A father who faces being restricted from seeing his daughter after an unidentified woman made sexual abuse claims against him has won the right to be told the name of his accuser.
Three Court of Appeal judges also said social workers must disclose the identity of the woman despite her refusal to be named.
The man, who is Australian, has so far also been denied any details of the claims against him, making it almost impossible for him to fight them.
He vociferously denies sexually abusing \”anybody\”.
In what was acknowledged as a “highly unusual” situation, a High Court judge ruled earlier this year that the woman’s identity could not be disclosed because she suffered mental and physical problems which were \”towards the top end of the spectrum\”.
It\’s possible to describe this two ways.
1) Woman so harmed by sexual abuse struggles to prevent this from happening to another. Bravely identifies her abuser. Her identity is protected to protect her fragile state.
2) Known nutter makes allegation. No one to know what it is, who she is, making it entirely impossible to prove allegations or to defend against them.
It seems the lower court and the social workers went with 1). The higher court with 2).
As it should be of course: any and everyone has a right to know the allegations, the person making them, so that they can be defended against.