Myself 1

INITIAL CHILD PROTECTION CONFERENCE - 07 November 2013 my paper 22
3.1. This initial Protection Conference has been convened due to a history of concern in respect of both parents care of the children, the impact of the parents acrimonious relationship on the children and a range of concerns about neglect.
There were no real concerns as regards neglect of my children and although my relationship with my ex-partner were strained, I always did my best to take care and see to the needs of my children. As I have often said, there was only the one time which became a problem.
5. 56-57Mrs Pearson, Health Visitor, stated that there are no concerns in relation to Kalindi's developement. ) Ms Da Costa is continuing to breast feed Kalindi although she does provide solid foods to Kalindi. Ms Smith stated that Kalindi has visited the G.P. Surgery on one occasion for a cough/cold. (...) Ms Smith has observed a loving bond between Kalindi and her mother.
3.3 To make a judgment whether Krishna and Kalindi are at risk of suffering significant harm in the future.
My children were never subject to significant harm from me, however my daughter was pushed by Craig, which is why I sought for new accommodation. I now have new accommodation and am no longer in the relationship, so there is no significant risk of harm in the future. I always cared for both my children and neither of my children have been subject to physical child abuse. Difficulties yes, but not child abuse or significant harm.
5.10 Mr Robson noted there was also an occasion when an unknown male collected Krishna from school and there were concerns raised that Ms Da Costa did not know the male well. Ms Da Costa added that the male who collected Krishna from school was her boyfriend at the time and she trusted him. (...)
The male was Dan and both myself and Krishna know him as a family friend. We met in 2010. However, when he went to collect my child, he called her Gouri, as I call her, instead of Krishna. The school staff called me and the misunderstanding was cleared up. Dan is not and was not a "stranger". I met Craig in November 2011, however he had never met with Dan. I have a few pictures of Dan, myself and Krishna together.
5.15. (...) There were concerns raised in conference today that Mr Robson has access to Ms Da Costa's home and there is the potential for him to seek revenge on her too.
Is there not a law against stalking and harassment, if so why has law not been used to prevent Craig from harassing me and how does this impact on my parenting ability. However, nothing was done about this. I was left with 2 kids in a mildly dangerous situation, which was of obvious concern to myself.
5.23 (...) Ms Dodds has advised Ms Da Costa to start searching for alternative accomodation.
As soon as I could, I sought out and now have a new home yet still my children have not been returned to me. However this was not without difficulty. Alison Dodds, knew my business had been destroyed by the activities of my ex partner, so finding accommodation was not easy.
this report is similar in nature to the INITIAL CHILD PROTECTION CONFERENCE - 07/11/13 (my paper 22) (it is colusion and cohesion cohesion binding together, or bound together in terms of agreement. Collusion, acting together for the purpose of secrecy in agreement. Mixed with lies from Craig).
2. (...) Luci has since been arrested for child neglect and 2 Police Notifications was also recieved regarding concerns relating to her care of the children(...)
I remember I left my children alone for half hour to work and was across the street, in the library, I acknowledge this was the wrong thing to do, but thought my 12 year old daughter was mature enough to look after the baby, who was sleeping for a short while. It was for this which I was arrested. I have no recollections of any other 'Notifications' by the police, if there were then please explain which two notifications these were and when they were made.
SOCIAL WORK ASSESSMENT (Alison Dodds) Birth Family: Parental Capacity, Assessors Comments
8 of 22-23. There are some concerns that Luci be suffering from diabetes and this would require further exploration.
Completely unfounded, no health professional has ever suggested at any time, that I may have diabetes, I cannot help but wonder, where she picked up this idea from.
(...) There are significant concerns regarding Luci's mental health that is based on information shared by other professionals, accessing departmental records, observations of my own and concerns reported by Craig (...) 13-23 There are concerns regarding Luci's mental heaalth, which did deteriorate pos natal following Kalindi's birth.(...)
There have not been any significant concerns relating to my mental health by ANY professional, in ANY departamental records. The report from my GP, Midwife, Psychatrist and Psychologist can prove that. Indeed the psychologist Dr Stephane Hill stated "using this formal classificatory system, Ms Da Costa DOES NOT demonstrate problems with mental illness." Any further statements relating to my mental health capacity will be deemed as libel, because there is no basis for them.
Children Delevopment page 11 of 23
Again this report is repeating what was already said in the previous report.
12-23 Krishna currently sleeps in the living area of the property along with her mother and sister Kalindi although she does have a bedroom of her own upstairs. During the period when the family had no access to eletricity, heating or hot water the family all slept in the living room together. When exploring Krishna's views on this she appeared to accept this and described that she has always done this due to other adults sharing the bedrooms within the property. This must be quite difficult for Krishna who has no privacy of her own or a room for her own personal space.
Krishna had her own bedroom, however she used to choose to sleep in the living room with me. It is also a complete lie to say that there were any other adults in the house at this time, there were not. Craig had moved away, by this time, so there was only me and my daughter.
13.23. Mrs Dodds states that I left the children "were frequently left home unsupervised". Below she said that (...) is difficult to assess at this stage, due to the short period of my involvement to date (...)"
There was only the one occasion where my children were left unsupervised, I have acknowledged this was the wrong thing to do, however, my daughter is a bright, mature 12 year old, who is quite able to manage being on her own for half an hour or so, as she is when she walks home from school. Or should she also be chaperoned to and from school? - I made the mistake of leaving her with Kalindi for a short while, whilst I went out to work, there were no other instances.
16.23. Luci is currently engaging with universal services and family support that has been identified, however it is unclear if she will maintain this in the future.
Which support? There was none.
Legal: (Comment upon the consideration of PLO Outline Progress, legal application to Court or any action already taken to safeguard the child/young person) page 17 of 23.
A repeat of previous reports and outlines.
3. During this time Luci had appeared unwilling to move property particularly in view of the fact that she has cats and could not find somewhere suitable to re-home them despite various suggestions from professionals.
There was only one suggestion which came from my health visitor, Debbie Smith. She suggested that I and my children were to move to a women's refugee home, 10 miles away from my child's school, however, it was the fact that there would be no practical way for my child to attend her school, which concerned me most, yet this, I note has not been stated, only the cats. In the meantime I was already seeking out an alternative place to live, without I might add any help.
(Health Visitor Debbie Smith and Joane Pearson, but report written by Alison Dodds based on speculation and Craig's lies.
4. Luci has strong cultural views as well as religious views some of which are not acceptable in this country. She is a very strong willed lady who knows her own mind and can be manipulative.
1. This is religious discrimination.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
I am a Hindu by faith and my faith is perfectly acceptable in this country. There is no part of the Hindu faith which is not acceptable in this country. This is clear religious discrimination by my Local Authority.

(...) when Luci at the housing department stated she would give the children cannabis.
This is a completely libel, untrue, unfounded and perjurious statement and amounts to defamation of character. I would never have said that to my children and incidentally, I have not used Cannabis myself. I object to the nature of this lie very strongly, it is pernicious to say the least and clearly designed to prejudice my case in the eyes of the court. Luci has her own health concerns but is disillusioned with her GP and these remain outsdanding.
Apart from when I was younger, furthermore I do not have any physical or mental health concerns and I also have a good ongoing relationship with my GP and midwife. Once again this is yet another biased, fallacious and prejudicial statement which is completely unfounded and it amounts of contempt of court.
Most of it is repetition again of the previous reports, many which are based on Craig's lies.
1. It is know that children and adults from black and ethinic minority groups can have poorer physical and mental health than from other groups and often lack access to health professionals (...)
It is true to say that I am not white, but Brazilian. However, this statement seems to demonstrate a clear onging instutionalised racism on behalf of the Local Authority and it may even be how Social Services view me as a person and a parent. If so then this statement is made with racist intent and against myself. I contest this statement completely as being totally untrue in every aspect relating to myself and my case. Therefore, if it is directed at me in terms of using it as evidence, would the judge kindly ask the Local Authority, to explain exactly, in what context and what bearing this state has on my case and also explain in what aspect this statement is being used in terms of it representing myself.
There is neither foundation nor evidence to support this statement as being in any way factual. It is completely inaccurate and has obviously been written with the clear intention to be racially prejudiced towards my ethnicity. Firstly I have NEVER lacked access to health professionals nor Social Services and secondly, to state that either I or my children, because I am from an ethnic minority, have poorer physical or mental health than other groups, is a racist statement in itself.
Not only that it is also, slanderous and prejudice but it is totally, completely and utterly untrue. Would the judge therefore make care to make a request to the authority as to why it is making racist and untrue statements to be contained in what is supposed to be a fair hearing? Statements, which are not only clearly untrue, but also detrimental and prejudicial towards me. I might advise this court that I am now seeking to initiate a private prosecution against North Tyneside County Council, for making racist and untrue written statements with the clear intention and purpose of them being detrimental to me, my children and my case. I contend that North Tyneside Social Services are commiting perjury and are also attempting to pervert the course of justice in terms of my myself and my children in using these inaccurate, false and racist statements.
It is also a violation of the Human Rights Act Article 6 as regards impartiality, because if a case is founded, which is clearly prejudice to certain sections or groups within the community, then that does not constitute a fair hearing. It is also a violation of Article 14 and is clearly discriminatory. Thereby the statement itself is illegal and I believe that in issuing this statement that the Local Authority (North Tyneside Social Services) has indeed fully intended to be racially prejudiced in regards to my case.

4. (...) poor parental mental health and drug use/dealing.
I reiterate and refer to my response above, I have never had a mental health problem and I have never dealt in drugs, this statement is also libel and constitutes defamation of character. My ex partner was involved with the Cannabis, not me.
Repetition of the previous report 10. (...) Luci received a caution for harassment which was reported to have taken place over a number of months.
I have no recollection of this caution, would the court endeavour to find out when this alleged caution took place.
CORE ASSESSMENT RECORD ICS Core Assessment - 1 to 2 years my paper 18 and on CHILD PROTECTION INITIAL CONFERENCE 07/11/13 my papers 25 , page 12 it said:
page 5. Children and adults from black and minority ethinic groups have poorer physical and mental health than from other groups, often lack access to health professionals (...)
Institutionalised racism, fully refuted in the statement above.
Added to which the report has not been completed, maybe because there were further incidences of racist remarks and comments?

page 1. The home is clean and reasonably tidy and has a very lived in feel to it. Kalindi has room to crawl and explore her environment. There are many toys in the home for Kalindi to play with and these are in easy reach for her. Krishna has her own room in the flat, she keeps this tidy and has her own personal touches throughout. She is missing her laptop due to the lack of electicity but is occupying herself with the artwork and reading. There is a lot of Krishna's artwork throughout the home as well as religious statues that Luci prays to. Krishna will set up the praying item for Luci.
The family suffered a traumatic loss or crisis which is unresolved (they answered YES

I had been suffering from stress as a result of being harrassed by Craig along with not having enough available money to be able to get a new house. I was unable to work because my business had been destroyed by Craig's behaviour, I was also looking after two children in a house which was without eletricity for 2 months. Social Services unfortunately could not help me to find a house, or provide electricity, so yet, it was somewhat of a traumatic time. I now however have a NEW home, with both adequate space and electric to accommodate my children.
Does a member of the household experience poor physical health? (they answered YES.

Myself 2
Myself 3
Laura Grundy
My Statement of Truth

Up ▲

No one in the household has suffered poor physical health, unless it was Craig and that would have been because of his Cannabis smoking.
page 2. The family is homeless (they answered YES)
We were not homeless at the time Social Service removed my children, I still had 5 days to live in the house. Rather I was mislead into a false and misleading "contract" which came in the form of Section 20, along with further lies which I was told by my social worker.
I repeat here my contention of the use of Section 20 Children act, under the premise to remove my children, once again that was not what I agreed to.
"I would like to point out that Section 20 uses the word accommodation, not the words foster care or adoption and unless this is a deliberate attempt by the law to be deceptive, then no agreement was ever made or reached for foster care or adoption.
The only agreement which was made was for a temporary proivision of accommodation. It was to a "temporary accomodation" which I agreed, nothing more, nothing less.
Nowhere in section 20 does it use the words foster care, or that in signing this form, that either of my children would have been subject to foster care, if it had done I would not have signed or agreed to the statement.
The wording used above D11 is not the same wording as used in section 20, I refer to the act itself, nor was the wording fostering or adoption used in anything which I signed.
Section 20 of the Chidren Act States
20 Provision of accommodation for children: general.
"(1)Every local authority shall provide accommodation for any child in need within their area who appears to them to require accommodation as a result of—
(a)there being no person who has parental responsibility for him;
(b)his being lost or having been abandoned; or
(c)the person who has been caring for him being prevented (whether or not permanently, and for whatever reason) from providing him with suitable accommodation or care. "
In terms of the agreement I made, it was in reference to the clear terminology of Section and the interpretation of Law's use of the word "accommodation" which is laid out in section 20. At no time did I ever give any agreement to, or was ever informed that, section 20 related or pertained to the fostering or adoption of either of my children. Nor does it state anywhere in section 20 that this is the case. To say otherwise is completely misleading and may well amount to misrepresentation of the law itself.
If it is the case that section 20 misrepresents the law, then Section 20 has been used against me in terms of either a clear and wilfull abuse and deliberate misinterpretation of the terminology laid out in section 20, by the Social Workers concerned.
Or it is that the law is written in a terminology which has the, clear, deliberate and wilful intent to mislead or misinform, as regards the contractual" basis of any agreement I undertook, which was based on section 20 subsection 9.
I reiterate once again that nowhere does it mention either fostering or adoption, merely "accommodation". Therefore it can only be speculative at best, or a deliberate lie at worst to say that I agreed for Kalindi to be placed in foster care, by a voluntary arrangement. I did not.
For my part, I have never once agreed to the first statement, in terms of its definition or its use in relation to fostering and adoption. If this is the case, then again my signature was again obtained by eliberate intent to deceive and mislead me in order to procreate a false statement for the Authority and with wilful intent to conceal the words fostering, or adoption. Once again I again reiterate, these words are not contained in the Act. If this is the case, any contractual obligation on my part is null and void, as this was not what I signed for or agreed to.
I, Luci Da Costa, have therefore been deliberately subjected to disinformation, which was misleading by intent, without my legal rights being recognised or acknowledged and without recourse to a Solicitor. I never once gave any consent to the local authority for either adoption or fostering of my children and to say that I have is libel, with intent to cause significant emotional harm and stress. Added to which this statement has clearly been submitted with intent to pervert the course of justice, in terms of my original understanding of the agreement. The intention here is to mislead the court into believing I signed an agreement for something which I did not. That is a perversion of the course of justice."

page 3. A parent/carer's is in paid employment (they answered YES)
At the time I was having difficulties with my business, I was struggling for a while, but then gave up.
The parent's/care's pattern of work adversely impacts on the child care (they answered YES)
I got into trouble for going to the library to work, which I have already explained several times.
Household bills are paid regularly (they said NO) My household bills were always paid promptly, yet another incorrect and untrue statement.
The family is managing on the income they recieve (they said NO) Another lie, I managed as well as I could, the only problem was not being able to work as I didn't have internet, thus I couldn't make money for a new house, first rent and deposit.
If in debt, this is increasing. (they said YES)
page 5-6. Again, just repetition of previous report, based on Craig's lies. The Cannabis farm was destroyed by the Police on 12/08/13. If it was of such concern for the Social Service, why did they remove the children on 13/11/13, 3 month later?
page 7 Repetition again of previous report. It seems that a minister can forget about his daughter who was left in a pub or McCanns leave their kids alone in the apartment, but I couldn't leave my children for half hour to try and earn some money in order to earn enough to get the deposit which I desperately needed to get a new house. This really is profound victimisation. For a very short period of time, my children were left alone, Kalindi was asleep in her cot and My daughter Krishna, who I thought was mature enough, was looking after her, for a very short period. That was all this incident amounted to.
Counter Statements.
"The family are a close and loving family. They are all committed to animals and vegetarianism. The Brazilian background is very much promoted and nurtured by Luci and Krishna's art work is decorating the walls within the home.
The art work was of Hindu nature, rather than Brazilian. Luci promotes that the family pray to their chosen religion, this is the Hindu Hare Krishna. Luci does consider herself to live by these codes and morals that the religion promotes, it is not my understanding that cultivating a cannabis farm is within those code and morals.
I never have and was not involved with the cultivation of any cannabis farm, I am completly against such. When I found the farm at home, I called the police. I knew Craig had a farm in Wallsend, but I didn't care as we were not a couple.
Luci is very aware of how she considers her family to be subject to prejudice and discrimination. She has very strong negative views about English people (...)
This is an inverse atttempt to accuse me of racism, I am not I have many English friends who will bear witness to the fact that I am not negative in any way towards English people; once again this appears to be an attempt to mislead the court into believing something which is not true.
However, I do believe that those who use Cannabis, are somewhat dirty and unclean and basically become not unlike an animal and I am not ashamed of that view, but that goes for all Cannabis users, not just English ones.
I would happy to call my English friends to the witness stand and I am sure they would be happy to contradict this statement, plus if I had such negative views about English people, I would not have chosen an English partner, now would I? -
Luci had admitted to having full knowledge of the farm and this raises the questions of why she did not report to the police immediately.
I found out about the cannabis farm in August and in August I called the police, please feel free to check the police records.
Luci has received a caution for child cruelty for leaving Kalindi in the care of Krishna while she went to use the computers in the library. Craig noticed her leaving and reported her to the police.
Child cruelty? There was no cruelty involved with this at all. As I have repeated on numerous occasions, Kalindi was left with Krishna, who is a competent, bright and mature girl, whilst I acknowledge this was a mistake, it is far from child cruelty.
Plus if Craig noticed me leaving, why did he call the police instead of taking over his duty of a father, if a mother was going to work for a short time, would not any father take over the care of the children? -
Craig would also look after Kalindi almost everyday then I could go to the library to work, however, he stopped comming to get her and as I have said before, I needed to work to make the money to get a new house.
I made the mistake to leave Kalindi and Krishna in the flat, because it was necessary to work. Craig lived 5 miles away from me and he must have known that I would be driven to this in order to provide for my children. Which is why he watched me leaving the house and called the police. Hardly the action of a real father though?

This is in my view another example of Luci putting the need to make money before the safety and security of her children.
This is a stupid, misleading and deliberately biased statement and no it is not an example of putting the need to make money before the safety and security of my children. This Social Worker knew my house could not be locked and that Krishna was anxious that Craig might come back to the house in an aggressive manner.
Therefore it is obvious, at least to anyone who is sane that is, (though I note not this particular social worker) that I needed a new house. Social Services are condemnatory and incorrect, I was indeed putting the needs of my children first and sadly neither Social Services, nor the Council helped me to achieve that by way of assisting me to find accommodation. I needed to got to the library to make money for the house, as if that was not obvious, not to make money for myself.
However, I cannot help wondering at this point, if I had not gone to work in order to try and raise some money to find new accommodation, would the same Social Worker have accused me of something else? Perhaps of being lazy and not earning enough to to feed my children? Therefore that would have been neglect too would it not? This is a statement based on profound ignorance of the ongoing situation and a completely disgusting and untrue assumption, no doubt written once again with malicious intent, in order to paint the darkest picture anyone could possibly paint of me as a parent.

page 11-12. haven't been filled up.
pag 9. Again repetition of previous report. Brazilian culture and Hinduism is not the same thing and I never had anything o brazilian culture at home.
There are no concerns regarding the children presentation. Both are clean and tidy. While the family have had no eletricity they have been using swimming baths and laundrette.
I have always loved and cared for my children very well, even through the many difficulties which I have faced. There was never a reason to remove them, with just a little help, everything would have been resolved.
page 11. Parental Issue - Physical illness YES.
Once again, I reiterate, No, I never had any physical ilness.
Parental Issue - Period in care during childhood YES.
Another lie, lie after lie, after lie, I have never been in care, I came to UK in 2000. This is yet another attempt to blatently mislead the court.
page 12. This report is just repetition of previous one.
page 5. (...) Luci has confirmed that she has thrown plates at Craig on a number of occasions and this is not acceptable.
I refute this as yet another lie. I did not throw plates at Craig on a number of occasions, only once, on 12/08/13, when I called the police regarding the domestic violence and the police ignored me. I was frightened and anxious at the time.
page 9. (...) Luci has had previous partners and these have stayed with her in her home until she needed to get the police to remove him.
False statement, please provide evidence and relevent police logs.
Counter statement.

page 10. Is the child/young person a child in need as defined in the Children Act? NO.
A child in need whose vulnerability is such that they are unlikely to reach or maintain a satisfactory level of health or development without the provision of services? NO
A child in need whose health or development will be significantly impaired without the provision of services (is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm). NO
Then why my children were removed from me? They have never been subject to significant harm, nor have they ever suffered significant harm, nor will they suffer significant harm.
INITIAL ASSESSMENT, my papers 13. By Joanna Dean, 28 August/13
page 4. (...) The interaction that I witnessed between Luci and her baby were appropriate and positive.
Summary And Conclusion
There are many inconsistencies and untruths in the reports made by various Social Workers, throughout the reports, one Social worker in particular, has attempted to distort the truth at every possible opportunity and also use language and strong terms which in reality bear no relation to events. There have been clear attempts to alter versions of events which, to all intents and purposes, has been wilfully done in order to create a false image of me, most likely as a deliberate attempt to pervert the course of justice.
I have no angst against Social Services, however the amount of lies, distortion and untruth presented at the hearing by North Tyneside Social Services is unpresidented. There is no doubt at all that events have been altered, that questions have been answered incorrectly and that both racial and religously predjudice statements have also been made.
It is because of these and the other incidences, which witnesses have seen, such as the incident in the court on May 1st, that I request an appeal, there is firm evidence to suggest that Social Services have made efforts to worsen the appearance of the situation, they have engaged in defamation of my character with many references to mental health problems and my religious beliefs, they have slandered my daughter in court, as regards her abilities and undermined her capability.
North Tyneside Social Services have clearly gone out of their way to act in collusion in order to orchestrate the removal of my children, when there was little, if any reason to do so, other than the fact that I needed a new home and left Kalindi in the house for a short while, with my daughter, who to all intents and purposes, is a bright lively, intelligent 12 year old girl and all because I had to put my children's safety first in order to get away from a violent drug abusing man.
I have been mislead, victimised, lied about, false and insinuative and unsubstantiated statements have been procured and promulgated against me, all from the creative mind of North Tyneside Social Services.
I wish my right to appeal to be respected, I have been subjected to a virulent, untrue and no doubt prejudice campaign against me.
The information and facts I have given are true and all can be made under a sworn statement.

Luci Da Costa

Up ▲