From Mark Harris

Dear Ivor,

Can I please place a very big thank you in the next "illeagle" to everyone
who supported me during my stay at HMP Pentonville. I am totally convinced the pressure upon the family court Judiciary-who, let's face it, have little respect nationwide anyway - played a major part in my release.

I am still in total disbelief as to what Madness Munby did in sending me down for such things as trying to bribe the mother into complying with a Contact Order (4 months), giving my children their birthday presents on a contact last year (4 months) ,driving near their home in hope of seeing them between contacts (6 months consecutive to the 4 months) while working as a driving instructor, but also his total disregard of four very good Court Welfare Reports and eighteen (yes,18) Social Service reports of observed Contact between 1994-Oct 2000, ALL of which detail my kids happy at contact.

Unfortunately, we had the Official Solicitor involved, who in my experience
simply does not ever support contact if the mother opposes it, so therefore
sends a Child Psychiatrist (why on earth we had one of them when no-one ever claimed any of my three kids were mentally ill, I'll never know) to interview the kids in the mothers presence, and therefore gets them dissenting against contact, so then Mad Dog Munby could then elevate this version of the kids wishes to the forefront, and disregard the 22 good welfare reports.

I tried to appeal this on 2 July, but Sloss and Thorpe dismissed my appeal as it was Madness Munby's "discretion" to disregard the contact reports by a total of two CWO's and five Social Workers, in favour of the Corrupt Child
Psychiatrist (Dr Hamish Cameron, 2 Kings Ride Gate, Richmond, Surrey) who never saw a single contact.

Therefore, although endless Perjury by the mother is accepted and encouraged, bias reports-against the father of course-are often passed through and accepted "on the nod", in my case GOOD welfare reports are simply disregarded in favour of the mothers wishes-just get the kids interviewed in front of her!

I have now gone back to Mad Dog Munby with my youngest's latest school
reports, this is the first year she has not had any contact at all. All her
previous reports (she's 10) describe her as "a popular member of the class","polite and helpful", eager to please", etc.

This year's now describes her as "very disruptive", "attention seeking" "very
silly at times" and "often falling out with her peers".
The only change to her life in the last year has been no contact with me at

Interests of the child, Munby style! Let's see what his reaction to her
reports in my application to restore contact will be-is he man enough to
admit he got it wrong? I won't hold my breath.


I will post a copy of the Wiltshire Gazette article from our demo on 21 July,
and his response via the Lord Chancellors department. As can be seen, they/he are defending their position.

But I do wonder just how much longer they will hold out before wanting to
talk to us.

We shall see, the next protest, August 18, Somerset!
(My aol connected computer has just spoken the term "you've got company" when I put the name Thorpe in-they are watching us!!!)

If Madness Munby ignores or dismisses my application to restore contact based on the adverse school report, I intend holding a series of vigils outside his Manningford Bruce home (Frith Copse, Manningford Bruce, Nr Pewsey, Wiltshire) in due course.

Anyone interested in coming along would be more than welcome. Press have already shown an interest, and I do intend to leaflet his village inviting
the residents along to discover what sort of man lives in their village, with
the lure of soft drinks, crisps, sweets and snacks for allthose who come

His anger in Court just five days after the excellent protest outside his
London home in April, I think, shows this nature of action-to the very
doorstep of their exclusive homes-is a very effective weapon of hope to bring eventual justice to the injust and corrupt family courts of today.

All any father wants is the same status as mothers new man; a presumption that you are fine to live with/spend time with/look after your kids UNLESS you actually do something wrong.

Just why should (as in my case) I could live with my kids until the eldest
was almost 7, then in the space of just 2 hours (the time it took my ex to
clear my home of possessions and children while I was at a Football Match) I have then had to go to Court over what is now 120+ times just to prove (unsuccessfully on the most recent) that I am good enough to just see them?

Yet her new man moved in, and has never been interviewed, checked out, or even observed with my kids, although THORPE himself found (Court of Appeal, Dec 95) that he had indeed ASSAULTED them in breach of orders not to. And, of course, to this day, still lives with them.

What we must all continue to do is ram home, time and again, the injustice,
farce and corruption that goes on every day in these Family Courts. The shift AWAY from contact has got progressively worse since Sloss became President of the Family Courts. Increasingly, the rearity of getting positive welfare reports are becoming consistently rejected by the current breed of hostile feminist/whimpish male Judges coming though the ranks since Sloss'; appointment, but negative welfare reports are followed, consistently.

It is painfully obvious that since Sloss took charge (and backed up by the
aggressive Mrs Justice Bracewell in the role as chair of the children act
advisory committee) that ANY form of contact order is unlikely if the Court
think the mother will become problematic over it.

All we seek is the same status as the mother's new man/men-that being a simple presumption you are fine with your kids UNLESS you actually do something.

If it's good enough for the mothers new plaything, then it's sure good enough for fathers.

We have press attention, the vast majority of the public perceive the Family
Courts as bias to the mothers, we must, now the Judiciary are panicking, take them to the CORRUPTION that goes on, every single day up and down the Country, of perfectly good men being denied the right to be fathers to their kids for no good reason at all.

We have right on our side, there are enough of us to bring about change, it's a simple case of us ALL being sufficently motivated to do something-Join the protest movement.

More information as to future protests, call me 01752 346395.

Mark Harris. 2aug01