing turns into a random colourful light display, all in Chinese - hilarity definitely but it was then not possible to power down - no off - not at all. There was NO WAY to turn the 'phone off, nor get the back off. Very frustrating indeed. I will fix these bastards one day. Hope this helps.

Why aren't the British manufacturing their own mobiles?

Even the Legal Ombudsman fears the control freaks - and they wonder why the world protests at the corruption?

 AND there was never an allocated worker. Corrupt? Yep

Thank you for your email.

Please note that we  are a separate organisation to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and have no influence over their decisions or processes.

Yours sincerely

Assessment Centre

Legal Ombudsman

Telephone: 0300 555 0333

www.legalombudsman.org.uk

From: Robillard]
Sent: 10 May 2011 18:38
To: Christian Paterson
Cc: SNIP
Subject: RE: Your enquiry: reference 201013366

10th May 2011

REF; 201013366 Anne Lehane, SRA non-action

Further to letters from the SRA months ago, they have still not allocated a worker to this case, please advise?

Yours sincerely

E.C.Lucy
sw5 9ba

---

From: Christian.Paterson@Legalombudsman.org.uk
To: chelsea.finest@hotmail.co.uk
Subject: Your enquiry: reference 201013366
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:59:07 +0000

Dear Ms Lucy

Thank you for your email.

The Legal Ombudsman investigates complaints into the service that someone has received from their lawyer.

We have attached a leaflet on how we can assist, and also a complaint form so that you can articulate the details of your complaint.

Before we can formally investigate a complaint, we require that the person bringing the complaint formally complains to the lawyer in writing and then allows them up to eight weeks to respond to it. We have also attached a template complaint letter if you require assistance with this.

Please be aware that there are two relevant time limits: the '12 month rule' and the '6 month rule'. Generally speaking, your complaint should be brought to us no later than 12 months from when the problem occurred or from when you should reasonably have become aware of the problem. Suppose the problem occurred, or you became aware of the problem, at the end of March 2010. You should bring your complaint to us before the end of March 2011.

Plus, you should come to us within 6 months of receiving a final response from your lawyer after complaining to them. Suppose you complained to your lawyer about the problem at the end of June 2010 and they responded with a final offer to sort things out in the middle of August last year. You're still not happy with what they offered. You would have until the middle of February this year (2011) to bring your complaint to us.

We would suggest that you contact our assessment centre on 0300 555 0333 where an assessor will be able to provide you with advice and assistance regarding your complaint.

If we do not hear from you within seven days, we will presume that you no longer wish to pursue with your complaint and will close your case.

Yours sincerely

Assessment Centre

Legal Ombudsman

Telephone: 0300 555 0333

www.legalombudsman.org.uk

From: Miss Ec Lucy [mailto:chelsea.finest@hotmail.co.uk]
Sent: 14 February 2011 08:44
To: Enquiries
Subject: FW: Anne Lehane - Solicitor Complaint

---

From: chelsea.finest@hotmail.co.uk

Subject: RE: Anne Lehane - Solicitor Complaint
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:36:35 +0000

SRA
RE Anne Lehane, Slctr R.B.K.C
Feb. 14th  2011


x 4 attachments


Dear Madam /Sir


Further to my requests for time-limits [] and your code-of practice:


Mss Lehane knowingly submitted false evidence in court to Judge Moorehouse during care proceedings.
She also omitted to inform the judge that by law, despite my being disabled (also with severe back problem (still) and grieving my mother, dead in the February of that year)  that my son nor I had no care plan despite a care-pan assessment in the April of 2001, Lettie Bluthe and Anne-Marie Wilson were the social workers. She ommited the fact I had complained to Jane Dykins of GBH by the SSD due to cosntant hrassments, lies and threats, denied in court.  The law then stated that care-pans should be implemented within 40 days.

Anne Lehane had had access to previous records (Matrimonial proceedings ending in March 1999, Kingston + Wandsworth Courts, Judge Walker Smith ++) Case Ref 92D 1089-

Just a year prior to the care-proceedings (where I had called social services emergency line all night and had had no response at all, so called police, thus placing my son in care voluntarily- a a police protection order was made- despite my home had been disgusting it was clean two days later- IGNORED by RBKC) Sean Ryan, our then social worker at RBKC and others, supported my parenting in 1999. In 2001 and 2002 onwards Miss Lehane knowingly kept evidence that could have changed the outcome of the case.  She kept evidence from the court of Autism expert, Prof.Eric Fombonne who had visited in the custody/RO/contact hearing, only to bring in yet another expert as she had allowed a social worker, Anne-Marie Wilson, to write what culminated in character assassination of me, with a falsified document, that was hearsay at best, in this document the social worker claimed I had self-diagnosed my own agoraphobia (my first treatment of it by the council, was in 1973, I had been agoraphobic in varying degrees my entire life and Miss Lehane and others knew it well, they had had access to all my records, although since then, I have had an apology from  KC PCT (Patricia Wright) as my records were mixed in with other patients,


Miss Lehane also claimed via this 'evidence' from Anne Marie Wilson (SW), also claimed I had diagnosed my son with a gut-problem and autism when she knew this was done by Simon Murch and I hadn't even been present, plus nobody had given consent - see a snip from my sister attached)  Miss Lehane had full knowledge that I had represented myself with lay-barrister Peter Bibby in 1996-7 at a SENDIST Tribunal and that due to that my son had seen quite a few consultant professionals (including NHS expert Dr.Hilary Cass) regarding diagnosis (he is SLD/Autism) my son had been statemented since 1995 (?) approx and regualry seen by local Ed.Pysch, Patsy Wagner and also including prominent experts such as Svien Eikeseth, Glenn Sallows and Esther Shaffer (R.I.P) -who's report was also left out of the care-proceedings that James did have some words- Miss Lehane is apparently covering up the fact my son ever spoke and although he didn't have fluent language he could speak a little and had was showing huge promise- she failed to inform the judge in the care proceedings of the mental problems and suicide attempts of the father and that the father is a drink-rive recidivist, had cheated benefits and tax, Hadn't paid court fees not any Child Maintenance in eight and half years (still outstanding) had been to prison for drug dealing, and had frequent hallucinations he is 'the devil'. LAC reviews were never legally abided by, I was never represented and was refused telephone links- as for the hearing- the care proceedings- I had access to only one and half days of the hearing , the rest was heard without my having access due to the video equipment having broken down, that violated article 6- despite Gordon Murdoch QC and Malcolm Chisholm representing me, I did not have a chance to intervene where I could have and let the judge know what was going on- Miss Lehane knowingly wasted public money on expert reports when she already had full access to many expert reports- via a tribunal I was running a home education at the time after having won the land-mark ruling ( see Luvy V RBKC) - there was no need for any expert reports. Miss Lehane also allowed evidence to claim I had diagnosed my son with a 'gut problem' when I wasn't even present at that diagnosis - my sister was present, Dr.Murch - a child-gastroenetolgist diagnosed my son wit the 'outlawed' LNH 4 and had sent me pictures of it- he had been my GP, Dr. Kate O'Briens'- next door neighbour- that GP had then tried to help us discover why my son was clutching at his tummy. I also had had a report from the Priory clinic regarding my agoraphobia and good character that she also had access to, she had reports from local experts and doctors , plus evidence that social workers had been 'pre-planning' to take Jamie into care as Jamie had been seen by Dr, Murch (apparently this means 'munchausens syndrome by proxy') that evidence was omitted from the court- a total mystery-  yet she and local solicitors and the barristers colluded to waste taxpayers money and take my child - as it was- Judge Moorehouse made the attached recommendation - that my relationship to my son was 'too important' not to have 'unsupervised overnight contact' but due to pure malice- Miss Lehalne advised social workers to reduce my contact with my son and has knowingly left my son at risk with his very violent and dangerous father- who sadly also has/had custody of a his daughter, Maxine, when a child, Cosmo Steele, already died in his care aged just four. the child was claimed to have died of cot-death and heart-disease. I had been 'suffocated' with a pillow by Mr.Jones (the father) and had to fight for my life, attempted murder charges should have been brought. Cosmo was found asphyxiated. I know from the previous (documented) violence I had suffered, and known about by Miss Lehane, these children are left at risk with him. I have suffered much malice and violations of much law due to the advice that stops at the hand of Miss Lehane, who has always blamed social workers - saying it her being directed by them, specifically by Brett Taylor. I do not believe that to be the complete  case, I believe she has deliberately mislead some social workers I  believe there should be a public inquiry, the case went on for something like ten days and I HAD ACCESS to TWO of those days- There is more I will follow up with when able. Thank you for your time

Yours sincerely
SNIP

VERY Alarming news from the NSPCC - how many are there? Who will put this RIGHT?! Time to pool resources NOW

Children missing from care:

(NSPCC to me) ''Unfortunately it is not known for certain how many looked after children go missing. Data is gathered by the police and by the Department for Education but there are discrepancies between the two sources.

A Parliamentary Inquiry in 2012 noted that it was impossible to know the true extent of the problem (in England) due to erratic data collection. The Department for Education (DfE) recorded 930 instances of children going missing from care, but police data shows an estimated 10,000. There are various possible reasons for this discrepancy. Local authorities only have to report on children for whom they have parental responsibility, so this does not include children placed in their area from another authority. The DfE statistics only record children who went missing for more than 24 hours.

You can read more in our briefing about the Inquiry findings here: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/briefings/missing-from-care_wda91122.html
The full Inquiry report can be accessed here: http://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/tcs/u32/joint_appg_inquiry_-_report...pdf


NSPCC research: The NSPCC sent a Freedom of Information request to police forces in England and Wales in 2013 to find out how cases of children missing from local authority care were reported to them.

“A Freedom of Information request from the NSPCC revealed that last year police received, on average, more than 75 reports a day involving nearly 7,900 youngsters, many of who were aged 13-17, although some were as young as six. At least 2959 of the children went missing more than once with some absconding on 35 occasions. Some weren't seen for more than a week and one force reported that six had still not been found.

However this is still believed to be a drastic under-estimate of the scale of the problem as it is thought less than half of all cases are reported to police and only 29 of the forces responded in full to the FOI.

Latest figures from the Department for Education put the number of children who went missing from care at under 1000 - a vast difference to that supplied by police.”
Number of children missing from care incidents reported to police = 28,123
Number of children missing = 7,885
Number of children who went missing more than once = 2959
Number of 13-17-year-olds reported missing = 3297.

Read more about these figures in our press release from 2013: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/news-and-views/media-centre/press-releases/2013/children-missing-from-care/children-going-missing-from-care_wdn95720.html

You may also be interested in this NSPCC research report on children missing from care: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/resourcesforprofessionals/lookedafterchildren/missing-from-care-report_wdf93502.pdf
Ofsted also produced a report on children missing from care in 2013: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/surveys-and-good-practice/m/Missing%20children.pdf


Suicides and deaths amongst looked after children:

We are not aware that the Government publish a statistic for the number of children who die whilst in local authority care.

Suicides: a 2012 Government report estimated that “Looked After Children and care leavers are between four and five times more likely to attempt suicide in adulthood”
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/216853/CYP-Mental-Health.pdf

Serious case reviews may give an indication of the number of deaths (including those by suicide) for children in local authority care. Case reviews are listed in our library catalogue. However, there may be circumstances in which a case review is not released into the public domain and our case review repository is not comprehensive, particularly for older reports. Please have a look at our case review web page for further information: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/casereviews

Our library catalogue can be searched at: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/inform/NSPCCLibraryOnline.asp In the Advanced search you can limit your search to “case reviews” by the Media type. The following keywords will be of use to find reviews about child deaths amongst children in care: “infant deaths”, “child deaths’, suicide, “children in care”. If you wish us to carry out a search of serious case reviews for you, please let us know.


The most recent biennial analysis of serious case reviews for England doesn't have a figure for the number of serious case reviews involving looked after children, although it does have one for the number of children who were not living at home at the time of the incident. This includes cases when children were in hospital or mother and baby units so is not directly comparable with earlier figures:

An analysis of serious case reviews in England from 2009-11 show that 13% of incidents took place whilst the child was not living at home or with relatives. (NB: this figure includes deaths as well as serious injury/harm).
Source: Brandon, Marian, Sidebotham, Peter, Bailey, Sue and Belderson, Pippa, Hawley, Carol, Ellis, Catherine and Megson, Matthew (2012) New learning from serious case reviews: a two year report for 2009-2011. London: Department for Education (DFE). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-learning-from-serious-case-reviews-a-2-year-report-for-2009-to-2011

An analysis of serious case reviews in England showed that 10% (2003-05) and 13% (2005-07) related to a child in care. (NB: this figure includes deaths as well as serious injury/harm).
Sources: Brandon, Marian, Bailey, Sue and Belderson, Pippa (2010) Building on the learning from serious case reviews: a two-year analysis of child protection database notifications 2007-2009 (PDF) . London: Department of Education: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/181651/DFE-RR040.pdf
Brandon, Marian, Bailey, Sue, Belderson, Pippa, Gardner, Ruth, Sidebotham, Peter, Dodsworth, Jane, Warren, Catherine and Black, Jane (2009) Understanding serious case reviews and their impact: a biennial analysis of serious case reviews 2005-2007 (PDF) . [London]: Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF): https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/222122/DCSF-RR129_R_.pdf


[snopped] '...Our factsheet on child killings may also be of interest in explaining what we do know more generally from the data on child deaths: http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/briefings/child_killings_in_england_and_wales_wda67213.html

The latest Department for Education statistics on the outcomes of children looked after by local authorities can be found here (although as mentioned, this does not include information on deaths): https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/outcomes-for-children-looked-after-by-las-in-englandhttps://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/outcomes-for-children-looked-after-by-las-in-england


You may wish to make a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department for Education to see if the data you require is gathered centrally. If not, then you would probably need to contact each of the Local Safeguarding Children Boards in England and ask them.


I do hope this information is of use to you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have further queries.

Kind regards

Duty Librarian
NSPCC Information Service ''