A court spokeswoman said the chief justice had fallen while walking for exercise and blamed dehydration.
WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. sustained a head injury last month that required a night at the hospital, a spokeswoman for the Supreme Court said on Tuesday.
“The chief justice was treated at a local hospital on June 21 for an injury to his forehead sustained in a fall while walking for exercise near his home,” the spokeswoman, Kathleen Arberg, said in a statement.
“The injury required sutures, and out of an abundance of caution, he stayed in the hospital overnight and was discharged the next morning,” Ms. Arberg said. “His doctors ruled out a seizure. They believe the fall was likely due to lightheadedness caused by dehydration.”
The incident was first reported by The Washington Post, which said it had made inquiries after receiving a tip that Chief Justice Roberts had been seen at a Maryland country club bleeding from his head.
Other members of the court, notably Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have volunteered information about health setbacks requiring hospitalization. Chief Justice Roberts did not disclose his fall until The Post asked.
The chief justice has twice had seizures, in 1993 and 2007, but Ms. Arberg’s statement said his latest fall had not been caused by one.
The last seizure happened at the chief justice’s summer home in Maine. At the time, the court described the episode as a “benign idiopathic seizure,” one that could be a sign of epilepsy. The incident was similar to one he experienced 14 years before, the court’s news release at the time said. Idiopathic means that the cause of the seizure remained unknown.
Chief Justice Roberts is 65 and appeared to be in vigorous good health when the court last heard arguments in March.
The chief justice has been busy, as the court has been working to issue major decisions in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic. He has emerged this term as the median justice, casting the decisive votes in all of the court’s closely divided decisions, including ones on L.G.B.T.Q. rights, young immigrants known as Dreamers and abortion.
The court is expected to issue its final five decisions of the term in the coming days. They include cases on whether President Trump can block the release of financial records sought by Congress and by New York prosecutors.
Well, it seems we may have ourselves an issue of an SCOTUS impeachment.
The article below is not about Obamacare, but the situation surrounding the adoption of John & Jane Roberts' two children and the fact that he worked on the Bush v. Gore Florida recount.
Now, whether there was blackmail involved or not, we are not yet there to even make that determination, but I can tell you this, when one is Blue Slipped, there is going to be a DOJ Office of Legal Policy background on the SCOTUS nominee.
OLP works with the Attorney General to advise the President on nominations for Article III and certain Article I judgeships. After the President has submitted a nomination to the Senate, OLP works with the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee to secure the nominee’s confirmation.
So, if there is an established process to vet a nominee for the Supreme Court, how come no one in the FBI caught his adoption situation, because it seems to me we have ourselves an issue of trafficking tiny humans, far beyond the normal trafficking of tiny humans issues.
Looks like something 'slipped' through about 2 to 3 layers over there at DOJ.
Well, from what we know about the U.S. Constitution, you have to be a U.S. citizen in order to be nominated and sit on SCOTUS, so, it is pretty safe to ruleout that Roberts was a citizen of Ireland.
Then, there is the issue of him going to a "Latin" country to finalize the adoption of the Irish babies, which would mean the mothers were trafficked from Ireland while pregnant, which means there was no baby trafficking because the babies had yet to be born.
If this is the case, then what nationality would the children be, being born in a "Latin" country?
It does not matter why the mothers would give up their children for adoption because it is well documented that no one cares about them, let alone bring up the idea that there would be fathers involved.
Since I brought up the parents, I thought now would be a good time to ask if the parental rights were terminated, or were the kids purchased for those imported tax credits through, perhaps, Catholic Charities.
I wonder if he disclosed his adoption tax credits on his tax returns.
Boy, I would love to see the certified court judgment of termination of parental rights.
I do feel for the Roberts family because John was probably too stupid to realize that if he really wanted to adopt a kid, he could go through the U.S. Foster Care system, but, then again, those blonde haired, blue eyed tiny humans are always in such high demand, he went through private adoption.
There could be the possibility that he got married and adopted to make an instant family for his SCOTUS nomination as a cover for his persuasions for the manlier side of companionship, but hey, what do I know?
I know the FBI is more than likely involved in a special investigation about all this.
I originally wrote this article and presented the research on January 28, 2013, on a now defunct forum LibertyCaucus.com, posted under my nickname “Trip”. The story got serious traction across the blogosphere, and was picked up at such sites as “WhatReallyHappened” and “BeforeItsNews”(Archived).
According to some sources, Roberts wrote both the majority and a large portion of minority dissenting opinions. The liberal news outlet Salon.com has a story on July 3, 2012, “Roberts Wrote Both ObamaCare Opinions”, written by law professor Paul Campos, citing “a source within the court with direct knowledge of the drafting process.”
In this Salon article, Campos rejects the claim that the conservative minority wrote the dissenting opinion in response to Roberts’ majority opinion. Instead Campos’ source indicates that Roberts authored as much as the “first 46 pages” of the dissent, a full 70%, originally intended to be the majority opinion entirely rejecting ObamaCare. Only after Roberts switched his vote at the last minute did the remaining four Justices author the final 19 pages of that dissenting opinion. In support of this, Campos points out that it is extraordinary “in the court’s history that a dissent has gone on for 13,000 words before getting around to mentioning that it is, in fact, dissenting”, and yet there are repeated references to dissent from the majority opinion in those last 19 pages.
These facts may answer that question.
Roberts Adoptions:
In 2000 Justice Roberts and his wife Jane adopted two children. Initially it was apparent that the adoptions were “from a Latin American country”, but over time it has become apparent that the adopted children were not Latin American, but were Irish. Why this matters will become evident.
In 2005 the NY Times began investigating Roberts life as a matter of his nomination to the Supreme Court by George Bush. The Times was shortly accused of trying to unseal the adoption papers and intending to violate the anonymity of the adoption process… however there is more to the story.
The NEW YORK TIMES is looking into the adoption records of the children of Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. The TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate the status of adoption records of Judge Roberts’ two young children, Josie age 5 and Jack age 4, a top source reveals. Judge Roberts and his wife Jane adopted the children when they each were infants. Both children were adopted from Latin America. A TIMES insider claims the look into the adoption papers are part of the paper’s “standard background check.” Bill Borders, NYT senior editor, explains: “Our reporters made initial inquiries about the adoptions, as they did about many other aspects of his background. They did so with great care, understanding the sensitivity of the issue.”
Were the Children Adopted from Ireland?
At the time, the adoption terms of the children was uncertain. The Associated Press reported that they were “adopted from Latin America.” This indication should have been noteworthy, particularly given the Time magazine report indicating that the children were born in Ireland. Also, their blond hair and fair skin do not seem conventionally Latin American. 1
TIME had a “web exclusive” on the Roberts’s (7/24/05) and therein quoted a family friend as stating the kids were “born in Ireland 4 1/2 months apart.”
How were the Children Adopted?
According to The New York Times, based on information from Mrs. Roberts’s sister, Mary Torre, the children were adopted through a private adoption.
As explained by Families for Private Adoption, “[p]rivate (or independent) adoption is a legal method of building a family through adoption without using an adoption agency for placement. In private adoption, the birth parents relinquish their parental rights directly to the adoptive parents, instead of to an agency.”2
But was Robert’s adoption utilizing “a legal method”?
Apparently the process of adopting Jack involved some stress for John Roberts. According to Dan Klaidman of Newsweek, during the contested 2000 election, Roberts “spent a few days in Florida advising lawyers [for George W. Bush] on their legal strategy,” but “he did not play a central role,” because ” at the time, Roberts was preoccupied with the adoption of his son.”
It is now quite evident that the two Children were from Ireland. Even wikipedia references these adoptions at the time of Roberts’ confirmation, and indicates that the children were of Irish birth.
However Irish law 1) prohibits the adoption of Children to non-residents, and 2) also does not permit private adoptions, but rather has all adoptions go through a public agency. This would explain the children’s origin from a “Latin American country”, so as to circumvent Irish law.
Evidently Roberts arranged for this adoption through some sort of trafficking agency, that contacted Irish women, arranged for them to be transported out of Ireland and into compliant Latin American countries, from which they were adopted, thereby circumventing Irish laws — entirely illegal, but perhaps quasi-legitimized by the birth mothers, two in this case, transporting the children out of Ireland.
Undoubtedly Roberts and his wife spent a great deal of money for this illegal process, circumventing Irish laws and arranging for the transit of two Irish children from separate birth-mothers to a foreign nation. As of 2012, those two children have been with the Roberts’ for roughly 10 years, since they were adopted as “infants”.
Some might feel an impulse dismiss this information, mistakenly believing Roberts and his wife were doing a good thing for a children needing a home. This would be a narrow perspective on what occurred. Such an inter-country adoption would only come about at great cost, and those who utilize this method are creating a for-profit black market in adoptive children, trafficking across international borders, and doing so from mothers who have not yet given up their children except for that profit. These actions are promoting a very unsavory profit-for-children human trafficking market that even necessitates immediate contact with new birth mothers in dire circumstances to offer financial gain. The entire arrangement is thoroughly predatory, turning children into aonly financial commodity, and even providing motivation for their birth mothers to give them up! That’s an important ethical recognition.
Roberts is not deserving of any sort of respect here, and is only the latest example of people in position believing themselves above the law, beyond scrutiny and exempt from repercussion.
It all now makes sense.
The circumstances of these two adoptions explain not only why this would be overlooked by an overall sympathetic media, but also why a sitting Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court would not want this information to become public fodder well into his tenure. Its release and public discussion would discredit Roberts as an impartial judge of the law, and undoubtedly lead to his impeachment.
This also explains why Roberts would have a means to be blackmailed, and why that leverage would still exist even after the institution of ObamaCare. …
And it has led to flipping the swing-vote on ObamaCare, which fundamentally changed the relationship between citizen and government, making us de facto property of the state, with our relative worth in care and maintenance able to be determined by the government. Essentially it was a coup without firing a shot, much less needing even an Amendment to the Constitution.
And it is consistent with Obama’s Chicago-style politics, that has previously involved opening other sealed <divorce> records in order to win election.
Irish Adoption Law
The weak point in this theory, beyond actual proof of blackmail, is the actual terms of Irish Adoption Law. However an overview of the widespread Irish Adoption laws do bear out the assertions. As a result of Irish adoption law being the accumulation of laws over the years, this following synopsis is an accurate representation of that law given no singular code can be directly referenced.
Reference: The below document makes the following statements:
“The responsibility for making adoption orders is vested in the Irish Adoption Board, An Bord Uchtala. Before a final adoption order is made, the child usually is placed with the future adopter(s) by one of Ireland’s Registered Adoption Societies.” [page 1]
Who may adopt?
… “While the Irish acts do not require the applicants have Irish nationality or an Irish domicile, the applicants must be ordinarily resident in Ireland or have resident there during the year ending on the date of the order.“[Page 4]
Adoption Authorities:
“The adoption process in Ireland is regulated by the Adoption Board — the An Bord Uchtala — which consists of a Chairman and eight members. THe Adoption Board is an independent, quasi-judicial statutory body appointed by the Irish Government. It has the sole right to grant or refuse to grant adoption orders. The Board is also responsible for granting the declarations of eligibility and suitability to prospective adopters in advance of their adopting abroad and for maintaining the Register of Foreign Adoptions in which the details of intercountry adoptions are entered.” [Page 4]
“Before an adoption agency can accept a child for adoption, the person proposing to give the child up must be furnished with a statement explaining the effect of adoption order upon his or her rights and the provisions of the adoption acts relating to consents. An agreement to place the child with prospective adopters must be signed prior to the signing of consent. The agreement to place must have been made freely, with full knowledge of the consequences, and under circumstances where neither the advice of persons engaged in the transaction nor the surrounding circumstances deprive the mother of the capacity to make a fully informed free decision. In particular an agreement to place is “not valid if motivated by fear, stress or anxiety or dictated by parents or deprivations.“[Page 7]
There are no private adoptions. There are no overseas adoptions.
All adoptions go through the government board, An Bord Uchtala.
John Roberts was not ordinarily resident in Ireland, and was not resident there for the year ending on the date of an order that never passed through the Uchtala Board!
Furthermore, it is doubtful that Robert’s adoption afforded the adopting mothers (two) an environment that fully informed each of them of their rights, and was free of stress, anxiety, coercion and “deprivations”. In fact it is virtually certain that the process involved removing two children and their respective mothers from Ireland, and any support structure they might have had there, not to mention removing them from the purview of Irish law!
This whole exercise was highly illegal and unethical. Even if John Roberts was not blackmailed, these conditions would undeniably provide leverage for extortion to use against a sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
After hundreds of years of children being Legally Kidnapped from their mothers, children being raped, children giving birth, tortured and murdered, Pope Francis says, "Oops, Our bad."
I wonder what he is going to say to the generations of "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth) in the U.S., who have been stripped of their legacies, and their children sold to their tax exempt god, otherwise known as foster care, adoption, and about the nasty ass shit they do to the children in their care and in society.
Release the Trust Funds and give us back our children, that would be a start for reparations.
On the second day of a difficult mission to win back the confidence of Irish Roman Catholics, Pope Francis awoke on Sunday to a bombshell accusation from within his own citadel.
A former top-ranking Vatican official released a 7,000-word letter asserting that the pontiff knew about the abuses of a now-disgraced American prelate, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, years before they became public.
The official, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, a conservative critic of Francis and a former apostolic nuncio to the United States, claimed that the pope had failed to punish Cardinal McCarrick, who was suspendedin June after allegations that he had coerced seminarians into sexual relationships. He was also found to have abused a teenage altar boy 47 years ago, when he was a priest in New York.
“In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church,” the archbishop wrote, “he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set an example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign with all of them.”
In a news conference on the papal plane back to Rome late Sunday evening, Pope Francis sought to avoid questions about the accusations. “I will not say a single word about this,” he said.
The archbishop’s startling accusation will not come as a complete surprise to Vatican watchers, since he is part of a conservative camp that blames liberals, like the pope, for allowing homosexuality in the church. But it further complicates Francis’ efforts to convince Irish Catholics that the church is ready to confront its legacy of concealing sexual abuse.
• Francis prayed at a shrine in the village of Knock on Sunday and then returned to Dublin to celebrate Mass, a day after meeting with survivors of abuse.
• In Knock, he addressed the issue of child sexual and institutional abuse by members of the church, begging “for the Lord’s forgiveness” for “the scandal and betrayal.”
• Vigils were held across the country, including in Tuam, where the remains of hundreds of children were found buried in an abandoned septic system of a Catholic-run home for unmarried mothers.
• The New York Times has live coverage of the pope’s visit to Ireland. Here are highlights from Saturday.
A conservative archbishop has waded into Vatican power struggles before
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States, wrote a 7,000-word letter asserting that Pope Francis had known about the abuses of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick years before they became public.
Archbishop Viganò’s attack on Pope Francis was not the first time he has been at the center of a Vatican controversy.
Three years ago, the archbishop arranged a personal meeting between the pontiff and Kim Davis, a county clerk from Kentucky who became a heroine to social conservatives by refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The meeting appeared to plant Francis firmly on one side of the American debate over gay rights and resulted in a media storm, something he had hoped to avoid.
The archbishop has figured in a series of Vatican power struggles. A cultural conservative, he represents a camp within the Vatican that has pressed the pope to strengthen the church’s doctrinal opposition to same-sex marriage.
In 2011, he was removed from the post to which Pope Benedict appointed him, secretary of the governorate of Vatican City State — akin to the mayor of Vatican City — and he was transferred to the United States, a move seen as a kind of administrative exile.
This followed a campaign of anonymous articles about the archbishop, later known as Vatileaks, complaining of his rough management style. In one leaked letter, Archbishop Viganò angrily complained that he had been promised an elevation to cardinal.
— Ellen Barry
In Dublin Mass, the pope rallies a demoralized church
An aerial view of the crowd gathered for Pope Francis’ Mass at Phoenix Park in Dublin on Sunday.
Thirty-nine years ago, when Pope John Paul II celebrated Mass in Phoenix Park in Dublin, around a million people — roughly a third of Ireland’s population — showed up.
At 3 p.m. on Sunday, the crowd that gathered for Pope Francis was nowhere near as large.
Aerial footage showed fewer people than expected on the streets to greet Francis as he made his way around in his Popemobile, including a trip to St. Mary’s Pro-Cathedral from Dublin Castle on Saturday. It was unclear whether a protest called “Say Nope to the Pope,” which encouraged people to snap up free tickets and then skip the events, was having an effect.
In his Mass, Francis sought to rally a church battered by secularism as well as its history of clerical and institutional abuse. He compared the task of the faithful to that of early Irish missionaries such as St. Columbanus, who sought to spread the faith to Europe in “an age of darkness and cultural dissolution.”
Francis described meeting with survivors of abuse by priests and members of religious orders, saying he wanted to put “in front of God’s mercy these crimes” and ask forgiveness for them.
“In a special way,” the pope said, “we apologize for all the abuses committed by institutions run by male and female religious and other members of the church. And we ask for forgiveness for the crimes so many minors were subjected to.”
He added, using words that many disappointed Catholics had been waiting to hear: “Some members of the hierarchy didn’t own up to these painful situations and kept silence. We ask for forgiveness.”
He also acknowledged the church’s role in separating tens of thousands of unmarried mothers from their babies, and encouraged those mothers and children to reunite.
“For all those times when it was said to many single mothers who tried to look for their children who had been estranged from them, or to the children who were looking for their mothers, that it was a mortal sin: “This is not a mortal sin,” he said. “It is the Fourth Commandment! We ask for forgiveness.”
Decades of clerical abuse, forced adoptions, forced labor in industrial houses and other exploitation gutted the Catholic Church in Ireland. And as the Irish government has broken free from the church’s hold, its people have voted in ways contrary to church teaching. They have legalized divorce and same-sex marriage, and in May took a major step toward the legalization of abortion.
In a speech beside the pope on Saturday, Ireland’s prime minister, Leo Varadkar, acknowledged all of the church’s contributions to Irish society, including its hospitals and schools, but also made clear that Ireland liked the direction it was heading in.
The pope, in his homily on Sunday, seemed to have no illusions of how hard his task is.
“Let us also humbly acknowledge that, if we are honest with ourselves, we too can find the teachings of Jesus hard,” he said. “How difficult it is always to forgive those who hurt us.”
— Ellen Barry and Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura
Visiting a shrine in Knock
Visitors at the Knock Shrine in Ireland. The pope was expected to pray at the shrine, where in 1879, 15 people were said to have seen an apparition of the Virgin Mary, St. Joseph and St. John the Evangelist.
Earlier Sunday, Francis headed to the tiny, hilly village of Knock, home to fewer than 1,000 people. Knock, in County Mayo in the west of Ireland, has served as an engine of faith for the Catholic Church since 1879, when a group of townspeople reported seeing apparitions of the Virgin Mary and other members of the Holy Family.
Around 45,000 Catholic pilgrims made their way here on Sunday, through heavy traffic and pouring rain. Francis used his time in the village to beg for God’s forgiveness.
Under drizzly, misty skies and the soothing sounds of “Ave Maria,” silent onlookers surrounded the Knock Shrine, which went into lockdown at 9:20 a.m., a few minutes before the plane carrying Francis touched down at Ireland West Airport.
“The pope has arrived,” the choir announced as a screen showed his descent from the plane. Audience members cheered, clapped and said, “God bless him.”
At the shrine, the pope declared, “None of us can fail to be moved by the stories of young people who suffered abuse, were robbed of their innocence, who were taken from their mothers, and left scarred by painful memories.”
“This open wound challenges us to be firm and decisive in the pursuit of truth and justice,” he said. “I beg the Lord’s forgiveness for these sins and for the scandal and betrayal felt by so many others in God’s family.”
Francis prayed at the shrine, asking the Virgin Mary to heal those who have been abused.
John Paul II also prayed in the village on the last papal visit to Ireland, in 1979. After that visit, the local priest, Msgr. James Horan, drew widespread mockery for vowing to build an airport in the tiny village.
“Now don’t tell anybody,” he told a television crew. “We’ve no money, but we’re hoping to get it next week or the week after.”
The airport was completed in 1986; in its way, it became a symbol of the power of the Catholic church.
For this papal visit, the village prepared feverishly. More than 50,000 flowers were planted, buildings along the main road were repainted, and every bed-and-breakfast in town — including those called the Lamb of God, Divine Mercy and the House of Eden — was fully booked by Friday.
“It was very emotional when we saw the pope in 1979,” said Tina Stenson-Cunningham, 63, holding a railing by the road where the Popemobile was expected to pass.
“But now we’ve experienced more of life, it’s more meaningful, more spiritual,” she said.
— Iliana Magra and Jason Horowitz
Paying tribute to Dublin’s ‘Holy Drinker’
Phot
A Dublin statue of Matt Talbot, who died in 1925 and has since become a patron of those struggling to stay sober. Francis is rumored to be considering making him a saint.
Matt Talbot died in obscurity 93 years ago, having drawn little attention during a quiet existence of modest means and hard labor. But on Saturday, the leader of the world’s Catholics stopped at Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Dublin to pray before relics of Talbot, who is far better known in death than he was in life.
Talbot, an alcoholic Dubliner known as the Holy Drinker, overcame his addiction with the help of a priest and became deeply religious. His story spread rapidly after his death. Substance abuse clinics around the world are named for him, as is a bridge in Dublin with a statue of him nearby.
Already an unofficial patron saint to those struggling to stay sober, he may be granted official status. The church gave him the title “venerated” in the 1970s, a step toward canonization.
One of 12 children born to a poor family, with a father who was a violent alcoholic, Talbot began drinking heavily at age 12 and became so addicted that he once pawned his boots to buy a pint at a pub. At 27, he swore never to touch alcohol again — a vow he kept until his death, 42 years later.
“Never go too hard on the man who can’t give up drink,” he is quoted as having said. “It is as hard to give up drink as it is to raise the dead to life again.”
Government agency admits they didn’t keep track of numbers
US embassy cables, revealed via Wikileaks, show that children who have gone missing from Irish state care over the last three years have ended up working as sex slaves in brothels. During a private briefing with diplomats from the American Embassy, in Dublin, the Health Service Executive (HSE) made this shocking admission.
The cables showed that foreign-born children, who were under the care of the HSE, went missing and ended up
Children who have gone missing from Irish state care over the last few years have ended up in brothels.
in the sex-trade as far back as 2008. The HSE made these admissions while US diplomats were conducting research for an annual report into people trafficking in Ireland.
The HSE told diplomats that some foreign children had been retraced to brothels, restaurants and private households where they were being used as slaves. According to reports in the Irish Independent, the children were found in various towns throughout Ireland.
HSE officials, also terrifyingly, admitted that they were not keeping statistics on the numbers. A HSE briefing, in February 2009, said gardai had located two children, both missing from HSE care, working in the sex industry.
The annual report was forwarded to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The cables showed that HSE officials believe Chinese children were at greatest risk. The HSE also said that traffickers bringing these children to Ireland were most likely non-national, and had preyed on their compatriots.
In Ireland, if a child under the age of 17, arrives in Ireland without a parent or guardian, they are automatically placed in foster care or in a hostel facility run by the HSE. Every year dozens of children go missing. It is suspected that they end up with the traffickers who brought them into the country in the first place.
Irish police maintain that traffickers were actually targeting Ireland due to the ease with which children can escape from HSE facilities.
Briefings received by the US embassy between 2006 and 2008 indicated that there was no evidence to point to the fact that children were being trafficked into the sex trade. However, the HSE now acknowledges that children are in fact being trafficked into the sex trade in Ireland.
Well, congratulations are in order for the newly weds who fled to Ireland, far away from U.K. Child Protective Services who deemed them unfit to raise a child. The plans were for CPS snatch the baby from the womb, but state intervention was terminated due to the bold and courageous measures this brave couple executed.
Kerry gets a kiss from her bridesmaids Lindsay and Diana
My twin brother/best man David with his daughter
Kerry putting a ring on my finger
My beautiful son Ben and gorgeous wife Kerry!
Everyone came along for the big day!
Ben was the guest of honour!
We finally did it!
On September 5th 2009, my beautiful partner Kerry and I were due to marry in a lovely church ceremony in Arbroath, Scotland. Unfortunately however, a Social Worker from Fife Council called Amanda Jane Ritchie had sent a letter to the registrar stating that Kerry did not have the capacity to understand her wedding vows. Fife Council Social Services had their eyes on our son. They wanted to steal him at birth, and in order to do so, had to stop me having any rights as a father which led to them ruining our big day.
We obviously had no other choice but to flee the corrupted UK for a more peaceful land, where people are treated with respect regardless of their background or disability, and where the sanctity of marriage is a respected institution. Finally we were able to legally marry, having fled the nanny state. Finally we were allowed to live our lives in peace, with our son where he should be, at home with his loving and more than capable parents.
Neither Kerry or I are bitter that we had to leave the UK, in fact, quite the opposite. It was a blessing in disguise that we came to Ireland because it is without a doubt one of the most beautiful countries on earth and best of all, when Ben is older, he will be able say that he was not born British, he was born a free man in Ireland.
