Blog

You might want to sit down with a cup of coffee and a couple of biscuits for this week’s update. It’s a significant one, and I’d really welcome your thoughts on what direction to take next.

Linkage College

The internal investigation report from Linkage College has now been released, and it makes for some interesting reading.

Here’s the crux of our concern about Linkage, not just that the relationship between Lizzie and Lewis developed there, nor that much of the grooming took place at the college (though I’d argue that the fact Lizzie got into Coral’s car the day after her 18th birthday is, in itself, evidence enough of grooming, whether you call it manipulation or lies, the result was the same).

No, the most critical issue is this: two weeks before Lizzie was taken from us, Lewis was overheard in class boasting that once Lizzie turned eighteen, he and his mother would take her to live with them, and she would never see her family again.

That sounds like pretty damning evidence of intent, doesn’t it?

Linkage thought so too. On 7^th July 2023, they held an emergency meeting and rightly flagged this as a safeguarding concern. They phoned Jane, Lizzie’s mum, and explained the situation. We were relieved they took it seriously.

Together, Jane and the college agreed on a plan: staff would make sure Lizzie got into her transport taxi on the last day of term, bringing her home safely. We suspected the Wilson-Clark plan was to take Lizzie directly from the college, so this precaution would mitigate that risk. Jane also contacted solicitors, who confirmed that under the Mental Capacity Act, as Lizzie’s primary carer, she had the authority to prevent any attempted ‘removal’. The police, they said, would have to comply.

But that didn’t happen. When the moment came, the police disregarded that legal position. They warned us: if we didn’t allow Lizzie to go with Coral (who was waiting outside our house, fully aware that Lizzie was being dropped off by taxi), we would be arrested.

And that’s how we lost Lizzie.

Back to Linkage.

Here’s the issue. Yes, they told us about Lewis’ threat on the 7^th of July 2023. Then, on the 20^th of July 2023, it was Lizzie’s eighteenth birthday, a lovely day that she spent with Jane and I, by her own choice. Lizzie and I went to York for most of the day, and the three of us were together in the evening. Lizzie was therefore not at college on the 20^th July, nor did she make contact with anyone at the college, including Lewis. That detail is important.

The next day, 21^st July, Lizzie went to college for the final day of term. A staff member (Lewis’ learning mentor) asked whether ‘the plan’ was still happening. Lizzie said yes. So now we have a member of Linkage staff who was aware of the planned removal, knew it had previously been identified as a safeguarding risk, and yet said nothing to us.

Lizzie herself had mentioned this conversation to me, during one of our rare walks in People’s Park after she was taken.

But what we didn’t know, until the interim report was released, was this:

“On the 20^th July 2023, the student event logs evidence that Lizzie confirms the plan of moving out of the family home. Staff made records of the conversation with Lizzie. Linkage staff escalated the information to social services.”

Read that again, knowing that on 20^th July, Lizzie wasn’t at college at all. She was with me in York and with Jane and me in the evening.

So how could that conversation have happened at Linkage? It couldn’t. Meaning the entry must relate to a conversation that occurred earlier, but was logged later.

And here’s the catch: before 20^th July, Lizzie was still seventeen. That’s a whole different legal landscape.

So why, we must ask, did Linkage escalate this matter to social services but not to us, her parents?

Here’s what appears to have happened:

• 6^th July 2023: A safeguarding issue and threat was identified when Lewis was heard boasting that he and his mum would take Lizzie etc.
• 7^th July 2023: Linkage advised us of the plot and their concerns.
• Between 7^th and 19^th July 2023: Conversations took place at Linkage about the plan. It was confirmed to still be ‘on’. Linkage seemingly escalated it to social services, but made no mention to the parents whatsoever.
• 20^th July 2023: On the day Lizzie was not at college, the day she turned eighteen, the conversation was recorded on the system, along with the mention of it being escalated to social services.
• 21^st July 2023: The day of the removal. A separate discussion took place between Lewis’ learning mentor and Lizzie in which it was confirmed that the plan was still ‘on’. No attempt was made by Linkage to contact Lizzie’s parents. At 5:00pm, Lizzie was taken from outside our home.

This is not just a safeguarding failure; it’s a complete collapse of duty.

Naturally, when the interim report claimed Linkage had acted appropriately, we challenged it. Even the investigator agreed something didn’t add up. So, further investigation followed.

The Final Report

This week, I received the final version of the report. I was curious to see how they’d explain the inconsistencies and failures.

Here’s an excerpt:

“Regarding the review of the data logs that have been entered onto the system in relation to being made aware of the intention to leave home, the student event logs have evidenced that, on the 6^th of July 2023, college staff were made aware of discussions regarding Lizzie potentially moving out of the family home when she turned eighteen years old. On the 7^th July 2023, a phone call was made to Lizzie’s mum outlining the concerns. Assurances were given that Lizzie would be supervised by staff into the taxi following receipt of the information.

A further data extraction of the records held on the digital logs was completed following the further information shared with me regarding the accuracy of recording as Lizzie was not at college on the 20^th July 2023.

The detailed records show that an entry was logged on the system on the 20^th of July 2023. This entry has been validated as the day that staff were made aware of the intention to move out of the family home. The disclosure also stated that Lizzie and her partner had contacted social services and the police to check that it was OK. The learning mentor recorded they contacted social services on the 20^th July 2023 and were advised ‘as Lizzie is eighteen, legally we can’t do anything apart from ensuring that Lizzie is happy with this plan and advising her of safe zones and that she can say no’. The learning mentor allocated themselves an action in the records to speak to Lizzie the following day.

Further data extraction shows the action entry was completed on the 21^st July 2023. This entry states that checks were made with Lizzie to inform her that staff were made aware. Lizzie stated that the plan was ‘for her partner to collect her from home after college’. The learning mentor reiterated that Lizzie could go home at any point and people want her to be happy.“

Only, Lizzie couldn’t go home at any point. Indeed, very quickly, Lizzie couldn’t see anyone from home at any point. Moreover, then she couldn’t even contact anyone from home at any point. And the inescapable conclusion drawn from Linkage College’s own internal investigation is that they were fully aware of the plan and deliberately chose to keep Jane and I entirely in the dark as to what was being cooked up in what appears to be grubby complicity with the plot.

Linkage knew. And in their participation in discussions with social services, Linkage were not only aware of the plan but actively involved in it. Lewis and Coral were getting all their ducks in a row to remove Lizzie, and Linkage’s actions were supportive of this.

Linkage College facilitated the predatory removal of Lizzie Gladwell, a vulnerable young person with a confirmed diagnosis of FASD, taken from her home one day after she turned eighteen.

What should I do now?

Would you send your vulnerable child (real or imagined) to that college?

And yet, the report concludes:

“In conclusion, following investigation of the additional area, I have found no evidence that Linkage has been involved in the development and perpetration of the situation. This complaint is now considered closed.”

Next stop, Charities Commission, I would say. But I do welcome other thoughts, other than “Take them to court”. My wish is to see my daughter (and for her to have the right to be able to see her parents, family, Godparents, friends etc), not to get drawn into a legal battle in a courtroom.

Capacity Assessment:

The assessment did not comply with due process as outlined in the Mental Capacity Act official guidance and other guidelines from NICE etc. We know that. However, one final snippet from the Linkage report which gives further cause for alarm is as follows:

“It has been established that, on the day the local authority assessed Lizzie’s mental capacity, she requested a familiar staff member to accompany her. The investigation has found that the staff member did not address the meeting, they were there for support should Lizzie request this, and no request was made. The local authority ascertained that Lizzie was assessed as having capacity.”

Lizzie requested a familiar staff member to accompany her. However, this staff member was excluded from the meeting, presumably left in a corridor or a different room. Lizzie was then taken into a closed space, alone, and assessed by someone unfamiliar with FASD, Lizzie, or the context, who had repeatedly refused to meet with her parents. In such a situation, Lizzie would not have had the awareness to ask the assessor to pause proceedings to summon the familiar staff member. Lizzie was denied the support she needed and refused the assistance that might have helped her.

It was a closed meeting without scrutiny or transparency, and the assessor got the answer he wanted.

————————–

Thank you for reading. If you have any insights, comments or advice, please feel free to add them below.