A man who raped his wife, controlling and threatening her and their two children tried to manipulate the family court into believing he was the victim of domestic violence, a judge has ruled.
In a damning verdict, Judge Middleton-Roy ruled that the man’s conduct – including frequently filming his family with a body-worn camera – had been ‘reprehensible and unreasonable’ after he made false claims against the mother and her allegations had contested against him because of a conviction. longer period.
The father, who was ordered to pay more than £50,000 in costs to his ex-wife, continued as of 2020 to accuse her of alienating their children – aged nine and 12 – from him to “upset” her , to confuse and to frighten”. This is reported by the Bureau for Investigative Journalism (TBIJ).
While the father alleged that the mother had turned the children against him, she alleged that he had subjected both her and them to a pattern of domestic violence. Each of the parents, who cannot be named for legal reasons, denied the other’s allegations.
On the first day of a trial in February to settle the dispute, the father said he was no longer pursuing charges of “parental alienation,” a term that refers to a child’s unjustified rejection of one parent due to manipulation by the other.
However, he continued to persistently and “with great force” claim that the mother influenced the children against him, harmed them and used them as a “pattern of abuse towards me”.
It was put to the father that he had sent the mother a link to an article from a psychology website about parental alienation with the message: “This is you.”
He told the court: “I sent her examples of parental alienation after she exhibited the behavior described [in the article] because I was worried about what was happening. If she was behaving badly, I would send this in response.”
Middleton-Roy said that, in stark contrast to the mother, the father’s evidence was “deeply disturbing” and “laced with sarcasm”.
The parents gave evidence of events that occurred during their relationship and also during a period after they had separated but were still living with the children.
In July 2021, after the couple divorced, the mother asked the court for an ‘occupation order’ to remove the father from the family home. She had previously obtained a molestation injunction (or restraining order) against him.
At the time of her application, which was rejected, the mother represented herself while the father was represented by an attorney. Middleton-Roy noted that because the application was rejected by another judge, the family continued to live in the same property.
During that time, the father used a bodycam to record the mother and children and had iPads record when he was not home. He told the mother she couldn’t talk to the children when it was “his turn” for contact and locked his oldest child in their bedroom.
Middleton-Roy found that the father was unable to reflect on the clearest evidence of his controlling and abusive behavior: the video he took on his bodycam during an incident in which he stopped one of his children from leaving their bedroom, which worried them greatly.
The judge said: “The father made the decision to video record all movements in the family home. He is hoisted with his own petard.
The mother’s lawyer, Dr. Charlotte Proudman, argued that in all his evidence the father attempted to “reject or deny the mother, attack the mother and attempt to reverse the roles of victim and perpetrator.”
In a ruling released earlier this month, Middleton-Roy said the evidence “leads to the clear conclusion that the father consistently, systematically and falsely attempted to manipulate the mother, the children, professionals and the court into believing that he is a victim of domestic violence. abuse committed by the mother”.
He added that his “depraved actions alone” led to both children, who stopped direct contact with their father in December 2022, rejecting him.
The father was represented at the hearing by Dads Unlimited, a charity that supports male victims of domestic abuse. However, the court found no evidence that the mother had abused.
Instead, the court found all of the allegations the father had made about her to be unfounded and upheld all but one of the allegations against him – that allegation related to the source of an email the mother received threatening to release a sexual video of her to publish if she has not sent £500.
The court found that the mother had received such an email, but that her concerns about the father’s email were based on suspicion or speculation.
More than a dozen findings against the father include that he was coercive and controlling, that he used violence and abuse against the children and that he raped the mother twice in 2020.
His persistent video recordings created an atmosphere of “control and intimidation”, the court ruled, and he would undermine the children and “distort their perception of reality”.
The father was also voyeuristic and took many sexual photos and videos of the mother without her consent, the judge concluded.
He also proved to be financially controlling and used legal proceedings to emotionally torment the children and their mother. This included asking the court for an assessment of her mental health, despite there being no concerns about her mental health or parenting.
In 2023, the mother successfully appealed the judge’s decision to involve a psychological expert in her case. The children’s appointed guardian had applied for new expert evidence following the father’s allegations of alienation.
Middleton-Roy accepted the appeal, writing: “The expert was invited to give an opinion on parental alienation. In the court’s opinion, this falls outside the expert’s competence.”
The case is yet another example of abusive men using the concept of parental alienation to deflect accusations of rape or coercive and controlling behavior.
In October, TBIJ and the Observer revealed that a woman raped by her ex-partner – and accused by him of parental alienation – was repeatedly forced to testify in court due to a judge’s error. The father was later stripped of his parental responsibility.
Testifying to the Justice Committee on Tuesday, the president of the Family Division in England and Wales said there has been a “complete increase” in the number of cases alleging parental alienation and suggesting it was being used as a trial tactic.
In response to questions from Conservative MP Caroline Nokes, Sir Andrew McFarlane said: “I suspect that you, like me, will be particularly aware that it is often fueled by the understanding given to divorcing parties that when allegations are made against you , you could counter that with parental alienation. So we have seen a real increase in the number of cases where this is alleged.”
In August 2023, the judiciary’s Family Justice Council issued draft guidelines for consultation on the handling of allegations of alienating behavior. The consultation closed on October 16, but the FJC has not yet responded.