Everard’s paedophilic excrementalism

There’s really no accounting for some people’s tastes. And then there’s Chris Everard, the Hoaxtead hanger-on who’s made a career of covering up his own fascination with child sex abuse images by bellowing as loudly as he can that everyone else is a paedophile.

Take a couple of his recent Facebook posts:

Everard-shit 1 2016-05-15

Are we the only ones with no recollection of the children’s original forced confessions containing even tangential references to excrement?

But for Everard, the poo is the thing: apparently he sees it, along with images of child sex abuse, wherever he goes (including, we understand, on his own computer’s hard drive, where he’s accumulated quite a collection).

Everard-shit shots 2016-05-15

If Everard’s paedophilic impulses weren’t so vile, his obsession with excrement might be funny:

We see them (governments) spending millions of dollars of our taxes on pooh – they are placing pooh sculpture everywhere.

To test this hypothesis, we ran an informal survey amongst the Hoaxtead Research team. It consisted of a single question: “Have you ever seen a piece of public art that appeared to represent human excrement?”

Not a single team member responded in the affirmative. But maybe, unlike Everard, we’re just not looking hard enough.

Just as Jake Clarke finds it necessary to spell out in great and graphic detail exactly how he imagines children were anally raped by cult members, and what by-products emerged from their bodies as a result, we suspect that Chris Everard’s untoward fascination with sh!t is one part of a so-called ‘paraphilia’, or derivation of sexual pleasure from abnormal, dangerous, and/or extreme activities.

A quick perusal of his Facebook page should be enough to convince even the casual viewer that this is a man with an unhealthy and voracious appetite for topics like paedophilia and coprophilia.

For all his histrionic shrieking about the ‘pooh sculpture’ and paedophilic images he sees all around us, we’ve never heard him—even once—make any recommendations about how to help real abused children, or how to stem the online tide of child sex abuse images. His interest, it would seem, is not in stopping these things, but in titillating his audience with more and more extreme images, more and more fantastical details.

Of course, this says nothing at all good about the 161 Facebook followers who ‘liked’ Everard’s sh!t pics, nor the 138 people who actually saw fit to share them to their own Facebook friends.

Then again, these people follow Everard, which really says it all.

blind-followers

31 thoughts on “Everard’s paedophilic excrementalism

  1. I’m going to repeat post this, page 125

    http://www.missingkids.org/en_US/publications/NC70.pdf

    I would like everyone involved with campaigns against child abuse to really understand that there may be a few wolves in sheep’s clothing out there. I’ve certainly noticed that some seem to repeatedly post the most graphic, and completely gratuitous detail.

    “Concerned Civilians”

    Many individuals who report information to the authorities about deviant sexual activity they have discovered on the Internet must invent clever excuses for how and why they came upon such material. They often start out pursuing their own sexual/ deviant interests, but then decide to report to law enforcement either because it went too far, they are afraid they may have been monitored by authorities, or they need to rationalize their perversions as having some higher purpose or value. Rather than honestly admitting their own deviant interests, they make up elaborate explanations to justify finding the material. Some claim to be journalists, researchers, or outraged and concerned members of society trying to protect a child or help law enforcement.

    In any case, what they find may still have to be investigated. If information from such “concerned civilians” is part of the basis for an expert’s opinion in the warrant, there could be questions concerning its origin, reliability, and accuracy. Investigators must consider the true motivations of these “concerned civilians” who report such activity. They may be individuals who, among other things, have

    ■ Embellished and falsified an elaborate tale of perversion and criminal activity on the Internet based on their need to rationalize or deny their own deviant sexual interests

    ■ Uncovered other people using the Internet to validate and reinforce bizarre, perverted sexual fantasies and interests (a common occurrence), but these other people are not engaged in criminal activity

    ■ Uncovered other people involved in criminal activity

    One especially sensitive area for investigators is the preferential sex offender who presents himself as a concerned civilian reporting what he inadvertently “discovered” in cyberspace or requesting to work with law enforcement to search for child pornography and protect children. Other than the obvious benefit of legal justification for their past or future activity, most do this as part of their need to rationalize and validate their behavior as worthwhile and gain access to children. When these offenders are caught, instead of recognizing this activity as part of their preferential pattern of behavior, the courts sometimes give them leniency because of their “good deeds.”

    Preferential sex offenders who are also law-enforcement officers sometimes claim their activity was part of some well-intentioned, but unauthorized investigation.

    In the best-case scenario, these “concerned civilians” are well-intentioned, overzealous, and poorly trained individuals who are, therefore, more likely to make mistakes and errors in judgment that may jeopardize a successful prosecution.

    In the worst-case scenario these “concerned civilians” can be sex offenders attempting to justify and get legal permission for their deviant sexual interests. In any case investigators should never sanction or encourage civilians to engage in “proactive investigation” in these cases, even if they are working with the media and the department thinks they want potentially positive publicity. Investigators should always encourage civilians to immediately and honestly report any criminal activity they inadvertently discover online.

    Like

    Liked by 2 people

    • I am now quite concerned about these fixated hysterics who all form a group were pedophilia is a common theme.
      Recall also Rupert Quaiantaince chortled away on one of his videos with Angela Power-Disney when he said he would like to try to rape a child just to see what it was like- before claiming it was a joke.

      Angela Power-Disney posts endless links to news reports of convicted child abusers as though this somehow confirms that all cases are real. For instance her latest post is about Harvey Proctor, clearly a case accepted by police & the CPS as a dreadful mistake. To Power-Disney anyone who is accused & then found Not Guilty has escaped via The Cult. She has done similar about Lord Bramall whose contribution to the freedom of Britain should be hailed by all of us yet he is continually defamed by these creeps.

      # Power-Disney has also given an interview recently where she claims – I believe this site- has falsely accused her of beating her children with iron bars. It is a lie and Hoaxtead have just repeated her own admissions that disciplined her children with a T-Bar. Another reason why this website exists to at least correct falsehoods and as a record of fact.

      Why are these people so determined that 1000s of children have been raped and murdered in London? (that completely ignore the dreadful incidents in Syria and the ME where children die every day or Africa where starvation is horrendous).

      Of course there have been horrible crimes in the UK. We spoke of Ian Brady in the last post- his crimes against children were utterly despicable yet a writer is more fixated on claiming he is her father and making money from that rather than the dreadful harm he caused to the families of those he murdered.

      There is a strange psychological fixation this ‘truther’ & ‘Satanic Cult’ mob have which demands children must have been raped & murdered. It seems to me quite dangerous . They need close watching.
      (what a creep that Everard is : now claims the children distributed the videos themselves. I believe all involved with perpetuating this particular hoax to be very dangerous & disturbed persons)

      Liked by 1 person

      • The circular reasoning of the Hoaxtead mob is truly mind-boggling. If someone is found not guilty of child sexual abuse against the mob’s own beliefs, then it’s clearly a case of ‘protection from the cult’. Anything that would be taken by a normal person as evidence that the cult doesn’t exist is taken by the mob to ‘prove’ the cult’s existence, since clearly the cult must have planted the evidence.

        However, if a member of the mob is accused of anything, no matter how trivial, they are the first to scream, “HELP!! I’M BEING STITCHED UP BY THE CULT!!” and “INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!!!”

        Like

    • The only charity I regularly donate to is an orphanage / hospital in Thailand. It is run by a French doctor and cares for kids who have contacted AIDs via their parents.

      He has had to set up his clinic in a very complicated manner to avoid charges of pedophilia. He donated his life savings to buy a large house for his clinic and orphanage. He lives well away from the building which is run by Thai volunteers, mainly nurses. When he visits he is accompanied by a Thai doctor & 2 Thai nurses. He attends the clinic 3 times a week. Even with an emergency he takes a trusted Thai nurse with him.

      Such are the precautions one well meaning foreign doctor must take in Thailand for 2 reasons : Western pedophiles have in the past infiltrated child care work as NGOs or freelancers. And false reports are endemic from jealous or disturbed Western creatures who we all know from the Hampstead hoax who will freely accuse on no proof or evidence while the ghastly creeps hide at home behind their computers & surf the web for conspiracies.

      # I caught a flight back from Thailand ten years ago and sat beside a noted NGO from Oz who runs a ‘child abuse” charity. Asking what her efforts were (knowing she gets huge private & government donations) it was mainly attending ‘conferences’ in 5 star hotels where she stayed. She got very drunk and started defaming many other well known charity workers including a Catholic priest I know who has an impeccable record and is funded by many prominent citizens including the current Oz PM. As well as calling all Thai women”sluts & whores”. She then attempted to grope me as she told me she had been a drug addicted child prostitute at age 13 before mercifully passing out. Flight attendants moved me to another seat after I complained.
      Those taking the High Moral Ground are not always what they seem and that applies to the Internet mob of Satan Hunters.

      Liked by 1 person

      • It’s a pity the person who runs the orphanage/hospital in Thailand has to go to those lengths, but admirable that he does so. I’d hate to think that we’d all have to take precautions like that in our daily lives to avoid being targetted by the Hoaxtead gang.

        Not that that would stop them, of course. Where there’s a deranged belief system, there’s a way.

        Like

    • Everard seems to have given himself away with this superb analysis of the parts of himself he is really ashamed of, and so has disowned and projected onto others. Once you are aware of projection and how common it is, it really is a window onto the entirety of a personality – that is, it gives access or view to the hidden, very private parts only few will ever see:Those that are in close intimate contact with the individual.

      Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unpleasant impulses by denying their existence while attributing them to others
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I agree that it’s often those objecting loudest who are doing so to deflect attention from themselves. Recently I was looking into a case of someone who accumulates clips from family vloggers containing images of children in diapers and I had to use certain terms in the search engine to track this person’s activities. Every time I did so I felt nervous and, bizarrely, guilty of something dirty and underhand.
    This was not the dark web, this was a channel on Youtube and I found that there is a flourishing diaper, excrement, urine, fetish community that freely posts clips on Youtube, often without even putting an age requirement to view.
    Pretty disturbing and I was especially shocked at how easily accessible it all was. But by going through this stuff I also came across a 10 year old girl at immediate risk of harm and was able to alert the authorities and get that particular channel removed.
    But I felt guilty by association, as if by viewing this stuff I’d committed an indecent act and, yes, if for some reason my searches were viewed I would possibly be assumed to be a pervert of some sort. So I agree really that it’s best left to professionals with the proviso that we invest in the resources to make that happen as there are too many 10 year old girls and boys just being left to their own devices online.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yes, it’s a very dangerous area–I’ve stumbled onto some sites that I’ve reported as well, but I stay away from actively searching out keywords. We really do need some sort of oversight of the web to protect children from this sort of thing, but to be honest I have trouble imagining exactly how that could be accomplished.

      Like

    • I can imagine the guilt you felt but congratulations for being able to alert authorities. Yet another reason that Youtube need to held to account for allowing criminal activity to flourish.
      I am so pleased to read the EU will probably fine Google $4B in respect of their advertising but it’s a drop in the ocean for them

      Liked by 1 person

  3. It is becoming my conclusion that all the Satan Hunters are a small section of society who are extremely dangerous to children and the vulnerable. They all seem to have some sort of mental problem, and they always seem to navigate towards the most vulnerable elements of society. Most people dismiss Satan Hunters as wacky eccentrics, laugh at them, ignore them, dismiss them as harmless fools. The Satan Hunter always act upon their fantasies, and they are capable of the worst possible abuses and criminal activity. Everyone hopefully will begin to take these Satan Hunters seriously and the great harm they are doing and will do. All the Satan Hunters need monitoring, ASBO types of orders, and the worst of them jailing and sectioning.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, I think this was the error made by Mrs Justice Pauffley and the police in this case: they dismissed the Hoaxtead pushers as wacky eccentrics, and thought that by calling them ‘foolish and/or evil’ they could shame them out of further activity. In fact, this just spurred them to deeper depths, and made things immeasurably worse for the community the Hoaxtead mob falsely accused.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. An interesting post El Coyote. It does seem that those who shout the loudest about paedophilia just may be the ones with the most to hide.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I can only think of two famous artists who are poo obsessed:
    Gilbert and George had a phase about fifteen years ago (I’m counting them as one entity) – I don’t think it led to any public sculpture. I think they are out of it now.
    Odd Nerdrum (yes really – Norwegian/Icelandic painter) regularly depicts people defecating. He is unlikely to take public money because he is a hard core “Objectivist” follower of Ayn Rand and far right libertarianism.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Nerdrum sounds like fun. Not. I’ve also been to 2 Gilbert & George exhibitions but frankly I got tired of their subject matter and then watching a film about their structured lifestyle bored me witless.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. I actually wish those images from Everard’s posts weren’t repeated here, they’re so revolting I can’t bear to have them scoll past on my screen. As is the dirty little pipsqueak himself!

    But yes, it’s an excellent point and not the first time I’ve heard it made either. – I recall very well that during one recent case a particularly revolting individual, who is thought by some to have been/be (almost certainly is) a trader in extreme pornography, seemed to take great delight in speculating over certain very minute, personal and intimate aspects of the victim’s alleged abuse, supposedly to debunk it! And certainly the Hampstead Hoax contained ‘too much detail’ to be about securing any kind of prosecution.

    Recently up here we saw the conviction of a local pervert who had actually raped several young girls, he got ten years. At his trial it emerged that he’d authored certain pornographic material (which his wife hid at her office in a children’s charity!) and also created obscene videos. It IS the case that suspicions about him were reported to the local police as far back as 1998! They did exactly nothing about him! – Which is one reason why he went on to rape children. – They’ve done nothing about the wife either!

    Something similar is true of the first individual I mentioned who is known to have committed offences similar to those contained in the Hampstead hoax. – Which you would imagine would be a useful ‘in’ for a police force interested in dealing with his trade in obscenity. The police haven’t just ignored legitimate concerns, they’ve actually been quite evasive in refusing to deal with the offences! This becomes all the more curious when it is known for certain that the man who was jailed for rape is known to have been an associate of the first! – That first character being something of a ‘Walt’ (claims to be ex-army/intelligence services etc – where have we heard that one before?) and the latter actually being a GENUINE ex-military intelligence operative.

    This forces the question of how do you make the police do their bloody job?

    Against this background I can actually understand why some people might become misguided enough to feel that they have to do the police’s job for them, gather the evidence, create the audit trail and walk into a police station with it before these guys will get up off their arses and do something about it. I can understand completely why stories of police/official cover-ups are rife and have ‘legs’. Equally well, as outlined in Tracy’s post, the reasons why no sane, responsible person can walk that road are very very clear… But, if the police just won’t do their job – and there seems to be a great deal of evidence on which to base the opinion that’s the case – where exactly are people to turn to?

    And really, that in turn is what not only fuels many a conspiracy theory – which people like McKenzie, Icke, Jones and others milk for the benefit of their own coffers. But it feeds into this form of ‘pornography’ – and provides perverts with the security to carry on with their filthy deeds.

    Truly, it’s a ‘catch 22’ situation.

    Liked by 2 people

    • They are too busy sending 20 officers to raid Lord Bramall’s house and then decamping to the local pub for lunch to ensure the entire village knows the great war hero is being investigated for child murder.
      As for real child abusing criminals like Abraham Cristie, they just knock politely on the door while he escapes over a rooftop and pisses off to Spain.
      I can imagine they ensured Lord Bramal’s name was at every exit point from the UK but apparently Cristie & Draper were just allowed to waltz off to thumb their noses at The Met from the safety of a sunny clime. Even when they had good case to convict a lunatic for ‘vexing’ a priest they stuffed it up,
      The cops are really beginning to piss me right off.

      Liked by 2 people

        • I wish I could share that hope. – It has happened before in other cases that, although they managed to jail a ‘face’ that deserved the time he got – the actual charge was spurious and established no-one’s innocence. The net effect was to make that individual a martyr. And give cause for even very reasonable observers to question why the authorities ‘gagged’ the so-called whistleblower rather than debunk the hoax.

          The lesson needs to be learned that silence is not a denial. Paulfrey’s judgement was a step in the right direction. And acting against the self-styled ‘paralegal’ McNeil – a woman who seems not to know the basics of the law and thinks herself above it – is the right thing to do. But really there needs to be legal action against all who have posted the children’s identities online; even if it is just a police caution. And it’s high time these idiot-fodder social media sites like Google/YouTube and twitter were forced to take joint and several responsibility for the illegal and harmful material they provide a platform for. Bear in mind these are commercial companies and in effect are making money from this filth as surely as any other trader in porn.

          Liked by 2 people

    • It really is a nasty Catch-22.

      We’ve avoided the realms of online child sexual abuse images, as we’re acutely aware that we don’t want to follow in the footsteps of Charlotte Alton Ward, who actively searched out and published some very disturbing images of naked children on her blog, and then was affronted–affronted! I tell you!–that the police sent her a stern warning.

      However, we’re aware that certain members of the Hoaxtead gang are alleged to be in possession of such images which they acquired for purposes of their own gratification. There’s no point reporting these people to the UK police, as they live abroad, and so we’re left feeling helpless in the face of probable criminal activities.

      Like

  7. Just had a look at Everard’s facebook page… what a sick puppy he is. I don’t think you’d need a degree in psychology to determine that.
    And yes, it does seem that a very unhealthy interest in the minutiae of sexual abuse is what fuels these SRA nuts – you can draw your own conclusions from that. The tragedy being that real (abused) children in the real world don’t get any empathy or support from them at all.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, he’s clearly got…erm…issues. I don’t feel qualified to assess any further than that, but he’s definitely one of a kind with the rest of the SRA nutters.

      Like

  8. I can’t help but think of Larry Grayson when this chap is mentioned,

    Which is about as much thought and credibility I’m going to give him.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. I’ve just made a video thanking everyone in Hampstead and thanking you for this post on this blog. After almost four years of harassment and threats from Everard and his accomplices and followers, it was very nice to wake up to your post on this blog. I can’t thank you enough.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.