A closer look at Hoaxtead’s ‘forensic linguistics expert’

Perhaps we’re just old-fashioned, but we seem to recall from our own days at university something about academic papers being objective, and their authors declaring any personal bias.

Apparently that doesn’t apply, though, when the subject matter is Hoaxtead.

Linguistics student Olu Essien Popoola’s very dry-sounding paper, “Assessing the veracity of children’s recantation of sexual abuse disclosures“, which he plans to present at an upcoming academic conference, discusses how the Hoaxtead kids’ retractions of Abe’s ridiculous allegations cannot possibly be taken seriously.

But Mr Popoola seems to have forgotten to note why, perhaps, he shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Connections to Hoaxtead

First, there are his undisclosed connections to people who are deeply involved in promoting Hoaxtead: let’s start with Angie Fag-ash Disney.

Popoola-Olu Essien-Angela P-DCheck.

And he seems to be on good terms with a host of other Hoaxtead hawkers:Popoola-Essien & John TaylorJohn Taylor, for instance. He’s the knobhead who was most recently reported to the police for making online death threats against Ricky Dearman.

Popoola-Essien & Saskia WhitfieldNot to mention Saskia Whitfield, who participated in the infamous church protests where elderly people were chased and harassed, and children terrified, by people screaming, “Baby eaters!” and “They’re fucking your children!”

But wait! There’s more!

Mr Popoola’s wife, Anastasia, owns Happenstance Art, an art and framing business in London:

Popoola-Anastasia-Happenstance ArtNow, Happenstance Art and Framing has a rather distinctive logo:

Popoola-Happenstance Art logo

…which, through utter happenstance (yes, we went there) happens to look very similar to the logo for Happenstance Radio:

Popoola-Happenstance RadioOi! You in back! Pay attention, because this is where things get really interesting: back in May, Charlotte Ward was looking for a place where she and her fellow Hoaxtead hawkers could chat openly and uninterrupted. Take a wild guess who offered them such a space?

Popoola-Happenstance Radio-HRSo, to recap: Mr Popoola, who is about to publish an unbiased academic article on why the children were lying when they retracted the stories Abe had forced them to tell, has been on excellent terms with some of Hoaxtead’s main players since at least May 2015.

Makes one wonder about that whole ‘unbiased’ thing, doesn’t it?

p.s. By the way, if you’d like to comment on Mr Popoola’s paper, here’s the link to do so: https://www.academia.edu/15656060/Assessing_the_veracity_of_childrens_recantation_of_sexual_abuse_disclosures


32 thoughts on “A closer look at Hoaxtead’s ‘forensic linguistics expert’

  1. Isn’t it amazing, how every piece of evidence CW offers as evidence turns out to be totally fraudulent? Do truthers know what ‘truth’ actually means?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. that paper mentions none of his links to campaigners, doesn’t give a link to the judgement or the neutral case title, doesn’t discuss the ethics of using an illegally released interview of very vulnerable children, assumes the police investigation is still closed, doesn’t used P & Q to identify the children, and there might be more.

    He has a supervisor at university.

    I think the earlier forensic linguistic report is probably him. Who else could it be?

    I wonder how the home recordings would stand up? Are the conclusions reproducible? Would Olu Popoola fancy a day in court now he’s published this? Could happen!

    There are still ongoing hearings, family and criminal, regarding this case.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I wonder : does he (Olu Essien Popoola) own a house ?. That’s the question my lawyer asked me when I wanted to sue over a civil matter a decade ago. For the obvious reason that there is no point in suing someone who is potless but if you have good evidence as a plaintiff a lien can be placed upon a defendants property if they appear to fight a court case with no chance of winning and seem intent on both sides running up bills.
    For if Olu Essien Popoola does publish what is claimed it is a serious libel with the High Court having judged the Hampstead ‘satanic’ case in favour of the father. Of course it all depends on whether they own a property outright or have a large mortgage and so on. My lawyer is also a friend and a defamation expert with many victories and I’ve always pondered why some hapless Hampsteaders do not sue for libel but also realise that many of these ‘troothers’ probably live in council properties and are on social security (how else do they get the time to hang outside courts etc).
    I put a friend of mine onto my lawyer 2 years ago when they were defamed on a Facebook post by someone who had worked for them claiming they never paid their staff. The defamer back pedaled like crazy after just one legal letter (they owned their own house outright) , apologised on Facebook and had to agree as the simplest way out of more legal action, to pay all costs which at that stage was £8K all up (barrister’s advice). A very expensive Facebook post.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s a shame if he owns a house, because the one hoaxteader who may have assets to make civil action worth it has the best defence. It’s an academic paper, and the paper doesn’t seem that libellous to me. It is his opinion of the interview.


      Someone he may be in contact with, Jacqui Farmer, on the other hand…….the one who is sending libellous bulk emails to people’s colleagues, looking at images of children being abused and all the rest………..


      • But also my point was that it’s often legal fees that will do in the defendant especially in libel cases where the courts are well aware that a defendant may be a man of straw and intend defending an unwinnable case knowing that even if they lose they have no money to pay damages & costs. Plaintiffs can demand and the courts usually agree, that the defendant must pay into the court substantial funds to cover costs in the case of an unwinnable case.
        Of course with newspapers such as the one linked to, the writer is always covered for costs by the newspaper owners who are also insured for libel.
        The threat of a defamation action is often enough to shut up a liar (except when they may be loopy like Lotus Princess).

        Liked by 1 person

        • Sorry, my reply went to the wrong place. Thanks for the excellent advice–you sound as if you’ve acquired more experience in this area than most.


          • I hate to beat my own drum but I did sue the News Of The World for libel over 30 years ago when they mistook me for someone else after we sent out a press release. It was a fairly standard press release about a film project with 3 us in various roles and the NoTW seized upon it without checking facts.
            All 3 received an apology in the paper within a fortnight plus damages (enough in those days to buy a new car) plus an apology delivered in the High Court, a very expensive exercise for the NoTW but I discovered after they went through this about 3/4 times a month !
            So I’ve really followed libel actions with great interest and one thing stands out : we could only sue the NoTW because one of us was quite well off and could put up the initial funds but since then many lawyers have jumped on the No Win No Fee bandwagon.
            However suing for libel can be a tricky matter and takes careful consideration as no doubt Freddie Starr would confirm.
            ## It’s the smugness of these Hoaxteders that really gets on my tits. !

            Liked by 1 person

      • Nonetheless if he is stating that the children told the truth then he is accusing the father & others of serious criminal acts and thus defames them particularly as the High Court has already settled the matter.
        Having worked on publications for a number of years when libel cases arose everyone connected with the paper was put on notice that they may be a party to the action : not just the author of an article but the printers, the newsagents, delivery truck companies and so on. Everyone who took part in getting a libel out to the public is either sued or threatened. In the end it’s usually the publisher who takes the fall.
        If Mr Popoola is using the University’s name- if he is actually a lecturer – to promote his paper then he could be making them liable as well.
        In the Hamstead case it’s very clear there has been a conspiracy to either deliberately or through ignorance to falsely accuse a number of Hampstead residents of serious crimes. As the Lord McAlpine case showed- he took on everyone from seemingly innocuous twitterers to the BBC.
        I guarantee the reason Belinda McKenzie has fled is for this reason and that’s also the reason she has gone dead quiet (I think you only have 12 months to commence libel actions but that can be a letter putting them on notice that they may be sued at any time in the near future). Her role is very muddy as she seems to inflame others to say the worst things but she appears to be the only Hoaxteader with property (that’s if it’s in her name) which Sabine etc all live in rented flats.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. OK now I’ve read Popoola’s paper but had read it before on a very odd German linguistic’s website.
    Firstly I am NOT an expert on libel but a very interested observer having both sued for libel (which was quickly settled) and having helped 2 people go through similar recently and currently supporting an English friend who is awaiting a decision as far away as South Australia & the Adelaide Supreme Court.
    She confidently expects to win (but that is never guaranteed) in a case against a US website & Google- Google being the main defendants who have fought tooth & nail but lost every similar case in Australia. Google are being sued for providing links to the damaging website.
    # unknown by most people is the fact Yahoo will now quickly remove links to defamatory websites once notified after losing similar cases.
    Despite Popoola’s high falutin language and citing sources he is certainly saying that the children’s recantations cannot be taken seriously- hence their original claims are truth , hence, all those previously accused are guilty.
    It’s a defamatory paper posing as academic research but is pretty amateurish but I reckon very actionable.
    But there’s more : Looking up Academia they are owned by several different entities but some are British who also become liable having published Popoola’s libels & via the fact they are a credible website (why people put themselves in this position is a mystery ie : allowing anyone to upload papers without checking them).
    As for Angela Power-Disney, Popoola has uploaded her highly defamatory interview (another of those amateur radio stations that takes themselves seriously) to Mixcloud which is a British owned music hosting website & they become liable for libel under British law.

    Of course suing is always a nerve wracking experience, especially libel actions which often take 5 years or so, and not for the faint-hearted and I can understand the aggrieved innocent Hampsteaders would be just hoping the whole thing will eventually die down especially as most have their own small children.
    I’m not sure it will die down though especially when early next year the case goes back to court and the decision is bound to get the nutters raging again. I don’t think they will ever let go unless legally tied up in knots.

    Liked by 1 person

      • as exampled by Lotus Princess 4U who was injuncted over the sad case of her niece, obeyed the injunction for a time and is now ignoring that injunction.
        The sad fact is that you can get a court order & if that order is ignored you have to spend more money going back to court to further enforce it.
        Despite recommendations for a criminal libel law in the last reviews on this politicians have ignored that aspect .

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: Essien Popoola’s links to Hoaxtead, Part 2 | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  6. Pingback: Angie publishes ‘poison-pen’ letters | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  7. Pingback: Tiny Magical Creatures harasses wrong business | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  8. Pingback: Charlotte’s final final statement (for real this time) | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.