D v B & Ors, Court of Appeal - Family Division, September 14, 2006, [2007] 1 FCR 369,[2006] EWHC 2987 (Fam),[2007] Fam Law 122,[2007] 1 FLR 1295

Extract

---

D v B & Ors, Court of Appeal - Family Division, September 14, 2006, [2007] 1 FCR 369,[2006] EWHC 2987 (Fam),[2007] Fam Law 122,[2007] 1 FLR 1295

Neutral Citation Number: [2006] EWHC 2987 (Fam)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 14th September 2006.

Before :

Stephen Wildblood QC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between:

In the matter of D v B and others (flawed sexual abuse enquiry)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgement

Stephen Wildblood QC

This judgment consists of 43 paragraphs and has been signed and dated by the judge. Insofar as may be necessary, the judge hereby gives leave for it to be reported.

Judgment

1. After some hesitation and guidance, I have decided that a shortened version of the judgment in this case should be released for publication. It is an example of a flawed enquiry into false allegations of sexual abuse. It also surveys the evidence of a 'veracity expert' who contended, wrongly, that the allegations should be believed.

2. This is a case which concerns the future welfare of a boy, TD, who was born on 8th February 2003. He is therefore three years old. TD's father ('the father', who lives in Somerset) and TD's mother ('the mother', who lives in X) were not married. The mother has a daughter called EB, who is aged 5 having been born on 4th December 2000. EB has a different father to TD. At all material times TD and EB have lived with the mother.

3. This is a fact finding hearing in greatly delayed proceedings. The substantive applications before the court are made by both parties under section 8 of The Children Act 1989 and relate to TD only. The dominant application is by the father for contact; it was made on 23rd September 2003. The father has not sought orders in relation to EB. TD has been joined to the proceedings and appears by his Guardian ad litem. The father now has parental responsibility pursuant to an order of 16th August 2005.

4. On 11th August 2006 (i.e. on the eighth day of this hearing) the Surrey County Council made a long overdue application under section 31 of The Children Act 1989 for supervision orders in relation to both children.

5. On 6th March 2006, I ordered that the mother should state in a written document the findings that she sought. The allegations recorded in the resultant document can be summarised in two sentences:

i) Both EB and TD have been sexually abused by the father;

ii) The mother's belief that the children have been sexually abused is genuine.

6. It is accepted that, in relation to EB, any abuse of her by the father must have occurred prior to 7th April 2003 (when the mother and father finally separated). The allegations of the abuse of TD arose first in August 2005 after the first unsupervised contact visit on 18th August 2005 but then became more specific in November 2005 after the first staying contact that then took place.

7. The specific detail of the allegations of sexual abuse are stated in a document as follows:

i) In relation to EB:

a) The father has hurt her bottom;

b) The father put his finger...

See the full content of this document

---