The recent landmark ruling re Baby J by Sir James Munby, the President of the Family Division, where the snatching of the baby was recorded by video and published online.

This case raises important questions about the extent to which the public should be able to read and see what disgruntled parents say when they speak out about what they see as deficiencies in the family justice system, particularly when, as here, their complaints are about the care system. The case also raises important questions about how the court should adapt its practice to the realities of the internet, and in particular social media. For these reasons I am giving this judgement in open court.

The judgement made the news in a number of ways and is also being analysed and presented on this video – starting min 47:

In summary: 

  • the good intention: public disclosure on mainstream and social media;
  • the ‘in camera’ rule in Chapter 41, Section 97 of the Children’s Act 1989.

The wider context for Melissa’s case is:

Requests to Return our Stolen Children:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s