Chiwar and Gloria Musa were refused bail again today at Wood Green crown court. What should have been a simple case of releasing this honest couple, even with £5500 in sureties/securities offered by supporters as part of release conditions, was disallowed . It was insinuated that the Musas had not attended to sign on a police stations during their police bail period, but i can state categorically that the Musas attended every time they were meant to. Indeed, often they were disallowed signing on, for some reason, and had to force the officers to let them give their signiture. Other times when asking to see officers connected to their case to discuss something or other they never did get to speak to the actual officer – he was away on holiday, or in a meeting or something and they never did get to speak to him – such were the obstacles put in their way to stop them making any progress in their case, time after time.
This entire hearing took nearly 2 whole days, with even the judge remarking on the length of time it was taking. It was adjourned from day 1 to day 2 because the police hadnt got it together to read reports, so it was claimed. Unbelievable. The judge also remarked that supporters of this shocking case of 6 children removed via allegations that were later proven totally fictional were “well-meaning but misguided” – which of course was met with the contempt it deserved by the many supporters present who actually know what went on and is going on regarding this appalling case. The subject of the disappearance of Favour Musa and her not being seen by the Musa parents for the best part of 18 months and her being “inappropriatly touched” – sexually molested to those who call a spade a spade – during the early part of her stay at her foster home was not mentioned, nor were a lot of other things, such as the other 4 children not being seen by the Musa parents for approx. 6 months, despite court orders allowing them to see all their children at least a couple of times a week. The so-called “Childrens Charter” actually encourages contact between removed children and their parents, but this family seem to have been excluded from this government scheme. The lack of contact visits is solely down to Haringey council’s deliberate lack of responsibility in carrying out the courts orders, for the contact visits, or rather lack of them, shouldve been sorted out months ago. There should be a proper thorough honest investigation about these irregularities by a department far removed from anything to do with the borough of Haringey’s social workers, police and judiciary/legal types. This council is never reprimanded for the appalling irregularities they are so very much responsible for – such as the lapsed contact visits mentioned to name just one important aspect thats totally ignored by those in authority. I honestly do not have the time to list all the irregularities we know of here, and some are far more serious, such as the molesting of the then 9 year old Favour Musa by a teenage member of the foster family she was placed with, sadly. It is disgraceful.
Also not mentioned at all was the baby, with her not being seen since her removal on the 28th June up till the Musas arrest on the 31 Nov. Needless to say a proper and thorough investigation needs to be done into her removal and the circumstances surrounding that, as judgements based on the “balance of probabilities”, such is the system in place in the civil courts where this baby’s removal was finally sanctioned, does not always bring out the full truth, and judgements can be made that are totally incorrect. The judges mean well but are misguided, to quote the judge at the bail hearing. In a criminal court things have to be backed up and proven – definately an advantage in the Musas case where so many things have been believed to be true when in reality they are not even remotely near. The Musa parents have suffered so much through things being fabricated – it is time the truth about all whats gone on in their case comes out into the open for all to inspect and see. THEN, WE SUPPORTERS KNOW, A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PICTURE WILL EMERGE THAN THAT THATS BEEN PORTRAYED. Christopher Booker in the “Sunday Telegraph” has written 14 or more excellant articles showing how this case has been progressing, but even he is subject to strict gagging. Some of those articles:
5} 14 Aug 2010 This entire article is about the Musa family. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7946155/Forced-adoption-social-workers-surreal-investigation-recalls-satanic-abuse-scandals.html
6} 14 Aug. 2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7946155/Forced-adoption-social-workers-surreal-investigation-recalls-satanic-abuse-scandals.html
“There could have been few more bizarre meetings anywhere in Britain last week than that between a married mother and the social workers who had taken her six young children to place them unhappily in foster care. The officials, of a council I cannot name, are fixated with the idea that this respectable Christian is a “sex worker”, whose children all have different fathers and who is engaged in “child trafficking”.
They appear to have no evidence for these charges other than the hearsay surmising of a single “witness”. I gather that the social workers had reluctantly agreed to commission DNA testing of parents and children, to establish whether they were all from the same father. But even now, I am told, the social workers are refusing to disclose the test results.
The mother, accompanied to this surreal interrogation by a nun who had known her for years, insisted that she had only slept with one man in her life, her husband, the father of her children. She went on to ask one of the social workers how many men she had slept with. The reply was that this was a private matter.
Perhaps we are not very far here from those extraordinary cases some 20 years ago when children were torn away from their families wholesale because social workers had concocted a fantasy that they were being abused in weird satanic rituals (a story I told in my book Scared To Death).
It is vitally important that when this case again comes before the courts, the judge should put the council’s supposed evidence to very careful test.”
6} 27 Nov. 2010: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8165143/Forced-adoptions-get-no-sympathy-from-the-ministry.html
“Last week I listened for an hour to a sobbing mother describing how she recently lost the six-year-old daughter who is the centre of her life.. Her fatal mistake was to ask social workers for advice when she was being troubled by “harassment” from the child’s father, from whom she parted some years ago. Within days, although it was never suggested that she had harmed her daughter in any way, she found herself facing a “case conference” of 20 people at the local council offices, the conclusion of which was that her child must be placed in foster care.
The solicitor she was given by the social workers refused to oppose the care order. At a “contact” session, when she and her bewildered daughter emotionally expressed their love for each other, the interview was halted. She has not been allowed to see her child again.
Having followed dozens of such cases in recent months, which suggest that something has gone horribly wrong with our child protection system, I was recently invited for an off-the-record ministerial discussion about what I have been reporting. But far from recognising that anything might be astray, the official line, it seems, is that the horrifying cases I have covered represent only an untypical minority of the total – “less than 10 per cent”. In general, the system is working fine.
This line seems to be confirmed by the latest guidance issued to local authorities by the Children’s Minister, Tim Loughton, who says that too many councils are failing to ensure that enough children are being adopted, and that the backsliders must speed up their flow of adoptions. No question as to whether social workers might be snatching too many of the wrong children in the first place – or why the courts seem so eager to support them that, of around 8,000 applications made each year for care orders, only one in 400 is refused.
I shall give just one disturbing instance of the latest developments in a case I have been following for months. Like many others, this came to me through the Forced Adoption website, run by former councillor Ian Josephs.. It involves a married couple whose five older children were seized earlier this year, subsequent to which their latest baby was torn from its mother’s arms only hours after it was born.
The bizarre story originally stated by the social workers to justify their ruthless intervention in this family’s life seems to have collapsed. At a recent court hearing, I am told, the judge seemed disposed to reunite the family as soon as possible. The baby was returned to her parents later that day. But the council asked for 21 days’ stay of execution before returning the five older children, three of whom the parents had not been allowed to see for weeks. The judge apparently agreed but insisted that an independent social worker should interview the children.
The independent social worker eventually managed to interview four of the children, apparently reporting that they all wished to be allowed to go home to their parents. But the court refused to give the parents a copy of the judge’s ruling, and on Friday they were summoned back to hear from him that he had now seemingly changed his mind and that the children did not wish to come home after all. According to the parents, they were not allowed to question the evidence on which he based his new ruling, although they were told they could appeal.
What on earth is going on here? Even from the little I am permitted to report of this case, it seems evident that something seriously odd is afoot.
But this is merely one of far too many cases where families are being heartlessly torn apart, often without the parents even being allowed to question the evidence or to speak for themselves. To hear such horror stories being dismissed as representing “less than 10 per cent” of all the cases where children are seized is simply not good enough. Each is shocking enough in its own right. But when every week brings news of a dozen more, this only confirms that we indeed have a national scandal on our hands.”