What’s with that IPCC letter?

If you’ve dared to overcome your squeamishness and dip your toe into Abe and Ella’s blog lately, you’ll likely have noticed that they’re claiming to have received a letter from the IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission) that promises to somehow vindicate their insane claims of a huge nest of baby-murdering child-raping paedophiles in Hampstead.

Unlike that clumsily faked ‘lawyer’s letter’ that Abe tried to pass off last month, this one looks as though it could be the real deal.

Granted, not everyone believes that:

IPCC letter bullshit

 

But even if we do believe that this particular letter could have come from the IPCC, there’s every indication that it doesn’t mean what Abe wants everyone to believe it means. Bet that caught you by surprise, right?

As it stands, Abe has posted 4 of the letter’s 5 pages (presumably either because they didn’t teach him to count at his approved school, or because there’s something on p. 2 that he’d rather we not see).

Page 1 looks pretty unremarkable:

IPCC letter-2015-11-18-p1

Rough translation: the IPCC can review the Investigating Officer’s report, but it cannot review or assess the original criminal allegation, or comment on the thoroughness of the investigation. All the IPCC can do is decide whether the Investigating Officer (let’s call him the IO for short) properly investigated complaints against officers.

Here’s the part Abe probably likes: “I have decided to uphold your appeal”.

Then the writer notes, “We have to see:”, and then…nothing.

We have no idea what they have to see, because p. 2 is written in invisible ink. Given Abe’s habit of suppressing or deflecting from anything that he doesn’t want us to see, we’re going to assume that p. 2 contains info’ that either damages his and Ella’s case, or makes him look like the bad guy.

Or both.

Right, on to p. 3 and 4:

IPCC letter-2015-11-18-p3

IPCC letter-2015-11-18-p4

IPCC letter-2015-11-18

Page 3 must have sent Abe into multiple hemp-assisted orgasms. (Actually, that is a thought we prefer not to entertain. Please forget we said it.)

Essentially, what this part of the letter is saying is that the police didn’t explain their decision-making processes during the process of determining that Abe and Ella were full of crap, and that the children had been tortured into making the videos and lying to the police.

In sum, the letter seems to be stating that the police did not ‘show their work’, as our maths teachers used to say.

Thus, when the IPCC says that the “matter needs to go back to the appropriate authority and be re-investigated”, they don’t mean that the children’s allegations should be re-investigated—they mean that the review of the IO’s failure to dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s should be looked at again.

On p. 4, the IPCC states that it won’t be looking into a bunch of stuff, including whether anyone has committed misconduct or gross misconduct.

So what?

 

Our question, and we think it’s a good one, is this: assuming that the IPCC letter is genuine, what, precisely, do Abe and Ella think this will achieve?

Even if it were to be determined that the IO didn’t adhere strictly to the book when writing up the case, how will re-investigating this help Ella and Abe in any way? It’s certainly not going to help her get her kids back. That’s done and dusted.

So they must think that a re-investigation could vindicate them in some way.

But even in the extremely unlikely event that an IPCC decision were to somehow lead to a complete police re-investigation of the case, surely even Abe and Ella cannot be delusional enough to believe that somehow their allegations of a gigantic ‘satanic cult’ would be proven correct.

In fact, a re-investigation of all available evidence, including forensics, would most likely lead police to the conclusion that they arguably should have come to in September 2014: that any abuse of Ella’s children was at the hands of Abraham Christie; that the entire satanic abuse story was a particularly egregious attempt to ensure that Ella’s ex-partner never saw his children again; and that the accusations against him and the people of Hampstead represent nothing less than an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

So what’s the point of all this?

Our best guess is that Abe wants to keep fogging the issue and distracting attention from his own culpability. Important news, Abe: that train has left the station. Everyone sees you for what you are.

p.s. We do find it just a bit rich that Ella and Abe are on the run from the law, hiding out in Spain to evade arrest…and yet they are more than willing to take full advantage of the UK’s available legal protections.

Ladies and gentlemen, your tax dollars at work.

You can run with a liebut you can't hide from the truth.

 

34 thoughts on “What’s with that IPCC letter?

  1. Sorry but that is not a letter from the IPCC. It is a fake. I have seen responses from the IPCC and they are not crouched in those terms. Someone has dodged this up for Abe (he’s too much an idiot to do it himself).

    It makes leaps of logic about the case. The IPCC do not operate in a vacuum, they must refer to the investigating officers and get their viewpoints as to why actions were undertaken.

    Remember- even the IPCC must operate under laws and they are very careful in naming any officer as to do so even in a letter to someone like Abe could result in a libel case.

    The letter makes points about the father not being arrested. Officers have the power to question people in several ways- by invitation, by arrest, or under caution. In whatever way they question the person being interviewed must tell the truth (or say y=the usual ‘no comment’). In either of the 3 ways a person is interviewed- it makes no difference to the outcome. It is the IO right to question the way he/she feels is the right method to obtain the truth. I cannot see why the IPCC would even question this aspect- but the claim reinforces Abe’s lunatic rantings.

    In fact if the father had been arrested or under caution he would have legally been able to say ‘no comment’ – as it is the IO obtained more information by not arresting him.

    The police must also be wary (not that they always are) of an accused person’s rights. On the fantastical claims made : 100s of babies eaten, mass rapes at a swimming pool and above McDonalds etc etc – the police moved very cautiously & correctly.

    Remember half of Hampstead was being accused of the same crimes- not just the father. Yet not a mention in that letter of all the others accused of murder & rape, just a long rant about the father. The letter also ignores the very fact the case proceeded to court and a judgement entered.

    Liked by 2 people

      • I think it’s Abe’s attempt to promote mystery : a ‘missing page’ implies that it’s genuine. The IPCC understands how the police operate and under what rules. Their role is to examine whether correct procedure was followed. It was and it ended in a court case where a Judgement was passed and reinforced on Appeal.

        This looks like a letter that Abe may have received but it’s been doctored. It looks like sentences have been added in. He’s not capable of the style of English used. It’s also defamatory of the father and the investigating officers.

        If the letter were real it would mean any police officer who did not arrest your neighbour because you claimed he was a serial killer could be sanctioned. Obviously they must look at the complaint but cautiously so.

        The IPCC has no power to order the police or to ask them to re-investigate when a case has proceeded to court and a Judge has passed a verdict.

        They would refer the writer to other legal avenues such as an appeal court or a body that investigates alleged miscarriages of justice. To make the claimed statements in the letter could prejudice any future case which is why it looks fake.

        The questioning of the father is another of Abe’s red herrings. What difference does it make under which method he was questioned?. As it is there was no evidence that the father had committed a crime : the police were pretty savvy when it comes to the children’s videos : The father either tells the truth or lies but takes a huge risk if he lies- there are penalties. The method of questioning makes no difference. The fact the father wasn’t questioned under caution implies the IOs were pretty sure he had committed no crime.

        Abe keeps flying kites and inferring that if things were done a different way the outcome would be different. In fact the only complaint I can possibly see that may have weight is that the videos originally were not looked at. The sooner he faces a court in the UK the better.

        Liked by 1 person

        • So the verdict, then: another of Abe’s counterfeit attempts.

          We heard last night from another commenter who passed along a real IPCC letter. When the two are placed side by side, the difference is very clear.

          Like

  2. The only genuine complaint that could possibly be made to the IPCC is that police have not put the criminal Abraham Cristie’s name on the Interpol watch list. But maybe they have.
    This criminal must be hauled back to the UK and face a court for his vile crimes. And I’m not sure Ella isn’t just as bad as Abe.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Maybe we should show this document to the IPCC and let them know how they’re being illegally misrepresented in public by a wanted fugitive😉

    Liked by 2 people

  4. I am going under the assumption that the letter is genuine, though I wouldn’t put anything past Abraham.

    According to the letter the IPCC took only two documents into consideration. Ella and Abe’s appeal letter, and the investigation report made by the IO. As far as I am aware the IO report from July is not released.

    It would appear then that the IPCC did not consider the CRIS report, the medical report, Pauffleys report, the Appeal report or the court transcript. They won’t have access to Abrahams criminal history nor any of the videos. Just that one document.

    I can’t imagine the IO will have written every single detail of every decision the police took, such as why they didn’t arrest Dearman. It will be a semi detailed overview of the investigation.

    All this seems to be saying is that the IPCC would like the IO to expand in the reasoning behind the decisions. If they write back with a fuller explanation and Abraham and Ella are still not satisfied, they can contact the IPCC again. The IPCC will read the fuller explanation and judge whether it satisfies them. If they are satisfied with the fuller explanation then they will not approve any further action. If they are not satisfied then this could go in circles for a while. I don’t know what more action the IPCC can take if they are not fully satisfied. Perhaps report the IO. However Pauffley and the two appeal judges who witnessed the appeal, are satisfied that the investigation was legal and satisfactory, having all the evidence and witnesses at hand.

    Abraham clearly wants to paint this as the IPCC judging the investigation to be lacking. However, as you point out perfectly, it’s really just a case of them wanting the IO to show his working. I imagine similar points could be made in most IO reports, but there isn’t usually a nut like Abraham making complaints about them.

    Liked by 1 person

    • As Sam says above, it’s the IO’s right to question people in the way that will get to the truth, whether that’s under caution, under arrest, etc. Ultimately, even if the letter were real, Abe wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

      Like

  5. It would be easy enough to pass on the documents to the IPCC and alert them to the possible fraud. More possible charges, and maybe enough to get put on the interpol list! Seriously, has Abe done this kind of thing before, I know he has a history of forgery and counterfeiting, but does it extend to elaborate fraud involving the knocking up of official looking documents and not just signing cheques? Where can transcripts and histories/details of court cases Abe has been part of/the defendant be accessed? It would be really interesting to see these.

    Liked by 1 person

    • We’d all be very interested in a more comprehensive inventory of Abe’s criminal past. I’m sure there must be some records knocking about, but I’m not sure where.

      Like

    • I have no doubt Abe has complained to everyone he can think of. The bulk of the letter is legalise that says not very much and the sort of thing sent out to look like a lot of trouble has been taken to look into the matter. I’m pretty sure stuff has been added in.

      Perhaps the missing page says something like ‘no further action’ etc.

      But I think the giveaway is the claim that Abe makes over & over about the manner in which the father was questioned. What difference does it make under which method he was questioned? If he lies & gets caught lying he is in trouble. If the police had other evidence he could have been charged and it’s irrelevant as to the method he was questioned under. The outcome was always going to be the same.The IPCC know these things & aren’t stupid.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Another thing: I am wondering what ‘vexatious litigants do’. Is part of their annoyingness that they simply pull up every detail in every situation possible that they are unhappy about, that didn’t go their way,that they want to be troublesome about, that they analyse ad nauseum in every minutiae, trying to force the exact guidance that should be applied *theoretically* (whilst of course never considering the wider picture) in part of their attack on some aspect of life they thought they could control, never realising that the world will not play ball with them in such narcissism and fraud? That sentence needs a rewrite, far too long/repeats but no time, sorry. Of course there is a place for such appeal, but when does it become ‘vexatious’ or wrong?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Maybe something for the future, and also useful for people like Sabine, Belinda, Nellu & Co:

    About vexatious litigants
    Litigation is rarely welcome by those who become involved in it, whether as a claimant or defendant. Some litigants may pursue a range of cases or pursue several different matters at once. For example, a person may:

    constantly and in most cases unsuccessfully, issue claims and applications within existing claims or appeals against every decision made against them
    commence proceedings many times against the same person for substantially the same reasons
    sue a wide range of individuals or institutions for matters which are identical or have no legal validity
    Vexatious litigants are individuals who persistently take legal action against others in cases without any merit, who have been forbidden from starting civil cases in courts without permission.

    2. Declaring a litigant vexatious
    2.1 The courts
    The court has its own powers to deal with unmeritorious claims and applications. It may:

    strike out the action as an abuse of process of the court
    issue various orders restricting the litigant’s ability to continue with further applications or claims (of it’s own motion, or on request by a party to the proceedings)
    2.2 The ‘civil restraint order’
    The civil restraint order (CRO) is a useful remedy for an individual to consider if they have been subjected to 2 or more unmeritorious claims or applications made against them by the same person and they relate to the same or similar matters. It is relatively quick to achieve, is granted for a period up to 2 years, preventing the subject of it from taking certain steps as specified in the order, without first obtaining leave of a designated judge.

    More here: About vexatious litigants
    Litigation is rarely welcome by those who become involved in it, whether as a claimant or defendant. Some litigants may pursue a range of cases or pursue several different matters at once. For example, a person may:

    constantly and in most cases unsuccessfully, issue claims and applications within existing claims or appeals against every decision made against them
    commence proceedings many times against the same person for substantially the same reasons
    sue a wide range of individuals or institutions for matters which are identical or have no legal validity
    Vexatious litigants are individuals who persistently take legal action against others in cases without any merit, who have been forbidden from starting civil cases in courts without permission.

    2. Declaring a litigant vexatious
    2.1 The courts
    The court has its own powers to deal with unmeritorious claims and applications. It may:

    strike out the action as an abuse of process of the court
    issue various orders restricting the litigant’s ability to continue with further applications or claims (of it’s own motion, or on request by a party to the proceedings)
    2.2 The ‘civil restraint order’
    The civil restraint order (CRO) is a useful remedy for an individual to consider if they have been subjected to 2 or more unmeritorious claims or applications made against them by the same person and they relate to the same or similar matters. It is relatively quick to achieve, is granted for a period up to 2 years, preventing the subject of it from taking certain steps as specified in the order, without first obtaining leave of a designated judge.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Dear Mr El,

    Oh, the frustration of the missing page!
    This reminds Frances of her dear, dear friend Miss Elizabeth, who wrote a poem to Frances, celebrating their eternal friendship. Spread over two pages (dear Miss E’s penmanship was atrocious and she needed all the space she could get), it began with ‘How do I love thee?’ and ended with ‘See ya next weekend in Blackpool, we are going to party hearty, Franny-Bananny!!’

    Dear Miss Elizabeth must have forgotten to include that missing middle page in the post. Alas, it is now lost to the mists of time.

    Frances feels the need to weep into her lawn handkerchief now, so will bid you adieu for now, with hopes that you solve this mystery of the missing page.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Miss Frances! Lovely to see you back. I hope your time away was refreshing.

      We think now that the missing page probably exists somewhere in the depths of Abe’s fervid imaginings. But thanks for the sympathy.

      Like

  9. Pingback: Verdict: The IPCC letter is a fake | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  10. I met the children at a Nutritional Event..and I was attracted to them…then I put my plans for internet fame in motion. muhaha..

    Like

  11. Pingback: The IPCC letter: A giant red herring | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  12. Pingback: Let’s clear up that IPCC ruling | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.