Let’s clear up that IPCC ruling

Yesterday one of our commentators noted that a new Facebook group which purports to be aligned with the hacktivist group Anonymous had published the following ‘demands’ regarding the Hampstead hoax:

Anonymous OpHampstead 2016-04-02

Leaving aside the ludicrous demand that Ella be permitted contact with her children (suffice to say that she has not contacted Barnet Social Services since she chose to bugger off to Spain with Abe, and has made not attempts to find out how the children are doing since that time), or that un-redacted minutes be provided (to whom? Ella and Abe? Not bloody likely. To this group of wannabe vigilantes? Even less so), we’d like to tackle the contentious issue of the IPCC investigation and its outcome.

Anonymous #OpHampstead claims that:

Barnet Police Department has been instructed by the IPCC to re-open the investigation into Ella Draper’s children’s accusations. We want to make sure this is happening. We demand a proper investigation into the crimes against humanity by the group of individuals lead (sic) by Mr. Dearman.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Barnet Police have absolutely not been instructed to re-open the criminal investigation. Of course, we know where this misapprehension came from: Abe and Ella deliberately misled their followers. Again.

Last fall, Abrella made much of the fact that the IPCC had approved their request to re-open the police investigation into the allegations Abe had forced the children to make.

At the time, various questions were raised here at Hoaxtead Research about the veracity of the letter Abrella had published on their blog. However, let’s assume for the purposes of argument that the IPCC letter was in fact genuine.

Here’s an excerpt, courtesy of Drifloud on Twitter:

Drifloud-IPCC 2016-03-23

Astonishingly, the Drippy One used this to claim that the original criminal investigation would be reopened. This calls his reading skills into question, as the letter very specifically states:

My role is to review the Investigator Officer’s report outlining his investigation into Ms Draper’s complaint. It is not within my role to review or assess the original criminal allegation and the IPCC is not able to make any comment as to the thoroughness of the criminal investigation.

So…the IPCC is not commenting on the original criminal investigation.

Seems pretty clear to us, but some of the Hoaxtead pushers might want to re-read it a few times, just to be sure it penetrates.

But if the IPCC won’t be re-opening the criminal investigation, what appeal are they actually upholding?

Well, Ella filed a complaint against the officers who conducted the original investigation. That complaint was investigated by Detective Inspector Anthony McKeown, who sent her his report on 8 July, 2015. On 21 July, 2015, Ella appealed the results of this report to the IPCC.

The letter itself states:

My role is to assess whether the Investigating Officer has properly investigated complaints against officers and to establish if any criminal or disciplinary action is appropriate.

We hope our friends from ‘Anonymous #OpHampstead’ are paying attention, because we’re only going to say this once:

The IPCC is saying that the Investigating Officer (DI Anthony McKeown, who was not involved with the original investigation) might not have followed all the rules when he investigated Ella’s complaints against some of the officers involved in the original case.

That’s all.

It’s not a grand victory, it doesn’t indicate that the IPCC wants the case re-opened, and it doesn’t indicate that there was anything wrong with the way the original case was investigated.

So get over it, and move on.

IPCC letter

 

134 thoughts on “Let’s clear up that IPCC ruling

  1. They’ve gone awfully quiet about the whole thing. Not even complaints that they haven’t received a response within the required timescale. To me it’s odd.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Very pleased you have cut to the chase with this so-called IPCC letter and pointed out the obvious. The letter purporting to be from the IPCC was incredibly long & I reckon the hoaxers as always, cherry pick an angle they like and promote it as it spreads like wildfire among the truther mob. I would venture that in any investigation there will be proper procedures not carried out due to pressure, financial constraints, overworked coppers. That doesn’t mean that police did not do their job properly. They reached the correct decision on Hampstead.

    As for the endless truther / fanatics / ratbags now claiming to be Anonymous, they fantasize that by authoring a Facebook page or Youtube channel they are somehow changing the world whereas in reality, they are simply attracting all the like-minded loonies to one place which even in their 1000s on a planet of billions doesn’t mean very much.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks, Sam. I have to laugh at the Hoaxteaders’ inability to read the letter without trying desperately to make it say what they want it to say.

      Like

  3. Yet more Angie bull….

    It would seem she made a significant donation late last night towards the fund to bring Rupert to the UK.

    Its interesting that she says its from her sister. (Perhaps from money her sister left to Angie when she died)

    I wonder if her sister would have prefered her spending $1000 of her savings towards helping someone fly to the UK for almost certain arrest and deportation. Or HER SISTER would have prefered the money spent feeding the African orphans that Angie had claimed to support before.

    Liked by 1 person

    • What happens if Rupert decides he doesn’t want to come over for the holiday?

      Who is in charge of the gofundme page, Angie, Belinda, Sabine?

      Who gets the money donated by Anonymous people if all the donations have to be returned?

      In answer to the question.

      Any moral person would probably spend the money on the little African children (if it actually got to them) rather than a holiday for an American rich boy.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Babs – spot on !!

        Its an easy moral dilemma – give money to rich american (who may not use it for the intended purpose) or give it to feed starving children.

        Easy choice….

        Except for Angie

        Liked by 1 person

          • That’s my thoughts as well. Pay the money to herself, stand the loss of 2.9% in order to make it look as if she has someone supporting her, I would imagine in an attempt to draw more people into her self funding scam.

            £290 would have helped those African children though…

            I am anticipating that it will be announced that she has made another donation to her “Kenya Project” over the weekend – again I would see that as a ploy to take the heat away from her in respect to the questions raised about what people have previously donated to her and her failure (to date) to give any form of real accounting or traceability.

            Its nice to be helpful to people, so (in view of Angies seemingly poor skills in keeping financial records) I have emailed the Revenue in Ireland with a copy of the screenshot of her gofundme project in order to help Angie be law abiding and pay tax on her income from her self funding venture.

            No need to thank me Angie, I am certain a number of other people would have done exactly the same for you – Oh, I forgot, she does not look at this site….

            Liked by 2 people

  4. Who is Anonymous #OpHampstead ?

    Re demand 4 “Grand Jury” and “Attorney General’s office” – suggests this source is from USA to use such terms, as nobody in UK would use them. Also, the individual lacks knowledge of history of case, as this case was dealt with by a family court not a criminal court.

    Re demand 2 “her property (the children)” – only one person refers to children as “property” in this case to my knowledge = Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV

    See part 1:10

    Like

  5. Any numpty can claim to be anonymous. Hey that’s the whole idea! Anyway, right at the outset of the Hampstead abuse affair hitting the internet Anonymous stated that they would not be pursuing it although they did pass on details of the accused to any interested parties.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. I was about to make the same observations about the obvious US source of the ‘Anonymous Hampstead’ nonsense. The first dead giveaway was the reference to ‘Police Department’. Not very smart is he?

    Liked by 2 people

  7. SV – I think you are right – the phrases and terms used seem to point to Rupert – perhaps he just wants a “free” holiday.

    I doubt its going to be free for him…

    Liked by 2 people

  8. This, it seems, is a fairly standard technique as used by the ‘McKenzie Circus School’! – They force a relevant body into admitting some minor adminstrative error, then weave it into their extended fantasies.

    Consider the ‘First Minister in missing records’ scandal which emerges from the Hollie Greig case. Apparently the Hollie Greig debacle was of such gravity that it could have brought down the Scottish government. – There was even a (now discredited) legal ‘tade paper’ in on the act! Claims were made that the First Minister had brought the Scottish Government into legal jeopardy by ignoring FOI requess and incurring the wrath of the Scottish Commissioner etc. etc. etc. – I believe the original debunk was hacked and can’t now be accessed, but it was reproduced and updated in more detail just over a year ago here:

    http://hollie-greig-book-closed.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/9-first-minister-in-missing-records.html

    Just as an aside, these points were all put directly to Robert Green contemporaneously, and he continuously dodged the issue – I have seen the relevant emails, and there is no doubt that he knew what he was doing, or at least whoever was ‘working him from behind’ did! The conflation of facts has McKenzie’s pawprints all over it in my opinion. She is the common thread in this.

    As to the children (of all ages) that don ‘Guy Fawkes’ masks they’ve purchasesd from the local toy shop, then parade around pretending to be something they are plainly not… Well most of us grew out of that sort of thing some time before our seventh birthday when we ceased to be impressed with plastic handcuffs, cap guns and ‘cameras’ that squirted water! In Britain no district has a “Police Department” let alone one that the IPCC can instruct. Clue: if you keep sailing East past the big metal lady with the ice cream cone, you do NOT fall off the edge of the world! The fantasies go downhill from there in terms of the author’s understanding of how the law actually works and is structured, who is entitled to demand what in terms of private information and why they might be able to do so.

    Does that include some silly (possibly overgrown) schoolchildren playing at Hactivists? – Off you go sonny!

    There is, incidentally, an “Attorney General’s office” in Britian – Mainly its jurisdiction is England and Wales:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/attorney-generals-office/about

    A little basic research will tell you they would be unable to intervene and are the wrong people to be talking to. “Grand Juries”? Again a little superficial research into the legal stuctures of the three nations and a province that make up the United Kingdom would be in order. – Grand Juries effectively ceased to exist in England thanks to the Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933. – Abolished because they didn’t work. – And (I address the masked infants of the ‘common law’ brigade here of course) for any other non-educated ‘Septics’ out there the terms ‘England’, ‘United Kindom, and ‘Britain’ are NOT interchangeable! The laws and structures you lot inherited and used as rootstock for the systems that exist in the US were not even universal to these islands when they were first adopted! – If you’re going to just make rubbish up, demanding this, demanding that as if you had rights here, a few hours spent learning the basics would be useful!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Someone decided that they held a grand jury on the internet about the case and then they delivered something to the Attorney General’s office by hand and got a hastily scribbled delivery receipt from the receptionist.

      Liked by 1 person

      • So I hear Tracey… And really, of what credibility is that? Truly, they are exactly like small children playing fantasy games in the streets. The difficulty of course being that in reality they are grown adults who have failed to mature. And the ‘fire’ they are toying with is pitched towards razing the homes of those who succeeded in life where they have so very obviously failed.

        Look at Rupert for instance – all the advantages in the world and how uneducated, foolish and infantile he has emerged in thought, conviction and conduct. Truly a manchild. – Does anyone know if he actually suffers from some condition – some ‘learning difficulty’ or disability – that has resulted in him emerging into the world as he has? Something that might mitigate or at least explain his behaviour?

        Or is he just a spoilt little rich-brat now reduced to parasite upon the poor and credulous?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Yes he is a Twat, simple really.

          Mental health is a much more complex issue, affecting people from different backrounds and circumstances, it’s certainly no measure of intelligence.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Very true. Some of the most intelligent people I’ve known have suffered from mental illness of one sort or another. It’s no respecter of economic status, intellect, or background.

            Like

    • mmm… the author of the link you provide re Hollie Greig did not, quite recently, think too much of Hampstead Research :

      “We see something similar tin the childishly abusive Scarlet Scoop and ‘her’ Hoaxtead Research site. – A site that seems closely-aligned with the ‘Holly Hoax’ brigade and equally frightened of the truth… It is, quite frankly equally-and-oppositely as unhinged as the mentally ill ‘Jacqui Farmer’ Hampstead Research site… With ‘Scarlet Scoop’ in particular having proven ‘herself’ every bit as dishonest – and perverted – as her opposite number… ”

      http://hampsteadresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/10-immunity-of-idiots.html

      Curiously, you write in the same scathing manner here with regards to other matters.

      Like

      • That’s entirely possible, but we’re not particularly fussed about it. Inchambers is a valued member of the community, and provides excellent insights and thought-provoking ideas. As far as we’re concerned, this is a big tent, and there’s room for everyone in it.

        Like

    • They pick & choose parts of Magna Carta to back up their claims and endlessly demand trial by a jury of their peers yet there is no mention of juries in that document. Like all matters in the truther world there is a tiny nibble of truth and a whole lot of baloney added on.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Wait..hang on…do you mean two entire hours of actual READING – as in “books”? Sorry, far too time- consumingly cumbersome (not to mention BORING ! ) for more than 99.9% of Americans to handle. Can you recommend a nicely condensed “Cliff’s Notes” version of the above info for those across the pond? Better still, might there be a cartoon, a shoot-’em-up-real-good video game teeming with car chases and explosions, or an action / superhero movie version of these alleged “facts”? Thanks in advance !

      Liked by 1 person

    • I’m not sure. Certainly he would be a new ‘live act’ at their freakshows, and as such may well attract some sort of crowd. On the other hand, it might well be that they’re scamming HIM! – The ‘boy’ is very obviously ‘soft in the head’, maybe he can be used as an ‘Aunt Sally’ and/or touched for some cash? He comes from a rich ‘stuffed shirt’ family I hear.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I honestly think he’ll pull out of coming over here in support of the Hampstead Hoax. He clearly hadn’t researched enough of the case, which is evident in his videos and in the comments he makes to people below his videos.How he refunds the money though, will be playing on his mind I think,

        Liked by 3 people

        • Being the foolish manchild he so surely is I suspect ‘daddykins’ and ‘mommy dearest’ will already have threatened to put his little red wagon in the next yard sale. – Honestly, I still question who’s actually collecting the dough though.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Agree with all that Jake Blake.

          It’s damn crazy of them to want him to come over to England.

          Who is he and how is he going to make the slightest bit of difference?

          He’s won’t.

          He has little idea of what is going on and who is who.

          It is an absolutely ludicrous idea and the only reason i can see for him to travel is so Angie can get her toy boy where she wants him.

          Liked by 2 people

    • Personally, it would be good to see the smug donkey dragged off to jail for a few months, then deported. Rupert wanted to destroy his family, I think Hampstead will assist in destroying his family name.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. The IPCC letter. I have to admit, confused me at the start. I had to read it a few times to fully grasp exactly what it meant when it was first published. This post has explained it well.
    The people who comment on YT that it demands a reopening of the investigation are deluded and completely incorrect, I hope they come across this post!

    Liked by 3 people

    • The guy’s an egotistical dickhead who really does think he has influence and even thinks he’s funny (don’t bother with his ‘comical’ efforts). As for Angie and her homophobic ‘social engineering’ crap, what was she on about?. The whole notion of gay & lesbian acceptance was to ensure that sector of people (no matter how small fuckwit Power-Disney thinks they are, or how big the community is) enjoy the same legal and social benefits that everyone else does and is entitled to.

      Angie Power-Disney is possibly a prime example of what is claimed so often now : that now that homosexual citizens are (largely) treated as equal to everyone else, these creeps who always need an enemy have chosen “VIP pedos” and ‘satanist cults’ as their target whether they exist or not. And when they do not exist they conjure them up and accuse innocents.

      Liked by 2 people

  10. 1:31 – Who, among the hoax-exposers, has been ‘selling porn globally’? Or at all? – An interesting bit of projection there!

    One of the more credible theories that emerged from another hoax I am acquainted with is that underlying the (relatively prosaic – for want of a better expression) abuse acknowledged as ‘probable’ by the police and other recognised bodies, was the possible involvement of certain individuals with the trade in extreme pornography and the ‘swinging’ scene. – The (typical of these things) accusations levelled at others, including friends of the family, judges, police etc were completely false; and meant to act as a deflection tactic as the limited evidence of abuse that did exist actually implicated the main source of the hoax!

    Now – Angie, I have a direct question for you… Who EXACTLY has been trading in porn do you say? – Noting of course our your comments about libel and defamation; at whom do you level this accusation? For you can be sure that I can place this before someone with a strong agenda to ‘bust’ a certain porn-ring and the contacts to see the matter put directly before interested law enforcement people. – If of course your claims ‘stand up’ to any degree!

    Also Angie, as you are so vociferous on these deviant and unnatural practices, can you please explain your complete silence on the matter of a local recreation ground near you being cited as a prime destination for ‘doggers’? – Recreation ground that is rendered unavailable to (say) folk who enjoy an innocent midnight stroll or a spot of astronomy – due to an activity that might present a very real moral and physical danger, particularly to the vulnerable? – I would seriously like to know why you’re so silent on such things Angie?

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Inchambers@

    Its hardly surprising that Angie is silent about the local recreation ground – how else would she get someone to sleep with her?

    Angie’s morals are selective and drift like a seed in the wind.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Well, It seems that Christopher Everard is still using and promoting this hoax. From his Facebook page less than an hour ago:
    ****************************************
    Christopher Everard
    47 mins ·

    HAMPSTEAD: I am still continuing investigations into the whistleblower children at the centre of the Hampstead case which erupted onto the newswires in 2015. This statue is at a stately home where the Rolling Stones did a photo shoot for the album BEGGARS BANQUET – the house is called OLD SARUM and is round the corner from Lord Janner who was at the centre of VIP sex crimes perpetrated at Westminster. Basically, in making a series of documentaries, I have managed to corroborate nearly every part of the testimony from the Hampstead whistleblower case.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Whose footage will the little fraud steal next I wonder? I DO hope Everard visits some of the Scottish film festivals or industry events some time. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t plan to ‘educate’ him on the finer points of intellectual property! – Unlike Maloney, the guy’s not even funny.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Agreed – he’s not funny in the least. And none too bright, either: when asked by a guest if he was familiar with the work of Ivan Pavlov, he responded clumsily that it didn’t ‘ring a bell’. Clever wordplay? No, just utter stupidity. Guess he’s not familiar with the Stones’ greatest hits, either.

        Beggars belief.

        Like

    • My pal has lived all his life in Whitechapel near where the Jack The Ripper murders happened. His parents owned the house before he did. It must mean something.

      Janner has been accused of crimes but not of being “at the centre of VIP sex crimes perpetrated at Westminster.”. Everard is indeed a moron.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Read his latest post about Aigue Morte which really pissed me off. It’s a fairly unknown French town in the South but I holidayed there for nearly 20 years as a late friend owned a house there. One of the most beautiful parts of France and the town is one of the quaintest I’ve ever been to, surrounded by a medieval wall but Everard has found only gloom & doom in the place. He should be put in stocks in the town square and pelted with rotten fruit.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Oh Dear… I now have Sandford and Saker’s “Stamp On A Skurff Today” running through my head. – For your own sake do NOT Google this! 😉

      Liked by 3 people

    • That was an extremely sudden & strange donation after her claims about receiving 20 grand from her sister. It is very difficult to make a phony donation to GoFundMe. You have to leave a credit card number. Frankly it’s a total unbelievable donation. Just not credible. Fraud on such sites like GoFundMe is still an untested area but it’s ripe for fraud and to ‘donate’ to the pot fraudulently to entice others to donate would be an act of fraud.

      If your name is not really Angela Power-Disney the one you are asking for donations in, you can easily ‘donate’ to yourself. She has used variations of that name. I guarantee we don’t actually have her real name. It may be a variation on the ones she uses.

      A favourite trick in the old days of con merchants or convicted criminals was to change one letter in the spelling of their name which fooled computers when they were first used.

      Also the UK is the one place where you can still legally change your name & not leave a paper trail. I know of one quite famous film director who did exactly that around 20 years ago after a drug conviction in New Zealand and before he found success. He changed the spelling of his first name & it was so subtle it worked.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Surely there a Deed Poll is needed in England and Wales for a legal change? – Though in Scotland there is no such thing. Certainy I’ve seen her use Disney and D’Isigny. – Being divorced as well she may well use plain old ‘Power’! – And that’s probably just for starters as of course we’re dealing with someone who seems to ‘operate’ across two different countries! – Slippy!

        Liked by 2 people

        • Sorry didn’t explain that properly : deed poll is the quickest way to change your name but there is no way of checking what deed polls exist, in the way you can go through local council records & see who owns a certain property. One of the oldest tricks in the book for career criminals was for an English resident to pop over to Northern Ireland and change their name there and visa versa. Most Western countries have now centralized name changing so police etc can access records and even restricted the number of times you can change your name but the UK hasn’t caught up.

          Liked by 1 person

          • A Deed Poll is witnessed by a Notary or a Magistrate and costs money. A Statutory Declaration is far easier, and all it costs is time and two willing people to witness it.

            (have done both for various individuals)

            Like

  13. 22:00 Yet again the lying bitch is claiming to have received death threats from us. Funny how she’s still unable to provide one single link or screenshot to back it up.

    Nice admissions that she’s being investigated for fraud, though, and confirmation that she’s pissed off to Lanzarote to evade arrest.

    Part 2:

    Sorry If these have already been posted – I’ve been away for the weekend and am slowly catching up🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    • Video 2, 4:56

      Does anyone get her bizarre rant about extra views being generated by us thumbing down her videos and about how this is also proof that YouTube (and Facebook, apparently) is covering up satanic ritual abuse? No matter how many times I listen to that bit, I can’t figure out what the fuck she’s banging on about.

      Liked by 2 people

      • She’s trying to make out that the approval score doesn’t match the view count…. And that ‘proves’ they’re in on the ‘cover up’. Personally I couldn’t be arsed trawling though her rubbish to see if there’s any truth in the numbers thing she claims – but given that Youtube won’t even delete the ILLEGAL videos that identify the children how the hell can they be ‘in’ on anything except filling their own pockets at any price?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Video 2, 17:20 – “I’m related to Princess Diana, I’m related to Camilla Parker-Bowles, I’m related to Madonna, I’m related to Gwen Stefani…and through my marriage to the Disneys…”

      *Rolls eyes*

      Liked by 2 people

    • Tried to listen but can’t stand the sound of her pompous voice.

      Will have to psych myself up another time to listen to it…

      Angela looks suspiciously tanned in that 1st video and unless she’s been in Lanzarote for a week or so, i don’t reckon she would be this early in April…

      Mmm…

      Surely not more fraud?

      Liked by 1 person

      • It’s difficult to understand how a individual can be so wilfully unread, but still imagine that the rest of the world is equally or even more uneducated. – Or perhaps, just like a badly-spelled email from a Nigerian scammer, this is some sort of ‘filter’ she uses to make sure than only the dimmest follow her wake?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Belinda must be loving the way Angie carries on.

          I can just imagine the smirk on her face now!

          Only people that are a “bit thick” or “thick” or “very thick” are going to believe anything Angela Power-Disney D’Isgny says.

          Where did the snob get the D’Isgny rubbish from?

          If your husband was Disney Ange, it’s DISNEY not D’ISGNY.

          Less of the snobbish nonsense, you’re a failed journalist…..

          Liked by 1 person

          • With all due respect Babs, in order to have failed at being a Journalist she would have had to at least have tried – seriously – to earn that title. – There is not any evidence of this. Not even so much to indicate she might have once read a ‘For Dummies’ book on the subject.

            And I wouldn’t doubt the adoption of the original form of the name is simply an attempt to defraud/deceive, though no-doubt she finds the aggrandisement to her (self) satisfaction.

            Like

  14. What the bloody hell is the lying skank banging on about now?

    Seriously, she blocked me months ago – I can’t even view her page from this account, never mind send her private messages! And how the hell is Gabriella Barney the name of her daughter?

    Oh wait – she thought she could get away with bullshitting about me because she thought I couldn’t see her rants. Trouble is, she was too stupid to realise that all I had to do to see them was log on from my other account. D’oh!

    Oh and what an absolutely disgusting lie about another friend of Hoaxtead Research and his daughter. Seriously, how the hell does this despicable excuse for a human being think she has the right to call herself a Christian?!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Pingback: Email breaches bail, libels Hoaxtead police officer | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  16. Pingback: Abe and Ella: Have they given up? | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.