Addition 3 – The youth court gave him control


The procedures of this social service office are that a social service worker has finished with a case when they hand a report into court. But this social service worker stayed closely involved, advising this father/husband on how to deal with us using emotional torturous methods.
Then she and this husband claim, quoting this husband: The wife only accepts help or advice if it goes her way.
Quoting the social service worker: She is currently conscious that she is in a situation of intense stress; she is looking for help, but if the help does not go in the direction she hopes, the help is not accepted.
I am unaware of their helpful choices offered. I am aware of their uncompromising abuse and torture, coupled with threats to me and my children. Abuse and torture misleadingly shrouded under a brazenly shallow pretence of child protection.

This confidential social service report arrived at the court chambers 4 May 2012 at 09:38. Unaware of this and on the same day around 09:30 I approached another organisation that aids abused women, for help and protection. They told me they cannot help me, saying they don’t have space in their protection houses. I gave them contact numbers of the social service worker and youth police officer. Later that afternoon I was phoned from this same organisation and told “this social service worker is afraid for me and the children’s lives” and that the children and I needed to come to their offices at once. They suddenly had space, and I was told I need to hurry if I want it, because they are closing. This husband refusing to let me take the car and dropped me and our three small children with our luggage off at their office.
He gives the following account on his actions afterwards:
Upon my return home, I telephoned the social service worker to enquire as to what I had to do in the circumstances. She advised that: The children would not under any circumstances be alone in the wife’s care; At the safe house, the children would be safe as the wife would be under continual supervision: In the circumstances it would be best for the children to let the wife be for the weekend. During the late afternoon of 7 May 2012 after the youth court made its order, both the social service worker and my advocate contacted me to advise me of the outcome.
This husband/father received full temporary custody of the children in this youth court proceeding, based on this social service worker’s report and this husbands’s diary that was given to the youth court. The Tuesday morning several policemen in uniforms and two cars, one police car and one unmarked car, with a two sentence court order that gives temporary custody to this father, came to fetch these small children out of the protection house to take them back to this claimed victimised , father/husband. In his non-caring fashion, this father was nowhere to be seen to give emotional comfort to his small children on their hour long journey. These police did not care that their actions were not conducive to small children’s emotional wellbeing or to mine. Later I found out that this is not normal behaviour or procedure for them. This same scenario, – “the police will come and take you away” -, would, for years after, be repeatedly and threateningly voiced to the children by this same father as a psychological weapon to control them. The very same father who personally organised this traumatic event for them.
This father describes this, saying:
The social service worker advised that I had to arrange to collect the children from the protection house. She advised me to obtain police assistance.

Was this the help, support and management of the social service worker in resolving a child molestation investigation?!

After the police left with my children, I phoned my advocate and was told I need to go to the emergency department at the hospital to see a psychiatrist. She said the youth court decided I was “mentally unstable”, based on the social service report.
This husband makes the following statements of the first proceedings in the respected country’s court. I quote him:
-The youth court proceedings concluded with an order that the children be placed in my custody, in so far as the wife is deemed a threat to the safety and wellbeing of the children. A first order was made on 7 May 2012. The wife made supplication for the withdrawal of the order of 7 May 2012, which was dismissed with costs on 25 May 2012.
– By order of the youth court, and on 7 May 2012, I was awarded provisional custody of the three boys, the court having found that the children are in physical and moral danger.

My three small boys, without an investigation, were given to an abusive man that is saying “he is called a pedophile” and that repeats that people have said “he prefers little boys”. But they all claimed I was the mentally unstable one.

I went to the hospital and waited for a psychiatrist for about 5.5 hours, but no psychiatrist came. I left. Got home around midnight. While getting into bed, I was told by this father that I was not going to sleep in my bed, but will sleep in the apartment. He gave me the apartment keys and told me to go. I went. This husband reports he has no responsibility. He states: On the advice of the social service worker and my advocate, the wife took occupation of the apartment on the top floor of our home.

In the following days this father changed the front door locks of the house and allowed me supervised access to the children for one hour a day. The supervision was done by his eldest brother, who arrived from our native country, and this father himself.
I was not allowed to breastfeed the smallest child, who was still used to being breastfed regularly, and would be punished by losing the next day’s visitation if he or his brother saw me breastfeeding. After one visitation this father deducted 15min off my next day’s time for every kiss I gave the boys when saying goodbye to them. I lost the next day’s visitation by continuing to kiss my smallest child and was verbally chased out the house in front of my children. In this husband’s court papers he says he did this because I smelled of smoke. This does not justify his cruel behaviour towards us.

This was behaviour from this father, whilst a youth court order made no mention of visitation rights for me. I told my advocate by phone of this torture. She told me not to fight, repeating I don’t have any rights.
This father makes the following statement in our native country’s court on his behaviour:
– On the advice of my attorney and the social service worker. I limited the wife’s contact with the children and insisted that such contact be supervised.
– I deny that I refused the wife contact, either as alleged or at all.
The above two statements is admittance and denial on the same topic. This father abusively and hardheartedly did refuse me contact, physical and telephonic, with my small, crying children. Again he named his attorney and this social service worker as his advisers.

While my children and I are being tortured this husband’s advocate in court 21 May 2012 lied to the respected country’s court employees saying:
The wife is in an apartment separate but she is always present at the communal house; this father has not changed the locks on the communal house; the wife threw a fit.
The judge excepted these lies. I asked someone, who witnessed this father’s behaviour, to write a statement for this court’s employees. They ignored this statement. As they had ignored all the documents that prove that lies regulate their behaviour.

Friends visited during that time, witnessing this husbands’s actions (19 May – 22 May 2012) and wrote a testimony stating the following:
– This father had changed the locks on the front door while his wife was out and we were under strict instructions not to let her have the keys.
– I was very disturbed to see this father’s eldest brother physically pick the smallest child up and rush into the house with him one day, when he was outside with the child, and the mother happened to arrive at her house at the same time. The small child saw his mother and immediately tried to go to her, crying “Mama Mama!” but this father’s eldest brother picked the small child up and rushed inside, at which point the child was sobbing.
– This father privately emailed a social service worker asking for guidance on the length of time his wife can be allowed to spend with the boys. She replied 1-2 hours a day and to shorten this time by 15 minutes every-time his wife says something negative about him in front of the boys.
– During our stay at the house I saw behaviour from this father that came across as manipulative and controlling. Even-though he said to me that his wife was a good mother and that he wanted her to have access to the children just as soon as she had had “treatment” for whatever might be ailing her, he appeared to me to be doing his best to ensure that she had as little access to the children as possible and that he planned to keep it that way for a long time.

My advocate instituted another procedure, in this youth court, regarding full temporary custody given to this father, scheduled for 25 May 2012. This court was provided with a medical certificate by a neurological psychiatrist, stating that I am reacting on my situation and that he is of the impression I can take care of my children.
On 24 May 2012, the day before this hearing, this husband took the children and left the respected country. His statement in our native country’s court is: I obtained leave from the youth court to take the children to their grandparents on the farm on 24 May 2012, and to return with them from our native country on 10 June 2012.
He returned 11 June 2012.
Before a court hearing, this respected country’s youth court gave special support to this father, giving him permission to leave their country and keep his children out of compulsory school for two weeks. No statements that he is neglecting children’s education or he does not care if the children go to school, are heard anywhere. The explanation is used that the children were kept out of school to secure this husband’s minimal paying job. Comparing his movements and the time he spent away, it is three times longer than the time that was needed.
Nothing changed with the children’s or my situation in this court hearing of 25 May 2012. An interesting factor for me was the judge elaborately stating that this husband is “worthy of the court’s trust”. One sentence highlighted this misplaced trust with the lie: The wife locked the children in the bedroom. Another lie showed the irony of this situation: The wife neglects the children’s education. At the exact time this husband was doing this with their permission.
Then this husband devised plans to remove me out of the respected country for his and the children’s return from our native country. They arrived back the same day he booked a flight for me out of the respected country for our native country. He said he did this so I could be “under my mother’s wing while receiving ‘treatment’ in our native country”. How “kind” is it of him to then remove himself financially from supporting me, resulting in my credit card being blocked, to stop his credit card on the flight ticket and to attempt to remove me from the medical insurance. The medical insurance had me as the main member. This first had to be changed to this father being the main member. It would take him another year before he can throw his “mentally unstable” wife in “need of treatment” off it. Whilst claiming to be a victimised, kind and generous man.