Ian & Penny's Story
Our Experience:
At approximately 6.45am, our house was raided by police, a sheet of paper was shown to us and social services proceeded to assist with the removal into 'protective custody' of our 5 children. Present was Emma Stark and Keith Harper of Comhairle nan Eilean Siar social work department.
Since the birth of our youngest, (8 months old at the time of the raid), I have been on anti-depressants and occasionally diazepam for panic attacks. When I began having panic attacks, I asked for help from our health visitor, as I didn't understand what was happening and began to feel agoraphobic. A social work assistant was assigned to me then who helped with housework and shopping until I was able to manage again. After her last visit (some time around July '03) her boss, Margaret Rigg, called to say they were not needed anymore as she had 'no concerns over the welfare of the children' (her own words). Margaret Rigg also told me that she was moving out of the children and families social work department. I later found out that this social worker had been the alleged victims social worker.
The same assistant became involved again during this case because she knows the children. However, I did not trust Emma Stark the social worker assigned, whose motives were unclear and who deliberately looked for problems where there were none.
While we were away in Aviemore, she called without appointment to see Ian, quite obviously to check that he hadn't left the island to see us outside of the supervised visits. She deliberately tried to get some indication of a controlling and violent father and husband from the questions she asked the children at first.
On the morning of the 3rd October, I began to suffer another panic attack and had to take a diazepam to calm down.
They handcuffed my husband who asked if it was necessary and was told that for the officers' protection, it was.
Officers were stood at every entrance to the house and followed Ian when he went to get my medication. The children were whisked away after getting them dressed (also done in the presence of someone else, as if I would try to speak to them and tell them to hide things or not discuss things.)
We were driven separately to Stornoway Police Station. When I got into the car, the male officer who brought me to the car stated that he had serious doubts about a lot of the evidence, this was before the female officer entered the car, she stated that "We don't do this without plenty of evidence you know." I made no reply and turned away, quite clearly they did do that sort of thing without plenty of evidence.
During my interview I became so distressed again that I had to take another diazepam. Convinced this ridiculous situation would be resolved rapidly, I declined to contact a solicitor. However the doctor that saw us both recommended that I had a responsible person present for the remainder of the interview (who turned out to be my social worker's boss!) During my interview, I was accused of devil-worshipping, of having devil-worshipping statues in the house. I was accused of assaulting the two girls with vibrators and wife-swapping, I have difficulty recalling the rest of the interview. When ever I stood up, I noticed the female officer, by far the worst of the two, looking to see if I had urinated on the chair.
My husband suffered a similar interview (we have since received a copy of the transcript of his interview which includes accusations of animal sacrifices, making of snuff videos, dressing in white gowns and masks and abusing these two girls as part of a ritual.
We both believe that a major factor in his being charged is that he considers himself Pagan. Something that during his interview, they blatantly equated with Satanism. (I have since found Christian websites that acknowledge that the two are not the same thing.)
The religious discrimination and deliberate misunderstanding has been blatantly obvious throughout this and we will be pursuing that for a long time to come. I contacted the Pagan Federation who were willing to provide, should we have needed one, an expert witness.
Our good friend and neighbour, has told us, and police when she was interviewed, that before we moved to the island, someone was spreading rumours of a devil-worshipping family moving to the island. The only people that knew we were moving to Lewis was the family we were exchanging council houses with and their relatives, the Strettons. We saw this family on two or three occasions between moving here (4th November 1997) and the end of that year. We have had no contact with them since. (Ian was charged with offences dating back to 1995, two years before we moved to the island.)
At the end of the interview I was taken to get my belongings and told that Ian had been charged. I had to grab hold of something because I nearly collapsed. My demands to know what he had been charged with were completely ignored.
My social work assistant and health visitor (who has known us for over 5 years) were there to meet me. Later that day I was taken back to my 8 month old baby, but was told that the police and social services still wanted to interview our children a second time the following day (obviously not satisfied that our children are well cared for and not abused), so I still was not permitted to see them. Telephone contact was also not permitted. I wrote them letters, the contents of which was read before being passed on. I spent a restless night, crying much of the time, holding my baby close to me, I wouldn't let her go. I was watched overnight as I was so distressed.
My requests to know if Ian was okay was finally answered the following day and later on, about 4pm, 4th October, I was taken back to our other children.
During the two days, our eldest daughter, now 10, wrote to me saying that she thought Ian and I had left her. I broke down again when I read that. Kyle was angy and scared, he was angry and crying, asking the police and social services what was going on, he was completely ignored they wouldn't answer him.
My constant demands to know who had done this were completely ignored at first, then treated with puzzlement. Quite clearly our guilt, or at least Ian's, had already been decided long ago.
I was unable to return home for about 5 days, I was told it was because of media interest around the house, I have since been told by neighbours that there was little interest after the first day, so I have my doubts that this was the real reason.
When I did return with the children, I found minor damage, including a large chip in an antique vase, and had to spend one entire day getting the house back in order and tidy.
Our safe secure home no longer exists. For weeks after I suffered badly from nightmares, flash backs and a constant fear of our house being invaded.
A village meeting was held, locals wanted to know what the police and social services were doing about the situation. On that night people were roaming the village in what I can only describe as vigilante 'gangs'. Our children were terrified so much that they had to leave the light on all night.
I was prepared for anything. At one point I noticed a torch-light outside, I went out, prepared to confront an angry islander. It was the police, checking our house. They informed me that they would be a constant presence in the area over the following week or so, small comfort considering they are the ones that caused this anyway.
No-one would tell me anything. Someone at the children's home we stayed in until our return home, told me that they worked for a support group for families of Scottish prisoners, he called them on my behalf. They in turn telephoned Porterfield Prison, Inverness (after 4 days I discovered this was where he had been taken) and spoke to the assistant governor. She spoke to me personally and I have to say, was extremely polite and considerate. Within a few minutes of speaking to her, I was speaking to Ian.
He assured me that he was okay, thought suffering abuse from other prisoners; urinating on their meals or in their drinks, verbal abuse, etc.
Ian shared a cell with another of the accused, I believe his surname was Tetley. This poor man said that Ian was the only reason he survived those nights in prison. Apparently already a self-injurer, he was close to suicide. He is believed to have been sacked from his job and lost his home (his rented caravan was burnt out) as a direct result of these allegations.
Mid October, he was released on bail, along with the others. (In court, police stated "There wasn't the evidence that they thought there was.") He immediately returned home (possible only because I had sent him money whilst in prison). He was never fully committed to trial.
Whilst returning to the island on the ferry, a neighbour and his daughter (who has I might add, been to our house numerous times) were also crossing and saw Ian. I was terrified for his safety and telephoned the police station demanding a police escort. (Ian had to travel 26 miles home by bus after the ferry journey, the mood on the island was such that night, that if he had been attacked, I doubt if anyone would have tried to stop it.) They said they couldn't provide an escort, so I told them when he was getting off the ferry and which bus he was travelling on. They agreed to increase the police presence around those times.
Ian got off the bus at our village. The neighbour who had been on the ferry, had got some others to follow Ian down from the bus stop in their cars shouting abuse at him. I was at home with the children and baby and unable to help him. He came in the house and it was a huge relief to be all back together, the children were very relieved and happier now Ian was home again. Little did I know it wasn't to last.
The night passed slowly, I never thought we would be terrified to be in our own home, we were that night.
The next morning, we found paint sprayed on the back of the house, it read "he better go pedo". During the previous evening and again in the morning, we received 3 abusive telephone calls. The final one occurred whilst two police officers were here taking statements about the paint and the 'welcoming committee', I immediately put the receiver to the officer's ear, we both heard a whistle being blown down the telephone.
Then as the two officers were leaving, two more arrived to inform Ian that social services had applied for and got, an exclusion order. At the back of the order they had included photo-copied pages from a book citing the change over rates for paedophiles (percentage of 'offenders' that will begin targeting other groups of victims), supposedly evidence that our children were at immediate risk of abuse by him. Devastating enough to be accused, now the crushing insult that he is considered such a danger to his children. He is and always has been, a devoted father. Whilst I am left trying to explain to our children that people are stopping him from coming home because they think he might hurt them. When he left that morning to see the social work department (they asked him to come in to 'talk', the easiest way to get him away from the house so they could serve him with the order) he was then unable to return home. As he left our (then 3 year old) son was screaming to go with his father.
Further to that, the exclusion order also forbade him from any unsupervised contact including by email, telephone, text-messaging or written.
Our children were upset and angry that not only could they not see him, but they were not allowed to talk to him, and no-one would tell them why. Our 3 year old would hit me demanding to 'talk to my Daddy', I could not let him, so I got blamed. (We knew the police were tapping the phone, even though it was denied.)
In the weeks running up to the arrests, cars would often park near the house for short periods of time and drive away. Others would park half-way along a dirt track, placing them directly in front of our house, for no apparent reason. We now know it was surveillance by the police.
The whole situation was a gross abuse of our human rights.
We had a meeting with NCH staff and social work to begin to arrange contact with the children. Ian said that he wanted to be able to see me for visits each week. (We have no family here and I cannot drive, the only way we could see Ian was through the social work department providing transport each week.) However, when Ian was out of the room, Keith Harper, the then children and families team leader, turned to me and said, with reference to arranging visits with Ian, "How hard do you want me to try?" I couldn't understand what he meant by that remark, and told him we had been together for 13 years, married for 10 of those, I couldn't consider not seeing him. I now realise that he was suggesting that considering the charges against Ian, perhaps I didn't want any contact with him anymore.
Arrangements were made for the two younger children to see Ian for two hours every Monday and Thursday. I also saw Ian just on my own for two hours every Monday, Wednesday and Thursday. The older children saw Ian for 3 hours every Saturday and 2 and a half hours every Sunday. Because he was so far away, it was not practical for the children to see him during the weekday evenings when they had homework etc.
My requests for them to speak to their father by telephone were at first treated with surprise, then ignored. Even direct requests by the children themselves were ignored.
Concerned about the impact this was having on our children, I asked for a child psychologist to be available to see our eldest two. There was some delay in her becoming involved as there was objection to her involvement at first by the social services. She then began to see them on a daily basis.
The psychologist approached social services with the children's request, finally they began to listen. It still took another month for it to be agreed (apparently some legal difficulty).
Though the names of the two girls are on Ian's charge sheet, and there were claims during the interview that they were making these statements, we do not believe that children of that age could invent the horrendous accusations that have been made.
I have been told by my ex-neighbour that their eldest daughter was taken into care before we moved to the island, that the girls were taken into care a few years ago, and worse still, that their aunt (the woman who we ex-changed with, and whose name has not appeared anywhere for some reason) told my ex-neighbour that she knows it's the girls father, but they (the parents) were covering it up by blaming the eldest daughter.
I have now been told that their mother spent time in a psychiatric unit on more than one occasion, surely questioning her status as a credible witness?
All this totally amazed me. All their past history of involvement with social services and the courts (the first solicitor we tried couldn't represent us because in his words, he'd "had dealings with the Strettons before") is being ignored.
Furthermore, a friend of ours has told me that the girls' cousin (daughter of the woman we exchanged houses with) used to boast about compensation money she had received for making abuse claims.
Our house was thoroughly searched during the first raid, our computer, cameras, children's cameras, camcorder and our eldest son's safe (two months later, they ask if I have a spare key) were taken in their search for child pornography. We have since had these items returned. Our books on Paganism were taken as apparent evidence of devil-worshipping, though our Christian books and Bible and a book about Jehovah's Witnesses, were not touched.
On Thursday 26th February, police arrived again with the social worker and searched our house again, at the same time searching Ian's accommodation. They arrived each time with a search warrant, I would have been more than happy to let them search without one. What angered me was that our children were at home at the time. I asked the social worker to take them out of the house for a while, however they returned home in time to see police searching through their clothes and toys. Our eldest sat very quietly for the rest of the evening. Our then 5 year old commenting very loudly that they had been here for a long time.
Eventually they decided to take two items of my clothing and one of my daughter's tops. I got the impression they felt obliged to take something with them. Nothing was taken from Ian's accommodation. I found it more than a coincidence that this second search was carried out only 4 days after my first letters of complaint to the Chief Inspector, Procurator Fiscal and others. I wrote complaining amongst other things, of the blatant religious discrimination shown towards Ian. I believe their second search was a deliberate attempt to imply that I was still being investigated and thereby negating, or attempting to, our argument for discrimination on religious grounds. Either that or pure intimidation.
During the winter, children threw snowballs at Ian's window, and someone wrote 'paedophile' on his car in the snow. I managed to get him to go to the doctors and he was put on anti-depressants. In the 13 years I have known him, he has only ever seen a doctor twice.
I locked my house door for the first couple of months. The first time ever in the years we have lived here.
The abuse was also bad for Ian, because many papers reported that 5 children had been taken into care, everyone assumed it was our children who were the alleged victims.
For months he was faced with whispered comments, glares or just intimidating behaviour, now people just completely ignore him. Before being put on anti-depressants his anxiety was such that when shopping he would literally be shaking. He was treated as if he was the vilest, most dangerous and disgusting person in the world. Innocent until proven guilty is a lie.
His 13 year old son from his first marriage died, police and social services tried to infer something sinister in that. Even though his son died in Guernsey (where Ian comes from) and Ian was here at the time. Social services have tried desperately to twist everything and find something sinister in everything.
At one time, Ian spoke of going to stay with his sister in Blackpool, he didn't go but the social worker demanded to know the address so she could alert the authorities there. As she put it "What if children go to the house?"
At the first case conference, the police confirmed that neither of us have any history of such offences. Yet the children were put on the child protection register, under the category of possible emotional abuse! Ironic, considering they are the ones causing it.
Ian changed solicitors in Spring, to John McCormick of Glasgow. Mr McCormick was not happy with the fact that Ian couldn't return home. (After the interim exclusion order expired, we were threatened with the removal of our children if Ian returned home, so he had to stay where he was, he was not prepared to distress the children by causing them to be taken from their home, even though social services clearly were happy to do so.) Mr McCormick telephoned social services saying that he wanted to take the situation to court, social services, when threatened with a court appearance where they would have to state they had no evidence again Ian, suddenly backed down and did not object to Ian returning home.
It was by this time that Keith Harper had been removed from the case and from his position as children and families team leader. At case conferences from then on, Iain McAulay, depute director of social work, chaired the case conferences, and the new team leader was Iris Henderson.
If they had done nothing wrong, why was Keith Harper removed? As I understand it, he no longer works with children and families at all.
In one of my letters to the Chief Constable I asked if it was the job of the police to investigate an allegation impartially, and discover the truth, I think it is worth pointing out that the reply I received stated that no comment could be made. (Other questions I put to him were answered.)
I have since written to our MP, MSP, the First Minister, Justice Department of the Scottish Office, Margaret Hodge MP, Claire Curtis-Thomas MP (Chair of the All Party Group on Abuse Investigations) and the Pagan Federation. I also contacted support groups, Dr William Thompson, Tania Hunter, and Professor La Fontaine.
Our Situation Now
On 7th May Ian returned home, there was no objection from social services after Ian's solicitor expressed his determination to have the situation and therefore the evidence against Ian reviewed in court.
We then had weekly visits from a social worker and our children were then also listed under the category of possible sexual abuse on the at risk register, much to our disgust.
On 2nd July, we learnt that all charges had been dropped. The following day, on 3rd July, we received a letter from the children's reporter to say that a children's hearing was not required.
The following week there was a final case conference at the social work department at which time our children's names were removed from the register completely and there has been no further involvement from social work since that time.