Abe resurrects his ‘Drifloud’ persona…again

Here’s the problem with trying to mount an internet/email campaign when you are:

  1. Stoned 99% of the time;
  2. A pathological liar;
  3. Not terribly bright to begin with.

Sadly for Abe, he is all three. And that’s what makes his latest round of ‘Drifloud’ posts and emails so comically painful.

Let’s review, shall we?

Abraham Jemal Christie is a small-time thug and convicted child abuser who tried to mastermind a hoax by torturing his girlfriend’s children into reciting his sick death-cult fantasies on video. Once he realised the law was onto him, he fled the UK and is now cowering in the south of Spain, where he’s been trying his best to deflect attention from his own activities by sending out emails, posting to Twitter and YouTube, and most recently posting (and erasing comments at an astonishing and highly entertaining rate) on his own blog.

Unfortunately, he’s not particularly good at any of it.

For one thing, he can’t keep his online personas straight. Ella Starlight, Nemesis Green, Nemesis, Drifloud…they all tend to run into one another after a while. And now and then he forgets that they’re supposed to be separate people, as in this ambiguous signature, found on one of his posts on his own blog:

Moral: Don't post while you are baked.

Moral: Don’t post while you are baked.

And today, he’s done it again. Dozens of unfortunate people discovered this gem in their email inboxes:

Subject: Remaining Human Beings in the Police and Judiciary? Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 11:57To Any Human Being Still Remaining in the Police and Judiciary Who IS NOT Corrupt, Who IS NOT Frightened To Do Their Job as a Public Servant, Who Still Possesses a Conscience and Who DOES NOT Consider It Acceptable To Cover Up Crimes of Child Rape and Murder When “Ordered” To

In cases where children make rape allegations and have identified their alleged attackers by name, it’s obviously essential to try to ascertain information that could substantiate the children’s claims. Unsubstantiated allegations can easily be dismissed as hearsay, leading to a situation where it just becomes a case of the alleged attacker’s word against the child’s. So logically, police questioning of the children needs to be aimed at identifying any distinguishing marks on or around the alleged attackers’ genitalia, as this information is something which the children would not normally have any knowledge of unless they had been subjected to some kind of sexual assault. Asking questions with the aim of intimately identifying abusers and therefore verifying abuse, is standard, routine practice in cases of child-rape allegations. This is just plain common sense.

It is known that gxxxxx and axxxx had already identified many (or all?) of their attackers by name. Yet in all of the police interviews of the children, there’s not ONE question aimed at ascertaining information regarding any distinguishing marks on the NAMED attackers’ genitalia. Why? But perhaps a recorded police video interview in which the children ARE asked such questions does exist? The mother, ella, has stated she made the police aware she had “a lot of other evidence” which included videos, diary pages and drawings, but that the police never asked her for this evidence. Why? Could the police really be so utterly incompetent? Well, let’s consider some FACTS:

FACT: The police were given mobile-phone and laptop recordings in which eight-year-old gxxxxx is seen/heard describing in great detail distinguishing features such as warts, pierce-rings, birthmarks and tattoos on the genitals of

And now consider the FACT that the medical examinations of gabriel and alisa, conducted by consultant paediatrician Dr Hodes on 12th and 16th September 2014, CONFIRMED findings which were consistent with the children’s allegations of rape. Consider also the FACT that these results were not only ignored by the police, but the police closed the investigation the SAME DAY Dr Hodes completed her full medical report (22nd September 2014) – and that Detective Inspector Cannon, leading the investigation, did not even enter this crucial evidence in the police CRIS report.

Just these disturbing facts alone (and be assured that there are a great deal more in this case) make it plain enough to see that this was not just some poorly-conducted, inadequate investigation, but that it was – and still is – an attempt at a complete cover-up. And there is ample documentary proof of this attempted cover-up, e.g. the police CRIS report, medical reports, Court judgements, as well as all the letters, emails, etc.

In light of the above documented and irrefutable FACTS, Anna Pauffley’s claim that she is “able to state with complete conviction that none of the allegations is true” (Pauffley judgement March 2015, para 16.) shows she is either incapable of rational thought, or that she is a barefaced liar – or both. It is simply not possible to make such a statement until those named and genitally identified by alisa and gabriel have proved they do not possess such distinguishing genital features. Pauffley’s further remark in the same paragraph that “The claims are baseless”, is patently utter rubbish, as the distinguishing marks testimony and the medical findings clearly and STRONGLY substantiate the children’s allegations.


There is an almost religious faith with many people to refuse to believe, let alone acknowledge, that figures in the police and judiciary – figures in positions of public trust – could be lying in cases of such seriousness which involve the rape and murder of children. This is understandable when you consider that most people are honest and truthful, and expect others to be too – especially those holding positions of public trust. None of us WANT to accept that THERE ARE such corrupt, evil and cowardly people in the police and judiciary who have betrayed our trust. However, a CAREFUL and UNBIASED examination of the FACTS in this case show that this is precisely what a number of public servants have done.

And those public servants in the police and judiciary can only continue to betray the public trust until those adults named and genitally identified by axxxxx and gxxxxx have undergone medical examinations to conclusively prove, or disprove the children’s allegations of rape. Until then, the Hampstead Child Rape and Murder Case continues to be, and can only be seen as, a cover-up by The Authorities.

And the real question is now: Who ordered this cover-up and who are the police/judiciary protecting?

from a conscious living being,

Drifloud                    October 22nd 2015      contact address: email

Now, here’s a snippet from one of his ‘Drifloud’ blog posts, also from today:

Abe as Drifloud on A+E blog…blah, blah, blah, we’re skipping the boring middle part…but here’s the end, with his ‘Drifloud’ signature.

Abe as Drifloud-2-Abe+Ella blogWhy…why, they’re both exactly the same!

Does he not realise that posting the exact same text under the exact same name on the blog is, um, kind of what you might call a dead giveaway?

Abe, you’re a pathetic buffoon.

Everyone can see through you. We all know that you’re trying desperately to cast blame around for your abuse of Ella’s children. We all know who and what you really are.

And, er, ‘Drifloud’…same goes for you.

Triple facePalm

13 thoughts on “Abe resurrects his ‘Drifloud’ persona…again

  1. Please don’t re-publish this garbage. Abe doesn’t deserve the publicity and the victims, children and adults, do not deserve to have their names printed here. They have all suffered enough.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I understand your point. We thought carefully about whether to publish this, but opted in the end to do so, as we feel that it’s important that Abe’s deceptions be made public. I just re-read the piece and realised that we’d inadvertently posted the unexpurgated version of Abe/Drifloud’s email, in which innocent people are wrongly named as criminals. We’re very sorry to have done this, and have corrected the error. Please accept our apologies.


  3. Not sure about others but I have a hotmail email for personal use. I bet everyone receives heaps of junk mail and every now & then a genuine message is treated as junk. But I find I have to send email from my often bounce back or will not be accepted. Abe & that loony Jaqui with her 100s of emails to- now gasp- the Boy Scouts & Girl Guides most likely don’t reach their target or are deleted immediately as spam (as I would if the subject line said “Satanic Cult” in it !). Very difficult trying to rev up your campaign will on the run or hiding out in South America.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I had a look at her site a day or so ago and someone called Jim had replied to Charlotte. She is libeling the Vicar of another Hampstead church at the moment – I’m not sure if he is aware of it.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: A tale of two Driflouds | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.