Father v Mother [2024] EWFC 419 (B)
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a victim of rape in a successful appeal and fact-finding. A previous judge found mother had fabricated rape allegations. The father had accused the mother of ‘parental alienation’. Dr Proudman successfully appealed. At a re-hearing, the judge found that the father had raped, abused and coercively controlled the mother.
“I find on balance that Father was sexually violent and coercive on occasions. I have concluded that he beat Mother…without her consent and took photographs and laughed about it. I find that it is likely…that this happened on more than one occasion and that [the] Father was sexually forceful in ensuring that his sexual needs were met.” [299]
“Father has used the police, children’s services and the courts to punish Mother for what he perceives to be parental alienation but is actually [the] Mother’s response to his constant approach of bullying and pushing her to get what he wants.” [308]
“In summary therefore, I find that Father has been physically and sexually abusive toward the Mother and has used the courts, police and social services and Cafcass at times against her to secure his aim of unsupervised family time with A.
“DJ.Lindsay did not make the findings sought by the Mother in respect of sexual assaults, although she did make findings in relation to the Father’s behaviour which amounted to domestic abuse in other respects. The Mother appealed the District Judge’s judgment and on the 8th August 2023, I allowed the appeal and directed a re-trial, as requested by the Mother. However, I directed at that point that all of the court’s findings should be re-tried.” [3]
“The fact-finding hearing in the court below considered only specific allegations of sexual assault and coercive and controlling behaviour brought by Mother. Father sought to establish parental alienation by Mother through a pattern of failing to promote contact.
In September 2023, Mother filed her final statement which enlarged her allegations of sexual assault during their relationship to cite “sex by coercion” and regular sexual violence, never seeking her consent for his actions.” [18]
“There has been a pattern of Father grossly exaggerating Mother’s behaviour and treatment of A and seeking to involve the authorities to support him. He accepts this but has not explained why he has acted in this way, satisfactorily or at all.” [232]
“Exaggerating Mother’s behaviour to professionals was in my judgment, manipulative behaviour, which shows a lack of awareness and insight into the impact on Mother and the potential consequences for A of his actions.” [233]
“I can only conclude as Father could not reconcile these different accounts that Father was indeed overexaggerating and had little if any genuine concern for A or indeed Mother…” [238]
“Father’s account is that Mother followed him into the shower and then requested that he hit her after an unsuccessful attempt to have sex due to the location and has back problems. He says that this was something he did not initiate but was something that she wanted. He did not refuse to hit her despite her clearly being ill. Father agrees that he hit her so hard on this occasion that he caused a handprint on her right buttock and then at her request, he took a photograph of this injury, which he says Mother found funny. I find it hard to accept that given that the Mother was in so much pain that she had to break her journey and only a week later was admitted for surgery, that she would demand to be hit on her buttocks and thighs and for any injuries to be photographed.” [277-278]
“The Mother, in my judgment has proven that Father was sexually violent and coercive to her…I find on balance that he did rape her…when A was in the room with them, that she made it clear to him that she did not want to have sex and that he was hurting her..” [280]
“I do find that there was a power imbalance in the relationship and that there was sexual violence which Mother seemed to feel powerless to address. I accept her account of feeling confused and frightened by the Father’s behaviour which she gave in live evidence to the court. She appears to have been completely disorientated by the turbulent nature of this relationship which is obvious from the chronology.” [298]
“I find on balance that Father was sexually violent and coercive on occasions. I have concluded that he beat Mother…without her consent and took photographs and laughed about it. I find that it is likely…that this happened on more than one occasion and that [the] Father was sexually forceful in ensuring that his sexual needs were met.” [299]
“Father has used the police, children’s services and the courts to punish Mother for what he perceives to be parental alienation but is actually [the] Mother’s response to his constant approach of bullying and pushing her to get what he wants.” [308]
“In summary therefore, I find that Father has been physically and sexually abusive toward the Mother and has used the courts, police and social services and Cafcass at times against her to secure his aim of unsupervised family time with A.
I do not find that he has, necessarily, done this deliberately to cause her harm, distress and fear, as I consider it unlikely that he intellectualises it in that way. He has behaved in this way to get what he wants and is prepared to do and say whatever he needs to achieve this.” [314]
“I consider his behaviour to have been coercive and controlling during the relationship, physically and sexually and to an extent emotionally, as a result. Since separation, the Father has subjected Mother to psychological harm by his selfish and careless approach to fighting for contact. In his mind the end justifies the means. At times such as when he placed chocolates on Mother’s bedroom pillow and when he covertly checked her mileage, he appeared to have no regard at all for her privacy. A has been distressed at times, as Father has admitted, by the extreme tension between the parents at handovers, which I find has been caused or at least exacerbated unnecessarily by Father’s attitudes and behaviour.” [315]
Related barristers: Dr Charlotte Proudman
