Drifloud tries to trash IPCC report, scores own goal!

It looks as though Drifloud has leaked another bit of the report resulting from the IPCC-mandated investigation of the way in which the Barnet police conducted the original police investigation in September 2014. Oh, huzzah.

We qualify this by saying “it looks as though…”, since we can only infer from the content of what he’s released that it is, in fact, excerpted from the final IPCC report.

The fact that he’s in a frothing rage is another clue, of course—clearly things didn’t go the way Abe and Ella had hoped, and as their last remaining fanboy, Drifloud is pretty much obligated to hop up and down from his position on the sidelines, shaking his tiny fist and screaming obscenities at the ref.

Anyway.

Here’s Drippy’s latest installment in the ongoing IPCC saga:

Drifloud-IPCC-14 2016-05-25

The screengrab is divided in two: the top half seems to be quoted from the investigating officer’s response to “Complaint Point 14: ‘The recordings made by officer Yaohirou were not made available nor reviewed by the investigating team’.

DCI Foulkes allows DI Cannon to speak to this question:

The recordings made by SC Yaohirou (which outlined the allegations in less detail than the ABE interviews) were seized by officers in Woodford and placed in a property store in East London. This matter was reported late on a Friday evening when the property store would have been closed and the seized laptop would not have been available for examination until first thing Monday morning, 8th September 2014.

Drippy waxes scathing in his response to this statement:

FACT: SC Yaohirou testified in Court, 17/2/2015, that “this matter” was FIRST reported directly to New Scotland Yard, very early Friday MORNING, “at around 1 am”—which would have been recorded. He stated that: “Two police officers with a sergeant” came to his house at around 8 o’clock in the morning, 5th September 2014, “listened to the recording and they decided to take the phone and process the matter.”

But Drippy seems to have forgotten his own revelations from two months ago, when he published parts of the transcript of the fact-finding hearing over which Mrs Justice Pauffley presided in February 2015.

Here’s what Drifloud was saying this past March:

Drifloud-Twitter-Yaohirou 2016-03-26Drifloud-Twitter-re Yaohirou 2016-03-25Drippy insists, here and in his comment on the IPCC report above, that when Barnet police stated that they hadn’t listened to the recording, they were lying.

However, reading Jean-Clement’s testimony a bit more carefully, the real picture becomes clear. Abe had told him that Haringey police were ‘in on it’, and so he had initially called Scotland Yard, where he was told to call his own local constabulary. This just happened to be Waltham Forest Police.

So Barnet officers didn’t come to his house on the Friday morning; Waltham Forest officers visited him, listened to the recording, and removed the phone for further study. Jean-Clement states that Waltham Forest Police “listened to the recording and they decided to take the phone and progress the matter”.

By the time the matter was reported to Barnet Police late Friday evening, it was too late to visit the storage facility in Chingford; and in any case, a video recording of the children would have been far less useful to the police as evidence than their own ABE interviews. They conducted the first of those interviews on Friday, 5 September—the evening they first received the report.

Just as DI John Cannon said, in fact.

In all his flailing about and fulminating, Drippy has managed to score an own goal…and a lovely one it is, too.

own goal-football

 

Advertisements

31 thoughts on “Drifloud tries to trash IPCC report, scores own goal!

  1. The “cherry picking” behaviour of any report or document is typical behaviour of the hoaxers. They distort the truth by omitting anything that proves anything other than the story they want to push.

    Highlighting the errors they make reinforces the argument that they are hoaxers and removes any credibility (no matter how small) that they might have at a quick glance.

    Well done EC, keep it going – it takes time but is getting results.

    Drifloud. Angie Power Disney, Sabine Mcneill, Belinda Mckenzie, Ian Josephs, John Hemming are now all discredited and shown (beyond any doubt) as liars and distorters of fact and truth.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Thanks, JW. They’re left with a scant handful of cherries in the bottom of their basket at this points, as each of their bits of ‘proof’ has been shown to be fabricated, false, or invalid.

      Incidentally, note to Hoaxtead pushers: there’s no such thing as ‘proof’ in law. There’s only evidence that points in one direction or another. And yours is running out.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. LOL: ‘as their last remaining fanboy, Drifloud is pretty much obligated to hop up and down from his position on the sidelines, shaking his tiny fist and screaming obscenities at the ref’

    You know, I can just picture the scene: Abe and Ella, high on first class weed start making all kinds of creative and normally unavailable connections in their THC soaked brains: ‘If…then’….failing, failing, to see the reality of the bigger picture, the whole situation, the other bits of the puzzle they have so kindly given us here,in their froth and rage trying to make the picture fit to their distorted choice of view. Well done, weed, well done EC, and well done Dri floud! Yes, keep it up!

    Liked by 6 people

  3. I believe the career criminal and convicted child abuser Abraham Cristie and his partner in crime Ella Draper have most likely been mentally affected by large doses of Marijuana & thank God the children were rescued from these 2 evil people.

    I note SC Yaohirou was being very circumspect by immediately reporting the matter to Scotland Yard. By involving himself in a serious investigation of alleged child abuse and taking it upon himself to record testimony from alleged child abuse victims he had crossed the line and could have found himself in very serious trouble. His immediate actions probably spared him a formal rebuke but I would say his career as a SC may be somewhat limited.

    The child abuse police unit has very strict protocols that must be followed in order to preserve evidence. The ABE interviews were part of that process and were done correctly and accepted by the High Court as evidence.

    This also demonstrates how frigging dumb both the disgraced career criminal and convicted child abuser and his dwindling band of supporters are. They are utterly ignorant to correct procedure that has taken years to craft due to great injustices in the past with numerous people being falsely accused by prejudicial taped recordings by amateurs. The notion that Josephs, McKenzie, APD and the others who run the Hampstead Hoax Cult should have any involvement with children is truly frightening.

    As for Draper & Cristie, there must come a time where their self-imposed exile and inability to travel to any European country must begin to really depress them. Even Ronnie Biggs longed to be back in the UK even if it meant going to jail.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Yes, they’re really in a prison of their own making at this point, though some would argue it’s a bit too warm and comfy, with regular and unlimited access to psychoactive substances.

      I know very little about police protocols, never having had occasion to find out, but it seems to me that the police could not properly accept videos of children reciting the details of sexual abuse (or any other crime). This sort of evidence would be useless to them, as it wouldn’t stand up for half a minute in court; they’d need to hear the details, unfiltered, directly from the children themselves. Hence the prioritizing of the ABE interviews over having a butcher’s at the Yaohirou material (even if the recording device weren’t locked up halfway across town).

      And, as you say, the ABE interviews were done properly, and were accepted as evidence in the High Court.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. @G of S.

    You share my thoughts with regards SC Yaohirou, his initial actions seemed to go against the protocols developed to handle such matters. As such he will have caused himself some alienation from his local colleagues.

    When he started to be told the allegations he should have stopped the conversation, rather than trying to record it and advised the parents to go to a police station to let them continue an investigation rather than trying to gain “points” by recording the conversation himself and then presenting it to a force other than his own…

    Liked by 2 people

  5. I kind of feel sorry for Yaohirou here, let’s not forget this was his sister’s brother, it was a highly unusual situation that he would have gotten sucked into. It unfolded within his personal space, he was not ‘in role’ as a police officer, in the environment of his home, but a responsible citizen, with cultural etiquette and other concerns competing and confusing him. Maybe he knew why he was recording, after all he had had communications with Abe earlier in June, iirc, that may have prompted his sense that whatever happened during this meeting could be vital evidence later, and it was, as it turned out.

    Yaohirou has probably been conditioned to be polite and listen to family members, as many of us are. I think he may have been afraid of the personal consequences to him from thug Abe whose capacity for violence and intimidation he may well have been aware of. He had known him for many years, perhaps, and may have heard disturbing disclosures his sister made about her bullying brother. As such he may have been scared of the consequences of offending Abe should he stop him midstream with work protocols. Abe could have perceived as a rejection. Who knows what kind of reaction that would have provoked in Abe, in front of the children? Yaohirou may not have wanted that to happen. He was wary enough of Abe to record the whole thing, and let’s not forget it is easy to pick apart actions after the event. Remember the cherry-picking will leave out all the really damaging stuff Yaohirou and others said in court. It was Yaohirou’s recording that really gave the judge a fly on the wall look at what Abe was like really: ‘Kill, Kill, Kill, I like the sound of that…’, etc. Yaohirou will doubtless have been under a lot of stress due to this case. He is yet another of the Hampstead Case victims.

    Liked by 4 people

    • I agree that in some ways Jean-Clement was a victim of this case. As you say, he was probably well aware of Abe’s criminal past, and might have been nervous of crossing him. I also think it was, in the end, Jean-Clement who moved the case from the family courts (where Abe and Ella had originally planned to air their little ‘surprise’) to the criminal side (which terrified Abe so much that he freaked out and fled the country).

      However, I take GoS and JW’s point that in allowing Abe to put the kids through their paces as he did, he was in fact violating police protocol. As a Special Constable, would he have been aware of this? And if not, would it be reasonable for him to be aware of it?

      Again, my ignorance shows: I don’t know how the SCs are trained, and whether it includes the very strange circumstance of one’s failed career criminal brother-in-law showing up with two children in tow and forcing them to recite details of rape, murder, and cannibalism, while encouraging them with little cheerleading chants like, “Kill! Kill! Kill the baby!”

      Like

      • Let’s not forget that it was Jean Clement who had earlier advised Abe and Ella that allegations were not sufficient as evidence and they needed to bring ‘proof’. Perhaps he thought he might be a hero himself by cracking a ‘cult’ in Hampstead. He sounded very credulous and, indeed, supportive of some of the basic beliefs around satanic cults and secret sects and Abe probably knew he’d get a sympathetic hearing from him, and not just because they’re related.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes, that’s true. I also think that Abe saw Jean-Clement as a potential asset when (as Abe and Ella originally planned) the case went to family court. They would have a ‘credible’ witness, who happened to believe in SRA, who could stand up and say he’d heard the story direct from the children. Fortunately for the children, J-C realised that he couldn’t sit on the information he’d received, and immediately called the police about it.

          Like

  6. Pingback: Drifloud tries to trash IPCC report, scores own goal! | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  7. I suppose the nutters would claim this is “punishment without crime ” and the mother is having her child ‘kidnapped’. It’s a horrible tale but not as bad as the Marie Black case (I’m talking to you Ian Josephs)

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3610282/Woman-ex-soldier-used-electric-shock-dog-collar-punish-toddler-beat-hard-broke-wooden-spoon.html

    “Woman ex-soldier used electric shock dog collar to punish toddler and beat him so hard she broke a wooden spoon”

    Not too dissimilar would be a headline : ”
    Step Father made children dig own graves & threatened to bury them while on holiday in Morocco, water-tortured them & beat them with spoons whilst feeding them “marijuana smoothies” as Mother administerd Marijuana enemas “

    Liked by 3 people

    • Yes indeed. Of course, Josephs and Hemming would try to weasel out of responsibility for this sort of thing by saying that they would never condone helping a person who’d actually been convicted in a court of law.

      Like

  8. I think Angie needs to be careful, she is digging an even bigger hole for herself.

    First – she claimed (on facebook) that she had been given free banking for the “charity” on that basis she NEVER needed to use her own bank account to handle any money of the charity….

    Yet in her latest posting:

    So with free banking – why did Angie put money for the charity through her own bank account? – to quote another part of her facebook post:

    Oh Angie – your copyright message on facebook – read their terms and conditions its worthless… Have a look at the article below, it might explain things in better terms for you – we all know your not very good with big words (as used in the facebook terms and conditions)

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/social-media/9780565/Facebook-terms-and-conditions-why-you-dont-own-your-online-life.html

    Oops – another home goal for one of the hoax promoters

    Liked by 2 people

  9. It gets even better – Angie has published on facebook photographs of what she claims are shots of her online banking.

    Why would a woman who recently claimed to have received at least 20000 euros (inheritance) need a Credit Union Loan, that is being repaid at 100 euros per week?

    She also published copies of a bank statement supposedly for “The Kenya Project”, to demonstrate some transfers made to the project – Angie, they are ALL THE SAME DATE, the same 100 eoros (plus 12 euros transfer fee…. Just the page held in a different way, some with tatty envelopes to redact parts of the info….

    GOOD LUCK WITH THE GUARDIA ANGIE – with that sort of “evidence” (that you have used to try to justify yourself) you will need nothing short of a miracle to avoid prison

    Liked by 3 people

        • Good grief. While even a penny given to a genuine charity is a godsend I’ve sent more than Angie’s efforts to my Thai AID’s clinic over a 10 year period. Not to boast as others I know donate huge sums to charity including a very wealthy but quite old couple I have worked with who have just set up a $50M cancer charity. That particular couple abhor the idea of any publicity.

          Does Angie really think she’s going to write a book about her charity efforts? What a scream. Talk about having tickets on herself. She is either completely delusional or so egotistical she genuinely thinks that she would be an inspiration to others.

          2 things stand out : Power-Disney is definitely feeling the heat from Hoaxtead no matter what she implies and her life reads like that of a textbook sociopath.

          Liked by 2 people

  10. Pingback: What part of ‘done & dusted’ does Drifloud not get? | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  11. Pingback: IPPC report offers a few surprises | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.