-
The Stealing of Emily: The Legal and Social Impact of Closed Material Procedures in Family Courts
This paper analyzes the implications of Closed Material Procedures (CMP) in family courts, emphasizing their risks to child safeguarding and judicial transparency. Drawing on real experiences from The Stealing of Emily, it advocates for legal reforms to enhance accountability and protect children’s rights, ensuring fairness in court proceedings.
-
Getting-away-with-murder
The report highlights systemic failures in social services concerning children in care, focusing on the inappropriate use of psychotropic medications as a form of control rather than treatment. There is a call for accountability, emphasizing that these actions violate children’s rights and contribute to lifelong harm. Urgent reform is necessary to support vulnerable children.
-
No Case
Background for a Poem Critical of Keir Starmer and Family Law Experiences The poem I have written expresses profound themes of injustice, alleged state-sanctioned abduction, and personal loss, framing Keir Starmer as a central figure in these grievances. To understand the context your poem inhabits, it’s important to look at Keir Starmer’s past roles, the…
-
The Government’s Railroading of Children: A Misguided Legacy
In “The Stealing of Emily,” the metaphor of the Underground Railroad shifts from a symbol of freedom to a state-sponsored system of control over families and children. This bureaucratic mechanism strips individuals of agency and autonomy, leading them to unknown, predetermined outcomes while families pay for an illusion of protection and support.
-
Letter to Prime Minister on Missing Emily Newbold-Smith
On May 3, 2025, a letter was sent to Prime Minister Keir Starmer demanding clarity on the concealed whereabouts of Emily Newbold-Smith, the writer’s daughter. The letter seeks her location, justification for withholding this information, and accountability from involved parties, warning of escalation to legal oversight if unaddressed.
-
Data Protection Inquiry to the Judicial Data Protection Panel
Mr. Martin Newbold seeks clarification from the Judicial Data Protection Panel on the application of data protection rights concerning judicial data processing, particularly for historical cases. He questions access to personal data, JDPP’s oversight, and complaint mechanisms, highlighting concerns about transparency and accountability in judicial data handling under the Data Protection Act 2018.
-
Public Outcry for Transparency: Where is the Justice?
Andrzej BrzezinaData Privacy OfficerJudicial Office11th floor, Thomas MoreRoyal Courts of JusticeStrandLondon WC2A 2LLwww.judiciary.gov.ukwww.twitter.com/JudiciaryUK Dear Andrzej, I place this all on the public record. Thank you for providing my letter back stamped with your receipt stamp. I have already ensured this was sent to you via signed-for delivery, so there is no doubt that your office…
-
Urgent Appeal for Justice: Emily Newbold-Smith’s Unlawful Removal
On April 29, 2025, Martin Newbold escalated concerns regarding the unlawful removal of his daughter, Emily, from his care, citing deteriorating health due to lack of proper care. He demands immediate action, full disclosure of relevant documents, and an independent investigation into judicial and social services’ misconduct, highlighting urgent risks to Emily’s well-being.
-
“Sixteen Years of Silence: Where Is Emily?”
For sixteen years, my family has lived under a cloud of injustice. Despite repeated pleas for help, the disappearance of Emily — a disappearance marked by unlawful acts and state failures — has been met with silence. I recently wrote to the Lady Chief Justice to highlight the grave failures that have besieged our family,…
-
Unlawful Child Relocation: A Call for Justice
Martin Newbold requests personal data from East Sussex County Council regarding his daughter, Emily, citing concerns over her unlawful removal and care placement. He accuses the council and judiciary of negligence, unethical conduct, and failure to comply with legal standards, demanding transparency and accountability in Emily’s case.