With her 8 April court date looming, Sabine McNeill is frantically trying to backpedal her way out of charges of witness intimidation, which could conceivably result in her spending time in prison. Sabine, who along with Neelu Berry faces charges for having illegally released Neelu’s witness statements on her ‘In the Best Interests of the Whistleblower Kids’ blog, has now replaced those statements with the following hand-written note:
Too little, too late
The statement, which Sabine says she penned during her most recent arrest on 10 January, makes the surprising claim that “while I believe I published the article in question, I do not remember any details at all”.
I am surprised that it took the witness 10 months to let me know of the intimidation I caused.
I am very sorry and apologise.
I am also surprised that the reason for arresting me required a surprise visit at night, even though I had informed my solicitor of the two phone calls I had from PC Davey.
My solicitor assured me that he would arrange for the interview.
I am now carrying it out without him.
P.s. I closed the blog Whistleblower Kids a few days ago.
Is this intended to be an apology? If so, it falls far short—as usual, Sabine takes absolutely no responsibility for her own appalling behaviour, but tries to shift the blame onto everyone else: her victims (there are more than one), the police, her solicitor…everyone is to blame for this sorry situation, but not Sabine. No, no, no!
As for her claim that she ‘closed the blog’ a few days ago: um, nope. It’s still there, and has been all along.
In the text accompanying the handwritten statement, Sabine says:
Instead of the ‘witness statements’ that I had put here in April 2015 whilst in exile in Germany, I am now putting the text that I wrote in the middle of the night at Holborn Police station.
Our suspicion is that Sabine intends to use the fact that she fled justice in the UK, and was residing in Germany at the time she posted the witness statements, as her defence against the charges facing her: crimes that are committed while the defendant is out of the country are not able to be prosecuted once the person returns home.
However, she has had the illegality of the witness statements drawn to her attention multiple times since her return last August, and until now, has chosen to leave them standing. This leads us to suspect that her legal team has had a stern word with her.
Let us hope that in preparing for the case against Sabine, the CPS has also gathered up the reams of harassing and defamatory material she has published, both before her flight from justice and following her return.