Yesterday one of our alert readers noted a comment on one of Sabine’s blogs, in which Sabine offered up a link to the event she and Belinda will be putting on at the Theatro Technis in Camden later this month:
You can find the announcement here. And if you thought their November ‘Forced Adoptions’ event was a blast and a half, you’re going to love this one.
Yes, folks, they’re putting ‘Public Service Authorities on Trial’.
Which ones? Why, all of them, from the looks of their agenda:
Yes, they went there.
‘We Accuse!’ is a deliberate play on ‘J’Accuse!‘, Emile Zola’s impassioned defence of Alfred Dreyfus.
Does this mean that Sabine has decided that she’s the new Dreyfus? Please, someone, tell us she hasn’t.
In any case, Sabine and Belinda’s latest effort sounds like a bit of a dog’s breakfast:
Of course you know the primary focus will be on how unfairly they’ve been treated—’defending the public interest and acting as public protection advocates, despite attempts to put us down’—and doubtless this will provide yet another opportunity for Belinda to simper some more about ‘the elephant in the room’.
It looks like they’ve thrown in everything they can think of, from Freemasonry to Common Law to all their usual conspiranoid lunacies, with a strong emphasis on how mean, unfair, and corrupt the police and other public servants are. If you have the patience for it, you can visit the site and check out all the links, but we warn you: take a large bottle of headache tablets with you. We got about halfway through the list before we started to lose the will to live.
It’s basically one giant self-promotional wank-fest, in which Sabine’s multitudinous blogs are used as though they were primary resources, not the highly suspect ramblings of a woman with a martyr complex.
But never mind. We’re sure the event itself will be…(yawn)…fascina…….zzzzzzzzzzz…….
Oh! Is that the time! We just remembered we have somewhere else we urgently need to be!
Sabine is not very bright.
If you click on the link in the title (the intineri for the meeting) a document is downloaded, embedded in the property are two names – author Sabine Mcneil, last edited by Belinda Mckenzie
http://aspects.duckdns.org/We-Accuse/20160321_index_We-Accuse_event.htm
No doubt that bail conditions will be breached, pushed on by Belinda of course who is not on bail.
I wonder if London’s Theatro Technis know that they are aiding a potential criminal act.
From the link you get taken to many of Sabines self promotion sites
From that site:
“About
An Association of McKenzie Friends became necessary on a number of occasions that resulted in frustration and similar unpleasant feelings, especially when helping Litigants in Person who are in prison – on remand, i.e. unconvicted:
After having been allowed ‘legal visits’ in HMP Holloway twice, one McKenzie Friend was ‘downgraded’ to social visits, i.e. no papers could be taken in by either the inmate or the McKenzie Friend
this made it impossible to prepare the response to an Order, let alone an appeal in time
McKenzie Friends were not allowed to speak to the prisoners who were waiting in the court cells
instead, they were given 20 minutes by a judge during a family court hearing.
Our Aims and Objectives are therefore:
to raise awareness of the value that McKenzie Friends bring to Litigants in Person – as an alternative to lawyers
to play the role of advocacy on behalf of victims of white collar crimes and child snatching
to lobby those responsible for making change possible
to publish relevant findings and experiences in the public interest.
Our immediate campaigning goals are:
allow McKenzie Friends the rights for legal visits in prisons
allow McKenzie Friends to instruct barristers
the recognition of ‘public interest advocacy’, when McKenzie Friends present their observations in courts or represent cases at meetings with MPs and MEPs”
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
So she expects the same rights as someone who studied law and is bound by a code of ethics.
Lets go and let the landlady of a convicted spy have unfettered access to prisons. (For anyone in doubt thats About BELINDA
Here is another post (from http://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/live-in-landlady-refuses-me-receipt-for.html):
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Live-in landlady refuses me receipt for £1000 in rent paid
This morning our live-in landlady, human rights activist Belinda McKenzie, refused me a receipt for the £1,000 I paid her in rent for the last month. She then emailed me, stating: “Regarding the payment of rent due today, I will receive the money in the usual way and give you a receipt as soon as you acknowledge receipt of the Possession Notice this morning.” So Declan has emailed Belinda’s solicitors, Messrs Kidd Rapinet, to have what was my payment of rent acknowledged in accordance with the law (see blog of 20 April Declan reports Kidd Rapinet to the Solicitors Regulation Authority):
Click to enlarge
Belinda has had to withdraw her claim for the accelerated possession of our flat due to the “wrong information” she provided the Court, to quote herself. But her stance this morning baffles me. As I said in the previous blog We lose all access to the internet, Belinda recently started up a group called the Association of McKenzie Friends – a McKenzie friend is a lay legal advisor assisting litigants in person. The Association is necessary, they say, “because too many victims of white collar crimes encountered too many problems and their helpers and supporters as well”.
First meeting of the Association of McKenzie Friends, Westminster, with John Hemming MP for Birmingham, featuring Belinda McKenzie and Sabine McNeill.
MI5 whistleblower David Shayler lived in one of the rooms below us for a couple of years, until 2007. Regarding Shayler, this is what we told the Court last week in our defence to Possession Order (see Additional Information, para. 4):
The defendants refute the claimant’s statement that she explained to them that their tenancy was never meant to be a long-term arrangement as she would need the accommodation back for her family at some point. The following email evidence is by no means exhaustive (copy of emails available to the Court upon request). On 24 July 2009, the claimant emailed an associate of the defendants in America stating that former MI5 whistleblower David Shayler lived in the house for a couple of years until 2007 (it is unfortunate that Mr Shayler then declared that he was the Messiah, became a squatter, and was subsequently ridiculed in the press for changing his name to Delores Kane), adding that her house could be an “in-house charity” for impoverished activists supported by “some kind of international fund”. On 18 September 2011, the claimant wrote that the defendants “could have stayed here indefinitely” if they “hadn’t been so generally stand-offish”. The Note to the Court goes on to state that the claimant needs the defendants’ flat for her family, but she has repeatedly stated in email correspondence that she wanted the flat for a homeless couple who were expecting a baby.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Excellent post ⭐
Great comment from JW too.
3 initial thoughts:
1. Is it worth us contacting Theatro Technis to alert them to the criminals who’ve booked their premises and the potentially criminal nature of the activities being scheduled?
2. Fingers crossed that all that bluster about “common law courts” and “general assemblies” will tempt Neelu to get involved, thereby leading (as SV pointed out yesterday) to both Sabine and Neelu breaking their bail conditions by communicating with each other? Bish bash bosh – two bonus arrests! (Pardon the technical language there.)
3. My life is finally complete now that I’ve seen that nice Mr. Coyote use the expression ‘wank-fest’ 😀
LikeLiked by 3 people
Excellent find, JW!
First Easter egg of the year 🙂
By the way, only Sabine is coming up as the author on mine.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Wank-fest” brilliant description of their event 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sabine McNeill and Belinda McKenzie have missed, and still miss, the point of what a McKenzie Friend is:
“A McKenzie friend is somebody who accompanies a litigant in person to a court hearing for the purpose of assisting him in such matters as taking notes, helping to organise the documents, and quietly making suggestions – for example as to questions to put to a witness. Although usually a non-lawyer, the McKenzie friend should not be thought of as a species of lay advocate and has no right to address the court.”
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed1568
LikeLiked by 1 person
J’Accuse linked to a case involving a bunch of anti-Semitic lunatics.
Irony lost on them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It strikes me that Belinda McKenzie’s vision for McKenzie friends is quite toxic. Where Lord Donaldson merely wanted to see an end to them having any weight in public perception as ‘unqualified legal assistants’ – Belinda of that ilk seems to be working hard towards the point where the law moves to ban unqualified assistance of any kind from the court; and thus ensure that the obscurity of McKenzie Friends is something quite indecent!”
(Source: http://hampsteadresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/3-association-of-mckenzie-fiends.html)
The case law quoted in the above-cited piece is quite correct as is the author’s interpretation of the legal position. And that comment is really quite insightful given what has recently happened. McKenzie has played no small part in the authorities making moves that will mainly impact on LEGITIMATE McKenzie friends who do very often do a good job, do have some legal training (and sometimes qualifications) and do carry the requisite insurances etc. And, one suspects, little or nothing to call HER to book.
With the effective destruction of legal aid under way, her actions do have a certain apparent design about them which seems determined to pull the last threads of the rug from beneath the feet of those who are most at risk of injustice. And this is yet another of McKenzie’s scams that cause one to wonder how the heck she gets away with it, and has done for decades.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Re No 3. You need to go out more. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
So how many of us are going and will they spot us?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Instead of Sabine & Belinda learning their lesson and backing off they just carry on regardless as if nothing has happened and no one has been arrested.
These bloody common law courts they mentioned and the whole Freeman movement is a farce that can end up with good people being misled and lied to and sometimes ending up in jail.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I can’t go. I don’t think, unless some of us, or all of us are RD, they will know who we are. If in doubt wear a kaftan and you will blend in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It should not be forgotten that Sabine has numerous injunctions against her to stop her publishing various things.
None of those seemed to work, instead she just wrote in another name. Its always given away by her style of writing which is very distinctive.
…………………………………………………..
The topic of harassment by social media is high on the CPS agenda.
From today’s Telegraph:
Faking social media accounts could lead to criminal charges
Crown Prosecution Service releases new guidelines on tackling offenders who create phoney Facebook and Twitter accounts to get revenge on others
Creating malicious fake profiles on social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter could lead to criminal charges
By David Barrett, Home Affairs Correspondent12:01AM GMT 03 Mar 2016
Offenders who set up fake online accounts to take revenge on other people are to face tougher action under new measures set out by prosecutors.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said people who create phoney profiles on social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter could face charges including harassment.
Facebook profiles can be set up maliciously
New draft guidelines published by the CPS set out how prosecutors should take tough action against anyone who attempts to humiliate or undermine someone else by publishing false information online.
Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said: “Online communication is developing at such a fast pace, new ways of targeting and abusing individuals online are constantly emerging.
“We are seeing more and more cases where social media is being used as a method to facilitate both existing and new offences.
“Offenders can mistakenly think that by using false online profiles and creating websites under a false name their offences are untraceable.
“Thankfully this is not the case and an online footprint will be left by the offender.”
“Online abuse is cowardly and can be deeply upsetting to the victim.”
Alison Saunders
A CPS spokesman said the guidelines cover the use of false online profiles and websites which are set up to publicise “false and damaging information”.
“For example, it may be a criminal offence if a profile is created under the name of the victim with fake information uploaded which, if believed, could damage their reputation and humiliate them,” the spokesman said.
“In some cases the information could then be shared in such a way that it appears as though the victim has themselves made the statements.
“This may amount to an offence, such as grossly offensive communication or harassment.”
The draft guidelines are open for consultation for six weeks and are expected to be brought into force later this year.
They also cover the way social media is used to publish “revenge pornography” by offenders who seek to embarrass former lovers.
“Revenge pornography is predominantly carried out online and is worryingly becoming a common tactic of revenge, often after the breakdown of a relationship,” the CPS spokesman said.
The guidelines also cover the use of the internet in domestic abuse cases.
Prosecutors will be told to watch out for cases in which an offender has used GPS location-gathering data and spyware “to assert control over a victim”, and to ensure this type of evidence is collected for use in court.
Mrs Saunders added: “It is vital that prosecutors consider the bigger picture when looking at evidence and examine both the online and offline behaviour pattern of the defendant.
“Online abuse is cowardly and can be deeply upsetting to the victim.
“Our guidelines are under constant review and continuously updated to ensure prosecutors have clear advice on new methods of committing crimes.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
http://www.cps.gov.uk/consultations/social_media_consultation_2016.html
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/new_guidelines_published_on_the_prosecution_of_those_who_abuse_victims_online/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, Mr Coyote was feeling a touch dyspeptic at the time of writing. Probably something he ate.
I would be inclined to sit back and see what happens on this event. As I recall, the police kept an eye on the last one, as well.
LikeLike
I’m afraid I’m with Danielle on this! 😀
LikeLike
They just cannot seem to wrap their tiny minds around that, can they?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes! I have wondered about this too. Her antics seem to purposely discredit legitimate, skilled Mckenzie friends. She’s not a stupid woman, unlike her acolytes, so it seems almost beyond belief that she could fail to grasp this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, it seems that the common law farce hurts mainly those who have the most to lose.
LikeLike
2:30-4:30 Accusations.
4:30- 5:30 Tea.
Yes, there’s nothing like a nice cup of tea after spending a couple of hours making unsubstantiated claims of paedophilia, kidnap and murder.
What a shower of numpties.
LikeLiked by 1 person
McKenzie doesn’t display a ‘damaged’ persona ( that’s not to say she doesn’t have one). Rather, she preys on those who do. – Neelu (for instance) was once (back in the eighties) a very very striking young woman with a bright future. She descended into mental ilness after a few traumatic incidents including the tragic death of her niece which finally pushed her over the edge. Robert Green was damaged goods. He went ‘overboard’ following the loss of his travel business to a con-artist business partner. Shayler? Again quite a damaged individual who lost his career due to mental meltdown. Sabine? – Some suggest she is Aspergic, and for that reason could make no headway in the commercial world. Now she wallows in a world of delusion some of which might be the result of her inability to ‘remember the sixties’ – if you catch my drift!
These ARE all intelligent people and on one level quite credible – an essential feature of McKenzie’s cons. The common thread is that they have each been beaten into mental instability by circumstances they cannot control or assimilate. None are “stupid” per se – but all are damaged to the extent they have lost sight or reality and are living in a fantasy world inhabited by their own deamons.
McKenzie feasts on this carion to her own financial ends. She is, primarily, a con-artist. – In my opinion of course. And quite a cold, cynical and calculating one at that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s a very chilling–and revealing–picture.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is very much the picture of McKenzie I have got over the last year too.
She puts on this charming persona and makes the most ridiculous ideas seem plausible. The people closest to her, including her daughter, have been exploited in every way she possibly can. She keeps on living in her big house in Highgate; others end up in squats or even in jail.
LikeLiked by 2 people
According to Belinda McKenzie her daughter has schizophrenia.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My trident and horns would just give me away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
SV She has in her round robin emails been quite prepared to use details of her daughter’s condition to gain sympathy for herself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was going but I see they won’t be tackling the important subject of the Rothschild links to the Royal Family and Adolf (Mr Nice Guy) Hitler or even Flat Earth policies for the coming age. What’s the point? Satanism is so passe.
LikeLiked by 1 person
she exhibits all the traits of a sociopath.
LikeLiked by 1 person