|
Sharon Kilby’s story.
CORRUPTION IN COLWYN BAY, NORTH WALES, UK.
PART 1
I am a victim of Domestic Violence and my children [Andrew, Michelle, Jordan and Melissa] are victims of child abuse,
perpetrated by my ex-fiancé Mr Gareth Williams [of ‘Bryn Tirion’, Tan Y Graig Road, Llysfaen] the father of my
two youngest children [J & M.] During my on/off relationship with my ‘Jekyll
& Hyde’ ex-partner I was warned that I would suffer serious harm and the loss of my children if I left him. He said that he could destroy me and my family and that he had powerful contacts and
that the police would never charge him as he “was one of them.” The
police did turn a blind eye to his - speeding, dangerous driving, drink-driving
and illegal parking. He would be stopped by police on several occasions but after
a short exchange of words, was inexplicably waved on!
On OCTOBER 5th 1998 I finally scraped up enough courage to leave him for good. For the next four months
or so my children and I were subjected to constant stalking, harassment and intimidation by Mr Williams. He even swerved his car into my 10-year old son, causing him to fall off his bike and he did criminal damage
to my property.
There was also a constant stream of Social Workers and Health Visitors and a DSS official sent by him and various members
of his family. Some of the calls were allegedly made by ‘anonymous’
informants. All referrals were venomous, vengeful and unfounded. Social Services acknowledged this and asked Mr Williams not to waste their time.
Police refused to arrest my ex even though they once caught him at my door pestering me and neighbours could corroborate
my statements. Police continued to insist that there was “not enough evidence”
even when he’d been seen climbing over my gate which was newly painted in black gloss and would’ve smeared his
clothes and himself. I learned from some officers, social workers and the welfare
officer that he was making spurious allegations to police about my so-called harassment of him and my children’s so-called
criminal behavior on and around his property. It was obvious though that they
believed that he was the liar and I the victim because police did not take his complaints seriously - I was never questioned
and also because he had felt obliged to resign as a Special Constable even though he’d only been one for a handful of
weeks. This was after having being advised: “The parties difficulties and
continued involvement of the police in their differences was not compatible with the role.” He was claiming that he had to resign as a “direct consequence” of my actions. But he couldn’t substantiate any of his claims and many officers who attended my call-out requests
stated that he was “untrustworthy, spiteful and a trouble-maker.” Given
all the evidence of his guilt, why were they trying to neutralize the situation and why wasn’t he being charged with
harassment?
I finally attempted to take out an injunction against Mr Williams but my solicitor Mr John Owens [previously of Howell
Hughes & Co, Colwyn Bay and now of Hanover House, The Roe, St Asaph, Llanelwy] persuaded me to accept an undertaking. His reasoning was that if the injunction application failed, my stance regarding the
more important issues of residence and contact would be much weakened. I was
badly advised and also pressured by Mr Owens into signing an undertaking as well. He
claimed it was “no big deal, just a formality” and that since my ex had also made complaints to the authorities,
it would prevent any further inflammation of the tensions between us. Yet my
children and I were totally innocent. [I later learned from my new solicitor that I shouldn’t have signed it.] So the legal Mafia had turned serious abuse of a woman and her four children into
a domestic squabble between partners. The image of a feuding couple hating each
other’s guts and, both on an equal footing, hell bent on revenge in their “tit-for-tat” activities was portrayed
in welfare reports and it was reported that we had both signed undertakings in relation to alleged harassment. I was to later realize that Mr Owens was deceiving me and that this was a deliberate
ploy to get my ex off the hook and shift the onus onto me.
On FEBRUARY 5th 1999 I had to leave my 8-month old baby in hospital overnight because a doctor misdiagnosed
a rash for a burn. The doctor called in Social Services saying that all cases
of suspected child abuse need to be investigated. I explained the predicament
I was in with my ex and begged her not to involve social services but she insisted she was “duty bound.” She didn’t seem to grasp the point that I was trying to protect my baby from
a real child abuser - her father Gareth Williams.
Paediatricians and three GPs diagnosed common infantile eczema. They said
there had been no need to refer Melissa to social services or admit her to hospital.
Yet I had no apology from the clinic. Social workers still pestered me,
did a “Section 47 Investigation” and held a “Strategy Meeting”.
Astonishingly all this appeared on a Court Welfare report where it was also stated that the “doctors had been
unable to establish the cause of the mark.” This was untrue since the doctors
had stated it was eczema and Melissa was prescribed hydrocortisone cream, which she would not have been treated with if there
had been any uncertainty. The report also stated that social workers would be
making another unannounced visit before they could “close the case.” It
didn’t make sense, why was my parenting under such scrutiny and under suspicion and what was the big deal about
common eczema? I would later discover that this suspected ‘burn’
would crop up frequently in various reports and in court. Also that a health
visitor would tell me that eczema is cause for concern and is taken into consideration when decisions are made about whether
a child should be registered “at risk”.
On FEBRUARY 25th 1999 I was threatened by Police that if I continued to call them out regarding Mr Williams,
they would be seeking orders for a binding over. The Court Welfare Officer remarked
that such threats were out of order. I was now beginning to suspect that something
sinister was going on and that my abhorrent ex was being protected.
I spoke briefly on the phone to Mr Williams’ ex-wife. As suspected,
her story was much the same as mine. I learned that she is still terrified of
him and that her son also still fears his father. She told me that she was devastated
when she lost her children and that she never knew what hold he had over the Authorities.
His influence quite clearly depended on an organization which had members in high places. Freemasonry perhaps? She said that GW had poisoned her children’s
minds towards her and that she’d lost her daughter completely although after all these years she never gives up trying
to have contact. She said that her [adult] son does keep in touch but not often
because his father has so much influence and does everything possible to prevent it.
[Her son had to correspond in secret and GW blocked all phone calls and gifts from his ex-wife to her children.]
I later learned that although many people were compassionate to my plight and could confirm everything I’d said
about GW, virtually all were too afraid of him to support me publicly. Worse
though was the fact that one family were so scared that they’d been pressured by him to sign a statement corroborating
his “good character” and “sobriety” and “happy family” status although they did regret
doing so afterwards and did wish to retract it. I was also shocked to discover
that GW had managed to get one of the group leaders at Alcoholics Anonymous to state to the Court Welfare Officer that we
had both sought help for our alcoholism. The truth is that he
was attending the sessions, his name was on the books and I went with him once on the first night just to support him,
otherwise he would never have gone. He did not stay long though and soon went
back on the bottle.
The welfare officer knew that he’d been drinking before one of his visits with her. She reported that he “did smell strongly of alcohol.” My fears are real and genuine and I stressed that for the babies’ safety, contact
with their father should be supervised. I explained that alcohol was the trigger
for most of Mr Williams’ violence and his irresponsible behaviour. But
the W/O retained her ‘neutral’ stance saying that we were “both looking for ways to denigrate each other
in court.” She even accused me of being hostile.
On MARCH 3rd 1999 I was interrogated by a Benefits Agency official Mr John Drew because of GW’s malevolent
allegations of benefit fraud. I explained our living arrangements and that we’d
spent time in each other’s houses for various reasons of which the agency was aware.
I pointed out that it was GW’s stated objective to incriminate me and cause trouble wherever possible and to
try to have my children taken away from me. I told Mr Drew that he should be
investigating GW for fraud because he was claiming incapacity benefit when he was clearly healthy enough to pass the police’s
fitness standards [and healthy enough to practice judo, go rally driving, hunting....] Incidentally GW also has a £200,000
home, various home improvements - courtesy of social services and a brand new family car - courtesy of mobility allowance. He's also had various County Court Judgments, a £2,500 debt with my dad and has been
visited by bailiffs on numerous occasions. I was able to produce relevant documents
to prove his lies in order to discredit him yet the B/A still prefer to target me and my ex remains above reproach. The CSA gave him immunity too.
On MARCH 5th 1999 police turned up to announce that I should be very grateful because they’d spotted
my children [aged 10 and 9] on CCTV under the pier in grave danger from rough seas.
Such was the urgency that they’d been ordered home and reprimanded and I was warned that if it happened again
they’d be placed on “this at risk register.” That did it. I
knew that something powerful but ugly was lurking in the background somewhere. It
just wasn’t kosher. GW’s ex-wife LOST her kids despite her love for
them and her desperate attempts to keep them. The AUTHORITIES had denied her
all contact to them. GW’s words were no idle threat. He could pull strings. How?
I questioned the authenticity, pointing out that the kids were bone dry [which the PC agreed], that CCTV was supposed
to be used for catching criminals not spying on innocent kids playing and that the camera in question doesn’t even focus
under the pier. I wasn’t allowed to see the tape or the stills, the Control
Room Official refused to reveal his identity, and the Council’s story differed to the Police’s version. Furthermore and without explanation the nameless official hastily cut short our conversation and for the
next two/three hours I was unable to phone back in. In view of the police’s
panic reaction and considering that my kids were supposed to be in so much danger that they could’ve been “swept
out to sea to their deaths,” I think I was entitled to see the evidence so that I too could’ve chastised them.
I observed that camera at different times of the day for long periods for a week and it didn’t budge once. I know exactly when it was turned on - 13th March 1999. Coincidentally a photo of my kids on the promenade with the rough sea in the background appeared soon after
in the Daily Post. This Kafkaesque scenario pointed to collaboration amongst
GW, the police and the council to enable the Welfare Officer to submit that I was an unfit guardian of my children. Some months later, my ex brought up the event and told me that the police had been considering charging
me with neglect. [I hadn’t told him about the incident and therefore he wasn’t supposed to know.] My solicitor Mr John Owens said there could not be an enquiry into the matter and he dismissed my
conspiracy theories. The police told me I was being “paranoid”.
I was so thankful when I gained the support of the Headmistress of the secondary school where GW’s children had
attended and I’d spoken to some of the people who live nearby. I learned
that people had reason to believe that something in the Williams’ household was seriously wrong. There had been “obvious neglect” and his ex-wife had been “beaten up by him and abused”
yet police had failed to prosecute him and, astonishingly, he had been awarded custody of their children. GW once admitted to me that it was only the strength of a good character reference [which he showed me]
from the police that had secured his residence application. This is despite his known motoring offences, violence towards
women, children and dogs, financial irresponsibility and electricity fraud....
I learned that local people were also worried about his children’s welfare and that they and the Head-teacher
even “witnessed Mr Williams pulling a gun on his ex-wife”, but when they alerted Social Services, they were effectively
told to keep their noses out. Such was the concern however that an Educational
Social Worker was called to GW’s house to do an investigation. Later the
Headmistress was to tell my new solicitor and Conwy Social Services and the Welfare Officer about her knowledge of GW and
all the worries that she had and she warned that my babies “should not spend too much time in their father’s company
due to possible danger to them.” She also told me that she was shocked
that no action was ever taken by social services - there hadn’t even been a meeting of child protection staff in an
attempt to help GW’s children. In her view his ex-wife “would have
been the better parent for the children to be living with.” She added that
she was aware though of how rare it is for children to be registered “at risk” or removed from an abusive parent/guardian
despite obvious appalling evidence of ill treatment and neglect, which many children suffer.
Incidentally I also learned that social services had been called in to help GW’s daughter at her Colwyn Bay school
because of various problems.
Because of the genuine concerns from professional persons I felt that I had a right to know more in relation to GW’s
suspected abuse of his children considering the fact he is also the father of my children and he wants residence of them. Over the next fourteen months or so I tried to get hold of the Official Records. Curiously it appears that those documents have been destroyed and the Educational
Welfare Officer concerned does not remember the family. [Most people would remember them because not many men raise children
{one of them a girl} alone and most people got lost trying to find his house which was in the middle of a forest.] Mr Owens repeatedly assured me that he was trying to get hold of the documents and said that he’d
written to the W/O and to the Headmistress. He lied about that. The Court Welfare Officer and Social Workers also tried to fob me off insisting that such documents
weren’t relevant because they applied to GW’s older children not to Jordan and Melissa. I find such wishy-washy attitude staggering. I would’ve
thought that since the lives of two young children are at stake, welfare officials would do as many checks as possible on
both parents for suitability. After all if you wish to foster a child
you have to endure months of cross-examination and investigations by an army of child welfare experts. And anyway, don’t lawyers have a moral duty to do everything possible to expose criminal behavior
and elements of corruption in order to protect the vulnerable - the children, and not crooked clients? I later formed the conclusion that Mr Owens was working for the opposition and that his misleading counsel
and refusal to request important documentation amounted to professional malpractice.
It was only after much persuasion that the court W/O did finally contact the headmistress. Meanwhile GW contacted the Education Authority, threatening to sue the Head with defamation of character!
On MAY 20th 1999 we suffered a small kitchen fire. At first
the Fire Service felt it had been caused by the kettle or washing machine but when I trustingly told one of the firemen, Brian,
about some strange phenomena that we’d experienced and thus wondered if there was some bizarre connection, the fire
department decided [after an ‘investigation’] that the fire had been started maliciously. Almost immediately we were treated as dangerous criminals. My
house began crawling with senior policemen. I had to surrender my keys for the
night. I was not allowed to return to collect essential baby items even under
police escort and they swiped Andrew’s workbooks and a book that I’d started writing, which included my opinion
of the authorities. A policeman stood guard outside my house. I was beginning to wish that I’d tried to tackle the fire myself to save being treated as an arsonist.
Prior to the fire, for a few months, there had been some unexplained smells [some pleasantly flowery and some disturbing
like stale fag ash] and other happenings, such as burnt tapers and evil messages. I
could not blame Andrew or Shell because such occurrences sometimes happened when they were out or when we were all together. Since I could not, at the time, find any logical explanation I wondered if there was
some supernatural influence. We began to wonder if we were experiencing messages
from a higher unquantifiable power. It felt as if we were being given the strength
and encouragement to fight malevolent Gareth Williams and his henchmen. It was
as if God was making himself known to us and consequently I believed that he wanted us to help spread his word. I had previously been a devout atheist.
There could have been another explanation, which only dawned on me much later.
It is possible that we might’ve been the victims of a cruel hoax because for some months we had been targeted
by well-known troublesome youths in the neighbourhood. [I had wondered if GW
was paying them to torment us because I’d never previously had problems with local gangs] and since the door key had
been misplaced there was a good chance that it could’ve got into the wrong hands.
Detective Constable Chris Walsh accused Andrew of arson and he was
interviewed under caution. The basis of the case against Andrew was his so-called
“obsession” with evil, talk about “demons” and “he writes about the evils of the world”
and “he writes about fires.” In fact he’d write and talk about
various things - good and bad as part of his home education and he was simply answering questions from a text which happened
to be about a fire. The CID’s report was misleading. D C Walsh was of the opinion that Andrew is a “very bright child” but was determined to find
Andrew guilty despite the lack of proof. A Police Social Worker had “concerns
as to whether Andrew should be referred to a Child Psychologist.” I told
them I’d rather they point the finger of blame at me rather than my totally innocent ten year old child. But they wouldn’t have it. [I even learned later on that I too would be grilled by a Psychiatrist.] It was beyond my comprehension that they were making all this fuss when there is so
much violent crime on the streets, so many children with “behavioural and anti-social problems”, so much drug
dealing.... and all of which the Police and Social Services fail to address.
Within days Social Workers came to question me about the fire. They seemed
quite supportive and sympathetic and felt that the matter should go no further.
On JUNE 12th 1999 my neighbour’s children and mine had an argument.
Despite reports from the Education Authority, Welfare Officer and Educational Social Worker stating that my children
are “intelligent, polite and well-behaved” and the fact that there had never been any genuine complaints regarding
their behaviour, a police officer barged into my kitchen with a face like thunder declaring that my son was a well-known,
unruly, undisciplined yob and that he’d have to drag him down the Police Station for a “stern talking to.” Andrew was aggressively warned that he’d be going on the “at risk register”
and that he’d end up being taken into care. I acknowledged that Andrew
had tried to help me shoo bothersome kids off our drive because no one else would but I made it clear that he was certainly
no troublemaker and that the officer’s spleen was misdirected as it was Andrew who was the victim of neighbourhood
bullies. I also told him that the “at risk” threat had a familiar
ring and that the joke was running a bit thin. But the PC ranted on regardless. By the time the Officer had finished accusing and threatening, Andrew was shaking,
crying and in shock. The PC was also derogatory towards me and hissed “this
will all end in tears” and he menacingly warned: “You will lose all of your children.” On his departure he told us to expect a visit from Social Services.
I was furious and frustrated. There was nowhere I could turn. All I could do was try to convince Andrew that he was not in the wrong and that the Police were liars and
were targeting him almost certainly on GW’s orders.
On JUNE 15th 1999 I was hauled in front of a panel of Child Health and Welfare experts for a Conference
about my children’s future. Despite the Social Workers’ opinion that
no further action should be taken, the other members disagreed and decided that all four of my children were at risk of significant
harm in the future and therefore should be registered “at risk”. They
even wanted to stop me taking my children home that evening until it was decided that a “very urgent core group should
be set up to look at ways of offering protection and support” to me and my kids.
I was incensed. They’d been plotting this and now they’d
done it. I just knew that the Police were behind it. D C Walsh had been the first with his hand up when it was time to vote for the demolition of my family. Everyone else [except the social workers] had followed his lead. It was outrageous; this had nothing whatsoever to do with whether my kids were at genuine risk from me
or not. There wasn’t even a Fire Representative at Conference or a Fire
Report available and it was claimed that an Out Of Hours Social Worker had attended on the night of the fire which I knew
was untrue and which later proved to be the case. I was powerless to prove that
there was something shady going on. I faced the real risk of losing my children
just because I was a victim of a vicious, vengeful, venomous man who happened to have ‘friends in high places’. All they could do was nit-pick about trifling matters of which I had proved to be
totally innocent. For example the ‘burn’ gave them “cause for
concern.” The fact that I successfully home-educate also bothered them
despite their knowledge that the Education Authority had stated that they were pleased with my children’s progress. My ex-partner with his scurrilous allegations coupled with the fact that there had
been a small fire was all the ringleader needed to persuade the others not to rock the boat.
We were to be ‘hanged’ also just because we’d been candid about our ‘paranormal’ beliefs,
God and the Devil. It was all so unreal.
I felt as if I was losing my mind. Probably that was the plan. All the ominous predictions from my ex were coming true. History was repeating itself. My fate was becoming a carbon
copy of GW’s ex-wife. Predictably my protest fell on deaf ears and my outcry
that the effect of all this would be devastating on the upcoming Court proceedings was disregarded. I just had to lump it and that was that.
The council’s legal mouthpiece recited the criteria for care/supervision order proceedings stating that we came
very close to facing them. I wasn’t even told that I was entitled
to a lawyer only that I could appeal whereby I could have a solicitor as long as he/she remained a silent observer. Such is the Council’s dictatorial regime that they were free to consult with and invite to
all the conferences whoever they pleased [in fact there were up to fourteen of them, most of whom I’d never seen before,
who’d been plucked out of a little box labeled ‘Child welfare Expert’ and deemed suitable to decide what
was best for my children.] In comparison I am bound by ‘confidentiality’
laws on the pretext of the protection of children. They wanted to put
my kids in their ‘care’; this in an area which is famous for paedophilia in care homes and where the finger of
suspicion has been pointed at police officers and Masons. Many of the abusers
are men of high standing. Victims are labeled ‘liars’ if they dare
to complain. Kids haven’t got a hope in hell of justice because everyone
with any clout closes ranks to cover up the sins of men - men who bask in positions of trust and authority. Since that is the truth it becomes our business to protect our children - ALL children - by whatever
means necessary and if that means breaking such laws as ‘confidentiality’ and ‘data protection’ then
we have a duty to ourselves, our kids and our God to do so.
The Child Protection Coordinator Mr Graham Seale assured me that the registration would not prevent me from resuming
my job as a carer of ‘special needs’ children in the future. However,
and just as I’d expected, this later proved not to be the case. After we
were finally removed from the obscene register Mr Seale fed me a pack of lies about re-registering as a carer. He told me that the procedure for becoming registered as a child/foster/respite carer is more vigorous
than it used to be and that there were “more hoops to jump through.” He
said that the pay for respite carers is half the amount that it was and he also said that if a carer has six months or more
time off from ‘caring’, he/she has to go through the whole process again of registering, i.e. all the various
checks - Police, Social Services, Medical.... The Social Worker who deals with the application process told me that what he’d
said was untrue. When Mr Seale told me that the final decision about whether
an application is approved or not goes to panel, I asked him what he would say if he was asked for his opinion. Mr Seale said that he saw no reason why I should be refused and he gave me his word
that he would look upon my application favourably. However, he did in
fact retract.
I am now prevented from resuming my work with other children. This is
in spite of having a good work record, good references and the fact that the kids and I had done everything that had been
asked of us - we’d endured nine months of being under suspicion, scrutinized and at the mercy of core group gatherings,
endless meetings and social workers’ and psychiatrists’ Comprehensive Risk Assessment. And after all that I was reported to be a “loving and capable mother,” my children were reported
to be “loved, contented, well cared for, happy, safe, polite, pleasant, intelligent and mature” and it was reported
that Andrew and Shell “receive a good education.” Also no one could
find anything to be concerned about except my “preoccupation with society being corrupt.” To that end their fear was that I might be a bad influence on my children!
Incidentally it took eight months from my first phone conversation with the social worker in charge of fostering applications
until I received my application form! During that time I frequently tried
to contact her only to be told that she was ill/on leave/off for some other reason.... There was nobody else who could assist
me. It took about a week to fill in their application ‘booklet’. I then contacted my referees only to be told soon afterwards by the social worker
not to bother with my application because a decision had already been taken to reject it.
I wasn’t told exactly why. Two months after her message she still
had not confirmed it in writing as promised. When I phoned, the excuse was that
the social worker could not reply because she had been off caring for her sick mother
I received a letter on June 2nd 2001 from Mr Gwilym Roberts [family placement team manager] telling me that I do not
now meet their “highest possible standards of safety for children due to the degree of uncertainty about events in 1999.” Remember we are living in pedophile/child abuse country where policemen and Masons
are above the law and luxuriate in perversion. I wrote back on the same day asking
what more I could do to satisfy their “uncertainty”. By September
2nd 2001 Mr Gwilym Roberts hadn’t even had the courtesy to acknowledge my letter. [He replied after I published my story on the internet.]
The ‘assessment’ of the Social Workers from The Family Support Team amounted to little more than faintly
entertaining useless gossip. I was interrogated on such matters as my brother
and his family, my parents’ marriage, my pregnancies, how Andrew [when he was 16 months old] reacted when Shelly was
born – all sorts of irrelevant questions. There were endless hours every
week for months and none of it to do with useful suggestions as to how I might reduce the risk that I was considered to be
to my kids. It was all about digging around trying to find something, anything
that they could ‘hang’ us with so that they could pretend to be “concerned”. They even tried to get me to describe my children as “demanding” and “difficult”. It didn’t seem to matter that what was difficult and damaging emotionally
for Andrew and Shelly was the unfair “subject” label that had been bestowed on them and the “young offender”
insinuation. Also, that they had to live with the fear of being taken from their
mother and younger siblings. Plus they had to cope with the unjust encroachment
of the Family Protection Social Workers, the Mental Health Social Worker and the intrusion of the Psychiatrists - a Consultant
Psychiatrist and a Consultant in Child Adolescent Psychiatry. Remember, hundreds
of hours expended maliciously by the parasites in the public service have to be paid for by the public. They pick on vulnerable people in order to justify their existence while pillars of society commit heinous
sexual offences with impunity.
The Social Workers were not concerned with the fact that GW was still being allowed to make a mockery of the Child
Welfare Agencies and that he was still tormenting us with a bombardment of malevolent referrals via: Child-line, NSPCC,
Health Visitors, doctors, Hospital A&E, Police and Social Services. They
weren’t bothered that he was still boasting about knowing my every move and having me watched. They weren’t interested in my experiences of dubious police dealings and that there could be wrongdoing
within the Authorities and they didn’t care about GW’s ex-wife’s fate and all the implications generally. All they wanted to do was waste hours trying to discover who started the fire and
why. And they wanted to brand Andrew and Shelly as needing help with their
“emotional, social and behavioural problems.” Plus they too refused
to believe the stark facts that GW was the one maliciously creating hardship and stress for us and that we were the ones suffering
persecution, battling against all adversity for justice. In a report they stated:
“It will be necessary for both adults to put aside their own difficulties with their relationship and focus on their
children’s needs as a priority.” I couldn’t seem to get it
through to them that they shouldn’t be bothering me with all the referrals by “anonymous” persons and that
they shouldn’t take any of them seriously unless the caller is prepared to reveal his/her identity [they needn’t
disclose it to me.] I told them that it should then be easy to determine whether
a call is genuine or just plain slander and that if the latter proves to be the case, the slanderer should be prosecuted. My protest fell on deaf ears. During
every session with them I felt as if I was banging my head against a brick wall. Why
couldn’t they face the facts and help do something about the real problem?
They did agree with me however [as did all the other officials and professional persons] that if their daughter
was put under the intolerable strain that I am under because of a lying, evil-minded ex-partner, they would be fighting like
fury for the truth to come out.
Fourteen highly qualified, high ranking, highly paid Child Welfare
Professionals were assigned to my case and they gathered together periodically to determine my destiny and that of my children
- all on the strength of one tiny, unexplained fire. When I was asking for psychiatric help [more than a year after
the kids came off the register] because of Jordan’s disturbing emotional behavior – which began at the onset of
visitation, I was told that there were no resources available for the kind of intervention needed. I was offered a chat with a psychiatrist and that was it. I
was informed by the psychiatrist [Dr Andrew Knight] that even if a psychiatrist’s report recommends that a child/children
should not continue with visitation due to psychiatric problems, judges, in 99% of cases, disagree and contact continues! In contrast, all the referrals that GW made were investigated. No one cared that the referrals were made by just one poison filled compulsive liar and that he was being
allowed [even encouraged] to continue on his wicked mission of revenge unchallenged because of venal officials. Neither did they care about GW’s abusive track record of raising children and that sincere serious
concerns had been raised regarding his older children over a number of years by School Teachers. It was a scandalous waste of the public purse and a shameful refusal of the so-called ‘protecting’
agencies to safeguard the futures of my two babies. I have no doubt that if the
boot was on the other foot and I had been guilty of even a morsel of my ex’s offences, I’d have
been prosecuted long ago and done my x months at her majesty’s pleasure.
Was he being protected by Masonic interests?
During the ‘Comprehensive Risk Assessment’ the court W/O continued with her ‘assessment’. She continued to misrepresent the true picture and in the doing FAILED to serve Jordan’s
and Melissa’s best interests. Although she mentioned the unhelpful trickle
of fabricated referrals, in the main she concentrated on creating a false image of quarrelsome parents, who are equally bad
and neither of whom, in her opinion, care about their children’s needs. She
used trickery and held facts supporting my case to be irrelevant. She reported,
for example, that babies “will obviously be reluctant and upset at changeovers if the parents are arguing.” The truth was that I would say very little at changeovers for fear of provoking
my ex. Jordan and Mel would get upset because he would easily fly into
a rage and would yell at, threaten or hit me or be rough with them. I tried to
make the W/O aware that not only were there witnesses - myself, mutual friends and GW’s neighbours - to his violence
towards his children and oppression of them, but the Educational Welfare Officer had also been called in by worried teachers. Her answer was along the lines of: “So what, the EWO visited you too.” She didn't seem to grasp the point that GW was being investigated for child abuse
whereas I was in receipt of a routine visit as all home-educators are. The W/O
painted a picture of a hostile couple playing sick games. For example, she described
us as collecting “proof” for the purpose of belittling each other in court.
There is a world of difference in my aim which was/is my desperate need to expose the truth in order to limit any future
damage to my children compared with GW’s evil, criminal intentions. This
is especially difficult as GW is so smarmy and therefore so plausible. She
also stated that neither of us had anything good to say about each other yet I distinctly remember praising my ex up for his
capability in car mechanics, his good DIY skills, good culinary skills.... and the fact that there had been good times. In all her reports she stressed such expressions as: “If they continue
to maintain their antagonistic stance towards each other, Jordan’s and Melissa’s emotional needs with be severely
hampered.”
This is totally and continually missing the point that Mr Williams is a liar, a dangerous evil-doer, criminally calling
the Authorities out on me in an effort to trigger care proceedings whereas I am being victimized by him and by the agencies,
struggling to defend myself and protect my children. You cannot mediate with
someone who is unreasonable, irrational, constantly attacking you and hell-bent on destroying you, your children and your
life. Six years on and GW continues to harass [with official help] and the evil
continues to flourish. Whatever happened to the law that’s supposed to
protect children?
As a result of the ‘registration’ my stance in court was, predictably, seriously weakened. GW’s solicitor Mr Chris Hind of Amphletts in Colwyn Bay jubilantly referred to it at every Court
hearing and my solicitor Mr John Owens stated that there was now a real risk that I could lose my babies altogether to my
ex and as such I’d be better off agreeing joint residence. His argument
was that if my ex and I could agree on such arrangements out of court, it would mean that, despite the Council’s
opinion that my children are “At Risk”, Mr Williams was acknowledging that I am a fit and proper
parent and therefore there would be no grounds for a judge to award him sole custody!
It was at this point that Mr Owens and I parted company. Prior to this
though and part way through proceedings, a date had been set for a trial and the opportunity of cross-questioning. However, on the day, we were denied this and the JP Mr G Roberts forced me to hand my babies over for contact
of four mornings per week [unsupervised] on the logic that “It is always in the child’s best interests to have
contact with both parents” and “You are contradicting yourself by, on the one hand blocking contact and on the
other agreeing to small increases. You are coming here every so often to play
games. Therefore I see no reason why Mr Williams shouldn’t have substantial
access to his children.” He had slyly focused the ‘blame’ onto
me whereas it appeared that GW was, in the magistrate’s eyes, a perfect father and the innocent party! I had foolishly put my trust in Mr John Owens who had advised me to “agree to small periodic increases
of contact rather than let the Court decide as it puts you in a less hostile light.”
He convinced me that fathers always get awarded some contact regardless of their crimes and he kept insisting that
we were “playing it the right way.” I was also bullied into giving
GW Parental Responsibility because my solicitor assured me that it “doesn’t mean anything” and that it would
be awarded anyway sooner or later and because “it looks better to agree than to have it imposed.” However it turned out to be very significant. It gave my ex
the right to sit with his solicitor, Mr Chris Hind, in on the Child Protection Conferences and it gave him the opportunity
to continue controlling and harassing on the pretence of being concerned about the babies, medically. At a later stage, and to my shock and disgust, I was threatened by a judge that I’d be sent to jail
if I didn’t comply with the court order. Yet there was never any question
of me not doing so.
My local MP wrote to the Chief Executive of Conwy Council in my favour asking that my kids be removed from the Register
because of unfair stigmatization but the answer was “no”. The council
rules because the council knows best! Almost daily we read of council failures
leading to the injury of innocent children and no doubt the authorities involved hush up many cases.
On SEPTEMBER 22nd 1999 the Police accused Andrew and Shelly of bad behaviour and of causing criminal damage
in GW’s neighbourhood [Llysfaen.] They were accused of: causing serious
injury to one of wealthy businessman Mr Dewi Jones’ prize horses. Mr Dewi
Jones [of D J Construction] also complained to the police that my kids had stolen things [although he wasn’t quite sure
what] from his stables and that they’d chucked his bales of hay about. GW’s
neighbours also complained to the police that Andrew and Shell had been seen in various gardens letting out rabbits and swinging
on swings.... As a consequence of the ‘registration’ my kids were barely out of my sight so I knew immediately
that this was another frame-up by the police. The police did not question me
until the Wednesday, yet the ‘crimes’ were allegedly committed on the preceding weekend. They couldn’t tell me the day/time of occurrence, or what ‘feed’ my kids had supposedly
fed to the horse, which had caused it to become injured and in need of fifteen stitches and they didn’t know if any
officer had visited Mr Dewi Jones’ premises and seen the wounded animal.
I visited Mr Dewi Jones’ stables and his premises that [surprise, surprise] back onto GW’s land and I interviewed
Mr Dewi Jones’ wife. She told lies and was clearly flustered. When my dad and I demanded an investigation we were sent a constable who was very cagey and unable to answer
our questions. He told us that he’d visit the D J family to find out more. Why didn’t he check the police record? After a short while the PC returned to
tell us that it was definitely not a case of mistaken identity. The officer then
told me to visit the D J family to find out more details so that he could then trace the incident on the Police Computer
and thus give me the information that I wanted, that is the Police’s version of events. [He might have had to alter them!!!]
I spoke to D J and his wife and two of their employees. There were differences
in their stories but all agreed emphatically: “This has nothing to do with Gareth, nothing whatsoever.” They were clear that Andrew and Shell had fed their horse “food that it shouldn’t have had.” This had resulted in the horse getting colic “bolting into its stable”
and gashing its thigh. One employee, Mrs Cooper told me that she’d
reported the offence to PC 1302 but he’d already stated that although a Mrs Cooper had phoned the police, he
hadn’t spoken to her. [P C 1302 was the only one who I felt was
telling me the truth.] The D J group stressed that Andrew and Shell had been
“coming and going all day Saturday and all day Sunday and Monday afternoon.”
If there was a scrap of legitimacy in any of it my kids would have been caught and questioned by the police AT THE
TIME OF THE OFFENCES because there would’ve been plenty of time for the police to attend the scene and catch the culprits
red-handed.
Social Workers fronted up to question me about the matter. They said that
GW had again been in their office with more of his ‘concerns’, one of which was the fact that his neighbours were
irate because Andrew and Shell had again been up to no good and had been feeding pellets to his neighbours’ extremely
valuable horse.... After the Social Workers had seen the transcripts of the secret tape recordings that I’d made of
the whole horsy story, they agreed that it was a bit fishy.
When my dad and I requested another investigation, Inspector Philip Hare showed up.
I explained that it was important that I get to the bottom of it all because I feared GW was behind it and because
I was constantly being harassed. I informed him that the W/O had stated that
GW’s behaviour is bordering harassment and that the Social Workers agreed that this latest incident was suspect and
that GW was guilty of wasting Social Services and NSPCC resources with his umpteen trumped-up referrals. I gave Inspector Hare a few examples as follows: GW would state that friends of his and people he knows
had ‘witnessed’ me hitting my kids with a broom handle, living with a convicted sex offender, going out drinking
every night and leaving the babies home alone; he claimed that ‘people’ had seen my toddler son playing alone
outside, virtually naked and that the gate was open; he said that ‘many people’ had seen my older two playing
with matches, letting car tyres down and that they’d seen my elder son being battered and shaken violently by me....
The Inspector told us that if his findings are that D J and Co had collaborated with GW and involved the Police then that
is very serious indeed and needs to be dealt with. But in the next breath he
informed us that it would take him over five hours to get any answers, that he had no intentions of finding out who’s
been fibbing and why and that he wouldn’t be questioning Cooper. Some investigation!
The result of Inspector Hare’s ‘inspection’ was that there was no doubt over identity - it was unmistakably
my kids. He informed me that the horse had been fed only grass but had
still become ill and had jumped a barbed wire fence gashing its leg. [More variation in the plot!] He stressed that nothing had been stolen, only misplaced, and that the family want it all to stop now. It later transpired that his ‘enquiries’ had not included the questioning
of the police officers or the D J household. He admitted that he didn’t
know if any officer had attended the crime scene and witnessed the poorly horse and he remarked that he wasn’t aware
that the horse was so valuable. He frequently emphasized that GW had no input
at all on the whole saga, that there was nothing dubious going on and that nobody was lying.
With regards to the stockpile of referrals made by the nameless GW, Inspector Hare declared that harassment need not
be tolerated and that I should ask Social Services for the identities of the person[s] watching me and my children. But when I informed him that they won’t divulge such information, he just shrugged. So much for the protection of women and children!
I wrote to the Police Complaints Authority but my complaint was referred back to the police for them to investigate
themselves! There is no independent body overseeing Police dealings. They can and DO go about their business doing exactly whatever they please.
No wonder corruption is rife. The ‘findings’ of Chief Inspector
Scott were that my children were “exonerated, they having done nothing wrong” and yet he concluded: “I’m
perfectly satisfied that all police officers have acted correctly.” Talk
about conflicting statements! There was no apology and no explanation, just the
brief additional patronizing comment: “Finally Miss Kilby, I sincerely hope that you now have a clear understanding
of the situation as there is nothing further we can assist you with in regard to this particular matter.” This is a clear case of corruption and cover up at the highest levels.
The sheer arrogance of the Police is truly breathtaking and the sinister web of secrets and lies conceals a deadly
truth known only to the perpetrator and the victim.
In SEPTEMBER 1999 some of my mail began to be delivered open or otherwise tampered with. To date around 40 envelopes have arrived open or damaged. Royal
Mail’s Security Officer Mr Neil Roberts has assured me on various occasions that investigations have been done yet local
postmen have told me that they have not been questioned. They confirmed that
they have delivered opened letters, particularly A4 sized envelopes, which have been sent from Literary Agents. Mr Neil Roberts has been unable to discover who is responsible for interfering with my mail.
On OCTOBER 16th 1999 I received a letter from the B/A demanding the return of almost £17,000 ‘overpayment’. Incidentally it’s amazing how the letter got delivered to me because my name/address
was not visible at the window envelope! It is astonishing that they are still
listening to and believing GW when I have provided more than enough evidence to prove that he is a most unreliable witness
and because I have provided them with utilities statements to corroborate. Solicitor
John Owens told me to appeal but strangely he would not allow me to see the transcript of my own interview with the B/A official
Mr John Drew. It was becoming more evident that he wasn’t really on my
side at all. In the interim I was interviewed again by Mr Drew. I produced more documents, which were required and I again wrote to him.
Months passed without any correspondence from Mr Drew and it wasn’t until a year later when I received a £1,000+
demand for Council Tax that I learned via the Citizens Advice Bureau that the B/A still expected their repayment if full. The CAB discovered on my behalf that, for reasons known only to himself, Mr Owens
had not lodged my appeal despite my instructions to do so. He had only sent a
letter to the B/A requesting the correct appeal form [which incidentally lay for over a month in the wrong department and
thus wasted more of the time that I was given to appeal.] Now, I’m told,
it’s too late to appeal, the B/A will not negotiate with me and there’s nothing I can do about it. Meanwhile Mr John Owens is allowed to remain unanswerable! There
is no legal aid to take him to court. It is staggering to think that they
are so all-powerful that they can dictate and destroy people’s lives in this way and so easily - with few questions
asked and with little resistance encountered.
I wrote to the Law Society but despite evidence incriminating both Mr Owens and Mr Hind, the Law Society sided with
my solicitor. Now these two bent solicitors: Mr Owens and Mr Hind, are free to
continue their corrupt practices at the expense of clients and the taxpaying public.
On JUNE 5th 2000 [Monday] I took my children for a short ‘Butlins’ break. I gave GW more than a week’s notice and offered to let him see his children before we went - on a
day of his choice. After much indecision he finally settled on seeing Jordan
and Mel on Sunday June 4th, the day before our departure. Because we’d
been urged to agree arrangements without the constant need for court intervention and on the advice of Social Workers and
the W/O, I prepared a letter confirming our agreement and asked him to sign it. He
refused. He then told me that he couldn’t have the babies on the Sunday
after all.
On JUNE 6th 2000 [Tuesday] GW and his solicitor Mr Chris Hind of Amphletts went to court in Chester to take
out an urgent ‘ex-parte prohibited steps order’ against me banning me from leaving the country as GW was alleging
that I intended to flee to the USA with the kids. Amphletts also wanted an undertaking
from me that I surrender my American passport to the police. It wasn’t
until the Wednesday [June 7th] that GW [in his “great distress and upset”]
contacted Social Services whereby it was suggested to him that I might be on holiday.
Everyone [including the Court W/O] agreed that GW’s story was doubtful and they questioned his motives. They were amazed that I was being dragged into court yet again and said that GW has
some explaining to do this time. Also they were surprised that Mr Chris Hind
was taking such legal action particularly because his client had not made any effort to check my whereabouts beforehand -
he hadn’t even contacted the police. After a few days, however, I received
a copy statement from him via my solicitor saying [amongst a pile of other lies and vicious allegations including references
to my mental state] that he had in fact gone to the Police on the Monday [June 5th] but that they’d been
“somewhat unhelpful.” As we are talking about the whereabouts and
well being of two very young children, it would’ve been the police’s duty to try and trace a ‘runaway’
family. Didn’t GW and the Police realize that all they had to do was make
a swift phone call to my dad, or even Social Services or the H/V on the Monday? It
would’ve saved us all a load of hassle and it would’ve saved the taxpayer a lot of expense.
Social Workers and my barrister stated that the reference to police was an after-thought and that GW was clearly causing
trouble and wasting everyone’s time. They agreed that if he had to pay
the legal fees himself instead of handing the bill to the taxpayer he wouldn’t be so quick to take such action. Also surely questions should have been asked about Mr Hind’s decision to rush
off to Chester Crown Court for Prohibition Order Hearings? Maybe he wouldn’t
have been in such a hurry if he wasn’t paid so generously by the Public Purse.
Plus I had to make full-day nursery arrangements at a day care centre in a moment’s notice. No one pays those fees and my traveling expenses. GW might
think twice if he had to pay his children’s fees.
At Court, the Judge had not one word of criticism for GW. Instead he gave
us both a lecture about how he sees warring couples like us all the time and how we must work together for the sake
of our children. He then quoted from a Welfare Report: “They are totally
unwilling or unable to work together, communicate effectively, agree arrangements or make rational decisions together regarding
their children.” It is quite breathtaking.
I have no doubt that had the tables been reversed, I’d have been hung, drawn and quartered long ago! Some local police officers have even commented that they can’t understand why nothing is being done
for me. It would appear that in the 21st century, our legal system
is still biased towards men and has nothing whatsoever to do with the welfare of children.
And why is it that years after I thought I’d escaped from the clutches of GW, he still has the State’s
permission to control my movements and those of my kids?
Despite the fact that Social Services and the Court Welfare Officer did finally believe that whatever I did I was damned
and that GW was guilty of harassment, a view which they communicated to the Police, the Police disagreed. They wrote: “Contacting the police, engaging in legal process and making reports to social services
are not courses of action which constitute harassment.”
|
