IPCC Report: What about the tattoos?

Hey, who wants to talk about tattoos and distinguishing marks again? Hands up!

Well, too bad.

We’re doing it anyway, and here’s why: in the IPCC report on the investigation into the September 2014 police investigation, the police explain exactly why this question was irrelevant. They do so carefully and simply, in words that even a Hoaxtead pusher could understand.

We know perfectly well that Abe and Ella aren’t going to make this uncomfortable information public, so we’re taking it upon ourselves. You can thank us later.

Here’s the question as it appeared in the 15 May, 2015 complaint:

Point 13 – Suspects should have been medically examined for scars / distinguishing marks.

One thing that becomes very clear on a read-through of the IPCC report is that police work is both methodical and fluid. It proceeds in a step-wise fashion, with each step forming the basis for the next. And it’s fluid, in the sense that at each step along the investigation, certain facts are established which rule out other possible steps…or suspects.

In this way, a solid basis of evidence is accrued, and certain people who might have been considered in the beginning are removed from the list of potential suspects.

As we know, Ella provided a detailed list of numerous suspects whom she claimed the children had identified to her and Abe. This list included some police officers. However, those police officers turned out not to exist.

This in itself would not necessarily have been enough to cause Barnet police to question the children’s allegations, but it wasn’t the only troubling inconsistency.

A thorough search of the church revealed that none of the features described by the children existed: no baby skulls in drawers, which were too shallow to accommodate them in any case; no refrigerator full of baby corpses; no secret rooms.

And then, during the police drive-round the children were unable to point out a single house belonging to an alleged abuser (despite having been coached by Abe the previous night). The house the boy pointed to as belonging to his father turned out to be completely empty and had been for some weeks, according a neighbour questioned by police.

Let’s pause on all of this for a moment.

A rather large group of people were accused of terrible crimes. The police took these allegations very seriously, and investigated them methodically and carefully. However, at each step along the way, not a single piece of evidence was found that could corroborate the original allegations.

This set off a rather large warning signal, as it ought to have. And in the absence of any evidence, no arrests could be made. Ergo, no tattoo inspections.

Couldn’t the accused have just come to the police and revealed their privates to prove their innocence?

In fact, that’s not how it works.

In order for the police to determine whether any tattoos or distinguishing marks existed, they would first have to arrest the suspects.

(True story: police aren’t allowed to just ask people to strip down for a looky-loo on a whim. They must arrest the person first, then have them examined by a medical professional.)

They couldn’t arrest the suspects without evidence—which we’ve already established they were unable to find. None of the children’s allegations had proven to be true, which left the police with only one option: forget about arresting anyone, until or unless some very convincing corroborating evidence should turn up.

This didn’t happen, and then on 17 September, after the children had been removed from Ella’s care, and were confident that they wouldn’t have to answer to her or Abe, they told police that they had been forced to lie. None of the allegations were true.

At this point, the case was closed. No one would be arrested, no one would be inspected for tattoos or birthmarks or witch’s marks or any other distinguishing mark.

Here’s a question for the Hoaxtead mob:

If someone were to accuse you of a dreadful crime, and the police were to find out that literally nothing your accuser said held up under investigation, and then your accuser changed his or her mind and said you hadn’t done anything wrong, would you want the police to ignore all of this and just keep thrashing around, hoping to find something they could pin on you anyway?

We thought not. You’d see it as a gross violation of your civil rights, and you would be correct.

Now, kindly get off the pot about the tattoos and distinguishing marks. It’s a non-starter.

Police-investigation-4

41 thoughts on “IPCC Report: What about the tattoos?

  1. It’s now beyond all reasonable doubt that this was a hoax (actually, let’s face it – it always was). Even the hoaxers’ beloved IPCC is saying so. Pity the more rabid members of the hoaxer crew are way to proud to admit that. Oh well, at least the vast majority of those who fell for the scam at the start have quietly backed off as time has gone on. It’s just the hardcore mentally ill haters left now. The Sonjas, Kristies, Angies, Neelus and Kachinas of the World. Imagine being stuck in a lift with that lot!

    Liked by 1 person

    • They all like the sound of their own voices. I wonder if Angela will ever admit she is wrong? I very much doubt it. I imagine she is a bit of a laughing stock where she lives. Neelu is obsessed with money.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Maybe the “private” investigator being mooted will be Neelu shinning up Hampstead drainpipes for a sneaky gander and a quick polaroid flash.Perhaps Sabine negotiated a last ditch EEC grant for a few trillion Euro for this creative job opportunity supporting the terminally deranged.
        Everyones a winner!

        Liked by 1 person

  2. And if they had arrested people (on no evidence) and had them examined those victims would have a huge case of false arrest against the police with possible sexual assault charges against all involved.
    It shows just how insane Abe’s plot was. He was hoping to get rid of the father and a few police officers at the same time. Vicious he is but not very bright.

    Add in the fact that by falsely accusing police officers he ensured they would not leave a stone upturned. He is a sociopath but an incredibly stupid one as well. Ella is another story. Not once in any interview with a Truther on Youtube or post on their own websites or elsewhere has she ever, EVER expressed concerns about missing her children. She’s one weird lady.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, I think Abe is living proof of the idea that not all sociopaths are brilliant. He really does seem to lack the foresight to plan his way out of a wet paper bag.

      As for Ella, I once heard someone described as ‘morally vacant’. To me, this represents Ella. There is no there there.

      Like

  3. Ella must be some kind of psychopath too unless she is being battered by Christie. I can’t see 2 psychopaths living harmoniously together though that may be the perfect combination for all I know.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’m not qualified to make a diagnosis about whether someone is or isn’t a psychopath or a narcissist.

      I must say though that where couples are concerned a dangerous combination is a psychopath and a narcissist or someone with narcissist traits. The narcissist relies on the psychopath for praise and attention and s/he will get played like a toy. Of course there’s a lot more to it than that and it’s worth reading about, espcially as we now know that at least one percent of the population are psychopathic.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Abraham Christie is a nasty bit of work. Actually so are a lot of people that are promoting this rubbish. Sly and insidious people. Out for their own gain and don’t give a flying f… about the devastation they leave in their wake. I wonder what the sentencing guidelines are for the up coming court case? I’m hoping that question is ok.

    Like

    • The question might be – but I’m not sure the answer is. I strongly suggest that it would be wise to avoid speculating or commenting on either the motives or mental states of any persons who may be involved in a court case until that court case is over.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Yet again, this is all very typical of one of McKenzie’s hoaxes. – It was repeatedly explained in immense detail to the ‘Holliehoax’ brigade, by an individual who wanted to move the case on to to examine more credible lines, that the police COULD NOT because were not empowered to, raid the houses and seize the computers of the people they had accused; Even if what’s been called the ‘extended allegations’ were not basically self-debunking. That caused the baying mob to start turning fire of the messenger. – Because of course it reduced the whole story to a non-lucrative ‘cold case’ of historic child abuse that had already been found unprosecutable.

    Again – and this is an old record – nobody promoting these hoaxes is interested in getting at the truth here; it’s all about keeping the dust whirling and the money moving. – And I think distracting peoples attention away from where actual child abuse is going on.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Excellent post.

      Of course some of the Hoaxtenders say that if they were accused they would voluntarily show their wotsits to the police. The problem is that even if they did this there are those who’d say it was all a lie and that the police doctor etc was in on it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I get the feeling that many of the hoaxers crave the attention of a nice big burly Policeman dallying with their undercarriage! – Just one of many odd fantasises they seem to harbour.

        Another small point of course is that, as far as I know, the Police aren’t prone to posting details of their investigations on Fannybook or Twat-er! – I’ve no idea what information various individuals might have voluntarily given to the Police; I suspect the hoaxers have even less!

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes, very much so, Joe. Unlike the Hoaxtead pushers, the police don’t publish evidence online, and cases are not tried on Twitter or Facebook. We should all be very glad that this is so.

          Like

      • Thankfully the law in 2016 sifts wheat from chaff with verifiable evidence and not emotive gossip,heresay or vindictive lies for personal gain.

        Clearly some hanker for a to return to the glory days when burning witches and anyone spouting gibberish was fair game.

        There are candidates a plenty to occupy the Hampstead town square stocks were certain individuals to lack care in what they promote and wish for.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Exactly,tthey have an excuse for everything. If something doesn’t fit their beliefs then they just make something up until it does fit in with what they think. I remember they were saying early on that one of the supposed cult members had recently been for a tattoo removal. Nevermind the fact that it isn’t that quick or easy to remove a tattoo.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes, that’s my understanding, AF. When a young person of my acquaintance went for a tattoo, she was told by the artist that she should consider this a permanent thing. It might be able to be removed, but it would be a long painful process, and very difficult to remove all traces.

          Like

      • Yes, plus what would the police do with such information? They certainly couldn’t make it public, until/unless the case came to court. It might be acceptable in court as evidence, if the information had been obtained according to police regulations, but ultimately it’s very unlikely that any of the Hoaxtead mob would be let in on the information.

        You know what would be nice? It would be really nice if anyone who’s been screaming for blood in this case had even the slightest, foggiest notion of how police procedure actually works. Hint: it’s not like on TV.

        Like

  6. Abraham Christie did let the cat out of the bag, he shared those home recordings of the children far and wide, one of the people the children named found out, and they went to the police voluntarily. This is in the very early days of the investigation too. He has kept quiet about this but just once he said that a few may be innocent. Abraham Christie was getting annoyed with a ‘grass’ who let people know about these videos.

    And also, consider this, Ella has three children, all supposedly in the cult and who have been abused. When does she speak about her eldest? Never. Was her eldest mentioned in the complaint to the IPCC, nope! Has this sibling corroborated anything? I think we would have heard if that’s the case! Ella’s eldest even went round Sabine’s place when the court case, the JR I believe, was going on. Maybe, just maybe, he knows it’s all a pile of utter shit from one scumbag’s twisted perverted imagination. I imarine this one of the three not corroborating any of it will be put down by the true believers to the cult scaring him or some other delusional crap.

    People don’t believe the children, Ella’s eldest, the two younger ones when they explain what a bastard Abraham Christie is, nor the children seen by social services as part of the investigation. They want a baby killing raping cannibal story because it gets them off, it’s exciting, fun, a great thing to share and send the ABE interviews out.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Furthermore, there’s a cult and they let one of their star junior members just wander off with the people who blew the whole thing open, pull the other one. Both fathers of Ella’s children are in cahoots? Doesn’t seem likely. Abraham’s trauma based mind control de programming techniques are so loving and reassuring and in no way involved violence or repeated badgering, threats, hours of questions? Well Abraham’s amazingness didn’t work on one, though he didn’t appear to have time to do the full torture and drugging method, which would actually explain it.

      I am sure that someone will invent a silly story, but whatever silly story people invent, you can’t change the past and show concern from Ella when there was none.

      Anyway, tattoos, those children with two cult parents get one, RD had two cult parents (calling bullshit on that one), his contemporaries in this invented cult are supposed to be tattooed, he is supposedly tattooed, but Ella never noticed in all the time she was having sex with him, which seems to be at least twice and quite probably more.

      No doctors or other parents have come forward, no ‘non cult’ teachers, to say they’ve seen tattoos on children, which would be illegal in itself.

      The mental contortions needed to believe Abraham’s execrable tale is tiring. I would think one would need to suspend any common sense or critical thinking.

      And the tale does correspond to Abraham’s prior beliefs.

      https://twicebakedinwashington.com/2013/04/03/my-first-two-weeks-eating-raw-cannabis/

      There Abraham is writing about his amazing blood substitute, before he met the children.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Twice baked? Half baked more like.
        Abraham failed to mention extreme raw cannabis diet may have turned him into a psychotic manipulative child abuser or that it certainly didnt improove or heal him from being the deranged criminal twat he always was.

        At least prison slops are slightly more balanced should his sorry arse land back in the uk.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, when people say, “I believe the children” they are being very, very specific in what they actually believe.

      To be accurate, they’re saying, “I believe ONLY Ella’s 2 youngest children (not her oldest) ONLY when they claim to have been abused by their father and a cult, but not when they state that they’d been made to lie, and not when they claim that Abe tortured them, and not when they say they never want to see him again, and not when they say they never want to see their mother again if she remains with Abe”.

      I too find it very puzzling that Ella only bothered reporting her two youngest children’s alleged abuse, when she’s said multiple times that her oldest child was also part of the cult.

      Like

      • Yes, they don’t believe any of that because they believe the children were coerced into retracting. What I can’t understand is why they can’t even entertain the thought that the children were coerced into making ludicrous satanic abuse allegations by their Mother’s boyfriend who was just out of jail.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Exactly. It’s completely plausible to them that the police coerced them into retracting their allegations, but not that Abe coerced those allegations in the first place.

          Like

  7. Abraham was spreading this document around for a week or so and making other online comments. He appears to have fallen silent again though.
    I do wonder how many of his believers will actually read the Met/IPCC document. Going on past evidence, they will not read it for themselves, but just believe whatever Abraham tells them about it.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Angie’s doing a live broadcast just now on Conscious Consumer Network. She’s just sang “Who wants to be a millionaire, I dooo”…and now she’s rambling about us, calling us “the Government Paid Trolls” LOL!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sounds like a major yawn fest right up there with watching face paint dry.

      Oh EC by the way that Attache case with the secret payment of 10 million squid can be dropped off by chopper onto my gold yatch in St Tropez..try not to hit the dancing girls like last time😉

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.