Had to share the news for multiple reasons. Firstly the safety and persistence of this website. The SSL certificate (that which gives you your safe padlock icon in your browser) for this site proves that I am the owner of this domain and therefore the site too. The following documents prove I am Teagan's rightful Dad. This means there can be no doubt that this site is indeed maintained by Teagan's Dad, rather than some random nut on the internet. Could there be a better person to hold the domain name of a child than the rightful father?

This also proves that (when the law allows) Teagan can be assured that when communicating via this site, that she is indeed talking to her rightful father, and not some random wierdo on the internet. So for a child's best interest, such proof is of paramount importance to be here, is it not? Perhaps there is a model here for protecting children from the worst aspects of the internet via such interleaving proofs? That would be a wonderful side effect of this case would it not?

The first letter is my bail notice which contains the first ever official proof of my daughter's name. And of course notification of my accuser and the end of my visiting rights to the wonderful village of Ashington for the time being. This letter prompts just the one question of is the 60 day ban on communicating with my daughter in addition to the 3200 days I already have, or is it inclusive of the existing sentence? Or would that just be splitting hairs?

It is this second letter from my duty solicitor which is far more interesting. Firstly, we have a new complainant, not matching the name on my bail notice. Which of these two people has the complaint against me, or should I steer clear of all Lucy's from now on? Perhaps now I have some sympathy for holding the wrong domain name all these years, until I found a new name myself only at the passing of last September. You have got to smile at the irony right? The good legal people seem to be having the same difficulties I did.

But most important, between these very official two letters, we have proof beyond reasonable doubt that the little girl named in the bail notice is indeed my daughter. And that conversely, for little Teagan, I am without reasonable doubt her rightful father. Is that not so?

But there's so much more. A stark warning to the press here comes with the first allegation. That I placed little notices of the existence of this website near to my daughter's school. Be careful where you advertise. But the second allegation, that I had the audacity to create a website bearing my own daughter's name, and having content specifically to allow her to discover the truth about what happened to her Dad. That allegation has shaken me to my core. How could I have done such a thing? In the light of such accusations would it be appropriate if I bought a dead parrot to the court sketch/case to come?

Also be careful you school run Mum's who are known to drive near your child's school up to 5 times or more per week. You can be arrested for doing it just twice. Perhaps alternating surnames might make your journey safer. I'm sure it's been tried before.

There's even more if you take the two allegations together. In these lockdown times, there must have been a celebrity on the TV who has irritated you just a little bit? There's always someone annoying on the TV right? Well, the above documents show that if that which irritated/annoyed/harassed you was previously advertised, you can ring the police and say the existence of that news item/tv show/whatever caused you some distress. That is what the letter states right?

Now you might reasonably have thought that such a flaky complaint would just be ignored, and you would fail to keep that annoying celebrity quiet for two whole months just on your whim? But you would be wrong. You see for such a terrible crime, you can be assured that the annoying celebrity would be arrested first, and only then be allowed to give his/her version of events. Furthermore, just on your whim, that annoying celebrity would be silenced for two months while you came up with something a bit more solid than a sandcastle's foundations. What better way to get even with one of those smarmy sorts on TV you don't like? A precedent has after all been set, has it not? You have my permission to reference this site as evidence if you decide to try it for yourself.

By way of suggestion, how about Peppa Pig? I hear this creature has been the torment of many a parent of young children in recent times. While there may be practical difficulties with the arrest of the great pink Peppa, surely her automatic silencing for two months would be a gift from the gods would it not? This was probably not a wise suggestion as my daughter at least used to like Peppa. I hope she can see the funny side one day. I hope I do too.

I hope I haven't breached my bail conditions posting this. I think the proof that this site is owned and maintained by Teagan's legally recognized father is too important not to post. Furthermore I have pledged to share with Teagan the truth of exactly what happened, so I am obliged to provide all the letters that I have ever received on this matter. To be read at a time only when she is legally able to do so.

Here's a tricky scenario I have been thinking about. What if my poor little girl, not understanding the legal reasons for not being allowed to communicate with her own Daddy, mistakenly reaches out and sends me a message on this site? A function it was clearly written to allow. What do I do? Do I do the legal thing of ignoring her, thus reinforcing any lies that may have been told her about a Dad who does not care? Do I ring the police to inform them my little girl has broken her side of the bail conditions? Or do I answer my only child's call and go to prison for it?

To help me answer that question I need only to look around me and in my heart. Outside the window of my painfully deprived of light housing association flat there are vertical metal bars. Provided I suspect to prevent me falling off the balcony should I feel the need for some light. But none-the-less, it's not really so different to a prison cell. Especially since I have to stay at home except for minimal exercise and essentials. Really not so different at all is it?

But its in my heart where the decision is made. I think I would sleep better in the prison cell with a heart filled with joy at having responded to my daughter's call, than I would in the housing association cell if I ignored that call. So, by virtue of being a human being, my opponents appear to have me at a disadvantage. It would be ridiculously easy with the right amount of malice to put me in a position where I would get myself sent to prison. I'm so concerned about this possibility that it's probably best for me to declare it right here.

In order to provide a little more context for the frightening legal challenges I now face, perhaps now would be a good time to share with the audience my previous convictions? Well, during the Balcombe anti-fracking protests, where I was protesting to protect the water supply to all of this area (including Ashington), I found myself arrested there too. I was arrested for attempting to fly superglue by means of radio controlled drone to a protestor locked onto a commercial vehicle. I was arrested wearing nothing more than a pair of speedos and a pink fluffy hat. I was released from Crawley police station at just after midnight. Practically naked. To my dismay the charges were dropped since it was decided that superglue is not a restricted item for air freight after all. And I'm afraid I have nothing more to declare on my criminal record. There isn't one.

You can take chunks out of me and send me to prison in return for helping my little girl smile and laugh at her Dad's love and audacity all day long. Those smiles, that look in her eyes, and her happiness, even at my expense, they mean everything to me. I have after all suffered heavily in Teagan's best interest already, so why stop now? If unconditional love, and willingness for self sacrifice for the benefit of my only child is a crime, then I'm officially the proudest criminal in the country this sunny day.

Time to update the evidence for this part of the story. What followed from here was a series of repeating bail conditions as the CPS desperately tried to find something to charge me with.

Here's the first of the rolling bail condition juggernaut, this one for a month and valid up until 17th June. Notice how much trouble they had trying to spell the word interfere. If at first you don't succeed, then try and try again. The police seem to have the same level of writing competence as Lucy. They never quite got it right this time. There's always another day.

It was about this time that I started to get suspicious. Here is a mechanism to severely punish without any charges. A wildcard means to punish someone for legal activity. I looked into it a bit and noticed that there was a Policing and Crime Act of 2017 that was introduced specifically to stop this behaviour by the police. Have a good read of it, try to sense the injustice it was intended to address.

The suspicions were confirmed after a month. Here we go again with the rolling bail conditions and punishments. At least they have learned how to spell interfere this time. This one rolls over till 18th July, just before Teagan's birthday:

This time I raised the issue of the Policing and Crime Act of 2017 and while no helpful information came from the police, my solicitor did have the answer I needed. It turns out that the simple act of passing the charging decision to the CPS allows the pre-charge bail clock to be stopped and thus circumventing the entire Act at a single trivial stroke. This is what illusions of decency look like. A piece of paper is prepared that appears to do the right thing only for a completely undeclared get-out clause to invalidate it instantly.

Again we have to be grateful for the freedom of information on the internet to be able to expose that which otherwise would go completely unnoticed.

Now things get really interesting. The stakes are now raised for the next rolling bail punishment would cover Teagan's 8th birthday. Would we finally have evidence that Lucy and her police would stop an innocent little girl seeing her Daddy on her birthday? What do you think? Is that possible in a self proclaimed civilised society?

Yes you were absolutely right. Of course they would. I got the phone call at the expected time just before the previous bail condition ran out. Just to make sure I couldn't have even booked an escape weekend away from the torture. It was the same routine. A call offering me no chance to reply, much like Lucy's malicious call that nearly killed me. A call that made it very clear there had been no progress, no indicator that anything was nearing completion, not the slightest sign that anything had progressed at all from the first day of bail conditions. And something else. To send me the message that it was further away even than when we started, this latest rolling bail would run for 5 weeks instead of the usual 4 weeks of the previous pre charge bail extensions. I realised instantly I was being provoked and hung the phone up mid call.

I had a a little something up my sleeve though. Prior to the call I had been invited to an amazing festival in Cornwall. The brutal bail conditions prevented me going. But this was a chance to use their rolling bail against them and I took it. If they had not repeated the bail condition to cover Teagan's birthday, then they had me. For I would not have attended the police station at the time stated due to the need to save my mental health by getting away from all the malice for that weekend. That would have been a criminal offence and technically I would have been on the run from Cornwall. Luckily the predicted malice saved the day this time.

When I returned from Cornwall still a free man, I got given a beautiful gift to highlight the injustice of this case. Instead of the usual police bail condition letter, this time I got a letter from the solicitor instead! Do we want to see it? Of course we do! Check this out:

Looks much the same as any other of these documents at first glance. But look at that highlighted word on the second line of the letter. Disposal decision. Not a charging decision. Now even for us without fluency in legal matters there is a fairly obvious change in direction from this wording. They don't want to take this to court. Just as we always knew. The system doesn't like it's evil reality being made public for that messes with the maintenance of their illusions of decency. Such cases are declared 'not in the public interest' as you would expect. They are seeking a means to throw this non-case away. You can look up disposal decisions on the internet.

So why did the police officer who rang me not notify me of this wonderful development? Had this change been mentioned in the first couple of sentences just as the above letter did, I would never have needed to hang up the phone in disgust. A crucial development withheld from me and just before Teagan's birthday. And with an extra week tagged on. Now I'm not going to suggest anything too serious here, I have shown you the evidence, it is up to you to decide for yourself what the intention of the misinformation was in this case.

The only thing I lacked was written proof from the police of the claims I have just made. Usually the police send the bail notice within a couple of days but this time all I had was the solicitors letter above. For some reason the police had decided to interact with my solicitor in some way before I was to be sent the new rolling bail extension. This had never happened before. I realised that due to deliberately withholding this progress change from me, the police wouldn't want to provide me evidence of this in writing. They aren't stupid after all, this is their game and they are good at it. Credit where credit is due.

Or are they? For a whole week later than the phone call guess what dropped through the post? Do we want to see it? Of course we do so here it is:

Whilst they are to be congratulated for finally nailing how to spell interfere, may I draw your attention to the highlighted word. Still a charging decision. And the extra week. And the period covering Teagan's birthday. Once again my claims appear to be validated. I thought the perils of telling lies was taught in primary schools. Does Ashington CE Primary School teach this? The problem with lies and especially lies driven by malice is that they are high maintenance to keep consistent. They can never take the pressure of being tested over time. Over time webs of deception always fail. Only the truth can be poked and kicked and still stand strong even through the passage of time. Is that not so?

Rather than show malice myself towards those so keen on denying Teagan her Dad, I find myself having to thank you instead, strange though this may sound. For what we have here is full documentary evidence for Teagan to see for herself how Lucy and her police tried everything to keep her Daddy from her. While we are on opposing sides, we have all contributed to the most important cause here. And that is so that Teagan may live her life knowing for sure, without having to believe, that her Daddy would take on the world to be with his one and only special little girl. She will see that she was manipulated and deceived and stopped from seeing her Daddy by force. And so she will never have to wonder if she was unloved by her Daddy. And I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for giving her at least that.

Without the evidence above, and throughout this website, Teagan would have been left having to believe she had a Daddy that loved her instead. After all this is the primary objective of this website. And I think we can all agree we would prefer her to know that for sure if we are claiming to be serving Teagan's best interests. Is that not so?

Perhaps another primary school lesson here for us all? While I obviously would dearly love to see my little girl, those in the know realise I'm playing for far higher stakes than personal gain. I'm playing for Teagan's happiness both now and more importantly for the rest of her life. The smart CPS barrister looking at this knows this too and has no intention of going up against that. This is what it means to play with the Ace of Hearts. And I gave fair warning that you can't lose if you play with the Ace of Hearts. And so it has come to pass. Teagan will know her Daddy loved her and was forcibly prevented from being with her. For no good reason. For the rest of her life.