Alex Tennant and Scott Robinson
Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People
Equality House
7-9 Shaftesbury Square
Belfast, BT2 7DP

Subject: Re: Complaints Procedures and Communication

2024-09-19

Dear Alex Tennant and Scott Robinson,

I am writing regarding the lack of response to my correspondence dated September 11, 2024, concerning serious issues related to child mental health support and potential breaches of duty by Newry Social Services in Northern Ireland. My complaint raised crucial points that deserve immediate attention, and to date, I have received no acknowledgment or update.

As outlined in my original message, the situation involved failures in safeguarding practices and potential violations of legal protocols under Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). These failures continue to impact my family, and the lack of communication from your office only adds to the distress.

In light of these concerns, I would also like to reference critical case law that underscores the gravity of the issues at hand and the accountability of those in judicial and ministerial positions.

Judicial Accountability: Case Law Precedents

The case of McMeel v. Gissing-McMeel | [2022] EWHC 1448 (Fam) is a notable example relevant to this situation. In this case, Sian Gissing-McMeel successfully sued HHJ Myles Kenneth George Watkins for fraud and was awarded £12,500 in damages. The judgment reflects the significant legal consequences of judicial overreach, particularly when false affidavits or fraudulent actions are involved. Watkins, who acted outside his jurisdiction in this instance, lost his judicial immunity, showing that judges are not above the law.

This ruling has wide-reaching implications for how fraudulent judicial behavior can strip courts and their officers of jurisdiction. When a judge creates a court order based on false or misleading affidavits, the judge may also be committing fraud. In such cases, the fraudulent actions invalidate any orders based on them, as illustrated in McMeel’s case.

Additionally, fraud has also been alleged against Judge Hollis and an unknown judge in Newry who were involved in Closed Material Proceedings. The proceedings themselves were conducted unlawfully and outside their jurisdiction. Under these circumstances, neither judge can claim judicial immunity for their actions. The fraudulent use of affidavits and the unlawful handling of the case strips both judges of their immunity and opens them to liability under the principles of Davis v. Burris, Gregory v. Thompson, and Cooper v. O’Donnell. Judges acting outside the boundaries of their jurisdiction cannot hide behind judicial immunity, especially when fraud is involved.

It is well-established in case law, such as Fidelity & Guarantee Co., 217 Miss. 576, 64 So.2d 697, that a judicial officer who fails to comply with jurisdictional requirements—even in good faith—can still be held accountable. This applies directly to the actions of Judge Hollis and the unknown judge in Newry, where fraudulent actions led to unjust court decisions that have caused significant harm.

Ministerial Accountability and Liability

It is equally important to highlight that ministerial officers who act wrongfully, even in good faith, are liable for civil action and cannot claim immunity from sovereign authority. This principle, established in Cooper v. O’Donnell, reinforces that the actions of those involved at all levels must be subject to legal scrutiny and accountability.

Conclusion

Given these legal precedents, it is clear that both Judge Hollis and the unknown judge in Newry, involved in the Closed Material Proceedings, were acting outside their jurisdiction and cannot claim immunity for their fraudulent actions. This not only invalidates their court decisions but also exposes them to civil action for their misconduct.

I urge your office to take immediate action regarding the concerns I have raised. Judicial and ministerial accountability is a cornerstone of our legal system, and the gravity of the failures in this case must be addressed. The fraud claims, the unlawful proceedings, and the significant impact these have had on my family must be rectified.

Please provide an update on the status of my complaint and confirm what steps are being taken to investigate and resolve these issues. I await your response and trust that it will reflect the seriousness of the situation.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Mr. Martin Newbold

Recent posts

• September 19, 2024 Fraud Allegations Against HHJ Watkins: Key Insights
• September 18, 2024 “Can I sue a Judge?”
• September 6, 2024Challenges in Data Protection and Stakeholder Engagement at Southern Regional College
• March 26, 2024THE STEALING OF EMILY – Closed Material Procedures (‘secret courts’).
• September 6, 2024Potential Criminal Concerns at Southern Regional College: Need for Investigation
• September 6, 2024Urgent Assistance Needed: Resolving Data Protection and Stakeholder Engagement Issues at Southern Regional College

Everyone is asking on twitter: “Can I sue a Judge?”

Yes, you can in very slim circumstances If a judge creates a court order based on that fraudulent affidavit, the judge has also committed a felony. Anyone attempting to enforce an illegal court order is, in effect, committing an act of violence against you.

What is an affidavit: a written statement confirmed by oath or affirmation, for use as evidence in court.

If these articles have impacted you, please be courageous and comment on the page. If you have faced legal frustrations, consider adding your case to those who feel the system is broken. Please note that this is on a secure server and requires validation data, which will be compared with the Family man database to ensure submissions can be verified. Do not hold back your emotions; this situation is truly horrific and evil. If you are not seeing the survey below this might mean you need to try a different Internet browser:

The Stealing of Emily – Review of cases for illegal Separation. | Crowdsignal.com (survey)