“Since the last checks in January of this year, a lot of information has come forward, regarding [the father]. [The father] is controlling not just of [the mother] but also the children…[the father] has shown coercive behaviour, but also it has come to light that a lot of non-consensual sex has also taken place between [the mother and the father] and she has been scared and allowed him to do this to her. It is also not normal to have cameras around the house recording and control others…[father] wears a body worn video camera around the house and will leave iPads recording when he is not present at the address. He will also tell his partner and his children that they are not aloud [sic] any contact with each other when it is his turn to see the children, if they are together in the house he will stand over them until they separate. He has also kept his daughter locked in her bedroom whilst she has been shouting at him to let her out.”
“The application for the Occupation Order was listed for final hearing on 21 and22 July 2021 on the basis that directions in the Children Act proceedings would be given at the conclusion of that hearing. The hearing did not proceed on those dates because the judge was ill. The parties were then offered 29 and 30 July. But the mother’s counsel, Mr Harley, was not available on those dates, and so the mother asked the Court to adjourn the hearing. The Court’s response was that an adjournment would be granted if both parties consented. The mother then tried to find alternative counsel, but, having been told how much that would cost, she then decided to proceed with the hearing, representing herself, but with a paralegal from her solicitors in attendance, to take a note. In the meantime, the father, whose counsel, Ms Foster, was also unavailable on 29 and 30 July, had indicated his agreement to the mother’s request for an adjournment, but when he heard that the mother had decided to proceed, he also agreed with that course of action, and he has been represented by Mr Cooper of counsel.”
“Mr Cooper [father’s counsel] invites me to make findings of fact in relation to the allegations in the scott schedule, whether or not those findings are material to my decision on the merits of the application for the Occupation Order, and it seems to me that despite the Court having determined that no fact finding hearing is necessary in the [Children Act] proceedings, it may still be of some relevance and assistance in those proceedings to have the findings, and so I shall do so.”
“On Day 1 of the two day hearing, I heard the oral evidence of the applicant [the mother] who was cross examined by Mr Cooper, and I heard brief oral evidence in chief from the respondent, limited to him commenting on the allegations made in the applicant’s most recent statement. On the morning of day 2, the intention was to hear the respondent [father] being cross examined by the applicant [mother]. But during the overnight adjournment, it occurred to me thatPD12J was engaged and that I should consider whether special measures should be deployed to protect the victim of alleged domestic abuse from having to engage in directly addressing the alleged perpetrator in her questions and being directly addressed by him in his answers. I raised my concern with Mr Cooper and the applicant on the morning of Day 2. Mr Cooper agreed thatPD12J was engaged and suggested the option of asking the applicant to put her questions in writing and of me putting them to the respondent on her behalf, and the applicant said that she would welcome that option, and so the hearing was adjourned for a short time to allow her to put the questions in writing, which she did with the help of her solicitor, who then sent me a list of questions and referred me to the pages in the exhibits to which she wanted the respondent to be taken. I then put those questions to the respondent.”
“The Court is aware of the many shapes and forms of domestic abuse, including abuse caused by a party being controlling and coercive, and of how often such abuse is perpetrated from behind a mask of charm and politeness. The Court is also aware that perpetrators of such abuse develop strategies which can be super effective at making it difficult to prove. In such cases there are frequently no isolated actions or words which fit neatly into a scott schedule of allegations.”
“The respondent struck me as someone who pays attention to detail, careful in his answers to questions, methodical. His witness statements are long and detailed. He took time and care when answering questions, anxious to be accurate about figures and dates. I took him to several parts of Dr Lopes’s [sic] report where she has expressed her opinions about him, for example where she said he presented as “emotionally vulnerable” (9.12), and that he has “preoccupied and dismissive attachment strategies” (9.14) and that “preoccupied individuals can be both angry and controlling in relationships but can also show selflessness in their actions when aroused by emotive causes” (9.28). I also referred him to the passage in her report where she said, “analysis of [the father’s] attachments might suggest that he would use coercive anger to manage his feelings about relationships” (11.24), “he remained preoccupied with his feelings of alienation and the financial impact of the current proceedings on his ability to provide for this children in the future” (13.10), and: “in his description of his children, [the father] would readily become distracted by his negative thinking about [the mother] and this would detract from his focus on his children”
“When giving his oral evidence, he came across to me as emotionally vulnerable, frequently becoming upset and tearful when talking about his children...But he also did strike me as someone who is preoccupied with his fear of being separated (he would say alienated) from his children by the actions of the applicant in pursuing this application to exclude him from the family home. He does agree that the current situation is far from ideal, but he denies that there is any alternative accommodation option available to him, and even if there was, he believes that if he left and so ceased to occupy the same physical living space as his children, he would lose all contact with them.”
“She says that it quickly became apparent that the respondent [father] “was extremely controlling” (C14 para. 8), and she says that she was “worried about both [the applicant’s] and the children’s safety whilst they are living in the same house as the respondent” (C14 para. 9). She says that the respondent [father] was “fixated with the view that the applicant was an alienating parent” (C16 paragraph 17) and was “incapable of understanding how someone else might feel”
“let me finish” before proceeding defiantly to justify her actions…she then added in an irritated and impatient tone: For God’s sake”
“The age of the allegation and the fact that it is a question of one word against another lead me to the finding that this is not proved.”
“ (a) Both parties became angry with each other, both making accusations against each other; (b) The Respondent [father] has addressed words of greeting and good wishes to the applicant and the children which have been ignored and so he has repeated them, which is not helpful or appropriate; (c) The respondent’s behaviour in repeating himself makes the applicant [mother] cross and she becomes exasperated by it but I do not find the children are scared by it; (d) The respondent [father] did not call the Applicant [mother] the names she alleges; (e) The respondent had not been financially abusive to the applicant; (f) The respondent has not been isolated or controlled by the applicant (It is understood from the Recorder’s reasons that, notwithstanding this express wording, the Recorder in fact made a finding that the father did not isolate and control the mother); (g) There was an incident in either 2015 or 2016 when the respondent had been driving the car in which the applicant and children were passengers and there came a time when the respondent stopped and got out and left the applicant and the children in the car and she had to drive it home...Having heard and watched the parties given their evidence on the issue, it is entirely consistent with my experience of watching and listening to the applicant give evidence that she [the mother] would have delivered a tirade of criticism at the respondent. On occasions during her oral evidence she spoke at speed without much hesitation or pause between sentences and once she was in her stride it was clear that she had no intention of allowing [Counsel] to interrupt and she told him on at least one occasion to let her finish what she was saying. I also find it hard to believe that the respondent would have left the children in the physical danger which the applicant alleges by stopping the care at a roundabout or in any way which exposed them to a risk of physical danger. The wording of my finding is that the applicant [mother] was angry and did deliver the tirade of criticism and that the respondent stopped the car because of the effect this had on him, that he stopped in a layby without causing obstruction or putting the children in any physical danger; (h) I am satisfied, having watched and listed to [the father’s] evidence, that he would not deliberately act in a way which he thought would upset the children or put them at risk. I am also satisfied that if what he was doing was causing the children to suffer even based on the limited communication which takes place, he would know that this was the case, and he would have stopped doing it. Having said that, I do find that the use of the stickers for leaving messages is off and it would not surprise me if the children think it is odd but I do not accept that they are frightened or scared by this. Alongside that it is extremely likely, given the strength of her views and the way she expresses them, that the children are aware of the applicant’s belief that the respondent is causing her and the children harm…I do have a concern that the applicant’s deep rooted belief about the effect of the respondent’s behaviour may become instilled in the children; (i) With the exception of the difficult times experienced by the children in the summer holiday of 2020 in [the mother’s country of origin], during which they were exposed to the conflict between the parties in the context of the breakdown of the marriage for which no individual culpability can be apportioned, the respondent has not lost his temper or verbally or emotionally abused the children.”
“Dr Lopes [sic] and Ms Parkinson may agree that it would be better for the parties and the children if the parties were living separately,” however, “the Cafcass officer in her safeguarding letter, written in the full knowledge of the parties’ current living arrangements recommends only that there be a section 7 report and does not raise safeguarding concerns about the living conditions: the Court accepted undertakings in place of the Non-Molestation Order, and: the Court decided there was no need for a Fact Finding Hearing in the Children Act proceedings, taken together, provide reliable and sufficient evidence that the effect of not making an Order will not be so bad…I have formed the clear impression that both the parties are managing under the current arrangements. The applicant is a strong character, and in my judgment, she has demonstrated that she can cope with the strained atmosphere and strange way of life that is being led by them all. The respondent presents as more vulnerable than she does...the draconian effect of an Occupation Order would be particularly felt by the respondent because the property has been his home for many years and he is attached to it…the effect of making an Order would be to disrupt the current level of contact between the children and the respondent and to cause major emotional and practical upheaval to the respondent.”
“No doubt it is impossible, and perhaps undesirable, to ignore altogether the impression created by the demeanour of a witness giving evidence. But toattach any significant weight to such impressions in assessing credibility risks making judgments which at best have no rational basis and at worst reflect conscious or unconscious biases and prejudices. One of the most important qualities expected of a judge is that they will strive to avoid being influenced by personal biases and prejudices in their decision-making. That requires eschewing judgments based on the appearance of a witness or on their tone, manner or other aspects of their behaviour in answering questions. Rather than attempting to assess whether testimony is truthful from the manner in which it is given, the only objective and reliable approach is to focus on the content of the testimony and to consider whether it is consistent with other evidence (including evidence of what the witness has said on other occasions) and with known or probable facts.”
"[25] … there are many cases in which the allegations are not of violence, but of a pattern of behaviour which it is now understood is abusive. This has led to an increasing recognition of the need in many cases for the court to focus on a pattern of behaviour and this is reflected by (PD12J ). [26]PD12J paragraph 3 includes the following definitions each of which it should be noted, refer to a pattern of acts or incidents: "
"[31] The circumstances encompassed by the definition of 'domestic abuse' inPD12J fully recognise that coercive and/or controlling behaviour by one party may cause serious emotional and psychological harm to the other members of the family unit, whether or not there has been any actual episode of violence or sexual abuse. In short, a pattern of coercive and/or controlling behaviour can be as abusive as or more abusive than any particular factual incident that might be written down and included in a schedule in court proceedings (see 'Scott Schedules' at paragraph 42 -50). It follows that the harm to a child in an abusive household is not limited to cases of actual violence to the child or to the parent. A pattern of abusive behaviour is as relevant to the child as to the adult victim. The child can be harmed in any one or a combination of ways for example where the abusive behaviour: i) is directed against, or witnessed by, the child; ii) Causes the victim of the abuse to be so frightened of provoking an outburst or reaction from the perpetrator that she/he is unable to give priority to the needs of her/his child; iii) Creates an atmosphere of fear and anxiety in the home which is inimical to the welfare of the child; iv) Risks inculcating, particularly in boys, a set of values which involve treating women as being inferior to men."
"It is equally important to be clear that not all directive, assertive, stubborn or selfish behaviour, will be 'abuse' in the context of proceedings concerning the welfare of a child; much will turn on the intention of the perpetrator of the alleged abuse and on the harmful impact of the behaviour. We would endorse the approach taken by Peter Jackson LJ in Re L (Relocation: Second Appeal)[2017] EWCA Civ 2121 (paragraph 61): "
“My wife insisted she would take him for a PCR test. My wife sent me a message with alleged NHS results. I suspected they were fabricated. Iwas scheduled to have care of the children. It raised my suspicions she fabricated a positive result to prevent the trip. I gave my son a lateral flow test. It came back negative and the PCR was negative.”
“It was not just once my mattress was moved…he told me where to stay…He was telling me where to go, where to sleep. He controlled every aspect of what I did.”
“[‘B’] wonderful child Beautiful dreamer curious boy Flesh soft and gentle Please don’t stop having your wonderful thoughts Please don’t stop playing your wonderful games There are no bruises on your beautiful body Thank God everyday that the tortures of illness don’t affect you Yet your mother who knows how much I love you Has said that I bruised you Unknown priest at the confessional Forgive this woman her awful lie Forgive her the hate that has made her say such a poisonous thing Please bless this mother who cares for our beautiful son Give her peace, soothe her, give her happiness that she deserves God you may curse me with the torture of her words, Only please release the pain that made her do something so bad to me Why would she do this to me and her own children? Solve this awful riddle that locks me in this purgatory It has locked her in as well and I long for her to be free”
“They were being part of the abuse towards me because of the negative influence of their mother…their mother was acting in an irresponsible way, damaging them…they were clearly influenced by [the mother]…[she] told them to say negative things about us.”
“I took the rest of the money out so she could not take it.”
“as a parent, [the mother] has learnt that it is ‘important to be together’ which would have increased her determination to stay in a relationship that she might have perceived as controlling.”
“He would be more limited in his range of responses to interpersonal difficulties,”
“People with the above-mentioned traits can experience considerable difficulties handling stressors that can threaten their self-centeredness and perceived entitlements. [The father] was extremely limited in his ability to think reflectively about his mental health, approach. He was not able to describe any particular insight into the pattern of anger or difficulties managing his behaviour when aroused by his rigid sense of right or wrong. Rather he would justify any feelings of anger in order to defend himself or a principle. On interview, he would become particularly more assertive when describing his feelings towards those that presented opinions that he perceived as a threat to his idealised view of himself including medical professionals and his wife and would dismiss their opinions as either untrue or presenting a false impression of events (“I’m going to get that letter ripped up”). He would reconcile these feelings by giving an evocative account of the harm that he felt he had experienced in their care/relationship and his attempts to protect himself or the children.”
“He said he was unsure. He told me that when he has fun it makes him ‘forget about the bad times’ and when he forgets ‘about the bad stuff’ he thinks it is ‘alright’ to meet his dad again but ‘it doesn’t turn out good’. He said after seeing his dad he felt that ‘everything was going to start again’ [in my view he was referring to the conflict he has observed between his father, sister and mother]. He said he felt worried ‘the bad stuff will start again’. He said he has ‘huge, scary worries’ about spending time with his dad. He told me he feels ‘nervous’ when his dad attends school to see him; he is nervous dad might say or do ‘something bad’…he said…his dad took him to the pier and made him ‘really cold’ and would not let him see his mum to say hi. [‘B’] then told me that his dad ‘pushed him’. He used figures to show me an occasion when he went to speak with his mum (during his dad’s time) and his dad came over and was angry that he was talking to his mum, and his dad pushed him (which made him fall to the floor). He said he hurt his forehead and his dad took him upstairs. He told me he then heard his dad argue with his mum. He heard his dad say, ‘why are you trying to go to him [‘B’], it’s my day’. He then acted out another occasion when his dad wanted him to go somewhere and ‘forced’ him to go. He said his mum tried to come into the room to ‘help’ him and his dad said, ‘why are you coming in here’ and shut the door on mum’s foot. He said they argued and then added ‘I mean my mum would be trying to explain, not arguing too.’ He said it was his dad arguing. He said he felt ‘scared’ when he heard arguments.”