On November 8, 2024, I contacted Philip Marsh, Lead Case Officer at the ICO, regarding Case IC-337307-W2B4, to address concerns about East Sussex County Council’s (ESCC) apparent withdrawal of my information request without valid reason, raising issues of transparency and accountability.

My long-standing case with ESCC has involved years of promised but undelivered contact with my daughter, Emily, which now may invoke estoppel due to detrimental reliance on these assurances. ESCC’s failure to meet these promises has impacted our family profoundly and unjustly, affecting our family life and contributing to delays akin to the doctrine of laches.

Emily, last residing at 226 Barcroft Park in Newry, has been effectively missing since 2017, with only one Looked After Child (LAC) meeting in the past 14 years. The lack of communication and the obstructive behavior by Southern Health and Social Care Trust have compounded this, with ESCC potentially withholding information related to past leadership. Furthermore, I believe ESCC engaged in unjust practices when Emily was removed from my home at age four under traumatic circumstances, possibly constituting unlawful conduct.

The ambiguity in ESCC’s responses regarding legal involvement has only complicated matters, with implied warnings from customer services about escalating complaints despite no clarity on legal representation. My EHCR cases were closed without addressing rights violations, and my submission to the Children and Families Truth Commission was included in a report presented to the House of Lords, revealing widespread systemic issues.

Despite extensive documentation, including Writs of Habeas Corpus and requests for service statements, ESCC has not responded meaningfully. I am seeking immediate action from the ICO to ensure compliance with data protection standards and full disclosure from ESCC regarding governance, modern slavery, and child protection practices. The ICO’s intervention is essential to address these longstanding issues and restore clarity.

I attached the communication in full:

EHCR Section 46 and Rule 39, Article 8, Article 6, Article 14.
Applicant: Martin Newbold
Care of Unlawful Separation and Breaches of Estoppel
Respondent (1): Southern Health and Social Care Trust
Respondent (2): ICO
Respondent (3): Northern Ireland Children Commissioner
Respondent (4): East Sussex County Council
Respondent (5): Council for Emily Newbold Smith
2024-11-3
STATEMENT OF TRUTH

---

Formal Claim of Negligence and Request for International Review and ‘Wrongful’ Separation under Regulation 26 Serious harm
EHCR CASES: 4873, 4867
(Ref: TOF-2032-2024)
(Ref: 18971405)
(Case ID: 24012899)
EHCR Case Submission 4867, 4889, 4882, 4873

________________________________________
Subject: Request for Reconsideration of Closed Cases Without Investigation – Reference to Cases 4867, 4889, 4882, and 4873

Date: 8th November 2024

Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally address the closure of my cases, identified under references 4867, 4889, 4882, and 4873, which were closed without a thorough investigation. I am deeply concerned that these cases were dismissed without appropriate scrutiny, despite the serious human rights violations involved. These cases reflect systemic issues in the child protection and family justice systems, and I respectfully request a reconsideration of the closure decision.

It has come to my attention that similar requests for examination were submitted previously, with the most recent submission recorded on 06/11/2024 at 13:53. While I acknowledge the ongoing review, I must emphasize that the closure of these cases represents a denial of my right to an effective remedy under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Furthermore, I would like to bring to your attention the findings of the Children and Families Truth Commission, whose report, endorsed by the University of Birmingham and presented to the House of Lords, highlights systemic failures within the child protection and family justice systems. The data collected by the Truth Commission, which includes my own case (Survey Response 34 from 5/8/2024), reveals significant violations of Article 8 (Respect for Private and Family Life), Article 6 (Right to a Fair Trial), and Article 14 (Prohibition of Discrimination).

The Truth Commission’s report includes the following key findings, many of which align with the violations I have documented in my own cases:

1. Violation of Article 8 (Family Life):
   o 93% of respondents, including my case, reported not receiving the support they requested from local authorities or other services.
   o 90% stated they were not offered appropriate support for the issues that led to their child’s removal.
   o 94% reported that their contact with their child was unjustly restricted or denied.
   o 86% were not informed about their right to apply for post-adoption contact.
2. Violation of Article 6 (Fair Trial):
   o 69% of families, including mine, reported that their legal representation was neither fair, supportive, nor independent.
   o 62% were denied access to relevant documents and information used to decide that their child should be removed.
   o 82% of respondents said that the court did not consider all available information about their case.
3. Violation of Article 14 (Discrimination):
   o 67% of families, including mine, had their mental health used against them in decisions regarding their ability to care for their child.
   o 93% of families, including my case, reported feeling unfairly treated or discriminated against by child welfare professionals. Discriminatory factors included mental health (54%), social background (39%), financial status (36%), and others.
   One parent quoted in the report shared the following harrowing experience: “My child died, I asked for help, and they took all my other children away.” This testimony echoes the injustices that have been endured by many, including myself.
   

Given the alignment between the issues raised in the Truth Commission’s report and the violations I have experienced, I respectfully request that the European Court of Human Rights reconsider the closure of my cases and provide a thorough investigation into the systemic failures outlined. The data gathered by the Truth Commission, which includes my case (Survey Response 34 on 5/8/2024), further supports the urgency of addressing these ongoing human rights violations.
Please confirm receipt of this letter and provide an update on the next steps in the review process. I trust that the European Court of Human Rights will ensure a fair reconsideration of my cases and uphold its commitment to protecting human rights.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Martin Peter Newbold
15 Valleyside Road
Telephone +44 1424430373
Email martinnwbold.mn@gmail.com
Author Website: martinnewbold.co.uk
[Your Case Numbers: 4867, 4889, 4882, 4873]

Attachment(s) (Links valid for three months)

• #### Read Me First ####.pdf  (72.25 KB)
• 2024-05-08 Survey Response 34 -Screen Dumps 6 M.pdf  (805.77 KB)
• Page 1 – The Stealing of Emily – Review of cases for illegal Separation.pdf  (110.89 KB)
• Preview of the Children and Families Tr…ity of Birmingham _ Researching Reform.pdf  (238.18 KB)
• The Children and Families Truth Commission.pdf  (88.67 KB)

Recent posts

• November 3, 2024 Formal Claim of Negligence and Request for International Review and ‘Wrongful’ Separation under Regulation 26 Serious harm
• November 2, 2024 Investigation into Complaint Against Police
• October 19,2024 The Pursuit of Truth and Justice in the Face of Adversity
• October 17,2024 Writ of Habeas Corpus and Writ of Attachment.
• October 15,2024The Hidden Costs of Care: Council Debt and the Impact on Children’s Services
• October 12,2024 Understanding Habeas Corpus and Child Custody Cases
• October 4,2024 Malpractice in Child Welfare: A Father’s Plea for Justice
• October 1,2024 Default Notice and Notice of Serious Misconduct
• October 1, 2024 Addressing NICCY: Negligence in Welfare Cases of Children
• 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)