THE COURT PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO MY CASE ENDED ON THE 23 OCTOBER 2006, meaning my daddy is not in contempt If he IDENTIFIES himself or my mummy.
This is how The Law, The Judges & Social Services (in my case Enfield Social Service) got it WRONG.
My Mummy 'Sarah Walton' is my Daddy’s second wife. He has two children from his first marriage. My elder brother 'Danny' was born on 2nd February 1999. On the 30th March 1999 he suffered from an episode which resulted in him being taken to hospital and being diagnosed with subdural haematomas and retinal haemorrhages, but no signs of any physical abuse, Although The Social Services Said "Shaken baby syndrome" . As a consequence of this brain damage, he is disabled
'Danny' remained in the care of my Dad and his first wife, care proceedings continued up to the fact finding hearing on the 6th March 2000. Both my Dad and first wife have always denied being responsible for his illness. Both my Dad and his first wife and were never charged or convicted of any wrong doing.
The medical evidence given was not challenged in court, because at the time, There Was Not Enough Medical Knowledge About 'SBS' All So my Dad’s legal team & the court stated "It Would Not Be Advisable To Pursue This Pointless Venture." We Now Know That There is a strong body of opinion that the medical evidence without any physical trauma does not point to a Non-Accidental Injury. However, the court found that either my Dad or his first wife were responsible. Their continued to be an involvement from ENFIELD SOCIAL SERVICES although 'Danny' remained in their care.
The relationship between my Dad and the Social Services deteriorated, My Dad worked nights at the time and would be expected to attend meetings during the day when he would normally be in bed. He admits chasing two workers away from their home at the time, He would have had about 2 hours sleep when they turned up and expected Him to have a meeting with them. This resulted in the Social Services indicating that if he remained in the home they would
take my elder brother and sister into care, He therefore left the home so as not to have his children go into care.
He continues to have unsupervised visits from my elder siblings, my Dad’s current wife is present during these visits, But Not Always. There have been no other criticism raised about my Dad or his first wife of the level of care given to either 'Zoe' (born 21st March 1997) my eldest sister or the care given to 'Danny' my elder brother. The only criticism was the time he chased two workers from his home.
On 23rd December 2003, My Dad Married my Mum 'Sarah'. 'Sarah' fell pregnant with me. I was born on Boxing Day 26th December 2004, My real MUM & DAD called me CRYSTAL. My Dad’s relationship with Social Services started on a bad note. In October 2004 my Dad was an in-patient at North Middlesex Hospital, the Social Services came into the ward and handed him some papers, stating at the same time "That they intended to remove me from my parents
at the moment of my birth and put me into care".
The way this was done was very un-professional and prompted my Dad to get off to a bad start with them. My Dad’s attitude towards Social Services wasn't intentional, but in light of the way it was done it is not surprising. 'I was removed from my parents care, and put into the care of my Mum 'Sarah' and my Grandparents (Joyce and Peter Scott) on the 30th December.
April 2005. My Mum 'Sarah' had done nothing wrong, to give reason for social service to remove me from my Mum & Grandparents. I was then taken into foster care in April 2005. The Social Services were saying that I was being neglected, I in fact had infantile eczema, most children get this at some point in their life.
My Other Grandparents (Joan and Terry Walton) were also assessed as candidates for possible carers for myself, they were ruled out because they have supported my Dad, right through all the care proceedings as far back as 1999.
A saga of rows between my Dad & Mum with Social Services ensued over a period of time with my Dad continuing to deny being responsible for my brother Danny’s original Illness. My Grandparents and my aunt & uncle expressed an interest in being a carer for myself; they were refused because they have such strong close family bonds. They said this is not good because the family was so close and supportive of my Dad.
On the 23rd October 2006 His Honour Judge Horowitz QC ordered that I (Crystal Walton) be placed in the care of Enfield Social Services, contact between My Mummy & Daddy was refused. Permission to appeal.
In November 2006, a courageous MP (John Hemming MP)
became involved. He has been acting as a lay adviser. His Personal view on the issue of the illness of 'Danny' was of a natural cause. This can happen for a number of reasons. The fact 'Danny' had track record of screeching in pain would indicate that such haemorrhages had occurred previously but not as severely. There are bases upon which this can happen naturally.
An important issue is that there were no signs of physical trauma that you would expect to have if a baby was shaken hard enough to cause this sort of brain
damage. This is much like the argument metaphysical fractures. Retinal haemorrhages do not prove 100% that a baby has been shaken.
The whole process was unfair because the medical "evidence" has never been challenged, Because in 1999 there was not enough Medical knowledge about 'SBS'.
At the beginning of 2009, In fact the 14th January 2009 My Mum & Dad were still fighting for Me. My Mum ‘Sarah’ started watching a documentary about SBS, there was a paediatric pathologist named Waney Squire. She was a pathologist involved in SBS at Oxford, Dr Squire originally believed that shaking baby syndrome was a myth, she still believes it's a myth as far as we know. My Mum & Dad sent her an email asking if she could help with their case, she replied to our email saying yes she would be able to help. Then she asked for Danny's medical notes. Waney Squire took her time and came up with Sinus Venous Thrombosis, but she still wanted the CT Scans and MRI Scans, My Mum & Dad made enquires about the scans, they were told by North Middlesex Hospital that they have been destroyed. (This is not surprising destroying evidence is part of this country’s policy, to destroy evidence would make it impossible for my Mum & Dad’s to fight their case court)
My Mum & Dad got back to Waney and told her that the Scans had disappeared, so Waney (After looking at the medical notes) found in the notes that the Umbilical cord was wrapped around Danny's neck at birth. Which my Dad had been saying all along. But Enfield Social Services decided to get there own Medical Expert, his name was Neil Stoodly. My Mum ‘Sarah’ researched him and found an article saying that he also believed that shaking baby syndrome was a myth. But on the 14th/15th/16th January, both medical experts were examined by my Dad in court. Waney Squire keep to her story of a Birth Defect. But Dr Stoodly was questioned up to five hours and still said SBS wasn't a myth and it exist. He committed perjury on the stand in front of everyone. He could not answer his own article, in the end the Judge Mr Hedley still went with the Neil Stoodly & the Social Services.
Around February my Mum & Dad put in an Appeal, my Mum ‘Sarah’ went in front of Judge Wilson and put their case across, but to no avail, yet again they lost. The Adoption Proceedings started. My Mum & Dad had to go to court and oppose the Order, they was granted permission to oppose it on the 9th of June 2009.
On the 19th of June 2009 my Mum & Dad went to court again. When they got in the court room the Judge said we had to have special circumstances to opposed an Adoption Order. They were told that they had done nothing wrong and it was proven beyond doubt that Danny had a medical condition. He issued a rule 29 report, stating the reason why they were to Adopt Me. In the document they claimed that my Dad was evil and my Mum ‘Sarah’ was a bad mum for staying with my Dad.
Also at this hearing which now became an Adoption Hearing, My Mum & Dad went in and sat down, the Judge started asking my Dad why Crystal shouldn't be adopted, He explained that the system was corrupt, and the fact that it was proven that Danny wasn't hurt. Then he turned to my Mum ‘Sarah’ and asked her the same question, she said "She had done nothing wrong except love my Dad, and that both my parents would never hurt Me". My Mum ‘Sarah’ went on to say that they should have me back if we're allowed to see Zoe and Danny. But the Judge just carried on and let the Adopter’s solicitor speak. Then Mr John Tugan (Enfield’s Solicitor) had his say. Then The Judge went on to read the Judgement out and said "My Mum & Dad were not allowed to oppose the Adoption and it's going to happen". He started going through the Adoption process whilst My Mum & Dad were still in the room, My Dad turned to my Mum ‘Sarah’ and said “He could not stay and my Mum said the same. My Mum & Dad turned to the Judge and said we're going, My Dad told the Judge that he know his wife, and my Mum ‘Sarah’ swore at the Judge. The Judge also said "it would be unfortunate if Mr Walton was to die due to his illness, before my Mum & Dad find me".
P.S. Please help me find my Mummy & Daddy!
If Enfield Social Services thought my Dad was a danger to Me. Why were my two elder siblings left in my Dad and his first wife’s care for over 13 years?
(Ever Since 'Danny' Was Born In Fact).....
Even up to the present day my Dad still has Unsupervised visits with both my elder brother & sister (Zoe' & 'Danny)
Written On Behalf of Crystal Walton
Copyright © 2004 ~ 2104 Ian Walton - All Rights Reserved.