<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Badly Behaved Barrister</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pinktape.co.uk/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=badly-behaved-barrister</link>
	<description>a blog from the family bar</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 21:33:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: get a life - get a blog &#171; Pink Tape</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-72</link>
		<dc:creator>get a life - get a blog &#171; Pink Tape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-72</guid>
		<description>[...] now I notice that this post has been referenced from Wikipedia as a source of discussion about Bruce Hyman the penny is [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] now I notice that this post has been referenced from Wikipedia as a source of discussion about Bruce Hyman the penny is [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Hyman &#171; Pink Tape</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-71</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Hyman &#171; Pink Tape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2007 21:51:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-71</guid>
		<description>[...] 20th, 2007 by familoo    This story has generated a lot of interest, so its only right that I should note that Bruce Hyman was [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 20th, 2007 by familoo    This story has generated a lot of interest, so its only right that I should note that Bruce Hyman was [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie Harwood</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-70</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie Harwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 15:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-70</guid>
		<description>Fair enough, I&#039;ll not use Hyman as a stick with which to beat the lot of you.  He was, after all, not a family lawyer.  It does, however, bring into question the matter of secrecy within the Family Courts.  It beggars the question, how many times has something else like this happened only to not go discovered and reported?  Proceedings in private for the benefit of our children?  I am not so sure, neither am I alone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fair enough, I&#8217;ll not use Hyman as a stick with which to beat the lot of you.  He was, after all, not a family lawyer.  It does, however, bring into question the matter of secrecy within the Family Courts.  It beggars the question, how many times has something else like this happened only to not go discovered and reported?  Proceedings in private for the benefit of our children?  I am not so sure, neither am I alone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GEORGE</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-69</link>
		<dc:creator>GEORGE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-69</guid>
		<description>lets face it lawyers / solicitors whatever you want to call them are generally speaking as bent as they come. They do what they have to just to make sure they win and sod the consequences. Thats  why its all so secret. At last one of them gets done for it but im sure it wont make much difference. I know a lawyer who told his client to commit abduction and he hasnt even been touched for it. The legal profession and system stinks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>lets face it lawyers / solicitors whatever you want to call them are generally speaking as bent as they come. They do what they have to just to make sure they win and sod the consequences. Thats  why its all so secret. At last one of them gets done for it but im sure it wont make much difference. I know a lawyer who told his client to commit abduction and he hasnt even been touched for it. The legal profession and system stinks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Stannard</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Stannard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:56:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-68</guid>
		<description>Hyman sentence due today</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hyman sentence due today</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: familoo</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>familoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 19:29:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-67</guid>
		<description>Okay, to deal with the several comments on here about my remark that &#039;Lord Justice Wall was concerned about this in his Report on Child Homicides where he was given anecdotal evidence of the victims of domestic violence or abuse (mostly women) being pressured by their lawyers into agreements about contact that they did not believe were safe&#039; - I had not intended to assert that most or all domestic violence is perpetrated by women. I have dealt with many cases where the violence is perpetrated by the woman (or more often by both parties). I have no reason to challenge the various stats cited by crashdive and Matthew Stannard.

What I was actually indicating was that in my experience the majority of parents who are in the courts opposing contact on the grounds of domestic violence are in fact women. There is no assertion that the Wall supports the proposition that men are always responsible for domestic violence, but I would surmise that the majority of those referred to in the report as feeling pressurised by their lawyers into agreeing contact were women. As we all know the majority of primary carers (for better or for worse) are women, regardless of the question of which gender is more predisposed to violence so they are most often on the receiving end of a contact application.

So, without making any comment about who actually perpetrates the greater proportion of domestic violence or child abuse - the assertion is that in the main the people with care of children and who are saying &#039;the violence I have been subjected to puts my child at risk&#039; are women.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, to deal with the several comments on here about my remark that &#8216;Lord Justice Wall was concerned about this in his Report on Child Homicides where he was given anecdotal evidence of the victims of domestic violence or abuse (mostly women) being pressured by their lawyers into agreements about contact that they did not believe were safe&#8217; &#8211; I had not intended to assert that most or all domestic violence is perpetrated by women. I have dealt with many cases where the violence is perpetrated by the woman (or more often by both parties). I have no reason to challenge the various stats cited by crashdive and Matthew Stannard.</p>
<p>What I was actually indicating was that in my experience the majority of parents who are in the courts opposing contact on the grounds of domestic violence are in fact women. There is no assertion that the Wall supports the proposition that men are always responsible for domestic violence, but I would surmise that the majority of those referred to in the report as feeling pressurised by their lawyers into agreeing contact were women. As we all know the majority of primary carers (for better or for worse) are women, regardless of the question of which gender is more predisposed to violence so they are most often on the receiving end of a contact application.</p>
<p>So, without making any comment about who actually perpetrates the greater proportion of domestic violence or child abuse &#8211; the assertion is that in the main the people with care of children and who are saying &#8216;the violence I have been subjected to puts my child at risk&#8217; are women.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Stannard</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-66</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Stannard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-66</guid>
		<description>The NSPCC produced a report in 2000 (which it no longer has on its website, unfortunately) that covers child abuse in the UK. It stated, &quot;most violence occurred at home (78 per cent) with mothers being primarily responsible in 49 per cent of cases and fathers in 40 per cent of cases.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The NSPCC produced a report in 2000 (which it no longer has on its website, unfortunately) that covers child abuse in the UK. It stated, &#8220;most violence occurred at home (78 per cent) with mothers being primarily responsible in 49 per cent of cases and fathers in 40 per cent of cases.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CrashDive</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-65</link>
		<dc:creator>CrashDive</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-65</guid>
		<description>familoo - You also misrepresent LJ Wall&#039;s Report on Child Homicides which demolished the Women&#039;s Aid myth that the courts were sending children to their deaths in droves. How many children were killed by their mothers (resident parents) during that 10 year period? In the hundreds?

&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;
Eighteen (18) of the twenty-nine (29) children who were murdered were not subject to any form of court proceedings.
&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;
Of the eleven (11) children who were the subject of court proceedings, I am satisfied that eight (8) died as a result of parental actions which could not have been reasonably foreseen or prevented by the court
&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;
THE FACTS:

Eleven (11) children killed in 10 years who were subject to court
proceedings.

Three (3) children killed in 10 years who were subject to court proceedings who may have been saved by a judge refusing a Consent Order.

NOT twenty-nine (29) as stated by Woman&#039;s Aid.

-------------------------------------------------</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>familoo &#8211; You also misrepresent LJ Wall&#8217;s Report on Child Homicides which demolished the Women&#8217;s Aid myth that the courts were sending children to their deaths in droves. How many children were killed by their mothers (resident parents) during that 10 year period? In the hundreds?</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;<br />
Eighteen (18) of the twenty-nine (29) children who were murdered were not subject to any form of court proceedings.<br />
&#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;<br />
Of the eleven (11) children who were the subject of court proceedings, I am satisfied that eight (8) died as a result of parental actions which could not have been reasonably foreseen or prevented by the court<br />
&#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"<br />
THE FACTS:</p>
<p>Eleven (11) children killed in 10 years who were subject to court<br />
proceedings.</p>
<p>Three (3) children killed in 10 years who were subject to court proceedings who may have been saved by a judge refusing a Consent Order.</p>
<p>NOT twenty-nine (29) as stated by Woman&#8217;s Aid.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CrashDive</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-64</link>
		<dc:creator>CrashDive</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-64</guid>
		<description>&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;victims of domestic violence or abuse (mostly women)&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;

Women are NOT mostly the victims of Domestic Violence as a huge amount of studies worldwide clearly indicate.

Child abuse is mostly committed by mothers, not fathers.

This blinkered thinking that does not recognise that DV and abuse is a HUMAN issue, NOT a woman&#039;s issue riddles the family court system. Leaving plenty of children in a vulnerable position both physically and emotionally.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"victims of domestic violence or abuse (mostly women)&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"</p>
<p>Women are NOT mostly the victims of Domestic Violence as a huge amount of studies worldwide clearly indicate.</p>
<p>Child abuse is mostly committed by mothers, not fathers.</p>
<p>This blinkered thinking that does not recognise that DV and abuse is a HUMAN issue, NOT a woman&#8217;s issue riddles the family court system. Leaving plenty of children in a vulnerable position both physically and emotionally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CrashDive</title>
		<link>http://pinktape.co.uk/uncategorized/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-63</link>
		<dc:creator>CrashDive</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalfamily.wordpress.com/2007/08/26/badly-behaved-barrister/#comment-63</guid>
		<description>&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;Lord Justice Wall was concerned about this in his Report on Child Homicides where he was given anecdotal evidence of the victims of domestic violence or abuse (mostly women) being pressured by their lawyers into agreements about contact that they did not believe were safe.&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;


This shows how institutionalised the prejudice and bigoted thinking is within the system.

Fathers are continually under pressure by the system and lawyers into agreeing that their children primarily reside with mother DV perpetrators/abusers etc because if they raise concerns it is nearly always guaranteed to be held against them. This is not even on the horizon for scrutiny.

Stopping/minimising the time a child see&#039;s a fit parent by another parent is Domestic Violence (emotional abuse). It is also Child Abuse. Parents who stop/minimise/interfere with court orders for contact should be immediately be flagged as a probable risk to their children and as a DV perpetrator.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;Lord Justice Wall was concerned about this in his Report on Child Homicides where he was given anecdotal evidence of the victims of domestic violence or abuse (mostly women) being pressured by their lawyers into agreements about contact that they did not believe were safe.&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;</p>
<p>This shows how institutionalised the prejudice and bigoted thinking is within the system.</p>
<p>Fathers are continually under pressure by the system and lawyers into agreeing that their children primarily reside with mother DV perpetrators/abusers etc because if they raise concerns it is nearly always guaranteed to be held against them. This is not even on the horizon for scrutiny.</p>
<p>Stopping/minimising the time a child see&#8217;s a fit parent by another parent is Domestic Violence (emotional abuse). It is also Child Abuse. Parents who stop/minimise/interfere with court orders for contact should be immediately be flagged as a probable risk to their children and as a DV perpetrator.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

