Historic accusation of sexual assault

[kanday]

I have to stay positive for my children and husband, we were talking about the questioning recently and he can't really prepare for them as her police interview was so vague, we know she is saying he did it 15 times over 4 years (he only lived there 18months which is even backed up by her own mum and dads statements!) but she can only recall the first and last occasion and one in between, but she just says she can't remember any details like how it ended each time or started or where etc she just says she just knows it happened!! Grrrrr like my husband says he can only stand there and tell the truth when questions are put to him.

quinb could you tell me what rule 9.5 is please?
Also does anyone know if it would be of any help to us to contact our local mp? Friends have suggested it but i can't see why? thank you

[quinnb]

You can't goto mp for two reasons. One they make the law they can't enforce it and two under the family courts it is as previously said the proceeds are secret. You are in contempt talking to your friends about it. And rule 9.5 entitles the children to be appointrd a guardian who will represent thier wishes in court via s barrister. Thier views ate important esp if they want to come home.

[kanday]

thank you i didn't think contacting the mp would help or why they suggested it. All our friends and famiy know of the allegations we haven't been told by our solicitors or anyone else not to discuss it, we haven't disclosed any details from any statments or police records (unlike my ex who was giving all details to someone we know who lives in australia and calling my husband a child abuser! our solicitors brought this up to the judge who only warned my ex not to repeat anything else!!) they just know what he is been accused of.

I will speak to my solicitor about the rule i don't understand why she hasn't metioned it to me, she tried to get cafcas involved but they were unwilling because ss are? the ss know how the girls feel and have said they will help after the finding of facts because we all know my ex still will try find some reason not to let them return home.

[quinnb]

I am surprised cafcsass normally get involved as matter of course. But they are more of law onto them selves thsn ss. And they carry more weight to so maybe not bad thing but betting they will get involved at some point

[Rights Fighter]

I have been through the fact finding. They are called a newton hearing. Now a couple of things. One the standard of proof is lower than a criminal court. Rather than all reasonable doubt its balance of probabilitys. Also under the childrens act people are free to say what they want. For example your false accuser admits under oath she made it up she is protectd under law from prosecution for peverting justice.or your husband admits he is guilty then again it can't be used in criminal evidence. Now this point I can be wrong on but the findings are secret meaning not even the police can know or be made known of them so I think it would have little or no effect on the criminal trial. But stress I could be wrong there. Also do your children on rule 9.5 meaning they have a guardian and in turn their own barrister.

"I have been through the fact finding. They are called a newton hearing".

In criminal law a Newton Hearing is known as a "trial within a trial" - minus the jury and members of the public usually to discuss something that has cropped up unexpectedly.

Hadn't realised there was such a thing as a "Newton Hearing" in family law. This could confuse the layman - how very odd.

[quinnb]

Is it family courts don't have members of public on them and no jurys so very similar to criminal newton hearings

[Rights Fighter]

Maybe - but it is odd they would call these Newton Hearings within the family court system when it is a specific criminal court hearing.

Nothing surprises me any more! Anything to confuse the public.......Are you sure this was a "Newton Hearing?" within a family court? I shall have a little Google............

[kanday]

Yes but i think it must have some effect on the criminal trail in some way because we went to the family court end of march where our solicitors told my ex's sol that we did not agree to an adjournment as it has gone on long enough, the judge agreed and set the date for the trail for july, 2 hours later after leaving court my husband received a call from his criminal sol saying he had to attend their office the next day to be summoned to appear at the maj, he hadn't been arrested or bailed at this point and the dc had told his criminal sol she had been backed in to a corner to make a descion that day. He was in front of maj 18th april then at crown 10 days later where a date was set for his trail in oct. We are back in family court in 2 weeks for a pre hearing where we have been made aware that my ex is to ask again for an adjournment because the girl making the allegation has told him she will not attend. In this case i think the judge said her police statment would be used? seems unfair that she wont be there to answer questions put to her though! I hope this judge also agrees that an adjournment is not in the best intrests of the girls, oct is so long away

[Rights Fighter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_hearing

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/d...#Determination

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_hearing


I can't see anything related to family court matters although I typed in "Newton Hearing" + Family Court.

That is not to say that there is no such animule in Family Court matters - just that I can find it and have not heard of it. If you find it please do post up here as it could help others in the future.



Edit: Just found this too:

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/gazette-...criminal-law-9

Extract: about 2/3's down


Bad character



Chapter 1 of part 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, in relation to evidence of bad character, is in force regarding all cases where the trial or Newton hearing (R v Newton [1983] Crim LR 198) began on, or after, 15 December 2004 (R v Bradley [2005] Crim LR 411). The provisions received their first consideration in the Court of Appeal in R v Hanson, Gilmore and Pickstone (2005) The Times, 24 March.


RF: So far I can only see references to the Newton Hearing in Criminal Law matters.

[kanday]

It has always been refered to as a finding of facts to us by judges and sol?

[Rights Fighter]

Finding of "Facts" is the usual term for it.

It is very unusual for just the complaint's witness statement to be used and remain unchallenged by the Defence. This would have to be agreed between the barristers for either side and if it is not - then I would think that there would be a ground for appeal on the basis that that evidence could not be challenged if/when the defence side has evidence to rebut all or part of it.

Of course the above relates to criminal law - I am not particularly au-fait with family court matters.

[kanday]

Couldn't they summons her to come, would that not be the case in a criminal court?

[Rights Fighter]

Really sorry - can't get into this as I am reviewing trial paperwork for a client at the moment - and it is for the solicitor who pays my wages - so this MUST come first.

[kanday]

Of course, i understand. sorry for all the questions my head is constantly spinning and i forget to ask my sol everything. Thanks for your time x

[Rights Fighter]

Couldn't they summons her to come, would that not be the case in a criminal court?

Just finished my current report on the trial I am involved with - so can help a little here for a short while.

It depends on the circumstances as to whether defence would want to summons her and if they are permitted by the judge to do that.

In the criminal matter - if defence consider summonsing her, then that would indicate that defence do not agree with proceeding with just her statement and could be a ground with which to appeal if they have evidence they could use in rebuttal (answering to the contrary).

Therefore I do not think it would be in the public interest to proceed in those circumstances.

I cannot speak for the family court matter as I don't know if she could be summonsed or not.