LISTEN UP AS THIS COULD HAPPEN TO ANYONE’S CHILDREN !!

Brian Sheridan, Mallow, Fermoy and Middleton District Court. Ten of his maliciously created Court Orders. Have now been vacated as he erred in law.

Here’s how state kidnappers get away with kidnapping WELL CARED FOR kids for financial gain: 1 kid being kidnapped every 20 minutes:

Sean O’Donnabhain, Cork Circuit Court: Did’nt listen to anything this mother said, rather, He listened to the blatant lies from a Child and Family Agency

AN GARDA SIOCHANA abuse section 12 of CHILDCARE ACT 1991 to take kids and hand them to CHILD AND FAMILY AGENCY, previously HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE. Within section 12, AN GARDA SIOCHANA personnel HAVE TO HAVE reasonable grounds for believing that there is an immediate and serious risk to the health or welfare of a child

Richard Humphreys, High Court: Breached High Court Order and condoned Child and Family Agency falure to bring this mothers daughter to High Court and Child and Family Agency. Failure to provide documention to clarify the reason for the unlawful detention of this mothers daughter.

AND it would not be sufficient for the protection of the child from such immediate and serious risk to await the making of an application for an emergency care order by a HEALTH BOARD:

1. THIS MOTHER’S DAUGHTER WAS IN A SCHOOL IN SCHOOL HOURS

Seamus Noonan, High Court: Did’nt listen to anything this mother said, rather would believe the blatant lies by Child and Family Agency and ignore the mothers evidence that her seventeen year old daughter wishes to go home.

when MR GARY KINGSTON dressed in garda uniform chased her daughter around the school to abuse section 12 of this act to hand her to HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE on 21 March 2013 ….. SCHOOL STAFF HANDING HER OVER TO MR GARY KINGSTON WITHOUT QUESTION …. SO WHAT WAS THE ‘IMMEDIATE’ OR ‘SERIOUS RISK’???? NONE

Sean Ryan, President of Court of Appeal.

2. THIS MOTHER’S DAUGHTER WAS TAKEN TO KILLARNEY GARDA STATION BY MEN DRESSED IN GARDAI FANCY DRESS after this seventeen year old was recorded as ‘missing’ on AN GARDA SIOCHANA pulse records AFTER RUNNING AWAY FROM THREE STATE AGENT

Mary Irvine – A mother herself – Court of Appeal.

who orchastrated to take her into some supposed ‘care’: NOW KNOWN TO BE PLAIN CLOTHED GARDAI AND ANN COLLINS SOCIAL WORKER SIXTH ATTEMPT TO TAKE HER on 8 November 2016: WHEREBY GARDAI FORCIBLY TOOK THIS MOTHER AWAY FROM MY KIDS FOR NO JUSTIFIED OR LAWFUL REASON:

Michael Peart, Court of Appeal. Previously a High Court Judge: Who heard this mothers ‘Judicial Review’ and summarised: “This case relates to the ‘False Imprisonment and Torture of you” and six months later, without any disscussions regarding the ‘False Imprisonment’ or ‘Torture’ He referred to, He dismissed the ‘Judicial Review’ on the bizarre grounds that he “was satisfied that the Gary Doyle order was complete”: Where there was no more information provided by Garda than before: And information is still awaited today!

HEADBUTTING THE MOTHER’S HEAD OFF AN UNMARKED ALLEDGED ‘GARDA’ CAR – THIS MOTHER’S KIDS WITNESSING THIS – AND LEAVING THIS MOTHER’S KIDS IN A DARK ALLEY AT 8PM AT NIGHT

John Edwards: Court of Appeal.

WITH ANN COLLINS WHO THEN WALKED OFF…. ON 17 November 2016 this mother’s daughter was ‘found’ by gardai and taken to KILLARNEY GARDA STATION whereby MR JOHN RYAN,

Paul McDermott: Court of Appeal.

A sergeant gardai, abused section 12 of CHILDCARE ACT 1991 WITHOUT ANY OF THIS SEVENTEEN HAVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO SEE HER FAMILY SINCE

James O’Connor: Killarney District Court.

November 2016: merely using the poor excuse that THIS SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD ‘DIDN’T WANT TO RETURN HOME’!!! …. SO WHAT WAS THE ‘IMMEDIATE’ OR ‘SERIOUS RISK’ THIS TIME????? NONE

Francis Comerford, Tralee Circuit Court: Choose not to let Mr John Ryan, a Sergeant Gardai summoned to Circuit Court, into the witness box to clarify what, if any, were the ‘Reasonable Grounds’ for him believing that there is an immediate and serious risk to the health or welfare of this mother’s daughter and why, as she was in Killarney Garda Station. Did he not deem it would be sufficient for the protection of the child from such immediate and serious risk to await the making of an appliction for an emergancy care order by a Health Board? Mr John Ryan decided to get his barrister to find the loophole of some PAYMASTER Case to prevent him going into the witness box to clarify anything.

THIS MOTHER’S SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER HAS NOW RUN OFF FROM STATE ABUSIVE ‘CARE’ FOR A FORTH TIME … SHE WANTS TO COME HOME, BUT CORRUPT POOR EXCUSE FOR ‘JUDGES’ STOP HER:

BRIAN SHERIDAN, MALLOW DISTRICT COURT, SEAN O’DONNABHAIN, CORK CIRCUIT COURT, RICHARD HUMPHREYS, HIGH COURT, SEAMUS NOONAN, HIGH COURT, SEAN RYAN, COURT OF APPEAL, MARY IRVINE – A MOTHER HERSELF – COURT OF APPEAL, MICHAEL PEART, COURT OF APPEAL, JOHN EDWARDS, COURT OF APPEAL, PAUL MCDERMOTT, COURT OF APPEAL, JAMES O’CONNOR, KILLARNEY DISTRICT COURT and FRANCIS COMERFORD, TRALEE CIRCUIT COURT: ALL ELEVEN POOR EXCUSE FOR ‘JUDGES’ IGNORE HER WRITTEN WISHES THAT SHE WANTS TO COME HOME???

SO NOW THIS MOTHER’S SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD HAS RUN OFF FROM THE CONSTANT ABUSE IN STATE SUPPOSED ‘CARE’

With many thanks to: Sally Smith & Brian Sheridan for the origional story.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1991/act/17/section/12/enacted/en/html

Free Tony Taylor now interned 376 Day’s

Tony Taylor from Derry City is currently Interned in Maghaberry Prison.

To date, there has been no allegation of wrongdoing let alone evidence put to Tony by the authorities to explain his continued imprisonment.

The decision to jail Tony has been taken by the British Secretary of State, based on unaccountable intelligence supposedly provided by the security services. This is an abuse of power, undemocratic and an infringement of human rights.

#freetonytaylor

With many thanks to: James Connolly.

Finucanes to take case to British Supreme Court

Pat Finucane (1949 – 1989)

The widow of solicitor Pat Finucane is to take her legal fight for a public inquiry into his murder to the UK’s supreme court.

Senior judges in Belfast today refused Geraldine Finucane leave to appeal their decision that the British government was entitled to deny her such a tribunal.

But it now clears the way for the family to petition directly for a hearing in London.

Mrs Finucane’s legal representatives later confirmed their intention to continue their challenge to judicial findings that former prime minister David Cameron had acted lawfully.

They are expected to argue that the case raises legal points of general public importance.

Mr Finucane, 39, was shot dead by loyalist paramilitaries in front of his wife and three children at their north Belfast home in February 1989.

His family has campaigned for a full examination of alleged security force collusion with the killers.

In 2011 Mr Cameron decided against ordering a public inquiry, and instead commissioned QC Sir Desmond de Silva to review all documents relating to the case and produce a narrative of what happened.

Sir Desmond’s report confirmed agents of the state were involved in the murder and that it should have been prevented.

He also linked the military’s Force Research Unit because one of its agents was involved in selecting targets.

However, the report concluded there had been no overarching state conspiracy.

The Finucane family rejected the findings as a whitewash and accused the government of unlawfully reneging on previous commitments.

Pledges to set up such a tribunal, based on the recommendation of retired Canadian judge Peter Cory, were made by a former Labour government in 2004 and reaffirmed in the following years, it was contended.

In 2015 a judge backed the government’s case that shifting public interest issues were enough to override Mrs Finucane’s expectation.

Appealing that verdict, her lawyers argued that a full public inquiry was necessary to examine an alleged abuse of power for which no-one in authority has been brought to account.

They argued that the murdered solicitor was the victim of an army-run death squad normally associated with Latin American dictatorships.

Counsel for Mrs Finucane claimed her husband’s killing was due to covert, state-sponsored terrorism and represents a “horror story” for the British Government.

Only Ken Barrett, the loyalist gunman and “UDA puppet” convicted of the killing, has been held responsible, it was contended.

But last month the Court of Appeal rejected the Finucane family’s case, including allegations that the government staged an elaborate sham process before announcing its predetermined decision.

Judges agreed that the murdered solicitor’s widow had received a clear and unambiguous promise that any recommended inquiry would be held.

However, they concluded that other issues, including political developments in Northern Ireland and the potential cost of a lengthy process, were enough to frustrate her legitimate expectation.

Mrs Finucane’s legal team returned to the court today to apply for leave to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

They again raised points about her legitimate expectation and rights under European law.

Despite those submissions, Lord Justice Gillen ruled there was no conflicting legal issues that warranted giving permission.

He said: “We are therefore going to follow the practice of this court and leave the matter to the UK Supreme Court to decide if they are going to grant leave on this matter.”

Later, Mrs Finucane’s solicitor, Peter Madden, confirmed plans to lodge an application in London next week.

With many thanks to: Madden and Finucane Solicitors.