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:

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:

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.