Apr 29 2015
I have now had a reply from Katia Vandenbroucke of the HCPC in regard to my complaint against the social workers, Nicole Miles & Julie robinson.
You will notice that Vandenbroucke reply has a bit of a ‘devil may care’ attitude about it.
It was also interesting to note that the email wasn’t marked “strictly private & confidential” – unlike her email prior to this one.
Indeed, it also has to be said that instead of putting the onus on me to send her a copy of the report and evidence contained within it – probably in the hope that I would lose interest – all she had to do was request a copy from the social workers.
And once having done so, should the social workers copy not tally with the evidence that I have already provided her with, then she could request our copy.
Yet despite the very serious nature of our complaint, the inference in Katia Vandenbroucke’s email is that if we don’t jump through hoops to provide her with the requested information, then the investigation will grind to a halt and the case closed.
Furthermore, Vandenbroucke completely ignored the question that I asked her to answer in my last email, in order that she may set my mind at rest.
Indeed you may remember that I asked her for a simple “yes” or “no” answer to the question:
Being as a social worker’s completed assessment has potentially life changing, devastating consequence for a child and indeed that child’s parents and will form the basis of any court proceedings on which a judge will heavily rely on when making a final decision – do you agree that nothing less than an unbiased, clearly set out, complete in content, totally accurate, mistake free, assessment which leaves nothing open to interpretation or misguidance, is acceptable?
The fact that she chose to ignore the question does fuck all to allay my fears.
Nevertheless, the following is a copy & paste of her email:
Dear Mr Spivey,
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email dated 11 April 2015 and the further information you sent, which was received on 17 April 2015. The further information you provided included screen shots of parts of various documents.
I understand from your last email that you are providing further documentation and we will await receipt of that.
In addition to any other documents you wish to provide, we ultimately seek a full copy of the:
1) Assessment prepared in relation to your grandson.
Please note that all cases are reviewed on a case by case basis in terms of whether they meet the Standard of Acceptance and require further investigation. As such I am unable to provide you with a definitive answer at this stage whether this matter will proceed to the next stage in the process, which is consideration by the Investigating Committee Panel.
We look forward to receiving the additional documentation from you in due course.
Case Team 3
It is also interesting to note Vandenbroucke’s reply to my friend “Pongos” email.
You see, Pongo had emailed her asking the following question:
Dear Ms Vandenbrouche: Is your discipline legal or social work?
To which Vandenbroucke replied:
Please be advised that I do not work in a social work capacity or legal capacity for the HCPC.
Case Managers are neutral and do not take the side of either the Registrant or the person who raised the concern with us. The role of the Case Manager is to manage the progress of the case throughout the process, to gather relevant information and explain how the process works.
Now, since Vandenbroucke is supposedly a qualified solicitor/barrister I find it strange that she is not working in her chosen field… But maybe that is just me.
Nevertheless, all the evidence to what I have alleged was sent off via recorded delivery mail along with a copy of our full complaint and I will be sending her a copy of the social workers report in full tomorrow via the same method.
It is also worth mentioning a Chimp article sent to me today by my friend Eric.
The article is about former Monty Python cameraman (is that the only program that he filmed?) who was arrested at home at 3AM in the morning on allegations of harassment… Hence it would seem that harassment is now a much more serious crime than say armed robbery since armed robbers get knocked up at around 6.30 AM in the morning.
Now Eric sent me the article to point out the similarities to my arrest but added that it could just be the Chimp following an agenda to ‘normalise’ arrests in the middle of the night regardless of the severity of offence – the latter being a theory that I am more inclined to agree with given the scant details in the article.
Course, the only real thing that is similar between mine and this short-term career cameramans is the ridiculous time of the arrest.
After All, the Monkey-nutz did not condemn my arrest, despite the fact that it was:
- and carried out despite having no evidence to do so
- by 4 very aggressive thugs
- who burst into my home at 1:30AM without arrest or search warrant
- and proceeded to steal and plant child porn on my computer
- after which I was held at Southend Central police station for 19 hours
- in which time a malicious, completely without foundation referral was made to Social Services.
Moreover, the fella in question, John Wellard was actually sending – or encouraging/inciting others to send – material to his alleged targets, as well as attaching insulting (albeit doubtlessly accurate) drawings & allegations about his victims to lampposts.
Course, that isn’t to say that I believe that the plod were right in their action in this instance.
On the contrary, this is just another example to add to the already countless examples to suggest that we are living under a dictatorship, policed by mindless thugs… An unacceptable situation which needs to change.
Six police officers arrested a pensioner for harassment and quizzed him for two hours over a series of satirical posters poking fun at local politicians.
Former Monty Python cameraman John Wellard, 71, told the uniformed officers who marched into his home on Friday night: ‘I wasn’t expecting the Spanish Inquisition.’
Police were responding to complaints that light-hearted posters appearing in Faversham, Kent, amounted to harassment of members of the town council who were being lampooned.
For the last year residents have clashed with councillors over fears the town’s historic creek area will be turned over to developers for expensive flats.
In recent months the posters, one depicting a Tory councillor riding a donkey, began appearing in the town.
Last night Mr Wellard – who refuses to confirm or deny any involvement – said: ‘It was completely Pythonesque.
‘Lampoonery and satire have been part of British public life for centuries.
‘Why have six policemen threatened to go through my belongings just because a few feathers have been ruffled? Freedom of speech is being whittled away.’
Mr Wellard, who was interviewed under caution at the local police station, chose to give a ‘no comment’ answer to every question.
He said: ‘It’s irrelevant who’s done what because I do not believe any offence has been committed.