The Outrage: Contact With a Father Who Murdered Her Baby Brother

Its beyond a simple sin of the conduct in the way that the Family Courts have treated mothers and children.  No words describe the psychological, social and organizational abuse by this court towards the young girl and mother.  Before walking through those Family Courts, I assumed that there was a civil line and expected that there was a limit as to how much a mother and a child is forced to endure.  Clearly, it was incorrect for me to simply assume that such civility is existent beyond these court room doors.  There is no line, no justice in what appears to be a sick game of the weakest link where the sociopaths, narcissists and psychopaths all join in to have their take on pleasure to a child and a mothers detriment.  There is no justification for the despicable act that took place upon this court day.  Nor is there justification for the countless violations of human rights against women and children that are not available to read under the judgments section.  This case is extreme mental and emotional torture that should never have taken place in a democratic country, a place where Australians use to utter the word, "Free". 

The Father Murdered Her Baby Brother

 In 2004, previous orders that are not listed on the legal database compelled the child to have prison visits with the man who bashed her three week old brother to death. 

"[7] Z started to grizzle really badly. You stood up. You walked around the kitchen holding him. He sat in your elbow with his face towards you. You had his head cupped in your right hand. He started screaming. That made you feel even more frustrated. You said: "For fuck's sake, will you just be quiet." You put your left hand around the back of your right hand. With the pressure of two hands you pushed in on his head. You are a strong man, and you knew it. Z's skull was soft bone, and you knew it. You were angry, because you wanted to sleep. Through your fingers, you felt something go click at the back of his head. You had crushed in his skull, causing bleeding that inevitably led to his death. Not immediately, but within a short time, you alerted S. The two of you rushed to hospital, but it was to no avail. Resuscitation measures were commenced. Before long, they had to be terminated. "

Mothers Pleadings for Protection

In 2005, the dawn of Australia's Shared Parenting Bill occurred one of the most horrific cases I have ever read.  Two years after the father killed his three week old son, the family court entertained contact with the older child.  The mother begged the court not to continue contact, describing every detail of grief and past actions of his violence towards the older sibling.
 

"I am terrified that, if S has contact with B once he leaves prison, that he will hurt her as he hurt Z. "

" Throughout our relationship, the respondent frequently lost his temper. This usually took the form of him suddenly losing his temper and yelling and roaring at me. At other times, he also manhandled me, grabbing me by the upper arms and shaking me or even just pushing me out of his way."

 

"Especially in the last three years of our relationship, I lived in fear of the respondent losing his temper. I was very frightened of him when it happened." 

 

" The respondent was also very controlling of me. He dictated where I went, who I'd see and make sure that I ran messages for him. If I didn't do what he wanted, he would blow up and lose his temper with me."

 Another occasion involved the father advising the mother that he had smacked B "so hard that she did not know what had hit her"

Paternal Grandparents Betrayal

What appeared to have been a clear case of no contact until the child was eighteen twisted into a living nightmare for both of them.  Whilst the father was in jail(only three years for manslaughter), the paternal grandparents had used their contact with the child to maintain contact between the child and the father whom had a complete disregard of his violent behavior and threat to the child.

"I am satisfied that Mr C Snr consciously disregarded the wishes and concerns of the mother when he permitted B to speak with the father by telephone. I am satisfied that the incident shook the mother's confidence in the paternal grandparents' preparedness to respect her wishes and follow her directions, over and above those of their son. "

".....S is a very kind and loving man. He couldn't even hit his child, she was at my place one day and she was being naughty and I said you should give her a smack, anyway he did give her - it was not smack, it was a tap, and she loves him so much and she thought I can play on this, so she broke her heart and the next minute he was crying, I said don't cry, you are supposed to be reprimanding her." 

 

Previous Judge Who Ordered Contact
The judge who made this order in 2003 was none other than the current Chief Justice of the Family Court, "Diana Bryant" known back then as FM Bryant.

"29. On 13 October 2003 orders were made by CFM Bryant (as she then was) providing that the father's contact be reserved and that the paternal grandparents have leave to intervene in the proceedings."

 

The Court Reporter

The support for contact with this father was overwhelming as they all sidestepped the uncomfortable realization that this man was a danger and it was reckless to even put this mother through mental torture.   An undertaking is a note that is not held as strong as other parts of the order.  It is simply making an unofficial promise to the court.  This is what the court reporter suggested,

"I recommend B commence contact with Mr D C and Mrs C one weekend a month from Friday to Sunday for the above mentioned reasons. If this contact is granted then I recommend Ms O attend counselling to assist her to deal with this issue, as it is necessary for B that she encourage and facilitate this contact. I recommend Mr D C and Mrs C give an undertaking they will not allow B to have contact with Mr C if there is no Order made for contact."

In other words, the child would unofficially be seeing the father.  Just recently, a father who was supposed to have been supervised during contact had killed himself and his children in a car crash suspected murder - suicide.   This is how far they will go to ensure that the fathers wishes supersedes everything else - including the children and mothers lives. 

" It is my view that B has through her childhood years developed a warm and close relationship with Mr C. Given this, it is my view that B should be given an opportunity to have contact with Mr C in prison. If this contact is granted, I recommend Mr D C and Mrs J C be the only people to take B to the prison for contact."

 

The following statement is obvious in its negligence and lack of knowledge in Family Violence:

"If the Court grants an Order for an observation session at the prison, I again recommend Ms O attend counseling to assist her to deal with this."

 
The Courts Psychiatrist

  "B needs treatment for what she will have to deal with."

"The alternative pathway is to allow this man to serve his sentence, and to await the passage of time. Time is a great healer. It may even enable everybody to gain some emotional perspective with regards to the future. If the father has treatment in goal of a serious nature, than when he is released he will be in a better position to argue that having paid his debt to society, both in terms of imprisonment, and psychotherapy, that her fears are no longer justified. In these circumstances I think that Ms O could at that stage benefit from treatment."

"He is the one who will need to take the lead, in my opinion, to have meaningful treatment before his former mother will be able to accept that eh does have in fact a capacity not to harm children regardless of whether or not he is remorseful at this stage. "

 

"Doctor Kornan assessed Mr H as being an uncomplicated personality "a salt of the earth, simple sort of guy who seems what I would think of as a very sort of nice fellow...".

The Judge Dismisses The Mothers Concerns
After reading quite a number of judgments, it all becomes the same after a while.  More than the law itself, judges know every verbal trick in the book on how to dismiss, diminish and confuse the concerns that mothers raise.  The training of judges associated in these strategies date back to the early eighties when the Association of Family and Conciliation(ACCC ) Courts launched worldwide conferences training judges with bizarre beliefs. promoting materials of Dr Richard Gardiners infamous "Parental Alienation Syndrome".  Researchers have linked a higher level of corrupted cases usually against mothers and children where AFCC have established chapters.  Justice Graeme Mullane of Newcastle is an Australian director in this organization.  This explains the large number of corruption reports from Newcastle's Family Court including a documented internal case where the courts counselors refused to implement domestic violence policies and an interesting relationship with the lone fathers association.  

"I found the mother's evidence as to the risk of physical harm to B in face-to-face contact visits at prison to be objectively unreasonable."

 

"My impression of the mother is that she jumped to a conclusion that B's sleep disturbance was attributable to the possibility of going to prison to see the father"

" The father denied any inappropriate discipline of B and I accept that evidence."

"I am satisfied that there is no risk of physical harm or violence to B if she has contact with the father in gaol. As I assess the evidence, the risk to B is psychological and will arise from the alleged inability of the mother to cope with her personal anxieties in relation to B going to gaol. Further, that B may suffer as a consequence of the mother's impaired capacity to parent her."

" I do not consider that B is at risk of becoming involved in domestic or family violence or that she has previously been exposed to any such violence. B's half-brother was a victim of violence and paid the ultimate price"

 

"For these and my consideration of the other factors referred to above, I will make orders that B have no contact with the father until further order - by which I mean until the court looks at the matter afresh when the husband makes application based on his release from prison as a change of circumstances.

"I am satisfied that the orders identified at the start of this judgment are in B's best interests."