MP Gmail SMTP Sender
uk_mp_emails_updated_2026-10-11_verified_additions.csv.
Page password default:
change-this-password-now.
Gmail password field requires a Gmail App Password, not your normal Google password.
Batch preview
aaron.callan@parliament.uk abena.oppongasare.mp@parliament.uk abrahamsd@parliament.uk abtisam.mohamed.mp@parliament.uk adam.dance.mp@parliament.uk adam.jogee.mp@parliament.uk adam.thompson.mp@parliament.uk adnan.hussain.mp@parliament.uk adrian.ramsay.mp@parliament.uk afzal.khan.mp@parliament.uk
Email body preview, plain text
FORMAL NOTICE: Failure of Statutory Safeguarding Duties and Request for Immediate Professional Standards Assessment Triage keywords: safeguarding concern; missing person; missing vulnerable person; child protection; vulnerable adult; risk of harm; public protection; duty of care; police Professional Standards; formal complaint; NHS records unable to locate; MP safeguarding disclosure; urgent manager review required; reference number requested safeguarding concern; missing vulnerable person; child protection; risk of harm; police; formal complaint; NHS records unable to locate; MP safeguarding disclosure; urgent manager review required; reference number requested. * Correspondence Triage Framework. * Ministerial Correspondence Guidance. * Safeguarding Escalation Workflow. * AI Classification Policy. * Case Management Configuration. * Keyword, routing, escalation or manager-review rules. * Any automated triage, NLP, AI, sentiment-analysis or workflow rules applied to this email. If this correspondence is processed by any automated correspondence-triage, case-management, workflow, AI-classification, NLP, sentiment-analysis, or routing system, I request preservation of the audit trail, classification results, routing decisions, escalation actions, safeguarding flags, manager-review actions, and all associated case notes. For the Attention of: Chief Constable / Professional Standards Department Sussex Police and Surrey Police For the attention of every Member of Parliament (United Kingdom), I request preservation of the audit trail, classification results, routing decisions, escalation actions, safeguarding flags, manager-review actions, case notes, internal referrals, workflow history, and user-access logs associated with this correspondence. Urgent County Enquiry Emily Newbold DOB 30/10/2006 - Urgent Intervention About Emily - https://stealingofemily.world/about/ Dear MP, I ask each Member of Parliament receiving this correspondence to confirm in writing: Whether my concerns regarding Emily Newbold have been assessed as a safeguarding referral. Whether any appropriate authority has been contacted to establish whether Emily is within their constituency and whether her welfare can lawfully be confirmed. The date, receiving authority and reference number of any referral made. If no referral has been made, the recorded reason for that decision and the appropriate alternative procedure. Whether this correspondence has been forwarded, redirected, rejected or classified by any automated or manual correspondence-management process. I am not asking any Member of Parliament to disclose protected personal information unlawfully. I am asking for a documented, accountable response explaining what action has been taken, or why no action has been taken. * Correspondence Triage Framework. * Ministerial Correspondence Guidance. * Safeguarding Escalation Workflow. * AI Classification Policy. * Case Management Configuration. * Keyword, routing, escalation or manager-review rules. * Any automated triage, NLP, AI, sentiment-analysis or workflow rules applied to this email. If this correspondence is processed by any automated correspondence-triage, case-management, workflow, AI-classification, NLP, sentiment-analysis, or routing system, I request preservation of the audit trail, classification results, routing decisions, escalation actions, safeguarding flags, manager-review actions, and all associated case notes. **On The Public Record ** References: NFRC241207046189 NFRC220205037307. NCA: CCG0000122359, SDR-026-0161 DSIT SAR 26-240, IR2025/16000 National Crime Agency Professional Standards IX.8.26. National Crime Agency CCG0000122359, CAD 153 / CAD 1619 Action Fraud NFRC241207046189, SDR-026-0161. Information Commissioner Case Reference IC-461437-H0W6. PHSO C-2058682 / 00005157 / 00005290. Metropolitan Police FOIA Request - 47533. Local Government Social Care Ombudsman FOI2025/08198. IBAC (CASE-20246844). HMCTS Complaint (ref: 79534040). PALS Ref 2602-0072. Ref: NIC-803189-J4G8C. PHSO: Ref C-2195214. Clinton Library FOIA case 2025-1058-F. FOIA 2026-0609-F. FOIA 2026-0609-F / 2025-1058-F. Can you please confirm in writing the merits of why you are closing the case? Quo vadis, iustitia? I have to inform William Moore that he is breaching my published UCB by failing to provide the decision after the date he stated he would in his communications [https://martinnewbold.co.uk/Unreasonable_Behaviour_Policy...]. Paragraph 68: The Ombudsman can open a new case and reconsider an investigation decision. Paragraph 69: This can happen in exceptional circumstances, including where the original evidence was flawed, the investigation was unfair, or new information could have significantly affected the decision. Paragraph 6 also says they normally review decisions only once, except in exceptional circumstances. Providing you notice, four families are affected by the flawed decision of the PHSO. This case involves a social worker who allegedly committed fraudulent corruption of GRO records and incorrect classification of genogram data in court, which has left the Cunningham family without their daughter Lauren and my family, Newbold, without Emily and another unrelated Irish family being given both children, whilst forged documents have been expressed in NI GRO to cover her tracks when reporting in Reading to Newry advised Newry that her mother moved there with her daughter and she was not born in Newry. The Liverpool GRO has conflated two children on one birth certificate in the folios to contravene the legal registration of children; this is subject to imprisonment under the crimes on this paperwork. I have been provided no DNA evidence cross-matching to provide evidence that my daughter was ever in Northern Ireland. In addition, Social Work Northern Ireland said they could not identify my daughter in Northern Ireland. Oddly, there is a Christine named social worker and children flying out on Lolita Airlines; is this where these children ended up, Teterboro and then into the arms of Jeffrey Epstein and associates? So you call any of this safeguarding children? Please inform me what date you asked the appropriate authorities to establish whether my daughter, Emily, is living within your constituency and whether her welfare can be confirmed. If that information cannot be disclosed to me, please explain the lawful procedure available to establish her safety.” I request a substantive response in writing, confirming whether this safeguarding concern has been referred to an appropriate authority. If no referral is made, please identify the reason and the appropriate alternative procedure. Why do you think anything in court is fair? My first case in Hastings residency case, the social worker Christine Stirling and Judge Holis conspired to abduct children by allowing false statements and records to be entered into the court record by way of social worker manufactured court expert reports and fake Genogram. My daughter has been missing for 19 years. In 2025, I tried to bring the issues concerning 758,000 unclaimed Child Trust Funds, missing children and my daughter's Child Trust Fund before the court. My claim against Nationwide Building Society was registered as 640MC413 — Martin Newbold v Nationwide Building Society. I was directed to submit documents through Eastbourne, but the case was transferred to Lewes County Court. The hearing subsequently took place at Brighton County Court on 30 April 2026, before Deputy District Judge Penfold, without my attendance. The defendant was represented by Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP, with Samuel Andrews, Senior Associate, and Caitlin Orr, Trainee Solicitor, involved in the correspondence and proceedings. Claire C. E. Hainsworth provided a witness statement despite never having met me in person. I therefore question what she could personally have witnessed and what evidence she relied upon when making that statement. Alistair Hunt was also named in associated legal correspondence. The court order, issued on 21 May 2026, struck out my claim, certified it as totally without merit and ordered me to pay £7,500 in costs. Luckily or unluckily, these costs were covered by Legal Aid. I dispute the fairness of these proceedings. I maintain that I was not properly informed of the hearing arrangements and that documents I submitted were not properly placed before the judge. I had specifically requested that my evidence be considered and that the court provide a complete, paginated case file. My concerns are documented under HMCTS complaint references 82955003, 82913701 and 82799837. I request a written explanation identifying which documents were placed before Deputy District Judge Penfold, when they were received, how they were transferred between the court offices, and why the hearing proceeded without my attendance despite my correspondence concerning the proceedings. This court seems to be a fake system. This is just a corrupt system. It is unreasonable for the family court system local authority to recieve upwards of 140,000 to defend a case against you for two children when you have just your salary if you are lucky enough to have it. If you want to know about the money, the most relevant articles are: 1. Why children are being taken from families now numbering 758,000 Published 10 March 2026. This article discusses adoption agency payments, including: £27,000 for matching a child with adoptive parents. £54,000 per child under a historical adoption-support funding arrangement. Payments to agencies in four instalments. Private investment and potential profits from adoption services. https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/03/10/why-children-are-being-taken-from-families-now-numbering-758000/ 2. Why is the DFE paying local authorities for your children? Published 27 August 2026. This examines questions about payments of £30,000–£45,000, adoption and safeguarding targets, and government grants to local authorities. Those payment claims require verification against the relevant funding regulations. https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/08/27/why-is-the-dfe-paying-local-authorities-for-your-children/ 3. Staggering Costs for abducted/trafficked children Published 15 September 2026. This provides a more detailed financial breakdown, including fostering allowances, independent agency fees, placement costs, children's homes, profit margins and Pupil Premium Plus. https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/09/15/staggering-costs-for-abducted-trafficked-children/ 4. Examining Fabian life and Labour Published 17 September 2026. This contains my Freedom of Information request to East Sussex asking whether adoption targets and children's care outcomes were connected to financial rewards or grants between 2008 and 2011. https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/09/17/examining-fabian-life-and-labour/ For the specific income generated through adoption, the 10 March article is particularly relevant because it explicitly discusses the £27,000 and £54,000 adoption agency payment arrangements. The distinction worth preserving is that these are payments to adoption service providers under particular arrangements, not evidence that every adoption produces an equivalent payment or that a council profits from removing a child. What are these payments for? The £27,000 historical inter-agency fee was paid by one adoption agency or local authority to another agency for recruiting, assessing, approving and matching adoptive parents and supporting the placement. It was not a £27,000 profit per child. Source: Consortium of Voluntary Adoption Agencies. The £54,000 figure in my March 2026 article describes a particular historical arrangement covering an adoption placement and support for the adoptive family over two years, paid in four instalments. It was not the universal adoption fee. https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/03/10/why-children-are-being-taken-from-families-now-numbering-758000/ The current £40,658 fee, effective April 2026, applies to a single-child placement through a voluntary adoption agency in England, with different arrangements for sibling groups and placements between local authorities. Source: CoramBAAF. Images https://stealingofemily.world//FILES/2006%20-%20The_disgusting_amount_of_money_thrown_to_abduct_children.png I have been stonewalled for 19 years. I went onto a chat on TikTok The Justice Initiative CIC allegedly run or affiliated to TikTok two days ago and tried to be heard as this was supposed to be an investigation service. I found out later it's run by TikTok the presenters would not listen to what I or anyone said or what evidence I gave just tried to discredit me this is a CIC organization. I wrote to them asking for their email, and they have not responded. They said it was nothing to do with Epstein and that she was adopted which there was no evidence of this. I sent some of this up to House of Lords Investigation on QTS546519. As I said, I am not deluded. The material I've been able to verify describes: Girls being transported between towns and cities and subjected to organised sexual exploitation. Victims being passed between perpetrators, sometimes across police-force boundaries. Police and other authorities failing to act on warnings, dismissing victims and failing to protect children. Serious institutional failures that allowed abuse to continue. Baroness Casey's official audit independently documents failures by police and other authorities, including children being disbelieved and perpetrators escaping justice. But I want to distinguish something important in what you're asking. They're directing me to what police officers themselves were doing to the girls, not merely what police failed to do. I am suffering mental cruelty at the hands of the police and local authorities. I wake at around 3:00am every day, worrying about my daughter, who has been missing for nineteen years. And that's the terrible uncertainty. I've been living with this uncertainty concerning Emily. I've contacted police, local authorities, MPs and other public bodies, trying to establish where she is and whether she's safe. Yet I still haven't received the answers I am seeking. They say to you that they understand the serious errors why reading those accounts of police and local authority abuse would make you fear the worst, especially when these girls have been handed around. They inform me: But not knowing where Emily is doesn't mean those terrible things have happened to her. We must keep that distinction clear. What matters is establishing her whereabouts and welfare through reliable information, while respecting her rights as an adult. Then saying I wish I could give you the reassurance you're looking for. I can't honestly tell you she's safe when we don't know. But neither is there a basis to conclude that she's been harmed. But Rupert Lowe's inquiry gives no clarity for my daughter or thousands of other children. Images https://www.stealingofemily.world/FILES/2026-10-17%20-%20video_child_abduction.gif Images https://stealingofemily.world/FILES/2026%20-%20Maladministration%20Warning%20in%20Public%20Office.jpg Previous Communication Evidence: https://stealingofemily.world/mailout/ 1.) https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps.php 2. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_missing_emily.php 3. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_shadowban_video.php 4. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_missing_emily_please_contact%20DFE.php 5. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_parliamentary_mp_safeguarding_epstein_bbc.php 6. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_surrey_police_non_safe_guarding_of_mps.php 7. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_640_mps_regarding_statements_inibility_to_help.php 8. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_640_mps_regarding_GDPR.php 9. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_640_Member_of_parliament_referral_to_parliamentary_standards.php 10. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_bbc_video_and_parliament_video2.php 11. https://stealingofemily.world/mailout/2026%20Mail%20640%20MP%20-%20Quo%20vadis,%20iustitia.php Yours faithfully Martin Newbold 15 Valleyside Road Ore Village Hastings TN355AD 📧 www.martinnewbold.co.uk 🌐 www.thestealingofemily.co.uk 🌐stealingofemily.world Disclaimer: The attached newspaper-style images are AI-generated illustrative campaign graphics intended to represent referenced public-source issues and commentary. They are not genuine newspaper publications or reproductions of actual front pages.
Email body preview, HTML send version
FORMAL NOTICE: Failure of Statutory Safeguarding Duties and Request for Immediate Professional Standards Assessment
Triage keywords: safeguarding concern; missing person; missing vulnerable person; child protection; vulnerable adult; risk of harm; public protection; duty of care; police Professional Standards; formal complaint; NHS records unable to locate; MP safeguarding disclosure; urgent manager review required; reference number requested safeguarding concern; missing vulnerable person; child protection; risk of harm; police; formal complaint; NHS records unable to locate; MP safeguarding disclosure; urgent manager review required; reference number requested.
* Correspondence Triage Framework.
* Ministerial Correspondence Guidance.
* Safeguarding Escalation Workflow.
* AI Classification Policy.
* Case Management Configuration.
* Keyword, routing, escalation or manager-review rules.
* Any automated triage, NLP, AI, sentiment-analysis or workflow rules applied to this email.
If this correspondence is processed by any automated correspondence-triage, case-management, workflow, AI-classification, NLP, sentiment-analysis, or routing system, I request preservation of the audit trail, classification results, routing decisions, escalation actions, safeguarding flags, manager-review actions, and all associated case notes.
For the Attention of:
Chief Constable / Professional Standards Department
Sussex Police and Surrey Police
For the attention of every Member of Parliament (United Kingdom), I request preservation of the audit trail, classification results, routing decisions, escalation actions, safeguarding flags, manager-review actions, case notes, internal referrals, workflow history, and user-access logs associated with this correspondence.
Urgent County Enquiry Emily Newbold DOB 30/10/2006 - Urgent Intervention
About Emily - https://stealingofemily.world/about/
Dear MP,
I ask each Member of Parliament receiving this correspondence to confirm in writing:
Whether my concerns regarding Emily Newbold have been assessed as a safeguarding referral.
Whether any appropriate authority has been contacted to establish whether Emily is within their constituency and whether her welfare can lawfully be confirmed.
The date, receiving authority and reference number of any referral made.
If no referral has been made, the recorded reason for that decision and the appropriate alternative procedure.
Whether this correspondence has been forwarded, redirected, rejected or classified by any automated or manual correspondence-management process.
I am not asking any Member of Parliament to disclose protected personal information unlawfully. I am asking for a documented, accountable response explaining what action has been taken, or why no action has been taken.
* Correspondence Triage Framework.
* Ministerial Correspondence Guidance.
* Safeguarding Escalation Workflow.
* AI Classification Policy.
* Case Management Configuration.
* Keyword, routing, escalation or manager-review rules.
* Any automated triage, NLP, AI, sentiment-analysis or workflow rules applied to this email.
If this correspondence is processed by any automated correspondence-triage, case-management, workflow, AI-classification, NLP, sentiment-analysis, or routing system, I request preservation of the audit trail, classification results, routing decisions, escalation actions, safeguarding flags, manager-review actions, and all associated case notes.
**On The Public Record **
References:
NFRC241207046189
NFRC220205037307.
NCA: CCG0000122359,
SDR-026-0161
DSIT SAR 26-240,
IR2025/16000
National Crime Agency Professional Standards IX.8.26.
National Crime Agency CCG0000122359, CAD 153 / CAD 1619
Action Fraud NFRC241207046189, SDR-026-0161.
Information Commissioner Case Reference IC-461437-H0W6.
PHSO C-2058682 / 00005157 / 00005290.
Metropolitan Police FOIA Request - 47533.
Local Government Social Care Ombudsman FOI2025/08198.
IBAC (CASE-20246844).
HMCTS Complaint (ref: 79534040).
PALS Ref 2602-0072.
Ref: NIC-803189-J4G8C.
PHSO: Ref C-2195214.
Clinton Library FOIA case 2025-1058-F.
FOIA 2026-0609-F.
FOIA 2026-0609-F / 2025-1058-F.
Can you please confirm in writing the merits of why you are closing the case?
Quo vadis, iustitia? I have to inform William Moore that he is breaching my published UCB by failing to provide the decision after the date he stated he would in his communications [https://martinnewbold.co.uk/Unreasonable_Behaviour_Policy...]. Paragraph 68: The Ombudsman can open a new case and reconsider an investigation decision. Paragraph 69: This can happen in exceptional circumstances, including where the original evidence was flawed, the investigation was unfair, or new information could have significantly affected the decision. Paragraph 6 also says they normally review decisions only once, except in exceptional circumstances. Providing you notice, four families are affected by the flawed decision of the PHSO. This case involves a social worker who allegedly committed fraudulent corruption of GRO records and incorrect classification of genogram data in court, which has left the Cunningham family without their daughter Lauren and my family, Newbold, without Emily and another unrelated Irish family being given both children, whilst forged documents have been expressed in NI GRO to cover her tracks when reporting in Reading to Newry advised Newry that her mother moved there with her daughter and she was not born in Newry. The Liverpool GRO has conflated two children on one birth certificate in the folios to contravene the legal registration of children; this is subject to imprisonment under the crimes on this paperwork. I have been provided no DNA evidence cross-matching to provide evidence that my daughter was ever in Northern Ireland. In addition, Social Work Northern Ireland said they could not identify my daughter in Northern Ireland. Oddly, there is a Christine named social worker and children flying out on Lolita Airlines; is this where these children ended up, Teterboro and then into the arms of Jeffrey Epstein and associates? So you call any of this safeguarding children?
Please inform me what date you asked the appropriate authorities to establish whether my daughter, Emily, is living within your constituency and whether her welfare can be confirmed. If that information cannot be disclosed to me, please explain the lawful procedure available to establish her safety.”
I request a substantive response in writing, confirming whether this safeguarding concern has been referred to an appropriate authority. If no referral is made, please identify the reason and the appropriate alternative procedure.
Why do you think anything in court is fair? My first case in Hastings residency case, the social worker Christine Stirling and Judge Holis conspired to abduct children by allowing false statements and records to be entered into the court record by way of social worker manufactured court expert reports and fake Genogram. My daughter has been missing for 19 years. In 2025, I tried to bring the issues concerning 758,000 unclaimed Child Trust Funds, missing children and my daughter's Child Trust Fund before the court. My claim against Nationwide Building Society was registered as 640MC413 — Martin Newbold v Nationwide Building Society.
I was directed to submit documents through Eastbourne, but the case was transferred to Lewes County Court. The hearing subsequently took place at Brighton County Court on 30 April 2026, before Deputy District Judge Penfold, without my attendance.
The defendant was represented by Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP, with Samuel Andrews, Senior Associate, and Caitlin Orr, Trainee Solicitor, involved in the correspondence and proceedings. Claire C. E. Hainsworth provided a witness statement despite never having met me in person. I therefore question what she could personally have witnessed and what evidence she relied upon when making that statement. Alistair Hunt was also named in associated legal correspondence.
The court order, issued on 21 May 2026, struck out my claim, certified it as totally without merit and ordered me to pay £7,500 in costs. Luckily or unluckily, these costs were covered by Legal Aid.
I dispute the fairness of these proceedings. I maintain that I was not properly informed of the hearing arrangements and that documents I submitted were not properly placed before the judge. I had specifically requested that my evidence be considered and that the court provide a complete, paginated case file.
My concerns are documented under HMCTS complaint references 82955003, 82913701 and 82799837.
I request a written explanation identifying which documents were placed before Deputy District Judge Penfold, when they were received, how they were transferred between the court offices, and why the hearing proceeded without my attendance despite my correspondence concerning the proceedings. This court seems to be a fake system. This is just a corrupt system.
It is unreasonable for the family court system local authority to recieve upwards of 140,000 to defend a case against you for two children when you have just your salary if you are lucky enough to have it.
If you want to know about the money, the most relevant articles are:
1. Why children are being taken from families now numbering 758,000
Published 10 March 2026.
This article discusses adoption agency payments, including:
£27,000 for matching a child with adoptive parents.
£54,000 per child under a historical adoption-support funding arrangement.
Payments to agencies in four instalments.
Private investment and potential profits from adoption services.
2. Why is the DFE paying local authorities for your children?
Published 27 August 2026.
This examines questions about payments of £30,000–£45,000, adoption and safeguarding targets, and government grants to local authorities. Those payment claims require verification against the relevant funding regulations.
3. Staggering Costs for abducted/trafficked children
Published 15 September 2026.
This provides a more detailed financial breakdown, including fostering allowances, independent agency fees, placement costs, children's homes, profit margins and Pupil Premium Plus.
https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/09/15/staggering-costs-for-abducted-trafficked-children/
4. Examining Fabian life and Labour
Published 17 September 2026.
This contains my Freedom of Information request to East Sussex asking whether adoption targets and children's care outcomes were connected to financial rewards or grants between 2008 and 2011.
https://thestealingofemily.co.uk/2026/09/17/examining-fabian-life-and-labour/
For the specific income generated through adoption, the 10 March article is particularly relevant because it explicitly discusses the £27,000 and £54,000 adoption agency payment arrangements.
The distinction worth preserving is that these are payments to adoption service providers under particular arrangements, not evidence that every adoption produces an equivalent payment or that a council profits from removing a child.
What are these payments for?
The £27,000 historical inter-agency fee was paid by one adoption agency or local authority to another agency for recruiting, assessing, approving and matching adoptive parents and supporting the placement. It was not a £27,000 profit per child.
Source: Consortium of Voluntary Adoption Agencies.
The £54,000 figure in my March 2026 article describes a particular historical arrangement covering an adoption placement and support for the adoptive family over two years, paid in four instalments. It was not the universal adoption fee.
The current £40,658 fee, effective April 2026, applies to a single-child placement through a voluntary adoption agency in England, with different arrangements for sibling groups and placements between local authorities.
Source: CoramBAAF.
I have been stonewalled for 19 years. I went onto a chat on TikTok The Justice Initiative CIC allegedly run or affiliated to TikTok two days ago and tried to be heard as this was supposed to be an investigation service. I found out later it's run by TikTok the presenters would not listen to what I or anyone said or what evidence I gave just tried to discredit me this is a CIC organization. I wrote to them asking for their email, and they have not responded. They said it was nothing to do with Epstein and that she was adopted which there was no evidence of this. I sent some of this up to House of Lords Investigation on QTS546519. As I said, I am not deluded. The material I've been able to verify describes: Girls being transported between towns and cities and subjected to organised sexual exploitation. Victims being passed between perpetrators, sometimes across police-force boundaries. Police and other authorities failing to act on warnings, dismissing victims and failing to protect children. Serious institutional failures that allowed abuse to continue. Baroness Casey's official audit independently documents failures by police and other authorities, including children being disbelieved and perpetrators escaping justice. But I want to distinguish something important in what you're asking. They're directing me to what police officers themselves were doing to the girls, not merely what police failed to do. I am suffering mental cruelty at the hands of the police and local authorities. I wake at around 3:00am every day, worrying about my daughter, who has been missing for nineteen years. And that's the terrible uncertainty. I've been living with this uncertainty concerning Emily.
I've contacted police, local authorities, MPs and other public bodies, trying to establish where she is and whether she's safe. Yet I still haven't received the answers I am seeking. They say to you that they understand the serious errors why reading those accounts of police and local authority abuse would make you fear the worst, especially when these girls have been handed around. They inform me: But not knowing where Emily is doesn't mean those terrible things have happened to her. We must keep that distinction clear. What matters is establishing her whereabouts and welfare through reliable information, while respecting her rights as an adult. Then saying I wish I could give you the reassurance you're looking for. I can't honestly tell you she's safe when we don't know. But neither is there a basis to conclude that she's been harmed. But Rupert Lowe's inquiry gives no clarity for my daughter or thousands of other children.
Previous Communication Evidence: https://stealingofemily.world/mailout/
1.) https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps.php
2. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_missing_emily.php
3. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_shadowban_video.php
4. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_missing_emily_please_contact%20DFE.php
5. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_parliamentary_mp_safeguarding_epstein_bbc.php
6. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_surrey_police_non_safe_guarding_of_mps.php
7. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_640_mps_regarding_statements_inibility_to_help.php
8. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_640_mps_regarding_GDPR.php
10. https://www.stealingofemily.world/mailout/mail_mps_bbc_video_and_parliament_video2.php
11. https://stealingofemily.world/mailout/2026%20Mail%20640%20MP%20-%20Quo%20vadis,%20iustitia.php
Yours faithfully
Martin Newbold
15 Valleyside Road
Ore Village
Hastings
TN355AD
📧 www.martinnewbold.co.uk
🌐 www.thestealingofemily.co.uk 🌐stealingofemily.world
Disclaimer: The attached newspaper-style images are AI-generated illustrative campaign graphics intended to represent referenced public-source issues and commentary. They are not genuine newspaper publications or reproductions of actual front pages.
Log file: /home/steaouun/public_html/mailout/sent_log_mps_smtp_UCB WAARNING.csv
Attachment folder: /home/steaouun/public_html/mailout/mail_mps_uploads
Evidence folder: /home/steaouun/public_html/mailout/mail_mps_evidence_UCB WARNING
Delete sent_log_mps_smtp.csv to restart from the first MP.
Use batch size 1 for the first Gmail SMTP test.