It's bizarre, kat. I can make no sense of it. If it's true (and it must be because it's from the BBC), then I can not imagine how it would not have been placed before all three courts. If it was placed before any of them, I cannot imagine how they could let it go by without mention. It points to an extraordinary situation.

(Those 100 wouldn't be part of the these appeal proceedings by mothers who wanted their specific kids back, but it is now clear that other kids' situations were being described as partial justification for the removal.)

(Then combine that with mothers testifying under oath (probably at diferent hearings) that they "can't recall" who lived in their homes with their children.)