Me, never ever ever stressed, as several fabulous local muvvas know especially since spring 2020 - a rock, it is totally impossible to get to me....i rise to ay so called crisis and smilingly get organised and get helping out (loads of kids in 2020 and 2021!) , as they have known in my region. Seen with their own eyes. fuck off with your assumptions hahh hahhh as i messaged the only truly fabulous woman have met for years albeit a nicer way of putting it, New Years day just gone..(a famous social justice Boudicca not English - so famous she has nice pictures of her and an actual Queen a few years ago , dont worry Mi5 i have no interest in the uk ever again)
My ONLY 'problem' in life is tat having extremely happily left a residence of 8+years in an EXTREMELY fabulous setting straight out of Thomas Hardy's Woodlanders, however with building renovation over many decades more or less from that era (i NEVER complain, LOVE IT!) it meant that my computing in the winter is so time limited it is daft - meaning gloves required to type, but having moved on at last to a WARER place - back of my jalopy for a bit, i have so little time online, still, that i cannot automatically format and proof read. I care about typos.
Indeed i have several years been planning to se my 'freedom of speech' to accurately catalogue the appalling build of Dell laptops, and almost every wire that one needs these days, for example usb charging cables (always buy two if EVERYthing that sort of works) that makes getting digital when in a period of happy transition an utter almost non starter. A keyboard on a 2 year old machine now unusable - and as a professional pilot of 18 years (tour pilot one festival season to Iron Maiden for example, but royalty too ) i have such ultra zen i treat everything with great care, and i am the most organised methodical person i the world - i challenge ANYone to a duel on that...
The following is about no one ever in particular.
12 years speaking with those with family legal issues i learned things.
audio
https://mega.nz/file/TvR02LKB#_jXNgXlY9q3CQLojnqf31jCBHGKtsOTWndEXEFiQIDw
video
https://mega.nz/file/m6gVQSbZ#jtin4weA7R0aiPzRlkLqLnNeB9FH7uVC8Ah8oYXJm5c
All i have is my splendid good looks or rather the ability to enjoy a lovely sunny day, always, no matter what....
ONE THEME NOT EMPHASISED ENOUGH (in monologue): latter-day dreadful journalists, who's work i have studied for some years such as Berg, Tickle et al... are incapable of prefacing everything with "as we knew from the top dog Lordly Wall in his interview upon being made top dog a decade ago!, stating Social Services can be Maoist Stalinist, we must this ALWAYS take with a pinch of salt, their 'side' of a legal case... "
Indeed their desperation to keep their jobs by the worst shabby journalisms ever by not prefacing their 'pieces' with that and rather trying to badly present a new novel 'argument' when evidence is sparse, rather than repeating a fact - the most senior person in the system allowed those words to be repeated in his flagship interview, is indeed Miss Anne Thrope because it is the number 1 piece of fact evidence that could help people understand why one should always have a LOT of salt on hand to pinch if ever reading the social services 'side' of an argument. Knowing that would help ordinary people help others in this system. Would inform the public authoritatively in respect of simple human rights. "head honcho said a decade back that my neighbour who we saw Social servs cart off, may not be the baddie, may indeed be someone victim of Stalin Maositsness...maybe we should see if we can help her rather than assume she is evil child poisoner.."
Neigh it should be module one in the how to be a good journalist lessons to future journalists - do not be like this current cabal... because they do more harm than =good.
But the theme not fully emphasised, is that of course if there is REALLY ELL EVIDENCED harm in the past to a child and as we know that is either physical or mental - mind you in my opinion about 50% of parents i have encountered for years falls into especially the latter category in which case it must be the following ( a good legal definition even if the law people cannot simplify and be accurate, as not simplifying keeps them in more unlawful well paid work) "RELATIVE to the average child in as we know toxic and rather messed up UK society how does the treatment this child receives relate - out of ten is it a 7, 9, or 3... ?" And it is only in the 1s maybe 2s that a case must progress. Otherwise they should be left alone for obvious reasons. If we did even all the 2s you would have to have as many social workers and courts as there are people off 'sick' after a positive test... anyway law says there must be good evidence they are in a problematical cohort.
So obviously if it is well established that we have a 1 or maybe 2..... i would never help them in any way.... and all lay legal 'help' up to the point where i, BASED ON EVIDENCE, could decide - and they trusted me.... so told me truths....as on their side..newspaper articles - my 'cv', made them feel i would be.... they felt they could trust me...so it was provisional until the overall likely true picture crystallised.
But one sniff of there being true danger to a child of course one must back out ... there are few 'professionals' in any area of child law, but try and send them to one who would at least not overtly stuff them...
It is also interesting how many parents approached me and i would work wit at great length - the professional blokes were the worst offenders at painting a completely perfect picture of themselves over a long period of time (in sessions with me formulating their legal strategies) and then slowly... vey gradually, i would realise that whilst never over the line of what is harm to child or other parent in the past, i would realise their inability to accept they were not able to handle the negotiations or court cases, well, was part of the problem. In other words they often had a very narcissistic viewpoint they were perfect and the other parent only the problem.... and thus could not compromise. And of curse had been saying things to antagonise what could be brought to a soft landing....
for the sake of a child one must always tell white lies even when they are "both of us are at fault...lets start with a clean slate and try and reboot and keep to the rules for the future....simple obvious ones ... including always paint a good picture of the other parent in conversation no matter what..which includes body language when describing something arising out of the existence of the other parent, be it their success, failures to hobbies or even standard wayward behaviour. any ordinary person from time to time may fall into... ........ [usual codicil - unless well evidenced unlawful actual harm]"
...nb .... those famous cases....
eg Minnock...2015 (newspapers called me about my thoughts on it all at the time)
