V v I [2025] EWHC 717 (Fam)

[2025] EWHC 717 (Fam)Case No FD24P00534
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION
Venue Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London, WC2A 2LLDate 26/03/2025
Before
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE JUDD
Between
VApplicantIRespondent
Justin Ageros (instructed by Craig Solicitors) for ApplicantGeraldine More O’Ferrall (instructed by Osbornes Law) for RespondentHearing Hearing dates: 6 th, 7 th, 12 th, 13 th March 2025
Approved JudgmentThis judgment was handed down remotely at 10.30am on 26 th March 2025 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail..............................THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE JUDDThis judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.
[1]This is a fact finding hearing in proceedings concerning three children, who are aged 8, 7 and 3. I will call them R, S and E. The parents, who are from the Cheredi Jewish community, were married when they were teenagers. The marriage was arranged and they only met very shortly beforehand. The mother was born and brought up in Israel and the father, though he was born in Israel, was brought up here. The two oldest girls were born in Israel and the youngest in England.[2]Both parties agree that the marriage was not a happy one. The father said that the mother did not do her fair share of domestic tasks, that the children were neglected and the house dirty. The mother says that the father was abusive to her and the children. I will set out the details of that later.[3]Things came to a head in June 2024 when the mother said she wished to go to Israel, very shortly after they had all returned from a family visit. The mother left England without the children and did not return for three months. During that time the father took the children and went to live with his parents so that they could help him.[4]The mother returned to England in September 2024, together with her father. She did not immediately inform the father that she had returned, but it is a small community and he soon found out. The mother contacted the paternal family through an intermediary, and said that she wished to resume care of the children. The children were returned to her at the family home, with the father remaining with his parents.[5]When the mother returned to England she sought assistance from Jewish Women’s Aid (JWA) and made allegations that he had abused the children. JWA contacted the local authority and a section 47 investigation was commenced. The children stopped having contact with their father. The local authority investigated but found the allegations to unsubstantiated and closed the case, informing the mother and father of this on 28th October 2024.[6]After this, the father became concerned that the children were not at school, and he said that the mother’s family were evasive about where she and the children were. He, therefore, applied for location and passport orders to prevent the children being removed to Israel.[7]Following the commencement of the proceedings the mother went to the police and made more allegations, which related not only to the children but herself as well. The children were seen again. Both parents were interviewed, and so was the oldest child, R.[8]During the course of the investigation the children have been living with the mother and having supervised contact with the father. The allegations[9]The allegations by the mother are that the father behaved in a coercive and controlling way throughout the marriage. She says he kept her away from events related to her family and made it difficult for her to speak to them. He restricted her money. She says he had a very bad temper, having tantrums every day. During the course of these he would kick her, throw things at her, slam doors and scream. She says that the children heard this and it would make them cry.[10]The mother also said that the father raped her on many occasions and sexually abused her by forcing her to engage in sexual activity without consent. She said that he did not listen to her protests and carried on regardless. I will not set out the details here but they are all contained in the first statement which she filed in the proceedings.[11]The mother also says that the father would shout at and humiliate the children, and had no patience with them. She says that he pinched them and was forceful with them when washing them.[12]Further, she made allegations of sexually abusive behaviour in relation to the children themselves. Once more, I will not set it all out here although I will have to engage with some of the details later.[13]The father alleges that the mother is causing the children emotional harm by raising untrue allegations against him in order to prevent the children having a relationship with him. He says that she is not concerned with the children’s general welfare but is intent on preventing contact. He said that she is alienating them from him and other family members, giving a number of examples, for example telling the children they have a new father, that they are not related to their cousins, that they should not accept sweets from family members, that the paternal family have stolen their passports so that they cannot travel to Israel. On one video call R is said to have told the father that he was the cause of all the trouble.[14]The father alleges that the mother has told the children that she does not like the father or the paternal grandmother and that they should hate them as well. He says she has also told the children that the grandmother kidnapped them and that was why they did not see her (the mother) for three months last year. The hearing[15]I read all the material in the bundles provided to me, and watched the video interviews of the parents and R. I heard oral evidence from each of the parents. The law[16]In determining issues of fact, the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities (Re B [2008] UKHL 35). The burden of proof lies upon the person or body that makes the allegations.[17]Findings of fact must be based on evidence and not speculation (Re A (A Child)(Fact Finding Hearing: Speculation) [2011] EWCA Civ 12). In that case Munby J (as he then was) pertinently said:
“[104] Any judge who has had to conduct a fact-finding hearing such as this is likely to have had experience of a witness – as here a woman deposing to serious domestic violence and grave sexual abuse - whose evidence, although shot through with unreliability as to details, with gross exaggeration and even with lies, is nonetheless compelling and convincing as to the central core. It is trite that there are all kinds of reasons why witnesses lie, but where the issues relate, as here, to failed marital relationships and the strong emotions and passionsthat the court process itself releases and brings into prominence in such a case, the reasons why someone in the mother's position may lie, even lie repeatedly, are more than usually difficult to decipher. Yet through all the lies, as experience teaches, one may nonetheless be left with a powerful conviction that on the essentials the witness is telling the truth, perhaps because of the way in which she gives her evidence, perhaps because of a number of small points which, although trivial in themselves, nonetheless suddenly illuminate the underlying realities.”
[18]Evidence must not be looked at in separate compartments and a judge must have regard to the relevance of each piece of evidence to other evidence and to exercise an overview of the totality of the evidence in order to come to the conclusion as to whether the allegations are made out to the appropriate standard of proof (Re T [2004] EWCA Civ 558).[19]If a court concludes that a witness has lied about one matter, it does not follow that he or she has lied about everything. A witness may lie for many reasons, for example, out of shame, humiliation, misplaced loyalty, panic, fear, distress, confusion and emotional pressure (R v Lucas [1981] QB 720). The application of this principle should go beyond the court merely reminding itself of it in broad terms: Re H-C (Children) [2016] 4 WLR 85.[20]In Lancashire County Council v C, M and F (Children; Fact Finding Hearing) [2014] EWFC 3, Peter Jackson J (as he then was) stated:
“in cases where repeated accounts are given of events…, the court must think carefully about the significance or otherwise of any reported discrepancies. They may arise for a number of reasons. One possibility is of course that they are lies designed to hide culpability. Another is that they are lies told for other reasons. Further possibilities include faulty recollection or confusion at times of stress or when the importance of accuracy is not fully appreciated, or there may be inaccuracy or mistake in the record-keeping or recollection of the person hearing and relaying the account. The possible effects of delay and repeated questioning upon memory should also be considered, as should the effect on one person of hearing accounts given by others. As memory fades, a desire to iron out wrinkles may not be unnatural – a process that might inelegantly be described as "story-creep" may occur without any necessary inference of bad faith”
. These words echo the words of Leggatt J in Gestmin SGPS v Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd [2013] EWHC 3560 as to the fallibility of human recollection, and the limitations of memory”.[21]A judge should avoid placing excessive or exclusive reliance on the demeanour of a witness: Re B-M (Children: Findings of Fact)[2021] EWCA Civ 1371 albeit the assessment of the impression made by a witness may be given weight by a judge alongside other matters in a case where the facts are not likely to be primarily found in contemporaneous documents and where due account is taken of the pressure involved in giving oral evidence.[22]The principles to be applied in relation to the evidence of children have been set out in numerous authorities. In AS v TH [2016] EWHC 532, MacDonald J noted that the courts have endorsed a number of the general principles set out in the ABE guidelines:
“It is desirable that interviews with young children should be conducted as soon as possible after any allegations are made (Re M (Minors)(Sexual Abuse: Evidence) [1993] 1 FLR 822).”
MacDonald J made a number of similar points in Re P (Sexual Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearing) [2019] EWFC 27. Where a child has been interviewed on a number of occasions the court may attach diminishing weight to what is said in the later interviews (Re D (Child Abuse: Interviews) [1998] 2 FLR 10). The court will wish to see responses from the child which are neither forced nor led (Re X (A Minor)(Child Abuse: Evidence) [1989] 1 FLR 30). It is normally undesirable for a parent to be present during an interview with the child (Re N (Child Abuse: Evidence) [1996] 2 FLR 214) and see the Cleveland Report (para 12.35). In Re S (A Child) [2013] EWCA Civ 1254, Ryder LJ confirmed that the guidance set out in the Cleveland Report at paragraph 12.34 with respect to interviewing children remain good practice.[23]In the case of SR [2018] EWCA Civ 2738, Baker LJ set out a number of points about ABE guidance, which is relevant to the evidence of children both within and outside the formal process. The mother’s evidence[24]The mother’s evidence about the father was set out in the statement she filed in response to the application. She said that he repeatedly criticised her about how she looked, and the state of the home. She said that she was kept short of money and had no financial independence. Added to this, the father made it difficult for her to speak to her family, constantly interrupting her when she was on the phone to them. She gave considerable detail about sexual abuse and rape she says she suffered at his hands. She gives an account of a man who had no concern at all about whether or not she wanted to have sex, and who repeatedly used her for his own purposes and despite her protests. She gave examples of his looking at women in the street and telling her that she needed to be ready for sex that evening. She said he had raped her through her tights on one occasion and caused her to tear and bleed.[25]She said that the father would shout at the children and humiliate them, having no patience. She said that she became aware that the way he would insist on washing and cleaning the children’s privates was not normal and also very painful for them, causing them to scream. She said that she felt helpless and did not know what to do.[26]She said that he caused blood to come out of one of their ears, and that she believed that he pushed the older girls, because they had bruises on their legs and arms. Somewhat curiously, she said in her statement that they told her and ‘this is what they told me but I don’t know if this was because they fell’.[27]The mother also said in her statement that he would let the girls lie next to him in bed, and that he would rub up against them, and did not push their hands away if they were against his genitals. He would allow them to jump on his genital area and she saw he was responding sexually, something which one of the children described to her too.[28]The mother said that the father did not behave modestly and that his sexual abuse of her became worse. They attended therapy, but this did not help, and he did not want to cooperate. The mother said that the therapist was aware of what was happening and even said to her that she thought he was enjoying sleeping with the girls in bed, but because she was close to his family she could not be trusted.[29]It was in those circumstances that the mother left to go to Israel without the children and sought help from the rabbi there.[30]The mother began to give her oral evidence from the side of the court, where she could be partially hidden from the room, and in particular from the father. She spoke very quietly through an interpreter and it was difficult for me to see her. I therefore asked the parties if she could give evidence from the witness box but with the father hidden from her behind the curtain.[31]The mother continued to give her evidence very quietly, and I was concerned that it was difficult for her. Both parties come from a close community and it seemed to me that they had limited links with the outside world, making it difficult to speak in a large courtroom about sensitive matters to those they do not know. The mother’s affect was flat a lot of the time, and she seemed overwhelmed.[32]When answering questions about the children, her answers were vague and sometimes contradictory. One example of this is that she said she knew the father hurt the children but she had not seen it with her eyes, although she later said that she had been referring to him hitting the children, as opposed to pinching or shaking them. She found it difficult to give specific examples of several things, including sexual abuse, stating at one point that her brain ‘was foggy’ and later that she thought that something had happened that was erased from her brain.[33]She was plainly very suspicious of everyone including the father’s wider family, and the school. She believed the teachers to be on their side, and said that she thought they might be influencing the children as to what to say. She was also suspicious of the therapist, and said in evidence not only that she had told her about the sexual abuse of the children, but the psychiatrist in Israel too, and yet neither of them had mentioned or reported it to third parties.[34]She said that it was the interpreter who had suggested to the children that they did not like their father because their mother did not like him. She said that she had heard the interpreter say this whilst she (the mother) was standing behind the door. The children’s evidence to third parties[35]R was visited at school on 30th September 2024, in the presence of the school safeguarding lead, the CAIT leader, a police officer and the social worker. I have a record of what R said but not of the questions she was asked. The report states that R answered ‘no’ when she was asked if her father did anything that made her feel uncomfortable or unhappy. When she was asked what her father did if she did something wrong, she responded with an account of how her parents had helped her when someone kicked her at a bus stop. When asked if there were nice things about her father she said he took them on outings and smiled, albeit she did not give details. She said that she liked everything with her mother but that she had worried about her when she went away.[36]R was also asked about who bathed her, and she said her grandmother and her father. She said she did not know if there was anything that she liked or did not like. The questioners tried to explore whether there was any difference when her father bathed her as opposed to her grandmother but R did not respond to that. The observations of the professionals were that R did not appear to show any fear when her father was discussed, and that she appeared comfortable.[37]S was visited at home on the same day in the evening. R was also there and S did not want to be without her. When she was asked if she liked her father she smiled and nodded. She said she liked going on outings with him, and when asked if there was anything she felt sad about relating to her father she said that she was sad when mum went away.[38]During the course of the investigation the safeguarding lead at the school said that there were concerns of neglect by the mother at the start of the year as R came to school with clothes and shoes that were too small and sometimes did not bring in lunch. She sometimes had no sweater and once said she did not want to go home. Sometimes the mother did not respond when the school tried to contact her. The home was said to be a mess (although I am not clear how the safeguarding lead at school could have known this unless she visited). The father was said to be a simple person but caring.[39]There was another visit to the family at a Jewish community centre on 22nd October. The mother was a little late with the children (it was a special festival day) and when they arrived the children appeared not to be listening to their mother and it took quite some time to engage them. On this occasion there were discussions with the children about privacy and their bodies. When being asked about bathing the children said nothing of concern. The children were asked if there was anything they did not like when they lived with their grandparents and S said that she did not like her grandmother and ‘mummy does not like [the grandmother] she did not let us go to Israel’. R said ‘I do not like my [father] because my mummy does not like him. [father] did not let us go to Israel, mummy’s mummy was in Israel she lives there, I was born in Israel’. R also said that her mother had gone away for three months.[40]I will not set out all of the conversation that took place apart from this, save to say that through numerous questions the children were given an opportunity to set out any concerns they had about their father and did not do so. They did not present as afraid when talking about their father, private parts of their bodies, or being bathed. They both smiled a lot and presented as being relaxed and happily drawing when they settled down.[41]Following the visits, the investigation was concluded and the allegations found to be unsubstantiated. The parents were informed and told there was no reason why the father’s contact with the children could not be reinstated.[42]A new s47 inquiry was commenced when the mother went to the police station on 29th October, very shortly after being told of the outcome of the first inquiry. She made similar allegations to those she had made before, but added to them. She said that the father hit the children on multiple occasions. She said that the father had had the children in his bed on multiple occasions when he had been partially naked. She said that the children had touched the father’s penis with their legs.[43]The children were then spoken to by the police at home on 31st October. On this occasion R said that she had been hit by her father a number of times, all over her body. T made no allegations, and responded by saying ‘good’ with a smile when asked about her father.[44]On 9th December 2024, the social worker visited both children at school. The head teacher and the rabbi (who is someone who was known to the father and family) were present. The social worker had a book with her called ‘My body is special’ and she asked a number of direct questions of each child (who she saw separately) as to whether the father had ever hurt their private parts when she was having a bath, and she said no. R also said no when asked if her father ever asked her to touch his private parts.[45]On 9th January 2025, R was video interviewed. During the course of this she said that her father screamed at her and her sisters, and also her mother. She was not able to give a specific example of what had caused him to do this on any particular day. She said after a number of questions that he had smacked her, describing this as being all over her body, and that he had pinched her when she put on her tights. She said that her father had hit her sisters too, as well as her mother, stating that she knew this because ‘mum has told me’. She said that she felt sad when her father hit her but the last time she had seen him she was ‘so happy’ because he had not done that. She said several times that she wished to remain with her mother.[46]Looking overall at what the children said to third parties about their father and his behaviour, it was very little. On the first two occasions they were spoken to by professionals they did not make any allegations about his behaviour, whether of a sexual or physical nature, and did not appear to show any distress or fear of him. Their responses did suggest that their mother had said things to them about their father, for example as to him hitting her, and also that their paternal grandmother had not let them go to Israel. Even when the children were asked direct questions about their father they said nothing untoward.[47]It was only on the third visit on 30th October 2024 that R made allegations of being hit by her father which she then repeated in the ABE interview in January 2025. She also said that the father screamed at them when he got home from work, and that he had hit them on their body. By this time, R had been with her mother for some time, and had only had supervised contact with the father for several weeks. She did not demonstrate any distress when speaking of her father, although it was plain from that and earlier interviews that the children had been caused distress when their mother went away in mid 2024, and that R wished to stay living with her.[48]The children have not said anything or behaved in a way that would corroborate the allegations of sexual abuse, or sexual behaviour on the part of the father. On 17th January 2025, T handed a note to the officer in the case with a drawing and a note, which read ‘my dady wipde’, but the police considered it likely that the mother had worked with the child to get her to make this particular allegation, and they considered the case to be closed. The father’s evidence[49]The father completely denied acting in the ways ascribed to him by the mother. He said that he had gone out of his way to be generous to the mother’s family and for her to be able to speak to them on a free telephone number which he himself set up. He denies controlling the money, saying that both of them had access to each other’s bank accounts. In any event, the money they each earned is modest, and any extras (such as presents or plane tickets) usually have to be funded by the paternal grandparents.[50]The father denied being physically or sexually abusive to the mother or the children. He said that he had always respected the mother and never had sex with her unless she consented. He said that there were lengthy periods of time when they did not have sex, and that she would more often say no than yes, which led him to believe that their sexual relationship was not a normal one, but that he never forced her to do anything, or carried on in the face of a refusal.[51]When the father was asked in his police interview if the mother enjoyed sex, he said ‘I don’t know’. In the same interview, he gave a description of asking her, and suggested that he was desperate because they had not had sex for several weeks but if she said no then he remained quietly in his bed. He also said that he did not remember if there was an occasion when she said she wanted to stop having sex once they had started, and mentioned for the first time in his oral evidence (he said this was because he found it difficult to talk of it) that there were times in the last year of their relationship that she really wanted sex, and some times when she really did not.[52]The father denied causing the mother any injury, during sex or otherwise. He denied having kicked her, shouted at her or ill-treating her in any way. He also denied shouting or screaming at the children, or being overly rough with them. He did say that there was an occasion when R had moved when he was cleaning her ear, which had caused some blood, but was vague about where the bleeding had come from, or how much there was.[53]He firmly denied allowing the children to touch his genitals, whether with their feet or hands, or doing anything sexual with them at all. He described situations where he and the mother disagreed about whether he should allow the children into bed when they were scared at night, and as to whether he should wash one of the children when she said it hurt. He acknowledged telling one of the children she would have to have another suppository (which she had hated) if she was not able to open her bowels.[54]Although the father gave his interview to the police in English, he gave evidence in court through an interpreter, as at times his understanding of the nuances of particular words is lacking. I have borne in mind the fact that he did not have an interpreter when he was speaking to the police.[55]The father showed some irritation when being cross-examined at various points, answering some questions with a question. Nonetheless, he was willing to expand on various matters that were in his statement and interviews, and, like the mother, to explain what are deeply personal matters.[56]In the course of considering all the evidence in the case I am acutely aware that this couple are part of a relatively small religious group with its own customs and culture. The community is a close one, where a lot of people know each other, or at least of each other. Moreover, those within the group, such as these parents, have had limited dealings with the outside world. There was an element of naivety that I saw in them both which seemed to reflect their upbringing, including being married after only one or two meetings, and having no other sexual experiences. Analysis[57]I start first with the allegations made by the mother that the father was coercively controlling of her. This allegation is an overarching one, which is said to be illustrated by all of the behaviour of which she complains. She says that, outside of the allegations of physical and sexual abuse, he behaved coercively to her by limiting her access to money and preventing her from engaging with her family. She said he would talk badly of them, and would disrupt her when she was trying to talk to them on the phone. She also said that he controlled all the money in the family, taking her own wages from her and deciding what it should be spent on. If he gave money to her, he would ask for it back. In the course of her submissions, Ms. More O’Ferrall also pointed to other aspects of the father’s behaviour which she characterised as controlling, for example that the father made the mother go and see a psychiatrist in Israel on the pretext that, should she do so, he would allow the children to travel to Israel to be with her.[58]The behaviour of abusive individuals will rarely stop at the bedroom door, or be limited to physical or sexual behaviour. It is commonly in the little things as well as the major ones that controlling and undermining behaviour will be seen.[59]In this case, the surrounding evidence does not support the mother’s contention that she was kept short of money or that her relationship with her family was disrupted by the father or anyone else.[60]The parents lived in Israel for the first few years of their marriage, and they travelled there quite frequently thereafter. They travelled to see the mother’s family in April 2024 and the mother then travelled again in June. The original return date was only two days after the trip out, but the father obtained the money from his parents to pay for the fare, and the ticket was changed so she could come back later.[61]I accept that the father arranged for a telephone line so that the mother’s family could speak to her without incurring charges. The mother did not give an account of a particular occasion when a telephone call was disrupted, or suggest that there had been days or weeks on end when she had not been able to contact them. The allegations were vague and unparticularised. It was contradicted by the father’s evidence as to specific matters.[62]So far as the money was concerned, this family lived on a modest income. The father worked full time and was responsible for paying for the household bills. The mother earned money part time by working in a hat shop which went into the tin in the house or the bank account. In the circumstances, there was very little financial freedom for either of them to spend on luxuries, including going out. I do not find the fact that money was used from the savings tin by the father to pay for certain items to be evidence of financial control. It is not alleged that the mother or the children went without, or that money was not found for things she needed, or visits to Israel. Once again, the mother’s allegations are vague and unparticularised.[63]I then turn to the sexual allegations in relation to the children. The mother’s case is that she believes the father’s insistence on washing the children’s intimate areas was sexually motivated, as was his wish for them to get into bed with him. She said that the children touched his genitals and that he was aroused.[64]These allegations were made in September 2024 when the mother returned from Israel. Having read and heard all the evidence about these particular allegations I found them, like the allegations of financial and family control, to be vague and lacking surrounding detail. There was no account of a particular occasion when it had happened, by reference to the time of day, what else was happening, what the children or she were doing. I would not expect details about every occasion, but there was little context even in relation to the most serious allegations. The accounts of what she saw also lack consistency.[65]At the end of the mother’s evidence I was left with the clear impression that the mother had become suspicious of the father’s behaviour without seeing anything specific. I note that when the children were asked questions about their father in the course of the investigations they did not say or reveal anything to suggest sexual abuse.[66]Likewise, when the children were spoken to on 30th September and 22nd October 2024, neither of them made any allegations about their father hitting or hurting them, nor did they display any fear of him or surrounding distress. On 30th October, S made no allegations but R said that she had been hit by her father a number of times on the face and the leg and all over. R was subsequently interviewed in January 2025. During the course of this, she stated that her father screamed at them and her mother, and also that he had hit her on various parts of the body. She also said that he had hit her mother, something she knew because her mother had told her.[67]By the time R was spoken to on 30th October she had already been spoken to twice and had made no allegations. In this case R was living with her mother and was plainly aware that she was making allegations of some sort against the father, and indeed that she did not like him. The mother has never said she saw the father hitting the children (although she said the children told her this), and the children made no complaint about being hurt by the father by being aggressively washed or cleaned by him, for example, quite the contrary. The mother refers to the children having bruises, but these are not described in any detail.[68]During the ABE interview R said that her father screamed when he came home from the office, but it was only when she was invited to tell the interviewer if there were things she did not like about him, and whether she had ever been hurt at home that she said ‘maybe father’ and that he had smacked her and pinched her. She was not able to say where he had smacked her, or, beyond that it was in her house, where it had happened. She said she knew her mother had been hit because her mother had told her.[69]There is always a danger that children who are interviewed several times about allegations of abuse, even without manifestly leading questions, may begin to make allegations which are not grounded in reality. This risk is magnified if the child is living in an environment where there is hostility to the person who is being accused. This does not mean that the child is lying, but that the attitude of the adults is capable of altering their perceptions of past events. They may wish to please those around them. In this case, the children did not evince fear of their father or make allegations about him in the earlier meetings.[70]The mother’s evidence about the way she and the children were treated by the father during the marriage is very stark. If it was correct that she was routinely physically abused and shouted at in front of the children, and also that the children were repeatedly physically abused, shouted at and humiliated by the father, I think that this would have been apparent to the professionals when they were initially interviewed on 30th September and 22nd October 2024. It is not so much that the children did not say anything about it but the fact that their demeanour did not give any cause for concern which is striking. Although I am aware the mother has some concerns about the objectivity of the school, it is also surprising they did not pick up any concerns about the father’s behaviour towards the children, bearing in mind that they were living with him and his parents for the last part of the school summer term and the first few weeks of September.[71]For all these reasons the reliability of what R told the professionals and police in the later interviews, including the interview in January, must be in doubt.[72]I then turn to the mother’s allegations of rape and sexual abuse of herself by the father. Some of these allegations do contain surrounding detail, and the mother has repeated them several times. The clearest example of this is the allegation the mother makes involving the wearing of tights. Whilst the father says that he did ask her to wear the tights, he denies the rest of the allegation.[73]It seems unlikely that such a specific occasion would be the subject of a complete fabrication on the part of the mother although her evidence overall was characterised by vagueness and exaggeration. If she is telling the truth about the father doing that, it begs the question as to why the father did not tell the court that this had happened.[74]There are other aspects of the mother’s evidence about these allegations which are problematic, however. She says that she told the marital therapist that the father was abusing the children, and that she also told the psychiatrist in Israel he had raped her. Whilst it is not impossible that professionals tasked with helping families would cover up or dismiss such serious allegations, it would still be surprising. There is no hint in the psychiatrist’s report that the mother had told him she was treated so badly. There is no evidence before this court that the therapist here (known as Sara) alerted anyone or said anything, or even signposted the mother to the police or local authority.[75]I appreciate that the mother was very distressed in June 2024 and it was in those circumstances that she wanted to be given permission not to go to the Mikvah and to go and see her family in Israel. She did not wish to go on and wanted to be allowed to leave the marriage and return to Israel with the children. Whilst I accept that these events could be supportive of the mother’s allegations against the father, they are also consistent with the mother’s unhappiness in the relationship overall, and the realisation that things had reached breaking point.[76]I also acknowledge that the mother went to see a psychiatrist in Israel, but I do not think that this fact can bear the interpretation that Ms. More O’Ferrall submits it should, and/or that it is evidence of the mother being coerced by the father. I note that when she returned to England it was swiftly agreed that the children could return to her.[77]It is well known that victims of sexual and other abuse do find it very difficult to speak of this to professionals or other outsiders. They may not fully appreciate what has been happening to them. Yet this is a case where the mother said she did tell professionals at least some of what was happening in the spring and summer of 2024, but that they did not report it. In those circumstances it is more surprising that she did not inform the authorities that the father repeatedly raped and sexually assaulted her during the marriage at the same time she made the other allegations on her return from Israel and waited to do so until the end of October.[78]There is more support for the mother’s allegations that the father would sometimes shout at her and the children. In the list of things that she compiled for the father (with the help of the therapist) in February 2024, before these proceedings were contemplated, she made a number of requests, including that he speak to her respectfully and not to be angry or critical. She also asked him not to shout at the children. Caring for a household and young children is hard and, at times, unremitting work and the flavour of that document is that the mother felt criticised, uncared for and unappreciated for all that she did. In his police interview the father complained that his washing was not done properly, and he also began to be critical about the mother’s cooking.[79]The father denied shouting at the children or the mother, but it is not difficult to deduce from what both parents said that they disagreed about various things, for example as to whether he should allow the children into bed with him when they were scared or send them back to their own beds, whether the child who did not like being washed should be overruled, and whether the children should submit to such things as having their ears cleaned. The father also accepted that on one occasion the cleaning had caused bleeding when the child pulled away as he was doing it.[80]It is obvious that this marriage was unhappy for a substantial period of time. It is also plain that there were tensions around the parties’ sexual relationship. In my judgement, the father downplayed this quite significantly, but there were various points in his evidence particularly in his interview with the police when he acknowledged some of the difficulties. I bear in mind the problems with language, but he clearly said that the mother would frequently say no to him on occasions and also that he had been desperate when he had not had sex for weeks, saying ‘I thought, ok, that’s my life. Maybe all the people are like this. I don’t know’. Conclusions[81]Standing back and looking at the evidence overall, I do not find, on the balance of probabilities, that any of the allegations made by the mother against the father are proved. I find it is more likely than not that her allegations derive from a combination of re-evaluating the father’s behaviour towards both the children and herself in a sinister light and exaggeration of past events in an unhappy relationship. The allegations the mother has made are not supported by the surrounding evidence or, for the most part, by the children themselves. It is apparent from statements that R made to the professionals that she had absorbed and heard a number of the allegations made by her mother, which very much limits the weight that can be given to what she said about the father hitting them or his screaming at everyone.[82]I think it very unlikely that the children’s teachers would not have been alerted to something going on in the home, or that the children would have presented as they did to the social worker on 30th September and 22nd October in particular, but also later, had the mother’s allegations about verbal and physical abuse of herself and the children been correct. The same applies to the allegations of sexual abuse of the children.[83]In stating this I make it clear that I do not accept all of the father’s evidence. In some respects he was clearly trying to cast himself in a positive light. He downplayed the disagreements between himself and the mother, and the extent to which he had become critical of, and frustrated with, her. Whilst not optimal, it is important that household tensions, arguments (even in front of the children), or frustration with small children who do not want to be wiped or cleaned, are not over-interpreted where the evidence does not warrant it.[84]The mother’s account of rape and sexual abuse was more detailed than the other allegations she made, and she was plainly distressed when answering questions in court. Such allegations are not lightly or easily made, but, after very careful consideration, I do not find that the father forced himself upon the mother without her consent, or that he sexually assaulted or abused her. I make this finding despite my doubts as to whether the father was telling the truth about having sex with the mother when she was wearing tights. Being entirely frank about such intimate matters is difficult and it does not follow from his lack of candour that this constituted a rape.[85]That there were sexual problems in the marriage is obvious from all the evidence. The mother did not enjoy the intimate side of their relationship much, if at all, and there were lengthy periods when the parties did not have sex. That caused tension.[86]These two people did not know each other before they married and have no sexual experience beyond it. The rituals surrounding sex within their religious culture (which, for example, require a woman to have permission to avoid going to the Mikvah) are likely to have acted to create expectations on both sides as to what was expected within the marital relationship.[87]I have not found the mother’s evidence in relation to other serious allegations to be reliable and I must take this into account when considering the allegations she makes about rape and sexual assault. There is a difference between an unhappy sex life where the wishes and feelings of the parties are misaligned and one party agrees to activity which they do not ultimately find enjoyable – or even which makes them feel subsequently as if they had been used - and a situation where they have not given consent.[88]In my judgement, the father may well have lacked empathy and respect for the mother in their daily lives, causing her distress and hurt. He may also have been crude and insensitive in his approach to sex. All this suggests that he needs to look at himself and take his share of responsibility for the failure of the relationship but, on the evidence before me, it does not cross the line to amount to coercive control or domestic abuse as defined within Practice Direction 12J of the Family Procedure Rules or more generally.[89]I then turn to consider the findings sought by the father. Whilst I have not made any of the findings sought by the mother, it does not follow that I find that she has behaved maliciously, albeit she has, on my findings, made some claims out of little evidence, and has convinced herself that she and the children have been treated in a way which is not objectively correct. She has not been careful about what she has said in front of the children and has allowed herself to be carried away. I am not prepared to make findings that go further than this.[90]Both these parties have suffered a very unhappy breakdown of their marriage, and the mother, in particular, has suffered emotionally from being treated with a lack of empathy by the father during the course of the relationship. I urge him to reflect on his behaviour and consider how he might be better attuned to the emotional needs of those around him, and more able to stand back and respect the role that the mother has played and will play in the upbringing of these precious children. To be a good father to his daughters he does need to be sensitive to their needs, wishes and feelings. The mother will also need to reflect on past events and how the children can be encouraged to have a relationship with their father.