One of many serious issues my case raises is media censorship. Whether you believe "Lily" was illegally removed or not is up to you, but if you aren't informed, your curiosity won't be triggered and you can't form an in-depth opinion.

It is ironic in the current post-Leveson climate (media regulation debate) that the UK mainstream media are telling the Public how important it is they are an effective check and balance against power abuse. Really? Then I would ask you to point the media to this and ask why they won't print so much as a column inch of it. If they say it's because they can't, ask them to google "Spycatcher Guardian ECHR". And then tell them that covering up such information is not just an insult to my family but to the Public in general, and in fact such collusion only encourages more power abuse.

Such legal arguments really aren't needed though because anything in the public interest trumps any censorship law. The Establishment selling out the Public's children, covering it up and destroying evidence to mask its mistakes is most definitely in that category.

The media are trusted by the Public to keep powerful institutions honest. Throughout the world it seems, the mainstream media have violated that trust.