31Claire Phelan
Office of Children's Social Care
Leicester Child Protective Services
91 Halford House
Leicester LE1 1HL
England
18.11.36
District Judge Q. Pennington,
Leicester Crown Court
90 Wellington St.
Leicester LE1 6HG
Dear District Judge,
This is a formal request for a temporary protection order be put in place to prevent a Mr. Gordon Reed, retired Admiral of His Majesty's Navy, from accessing his grandchildren (Finlay Danvers-Reed, Callum Danvers-Reed, Rory Danvers-Reed, Meredith Reed, Malcolm Reed, and Madeline Reed) unsupervised. Beginning on the eleventh of this month Mr. Richard Abney, of LCPS, has conducted several interviews with Mr. Reed's grandsons and two of his granddaughters (Helen and Margaret Reed, eldest daughters of his Adm. Reed's youngest son, Harold Reed), and has become concerned with Mr. Reed's behaviour towards his grandchildren, believing it to be verbally abusive and neglectful. After consulting with other colleagues at LCPS, Mr. Abney believes that the immediate danger to the emotional and physical well-being of the children in question warrant restrictions being placed on their grandfather's access to said children.
Miss Meredith Reed has previously been barred from associating with her younger brother due to the physical and mental abuse it is believed that she is inflicting on him, a Master Malcolm Reed. The request has already been granted by your office, and I make note of it as it is the opinion of Mr. Abney, as well as the psychologist attached to our office, Dr. Mhasalkar, that Miss Reed's behaviour is the direct result of her Grandfather's treatment of her.
Please find attached a summary of Mr. Abney's report on the Reed family, as well as the application form for said order. DCI F. Green, of the Mansfield House Police Station, is currently conducting a criminal investigation into the actions of Adm. Reed and Miss Reed, irrespective of each other. My colleague at LCPS is to conduct several more interviews with the family and gentleman in question prior to the hearing taking place at the end of the period outlined, so as to determine if it will be necessary to upgrade the protection order to a barring order. It may be requested that the barring order be extended until the Inspector's investigation has been concluded.
Mr. Abney has also drawn up a detailed family intervention plan, which this office will request be ratified and enforced, depending on the outcome of future meetings.
Kind regards,
Claire Phelan, Esq.
District Judge Q. Pennington,
Leicester Crown Court
90 Wellington St.
Leicester LE1 6HG
20.11.36
Claire Phelan
Office of Children's Social Care
Leicester Child Protective Services
91 Halford House
Leicester LE1 1HL
England
Dear Ms. Phelan,
After carefully reading the aforementioned report from your colleague, Mr. Abney, this office has elected to grant your request. The protection order has been issued to the gentleman in question, and will be in place for a period of thirty days – from the twentieth of November 2136, until the twentieth of December, 2136. A hearing to determine the necessity of upgrading the protection order to a barring order for a further period of six months will take place on the twentieth of next month.
I request that your office keeps the court apprised of the results of the investigations being undertaken, a similar request has been extended to the office of DCI Green.
Kind regards,
Quintin Pennington
Neville Thornton
Shakespeare Martineau LLP
2 Colton Square
Leicester LE1 1QH
England
20.11.36
Claire Phelan
Office of Children's Social Care
Leicester Child Protective Services
91 Halford House
Leicester LE1 1HL
England
Dear Ms. Phelan,
My name is Neville Thornton, I represent the interests of the Reed family, and I understand that your office has opened an investigation into one of my clients, Adm. Gordon Reed. My dear lady, let me assure you that these allegations are absurd and a complete fabrication. In the instance that you're not aware, your office is obliged to disclose any and all materials related to the complaint against the good gentleman in question.
As such, I have received all materials from the office of the Judge Pennington. I think in the interest of fairness, I should disclose this to you as I fear that you may not be aware of the extent of the information that myself and my client is entitled to receive in this instance. I have thoroughly reviewed the reports your Mr. Abney has compiled, and I must say that it seems to me that the boy in question is either being led by your esteemed colleague, or has fabricated the entire story for attention, which, from what I hear from his family members would not be out of the ordinary. He is a fanciful child, not to mention troubled, as his school records will show. He has been reprimanded for tardiness, not handing in his work, talking back to his teachers, and fighting with his peers, in contrast to his sister Meredith, who is a model pupil. it may also interest you to read the boy's file from the school counsellor, which goes into some detail about his state of mind. I do suggest you read it, in order to form a full and complete opinion of the boy.
May I suggest, my dear, that you rescind this unnecessary restriction on Adm. Reed from ever seeing his grandchildren again – he is nothing by a doting and affectionate grandfather, who only enriches the lives of his grandchildren by being in them. I implore to your better reason to remove the order before you do more damage to these children than you have already done by preventing them from seeing a most beloved grandparent, and even worse, doing more damage by extending the order to include Mrs. Reed, an excellent woman who is deeply hurt and confused by your tearing her family apart.
I appeal to your common sense, my dear,
Kind regards,
Neville Thornton, Esq.
Claire Phelan
Office of Children's Social Care
Leicester Child Protective Services
91 Halford House
Leicester LE1 1HL
England
21.11.36
Neville Thornton
Shakespeare Martineau LLP
2 Colton Square
Leicester LE1 1QH
England
Dear Mr. Thornton,
As I'm sure you're aware, protection orders are temporary restrictions placed on individuals to prevent access to vulnerable people, children for example. I'm sure you're also aware that they must be reviewed within the thirty day window and a decision made to upgrade the order, or to remove restrictions. It cannot be removed until this date, unless overwhelming evidence is presented that proves it unnecessary. Obviously, this tends to take place at the hearing, which has been scheduled for Thursday, twentieth of December 2136. I trust you have the details as to hearing's time and location. I assure you that the family in question will not be put under anymore strain than is strictly necessary, and as I've said already, the restriction is temporary. Unless, of course, it is deemed prudent to impose further those restrictions that you seem to believe are already imposed.
If you believe you have ample evidence to persuade the judge to remove the PO I would encourage you to arrange a meeting and present it to him. Though, I must warn you, as this office requested the PO I am legally required to be present in chambers when you do. But I'm sure a man of your expertise was aware of that. Once all interviews have been conducted, and my colleague has had time to compile his finished report you will have the necessary information to mount your defense.
Looking forward to seeing you on the twentieth,
Kind regards,
Claire Phelan Esq.
Neville Thornton
Shakespeare Martineau LLP
2 Colton Square
Leicester LE1 1QH
England
22.11.26
Claire Phelan
Office of Children's Social Care
Leicester Child Protective Services
91 Halford House
Leicester LE1 1HL
England
Dear Ms. Phelan,
I am, in fact, astounded that your office would consider pressing forward with this case when all your office has in evidence is hearsay and conjecture. Unless, of course, there is more to these reports than you have allowed me to see. If this is indeed the case, and I must admit, I found your colleague's report shockingly lacking in detail so it would not surprise me, then I must insist on being allowed to view all of the information your office has, to create a complete picture of the allegations against my excellent client.
But this entire story is pure conjecture madam. Pure conjecture! If what you have sent me is all your office has, then let me give you some advice my dear – rescind the application. I am aware that it is normally either extended or ended at the hearing, but I feel I should make you aware that it is within the powers of your office to do this, and not only is it within your powers, it is most advisable in order to save yourself the unnecessary headache and embarrassment that pressing forward with this case will bring onto you.
My dear, take my advice,
Regards,
Neville Thornton Esq.
Claire Phelan
Office of Children's Social Care
Leicester Child Protective Services
91 Halford House
Leicester LE1 1HL
England
23.11.36
Neville Thornton
Shakespeare Martineau LLP
2 Colton Square
Leicester LE1 1QH
England
Dear Mr. Thornton,
Thank you for your sage advice, I will take it onboard. Please allow me to assure you that my colleague's report is as complete as can be, given the sensitive nature of the case. If you require more information, then I suggest that you appeal to the Judge who shall be presiding over the hearing on the twentieth of next month. He has read the report in full, and has redacted what he deemed necessary in order to protect the children in question. I trust you have his contact information.
He may, I regret to inform you, deny your request for more information, but you are of course entitled to appeal this decision and seek judgement from another justice in the District Court.
If I have any further information to send to you, please be assured I will, but at present I do not. Your office has been provided with all the details necessary for you to mount your defense and I suggest that this is what you focus on.
Looking forward to meeting you at the hearing, don't forget it's on the twentieth of next month,
Kind regards,
Claire Phelan Esq.
