Why wasn’t the Pauffley court order enforced?

Even before Mrs Justice Pauffley read her judgement in the fact-finding case regarding RD’s children on 19 March 2015, she had issued a court order that was supposed to have kept the Hampstead hoax from exploding online.

Court Order ZC14C00315, issued on 15 February 2015, was quite plainly worded.

On page 1, it states in big bold letters that “Any person or body who knows of this order and does anything to breach its terms may be held to be in contempt of court and may be imprisoned, fined, or have their assets seized”.

Court Order 15-02 2016-07-16It goes on to explain why the order was made:Court Order-2 15-02 2016-07-16In other words, the court had become aware of the material about the case which Ella and Sabine had already posted online; Ella had elected to flee the country instead of showing up at court to attempt to regain custody of her own children; and the court had realised that further violations of the children’s confidentiality were likely to be released online. Court Order-3 15-02 2016-07-16Court Order-4 02-15  2016-07-16
Thinking back to the time when this order was issued, it all makes a great deal of sense. Mrs Justice Pauffley was concerned—and rightly so—that the online campaign begun by Ella and Sabine would escalate. She wanted to prevent that from happening, because she understood that it would have a catastrophic effect on the lives of RD and his two children.

This court order prohibits not only Ella and Sabine, but any other person or body from publishing or disseminating any information about RD, his two children, the court proceedings which were ongoing at that time, any information which might lead to the identification of RD, and any information about employees or representatives of the local authority.

It also blocked any attempts to harass RD, or to subject him to “unlawful and unwarranted psychological intimidation by posting articles and information upon any internet or social networking website accusing him of unlawful activity”.

If this one rather short and plain document had been adhered to and obeyed, Hoaxtead would have died on the vine. However, as we know, that’s not what happened.

In fact, the court order was violated literally thousands of times, as not only the two named individuals in it, but their followers, and their followers’ followers, published videos, images, blog posts, comments, online radio shows, Facebook and Twitter posts, and much, much more online.

The consequences for all of this frenzied violation of the court order? Almost nothing.

No one was ever arrested, and only a couple of people were spoken to by the police and persuaded to remove their material from the internet. Despite dozens of complaints from this blog and other outraged commenters online, the court order was almost completely ignored.

This strikes us as passing strange: why was the court order never enforced, even in the most perfunctory way?

To understand this, we need to remember that at the time the order was put into place, neither Sabine nor Ella were in the UK. They had fled the country, as each was afraid that their activities could have led to their arrest. Acting from the safety of Spain and Germany respectively, they kept pumping out material that violated the court order…and there was nothing any UK court could do to stop them.

However, that doesn’t account for the lack of activity against “[A]ny person or body who knows of this order and does anything to breach its terms”.

People like Araya Soma, Deborah Mahmoudieh, Henry Curteis, Jim McMenamin, Butlincat, John Taylor, Kevin ‘Wearechange’ Weaver, Neelu Berry, Penny Pullen, Belinda McKenzie, Jake Clarke, John Banks…all of them live in the UK.

All shared illegal material that had originated with Sabine and Ella. All could  have been arrested for violating the court order. And yet none of them have been.


Part of the issue lies with the fact that a court order doesn’t activate automatically when someone violates it. The police don’t have someone on duty searching out violations so they can rush out and arrest people.

It’s up to the person or persons protected by the order to document the violation, contact the police, present them with the order, and ask them to act. Given the barrage of material that flooded the internet beginning in February 2015, it’s not reasonable to expect one person to have acted to stem the tide. It would have been a full-time job for several people, at that time.

Now, though, while illegal material is still being posted, the volume has slowed to a trickle, and it’s now much easier to trace its origins. For example, the other day one of our commenters noted that Jake Clarke had posted pictures of RD’s children, a clear violation of the court order.

It’s now a relatively simple matter for the respondents to take action…and we hope they will.

scales of justice


129 thoughts on “Why wasn’t the Pauffley court order enforced?

  1. Be proud of those little victories, though, EC. You guys got loads of videos, posts and blogs taken down and a number of people arrested, fined, “restrained”, gagged, deported or warned (Sabine, Neelu, Christine Sands, Dawn Moses, Tracey Morris, that creepy videographer mate of Angie’s…). But yes, the police cold do a lot more and it would really help if YouTube and Facebook didn’t keep declaring that blatant death threats “don’t violate our community guidelines”. Bottom line, though – you’re all doing a great job and getting results – don’t be put off by the oft stubborn nature of the British legal system.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Oh, this is not to downplay the victories we’ve had, not at all! I think that as a group we’ve done a huge amount of good over the past 18 months or so. I am just mentioning the Pauffley court order as I think it was a weapon that could have been used better, had we known then what we know now. Of course, there’s the major issue that both Ella and Sabine were on the run from the law at that time, which made the order unenforceable in their direction. But still….

      Liked by 3 people

  2. Speaking of knobheads who should be gagged and restrained…

    Mind you, I don’t think we need worry about Rupert bringing down the state – the statement at the bottom says it all. Sad twat.

    Liked by 1 person

    • He’s claiming to be in the UK, I believe, but one would think that if he’d been serious about any of this, he’d have at least put in an appearance at court last week.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. For some inexplicable reason (a combination of boredom and attention-seeking, I’m guessing), the charity-scamming child-abusing Jew-hating freak that is Angela Dizzy-Powder has taken time out from ranting against online harassment to…er…harass someone online, to wit one of the women who was falsely accused in the Hollie hoax.

    I don’t think I’m at liberty to mention specifics about how this poor woman’s family was affected by the false allegations and subsequent harassment (though I know she got a lot of support from our very own Maggs Shaw O’Neill); but suffice to say – shame on you, Angela. Shame on you.

    Having said that, Angela resurrecting this “cold case” has been a marvellous opportunity for her and her hoaxer mates to once again demonstrate their awesome detective skills; they clearly has the case sewn up…

    Seriously, I defy anyone to argue with THAT damning proof.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Angie’s journalism masterclass: it’s all about doing thorough research and fact-checking….but then chucking it all away and going on gut-feeling instead:

      Thank Christ that 3rd class journalism degree wasn’t wasted, eh, Ange!

      Liked by 1 person

      • 3rd class? The only degree Angie has ever seen is scribed to the front of a thermometer!

        I have it on very good authority that Mrs Major is guilty of nothing more than having kept company with one VERY dodgy ol’ mare back in the day! A certain ‘lady’ by the name of Anne who, back in the 70s and 80s lived in a ‘certain type’ of glass house! – She’s one of several people that the Scottish legal system failed by not explicitly clearing her name as it paved the way for that idiot Green’s martyrdom. ‘Like’ her or not (and you really don’t have to) she’s an innocent woman. Like a few others, she’s been used as a red-herring to keep people off the scent of the truth of that particular case….

        Liked by 1 person

    • So they’re prepared to destroy a woman’s life and wreck her family because they think her eyes look shifty. Yup. A new low for Angela and her vile circle of haters. I hope everyone remembers this and throws it back in her face the next time she whines about being “harassed by trolls”.

      Liked by 1 person

      • She’s the Widow of a man who was perceived to be a Copper. Actually, the man wasn’t. – Now – hypothetically of course – if you were a dirty wee scheemie drug-dealer (now in middle-age) who had spent your entire life swimming about in your own shite on a run-down sink estate in the arse-end of Aberdeen, you might have a wee something against the Police? Especially if they had a slightly ‘odd’ surname that once appeared at the bottom of a police report relating to you? Likewise if you were once in the business of flogging shady porn videos; especially if you were actually IN one or two? – There are,I hear, some people up there who do seem to miss the days of the old VHS in a Jiffy Bag!

        Liked by 1 person

  4. This was a very important point:
    “Part of the issue lies with the fact that a court order doesn’t activate automatically when someone violates it. The police don’t have someone on duty searching out violations so they can rush out and arrest people.
    It’s up to the person or persons protected by the order to document the violation, contact the police, present them with the order, and ask them to act. Given the barrage of material that flooded the internet beginning in February 2015, it’s not reasonable to expect one person to have acted to stem the tide. It would have been a full-time job for several people, at that time”.

    A person or persons protected by a court order might also be very busy earning a living and having a life, unlike many obsessive internet Hampstead Hoax promotion trolls who don’t do either of those things. There can be many reasons why a person protected by a court order might not invest a lot of time & effort in tracking and reporting violations, themselves. Not least of which, they might be trying to move on and put the circumstances which necessitated the court order in the first place behind them. To some extent, tracking violations could feel counter-productive, an activity that keeps the harassers “in their life”, perhaps.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yes, I thought of this myself, Dave. I mean absolutely no disparagement of anyone who is unable to spend their lives being as bizarrely obsessed with this thing as the Hoaxtead mob are. Most of the rest of us have lives to lead, jobs to do, children to care for, homes to keep, and so forth.

      One of the odd things about last week’s trial, I found, was that while the people supporting the witnesses seemed to come in shifts, with some appearing quite regularly and others only sporadically, those who supported the defendants could be relied upon to be there every single day from beginning to end. Except for one morning, which is when I understand many of them had to be off to collect their benefits.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Well, I hope that they were common-law freeman-of-the-land benefits. You can’t trust those Illuminati mainstream giros!

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lol.

        Think most are on some kind of sickness/disabled benefits.

        They are sick in the head that’s for sure but they could work in a factory putting cheese on pizzas for example.

        They can get their backsides to here there and everywhere and have the cash to do so.

        Are you sure they didn’t all have medication appointments?


        Liked by 1 person

        • Overall you make a fair point Babs, but realistically these days you need at least a 2:2 in Food Technology plus a PGC/D in Italian Studies to stand any chance of finding work in a factory putting cheese on pizzas….. Even then it’ll be 40 miles away, a zero-hours contract and minimum wage!

          Liked by 1 person

    • It is one of my major issues about this case that the “victims” appear to have been so passive, indifferent and intimidated that they have failed to make noise, complain or activate the opportunities open to them to end this nonsense by reporting violations etc.


    • Justin makes very valid points. That underscore the insanity of making it incumbent upon individuals to prop up a court system. The family court has issued an injunction. This injunction is simply ignored. SOMEBODY ought to be responsible for upholding the bloody law. I quite accept and understand that this is a heavy burden to place on one individual.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. The following rant was posted in recent comments, for one of the prohibited videos of the children, under the name “Ella Draper” but I suspect written by Abe. I need to reproduce the whole thing, to make my point:

    “The damning evidence in the Jean Clement recording concealed by the police and the original short video clips of the children’s disclosures, which went viral in 2015 were concealed by agents of the U.K.Plc ( members of the Metropolitan police service) in the attempted Hampstead Cover Up.
    The children have been kidnapped and held incommunicado to prevent them revealing more details of the “not so secret” State sponsored Trauma Based Mind Control programs, infesting schools in Hampstead and Highgate, London,the British Isles, and other institutions around the world.
    This evidence of the children’s initial official disclosures was seized and hidden, because once the children gave their ABE interviews corroborating this evidence the police were duty bound to arrest the suspects, Ricky Dearman, Kate Forsdyke, Louis Hollings, Priest Paul Conrad, Galyna Upson, Sophie Dix, Nurse Nina Marden, Vanessa Fitzpatrick etc. named and identified via intimate marks, birthmarks and TATTOOS by the children.
    D.I. Cannon AND D.C.I. Foulkes are proven LIARS who have LIED repeatedly and perverted the course of justice in the attempted Hampstead Cover Up of child murders and rapes in schools and churches in the Hampstead and Highgate area.
    Read the first 10 pages of the IPCC Appeal document compiled by Ella’s legal team which totally demolishes the abysmal, shameful wreck of a cover up, in which numerous dishonourable servants of the state bear false witness against two innocent children”.

    Can you find, anywhere in this rant, any sincere expressions of caring & concern for the children? This rant isn’t about THE CHILDREN at all – it is about an alleged conspiracy involved in a coverup of supposedly secret information, supposedly exposing horrendous crimes by powerful people and a corrupted “system”. And THAT is the only thing concern is expressed for, in this rant under the name of the children’s mother!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lots of people will be suckered by that “Ella” rant, no doubt. They won’t allow themselves to understand that Abrella are just exploiting the children as a front, through which Abrella promote their true passions and agendas – which are self-evidently not the well-being of Ella’s kids.

      Many of the youtube channels that are, or have been, involved in broadcasting the illicit videos of Ella’s kids are just as transparently insincere, exploiting Ella’s kids and the whole subject of CSA to promote ‘hidden’/unspoken agendas, as we know.
      “But I AM a campaigner for child victims of sexual abuse – look at all the CSA related videos I’ve uploaded to my channel”!
      Promoting genuinely educational videos on the subject of CSA would indeed be an admirable endeavor, BUT…promoting “forgotten” old newscasts and documentaries full of amatuer-armchair speculations, incorrect theories, false allegations or fraudulent testimonials which were long ago discredited – or videos that purport to “expose protected-powerful CSA conspiracies” but are really about promoting hatred for the members of some religious, social-cultural or political community – or videos that “teach” conspiranoid legends & mythology rather than documented facts – THAT kind of “campaigning” actually puts vulnerable children at greater risk by obscuring the realities of CSA behind a screening fog of falsehood.

      Liked by 3 people

    • That is Abraham Christie.

      He’s been like that all along. Neither of them have expressed a recognisably human feeling for the children. Not once.

      I don’t think I’d be able to give 20 hours or so of interviews, on the subject of my children being harmed, without ONCE getting a little upset. These interviews get uploaded uncut for the most part.

      It’s something on my to do list, find a clip of Ella upset about her children. She’s not normal, in a very, deeply bad way.

      I share your concerns about those channels too.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Psychopathic?

        No emotions or guilt?

        Abraham wouldn’t be really bothered about Ella’s children, didn’t he abuse his own.

        I suspect a money making exercise like most of the people promoting this Hoax.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Sadly Court orders (made in the Civil Court) seem ignored.

    Sabine Mcneil and Neelu Berry are no strangers to such orders, indeed in the case of Neelu Berry these extend back to as early as 2004. Her refusal to adhere to a restraining order issued against her in the High Court ultimately caused her to be struck off from her profession as a Pharmacist in 2009.

    Please do not be fooled by the name, Neelu Berry is also known as Neelu Chuadhari and Ved Chaudhari. – Its not a question of a name change by deed poll or marriage, the name frequently changes as can be evidenced in the name used in the High Court in Neutral Citation Number: [2004] EWCA Civ 458
    Case No. A2/2004/0435.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. What the police need to do is some kind of sting operation.

    Along the lines of what you hear they do to catch burglars.

    Invite all the suspects that have shared photos of the children, videos etc. to some kind of Child Abuse/Hampstead meeting in a large building.

    Imply the organisers are not the police.
    Angela seems to do a lot of implying and manipulation of words, so she’d appreciate that way of “working”.

    Half way through the meeting, the police stand at all escapes routes, whilst all the occupants are arrested by other police on suspicion of whatever that person has allegedly done that is criminal.

    Might need a few police but hey they’ve spent enough man/woman hours on this case already.

    Could possibly make others think twice in the future.

    The people that have acted unlawfully already, do not seem to have stopped in their tracks so far, in fact some like Jake Clarke seem to have escalated their promotion of sharing unlawful images.

    I see he has kept the “drawings” up on his fb page despite removing the photos…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Indeed numerous police officers and social workers have been defamed and they have unions who fund actions to take people to court.

      They seem to be off the opinion it will all eventually fade away. It won’t. It will get worse.

      I had this argument over the past 10 years with my own lawyer dealing with a psychopath who I defeated in court.

      My lawyer kept thinking the nightmare would eventually give up- he didn’t. Now he’s just successfully taken an AVO ( a restraining order and issued defamation proceedings. As I keep saying : it finally dawned on him that his kids were growing up and would soon begin to read these ghastly things about their father on the net.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I hope someone of the aggrieved seek damages from the ones that have property.

      APD for example.

      Belinda is too clever to have anything of value in her name.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Belinda has clearly definable assets but prefers to load the gun to let other idiots fire the bullets and to take the risk – hence she removes herself from the risk

        Liked by 1 person

    • Well APD has a property that she owns outright, or so she says, must be worth £100k.

      I’ve no idea of house prices where she lives, but as she bought it for 26,000 Euros 2 years ago, i’m assuming that’s a 70% council tenant discount, so around that amount.

      Whoever needs to claim should and take the frigging lot from her.

      People have suffered much, much more for much less attacks on people.

      It’ll be the only way to stop this escalating more.

      Some of the ring leaders need to be held to account seeing as the followers hang on their every word and think along the lines, if blah de blah can say that, so can I.

      Prime example, Jake Clarke.

      Liked by 3 people

      • The problem with APD is she resides in a Country not covered by UK law, otherwise it would be very very easy to take her activities down.

        Liked by 1 person

          • A crime is a crime – the problem is that particular countries legal power (jurisdiction) to handle a crime in another country – hence why people are extradited to face proceedings

            Liked by 1 person

          • Yes it’s true that a crime is a crime; the problem is getting her arrested. Of course, there’s the fact that she’s a British citizen still, and there are charges awaiting her here, should she venture across the water.


        • Irish defamation laws are almost identical to UK laws. the father would have a case seeing APD deliberately publishes her libels worldwide. He would easily win as it ‘s not just one libel it’s endless repeated defalcations over a couple of years. Berry, McKenzie have assets.

          I’m beginning to wonder why RD doesn’t take legal action. He has the power to have the court orders enforced and to sue various parties for libel. I guarantee lawyers would line up to take on his case.

          About time he did something seeing so many people are defending him and his children. None of this will get better , just worse. He needs to take action to nip this in the bud now.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Angela will be in London on September 17th.

            However, now she’s read this, she’d be wise to not bother.

            The lure of getting on the microphone will probably override.

            We’ll see.

            It would be a good time for the police to arrest her, if they so chose.

            Liked by 1 person

  8. The problem with seeking damages is that in order to make that worthwhile its important to ensure that the defendant has the funds to actually pay the damages (and the costs)

    Liked by 2 people

    • But libel actions do not need to proceed to court. It’s not that expensive to have lawyers threaten libel and if the response is negative issue a summons. The real costs happen if a defendant wants to defend their alleged libels. These people have absolutely zilch defense. A judge will consider whether they have a defense and would refuse their attempt to claim satanist rubbish.

      There are numerous processes lawyers can use against defendants who think they will frustrate the court. A judge can order the defendant to pay into court a sum of money to cover costs if they lose if he thinks the defendant has no funds and will try to frustrate the law and deny a plaintiff.

      There are numerous cases where people take libel actions and you don’t hear about them in the media because the defendant caves in, apologizes and agrees not to repeat their libels.

      Liked by 1 person

      • A plaintiff can also include all those who defame him in the one case thus reducing the costs. Combining some of the main libelers who have houses with the layabouts like Jake Clarke tends to cause immense havoc among the defendants.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Each losing defendant can be order to pay costs and damages no matter whether they have assets or not. So Berry would lose her house. APD can be included. If she doesn’t turn up it’s her loss. Jake Clarke would become bankrupt (the smart little dickhead would then find life is not so funny with a bankruptcy at a young age which can f*ck up his life for 10 years).

          On a practical lever Dearman has nothing to lose and an awful lot of money to make in damages which he deserves. Why he doesn’t is a mystery.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Another interesting fact: Kane Slater owns a condominium flat in Toronto. Toronto’s housing prices are nothing to London’s of course, but they’re among the highest in Canada.


          • There is nothing to stop a plaintiff suing a defendant in a UK court even if they live abroad. They can turn up and defend themselves or they can ignore the process and have a judgement entered against them. Of course getting damages can be a problem but in all countries where the law is based on British law there are avenues. Only the USA is difficult.

            David Icke was sued in a Canadian court, and lost, for his ant-Semitic libels and he is an isle of White resident.

            This case can be pursued in a UK court against foreign residents because the libels have been published worldwide and are specifically aimed at the UK. I’ve had to research a number of libel cases working as a paralegal and I once personally sued the News of The World (mistaken identity) for libel in the 80s. (settled within a fortnight and damages were enough to buy a new car- costs for News Ltd horrendous)

            Of course any legal action is something everyone tries to avoid and that is understandable. It can be quite frightening and incredibly stressful but this case is quite unique in that it’s not one defamation printed in a newspaper- it’s repeated time and time again.

            And recall the case of Ched Evans where a number of people were fined for revealing the name of his alleged victim on Twitter,

            Liked by 1 person

  9. You can bet that any case brought against then would be defended by their star legal adviser – TERRENCE EWING. Google him and you will get a taste,

    From a BBC report:

    “Professional nimby
    Mr Ewing tried to take a similar case in England but it was thrown out by Mr Justice Coulson who described him as a “serial litigator” with a position of “can’t pay, won’t pay”.

    The judge added that Mr Ewing’s stated policy was to “deliberately cause the parties against whom he is proceeding to incur large sums unnecessarily by way of costs and then refusing to pay any costs ordered against him”.

    The Court of Appeal in the case R (Ewing and Another) v The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister said the plaintiff was a “professional nimby”.

    His attempt to take the case in Scotland after similarly going to a library there was heard before Lord Brodie, who decided that he should pay £15,000 into court, effectively a kind of legal deposit, before being allowed to proceed.”




  10. The judges summary comments and “terms” of possible restraining orders on Monday may have a significant bearing on future matters.We shall see.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. A timely post on Mrs. Justice Pauffley’s order…what the heck does it mean if an order so comprehensive and coming from so high up the court chain, can be blithely ignored by scoff-laws who are physically under the jurisdiction of British law? If judges cannot protect innocent people, and most particularly children, from deranged fantasists, who do we go to next?
    I suppose what I’m really trying to say here is: how do we get the police to do their actual jobs?
    This is simply not good enough.
    Would there be any traction in making a complaint against the police?
    Something I’d normally be very reluctant to do.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s difficult to get the Police to do their bloody job at ANY level! – If you have the ‘right handshake’ for instance you apparently don’t need to insure, tax or MOT your car nor apply for the relevant permissions to run a, ‘OTQ’ but still-commercial garage! Residents can call the Police ’till they’re blue in the face, they just won’t come! And that’s just a chard at the tip of the iceberg!

      I know for instance that there have been several, very well-defined and specific, complaints raised with two English forces in relation to an individual connected with the Hollie Greig case – another ‘teflon-coated’ character. The offences in question are specific to England and Wales, and were committed from within these two force areas, the individual in question is and has been resident in England and Wales throughout the period of the offence, and is still now. The Southern forces’ reaction is to pass the complaint to Police Scotland who of course have absolutely no jurisdiction over or legitimate interest in the complaint; but still happily dismiss it! In other words, a crime has been committed; but the Police across THREE UK forces point-blank REFUSE to even investigate it!

      As is the case with Belinda McKenzie herself, the question that arises from this is who grants these people this sort of ‘immunity’ and why? What do they know or who do they ‘have the goods’ on? – Is it any wonder conspiracy theories arise when such examples can be proved to exist?

      Liked by 1 person

  12. I think this has been pointed out repeatedly by a few folk up here, and in relation to more than one case:

    “The victim in a case of rape or one of the sexual offences listed in the 1992 Act is (in England and Wales at least) entitled to ‘anonymity’ in the press. Once an allegation of one of the relevant offences has been made, nothing can be published which is likely to lead members of the public to identify the victim. The offences listed in the 1992 Act include most offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, part 1. ”

    ….That’s from the CPS guidance. I believe it’s also been established that “the press” includes amateur publication including online publication.

    Mrs Pauffley’s order, and the matter of who can press what button aside, it appears to me and a great many others that every time those children are identified a crime is committed – not just morally but literally… At least that’s the case if they are identified from within England or Wales.

    Why isn’t that crime being pursued? – And it’s not the first time a “McKenzie Industries” (as one commentator up here calls them) scam has attracted this level and type of immunity!

    It’s also at least he second time where a quite-convoluted mechanism has been used to get the miscreants in court. – And to what effect this time? As I said before, at least in this case they were effectively forced to admit in court that the claims were false. In the Hollie Greig case those falsely-accused DIDN’T actually get their names cleared as they should have, thanks to the bizarre line that was taken to prosecute (or more accurately, provide martyrdom to) Robert Green.

    It is simply not good enough – it does not meet the ends of justice – that the British legal systems act in this peculiar way and fail or refuse to apply the law to protect innocent people.

    I can fully understand individuals not having the resources (be they in terms of emotional, time, physical energy or financial) to invoke their rights under court orders and/or raise defamation cases. – Defamation in particular, despite the whinging of the gutter press, really ISN’T an easy or cheap option in this country. But I’m afraid I hold the law of the land up to question; it should be there to ‘set things right’ for people. And should be acting to protect them – where McKenzie-esque scams are concerned, it is failing badly!

    Liked by 2 people

  13. I know this will take a lot of time and effort, however, would it be possible to have ALL the abusers, intimidators etc all in one place (thread/post), with videos, images, written words of their wrong doings, that clearly go against the judges court order?

    Liked by 3 people

      • Possible it would be if there was any sign they knew what the fuck they were talking about.

        “also [sic] why would they purposely forget doctors [sic] evidence in the inquest” …What inquest?

        Inquests are held into sudden and unexplained deaths and also into the circumstances of discovery of “treasure trove”. What inquest was there in relation to this case?
        Who died?

        – What I saw in the original videos were two small children each showing signs of neglect and physical assault being ‘goaded’ by a pervert into repeating a completely non-credible tale which only the adults involved could have generated. Only a complete fucking idiot could have been taken in by this ridiculous rubbish! Especially as the little girl seemed to be sitting there with two more-or-less black eyes! It was perfectly obvious that Christie had beaten the kids to get them to ‘perform’.

        That was in sharp contrast to the measured and professional police retraction videos. No idea whether the copper in question was a lodge member; but in this case that IS completely irrelevant, and you can take that from someone who is about as anti-masons as they come!

        Liked by 3 people

    • “Zeus”, like so many other sex crimes comment trolls, assumes that their uneducated preconceptions and intuitive perceptions on the subject must represent The Truth Of The Matter. This is frequently maddening for people trying to correct mistaken beliefs & misinformation, but can also be hilariously inane.

      CSA comment troll “critiques” of the A & G police interviews are almost universally pathetically vacuous, arrogant, uninformed or simply childish: “Who is this idiot doing the interview? What a moron! He/she must be one of the abusers. He/she should be fired/prosecuted/executed/blasted into space on a one-way rocket…”, etc.
      Most don’t even try to pretend that they have an intelligent or useful analysis to offer – they just want to rage against and heap abuse upon ANY professional who dares to discover and expose falsehoods in a CSA claimant’s narratives, especially a child complainant.
      But I love it when these same comment trolls assume that ABE is a police interviewer, in the videos & recordings of the kids that Abrella made – 🙂 “Who is this idiot asking the questions? [It’s ABE!] What a moron! Why doesn’t he ask them about…(fill in the blank)? He sounds like a brain-damaged baboon!”

      The supposed “medical evidence” totally failed to corroborate or validate what Abe and Ella made the children claim to have experienced, but even reasonably informed people might not understand how and why. It is true, that normal anal elasticity and documented rapid healing ability, makes forensic medical analysis of forced anal penetration problematic. Minor injuries in, on or around the anus might be evidence of abuse, but they might not be. NO such injuries might be evidence that no assault occurred, but it might not be. However, the scenario that “G” described – anal rape by dozens of persons, always including penetration by a large object, for at least 4 hours at a time, at least once a week for a year or more…could not fail to cause “Gay Bowel Syndrome”. An unfortunate name, “coined by some physicians in response to a “clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases encountered with unusual frequency” in homosexual men” [wikipedia]. I won’t go into details, suffice to say that if these children had suffered what they were made to claim, there’s no way they could have escaped becoming very obviously ‘damaged’ and chronically incontinent.


  14. LOL, Angela’s now claiming she never said today was her birthday:


    Trouble is, she forgot to delete the post from this morning in which she made the claim (and then sat back and soaked up the birthday wishes from her creepy admirers):


    Oh and does anyone have the heart to break it to her that today is the 17th, not the 16th? Oops!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Jake did put up posts, but after reading that people on here were aware, he deleted them.

    Lol but not before someone had screenshot them!

    Liked by 2 people

      • I don’t know for sure when it was, despite having been accused by Dave Conaghan of reading on Jake Clarke’s fb post that his Mum had to wake him up one day last week or some such nonsense. You’re in fantasy land Dave.Have a good read of this when you’re sitting with your new best friend Sab.

        Liked by 1 person

  16. Rupert’s latest radio show. His mum and dad were listening. He says he’s somewhere where everyone is markedly unattractive. He’s in Manchester then. (I’ll get my coat…..)

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Rupert:
    “This is a terrible phrase that they must say in Britain.
    Lie back and think of England.
    And that just sounds weird to us Americans.
    British people I think know what this means but
    this is advice given when a woman will
    inevitably be taking part in unwanted but mandatory inevitable sex
    usually with a partner but sometimes attributed to rape.
    ‘You’ll be fine, just get it over with. Lie back and think of England’
    Y’all have a rape coping mechanism phrase that you pass around
    There’s a big problem in England.”

    If you’re reading this Rupert….this phrase is sometimes attributed to Queen Victoria and it was apparently the advice she gave her daughters on their wedding nights. They had arranged marriages you see.
    We say it now AS A JOKE.
    Like right now I’m listening to your radio show because under the circumstances it’s necessary. I’m lying back and thinking of England because basically, it’s a bit of a chore.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I googled and to give him his due he has sort of been misled by some websites. Nobody in their right minds would use that phrase seriously these days and I think he got that….
      Meanwhile I’m still listening and feel like I’m more lying back than laid back right now. Pass the whisky someone….

      Liked by 1 person

      • That’s Queen Victoria who had a very passionate marital relationship with her consort then! She enjoyed sex.

        He’s gone to Google result number one and read it out hasn’t he!

        Liked by 1 person

      • I take back anything positive I said. He doesn’t get it.

        “We don’t have a phrase in America for just lie down and take the dick. We don’t have that. I’m trying to think. No we don’t. I think we respect each other a little bit more than that. But apparently in England they have this lie back and take the dick culture whether you’re a little boy or a little girl or a 55 year old woman. There’s just this culture of lie back and think of England. Man if anyone said that to me the next thing that they would see would be fists flying in their face.”

        Well that’s me offended. He can’t help it can he, and he talks like this when his parents are listening.

        I think I have to give the rest of the show a miss. Feel physically ill when I listen to this man.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Purity balls, I repeat, purity balls. Creepy. Daughter’s make promises about their sex life to their father, always their father. Like that’s not a little icky when it’s never the mother. Maybe they haven’t got over the father owns the daughter, including her sexuality, thing and then her husband owns her, stuff, like that.

          Liked by 1 person

          • So creepy. I find it hard to imagine any teenaged girl talking to her father about her sex life–and as you say, maybe they just haven’t got over the “women are owned by their male relatives” thing there.


          • Also brings into play that whole issue of women’s value being in their sexual purity. That usually doesn’t bode well for a compassionate attitude to victims of sexual assault.

            Liked by 1 person

    • I find it difficult to believe anyone really is THIS fucking stupid and is allowed to walk around outside on their own without a carer. To me this bubble-headed Septic is just trying to create a myth he can milk. – SO much of an ignoramus he doesn’t know the difference between Britain and England? So blindingly non-educated he doesn’t know how to do very basic research? – No, he’s being dishonest. And is idiot enough to baselessly offend an entire nation in the process. He’s got a big mouth for a stick-insect.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. Rupert is not a complete failure.
    His plan to shame and drag the Quaintance legacy into the mud (in perpetuity) and then jacking the families inheritance up his arse is being remarkably well managed and likely to prove an unmitigated success.


Comments are closed.