ALECOMM

Isn't it a shame that mainstream media (so-called) journalists that followed suit like a bunch of lackeys, when they all jumped on the "criminal syndicate kidnapping children" bandwagon instead of doing their own homework.

Here's a few points to mull over whilst the real story gets hidden.

1. Pensioners and professionals are believed to be part of the syndicate, which allegedly used encrypted messages in order to avoid detection.  "Syndicate"?  Really?  If the family court sent your children to live with or have unsupervised access with a paedophile, what would you do to help them?  Any decent human being would help.  Criminalising the good guys and covering for the real criminals is such a gutless act. 
2. If mainstream media weren't so pathetic, they would do the research the staff at Alecomm have and discover, that the Australian Government and Family Law Courts routinely give paedphiles and convicted sex offenders access to their child-victims.
3. Pridgeon - who was arrested at his home in Grafton, New South Wales on Wednesday - is a GP and founded the Australian Antipaedophile Party.
4. He allegedly used Commonwealth money to create a network of 40 people which were part of the operation.Police allege O'Dea, who was also arrested on Wednesday, was given the job of driving around Australia for days at a time to pick up women and their children.
5. O'Dea - who once served in the Rhodesian army - allegedly stalked and threatened a father who eventually had his children returned to him years after they were taken.
6. It is alleged Pridgeon ran a Facebook page where women would send messages asking to escape from men they claimed to be paedophiles.  Surely the mainstream media is aware that one in four girls is sexually assaulted by the time they are sixteen. The figures aren't much different for boys.  Given that 24% of abuse cases in the family court are allegations of sexual assault, I'd say the figures match the statistics - meaning it isn't possible that all these women are lying and or jilted.  What it does mean is that everytime a magistrate calls a protective mother a liar in the federal and family courts, and given the statistics of probability, he/she is potentially sending a child to live with their rapist.
   

If that's not bad enough, please read this long list of family court judgements that gives children either full custody to the child-raping parent or overnight-unsupervised access.

To give you a peek into what's in there we will start with Justice Carmody, who in the case of Murphy vs Murphy, stated :

“There is no presumption or a priori rule that even gross misbehaviour such as child sexual abuse or family violence disqualifies the offending parent or puts up an insurmountable barrier in the way of having contact with a child victim”.

He also either ignorantly, incompetely or deliberately stated : "

“There is no presumption or a priori rule that even gross misbehaviour such as child sexual abuse or family violence disqualifies the offending parent or puts up an insurmountable barrier in the way of having contact with a child victim”.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FamCA/2007/795.html?query=%2272%20Australian%20Law%20Journal%20434%22

You must be logged in to comment due to spam issues.