UPDATE: Since the death of Ellie Butler, we have written a clarification, explaining the reasons behind the post below. We have also offered to remove this post if Ellie’s family would like us to. Researching Reform is shocked and saddened by Ellie’s passing, and our thoughts and prayers are with her family.
In a recent case, which has since been made public and appears to publish the names not only of the parents, but the children involved, there are some extraordinary skills to be appreciated and welcomed.
Family law often finds itself at the cutting edge of medicine and medical conditions, due to the fact that there is still so much we don’t know and we can’t deduce, that only the greatest care and the finest consideration will do and we feel this case and the judge who dealt with it, delivered just that.
Mrs Justice Hogg found herself having to pour over detailed medical evidence and testimony in a case which saw a mother and father lose their child to the local authority over what was believed to be non accidental injuries. However, this was later disproved and happily for the parents and their daughter, they were reunited, but not before facing the threat of losing their newborn who came into the world during the proceedings concerning their first daughter.
It’s not everyday you see such meticulous care in the family court system, nor is it usual to come across such courage and clear headed thinking, but for all those attributes, we would like to award Mrs Justice Hogg our Judge of the Week.
And as always, the parents and children are the unsung heroes in a system which has not yet found a way to treat our families with the compassion they deserve.
Clarinette said:
Interesting case but could you explain why we needed to know the names of the parents/kids ?
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Hi Clarinette, we weren’t responsible for making the judgement fully public, so we can’t tell you why it was decided so, but we can assume that it was done to help with transparency issues. This was a good case, where the judge took great care and the professionals further down the line seemed to do the same. However, not all cases have happy endings and we would like to see all judgements being made transparent, but not necessarily with names of parents and children included.
LikeLike
Sue G said:
Maybe if the welfare of the child had truly been the paramount consideration, there would have been a different outcome. The Family Court should not be about putting the wrongs parents may or may not have experienced right – it should be about putting the child’s interests at the centre of proceedings, as the legislation requires. If that had happened, the fact that Ellie had spent most of her life with her grandparents should have led to more caution about severing her primary attachment to them so abruptly. Surely Ellie deserved the time (and expenditure) necessary to test her parents’ commitment to her properly and enable a transition to them with the minimum of distress to her. If that approach had been taken for Ellie, it is likely that Ben Butler’s behaviour would have become apparent and rang some alarm bells. It costs public money to do this in children’s best interests (and those of their parents and family). But that’s another story entirely.
Natasha, I think you are brave not to delete the post following the judgement in view of what has happened.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Dear Sue, thank you for your comment. I agree, there should have been more engagement with Ellie and much more of a focus on her needs and wishes.
Thank you too for your kindness about not deleting the post. I felt keeping it up was important from a transparency perspective and in keeping with an honest editorial ethic, but I have offered to remove it if the family ask me to.
LikeLike
Andrew said:
Justice hogg what a cunt
LikeLike
Catherine Mill said:
A wise woman indeed with caring eyes.
Just a shame she has to wear the red suit and wig though, letting us all know courts and judges etc still answer to the Vatican- red Mass day must be close?
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Yes, we really need to get rid of the ridiculous wigs and gowns and perhaps switch to professional-looking suits that are relaxed but professional. Our lawyers are a right scruffy bunch 😉
LikeLike
Not to be named due to secret family courts said:
Hello, while I agree with your sympathetic comments on this case may I leave two comments:
– What about the horrid behavior of social services?
– I have quite some experience from this judge and she has caused children that I know what is probably irreparable emotional and physical harm due to her many uninformed and ignorant judgements. Her court, with her dog and all, is all about her, and not the sad children customers that perpetually pass in front of her.
LikeLike
forcedadoption said:
MRS justice Hogg is very aptly named ! Just ask her why she decided Vicky Hague (who has never hurt anybody) should be forbidden from communicating with her daughter by email ,phone,facebook,or any other means for another 4 years !
How could such a cruel and horrible woman ever be made a judge??
LikeLike
Natasha said:
I’m sorry to hear that.
LikeLike
Victoria Haigh said:
Yes I often feel that I am on a film set filming Planet Of The Apes when I go into a family court. These people like Hogg are definitely creatures from another planet. To separate a mother and her child using methods which go against the democracy of a country that is supposed to be democratic, and getting away with it thus far, is the actions of alien creatures void of nature and compassion. Human Rights seem to escape the Apes in the family court system.
It will all come out in the wash , with the UK having the highest rate of teenage suicide in Europe. What is wrong with the UK system? It has gone from protecting children, to somehow protecting Peodophiles, or did it always protect Peodophiles and I joined the party along the way?
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Hi Vicky, I think the system is a blunt instrument – well it was ten years ago, now I think it is well and truly broken. It really boils down to competence and ethics, but so much has gotten in the way of that, as you know.
LikeLike
Dana said:
Natasha, another nomination. Justice Holman, who returned a child to his family.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2862452/Judge-rules-toddler-taken-away-perfect-adoptive-couple-sent-live-family-father-initially-showed-no-him.html
Mr Justice Holman has ruled that a toddler should be moved from the ‘perfect’ adoptive couple who have loved and cared for him for the last 13 months to live with the family of the father who initially shunned him
LikeLike
Patricia [edited] said:
Justice hogg give my son to a evil dad.will never forgive them in the family court of law [edited] was 10 years old now he nearly 22 years old his dad as controlled him all his life never would believe England gone evil
LikeLike
David Farr said:
BLOOD ON HER HANDS!!!!!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bruce Antell said:
Will Natasha come down and justify her award ? Given the evidence we now know Justice Hogg overlooked her decision (and this award) look increasingly detached from reality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
Judge Of The Week was given to Justice Hogg for being careful in the case above, and not for any other actions in any other cases. I stand by my observation of the judge’s conduct in this case, and can’t be held accountable for cases that come to light/ come to my attention after the writing of a post. I think it’s quite clear from my blog that I’m pro improving the system and anti poor decision making and conflicts of interest jeopardising families. There’s no argument to be had here, so go and look for one elsewhere.
LikeLike
Andy said:
‘No argument to be had here ‘
Your article , so full of subjection and hyperbole positively invites it.
If you discourage argument, don’t present opinion as fact and certainly desist opining on the law.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
I take no issue with debate, but I won’t allow trolling on the site. If you continue to post aggressive commentary you will be barred.
LikeLike
Dave Hughes said:
As the child in the case above was later murdered by the father we can say that the judge was, at best, misguided.. Don’t forget she ignored the expert advice from Social Services and the Police.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
Thanks for your comment, Dave. These cases are complex, and sometimes it’s impossible to know whether expert advice is right, or not. We already know that this kind of advice is sometimes flawed and far too much weight is given to reports which are not fit for purpose. There are many other factors too, including the ability to truly assess risk, and in every case like this, whether the law allows for certain types of discretion or not. In a world where too many judges find against parents without due cause, extra care before removing children is a welcome move, but regrettably, sometimes that caution is made in error.
LikeLike
Forced Adoption said:
Abig difference between taking a child for one unexplained bruise and for a history of injuries as in the case of baby p and also the case above.Children are taken too easily for one bruise of the sort that every boy encounters when growing up , and far too often left after a catalogue of injuries (poor adoption material)
LikeLike
JuliaB said:
So, aside from throttling Ellie as a baby, Ben Butler strangled his ex-girlfriend, was violent and abusive to Jennie Gray and Ellie was so terrified of him she would hide in the car on contact days. Was any of this considered in the ‘meticulous care’ that Mrs Justice Hogg showed in her decision? Obviously not for long because 11 months later that poor little girl was brutally murdered. That is more than that weasel word ‘regrettable’ it is an absolute travesty of justice.
Given the emerging facts, all this article demonstrates is how gullible Mrs Justice Hogg was to Butler and Gray’s deception. There is a lot of public anger at this right now and I am absolutely amazed that you have not taken this stupid sycophantic article down.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Julia, you’re welcome to post your views but if you can’t do so politely, you won’t be able to comment here again. The post refers to the effort the judge put in, in trying to get it right. Obviously, she did not get it right. No one is suggesting for a moment that since this tragedy has come to light that the decision was correct. Anyone who thinks that is what this archived post is doing is clearly not being rational. And no, the post won’t be taken down- not because I take the view the judge was right, or because I’m not upset and distressed like everyone else, but because this post represents the complexity of family law cases and the reality that even the most earnest decisions can sometimes be wrong.
I hope this clarifies the position as regards this post. There will be no further comment from Researching Reform.
LikeLike
David said:
You must feel pretty damn stupid right now! If you don’t, I wonder why not. I realize that it is very easy to second guess a decision or position, but that is what you (and Mrs. Justice Hogg) do. How does it feel to have shoe on the other foot for a change? Also, how come Mrs. Justice Hogg hasn’t stepped down from the bench given her incredibly naive & disastrous judgement in this case (and others too, apparently). If she doesn’t, she should be removed. There seems to be every chance she will end up being responsible for ruining many more lives & possibly the injury & even death of more children.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
I have no reason to feel stupid. I’m sure justice Hogg is devastated. She will have to live with this decision for the rest of her life.
Your angry, senseless comments have no place here. You’re barred from posting.
LikeLike
Manila said:
I personally don’t care if Mrs Justice (what an irony) Hogg is devastated. I personally think that given the emerging facts (as they are referred to in the news) an inquiry must be open in relation to her work on Ellie’s case and all her other cases must be reviewed.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Thank you for your comment Manila. Ellie’s grandfather is calling for a public inquiry into her case. http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/ellie-butlers-grandfather-calls-for-public-inquiry-into-death-11364069293664
LikeLike
Sam said:
If there was any chance that the father was a violent brute (which had been established on multiple occasions), and if the child was in the care of loving family members, and when an error in judgment may lead to the brutal beating death of a child, is it not simply praiseworthy, but imperative, to err on the side of protecting a child?
There were two competing legal opinions: One establishing that the father was a sociopath, supported by the police, Social Services, the child’s school, the grandparents, and a long string of convictions. Another, an exoneration by a judge who has long had an agenda and went far beyond her brief to grandstand in defense of these detestable parents and to savage Social Services. Any reasonable person would conclude that Mary Hogg has the blood of Ellie Butler on her hands.
LikeLike
Tracy Spreckley said:
Natasha, there is nothing wrong in admitting you made an error and removing the article, or adding a follow up. That you continue to leave it up must be a further cause of distress to the family concerned who have lost their grandchild. To cite complexity of case as a reason for keeping the article online appears naive and tasteless.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Tracy, that is your view. The family would be smart enough to know that the article was not put there recently. I’m not in the slightest bit concerned about being proved wrong in any way, there is no vanity here. What does concern me is that complete strangers like you, are coming on to this blog and attacking me for the tragedy that’s taken place. I see no logic in that, just vexed individuals looking to vent online, which is a sad state of affairs.
LikeLike
Tracy Spreckley said:
Hi Natasha, sorry if I struck a nerve, but it is an odd choice not to update your article, or add some kind of follow up, in the light of recent events. I never mentioned the rights or wrongs of the article, which I’m sure was well intentioned only that your response to comments and events seems out of touch. I was reasonable, did not vent and I don’t understand what you thought was an attack. The only attack was your response to me. Apologies if I was supposed to know you before commenting. I’ve never heard of such a rule before. Please feel free to bar me, you seem to be doing a lot of that.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
I’m not going to respond to your passive aggression. I can confirm that I have already written a follow up post, which will be published tomorrow.
LikeLike
Forced Adoption said:
Apart from Sir James Munby none of the judges in the family courts deserve any sort of praise .L.J.Thorpe the second most senior family court judge before he retired said that it was a very serious matter to take a child from its parents as it was very hard for parents to get their child back because the courts were SO PREJUDICED THEREAFTER.
Unfortunately the standard of proof when deciding if parents are a risk to their child is one of probability so that if the social workers say rhe parents have harmed their child or are a risk to their child the judge inevitably believes them rather than the parents as social workers are thought to be more truthful than parents thanks to the inbuilt prejudice; That is why parents lose nearly every time due to that same prejudice…………The unfortunate case involving Judge Hogg proves the exception to the rule
LikeLike
Tracy Spreckley said:
Thanks, Natasha. Your site is quite high on searches for the current case, so a follow-up post makes sense.
LikeLike
Pingback: Ellie Butler: Living With A Fatal Judgment | Researching Reform
Bruce Antell said:
Natasha, I think what’s annoying most people is that the Judiciary knows a total screw-up happened (which is why Justice Hogg retired early just before the trial, I guess), but they seem to think it beneath them to apologise, even though this is clearly a case where an exception can be made to their usual practice of treating the public like fools.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Hi Bruce. I think Justice Hogg needs to make a formal apology to the family, it’s right and necessary for her to do that. Unless she’s a monster, which very few people are, she must have taken Ellie’s death quite badly. In confidence, judges have often told me that they feel terrible about certain decisions they made in the past, some involving loss of life, others less severe in outcome, and many of these judges go on to do reparative work, either as charity volunteers or child protection consultants. This doesn’t mitigate poor judgment, but I think it highlights the reality. There is too much arrogance within the judiciary, but also amongst child welfare professionals generally. A lot of reports are second rate and many experts don’t have the right qualifications. These things can make good decisions hard to come by. The system is complicated, both for its flaws and its vast array of multi agency activities, but in the last ten years a lot of us have fought hard for accountability and transparency, and we will continue to fight.
LikeLike
Forced Adoption said:
Forced Adoption | June 22, 2016 at 12:14 pm
NO punishment without crime ! BUT This father was a violent criminal and had not just one but a string of convictions for violence plus writing threatening notes, so the child was obviously better off with grandparents (not adopted or anything as drastic as that) .
That same judge Dame Hogg extended the injunction against Vicky Haigh (who has never hurt anyone) to another 3 years forbidding her from contacting her daughter by phone,skype,email;or letter even though Vicky now trains racehorses in France !
What a horrible ,horrible woman and thank goodness she retired conveniently 1 week before the trial of the murderous father !
LikeLike
Bruce Antell said:
It’s not completely related to Justice Hogg’s judgment but this news from the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/jun/22/high-court-refuses-to-publish-ben-butler-judgment-from-2014 doesn’t do the Courts any favours.
I think we all accept that the Law is a very complex business and any rush to judgement is potentially risky, but it’s hard to see how the refusal to publish the judgement on the grounds that it may prejudice any future court action is anything more than the Legal establishment protecting its own; Butler’s not coming out of prison for a very long time, if ever and as is pointed out in the article there is no future prosecutions scheduled, so it’s hard to see what is gained by this decision.
Miscarriages of justice, or justice badly applied are extremely dangerous for the public support of the Justice system, but the Justice system bringing itself into disrepute by trying to cover up for itself (or allowing itself to be seen as so) is equally, if not more, damaging.
LikeLike
Denise said:
Are you fucking joking ? Judge of the week ? It’s straight out of ‘ the emporers new cloths’. Do you not see what that judge has done ? How she never considered the welfare of Ellie and was taken in by a sociopath ? I would have expected Judge Hog to be struck off and charged not awarded Judge of the week. My heart breaks for the Grandfather. I am so sorry he has been left to grieve without his beutiful wife and that he had to have this kind of salt rubbed into his wounds.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Hi Denise, the post was written before Ellie’s death. In the interest of transparency I have kept this post up. However I also acknowledged the contradiction in a later post after news of Ellie’s death care to light. My heart still goes out to the family.
LikeLike
Faye said:
Do you still commend Judge Hogg now that the father had been convicted of Ellie’s death
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Of course not.
LikeLike
Faye said:
I think on light of the fathers conviction and respect for the family, you should take this down. It’s just common decency!
LikeLike
Natasha said:
I have left it there for transparency. As explained at the top of the post.
LikeLike
Faye said:
This is just triggering to anyone who had lost a child through violence. Whilst it highlights the work of the judge it serves no purpose but highlight how wrong the judge got it and the danger Ellie was put in.
LikeLike