You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Judges who allowed Sara Sharif to remain in her father’s custody to be named next week
Name the judges who left Sara Sharif in care of father who killed her, court told
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/name-judges-left-sara-sharif-144437172.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/name-judges-left-sara-sharif-144437172.html
Comments
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/judges-oversaw-sara-sharif-care-140900734.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/judges-who-allowed-sara-sharif-to-remain-in-her-father-s-custody-to-be-named-next-week/ar-AA1xMElL?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=9a6abc82fc9843a991fb9f343ce9ba6f&ei=8#fullscreen
Judges have to be able to judge impartially-the clue is in the Title.
People do not realise just how common it is for Judges to have to choose, with foresight as opposed to hindsight, as to which is likely to be the least bad out of a bad set of options.
This particular scenario is far more common than you might think. In essence, the 3 options are/were:-
1. Give Custody to Father and Stepmother, when there is an amount of credible evidence that there are risks to the child; or
2. Give Custody to Mother, when there is an amount of credible evidence that there are risks to the Child; or
3. Put child into Care, ensuring that that child is removed from both Parents. Known credible risks, both due to inherent weaknesses in Care system, coupled with profound mental effects on Child, who tends to blame themselves
Up until now, a Judge, with experience and foresight, can weigh up what is best for the child. The least risky option. Because there is never a no-risk option
This ruling changes that. Imagine, for a second, that there is a 1% chance of serious harm to the Child in 1, a 1% chance in 2, and a 5% chance in 3. Imagine you are the Judge. And you are dealing with 100 such cases a year.
The current overriding objective is what is best for the Child.
Now look at this Order. And the fact that 1 of those 100 cases is going to cause serious harm, resulting in baying mobs outside your house and threatening to kill your kids. Never able to Judge in future cases because hindsight proved 1 to be wrong.
Or 5 of those 100 cases result in serious harm to the child, but in a way where no blame is attached to the Judge.
It is going to result in more harm to children. Not less.
However, havent you just presented a case for not changing anything?
The other side of the coin is that three out of three judges chose the worst possible option.
The evidence for which, is that the poor child is dead.
You can argue that this was obvious, but only with the benefit of hindsight.
Although this can be disputed using the evidence that was available at the time.
I am unsure as to which agencies would have given evidence in court, but surely if the school, social services, and the police had participated in the case, and given all the evidence they were aware of, then it would surely have been impossible to return the child to her Father.
We constantly hear that lessons will be learned, but little seems to change.
On this occasion the court had three opportunities to avoid the inevitable outcome.
Based on what you have said, and the evidence that was available, it would seem to be virtually impossible for a child to be taken into care, irrespective of the actions of the parents.
I am not sure that naming the judges will accomplish anything positive, and probably subject them to much abuse.
How much abuse should a child have to suffer before being taken into care?
1. Yes, I was a Solicitor for quite a lot of my life. And before that I spent some time as a Barrister.
2. I'm certainly not saying nothing should ever change. What I am saying is this is not the way to do it. As an example, it is perfectly possible to review the decisions. But that most certainly does not need to involve bringing named Judges into that process.
3. The advantage I have over you is that I (sadly) know just how common this sort of situation is. For example, as I understand it, the Mother had severe mental health problems, which were believed to have placed the child at risk. The risk was perceived to be far higher than the Father. On the info then available, it was.
4. There are currently over 100,000 children in our care system
https://www.actionforchildren.org.uk/blog/four-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-uk-care-system/#:~:text=Four things you need to know about the,foster families to help children in care
5. It is easy to say with hindsight that this 1 child should have been in care. But I am presuming you have never acted for Parents desperate not to lose their children. And 99.9% of them are unlucky, or merely inadequate and need help which we are unwilling to pay for. Which isn't to say the 0.1% are not vitally important. They are. Spotting them is rather more difficult
6. I mentioned that I used to be a Barrister at 1 time. For good reason. 1 of the cornerstones of British Justice is the "cab rank" principle. It means that if a Barrister has appropriate knowledge, experience and availability, they must act for people. Because-guess what-next to no-one wants to act for child-beaters, paedos and Tommy f.ing Robinson. So-where are we going with this? Going after the Judge? The person acting for the winning side for doing their job too well? The one acting for the losing side for not predicting the future?
7. Do you think the Media are the right people to judge on all of this? And to hang people out to dry for doing their job? The World has changed-someone with a 10 year old phone has access to a million times more information than 30 years ago. Together with names, addresses and pictures.
Glad I've retired.
In cases like this, and a lot of others, that is quite obviously not true, no child should have been in the care of either parent, they should have been in state provided care, not just poor Sara but any other children they had as well.
The trouble is that the state care system, like virtually every other state provided system in this country, is stretched beyond breaking and as a result is not operating anywhere near as well as it should be, or is not working at all if there are no places.
Also consider that abusers will put themselves in positions of trust and access, whether that be sports coaches, teaching, care work etc. Sadly the very people you rely on.
I know individuals that have been horribly let down by the care system (let down is a very mild term considering the treatment they received) but I do cling to the hope that it is better now than it was 10, 20, 30 years ago (or even longer).
There is no easy answer, but certainly blaming the judges, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and naming them, is not the way to go.
Continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of madness.
Going from memory, prior to the court cases, Sara had been under police protection, the Father had been suspected of abuse of her siblings from before she was born, and the school had reported their suspicions of her abuse.
Yet the court awarded custody to her Father, not once, but three times.
I dont blame the judges because I dont know enough about it, and suspect they would have been acting within guidelines.
Naming them just seems spiteful.
We surely have to have a system where schools, doctors, hospitals, and the police report any suspicions of abuse to social services, and social services investigate effectively.
The fact that it took social services 4 days to close this case, wouldnt seem like an adequate investigation.
I have to agree that for the most part children are better off with their parents, but someone in authority has to make an informed judgement, and they cant be afraid to take a child into care.
I believe they have resolved the home schooling b0ll0x.
I cant think that there is anything more stupid than anyone, even a moron, could possibly have the right to home school their child.
Taking into account all the evidence that was available in this case, it is hard to imagine what would have to have been done to this child for her to have been taken into care.
It really isn't that simple.
"Informed judgment"? Totally impossible. Simply because the honest do not tell the truth either-if it was my kids being taken into care, I would have done anything to keep my kids.
The info was not available in the way you mean. There are tens of thousands of cases that (at that time) looked the same.
Schools? Teachers are well-intentioned, but this is not where their strengths lie.
You have no concept of the amount of cases, and the immense burden on Social Workers. Under-staffed and under-appreciated. The things you believe should happen involve spending £Billions. Which we say should happen-but we won't pay for it.
Thankfully it is still very rare that horrible cases like this happen
Sara was found to have ten spinal fractures and further fractures to her right collar bone, both shoulder blades, both arms, both hands, three separate fingers, bones near the wrist in each hand, two ribs and her hyoid bone in the neck
1. January 2013
Sara Sharif is made subject to a child protection plan at birth due to her father Urfan Sharif being accused of attacking three women including her mother, as well as hitting and biting two children. But she is allowed to remain with her father.
2. February 22, 2013
A month after Sara is born, social services and police are told that Sharif has slapped a child around the face. No charges are brought.
3. May 7, 2013
A social worker spots a burn mark on a child’s leg. Sharif had failed to report the incident and claimed it was a BBQ accident. Nothing is done.
4. October 7, 2013
A child is seen with a burn mark sustained from a domestic iron. Sharif told social services the child had knocked into the iron. No action is taken.
5. 2013-2014
A child tells a social worker that Sharif smashed up a TV and punched Sara’s mother Olga.
6. November 2014
Sara is taken into foster care after a child tells a social worker about a bite mark. But she later returns to live with her father following a family court hearing in October 2019 where social services recommend she should stay with him because that is her preference.
7. January 2015
Sharif is reported to social services for waving a knife around at home in what he said was a ‘zombie’ game. Social workers note that Sharif hit and kicked Olga at home and the pair threatened to kill each other.
8. February 2015
A child tells their foster carer that Sharif used to hit them on the bottom with a belt. In September the child is heard to say to Sharif, ‘when you’re at home you hit and kick me every day’.
9. 2015
Olga tells social services that Sharif tightened a belt around her neck. Around this time social workers complain Sharif is coercive and derogatory towards them.
10. December 2016
A child tells a social worker they don’t like Sharif because he punched them all over their body and gave them lots of bruises. Social workers observe that Sara flinches when Sharif tells her off during supervised contact and she seems surprised when he cuddles her.
11. June 6, 2022
A teacher reports that Sara has a bruise under her eye to the school’s online child protection monitoring system. Sara initially will not say what happened, before claiming another child hit her.
12. March 10, 2023
A teacher saw bruises on her face. Sara said she had fallen on roller skates. When Sara gave a different story to a safeguarding lead, the school made a referral to social services. Six days later social services remove ‘decide to take no further action’ and replace ‘close the case’.
'The headteacher spoke to her and Sara lowered her head and refused to lift her head or show her head,' prosecutor William Emlyn Hughes KC told jurors during the six week murder trial.
'She was reluctant to talk and kept her face lowered and only spoke with her face buried with her arm on the table.'
13. March 20, 2023
A report is logged on the school's internal system after Sara’s stepmother Beinash Batool is overheard referring to children as "motherf***er, sister f***er, b**** and ****" in the playground.
14. March 28, 2023
Batool claims to a teacher that a mark on Sara’s face is caused by a pen. The teacher tells the school’s safeguarding lead.
15. April 17, 2023
Sharif decides to home-school Sara. The school rings the council for advice and is told it should make a referral if there are concerns.
It was the third time she had been taken out of school following previous occasions in June 2022 and again after April 2023.
Staff see Sara later that day at school pick-up and she seems fine so they decide against it, even though she had been beaten earlier that day. She is never seen outside the home again.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14105413/sara-sharif-abuse-murdered-woking-surrey.html
In the Court of Appeal’s ruling, Sir Geoffrey Vos said: “In the circumstances of this case, the judge had no jurisdiction to anonymise the historic judges either on 9 December 2024 or thereafter.”
A shocking trial saw Sara’s father, Urfan Sharif, 42, and his wife Beinash Batool 30, found guilty for her murder, after she suffered a catalogue of 70 injuries, including 25 fractures, human bite marks and burns. Her uncle, Faisal Malik, 29, was convicted for causing or allowing her death while living with them.
Details later emerged from previous family court proceedings, which revealed that Surrey County Council had repeatedly raised “significant concerns” about Sara’s safety.
The council first had contact with Sharif and Sara’s mother Olga Domin in 2010 - more than two years before Sara was born - having received “referrals indicative of neglect” relating to her two older siblings, known only as Z and U.
Within a week of Sara’s birth in 2013, the authority began care proceedings concerning the children.
Between 2013 and 2015, several allegations of abuse were made against Sharif and Domin, which were never tested in court despite three sets of family court proceedings.
One hearing in 2014 told that the council had “significant concerns” about the children returning to Sharif, “given the history of allegations of physical abuse of the children and domestic abuse with Mr Sharif as the perpetrator”.
Sara and her sibling U were returned to the parents. Sibling Z remained in foster care where they made allegations of physical abuse perpetrated by both parents, as well as allegations of domestic violence.
These allegations were denied by Sharif and Domin and the court did not determine the truth.
In 2015, Domin accused Sharif of hitting her and their children, as well as controlling, violent behaviour. He made counter-allegations against Domin and agreed to go on a domestic violence course, but these allegations were never tested in court.
Sara would briefly go into foster care and then join her mother in a refuge. While in foster care, a carer noted scars potentially consistent with cigarette burns on Sara and her sibling, which Domin and Sharif said were chicken pox scars.
By November that year, the family concluded the children should live with Domin, allowing supervised visits with Sharif.
In 2019, after Sara alleged Domin had abused her, a judge approved her moving to live with her father in Woking, where she later died after a campaign of abuse.
Freelance journalists Louise Tickle and Hannah Summers were two of many media figures who appealed the decision as they told a hearing on 14 January that the judges should be named in the interests of transparency.
Chris Barnes, for Ms Tickle and Ms Summers, called the judge’s decision “unfair, poorly reasoned and unsustainable”, calling it “out of step with the recognised need to promote transparency, and media reporting, in the Family Court”.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/judges-who-allowed-sara-sharif-to-remain-in-her-father-s-custody-to-be-named-next-week/ar-AA1xMElL?ocid=BingNewsSerp#
1. 3 children involved-none of which appear to be Sara
2. A child-not Sara
3. A child-not Sara
4. A child-not Sara
5. Alleged violence v ex-wife. Not Sara
6. Relevant. But minor and common
7. V Adult-not Sara
8. A child-not Sara
9. An adult and Social Workers-not Sara
10. A child-not Sara
11. As is very common, child gives believable account explaining injuries.
12. See 11
13. The stepmother used some bad language at the School. Really?
14. See 11
15. Finally got to the stage where it is becoming clear further action is warranted. Sadly, too late
There are tens of thousands of children where similar levels of suspicion start. Thankfully, this level of harm is very rare
1 thing that has become clear is that 1 of her siblings was taken into care. Although we do not know why. Or why not with her Mother
Officially, there are currently (according to Govt statistics), 400,000 children with similar "massive red flags"
https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/children-in-need
I believe we would be able to provide what you (and indeed I) regard as an appropriate level of protection.
Now-who is going to agree to the extra £10,000 tax each every year to pay for it?
Just 1 statistic in there to ponder. 643,000 assessments. Just in 2024.
The child was her sibling.
Is battering your wife ok?
Sara was found to have ten spinal fractures and further fractures to her right collar bone, both shoulder blades, both arms, both hands, three separate fingers, bones near the wrist in each hand, two ribs and her hyoid bone in the neck
I would have thought that it would have been reported if they had.
Or was the chicken pox excuse for the f ag burns exactly that.
Where divorcing parents did not routinely make allegations against their former Partner for leverage in Custody and Contact battles.
Where Local Authorities had the resources and powers to do all the things you want.
Where 640,000 assessments weren't completed last year. Where 400,000 kids were not designated as "in need". Where there were not 50,000 kids currently on child protection plans.
Where I felt able to opine that matters were simple.
They are not. I wish they were.
I dont think you are putting forward a relevant argument.
The evidence that was available in this case, has no comparison to a bit of flak flying about during divorce proceedings.
There were suspicions about the Father abusing his wife and kids, before she was even born, which probably werent investigated properly.
Sara was found to have ten spinal fractures and further fractures to her right collar bone, both shoulder blades, both arms, both hands, three separate fingers, bones near the wrist in each hand, two ribs and her hyoid bone in the neck
There was another case today .
A woman with mental health issues left her two sets of twins at home, while she went out.
They were all killed when the house burnt down.
Mum jailed for 10 years after four sons died in house fire while she went shopping
The family of four boys who died in a house fire said ‘justice has been done’ after their mum was jailed for 10 years for leaving them home alone to go shopping.
Deveca Rose, 30, left her two sets of twins alone in the unsafe terraced house in Sutton, south west London, when the huge blaze broke out on the evening of December 16, 2021.
Leyton and Logan Hoath, aged three, and four-year-olds Kyson and Bryson Hoath screamed out for help, and a neighbour desperately tried to break down the front door.
Firefighters found the bodies of the boys huddled under beds in the house which was full of rubbish and human excrement.
Rose, who had split up with her partner and suffered from mental health problems, was found guilty on four counts of manslaughter.
‘We have heard speculation the fire was caused by lights on a Christmas tree, false claims the boys were left with a babysitter.
‘We thank the jury for seeing past that and delivering us a true verdict.’
The judge noted Rose had already been to Sainsbury’s earlier that day and her return trip at the time of the fire was not to purchase any items that were essential or vital.
He told Rose: ‘You were not there and the children were too young to know what to do. As a result of what you did, they were all killed.’
The Old Bailey heard Rose and the children had been living in squalor, surrounded by rubbish and human excrement before the boy’s deaths.
There were no working toilets in the house, and buckets throughout the property were used instead.
The children had not attended school for three weeks before their deaths.
Prosecutor Kate Lumsdon KC had told the court: ‘There was rubbish thickly spread throughout the house. The toilet and the bath were full of rubbish and could not be used. Buckets and pots were used as toilets instead.’
When she arrived back at the property to the scene of the fire, she told firefighters she left her children in the care of a friend name Jade.
This prompted firefighters to go back into the house to search for her.
But police concluded she either did not exist or had not been at the house that day.
When a cigarette or tea light in the living room sparked a fire, the boys were trapped and ran upstairs calling for help.
https://metro.co.uk/2025/01/24/mum-jailed-10-years-four-sons-died-house-fire-went-shopping-22427840/
What a terrific & well-debated thread, well done lads. If only we had more like this.