Neelu gets into more hot water

/ 24/04/2016

Thanks go to one of our supporters, who happened to be outside Maggie Tuttle’s ‘Children Screaming to Be Heard’ conference yesterday afternoon, where he met Neelu Berry, who was handing out leaflets to unwary passers-by.

We’re not conversant with her current bail details, but it does strike us as probably unwise for Neelu to be flogging the Hoaxtead case on street corners.

Some of our team members recall that Hollie Greig campaigner Robert Green was done for a similar activity a few years back. Granted, Green’s leaflets contained the names of those he accused, but Neelu’s leaflets do refer to websites where those names may be found.

And of course, those sites identify RD’s children, as well as the other children supposedly abused by the alleged ‘cult’; they also name the accused adults.

The photos are a bit hard to read, so we’ve transcribed the text here:

PLEASE BE AWARE, VIGILANT AND SUPPORT

Please be aware of the 2 Hampstead whistle-blower children, then 8 and 9 yrs old in September 2014.

A cover up of systematic abuse of these two children, involving the ‘Royal Courts of Justice’. Also ‘Daily Mail’, ‘Telegraph’, ‘The Mirror’, ‘Ham&High’ (Hampstead and Highgate newspaper) and just recently, over a year after the initial exposing, ‘The Sun’. In a panicking attempt by these abusers to cover their evils. Also a few disinformation conspiracy sites including ‘WideShut’ and ‘Spiked-online’. Also as you can probably imagine, the BBC also play a part in this cover up. We can uncover.

Their mother felt her life to be at threat due to the infiltration of police regarding this abuse, so has fled the country to be in a safe place to compile evidence and support, and to attack this system. We need to make people aware and vigilant so this corruption within institutions can be cleansed.

The brother and sister have made extensive testimonies regarding places and people involved in North London. Police interviews are uploaded to the internet which we must see as a blessing as sad as the situation is. The plan is to make as many people in the world aware and confident with the knowledge of who is telling the truth—the children!

There are many false account names on Facebook and YouTube trolling to cause confusion and delusion. They try to suggest that they/others are uncovering truth, but it seems the child abusers are throwing accusations back and forth to confuse an unsuspecting public, and to cause distraction.

Please—look at ‘Hampstead Cover Up on child abuse’ on YouTube, Facebook and Google with an open mind. Please don’t be fooled by shallow press comments. Look deeper. Share with as many as you can. Thank you so much.

THE MOTHER’S SITE: http://www.hampsteadcoverup.com. Also the group http://www.facebook.com/Anonymous-OpHampstead-526143144231337/

We admit to a small sense of annoyance at not being included in Neelu’s list of ‘disinformation conspiracy sites’, but we’ll let it pass.

Meanwhile, we’ve informed the police of Neelu’s activity. We’ll keep you updated to any results.

Neelu Berry 2015-10-07

Related posts

43 thoughts on “Neelu gets into more hot water”

  1. Lotus Princess clearly has real problems (arrested treasonable judges, liens and so on) so you would think some of the saner (?) hoaxers would be a bit more protective of her seeing she is already in trouble. But no they allow her to get herself in deeper and deeper. Did Robert Green get any support form his cohorts ? No they just sort of abandoned him to his feat while they made a few sympathetic noises and then moved onto the next drama.

    Liked by 1 person

    • They were delighted to use Carol Woods, the ex-social worker with obvious mental health problems, to promote their agenda indoors at the conference, while Neelu, a similarly vulnerable person, was allowed to promote that same agenda outside. These people are truly vile.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. What an incredible ending to the week, one must wonder if these people actually live in the same universe as the rest of us? Civil disobedience as a statement to try to get change of the law is one thing (albeit incredibly close to crossing the thin line and moving onto acts that are criminal) but actually starting off with actions that clearly place a person at risk of criminal law action seems totally silly.

    Personally I feel it is unwise to speculate on Neelus reasons behind her actions yesterday or the possible consequences upon her pending trial – such speculation might be what Neelu and Sabine are actually hoping for as a tool to alter the outcome of their trial (a claim from them perhaps, that they could not have a fair trial due to what has been published on the internet – ironic really)

    Liked by 2 people

    • grrr only if we let them……. ? i’m not sure whether to fight fire with fire ? petition, event, vigil 🙂 i reckon by july nice whether, get some real truthers along, and good films, of in depth talks, etc or through other creative means, which are becoming more likely…… ? i will be planning some events, and stuff soon, mooting, ? waddya think ?

      Given that is my manor, i will explain why i know really do believe this dirty lot preplan on how too’s, from highgate hub, there is a chess board in the garden, i reckon plans, pawns, are enacted as well as all kinds of rituals, none of which bothers me, because i see things quite simple and essentially it’s about focus, willpower, power, energy, motivation, intention, i have tried to make my position clearer, that i do believe the roots began for social media on CSA sabotage from 2010, and have grown and spread from there…….

      Their downfall will be because of their viralisation of toxic and that the core of the web is wrong…… that core has been seriously damaged and the web is fragile, weak and falling apart, the core strength of real survivors and thrivers, or those that can still go on, will come back to a more healthy centre and this case has facilitated that, which i didn’t expect, and have been i hope respectful to the main core victims of this particular case…….

      The children of hampstead, Christchurch and all hurt as the nastiness spread leaving so much damage in the wake, except that the abusive behaviour of all, who promote the case, still as real……. has been highlighted to very serious networks on this, and today i have highlighted sabines latest attempt, to serious international networks on human trafficking and if the MEP’s are not aware, they can be very quickly and properly educated, by people who already work with the FBI, Interpol, and all agencies…………

      I do hope that more good than harm can come of this, but then i am an eternal optimist, but i do believe we can transform much, from the education that has come from this blog…….

      A team of people able to sustain and entertain varying points of view, beliefs, and differences of opinion amongst such a contentious subject and case, which on top of has been systematically massaged into worse than ugly depths, …….

      So many are still playing their part, and crossing swords on youtube and other platforms, as the main players attempt to ignore us and carry on…….

      Like

    • @JW – can you please elaborate on what exactly the Sabine defence team could say about their own case being compromised due to internet coverage of their alleged crimes as they happen, which is imo a service to the community, as the police and various agencies do not seem to have the resources themselves to track and document these themselves, and make the connections with other aspects, in real time. The information contained within this blog might be a vital repository of evidence for court which may otherwise not be available. What can be said, and what cannot be said here?

      Like

        • I agree any talk should be well considered and I’m sure moderators of this blog are diligent enough to censor any material on here that may give cause grief. I think however if this was a planned strategy in respect of receiving a ‘fair trial’ it would be doomed. As demonstrated by the vast amounts of prejudicial publicity given to recent celebrity trials that have not even got a mention during trials.

          Liked by 1 person

          • That’s a good point, Sam–the courts do seem to be able to ignore material published about celebrity cases. However, as you say, we realised once Belinda and Sabine’s case got under way it would be best for us not to comment on the details of that case for the duration. We’re taking a ‘better safe than sorry’ approach, since we really don’t know what sort of impact our small publication could have.

            As SW says above, though, the nature of the internet is that material we’ve published in the past remains on view, essentially forever. It seems almost silly to now clamp our lips shut and refuse to discuss things once charges are actually laid, as anyone who cares to can look up past posts here, but that’s how it must be.

            Like

      • As a general principle discussing a trial in the “media”, its merits and it outcomes holds the potential that such discussion may be deemed to be an attempt to influence the outcome of a trial and is thus in contempt of Court.

        The Internet and its various public blogs, and open social media sites are defined in our modern world as “media”

        This article, whilst now quite old does reflect the thoughts of the legal system:

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25210867

        Without doubt the two defendants in this case are smart enough to try to use any loophole to avoid a trial – why would anyone want to undo all the good work done by this site?

        There have been numerous prosecutions of people (in recent years) when that line has been crossed.

        Contemporaneous factual reporting in the media is allowed, however speculation is dangerous and crosses into a potential black hole…

        Liked by 2 people

      • You are currently commenting on an active case ‘Sabine Watch’, the law disallows that for good reason. It is inappropriate to comment/speculate on what may or may not happen at trial. Only contemporaneous reporting of events is permitted by the law. I would suggest that no-one with an interest in seeing justice run its course should be tempted by what might be viewed by some as a tasty bait.

        Liked by 3 people

  3. Pingback: Neelu gets into more hot water | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  4. On another front, yesterday bought some incredible claims in the case of the Zimbabwean mother and boy currently seeking refuge from the Courts in the Zimbabwean embassy in LOndon.

    Its a case that Belinda McKenzie has latched onto, and has been reporting on via the website for the Knight Foundation (the “charity” that Belinda removed herself from as a director earlier this month).

    Its strange that Belinda has made no report on the hearing that was held on Friday in the RCJ before Mr Justice MacDonald. There are various reporting restrictions placed upon the case by an Injunction also involving the Child’s Grandfather (who I shall not name) – Its sufficent to say that he is a prominent figure.Those restrictions did not stop Belinda with her previous three reports.

    Many of the issues share remarkable similarity to other cases that Sabine and Belinda have been involved with – publishing information on the internet, contrary to a Court Order not to do so, Recording Court proceedings, sacking of a lawyer to be be replaced by a Mckenzie friend, a request for donations…..

    The mother has setup a website and seems to have little regard for the Court, or the protection of the sons anonymity as ordered by the Court.

    Indeed the mother appears to have helped the publication of an audio recording of the entire Court hearing on the internet, as well as various video links during the hearing on Friday (22nd April) between the Court, her and her son.

    Its clear that neither Sabine or Belinda are the “McKenzie friend” for the boy – instead its EX MP John Hemming who has been put forward to act as the McKenzie friend.

    Hemming in another video of the Mothers / boy is seen discussing with Hemming about the legalities of posting information on non UK hosted websites to avoid British law.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Neelu also seems to have latched onto this, with mentions of John Hemming in her latest facebook posts and also this post note the comment about donations and “cash flow problems”

    Liked by 2 people

    • The Princess has her own way of exaggerating everything that now includes rape whilst in care. She believes everything she is told.I wonder if she is interested in a project I have that involves Zimbabwe and a hidden $$Million dollar fortune secreted in a Swiss bank by Colonel Boopbopalooloo which for a reasonable fee I can have transferred to her bank account?

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Actually Robert Green wasn’t “done for a similar activity a few years back” – we would have been happier if he had been. But sadly, that he was ‘persecuted’ for handing out leaflets is a myth promoted by his supporters. Additionally, since (incredibly) the right to anonymity doesn’t exist in Scotland, the matter of him naming people would have been a civil matter of Defamation. – In reality Green was prosecuted for ‘Breach Of The Peace’. And that was based on a course of conduct which, it was evidenced, frightened certain residents of an Aberdeen suburb. His case is thought to have been the most expensive of its type in Scottish legal history. and the prosecution was gained largely because Green, instead of defending himself, used his trial to spout a load of nonsense that was of little or no relevance to the charge.

    As Robert Green is attempting a ‘comeback’ on the conspiritainment circuit it would be as well not to feed the myths he rides on! – Green’s presecution was a shambles, it didn’t explicitly clear anyone’s name and only served to make him more of a martyr. And the fat lady hasn’t finished her last aria where he is concerned!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ah, thanks for clarifying the Green issue. I apologise for misspeaking on that. I’d hate to do anything that might help him regain a foothold in Conspiritainment Land. Mea culpa.

      Like

  9. I was led to believe that this is an X-Ray of John Hemmings head.

    (ok – so, it was Roger the 12′ Rabbit who said it)

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I think the activities of Neelu and Sabine seem designed to attract our attention. We need to avoid speculating on their case.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I don’t see any of us speculating on the case itself. We and the website are pointing out facts- a person was handing out leaflets that breach a High Court order.

    Quite apart from the case in question the matter of getting a fair trial is not a black and white matter. If a person commits a number of offenses for which there is clearly proof and evidence they did it, no amount of pre-trial media will get a trial stopped. At the most a trial can be deferred until media speculation dies down.

    It would be as though a bank robber who is caught red-handed in the act could get friends and family to mount an internet campaign and then claim they cannot get a fair trial so they should be let free.

    If however there was questionable evidence that a jury must weigh up and consider it could at best get that trial delayed until the clamor died down. Otherwise it would be so easy for any criminal or accused to have their trial stopped by mounting their own covert media campaign.

    Recall in the Rolf Harris trial main claimant sold their story to an Oz magazine and a tabloid TV show in an act which the former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions called a despicable. Nonetheless the trial went ahead in the UK. Likewise the Australian actor Robert Hughes was convicted and there was no delay in his trial despite the main complainant selling their story to a tabloid magazine and TV show with evidence produced in court that she & her agent argued over the price received for the story and the complainant stating in emails she wanted the trial and conviction publicity to help launch a US film producing career.

    Given that certain people in a current controversy may think they are clever enough to use say a website like this to have a trial stopped they wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell. Given some of the very weird ideas people out there get who think some matters are prejudicial- as an example, say a young man is called the ‘toyboy’ of an aging Irish suspected child scammer and they think they can complain to police, the likelihood of a mob of loony Satanist hunters forming any sort of credible campaign is as likely as this planet being flat. I think this is generally called ‘they couldn’t;t organize a piss-up in a brewery”

    Liked by 2 people

  12. latest from Araya Soma formerly of Soho on the death of Prince : “Under the KNOWERS’ ARC or ARCH or DOMEcile.

    PRINCE dies in the year of the (moon) QUEEN’s 2016th birthday and all the world will be playing Purple RAIN – that’s ROYAL PURPLE REIGN. Royal red and blue, aka electro magnetic energy make the purple nightly haze we see above us in the EVEning. EVE is the moon. RAIN is RA IN.

    This is all connected to the ORDER of The GOLDEN DAWN ROYAL ARCH and the ORDER of TRANSYUGGOTHIAN sex, sex, sex or 666 magic, or trans-PLUTOnium space manipulation of the purple NINTH GATE ARCH captured beneath our kingDOME ARCH.

    See more here: http://www.conjectureviews.co.uk/…/the-word-his-masters-voi…“

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Pingback: Urgent: EU Anti TraffickingMEPs | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  14. I still maintain that those directly accused of vile crimes of child abuse and murder should consider suing some of those who have perpetuated these falsehoods.

    Here is an example of a libel case which is over a far more simple matter – a man accused of having a raucous dog yet it has cost those who defended a libel action a small fortune and risks bankrupting them with no end in sight to the dispute.

    A student also found himself with a bill of over $100K after a Twitter post.

    In the Hampstead case it would not be too difficult to prove a conspiracy to defame and we know who the perps are here which include a well known woman who claims to be a McKenzie Friend who owns a substantial property. Another who hands out leaflets defaming a father owns her own home.

    I’ve worked on a umber of libel cases as a researcher. I’ve watched as people like the Jakes & Rupert Qs of the world mock such actions but when they are inevitably bankrupted they find it is suddenly a very serious matter that causes havoc in their lives even to the point of having an electricity or utility connection having to pay a huge deposit up front.

    Anyone trying to defend a libel case in an effort to frustrate the court process (knowing they have no money) can be made by the court to either deposit a substantial sum to pay for costs if they lose or admit guilt. Once they admit guilt and still defame they can be in serious trouble.

    At the very least those libeled should inform the defamer in writing that they reserve the right to sue them to avoid a matter becoming limited by time.

    The last matter I was involved with (apart from my own solicitor threatening his harasser which has made him pull his head in & apologize) was actually between two people I know professionally – one who worked for the other. The worker was sacked and posted on Facebook that they hadn’t been paid by the other and that their boss didn’t their bills. Within a month they had apologised on Facebook and were forced to pay the bosses legal costs of $15K. Only 2 solicitor’s letters were involved.

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/australian-couple-plead-bankruptcy-by-legal-bills-after-facebook-defamation-case-20160420-goauyw.html

    Liked by 1 person

    • A few years ago I fought off a defamation action from a politician. In defending what was on reflection a risky statement I made it cost me £3000 and the other party a certain amount as well. The individual who took me to court had a nervous breakdown. The matter went to arbitration paid for by the taxpayer. I am far more cautious about what I publish now. A defamation action is expensive for both sides on time, money and psychologically. I suggest avoid such actions unless the individual has money to burn and did suffer serious injury to their reputation or business. The alternative is damages claims via the county court for mental injury, loss of business, invasions of privacy, family etc.

      RD and his two children have some very good and serious damages claims they could launch against people like Angela Power Disney and Belinda McKenzie.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I agree. Libel is the last action to take but there are now lawyers in the UK who will accept a case with no money up front. Once a case begins it’s in the hands of the lawyer. The stress is really on the side of those trying to defend an action which is indefensible. It crucifies them.

        There are as you say other avenues to take : suing for stress and harassment which would be basically a slam dunk.

        But I can tell you this : I’m getting a bit weary of contributing to an excellent website which is fighting the cause of people who have been wrongly accused of terrible crimes and never getting feedback from those accused.
        I have taken an interest in this cause because friends of mine who live in Hampstead are friendly with some of those falsely accused and tell me of the stress & distress it has caused. That in turn has caused my friends stress as well but they are also thinking like me at present.

        There comes a time when people have to front up and fight their own battles. Winning the case in court and receiving a High Court judgement and injunction is worthless if there is no follow through. While a couple have been charged it is taking ages as legal matters do, to be processed.

        In the meantime the real Hampstead victims could have pursued their defamers and harassers. They not only fail to, they failed to turn up to court when it really mattered.

        While I do not intend to attack the genuine victims for their inaction : if they are unconcerned that their names keep cropping up and are published- and I’m talking about those on the periphery whose names have been published along with their children’s names and addresses – I don’t see why others should fight an online battle for them. If they are so unconcerned that these internet lies will remain as their children grow up & have no wish to actively get these libels removed ( a good lawyer could do it) then so be it.

        I keep reiterating : these harassers will not go away.
        They will continue to defame and they will exaggerate their claims.
        They will continue to publish names and accuse innocent people of vile crimes.
        They will take the silence and inaction of those they accuse as further proof of their guilt.
        It will get worse.

        So that’s my last post on the Hampstead matter. I wish everyone well in this battle.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Sam, I completely understand and share your frustration about this.

          I think I can safely say that at the beginning, when this case first emerged, lawsuits were considered very seriously, but it seemed more likely that police action would be more effective. We all know how that has worked out so far.

          I really hope this won’t be the last we’ll see of you. Your commentary here has been incredibly valuable, and has had more of an impact than you might know.

          Liked by 1 person

          • I’m having a rest.
            The Hoaxers need not think I have changed my mind and am veering to their side or are having doubts that these rotten false accusers like Belinda McKenzie, Angela Power-Disney , Jake etc may have a case. If I could nail just one of them for their putrid lies, threats and false accusations I’d do it with gusto.
            I still remain an avid reader and if I can think of any way in which I can help or assist put some of them or just one of them into the courts where they belong I would have no hesitation in doing so.

            Liked by 3 people

            • I would never think you’d switch teams, Sam! But rests are good for the soul. Enjoy yours. 🙂

              For me, the ultimate goal is to ensure that as many of these evil and/or foolish people face justice as possible. It’s a slow process, but my hope is that it ‘grindeth exceedingly fine’.

              Liked by 1 person

          • I think the latest spate from UK people of slurs on me, and the threat on twitter the other day, means i can now instigate a case, in the hope that it will prove conspiracy involving this lot…..going back years.
            I’ve been thinking this way for a while, and awoke realsing that i was going to.
            Not sure how, or with who, yet, but hey, that is how that first rally happened, 🙂
            Feels the right time now.
            If anyone has time to capture the evidence, the police will possibly visit again, so i can show them through my screen, i’ll be taking whatever action is available to me.
            If it makes a way for others to easily form class actions, support for their victims/ witnesses to protect them from further harm, etc, that will make it all more worthwhile.

            Liked by 1 person

        • Sam, I agree that it is disappointing that there are so few, even no Hampstead residents making any effort to fight this hoax. Most of the people fighting this hoax are from outside of Hampstead. This was one of the reasons why I had proposed a leaflet drop in the Hampstead area to promote this site and our fight against the hoax. It is the way of the world that it is always the few that fight a battle for the many, who will only complain and criticize what the few do.

          Each individual can ask themselves why they get involved in this battle. For me, it is to defend my religion of Satanism, which is being associated with dishonest fictions of harm to children; my religion is unjustly being used against innocent people to do harm to them, such as RD and his children. The same Satan Hunter would murder Satanists such as me, burn my h0me, and abduct the children of Satanist families, so this fight is a life and death fight for me.

          Others come to the table because they see innocent people being hunted down by Satan Hunters. Others are true child abuse survivors who see how the Satan Hunter undermines real child abuse cases by their actions. Others are veterans of battles such as Hollie Grieg case. Others are lawyers and activists who fight an unjust and broken system that gives too much power to social workers and works against the most vulnerable in society, where parasites such as Belinda McKenzie and Sabine McNeill feed on those vulnerable people.

          Like

          • SV – well said. It is a hate crime, if the Police chose to ignore a complaint from a Satanist then that would be an offence under the Equalities Act 2010.

            However successful prosecutions for religious hatred related crimes are few and far between, mainly due to the necessary standards of proof being set very high.

            From the CPS guidance

            Liked by 1 person

  15. On the Satanist front things are starting to roll slowly forwards with alliances being created and tactics being explored. Every claim of SRA is also a hate crime, so the legal situation is going to be explored to bring complaints to the police and also legal actions against the Satan Hunters. LIke everything it is acorns to oak tree situations, things develop slowly over time.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Pingback: Jake’s rants get around…and around | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.