Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 2 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
Section 7 - What happens? How to prepare?
- Thread starter UkDad
- Start date
Sorry, that should have read 'ABE interview'. Late night typing!
An ABE interview is an interview with a child conducted under the guidelines set out in 'Achieving Best Evidence [ABE] in Criminal Proceedings'.
Long story short, where a child makes an allegation, that child must be interviewed in a video recorded interview with specific guidelines adhered to. That interview can be conducted by the police or social services but without it, courts give considerably less weight to an allegation, even if a child is claimed to have made it or supported one made by another party.
Courts take great care with child allegations. Judges describe them as allegations whilst social services often fail into the trap of calling them 'disclosures'. That term has been strongly judicially discouraged since the 1987 Cleveland Abuse Inquiry in part because it's use tends towards acceptance of the allegation as true.
Proving a claim made by a child at court (a Fact Finding Hearing) is a high hurdle and there are examples where a claim has been made and they are discounted for these reasons. In particular, there is one judgement by the former President of the Family Division, Lord Justice Munby.
If you want to glance at the headings and summary of the ABE report, you'll find it here on the government website:
Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings
Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures.
That is really helpful. Thanks very muchSorry, that should have read 'ABE interview'. Late night typing!
An ABE interview is an interview with a child conducted under the guidelines set out in 'Achieving Best Evidence [ABE] in Criminal Proceedings'.
Long story short, where a child makes an allegation, that child must be interviewed in a video recorded interview with specific guidelines adhered to. That interview can be conducted by the police or social services but without it, courts give considerably less weight to an allegation, even if a child is claimed to have made it or supported one made by another party.
Courts take great care with child allegations. Judges describe them as allegations whilst social services often fail into the trap of calling them 'disclosures'. That term has been strongly judicially discouraged since the 1987 Cleveland Abuse Inquiry in part because it's use tends towards acceptance of the allegation as true.
Proving a claim made by a child at court (a Fact Finding Hearing) is a high hurdle and there are examples where a claim has been made and they are discounted for these reasons. In particular, there is one judgement by the former President of the Family Division, Lord Justice Munby.
If you want to glance at the headings and summary of the ABE report, you'll find it here on the government website:
Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings
Guidance on interviewing victims and witnesses, and guidance on using special measures.www.gov.uk
I've always hated the term "disclosure" and am glad the court has reservations too. It is ok for releasing records, as in SAR. But not for the outpourings of an alienated child.
Welcome. I had a quick look for the Munby judgement but couldn't find it right now.That is really helpful. Thanks very much
I've always hated the term "disclosure" and am glad the court has reservations too. It is ok for releasing records, as in SAR. But not for the outpourings of an alienated child.
Here is an interesting read on why the term 'disclosure' is frowned on:
Why words matter – the debate about ‘disclosure’ | The Transparency Project
transparencyproject.org.uk
CAFCASS will take their own view. Even if you show them evidence, it won't carry weight with the court until filed, presented and assessed as part of a Fact Find.
Thanks. Is it actually allowed though to show Cafcass evidence during an interview?
I doubt there's a rule about it. But even with evidence or won't carry weight until the whole formal process of Fact Finding has taken place.
Cafcass will believe the mother and make their recommendations on the allegations as being true without seeing any evidence.
I showed them evidence during my visit and they completely ignored it. How can they ignore factual and professional documentation.
That is how biased they are. Against anything else.
However frustrating it is, CAFCASS is not the court and not a judge. They are not trained to evaluate evidence nor determine the truth of any claim.
A court will firstly decide if a Fact Find is necessary and then properly evaluate all oral and physical evidence before making a finding. CAFCASS, social services and the police don't have that power.
But the fact that they take the mothers word without any evidence is shocking. And make outrageous recommendations based on that.
But that isn't a finding.
A social worker - be that a CAFCASS social worker or a local authority worker - can make any claim. Until there is a finding by a court it is meaningless.
Irritating but meaningless.
I have seen quite a few stories on here where even with no findings, Cafcass believe them to be true and frustrate proceedings further. Even proving the ex has lied they still believe them.
CAFCASS can't frustrate proceedings. They can make recommendations and those recommendations can be ignored by the court.
If allegations exist then either Practice Direction 12J needs to be considered or a Fact Find needs to take place.
I have first hand experience of a social worker attempting to stop contact and the judge putting her views aside.
There's a fundamental point here and it applies to everyone's individual case at court.
No matter how it may seem your job is to convince the
court, not CAFCASS. The most intractable cases are often the ones where the ex is more than willing to make up any lie whilst thinking there are no consequences. There are. Firstly, I'm respect of damage to their credibility and secondly to the risk of committing perjury to support their lie if a Fact Find is held.
If you have evidence then you can pick one or two single brief pieces of evidence and include them in a Note to the court and the other side on the day of the Hearing. So if you're ex lied that (for example) you didn't contact her about the children being late back because of traffic on the most recent 'contact', you can attach a screenshot of that text message to a Note. That Note should be short (a couple of sides of A4 at most) and it is not worth including reams of evidence: including it in a Note does not make it formally 'filed' evidence and you don't want to over burden the court.
What that Note and brief evidence achieves is that it demonstrates to the court that you do have evidence and you need to also state clearly that you have *all* the evidence necessary to refute the ex's claims and you will be willing to file it for a Fact Find.
Anyone think ^^ this ^^ is a reasonable question to ask CC during an interview?
I don't think it's unreasonable but the CAFCASS officer will include something addressing this in their report.
I think you /we have to be mindful of the difference between expressed and ascertainable wishes and feelings (cf. The Welfare Checklist) and the likely effect of any parental alienation and the judge will have those things in mind when assessing the report.
Procedurally, interviews with the children should take place in a neutral venue and away from the resident parent. Something else to bear in mind when considering what they said - the impact of being constrained in front of a parent.
I think you /we have to be mindful of the difference between expressed and ascertainable wishes and feelings (cf. The Welfare Checklist) and the likely effect of any parental alienation and the judge will have those things in mind when assessing the report.
Procedurally, interviews with the children should take place in a neutral venue and away from the resident parent. Something else to bear in mind when considering what they said - the impact of being constrained in front of a parent.
What are your views on the mother making false allegations to prevent any contact? This is arguably coercive control and implacably hostile behaviour.
This is also exposing the kids to harm. Purposely preventing and denying them a relationship with their Father, disguising compliance, delaying a resolution etc
I've been through this for a period of years and my views on these matters are very clear.
To prevent contact without good reason is emotional abuse. For me it is coercive and controlling behaviour directed to a former partner. As such it is domestic abuse which the children will be exposed to. Further, I'd add to prevent a relationship with a parent is a further form of harm and together, these are all safeguarding issues.
All part of forming the case. My ex even registered our child without my consent or knowledge to purposely remove my parental responsibilities. This is all part of the control