The tired old ‘child porn’ myth debunked…again

You can tell the Hoaxtead gang are running low on material when they start recycling arguments that were roundly debunked a year ago. This time, it’s the old ‘RD is a consumer and/or producer of child sex abuse images’ myth.

The intellectual powerhouse Scott Pattinson, aka ‘SuperEarther’, has resurrected this video, in which he does his best to reproduce an argument he seems not to understand:

We can’t recommend that you watch it, unless you’re fascinated by the apparent failure of our educational system to reach those at the bottom end of the bell curve, but it reminded us of this post from last year, when Charlotte Alton Ward got all frothed at the mouth, and wrote this highly imaginative gem (transcript of one of her obscene videos):

The children allege that their father RD is a child pornographer. RD, they allege, sexually abuses and humiliates them and the other children, along with all the other members of the cult. RD and the others film this and upload it onto the internet; the children claim that their father has shown them some of this material.

So in this video we’re going to offer evidence that seems to substantiate the children’s allegations.

Every internet user is familiar with predictive analysis. Predictive software analyses your behaviour patterns online and works out what kind of a person you are. For example, if you buy lots of shoes on ebay the software will pick up your shopping patterns, analyse them and advertise shoe shops and ebay at you. YouTube uses it to recommend videos based on the other videos you have watched and so on. Ecommerce is now such big business that online retailers have invested millions into developing increasingly accurate predictive software.

Back in March 2015 a fellow researcher – let’s call him John Smith – left a message on our Hampstead Research blog. John stressed that he was not accusing anyone of being guilty but RD seemed to be delting (sic) all traces of himself from the internet.

John drew our attention to one particular website that RD had deleted. The IP address of this website was very important, he said.

Ns2.2heartsdelight.com

We were unable to verify whether 2 hearts delight belonged to RD so we took John’s word for it. John explained that 2hearts delight’s IP address is not a normal IP address, it is a step up from that: 2heartsdelight is a domain name server, or DNS. A DNS is used as a look up table to reference other websites. According to John, if you add a DNS address to your computer you can access websites that other people can’t access, not unless they know the IP addresses of those websites.

So, we wondered, would a DNS give someone who knew what they were doing access to illegal sites, sites that were hidden, sites that contained, say, child pornography? Could a DNS be used to search Deep Net? Is this how paedophiles and other criminals operate online? We don’t know but from what John said, it sounds as if this could be the case.

We followed John’s lead and looked up 2heartsdelight on the Wayback machine. And here we can see that 2hearts provided services and conducted tours with deep connections into the US and Russia.

We have also heard that the symbols of two hearts is sometimes used as a pedophilic reference to sex with young girls. We don’t know if this is fact but if it is then the name 2heartsdelight could signal more than a straightforward dating agency.

Still following John’s lead on 23 March 2015 we accessed this website, which shows us all the websites that are hosted at RD’s IP address.

On the surface it all looks perfectly innocent – a selection of health related sites. But when we checked the predictive analysis software, which can see what’s going on behind the scenes, we were directed to a list of hardcore and child pornography websites.

We decided to look into these websites for the purpose of fact checking. After all, they look and sound like child pornography but are they really? What we found is that most of these links were inactive. One, however, was active. This link was offering pornography of children as young as one year old. In the cause of fact checking, because we did not want to accuse an innocent man, we followed some of the links and found pronographic (sic) images of young girls. We did not want to investigate further but we did this to demonstrate to our viewers that this is fact.

So the predictive software had worked out that was going on behind the scenes on RD’s computer was nothing to do with health and fitness – the predictive software told us that these websites might be a front for child pornography.

Please note that predictive software cannot lie. It cannot be compromised or intimidated into silence. It is automated; designed to analyse online behaviour.

We emailed this website to ask which predictive software they use and how it works but they have not yet received a reply.

The child porn site you were looking at may not have been registered by RD and the material we examined may not originate from him either. It is, however, quite possible that this is the case. The software strongly suggests that he and the other users of his websites have at least accessed this IP address. When we look up who registered littleorgies we find someone at an address in the Ukraine calling themself (sic) V Smirnoff, which may well, of course, be a fake name.

Please note that as RD seems to be removing his websites or moving things around, things will have changed over the past three weeks. When we checked the predictive software on 16 April 2015 the only trace of child pornography we were offered was this: the gay website is probably nothing illegal although dorms may have paedophile connotations.

Tellingly, back in March, when we dug further into the predictive software it revealed that users of this child pornography sites appeared to be accessing a collection of medical sites to do with

diagnosing whether an adult man – or female child – has a sexually transmitted disease. Many of these websites look the same, as if they have been created by the same person.

And now I want you to use your imagination. What if a decent loving parent or relative heard that their child had been abused and that videos of this had been posted online. What if that person was so distressed they felt a need to investigate those claims, search for that pornography and try to identify faces and guilty parties? Would that parent be allowed to do this?

No way. No matter how well meaning they were they would be risking arrest.

Yet these laws do not apply to child pornographers and paedophiles. People like RD are being protected by the UK judiciary, people like Judge Pauffley. And when previous PM Tony Blair was informed that a large number of his fellow politicians and members of the estalishment (sic)  had been caught viewing child pornography online, he issued a D Notice, which prohibited the media from reporting the matter and protected the child pornographers and paedophiles, who were never arrested.

Thank goodness, then, for John Smith’s message and predictive analysis software, which gave us evidence to substantiate the children’s allegations without having to search out or view such material.

We hope that this evidence will be admissable (sic) in court in support of the children’s allegations.

Quite aside from the fact that Charlotte admits several times that she doesn’t actually have any evidence at all (“we took John’s word for it“; “we have heard“; “we don’t know if this is fact“; “now I want you to use your imagination“), both she and ‘John Smith’ are both, well, full of sh*t.

Why it doesn’t work that way

As it happens, we have our own tech specialist here at Hoaxtead Research, and here’s what they said in answer to our questions about Charlotte’s allegations:

1. Would a DNS give someone who knew what they were doing access to illegal sites?

Yes, in a way it would, if by “a DNS” they mean “adding entries to the host’s file”. The porn site was never inaccessible to begin with, but doing it that way is one (very clumsy) way to trick your browser into making the request you need.

2. Could a DNS be used to search Deep Net?

To access certain sites, yes. To search, no. Not unless one of the sites you access is an index of said net. (DNS has no search capabilities at all.)

3. Is this how paedophiles and other criminals operate online?

Maybe. It’s a plausible, if very low-tech, way to sort-of hide a website. They would have to be pretty inept criminals, without much technical expertise.

4. Can you really use predictive analysis software to find out what someone else’s “sites of interest” might be?

Nope. Never, not at all. It will only show you what it thinks your own interests might be, based on where your browser has been recently.

In other words, because Charlotte is fascinated by child sex abuse images and has probably gone looking for similar sites in the past, her predictive analysis software takes her to that kind of site.

Oh, and a brief word about IP addresses:

In addition, when a person sets up a website and puts it on a host server (like Bluehost, GoDaddy, etc.), their site will not get its own unique IP address. It will get an IP address that’s shared by a bunch of other sites, because there’s a finite number of IPs laying about, and web hosting companies will typically place a bunch of domains on one IP.

So…to the Hoaxtead pushers who are hoping to resurrect this old and not very clever myth: sorry, nice try, but no prize.

(p.s. For even more on this subject, this post from last year contains excellent reference material. Not that we expect Scott Pattinson or Charlotte Ward to get any of it.)

Nice try pervert

37 thoughts on “The tired old ‘child porn’ myth debunked…again

  1. How on earth would this bunch of dipsh*ts know what RD’s IP address was ?. In this day & age of the internet I think there really needs to be a law of Criminal Libel. I guess “Predictive software analyses” does work though as even on here adverts pop up obviously for me – for brand new Mercedes cars because I’ve been searching online for a second hand Merc of a certain vintage. But to show how inaccurate it can be : I cannot afford a $80K brand new Merc and that’s what the ads keep giving me. So it’s rather useless really in predicting much.

    As for this creature Charlotte Alton Ward she has admitted seeking out child porn in “the interests of research” : an excuse used by many who get busted for the same. Quite apart from libeling numerous innocent people she repeats myths such as the D-Notice supposedly issued by Blair (no proof -just internet gossip) which ignores Britain’s rapacious media who would be all over it if true as would those accused political enemies.

    ## it occurs to me that with Jake & The Caution from the previous thread- these hoaxers have accused numerous police at particular police stations of being baby murdering cultists along with social workers etc. Perhaps – as would be their right – they are insisting authorities crack down on these defamers.

    Liked by 2 people

    • These people know enough about technology to find the ‘on’ switch on their laptops, and that’s about the extent of it. The rest of Charlotte’s post, and Scott’s attempt to remake it, is pure 100% unadulterated gibberish.

      While predictive analysis is accurate to a point, as you say, it tends to be quite general; however, it clearly sussed the type of page Charlotte was interested in, and gave it to her.

      Like

      • EC, I am clearly techno-challenged and fatigued by other major stressors at the moment, but am I to understand from the first item you explain in detail that some of the most ‘damning’ screenshots they trot out – in particular, the one that shows the name and age of at least one of the children within the context of a pornographic video – was, in fact, created / embedded by the hoax brigade itself in order to ‘prove’ culpability on the part of RD as convincingly as possible? Please forgive my glacial mental pace at the moment …never developed any IP expertise myself, and certainly have no experience or familiarity with access to child abuse sites. Hope my question made sense…

        Liked by 1 person

        • It’s entirely possible that that’s what they did, yes. I recall Charlotte messing about with child sex abuse images that she acquired on various illegal sites. But the DNS thing is a separate issue: the fact is that as JW says, the sites named don’t exist any longer, and even if they did, they wouldn’t behave the way she and Scott seem to think they would.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. Great post, EC! I notice several commenters attempted to knock some sense into that ultra-thick skull of his – to absolutely NO avail, of course. Pattinson and his ilk are quite clearly pathologically obsessed with the deflated hoax, and will likely remain every bit as deluded /preoccupied when drawing their last breaths. As disconcerting as their obsession is, the silver lining is that (speaking for myself, anyway) it fills comparatively well-adjusted humans with a sense of gratitude vis-à-vis their own sanity/ability to actually think rationally, AND about *other things* happening in the universe ! This has deep psychopathology written all over it in metaphorical capslock mode- with a mega-dose of dyslexia thrown in for good measure. What a *pathetic* sod.

    By the way, does anyone know what that infernal, accompanying ‘theme music’ is? I can’t place it, and it’s driving me nuts ! I know, I know, it shouldn’t…

    In sum: way to stick it to the creature and his equally twisted (but mercifully tiny) posse, EC !

    Liked by 1 person

      • Okay, just one more try on this effer!
        I understand your points. Guess what I’m suggesting is that, even if any such link no longer exists, I’d love for someone to be able to trace it directly back to its original architects who, to my untrained tech mind, must have *created*, not simply *come across* it, precisely because of the clearly purposeful embedding of a child’s exact (unusual) name and age beside the “2 clicks” in an effort to incriminate an innocent man. Don’t know if this info, having floated around for so very long, could still be traced to a specific, libellous source or sources. Seems highly unlikely that it was found through ‘dumb tech luck’, though…but constructed meticulously to reinforce a hoax /ruin a father. And the person/s behind its inception -to my rudimentary legal mind, anyway – should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if successfully identified and caught. I just cannot bear to imagine such specifically targeted,diabolical acts going unpunished. They have decimated a reputation and caused irreparable damage to so many that simply letting go of that pivotal piece of the legal puzzle, instead of getting to the very bottom of it, would be nothing short of a gross miscarriage of justice. Is it simply too far gone for any restoration of true karmic balance to be expected at this point? The hoax is dead and buried,but only the innocent have suffered and paid in their own tragic ways thus far…crossing my fingers that the chickens will come home to roost for as many evildoers behind it all in their various capacities – & the sooner, the better !

        Liked by 1 person

        • I have a feeling that many of those chickens are finally on their way back home. It’ll take time, but you know chickens: not terribly bright, and their flight and navigation skills aren’t always the best. However, we’ll be waiting for them when they arrive.

          Like

  3. Well – its a fact that “Ns2.2heartsdelight.com” is NOT a current DNS and “2heartsdelight.com” is not a current registered domain.

    It’s also a fact that in the world of forensic IT its relatively easy to trace WHO posted a video and from where. IP spoofing is not very successful in today’s modern world.

    Another fact is that the video has been reported to YouTube for violating its terms and conditions, EC is right its a sign of hoaxsters becoming increasingly desperate to clutch at anything as their boat sinks

    Liked by 2 people

  4. That vile creature Power-Disney who has lured a young man into getting a possible criminal record has a bizarre obsession with child abuse cases that makes me wonder where her brain really is at. She more than many hoaxers posts endless links to newspaper reporters of abuse cases (as though none of us scan the newspapers ourselves) but in a manner that this scatter gun affect some how proves her false claims of Satanism in Hampstead. Now she is alluding that celebrity deaths are possibly like the Lord Lucan case. Celebs don’t die (even in their 70s/80s) -they go off to live in Israel with Robert Maxwell and Greville Janner and maybe even Jimmy Savile is there.

    I think this woman more than any others is a grifter of the first order trying to establish herself as a “child abuse” campaigner. We have seen from real charities than many people often donate to numerous causes and we don;t really know how much is channeled to these hoaxers via their Paypal buttons. There may be 100s or 1000s who click just a few quid but it all adds up. Does social security know she is receiving donations? All income must be declared.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. That is the worst hampstead hoax propaganda video ever. Whoever made it has an IQ of -170.

    With that kind of rationale/logic you are just banging your head against a brick wall, unfortunately.

    What to do about really stupid people?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you! I was actually looking for this video from last year, but it was lost amongst all the links that piled up then. If anyone has trouble getting it to play, just right-click on the screen and click ‘play’.

      Like

  6. We are lucky in the UK to have CEOP. Scott is a fool to try to push the hoax again, still it might not be Scott – but that will no doubt be checked by CEOP and the perpetrator found.

    The end result of all of this (the video at the start of this thread) is untold damage to the children

    Like

    • Yes, exactly. Scot is a fool–he’s a low-level foot soldier, with lead ingot where his brains ought to be, which is why he seems determined to keep publishing this garbage.

      Like

  7. Belinda seems to be up to her old tricks again. Its worth reading as it seems Belinda is pushing the limits of an injunction (has she exceeded those limits?)
    Also considering that the mum (of the Zimbabwean boy) states that on 2015 her son was returning to attend an elite school, the Knight Foundation website is still calling for donations.
    The mother is obviously a well educated and qualified person – why does she not get off her backside and EARN some money instead of calling for donations….
    The article:
    From: http://www.theknightfoundation.org.uk/home/2016/04/zimbabwean-story-2/
    “Zimbabwean Story (2) Mum writes to London Borough of Sutton
    FAO All LB of Sutton Councillors, All LB of Sutton Taxpayers and the MP for Sutton
    Dear Sir/Madam
    [Name Redacted] Grandson in the care of the LB of Sutton
    On Monday 18 April 2016 the former Lib Dem MP, John Hemming, appeared on ITV’s Good Morning Britain to talk about the Celebrity Media Injunction that was being decided in the Court of Appeal, during this interview Mr Hemming spoke about the Celebrity Media Injunction obtained by the LB of Sutton concerning my son’s grandfather, [name redacted]. Later on 18 April 2016 Mr Hemming appeared on BBC Radio Ulster’s Evening Extra programme at 5.38pm to speak in more detail about the scandal of what is going on in the LB of Sutton and that it is in the interest of taxpayers to know what is going on at the LB of Sutton.
    Below are the links to the ITV & BBC Broadcasts.
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByzgcWNXJjkoeTdQMWJjcjBQOTQ/view?usp=sharing
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByzgcWNXJjkodlZlWnVMYnJDQWM/view?usp=sharing
    In May last year my son, then 15, was spending a few days holiday with relatives in the UK before he was due to get on a plane to fly on 8 May 2015 to South Africa and then onto our home in Zimbabwe and to attend an elite international school there. Instead of flying out on 8 May 2015 my son ended up in the care of the LB of Sutton. At that time I was fighting for child maintenance for my son in the South Africa Courts from Trevor [name redacted], my son’s father. Not one penny has ever been paid in child maintenance. Under South African law if a father does not pay maintenance for his child then his parents, [names redacted], should pay instead – but they have not paid anything and indeed have not seen their grandson since he was 2. When we were living in Canada I tried to take my son to meet his grandfather at an event there, but we were barred.

    I am aware of the [name redacted] Foundation UK and its close links to Sutton and the LB of Sutton, on its website is a photo of Cllr Ruth Dombey who is the Leader of the LB of Sutton.
    As stated by John Hemming in the media, my son and I have been doing a “Julian Assange” since 5 April 2016 when we took refuge in the Zimbabwe Embassy after my son ran away from a hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice. We remain living in the Embassy trying to get a safe passage out of the UK. On Saturday 9 April the LB of Sutton solicitor was trying to intimidate us in the Embassy via an out-of-hours Collections Order re my son; at the same time the [name redacted] Foundation UK were holding a Peace & Mediation Conference in Regents Park – speakers included Desmond Tutu’s daughter and grand-daughter.
    My son has been in care for nearly 12 months, even though under Article 6 (2) of the Hague Convention 1996 this was unlawful as my son was habitually resident throughout that time in Zimbabwe. For more details re this please see the link to a website.
    Zimbabwean Teen On The Run From Abuse in Norwich’s Perverted Juvenile Prison
    Below are links to 2 videos made since my son and I have been in the Embassy to help you understand the scandalous waste of taxpayers money by the LB of Sutton.
    Fugitive Zimbabwean Teen still trapped in Embassy – And yet UK has no Jurisdiction
    Appeal for Donations for [name redacted]’s Zimbabwean Grandson trapped in Zimbabwe Embassy in London
    Some examples of wasted taxpayers money include hiring an immigration barrister to see “if my son can get asylum here when my son does not want to live in the UK”, applying to the Home Office for extensions of my son’s visa to keep him in care at public expense, hiring a solicitor in Canada and wanting to finance 2 court cases in Canada against the Canadian Government in Alberta who refuse to take responsibility for my son in Canada. The LB of Sutton have been very determined that my 16 year-old son should live alone in Canada, even though the only realistic option is that he has to live in a homeless shelter there. Now they want to send him to Newcastle to live at taxpayers expense and then deport him when he is 18.
    The LB of Sutton care so much for my son that when he was in hospital recently he had to go nearly 8 weeks without even a change of clothes;. Up until now he still has not recovered his belongings. My son sustained criminal injuries on 12 August 2015 when he was stabbed – what has the LB of Sutton done to get my son compensation from the CICA? Who can persuade the LB of Sutton to pay me the contact expenses that they promised to pay me? On the video we made on Sunday you will see my son asking money for food for us and that kind strangers are bringing us food to the embassy.
    Should someone be doing a Freedom of Information request as to the whole cost to the British Taxpayer of keeping my son in the UK against his wishes? Does the LB of Sutton really need to take into care foreign tourist children visiting London, at public expense?
    My son wants to stop being an avoidable expense to the UK taxpayer and to go home to Zimbabwe as soon as possible, what can you do to help us to leave? Here is a link to his appeal to Mr Justice MacDonald today.
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByzgcWNXJjkob2hZdGU4MVFxakk/view?usp=sharing
    If you have any questions on any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.
    Yours sincerely
    [name redacted]
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………
    Just as a reminder of the domain registration details:
    Knight of course resigned from the Knight Foundation on 14th May 2014 – 2 months AFTER the domain was registered
    BELINDA MCKENZIE RESIGNED AS A DIRECTOR OF THE KNIGHT FOUNDATION ON 12th APRIL 2016 – things must be getting hot for her – A Charities Commission investigation into the foundations affairs and the Zimbabwean Boy case….
    Her resignation was two days after the annual return for a DORMANT company was filed
    Now £1 in the bank??? Remember Belinda’s statement

    So the £800 – Sabines living expenses?
    After the resignation of 7 officials of the company the person left alone holding the baby is David Mark Forbes. A 32 year old – is he due to be left carrying the can for the actions of Belinda and Sabine?

    Liked by 1 person

    • EC please, in the interest of clarity, would you correct my typo above:

      Was: “Also considering that she states that on 2015 her son was returning to attend an elite school she is still calling for donations.”

      To: Also considering that the mum (of the Zimbabwean boy) states that in 2015 her son was returning to attend an “elite school” The Knight Foundation Website is still calling for donations for the Zimbabwean cause….

      Liked by 1 person

    • I am having a bad day (too much wine and not enough sleep).. EC please also correct the two days to two months

      From

      Knight of course resigned from the Knight Foundation on 14th May 2014 – 2 days AFTER the domain was registered

      To

      Knight of course resigned from the Knight Foundation on 14th May 2014 – 2 months AFTER the domain was registered

      Sorry.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks, JW. I hadn’t realised that Belinda had resigned from the Knight Foundation earlier this month. Most interesting indeed.

      And I agree, that sounds like the typical build-up to a Belinda-style media campaign.

      What do we bet a Mr Booker picks it up at some point for his newspaper column? And I’m sure the red-tops will be all over it like a rash, as it contains all their favourite ingredients: sex, child abuse, and a chance to play Pin the Scandal on the Celebrity Icon.

      Like

    • The Zimbabweans seem to be stamping their feet and demanding privileges not available to anyone else in their situation and seemingly because the boy is related to Tutu.
      So McKenzie has admitted defrauding her own charity to send money to Sabine whose benefits were cut off because she fled the country- something that would happen to any other person fleeing.

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.