Judge finds mother fabricated pregnancies in ‘bizarre’ case

A family court judgment deciding between ‘two extremely unlikely, if not to say bizarre, scenarios’ highlights the difficulty of finding the truth amid serious deception, a solicitor acting in the claim has said.

In John v Jane, Mrs Justice Judd was dealing with a private law application in relation to two children - whose very existence was disputed. 

The applicant, 'John', believed he was the father of two children by his former partner, 'Jane'. John regularly sent money, around £30,000 over two years, to Jane for herself and the children, the judgment noted. John made an application to the court to ascertain the whereabouts of the children and for parental responsibility. Jane then applied for a non-molestation order alleging verbal, physical and sexual abuse. 

However during a hearing Jane informed the judge through counsel that she and John did not have any children. She ‘repeatedly denied that she had given birth or been pregnant during the course of her relationship with the applicant’. 

Finding Jane had ‘lied repeatedly and about multiple events’, the judge had to decide between 'two extremely unlikely, if not to say bizarre, scenarios'. 

Describing the case as ‘most extraordinary’, the judge said 'it is more likely that the respondent fabricated the pregnancies and the children than that she genuinely gave birth.

‘In coming to this conclusion I recognise that there is no piece or part of the evidence that is conclusive, and I make it clear that this is a finding on the civil, not the criminal, standard of proof.'

Jane's deception 'is inexplicable and inexcusable, but ultimately that is what I find that she has done. In my judgement, the [John] was the victim of sustained and elaborate campaign of deceit which also involved his mother and closest friend.’

Kandice Phillips, solicitor at Dawson Cornwell and solicitor for the respondent, said the case 'shows how a private family dispute can become a forensic investigation into modern forms of deception: screenshots, social media images, voice notes, deleted messages, search histories and metadata all became central.

‘This case brings together family law, digital evidence, the misuse of online images, and the difficulty of finding the truth where serious deception is alleged.'

Careful examination of the evience was critical, she said. if the court had concluded that the children did exist, 'the consequences for [Jane] could have been extremely serious.’

Carolina Marín Pedreño, partner at Dawson Cornwell, added: 'This case demonstrates why the safeguards available to vulnerable witnesses, including intermediaries and appropriate adjustments, are so important in enabling the court to reach informed decisions.’