Thanks to a poster called Aang, who writes with the following query:
—
Well done mate, the same medical records prove that the children were sexually abused by their father, Ricky Dearman. This was the consensus of the examining doctor featured, coupled with comments from the children that they were suffering from nightmares that their father was going to kill them.
Now because this a rebuttal to the above comment and this blogger’s line of thinking, they will undoubtedly not publish this comment, rather edit it for their own means. Proving that this blog has no place for informed and rational debate.
—
This was my response, which I thought worth sharing as a response to a number of similar questions we continue to receive:
—
I repeat. We don’t censor comments, unlike that crazy lady over at Hampstead “Research”. A quick browse of our posts will show you that all comments are approved, including abuse, slander and death threats, so I’m not sure what you’re basing that accusation on. Apology accepted but you’ve done your credibility no favours by opening with that remark.
Now to business:
The medical report was universally dismissed by a number of medical experts and the medial examiner who conducted it is facing investigation.
Secondly, even in that report, nothing confirmed that RD had abused the children.
Moreover, anal scarring is extremely common and can be caused by a range of minor factors, such as constipation.
Besides, don’t you think that if the children had been regularly raped week in week out by dozens of adults, as you allege, that there’d be infinitely more damage than a tiny scar mark?
Finally, would you mind please explaining how a tiny scar is proof that a school closes down once a week for an orgy with the kids and that thousands of babies have been cooked and eaten at McDonald’s without anyone ever getting caught or reported? What are we missing?
Oh and feel free to look into Abraham Christie, the mum’s partner, whom the children named as a serial abuser who had beat them, thrown them against walls, kicked them in the privates, subjected them to naked water torture and threatened to drown them or bury them alive. For some reason, none of your associates seem remotely bothered by that, despite all their bluster about RD being worthy of investigation. What are they scared of? Do they perhaps have something to hide?
Anyway, feel free to post some proof of the extremely serious allegations that your associates continue to level against the Hampstead community (we’re very open-minded here). Or give Barnet Police or Crimestoppers a ring. Thanks.
—
Aang:
Well I’m pleasantly surprised. So Scarlet, what are your thoughts on how the medical records portray the father?
—
Scarlet:
How do you mean? The medical report is, well, a medical report, so it merely deals with medical factors. Even if it proved sexual abuse, which independent experts confirm it doesn’t, it wouldn’t specify who the abuser is. And lest we forget that the only person who has been cited as an abuser (though not a sexual abuser) by the children is Abraham. A man, incidentally, who has previous convictions for violence, drug and dishonesty and a Police caution for assaulting his own son.
—
Aang:
What medical experts disputed the report then? And on what grounds would Dr Deborah Hodes be under investigation? She’s a proven professional, having hand in the Baby P case also. How can Judge Pauffley, having no medical background or knowledge undermine the opinion of a medical professional? – She’s an establishment stooge, that’s how she can. And those naturally occurring anal scars were a product of “blunt penetrating instruments”, the documents detail. Without any empirical evidence on the Mcdonalds allegation it’s impossible to say definitively either way. For the record, I don’t align myself with Hampstead Research and I don’t condone the protests outside the school. Public campaigning efforts in the area aren’t affecting the right people. Plus I fear Hampstead Research could potentially be a psy-op, but I don’t know to what end – your blog would inevitably be a part of it if it was though. One thing that struck me was a plea from HR to stop using the world Satanism. To take that word out of equation would be an effort to hide the truth.
—
Scarlet:
“And on what grounds would Dr Deborah Hodes be under investigation? She’s a proven professional”
^ Is that a serious point? Because someone is professional, they’re perfect and can never be investigated?
But fair enough, just to clarify, there may not be a formal investigation but the report was criticised by independent medical experts, as I stated, and significantly amended. This is what the court report had to say about it:
“128. Subsequently, Dr Hodes took this case to a peer review meeting. As explained in her Amended Medical Report of 4 December 2014, her anogenital findings in relation to both children were then significantly amended. The previously confirmed fissures were said to be irregularities in the ruggae (folds, wrinkles or ridges) and their clinical significance was described as ‘possible normal variant’.”
By the way, you’ve just made a serious allegation about a judge. Would you mind sharing your supporting proof with the rest of us? Thanks in advance.
Your comments about McDonald’s are naïve at best. It is indeed possible to state categorically that these events did not occur, as they are logistically unfeasible. Moreover, have you ever been in a McDonald’s kitchen? Hygiene fascism would be putting it mildly. Oh and we’re talking about an extremely busy McDonald’s in a bustling part of London, with an open kitchen in full view of tens of thousands of customers. And you’re saying that “thousands of babies” were ritualistically cooked and eaten there without anyone ever getting caught or reported. Oh and yeah, that particular McDonald’s closed down 10 months before these events are alleged to have occurred!
—
https://hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com/2015/05/30/another-level-headed-hoaxteader-strikes
HOAXTEAD RESEARCH 
You’re absolutely right, the medical report doesn’t paint either party in a great light. But those allegedly naturally occurring scars were a product of “blunt instrument penetration”. Some grounds for investigation there wouldn’t you agree? And you already concur yourself that Mr Christie was not the sexual abuser of these children, so who was then?
On what grounds would there be any investigation in Dr Deborah Hodes? She’s a seasoned and trusted professional having previous experience with the Baby P case. And what colleagues within the profession have gone on record to undermine her findings? Other than Establishment stooge, Judge Pauffley. Having no medical background or experience, she has no right to undermine the conclusions of Dr Hodes.
For the record, I don’t align myself wholly with Hampstead Research and I don’t condone the protests outside the school. They’re counter-productive, and affecting the wrong people within the community. My reasoning for not entirely aligning with HR, is that I fear that it could be a psy-op.. One thing that struck me was their plea, (which comes from a practicing Satanist) to not use the word Satanism. If they are successful with this attempt it will remove that word from the public consciousness thusly hiding it’s inexorable relation to this case – although I freely admit that I could be entirely wrong, but I believe with conviction that these children were sexually abused.
LikeLike
I repeat. There’s no evidence of sexual abuse at all. But as I say, accusing us of being a “psy-op” means we’re done here. Good day to you, Sir 🙂
LikeLike
Aang, here is a useful journal entry discussing the problems with using medical examinations for sexual abuse, as complete diagnostic tools. http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume1/j1_3_1.htm
Here is another which discusses RAD and the dangers of becoming entrenched in the belief that such signs as scarring and RAD automatically mean abuse has occurred.http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume6/j6_2_1.htm
The medical profession, other experts and scientists can often disagree on data, outcomes and causes. That is why In court cases both the defence and prosecution often have opposing “experts”. The judge therefore has every right to make judgement on an experts testimony. Further, the judges criticisms are mainly about the extra activities of Dr Hodes. Hodes is an expert in genital examination. Many judges feel that is where an examiners opinion should stop. Instead, Hodes was giving advice on the long term psychological treatment of the kids.
You will notice in the link that some experts feel that examiners should not even be allowed to ask the kids questions about where scars came from…etc, in case their emotion towards the kids will bias their opinion. That also goes with this case when Hodes only asked Ella about their history, without any discussion with the father.
Hodes also comments about the nightmares…etc as being signs of PTSD. Again, that is not the job of a physical medical examiner. It was these extra activities that the judge felt was inappropriate.On the subject of those nightmares you must bear in mind what the children said. They told us that Abraham would insist it was their father who taught them to touch, while they insisted it was learned from a friend at school. The kids say they were hit until they were so afraid they went along with what Abraham insisted. Abraham tells us he did hit them when the questioning became acrimonious. So Abraham is hitting the kids into a state of fear and telling them their father is a cannibalistic baby killer.No wonder they had nightmares about their father coming to get them.
In this case Dr Hodes and her peers had already decided in the amendments that what she thought was scarring, maybe other irregularities. They are not looking at a large scar on an outer body part, they are using a colposcope and trying to determine if tiny areas of discolouration, raised or sunken skin…etc , maybe signs of healed fissure scars.
It boiled down in the end to the Reflex Anal Dilation in the girl under one examination. The judge is correct to say that RAD is widely discredited as a diagnostic tool of sexual abuse, as people who have never been abused can present with RAD. All they can ever say is it is “consistent with”, not “evidence of”. Especially because RAD can also be caused by other innocent means, such as the enemas discussed in court. Looking through the literature I would agree with the judges assessment. Some studies show that RAD is rarely found in non abused children. Other studies find it is actually quite common. There is also some disagreement about what constitutes true RAD, because almost 50% of non abused kids will have some degree of RAD. There is some attempt to make a standard criteria, which is RAD of 2cm or over after a particular number of seconds (can’t remember off the top of my head). Unfortunately, the medical report does not give a measurement.
The reality is, anyone claiming that the kids were definitely sexually abused, is ignoring the reports, or has not researched the difficulties with diagnosing sexual abuse. Especially, when in this case there are other possible reasons for the results, and the results are unclear anyway.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, excellent and very detailed comment! I am indebted to you.
And I absolutely love that user name!
LikeLike
The sad thing is that the likes of J Farmer will not take any notice. Afterall, Belinda, and some websites, still describe the findings on Hollie Greig as scarring.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed, mate. Further arrests are imminent but there will always be a handful of weirdoes coming out of the woodwork to try to perpetuate these hoaxes. We’ll just have to take comfort from the fact that in the eyes of the courts, the Police and the press, they lost.
LikeLike
Don’t ya think shoving an enema up a kids backside on a regular basis, would not leaving scarring ffs!! The children said that their mother gave them enemas. Think about it a plastic rigid tube stuck up their arse repeatedly is going to do some damage!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ll take your word for that, LOL. I’ve never tried it myself. Maybe Video Man might know 😉
LikeLike
http://www.healthline.com/health/enema-administration#Results4
Forcing an enema into the rectum can cause irritation and damage to surrounding tissue. Never force the tube into the rectum. If problems persist, try administration at a later time or call your doctor. Blood that is present in the stool after the enema may indicate rectal damage or an underlying medical problem. Consult with a physician immediately regarding any rectal bleeding.
LikeLiked by 1 person
• Neither child has been sexually abused by any of the following – Ricky Dearman, teachers at Christchurch Primary School Hampstead, the parents of students at that school, the priest at the adjacent church, teachers at any of the Hampstead or Highgate schools, members of the Metropolitan Police, social workers employed by the London Borough of Camden, officers of Cafcass or anyone else mentioned by Ms Draper or Mr Christie.
• The children’s half brother, his father and stepmother – Will and Sarah Draper – are likewise exonerated of any illicit or abusive acts involving the children.
• There was no satanic or other cult at which babies were murdered and children were sexually abused.
• All of the material promulgated by Ms Draper now published on the internet is nothing other than utter nonsense.
• The children’s false stories came about as the result of relentless emotional and psychological pressure as well as significant physical abuse. Torture is the most accurate way to describe what was done by Mr Christie in collaboration with Ms Draper.
• Both children were assaulted by Mr Christie by being hit with a metal spoon on multiple occasions over their head and legs, by being pushed into walls, punched, pinched and kicked. Water was poured over them as they knelt semi-clothed.
• The long term emotional and psychological harm of what was done to the children is incalculable. The impact of the internet campaign is likely to have the most devastating consequences for P and Q.
These are the findings. those that are trying to continue the internet campaign are harming the children. Take note
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said! And lest we forget that Abe also threatened to drown the poor children and bury them in the Moroccan desert if they didn’t go along with his ridiculous stories.
LikeLike
Pingback: Musings on Dr. Hodes’ discredited medical report | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH
Pingback: Tainted evidence: Dr Hodes and RAD | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH