Although the mother was cleared of murdering Khyra , she admitted manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. It is expected that she will spend seven-and-a-half years in prison and spend the rest on licence. Her partner also pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

See BBC News

Related posts:

1. Mother sectioned after death of sons
2. Mother of Khyra says “It’s all my fault”.

1. Mother sectioned after death of sons
2. Mother of Khyra says “It’s all my fault”.

More information can be found on this story at:-

Related posts:

1. Report criticises Sheffield Council
2. Abuser given child ban

1. Report criticises Sheffield Council
2. Abuser given child ban

Timeline of Events

The first suspicions were raised back in the early 1970’s when seemingly non-accidental injuries raised suspicion, but it was not until 1981 that both daughters are thought to have been first sexually abused. Childline were contacted in 1988 by the daughters, but as they could not receive assurances that they could keep their children, they terminated the call.  During the 1990’s the family frequently moved throughout Sheffield and Lincolnshire – it is thought to evade suspicion and detection.

Another opportunity to stop the abuse was missed in 1997 when the son, who now suffers from mental health problems, moved from home and alleged incest. Whilst an police investigation followed, no actions were taken. Moving to South Yorkshire in 2004 social services finally began to take a keener interest and by June 2008 the father was finally arrested.  Pleading guilty to 25 counts of rape, he was sentenced to a minimum term of nineteen and a half years, though this was reduced on appeal by 5 years. Before that had occured, however, the family had contact, over the years, with  over 100 members of staff from 28 different agencies. The media are already reffering to this case as the British Fritzl.

The Review

Today, March 10th 2010,  Sheffield’s Safeguarding Children Board delivered a damming review of the multi-agency involvement in the case described by Alan Goldsack QC as the worst he had seen in 40 years.

The fact that the family moved 67 times undoubtedly made it more difficult for each agency to build up a full picture of what was occuring the family, but  where this case diverges most startkly from that of Joseph Fritzl is not in the tactics employed to evade detection. The most stark difference is that the daughters in this case did have access to authorities designed to protect them. As Dr Sonia Sharp pointed to, it was the systematic failings of these agencies that meant that “time after time…groups of people failed to take action”.

The GP who dealt with the daughters was suspended over five years ago, but the report calls for a lead tasks with safeguarding children at every GP practice.

This is not the first time that such a board has found troubling failings within Sheffield Council and, as Professor Cantrill sadly noted, the authorities “never seem to learn”  from these reviews.

The full report can be found here.

The law on child protection

Local Safeguarding Children’s Boards were set up under the Children Act 2004. This Act arose out of the Government’s Green Paper, “Every Child Matters” alongside its formal response to the Victoria Climbie Inquiry Report. The intention of the Act was:-

To concentrate on outcomes that children and young people say are important rather than organisational change

To create clear accountability for children’s services

To enable better joint working

To secure a better focus for safeguarding children

The former Area Child Protection Committees were replaced by Local Safeguarding Children Boards

According to the BBC report, the LSCB’s have apologised to the women, following the conviction of their father, a Sheffield man on 25 counts of rape. They found a catalogue of missed opportunities and failures to protect the children over three decades.

Potential Compensation

Would these two women have claims for compensation?  There are several routes here. Firstly each would probably have a claim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. There is a two year time limit from the date of the “crime of violence” for making an application but the CICA often waives the time limit where the conviction is relatively recent. The CICA operates a bar against persons who are abused by a member of their own family who is living in the same household, but this only applies to crimes of violence that occur before the 1st October 1979. There may be ways around this rule, but it is difficult to see from the report when the abuse actually occurred. Apparently there were several periods in the history of this family, which were examined by the LSCB, the first one dating from 1975 to 1988.

In addition, the two women may have a civil claim against the local authorities, who allegedly should have protected them. See the case of Pierce v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council 2008 for an example of a “failure to protect” situation that resulted in an award for the the Claimant. The apology issued by the Local Safeguarding Children Boards is bound to be helpful in the establishment of fault on the part of the local authority.  

There is also the possibility of making a complaint to the local authorities in question. All local authorities operate a complaint scheme, which can result in a final decision by the Local Government Ombudsman. Large payments to complainants have been recommended in such cases. However the complaints system is not intended to work alongside a litigation case, and it is unclear whether a person who receives say £10,000 from a complaint of failure to protect, would have to pay that amount back if he/she launched a successful litigation case against the same local authority.

In relation to the CICA claim, the CICA scheme does specifically say that they are entitled to take into account any compensation awarded in the civil process, and in the writer’s experience the CICA await the result of the civil claim before making any award.

Clearly this is a very serious case.

Related posts:

1. Jersey authorities deny compensation to victims of child abuse
2. More information about the Sheffield abuser

1. Jersey authorities deny compensation to victims of child abuse
2. More information about the Sheffield abuser

This is a disturbing case, which demonstrates how some parents use their own children to engineer a particular situation, and in some cases are prepared to make them seriously ill.  

One condition which has been reported in the family courts is Munchausen by Proxy, where the parent makes the child ill so as to gain attention for himself/herself. From the child’s point of view, their life is put at risk time and time again, until the authorities become aware and take action. In this case, samples of codeine and a painkiller, Tramadol were found in the child’s system.

The father had apparently met the mother on an online dating agency. The fact that their relationship began on the internet is not indicative of a child protection issue or indeed an indication that the mother in some way should have known about this man’s propensity to violence. The internet is simply another tool that male abusers to use, in order to target vulnerable women.

Related posts:

1. Boy aged 12 is not the father of child
2. Father David Taylor

1. Boy aged 12 is not the father of child
2. Father David Taylor

The authorities are under strict legal constraints, given the fact that they themselves would have arranged new identities for the two boys who killed James Bulger. The long term plan would have been to rehabilitate the two back into the community. That process may still be ongoing, but very little is known about how the authorities dealt with these two children from 1993 onwards.

Normally in a criminal prosecution, the Defendant is identified from the outset unless the court makes an order banning the media from reporting their identity. 

There are a number of statutes that provide for protection against identification of children involved in any court proceedings. Section 39(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 provides protection for child defendants and witnesses in criminal proceedings. The court can direct that no newspaper may identify the child or publish photographs without leave of the court. 

Under section 12(1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 (as amended) the publication of information relating to proceedings under the Children Act 1989 or the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction over minors is a contempt of court. Section 4 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1974 contains similar restrictions.  The court also has further powers restricting publication of court proceedings under section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court 1981 section 4(2).   

Section 71(1) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 states that it is a criminal offence to publicise other than limited details in relation to family proceedings and proceedings under the Adoption Act 1976. 

Section 97(2) of the Children Act 1989 provides:- 

“No person shall publish any material which is intended, or likely, to identify:- 

“(a) any child as being involved in any proceedings before the High Court, a county court or a magistrates court in which any power under this Act may be exercised by the court with respect to that or any other child; or 

(b) an address or school as being that of a child involved in any such proceedings.” 

Regulation 23 of the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rule 1991 and Rule 4.23 of the Family Proceedings Rules 1991 restricts disclosure of care proceedings documents to certain persons.

However the mother of James Bulger has demanded answers. This is a sad feature of these cases. The relatives of those taken away from them, find any news story on the subject intensely distressing.

There is another point to be made. Those who live in the neighbourhood of James Bulger’s killer, would want to know if there was a risk to their children.

On the 8th February 2010, we reported on how a new “Sarah’s Law” was to be implemented across the country, allowing parents to know if their children might be at risk from a convicted abuser in the neighbourhood. See Link.

Related posts:

1. The Day Care And Child Minding (Functions Of Local Authorities: Information, Advice And Training) (England) Regulations 2001 No. 2746
2. Mother and partner admit to manslaughter of child

1. The Day Care And Child Minding (Functions Of Local Authorities: Information, Advice And Training) (England) Regulations 2001 No. 2746
2. Mother and partner admit to manslaughter of child

The case is reported by Mr Justin Levinson of One Crown Office Row who represented the Claimant. 

This was a case involving a Claimant who was 23 years of age at the date of commencement of proceedings. She brought a civil claim against her former foster mother for physical and emotional abuse inflicted on her during her childhood.

G was taken into the care of Mrs Spry at the age of six as a foster daughter. This was a private fostering arrangement. Mrs Spry subjectd her to physical and emotional abuse, which included regular beatings with a metal bar, stamping on her throat, isolation from her parents, being made to eat rat and chidcen excrement, being made to crouch against walls for lengthy periods, being made to drink washing up liquid, sleep deprivation and being made to cook for the household from the age of 10. 

G was also taken away from school and given no schooling so by the time she left her foster mother, she was practically illiterate.

Eventually Mrs Spry was convicted of numerous counts of assault and child cruelty. She was sentenced to 12 years.

However by the time of the trial of her civil claim, the Claimant had acquired some qualifications and looked forward to qualifying as a veterinary nurse at the age of 28.

The judge was referred to two cases, Pierce v Doncaster MBC 2008 and MB v London Borough of Ealing 2008. He made an award for loss of earnings, but whilst he accepted that the Claimant’s career had been shortened as a result of its delayed commencement, there would have been about four years without earning in any event attributable to the fact that the Claimant was a single mother of a five year old girl. She would also have faced some difficulties insofar as she had been separated from her parents at an early age.

The Claimant was awarded as follows:-

General damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity – £45,000

Aggravated damages (“punitive” damages on top of the above – £10,000

Five years loss of earnings as a veterinary nurse – £65,325

Future handicap on the labour market – £20,000

Cost of future therapy – £2000

Total award including interest – £146,518

Related posts:

1. Various Claimants v Flintshire County Council 2000
2. KR and Others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Limited (In Liquidation) and Royal & Sun Alliance PLC [2003]

1. Various Claimants v Flintshire County Council 2000
2. KR and Others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Limited (In Liquidation) and Royal & Sun Alliance PLC [2003]

Leeds City Council officers explained the idea behind the change was to harness their resources more effectively in the wakes of cases such as Victoria Climbie and Baby P.

The government responded to the death of Baby P by announcing a national child protection review by Lord Laming, which was published in 2009. The local authority in Baby P’s case, Haringey, was the very same council that found itself at the centre of another child abuse scandal in 2000, after the death of Victoria Climbie.  It was therefore particularly pertinent that Lord Laming should now consider the effect of the reforms that he recommended in 2003.

In March 2009, Lord Laming published his “Progress Report.” One of the recommendations in his earlier report on Victoria Climbie was that child protection services should work together with other agencies.

This is nothing new. Working together under the Children Act 1989 (1991) HMSO an early guidance document published to inform social work  makes it plain that social workers should engage with other agencies and departments within a local authority in order to protect a child. In fact one of the most common area of concern in modern social work is the failure of agencies to communicate effectively and pass on crucial information.

Section 3 of Working Together to Safeguard Children sets out the roles and responsibilities of various agencies in relation to childcare. These agencies include local authorities and their social services departments, education authorities, independent schools, youth services, cultural and leisure services, health services, day care services, the police, youth justice, the probation and prison service and the private sector.

The 1989 “Working Together” has been updated and it remains a key document used by social workers. A revised version of Working Together to Safeguard Children is currently open for consultation on the Department for Children, Schools and Family consultations site. The consultation closes on 11 February 2010.

Related posts:

1. Suspect detained for toddler murder
2. Convicted paedophile today jailed for neglecting a baby

1. Suspect detained for toddler murder
2. Convicted paedophile today jailed for neglecting a baby

On the 2nd February 2010, we referred to another BBC report, where a 19 year old man from the Midlands had been gaoled for making and distributing indecent images and inciting sexual assault on a child under 13. The man has been banned from working with children for life and placed on the Sex Offenders List. Apparently he was found in possession of a memory stick containing footage of a woman abusing her young child at his direction.

These kinds of crimes come under Sections 9 to 15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which includes the offences  ofincluding causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, arranging or facilitating commission of a child sex offence and meeting a child following sexual grooming. Indecent photography is covered later in the Act from Sections 45 onwards.

It is also conceivable that the abused child might well have a claim in assault against the convicted man, although much would depend on whether he had assets sufficient to cover any judgment. Alternatively she might have a claim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, although under Paragraph 8 of that scheme, the offence has to arise out of an “injury sustained in and directly attributable to an act occurring in Great Britain. Consequently such a claim might be in difficulties.

The writer has considered the issue of whether the Internet Service Provider might be liable. This area seems to have very little coverage. At present this woudl appear to be a very difficult claim, since obviously an ISP would argue that it had no control whatsoever on this kind of activity.

However should ISP’s monitor their own traffic?

See BBC News

Related posts:

1. Internet user gaoled for inciting abuse
2. Sexual assault on 14 year old girl in Ilkley

1. Internet user gaoled for inciting abuse
2. Sexual assault on 14 year old girl in Ilkley

The baby was admitted to a Hampshire hospital at the age of five months, emaciated and suffering from serious injuries, including fractures and bruising. Apparently health visitors had not seen anything of concern despite checking on the child at least a week prior to his admission to hospital. He has been placed with foster carers.

Abuse of children by both parents is not uncommon. Prior to the Domestic Violence, Crime And Victims Act 2004 there were sometimes difficulties in prosecuting two parents, where both denied any abuse, but blamed the other. 

Section 5 of this Act creates a new offence of failing to protect a child or vulnerable adult.

A person is guilty of an offence if a child or vulnerable adult dies as a result of the unlawful act of a person who was a member of the same household and had frequent contact with him. There has to be a significant risk of serious physical harm being caused to the child or vulnerable adult, and either the Defendant is the person who caused the child/vulnerable adult’s death or D was or ought to have been aware of the risk, failed to take reasonable protective steps and the act occurred in circumstances that the Defendant ought to have foreseen.

What of the child’s rights to compensation? It is anticipated that the local authority (which will probably have taken out a care order over him) will submit a claim for compensation to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.

A claim against social services looks very uncertain. It is not clear whether social workers had any involvement with this family prior to his birth. If there are concerns about a child’s welfare at birth in hospital, then the hospital itself may have social workers on standby to monitor the family. However it may practically speaking, be very difficult to spot deliberately caused injuries on a child and even more difficult to guard against a sudden sustained assault by one or both of the parents.  Social workers may rely on background information, so for instance if a mother of a new born baby takes up with a partner with a history of violent offending against children, then there may be grounds to act. However a full care order is not granted lightly, there has to be a risk of “significant harm”.

Related posts:

1. Domestic Violence, Crime And Victims Act 2004
2. Parents Sue buggy firm for injuries

1. Domestic Violence, Crime And Victims Act 2004
2. Parents Sue buggy firm for injuries

The government report of 2003 can be found at www.victoria-climbie-inquiry.org.uk. 

More recently in March 2009, Lord Laming published his “Progress Report.” This is the government’s response to the shocking case of Baby P, as a result of which three people were convicted and sentenced to prison. So what does Lord Laming’s 2009 report hold for experts?  A number of recommendations were made but experts did come up as one issue of concern. Firstly Lord Laming said that the expertise of the professionals already involved with the child should be sufficient expertise and a national expert is rarely required to add weight to a case. Secondly Lord Laming also commented on what he perceived as an over cautious approach by professionals. He identified a tendency on the part of professionals towards justification and reassurance that all was well, rather than more objective consideration and investigation of what had occurred.

Now Lord Laming has spoken again about to strengthen child protection. Regrettably the tragic deaths of children at the hands of relatives, friends and strangers continue to make the news. Most recently we have the death of Khyra Ishaq who was starved to death by her mother and her mother’s partner.

In fact calls for action on child abuse and greater child protection have been a feature of the care system for decades. The deaths of Victoria Climbie, Peter Connelly (Baby P) and Khyra Ishaq are not isolated cases. It is thought that most local authorities deal with these kinds of cases, which do not always result in the death of the child. There are of course huge restrictions on reporting the abuse of children, which are in place to protect those children. Obviously where the child is dead, the reason for protecting their identity is less pressing. That in itself demonstrates the failure of the child protection system.  If society cannot protect the life of the child, it is even more unlikely to protect the name of the child. 

Where the case is serious, the local authority will generally commission a “Serious Case Review” in order to see what lessons can be learned. The Serious Case Review is then published in abridged and anonymised form.   A  Conservative spokesman on television recently said that a Conservative government would enable the publication of the whole of the Review. The writer does not think they will do that, it would mean the publication of the identities not only of the child or children but also parents, relatives, social workers all of whom have rights of privacy under the Human Rights Act 1998. Any kind of legislation would be wide open to legal challenge. As matters stand, it is difficult enough in a civil compensation claim to persuade a court to release the Serious Case Review. In the last such case, the writer had to undertake to the court to keep the Review in a locked safe at all times (which on reflection is not unreasonable).

Coming back to Lord Laming’s plea, these are words that need to be heard but one of the biggest problems with social care is the resources allocated to social workers to do their job. This is not a politically attractive subject. I fear we will see more such cases in the future.

Related posts:

1. Suspect detained for toddler murder
2. Leeds council plans to merge social services and education

1. Suspect detained for toddler murder
2. Leeds council plans to merge social services and education