Neelu & Sabine trial: Day 6

It would not be an overstatement to say that all hell broke loose in the courtroom during the final day of Neelu and Sabine’s trial on charges of conspiracy to commit witness intimidation. Hold onto your hats, readers—this will be a bumpy ride.

Disorder in the court!

From the start of the morning’s proceedings, Neelu was on her feet attempting to arrest the judge on charges of…oh, you know. The usual. Treason, fraud, kidnapping, false arrest, no authority, etc.  She asked if he could be removed from duties, and unsurprisingly, he said he could not.

The judge asked her to sit down and be quiet, but she continued ranting at him.

Finally, the judge said  that either Neelu would have to leave or he would. At this point, he called for a 5 minute recess.

Outside the courtroom, various supporters of the defendants were heard complaining that they were being silenced by the courts.

As we reported on Friday, the judge directed the jury to acquit, which they did. However, as we mentioned, gagging orders are being drafted against Neelu and Sabine. When the reality of this hit the public gallery, there was much muttering and loud commenting.

While the jury was filing out of the room, a member of the public gallery stood up and asked the court whether the defendants’ supporters would be able to speak to jury members now. The judge said they could not, which seemed to incite the public gallery further.

A woman whose 6 children have been taken into care stood up and began shouting that the courts had stolen her children. This prompted Neelu to jump up again and start shouting over the judge, ranting at the court that they were all responsible for baby-stealing, Satanic rituals, and baby killing.

Judge Worsley ordered her to sit down and warned her that any further outbursts would result in her being taken down to the cells for contempt of court.

Then Neelu’s solicitor Aseem Taj (who co-incidentally also represents Ella Draper) stood up and shouted, “Research the Hampstead coverup! This judge is trying to to shut my client up so she doesn’t expose the satanic cult paedophiles!”

Judge Worsley shouted at him to shut up, to which Mr Taj responded, “No, you shut up!

“They’re all killing babies!” he shouted at one point, adding that the court was responsible for allowing cult members to rape, murder, and eat babies and children.

Judge Worsley ordered him to sit down, and mention was made of referring Mr Taj to the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority. Mr Taj stormed out of the courtroom, shouting as he left.

The judge said he wanted the recordings of today’s events sent to him immediately.

Mr Taj seems to have made a serious career-limiting move today, and it would appear that Neelu and Sabine and their followers have managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as the court is unlikely to show much lenience in the face of this graphic demonstration of their tactics.

disorder in the court-3 stooges

174 thoughts on “Neelu & Sabine trial: Day 6

  1. Bloody hell, i wasn’t expecting that. What on earth was Mr Taj doing, it appears all walks of life have been infected. Thanks for this, made my day. I believe that Mr Taj is going to severely regret his actions today.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. As predicted. Neellu will arrest the judge. But in accordance to the judicial rules the judge has the duty to make report to CPS for contempt of court and perverting the course of Justice. I am amazed that a Member of the English law society acted n such disgusting manner. The woman with the 6 kids has been mislead because she has learning difficulties, so i ask you all no to attack this woman. She was told by Sabines Evil crew to act like this. This is very serious situation and I expect criminal charges for contempt of court against the solicitor , Neelu and anyone that tried to intimidate the jury.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Contempt of court is dealt with by the judge, not the police and CPS. It’s not like an everyday offence. The judge has obviously asked for the recording in order to decide what to do next. He’s got a lot to decide.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Shocking and amazing. Shocking that a solicitor would act completely unprofessionally, amazing that the whole crew decide to kick off just at the point when they looked likely to escape significant punishment! Obviously Neelu is desperate to try prison food!
      Did anyone notice what Sabine was doing while all this was going on? Did she just sit in a corner embroidering swastikas onto her hanky?

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Have you noticed that none of these evil scumbucks mention the Rochdale scandal where 16 Asians Muslips raped 1600 young girls over 8 years period. I wonder what the opinion of their screaming solicitor is

    Like

    • There are a few cases that the ‘conspiritard set’ like to avoid talking about. – Hugh Mitchell, who was actually REALLY an ex-army intelligence officer for instance. Recently sent down for raping a number of young girls. – His wife, an MBE, hid the paedo-porn that he’d authored in her office at a children’s charity. Nothing has been done about HER! – You’ll find the Ickes, McKenzies, and Disneys of this world strangely silent on things like that.

      Looks like this Taj fellow is barely out of school:

      Aseem Taj Solicitor Admitted as a solicitor: 02/12/13 SRA ID:458258

      Liked by 2 people

    • And the relevance of his ethnic origin is what? Do you hold the Yorkshire Ripper against every Englishman in the same way? Thought not.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Well,it’s not usually relevant.

        But that is certainly not to say that it’s never relevant.

        It’s certainly not irrelevant to note that in Pakistan (the country/culture of origin for the majority of the Rochdale/Derby/Oxford etc grooming gangs) there is no law or cultural prohibition against pedophilia.
        This might be said to have a certain relevance when it comes to potentially understanding the motivations and the mindsets of those involved in similar practices within the UK.

        For instance, when a Pakistani women’s rights pressure group recently attempted to introduce a law that would establish (for the first time) a minimum age for Pakistani child brides, it was struck down at the very first opportunity by the political machinations of religious leaders, who branded it ‘incompatible with Islam’. and ‘counter to the perfect example given us by the prophet Mohamed’.
        That’s why there is (and will never be) any prohibition of pedophilia or a minimum legal age requirement for child brides in Pakistan. They can marry a girl of any age, and there is no law or social/cultural Prohibition against it.

        Relevant links:
        https://www.rt.com/news/329157-pakistan-child-marriage-law-islam/
        http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/pakistan-child-marriage-160118062004700.html

        They had exactly the same response from religious leaders when a Pakistani women’s group attempted to introduce a bill to stop wife beating by making it illegal. (It too was dismissed as ‘un-islamic’)
        https://www.rt.com/news/344599-pakistan-husband-beat-women-lightly/

        Also, with regards to the lawyer’s rather surprising outburst regarding ‘Satanic conspiracies’.
        Living and working within one of the UK largest Muslim communities, it may surprise you to learn that I have heard a similar opinion voiced many times, even from my Pakistani friends, (and even from those friends I would have previously considered educated, fairly sane and well balanced.)
        I am told by one or two of my Pakistani friends that ‘they can be sure this this information is true because it comes straight from their religious ‘teachers” (who are, incidentally, usually specially imported from the ‘old country’) who tell them that ‘the only reason that the west (as a whole) and the UK specifically is not already Islamic is because it’s under the thrall of some vast Satanic conspiracy, otherwise we (meaning ‘the west’ in general) would clearly see that ‘Islam was obviously true’.
        I have heard this said so many times that I can now keep a fairly straight face whenever I hear it.

        So, tragically, it would appear (at least possible) that the lawyer could potentially share religious delusions that dovetail rather neatly with the broadly similar manic delusions of Neelu et al.

        Like

        • Late reply. But I have to say that this is utter nonsense and worse, based upon no knowledge whatsoever of the solicitor’s background.

          Now, the solicitor’s conduct, based on this report, was frankly extraordinary and disgraceful. But you want to make that a race/ethnicity thing, based on no knowledge at all (and links to RT for heavens sake). That is also disgraceful.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Well Neelu has blown it now. Stupid woman. Did the jury hear all this? I bet Belinda didn’t utter a word. Did Sabine have the manners to keep her mouth shut. The soap opera rolls on.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Apparently all of this blew up as the jury was filing out of the court, having delivered their verdict of ‘not guilty’ at the direction of the judge. They must have heard at least part of it; if I’d been one of them you’d have had to pay me to leave!🙂

      Liked by 2 people

  5. Aseem Taj should be disbarred and I would be surprised if he is not.
    Barristers act upon advice from solicitors. It’s like the barrister is an actor and the advising solicitor is the director.

    Mr Taj appears to have advised the two defendant’s barrister to commit perjury to the court by claiming that there had been no cannibalism and no Satanism. The man is a disgrace and a danger to any potential clients.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I think Mr Taj’s outburst might have been at least in part caused by the fact that all 3 barristers (defence and prosecuting) and the judge agreed last week that
      a) the Pauffley judgement was sound; and
      b) both defendants were not of sound mind, were irrational, and were involved in an obsessive and ill-advised campaign based on a false allegation.
      He knew that his clients were about to be served with restraining orders which would likely severely restrict their ability to promote the hoax. I expect this made him unhappy.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oh, what I’d have given to be present in that courtroom ! High drama and stratospheric lunacy quotients all around. I’ve done a fair amount of court interpreting in the past and have seen/heard/*communicated* some seriously crazy things – but nothing even APPROACHING the level of utter madness you’ve just witnessed !
        I’ve had an overwhelming week and decided to wait until things calmed down significantly to read the entire saga in one calm sitting, but I couldn’t help myself and jumped ahead to this entry. I still have to go back and read the last installment. Outstanding reporting, EC, and an experience I’m sure you’ll NEVER forget !

        *Neither* of sound mind, eh? I wouldn’t have predicted that conclusion, and can’t wait to read about how the judge ‘arrived there’ in the case of one of them…but most outrageous of all is Aseem’s joining in the psychosis-fest ! I agree with all other posters above this: he’s toast ! This person actually studied law and qualified as a solicitor? My jaw just hit the floor a few minutes ago and, strive as I might, can’t seem to get it back into position… 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

  6. A barrister takes their instructions from the lay client which can be presented to them by the solicitor by way of a written brief, or taken directly at court.

    If what is reported here is true then the Judge can have no confidence in the words of certainly Neelu Berry. I recall it was reported that all barristers confirmed at the outset of the trial that the allegations of satanic ritual abuse and baby eating were false; therefore both Ms Berry and her solicitor would appear to have lied to their barrister.

    A barrister is not permitted to mislead the court – it is a serious breach of ethical standards. Therefore the barrister could not have assured the court his client accepted the allegations were false, if he knew that in fact his client did not.

    I do hope the criminal courts show more appetite for clamping down on this than the family courts so far have.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I take the judge’s demand for the tapes of the day’s events as evidence that the judge is planning some rather severe clamping down. Will report as soon as I hear from our sources in the field.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. These conspiracy loonists, are they kind of trying to waste as much public money as possible? I seem to remember Robert Green was convinced, the Hollie Greig fairytale was the most expensive court case in Scottish legal history. Bad luck Robert, it wasn’t, that honour goes to the court case of the blowing up of that Pan Am Plane. And now this crap with Noolu the Noodle. Is this one going to go backwards and forwards now too. Seeing as her dodgy Brief said what he said, could there actually be a retrial, or just the usual tennis charges going back and fourth to court. It seems to me there’s an awful lot of time wasting here.

    Like

    • – Most expensive Breach of the Peace case in Scottish legal history. which, actually, I think it IS widely accepted as being.

      Like

  8. Mr Taj was the guy inside ellas house when the police went to arrest Ella under section 17. Mr Taj was negotiating until ella escaped from the back door. so he is suspicious character and nothing he does is within professional standards of the English law society, or even within the Law because He dint understand what section 17 meant .There is a video out there

    Liked by 2 people

    • Are you referring to the YT ‘video’ (with only audio on it, as I recall) c/o the staunchly anti-Annett channel called ‘Radio Free Kanata Exposed’ (or something similar)? It featured the voices of polite but increasingly frustrated cops outside asking for someone to please open the front door, a somewhat nervous-sounding guy with a classic ‘RP’ accent talking to Abe in hushed tones (presumably the ‘legal rep’) and to the police far more audibly without ever opening it, protesting that they didn’t have a warrant, that it wasn’t even his house, etc…
      It also featured the voice of Ella’s mother repeating ‘Sorry, no English’ a few times, someone else (Ella’s father?) eating quite noisily throughout the entire ordeal while E.D. presumably slipped silently out the back door into the blackness of the night? Must be the same recording (very memorable, as the whole thing sounded like a scene out of an absurdist Beckett or Albee play !) So the legal rep.in that recording was Mr. Taj?! Wow. This crazy story is just *screaming to be seen* in the form of a television melodrama at the very LEAST!

      Like

    • As predicted The case is not strong enough to send them to Holloway. But Neelu is is perfectly well positioned to place her self in more trouble. I can see tomorrow videos from neelu demanding £Billions in Cash from the Judge, the CPS, the Prime minister, the Queen, although Neelu herself have said Britain is bankrupt since 1931

      Like

    • The decision on Friday was that there was no case to answer, so in that sense they won. However, the reason the decision was made is that the court was of the opinion that only irrational, obsessive individuals (i.e. people with mental health issues) would behave the way they did. This line of thought seems to be leading down a particular track. We’ll report more on it as soon as we have confirmation of it.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. I would not be surprised to hear this Taj character has aquired dodgy qualifications to secure his post.If he is fully legit then nothing from law school has penetrated as to how to perform his duties.I just hope a thorough investigation into this suspect clown whom as pointed out should be no where near clients or a court of law.

    Neelu was looking at a gift horse in the mouth potentially and has shot herself in both feet with a giant blunderbus.

    Thanks EC et al for your marvellous sharings.Where is this trial at as things stand? is the case effectively concluded on that bombshell exit or is there another day of thiis to wrap matters up?

    Like

    • Let me inform you that in order to obtain LPC (legal practice certificate) the old article ship exams to get your English society license, you do not need legal qualifications, You need lets say work experience of minimum 5 years in a Law firm. So although this dodgy guy TAJ may have not idea or respect of the law he has managed to gain an LPC by working in a Law firm hasan & Co

      Like

      • Hasan & Co Ltd run licensed restaurants… And a firm of Solicitors would (we hope) be a bit brighter than to trade under somebody else’s trading name; it’s called “passing off”.

        Like

      • I think that was true about 50 years ago but it isn’t now. You get an LPC by getting a law degree or equivalent, then passing the LPC exam, THEN you have the experience (a training contract) and some other post qualification courses. Then you’re a solicitor. Takes about 5 years. There’s nothing easy about it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I think that was true about 50 years ago but not now, to be a solicitor you have to have a law degree or equivalent then pas the LPC exams, THEN do 2 years as a trainee solicitor and some other post qualification courses, then you’re a solicitor. It’s not easy.

        Like

  10. Something not right here… Taj….

    Admitted as a solicitor: 02/12/13 SRA ID:458258 – 2nd of December 2013

    According to LinkedIn he was:

    A Trainee Solicitor with JD Spicer January 2010 – August 2012 (2 years 8 months)

    In November 2012 – over a year before he was admitted as a Solicitor – he was apparently presenting himself to the media as Solicitor to Imran Mostafa – Son of Abu Hamza, reading a statement on behalf of Mostafa outside the court on the occasion of him being convicted of armed robbery. A short segment of footage of this exists I’m told; we’re trying to trace it.

    The message given on the steps of the court was apparently along the lines of there being a conspiracy to convict Hamsa’s son – unhinged rubbish in other words.

    The question arises – Who the fuck IS this nutjob and how the hell does he come to be acting as a Solicitor? He would appear to have misrepresented himself in November 2012 when he spoke for Mostafa.

    Like

  11. Lol, I noticed last night that Neelu was making court lists and wondering about costs. I knew then that she would kick off in court today. Though I didn’t think it would become this ridiculous. I’m shocked, but somehow unsurprised that Mr Taj would be just as bonkers as his client.

    Strange that Abraham and Ella use the same solicitor. After all, Abraham claimed that McKenzie Friends was being used to imprison Ella and fleece the public using charity scams. That obviously included Sabine and Belinda, but more importantly, it also includes Neelu, because Belinda brought Neelu into this case. Abraham has accused Belinda of being MI5 but is happy enough to use the same solicitor as someone that the MI5 agent brought into the case. How does he know he can trust Mr Taj. Mind you, maybe Abraham doesn’t have much choice, because there can’t be many other solicitors willing to ruin their career over such obvious nonsense. Perhaps Mr Taj will be accused of being a cult member when the IPCC appeal fails.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Oh, the convolutions! As you say, there cannot be all that many people willing to sacrifice their careers for these nutters. And we all know what happens to people who fail Abe and Ella: they instantly become cult members and foul betrayers.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Oh my God, it’s at times like this that you wish you could film in court!

    I’ve only read the opening bit so far, about Neelu kicking off at the judge, and I’m intrigued to read on to find out why she would do that even though the judge had instructed the jury to find her not guilty!

    The funny thing, though, is that last week we were all joking about Neelu trying to arrest the judge during the trial. Joking! Many a true word spoken in jest.

    Now to read on….

    Liked by 1 person

  13. I’m shocked at Aseem Taj’s behaviour, but not surprised because I have read the letter to the IPCC on the behalf of Ella sent by Hanson Young Solicitors, it includes that very dodgy “evidence” of RD’s website, which was nothing of the sort of course.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. I’m actually really shocked that a solicitor could act like that, and also be a hoaxer. Hanson Young Solicitors will no doubt hear about it.

    As far as Neelu and Sabine being found not guilty goes, well if they are not guilty of that offence then they are not guilty. The end. I do wonder what on earth will stop them doing the stuff they do though. Neelu has been pursuing her vendetta for over a decade. Sabine, I can’t see her stopping any time soon.

    Liked by 1 person

      • He’s not on their list of people on the law society website. I’m not sure that means anything though. Maybe he’s moved and his client has moved with him.

        Like

        • His SRA registration can be found… But it seems to post-date the point where he started calling himself a solicitor. There is something definitely amiss about this oddball.

          Liked by 2 people

          • From what we can find out – and we do have contacts at Anglia – he addressed the press and read out the statement as Solicitor, and more than one agency reported on this.

            Like

          • Graduated Southampton Solent in 2007 with an LLB perhaps?

            He may have let his business be struck off and it never filed accounts.

            Like

          • Possibly, which would make him 22 at graduation – where was he for the six years between that and registration? And why all the ‘odd’ footprints? I don’t think it unreasonable to form the opinion that here is a man with problems.

            Like

      • At the risk of sounding like ‘one of them’, the degree of insanity described almost sounds like part of a set-up. Unless he truly went mad in the courtroom (or succumbed to one of Belinda’s fabled ‘hypnotic spells’!), I just can’t see a solicitor who’s normally rooted in reality risking his professional future by exhibiting such lunacy. This is profoundly suspicious in so many ways…

        Liked by 1 person

  15. The hoaxer crew were genuinely surprised that they weren’t allowed to approach the jury?! Wow. Just…wow.

    And why the hell did they want to speak to the jury anyway?

    Thanks for this report, EC. Fascinating reading!

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Yeah and he comes back in later with a towel wrapped round him.

    I think the boxers had disappeared.

    Yikes!

    What the f is he talking about?

    Liked by 2 people

    • You are allowed to call your self a Lawyer or even a solicitor as long as you dont do this for financial gain. Recently Sir Munby in a case of someone who was calling himself a “lawyer” he said that he can call him self a Lawyer. But anyway he banned Nigel to enter any family court in UK.

      Like

        • I am aware of this rule that you cannot call your self a solicitor. But weird enough Sir Munby in his judgement added Lawyer and solicitor and this Judgement raised few eyebrows. It is correct what the law society states.
          You can only call your self a lawyer. But not a solicitor.

          Like

      • http://www.sra.org.uk/bogus-solicitors/

        “It is a criminal offence for someone to call themselves a solicitor or act as a solicitor if they are not on the roll of solicitors.”

        Although he Is now registered, there is some evidence that he has committed that offence; it’s for the relevant authorities to assess the position.

        Section 14 of the 2007 Legal Services Act:

        14 Offence to carry on a reserved legal activity if not entitled

        (1)It is an offence for a person to carry on an activity (“the relevant activity”) which is a reserved legal activity unless that person is entitled to carry on the relevant activity.

        (2)In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1), it is a defence for the accused to show that the accused did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that the offence was being committed.

        (3)A person who is guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is liable—

        (a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both), and

        (b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or a fine (or both).

        (4)A person who is guilty of an offence under subsection (1) by reason of an act done in the purported exercise of a right of audience, or a right to conduct litigation, in relation to any proceedings or contemplated proceedings is also guilty of contempt of the court concerned and may be punished accordingly.

        (5)In relation to an offence under subsection (1) committed before the commencement of section 154(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44), the reference in subsection (3)(a) to 12 months is to be read as a reference to 6 months.

        …..The matter of them being financially compensated or not is completely irrelevant.

        Formal letters drawing the matter to the attention of the Law Society and SRA have already been posted. If anyone is in court tomorrow they might like to have a work with the Clerk before proceedings begin.

        Like

        • Yes I am aware of this. am trying to find this recent weird ruling by Sir Munby in a case of Nigel Quinlan., whom was banned to go near the courts any way. Please google the case . but I am 100% sure as you are that in UK you cannot call your self a solicitor unless you are register going back to this Taj guy one has to investigate further. I was not aware about his activities prior to his registration I only heard of him since he got involved with sabine and ela draper.

          Like

        • If this individual were to be deemed to have been acting illegally,what options exist beyond sanctions on him?
          Could judge elect to null and void the case and recommence at a later date,from scratch .Are decisions he arrived at invalidated or am I possibly barking up the wrong tree all together?

          Liked by 1 person

          • Well Mik, today he IS apparently properly registered, therefore there is no question of him ‘acting illegally’ in that sense – not in relation to the McNeill/Berry case at least. But there does seem to be some evidence of him acting outside the law in the past – that calls into question his integrity, as does today’s incident.

            It needs to be a matter for the SRA and Law Society to consider. I dare say the Judge will be entitled to express their thoughts on the matter too. – But either way; the guy’s credibility is away up the chimney! He’s done!

            Liked by 1 person

          • Anyone who was in court or anyone on here in the UK can complain to the Law Society about this errant solicitor and I encourage them to. He has mocked and insulted the sanctity of the court. They will not treat the matter lightly.

            Liked by 1 person

    • I disagree with Catherine but I disagree with Karen (from the same thread) even more:

      Nothing beautiful about Angie’s heart, Kazza – it’s as black as they come!

      Like

  17. Pingback: Neelu & Sabine trial: Day 6, Part 2 | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  18. Okay, I’m going to say something that might be unpopular with some. I don’t like people involving Hoaxers family members in this. I just watched the video with APD’s daughter and found it quite upsetting. This poor girl hasn’t done anything to merit any attention as far as I can see. She can’t help that her mother is spewing bollocks to the world and she’s obviously confused about what is really going on.

    If she reads this she needs to know that she’s not under threat. There is no cult – it’s all been made up mostly by people with mental health problems. If she feels anger coming from this side it’s because innocent people have been attacked in a variety of ways by conspiraloons. People are fed up of it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It was revealing how Angie didn’t flinch when the bit about the death of her sister being a false flag was brought up. If your daughter was recounting such horrific nonsense you’d stop and ask her to repeat what she’d just said, you’d take a moment to absorb the awfulness of the accusation, you’d be shocked. But no, nothing. Angie doesn’t miss a beat and just breezily says, oh they’re cunts. That’s it. No talk about the absurdity of the accusation, nothing. This makes me more sure, as someone suggested earlier, that these posts are made by Angie herself, to drum up sympathy and concoct an array of enemies out to get her. We saw signs of it with the alleged poison pen letter.
      If she is creating these posts herself, and involving her unwitting daughter into defending her against invisible demons, then she is even more despicable than I first thought.

      Like

  19. Pingback: Restraining orders spell end of Hoaxtead | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  20. Pingback: Meanwhile, in Belinda’s War Room… | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  21. Pingback: Neelu violates restraining order | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.