Телеграм канал «The Irish Inquiry»

Babysitting Holiday Advert Worth Noting.. This is welcome news. The parents may still get away with burying his little body on wasteland (after he died in God knows what manner), but at least little Daniel's death is being taken seriously.  Because he had been buried so long, there were no conclusive results as to how he died. So who knows where this investigation will go. Hopefully, there are incriminating communications and other evidence of wrongdoing. It is worthy to note that Tusla dropped the ball on this child. He was put up for adoption and then given back to the parents and then closed off his file prematurely (as they did with over 45,000 cases during those lockd*wn times). It's also worth noting that his mother put up an ad online looking for a total stranger to mind the little boy for a week while she and her boyfriend went away on holidays for a week. That ad was not answered, and the post was not fulfilled. I often wonder if they went on holiday anyway. In any case something is not right. No one buried their little child like this and then claims social welfare for them (in the case of the mother) or flees to Brazil (in the case of the father) if they are innocent. We can say my views on that as this case is not subjudice/pre trial/trial phase yet (and may never be depending on what case the Gardaí can put together and depending then on what file they send for the attention of the DPP). Note what the Journal image says. DANIEL AS A BABY. He was still just a baby when he died, he was only 3. Rest In peace, Daniel.

This is welcome news... Read on below...

Tusla Says It Is NOT Responsible For Verifying Age! Tusla said it was “necessary and important to clarify” it does not conduct age assessment in the strict statutory sense”. Tusla said its role was “confined” to determining if someone referred to it was eligible for services under the Child Care Act 1991.... Surely to be eligible though you have to ACTUALLY BE A CHILD?? Tusla went on to say "Therefore, the appropriate authority for determining age for international protection purposes is the International Protection Office,” The Department of Justice was "forced to clarify" last week that the International Protection Office (IPO) is "ultimately responsible for determining the age of an applicant being treated as an unaccompanied minor in the system. This is despite the fact that in practice, Tusla was the agency assumed to be responsible for determining The Department of Justice had previously “allowed” the PAC to believe that age verification was Tusla’s responsibility." Additionally, there have been 14 cases in which legal proceedings were taken against Tusla over age verification but it is not clear what the specifics were of these cases. There are "three ongoing cases and six where no damages or costs were issued against Tusla. In two cases, the legal costs against Tusla were €45,675.17 and €6,460. In three other cases, the damages awarded against Tusla ranged from €2,500 to €6,460." Also last week, Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan told the Dáil that “in practice, and for many years,” Tusla’s assessment has been the one that has been “taken as being determinative of age for the purposes of both eligibility for services and for the processing of an international protection application”.

Tusla Says It Is NOT Responsible For Verifying Age! Read on below...

3.5 years? 14 Years Was The Maximum That Could Have Been Given He will be out in less than 2. An insult to the victim, who was 9 just and is now 16 (and it was TWO sexual assaults). Not one. As the headline suggests. Edward White (48 years the victim's senior) put his young victim through the extreme stress of giving evidence and being cross examined and was also allowed (after being convicted) to stand up and say the victim and her family lied again and again. Her age in court was stressed as being "9 and a half" as though the extra six months in age made the crime lesser somehow. Because this vile monster has some seemingly benign health issues, such as tinnitus, he got a lighter sentence. The female judge also deemed the attacks were brief and, therefore, less serious (as though it takes more than a second of inappropriate touching to destroy a child's life). Additionally, his advancing age was taken into consideration when deciding on a sentence (he was well capable of sexually assaulting, threatening, and intimidating a child, and no doubt still is). Mr White committed the acts in the child's home and then told her he would do bad things to her family if she called out for help or told anyone. He said it was egregious to send him to jail given his health issues.

3.5 years? 14 Years Was The Maximum That Could Have Been Given Read on below...

Tusla Children Sent To A Foreign Land While The State Accommodates Economic Migrants By Susanne Delaney Yes, they're sending away our vulnerable children to the UK while accommodating tens of thousands of asylum seekers in hotels here in Ireland. It has been reported that €1.3 million euro in tax payer money is to be sent to Scotland  supposedly for the care of ONE single child for one year (€23,000 a week). This child is not the first one to have been sent away either. Judge Alec Gabbett commented that, in this particular family law case, the "cheque book is open for obvious reasons" (meaning the risks involved in caring for this child are so great). However, in my view, the chequebook is open for obvious reasons to do with profiteering from the (Tusla or unregulated care induced) misery of children. This is not the first nice big cheque to be on its way to some (likely unregulated) "care provider" in an entirely different nation, and when the child turns 18 it is possible they will be turfed onto the streets of Scotland. They may enter an adult care facility if they have severe intellectual or physical disabilities, but otherwise, they're on their own. Abandoned and left to fend for themselves (this has already happened to children in care who have been sent abroad). All children are discharged from Tusla's responsibility on the very first day of their young adult life. Unless, of course, we are talking about unaccompanied asylum seeker "minors" who pose as children. THEY get accommodated indefinitely (transferring from Tusla's care to IPAS hotels). This may surprise many, but what is more surprising is that real children in Tusla's apparent care are actually being sent to the UK regularly. This warrants deep scrutiny. There is not only a deep cruelty inherent in that [to send often traumatised minors to a land they don't know], but there are serious unaddressed safeguarding issues. How do we know what happens to these children exactly? Who are these care providers? Have they too been falsifying Garda vetting checks (like two non national African pastors unregulated care providers have been found doing in Ireland?) Are children also vanishing from care there like they are here? (and if so, what are the government and Gardaí doing about it exactly?). We already have children in care in Ireland being targeted by rape gangs (as noted in the UCD report on predators targeting children) and we know vulnerable children in the UK have been targeted by rape gangs for decades. So we have a right and duty to ask: WHO is watching the minors sent there, AND are these people and companies trustworthy? If none of what I have said registers as concerning, then listen to ex Scotland Yard Detective John Wedger to understand the scale of child sex trafficking (and cover up) happening involving vulnerable minors in the UK. While you are at it, ask why our government takes in economic migrants like it's our moral duty while simultaneously justifying sending away our most vulnerable. It's time the nation started really understanding what is going on and why.  None of what we are seeing is done out of goodness and kindness. It's greedy, dark, and corrupt will have devastating consequences for all of us. If all of it was altruistic, the government wouldn't abandon children in care on their 18th birthday while spending billions on asylum seekers and refugees, many of whom ARE disingenuous. The Dept of Justice has previously admitted [in a secret memo to Helen McEntee] that most asylum seekers are undocumented and are actually economic migrants. Most of them come over from the UK (where they have been living and therefore are not entitled to claim asylum here). The Information Commissioner forced the Dept to release the info after the DOP tried to initially hide the memo in order to shield illegal untraceable scammers from the ire of the public. The very public the Dept of Justice is tasked with protecting (see comments).