Neelu & Sabine trial: Day 6, Part 2

Yesterday we described the extraordinary events that took place in Court 2 at Blackfriars Crown Court, when Aseem Taj, Neelu Berry’s solicitor, took it upon himself to approach the jury to inform them that his client was “being silenced” and that she was a victim of a cover up by the paedophile satanists (including HH Judge Worsley).

The very mild-mannered and measured Judge Worsley finally lost patience at that point, and was ‘minded’ to shout at Mr Taj’s unprofessional outburst. At that point a barrage of abuse erupted from the supporters in the public gallery.

The barristers present, both defence and prosecution, and all Court staff were shocked and incredulous that Mr Taj, an officer of the court, could behave in such a manner. Comment was heard to the effect that this particular judge had never before been known to raise his voice, let alone been reduced to having to shout in order to restore order in his court!

After lunch, court resumed with supporters reduced from 9 to 5, the rest having been barred from court along with Mr Taj, due to the morning’s outrageous outburst.

Neelu leaves the court

Neelu Berry refused to return to the courtroom and said she understood that the judge had barred her as well as Mr Taj. Her barrister, Ms Zentler-Munro, sought to reassure her that the judge had invited her to return and she demanded that this be put in writing. Despite assurances being given, she stated she would not return without her solicitor, who by now had fled the scene of the crime.

Ms Zentler-Munro tried to coax her back to court, but each reassurance was met with a fresh demand, and ultimately Neelu elected to remain in the corridor and refused the request to return to court whilst the judgement against her in respect of a restraining order was read out. Her barrister’s growing frustration was palpable.

Judge Worsley returned and stated that albeit that he would be well within his rights to arrest both Mr Taj and Neelu, who were blatantly in contempt of court, he saw little use in following through and committing them to prison. However, in respect of Mr Taj he ordered that the transcript / recording of his outburst in court be referred immediately to The Law Society in order that they deal with the solicitor’s unprofessional conduct.

Neelu was also deemed to be in ‘breach of bail’ for her refusal to return to Court, as she was technically under the jurisdiction of the Court and had not yet been discharged.

Restraining orders issued

Judge Worsley ruled that despite the acquittal of the defendants, he was still given powers by Parliament in respect of restraining orders. He said he could not think of a better case or circumstance in which to exercise these powers.

He said he felt he had reached the bar of necessity in this matter, as in his view the defendants were likely to pursue a course of further intimidation. He noted that the test of ‘reasonable’ and proportionate’ rulings had also been met. Any further breach would be subject to a maximum of 5 years imprisonment.

Neelu and Sabine were each given restraining orders prohibiting them from contacting, directly or indirectly by themselves or by any person acting as their agent, or by any means whatsoever, any of the witnesses who’d testified at the trial last week, or any person who to their knowledge is or has been clergy at Christ Church Hampstead, or staff or a pupil at Christ Church Primary School.

The orders also bar both Neelu and Sabine from entering an area surrounding the church and school. As well, they bar them from making public in any way, including on the internet by any blog or otherwise including by re-publication of material already made public before the making of the orders:

  1. Anything relating to any persons named in the order.
  2. Any allegations of cannibalism, sexual child abuse or satanism, at any time at or in relation to Christ Church or Christ Church Primary School.

The orders will remain in force indefinitely.

Objections to the restraining orders overruled

Many arguments set forward by the defence in objection to the restraining orders were overturned by the Judge. These included freedom of speech and the right to legitimate protest; it was also suggested that the limitation of the order duration ought to be confined to a maximum of two years.

The judge stated that whilst he was mindful of the first two issues, he also had to balance the issue of harassment and distress caused. He noted that as Neelu had documented her intent to turn the church service of 22nd March 2015 into a ‘court of common law’, this served to prove the intent to harass. As he was of the opinion that this harassment would continue, he therefore didn’t believe that the orders were unreasonable or disproportionate.

With respect to the limitations of the orders, he decreed that these should remain indefinitely.

Judge Worsley stated that he was far from convinced that the harassment would last only for the short term, saying he felt rather ‘that it would go on and on and on’! He went so far as to state that even in a period of 5 to 10 years, he was not convinced that things would have changed or subsided.

The background to the case had been “well rehearsed and the obsessive campaign in the face of Justice Pauffley’s ruling had been an appalling and frightening experience for the witnesses”, he said. The protestors as a whole continued to make allegations regarding drinking babies’ blood and sexual ritual abuse.

It had also been argued by the defence that the physical restriction on Sabine in respect of approaching the church and school should be waived, as she had never attended the protest on 22nd March or visited the area.

However, the judge saw fit to extend the restriction to her. He said the discovery and submission to the Court on the second day of the trial of a private blog from Sabine to Belinda McKenzie and other supporters, stating that seats in the court room ‘were taken up by satanists from Scotland’ and that the ‘Judge should be arrested,’ had once again only served to prove that she was obsessed and was “absolutely at the heart of this continuing campaign, despite the judgement”.

Although the orders seek to protect the clergy, staff of Christ Church School and its present and former pupils, it stopped short of protecting the named parents. The defence argued that although this group of people did indeed require the protection of the law,  which had so far failed in its duty to protect them, this was a case for a different court, on a different day.

We are confident however that these people will be afforded justice in the not too distant future.

And finally…

A request has been made to us by those present in Court throughout this 6-day process, to highlight the courtesy that all barristers, both defence and prosecution, have shown towards the individuals affected by this harassment. Their empathy and consideration of those whose lives have been devastated by the people promoting this obsessive campaign has been very much appreciated.

In  a previous version of this story we incorrectly named Neelu’s Barrister as Mr Byrne. Of course her barrister is actually Ms Zentler-Munro. We regret the error and apologise to both Mr Byrne and Ms Zentler-Munro for it.Justice UK

108 thoughts on “Neelu & Sabine trial: Day 6, Part 2

  1. So we have a perfect example despite the protestations of those like APD that the case was “not going the way we wanted” that a British court once again acted completely impartially ad applied the law as it is written and meant to be applied.

    The judge should be applauded as well for his integrity and even-handedness in not imposing some vindictive measure but a well thought out and intelligent decision to the best of his ability, that seeks to protect innocent members of the public.

    Yet this unruly and hateful mob will again scream ‘satanism” and ungraciously not accept that they had a victory marred by their own vindictive hysteria and proclaim that the Illuminati or whatever idiot group they say this week runs the country, put in a fix for various reasons (mainly that their bullying demands to continue to bully innocents was not granted). And thank God the jury was protected the jury from these gutter, cult, urban terrorists as they too would have found their lives blighted from now on.

    It’s just a matter of time before they breach these new orders. They have form.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. (this word blindness seems to get worse with me- it must be Satan messing with my mind)


  3. As you so eloquently pointed out, El C, in a recent blog post about the Pauffley order, the issue of how such orders are activated and enforced remains problematic. Will this new restriction also rely on those it affects reporting any violations to the police and having to keep track of all Neelu and Sabine’s many online activities, or will there be a better mechanism to ensure they don’t breach the order such as monitoring their online presence? Surely the police don’t have the time, or indeed the legal right, to do such things?. Neelu also has form for ignoring court orders and it seems that those who have been harassed just get to the point where they can’t face any more court action or police reports and they just hope she’ll eventually go away.
    I’m just not sure how much of a victory this is, although I’m happy to be contradicted by those with more knowledge of these things.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Good result – and an indefinite order is exactly what is needed here. For me, the real victory is the legal team for the defence acknowledging in open court that the SRA is untrue. Whatever retractions, twists and spin are put on this, it was said by a legal representative presumably acting on the instructions of his client.

    I didn’t want to say anything during the week about the charges themselves, but I think that charges as set out were likely to fail. Witness intimidation is a tricky one……I wonder if it would have been better to regard the Hoaxtead nutters’ activities as a kind of stalking/harrassment (see here for example:

    Charges are framed by the CPS, but they grow out of the initial complaint/police report afaik, There’s seems to me to be quite a bit more leeway in the definition of harassment and stalking, so presumably the subjective experience of the complainant is given more weight? And possibly makes it easier to get a conviction. Just a thought… I’m not a legal person.

    If I were one of the witnesses or any other person connected with Christchurch I think I would be seeking assurances from the local police force that they all were aware of the order and were willing to act on it promptly and efficiently.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. The judge and his staff have been remarkably lenient considering how the Satan Hunters have acted. Well done to the judge on keeping his cool. The end result is that the Hampstead hoax died in that court room.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Lets make sure that Neelu Berry and Sabine McNeill are made to answer for any breaches of their court orders if that were to happen, they must never be allowed to get away with breaches as they have done with other injunctions and court orders.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Nah. He has lots of friends and like him they don’t know how the world works. I hate to see him get manipulated like this. Notice all the praise he gets….


  8. The good news is that yesterdays restraining orders were made by a criminal Court, rather than (as in the past) an injunction or order in a Civil Court.

    It is a criminal rather than a civil offence to breach yesterday’s order. The Police have the powers to act immediately upon a breach of a restraining order.

    I do hope Sabine and Neelu recognise the implications (if not they have NO EXCUSE)

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Totally agree. They should never have charged them with ‘conspiracy’. I think if they’d kept to indivdiual cases of Witness Intimidation they’d have got a conviction.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Are you saying that the complaint about a breach doesn’t have to come from those named in the Order? If so, they’re fecked! Hallelujah!

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I see what you mean but he’s trying to destroy peoples lives, if i was involved in this i would probably lose it and go looking for him, especially if he was endangering my children, remember he would hand those kids back to christie if he could, he is dangerous in that respect, but he’s definitely a bit slow witted

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I’m far from alone in finding the ‘line’ taken by both the Scottish Crown Office (COPFS) and the CPS in these type of cases completely unacceptable in terms of basic competence.

    In Robert Green’s case a much harder line that actually forced his idiotic claims to be specifically examined should have been taken. In this way his claims would have collapsed and been irrefutably debunked, and the people he defamed cleared, not by some sort of process of default, but beyond question. – Similarly, any ‘underlying issues’ would have been exposed. – As things stand the COPFS simply railroaded him on tertiary charges which, whilst it might have put him where he deserved to be, failed to provide clarity, called the entire Scottish justice system into question, and facilitated any truths at the core of the matter being buried forever. – As well as providing Green himself with effective martyrdom and ‘hero status’ among the deranged and dishonest!

    We hear here these two gabbling idiots distorting and misrepresenting the Ben Fellows case. To me, Kenneth Clark is one of the most unsavoury characters on the planet. But he was in no was, shape or form guilty or even involved in the things that liar and fantasist Fellows accused him of. Where is the clarity? Where is the justice?

    Already we are hearing the distortion that ‘Neelu was right’. Not the case; the matter was NOT dismissed on the grounds claimed by Neelu. It is simply that the Crown failed to complete the proof required to make their case. – And frankly that is just not good enough! It’s just not competent!

    The question then is, why are our public prosecutors so bloody incompetent when it comes to this type of case? These are legal experts; why can they not construct watertight cases against these idiots? – All they are doing is feeding the fires of stupidity and dishonesty, and failing the good people of these Isles! If we assume for a moment they are not actually too-incompetent to do their jobs; what the hell are they bloody playing that dealing with these idiots along lines that cannot achieve a prosecution?

    We’re yet to hear the final conclusions; but it strikes me that any form of restraining order is completely pointless if there is (as seems to be the case) not the will nor the mechanism to enforce it when it is breached! And IF the court is prepared to ignore or disregard the breach of the existing order, then I’m afraid by dint of its action – just as was the case in the Robert Green case – they system of justice in Britain is called into disrepute and the doors flung open for further contempt of the courts.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. It would be good if an exact copy of the order was posted on line – at least that leaves no one in doubt as to its contents

    Liked by 1 person

  14. The Hampstead Hoax died with the idiotic videos posted by Christie and Draper. – It’s the ‘Satanic Panic’ that followed it that is the issue, and far from having died, the idiots behind it will now feel vindicated and further empowered! – It’s a wholly unsatisfactory conclusion!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Its interesting to note that all comments on Sabines “Whistleblower Kids” site are moderated before they are allowed to be published online. From that is a safe assumption that those comments are approved by Sabine McNeil before they go live.

    To quote EC:

    “Neelu and Sabine were each given restraining orders prohibiting them from contacting, directly or indirectly by themselves or by any person acting as their agent, or by any means whatsoever, any of the witnesses who’d testified at the trial last week, or any person who to their knowledge is or has been clergy at Christ Church Hampstead, or staff or a pupil at Christ Church Primary School.

    The orders also bar both Neelu and Sabine from entering an area surrounding the church and school. As well, they bar them from making public in any way, including on the internet by any blog or otherwise including by re-publication of material already made public before the making of the orders:

    1: Anything relating to any persons named in the order.
    2: Any allegations of cannibalism, sexual child abuse or satanism, at any time at or in relation to Christ Church or Christ Church Primary School.

    The orders will remain in force indefinitely”

    Are the new comments showing on Whistleblower Kids, in breach of yesterdays order? Sabine McNeil, in allowing their publication would seem to have already breached the order.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Hi Joe

    Contempt of court is a complex subject and carries both a civil and criminal element dependent on the circumstances.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Thanks for the excellent update EC.Mixed feeling but overall more positives than negatives given “intention” is always a tricky one given the charges put forward.
    Certainly whatever selective delusional thinking hersay mafia tribe may foolishly gloat over I fail to see where they “won” anything.
    The court quashed the idiotic satanic fanatasies early doors and have set justifiably high restraints on the activities of the miscreant clowns in question.
    Anyone in their right mind would sit up, take notice and go back to something more useful like knitting but unfortunately this is not in their want and inevitably further rope entangling own goals an absolute dead cert

    If dignity were being scored it would be Court and witnesses 12 Hoaxmob Hystericals 0 (with several on yellow cards and a referee inclined to send them off at the next dirty tackle).

    and its not even half time!!!! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  18. I think that people are writing off yesterday’s events too soon despite the slow-as-a-snail pace of the law.

    It should be noted that these orders, as previously mentioned, were made in a Criminal court and not a Civil court. It is an entirely different kettle of fish and the police will, after losing part of the case monitor the activities of these two.
    It’s just a matter of time until they breach those orders : they seem to have a solicitor actively encouraging them too.

    You can liken it to someone being put on a bond instead of a jail sentence and perhaps thinking they have got off scot-free. It only needs a complaint to police that these criminal orders have been breached and the cops must take action.

    Despite the celebrations of the hoaxers they seem either ignorant or are just too bloody dumb to realise what has gone on: they were found Not Guilty yet had orders imposed upon them.
    This is quite rare.

    All those who will and have fomented the false allegations are agents of this pair : APD, Jake Clarke, the Dowsing Dame and so on.

    And I still re-iterate : the innocent children in this case will have a solid case in the future to sue this mob for harassment and civil damages ( defending such a case alone will decimate their finances- let’s hope Neelu keeps paying her mortgage as the kids can treat it like Superannuation)
    You can see by the tone of the comments on their blog, they just intend to continue as always- perhaps muted for the present but to them it’s like a narcotic- they cannot do without the drama. They are drama queens.

    And the other reality is: what a really sad lot they are (apart from the horrible damage they cause)- what a miserable pathetic bunch of miscreants who revel in hideous & dark false accusations and whose entire lives are spent in dwelling on vile sickening fantastical claims. They brood over them. they meet to discuss and celebrate their dark thoughts. They are a cult and a dangerous evil cult that ensnares the feeble minded like Clarke. And they cannot see that where reasonable sane people avoid court at all costs, they have been dragged through the system. It’s just a matter of time before it happens again because they feel emboldened by this week and this noxious mob don’t seem to have a frigging clue how the courts work.

    Frankly you wouldn’t want be one of these nutcases for all the tea in China (which is a lot)

    As always- I blame Care in The Community and think Broadmoor should build a few 100 extra padded cells.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. So it’s worse than the slap on the wrist I thought it would be, they got off completely.

    Typical British “justice” for the victims.


  20. Those comments alone show how cracked these loonies really are. Indeed there is a ‘change in the tide” but it’s a tide that will sweep them out to sea. I mean they are just f*cking plonkers aren’t they?
    Apparently they were the inspiration for the film : Dumb & Dumber.

    And remember the fruitloop Ben Fellows (whatever his name is this week) had a proper solicitor and a barrister who clearly advised him to zip his lips from now on even though no orders were made. At least he has the brains to take notice of them. Same same Bill Maloney who has run a mile into the wilderness after the collapse of Op Midland and the exposure of the creepy Chris Fay. Maloney has done time. He doesn’t want to again. He is smart enough to know his alleged career as a ‘pedo buster’ has been busted. I hope he kept his taxi driver license up to date.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Up to a point he is Sam. He’s still doing the rounds, getting handouts and getting his ego massaged. Meanwhile the means by which his martyrdom were achieved remain unsatisfactory. And that little grain of truth at the heart of the matter is having to be approached from a different direction.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. The trial concludes tomorrow? So we’ll wait until then, but so far there is nobody up here who is ‘impressed’ with what’s gone on so far! Not remotely!


  23. I think this injunction will also rely on the victims keeping a weather eye out for breaches. However, unlike the family court injunction, I believe Neelu and Sabine will find that the criminal courts’ version has rather sharp teeth.


  24. Hahaha! He came into the court on the first day trying to beg for a seat, and the usher told him to leave as there was no room. Jake said he was a ‘witness’, and the usher said that in that case he had absolutely no business being in the court at all at this point. Jake backpedalled and fumbled and said that erm, no, well, you see, he was there to ‘witness’ the trial on behalf of Neelu. The usher, who’s seen it all before and then some, told him that in that case, he should leave because there was no public seating left. Poor Jake. Seems to have a giant L tattooed on his forehead.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Ooh tough choice indeed. We all know that Neelu and Sabine both have a problem with keeping their mouths shut. Place your bets now ladies and gentlemen.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. Judging by Sabine’s most recent blog on the matter, I am not at all sure that she does realise the implications. I’m sure her barrister will have told her, but whether it will sink in is another matter. Time will tell.


  27. It is only “seriously restrictive” to law abiding citizens. This lot will continue posting their harassing BS anonymously all of the Internet.

    I’d prefer to see their liberty seriously restricted but the judge is obviously a push-over and victims are let down by British “justice” yet again.

    Disgusted but not surprised.


  28. Yes, I suspect that as the barristers and judge all agreed last week, Sabine and Neelu are both incapable of rationality and self-preservation when it comes to their deluded campaign. This is why they were ruled ‘not guilty’…and it’s also why they both now have restraining orders against them, which will be launched into action the moment a victim reports that they have violated them.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. All those who will and have fomented the false allegations are agents of this pair : APD, Jake Clarke, the Dowsing Dame and so on.

    This, I think, cannot be overstated. Any time one of these buffoons breaches this order, they are instantly placing Sabine and/or Neelu in danger of immediate arrest.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. What time Wednesday?

    Is it 10-30am?

    I may go lend support to the innocent victims of Hampstead.


  31. I would thoroughly disagree, Anon. In fact, while they’re not facing prison terms, this give a great deal of power to the victims of this monstrous hoax: the first time either Neelu or Sabine breaches the order, they will be subject to instant arrest and imprisonment.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Yes, I think it’s important to realise that the court order is possibly the best outcome for this thing, as it places the power back in the hands of the victims.


  33. Agreed. I’d like to read it in full.. and if, indeed, ‘anyone’ can report a breach, then I’ll be doing it.

    Liked by 1 person

  34. I doubt they will, FS. But that’s because, as the judge and all the barristers agreed, Neelu and Sabine are both challenged in the mental health department. That’s why the orders were put in place.


  35. Pingback: Neelu & Sabine: Restraining orders | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  36. Meanwhile, on Rupert’s radio show he’s talking about paedophiles:

    “Its always some ugly old sob too, right? Every time you look at one of these things it’s like oh this guy was doing a bunch of stuff and nobody had any idea.

    It’s always some old rich white guy with wiry eyebrows and a shitty haircut looking pervy as hell.

    There’s a couple of them and its like you couldn’t look at this guy and tell? You couldn’t just look at this dude and be like wow.

    What about a little paedophile profiling over here.

    Can’t we just ask the ones that look like crap?

    I saw a priest when I was in Rome.

    I just wanted to hit him just in case cos he just looked like the type.”

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Ooh, someone is sounding just a tad bitter. Belinda is probably very unhappy to watch 2 years’ worth of plotting and scheming go down the drain. All together now: “Awwwwww!”

    Liked by 1 person

  38. I suspect Angie would like nothing better than to encourage one of these malleable mentally challenged individuals to be martyred for the cause.She might get a couple of extra hits on CCN on the back of it.

    Liked by 2 people

  39. Only it isn’t always some old white guy. Sometime its a benign looking youth like Richard Huckel.

    Other times it might be a woman, like Rose West.
    If you could tell some one was a paedophile just by looking at them the police’s job would be a lot easier.

    Nice to hear Rupert is making threats of violence against strangers. I hope immigration are reading this.

    Liked by 2 people

  40. You’ve not heard the half of it. He says “If you know somebody’s doing something to kids and they’re gonna keep doing it and you can shoot them and nobody would know….good……put on a mask and a hoodie and go for a jog….double tap ’em in the head…that’s what I say.”
    Tbh I understand his sentiments but if you’re going to identify people based on their eyebrows it’s all a bit dodgy isn’t it.

    I expect if he sees this he’ll say he was joking.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Reckon you’ve hit the nail on the head, not only do they accept him, they put him out there to promote the farce.

    That’s because they are using him.

    Liked by 2 people

  42. Given Ruperts owncunningly forged impression of being stuck at the age of about 9 (being charitable there)he perhaps ought to be careful what he wishes for.
    Vampires have an aversion to mirrors so cant really blame him for not having a good look into one recently.
    Dorkus Idioticus.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. Actually, one visible clue to paedophile tendencies is dressing and behaving in an age inappropriate way. For example, a man of nearly forty who dresses like a teenager and travels halfway around the world with the intention of “investigating” a primary school would seem very suspicious, especially if he is planning to lurk about the school gates with a video camera.

    Liked by 1 person

  44. I am sure when Jake was on ccn with Angiethe other day he mentioned needing to “check it out” with his social worker about him taking part in a phantasmagorical class action against all of us RD clones.
    If correct he will be receiving oversight by an adult mental health team who perhaps need to be aware of the perils others are drawing him into and the risks both to himself and others.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. “Those two brave children will know there are people who believe them!!”
    LOL! Those two brave children, retracted everything and told the Police Abe had abused them physically and mentally and told them everything to say on camera! Also stating they did not ever want to see their Mum again as long as she was still with Abe!

    Why the hell don’t the hoaxers see that??

    Liked by 1 person

  46. He’s a wee little man, we hear. Looks like he just had his braces removed. It’s pretty clear when you see most of these people close up that they have severe mental difficulties.

    Liked by 1 person

  47. Maybe but dressing and behaving like a teenager is also indicative of someone who might be really immature and a mummy’s boy.
    Tell you what, if he hangs round a primary school and gets spotted he’s gonna be doing a Christine Ann Sands faster than he thinks.
    This isn’t a game where you get to go home straight away after you bother someone on the street.

    Liked by 2 people

  48. Apparently Jake has sufficient mental capacity to drive himself around on public roads. Imbecilic he may well be, likewise a mummy’s boy etc. But I’m afraid the indicators are that he has sufficient capacity to take complete responsibility for his conduct and demeanour (else, why is he considered fit to drive?).

    Certainly, the consensus up here is that this age-inappropriate behaviour may well be an indicator of a ‘Pied Piper’ type personality with a predilection for the company of, including sexual contact with, children. One of the late teens/early twenties girls in the office summed it up; “he’s a creepy lookin’ wee bastard”. Bear in mind that Jake is approaching 30? And the same point applies to him as applies to Quaintance. – Men his own age will shun this infantile idiot, and it cannot reasonable be through ‘attractive’ to normally-adjusted women of an appropriate age group. – So who EXACTLY is it these two creeps are ‘reaching out’ to with their behaviour?

    It’s just not natural or normal… Add to this their ‘fascination’ with Paedophilia… These are two VERY creepy men. VERY creepy indeed.

    Liked by 1 person

  49. I haven’t been to London in over 5 years but remember covering that same basic stretch a few times, so that’s roughly the distance I remembered when he mentioned it taking 2.5 hours (!)…isn’t the Globe in (or *very* near) what’s technically Southwark? Nay matter…he’s glacial in pretty much every possible department anyway !

    Liked by 1 person

  50. I have a have a hard time imagining him being surrounded or respected by a group of well-adjusted *peers* – seems like the type who may only be capable of relating to a far younger crowd (or, in this particular case, to the geriatric set !) The guy is almost THIRTY, yet looks/acts like an adolescent, is completely obsessed by ‘water consciousness experiments’ and nonexistent satanic cults, etc…that combo would likely be lethal to a decent social life within the context of ANY age group ! I honestly think he must have a legitimate psychiatric issue or ten…

    Liked by 1 person

  51. EC, although I need to go back over the entire story carefully once again (as I clearly have no impulse control with respect to the topic and simply *had* to read the last bits first !), it appears that APD and Jakey are euphoric over the fact that S & N escaped harsh punishment due to abundantly clear delusional/obsessive psychiatric illnesses. Doesn’t seem like anything to celebrate from *my* perspective ! Although not having to do any ‘hard time’ (for now, at least) is obviously a desired outcome, the reasoning behind the verdict in no way confirms, or even suggests, the existence of any ‘cult’ – on the contrary, it solidifies the objective fact that NONE EXISTS ! Am I misinterpreting (or simply missing) something painfully obvious here?


  52. Breach of a restro is a criminal offence carrying a max of 5 years and an unlimited fine. The police regularly prosecute them and sentences of imprisonment are fairly common. The normal course would be for a victim to report a breach to the police, like any other victimed crime.


  53. “We are confident however that these people will be afforded justice in the not too distant future.”

    The judge wouldn’t have stated this unless he was aware that further action was on the cards and that it is likely better evidenced.

    Liked by 3 people

  54. Sadly I would beg to differ, judging from the number of bonkers Twitter accounts that have decided to intrude upon my timeline in last two days. I am afraid there does seem to be a tenacious rump of supporters who are continuing to publish videos and name the children.

    I wonder how easy it is to prove that someone is an ‘agent’ for the purposes of establishing a breach of the RO?

    Liked by 2 people

  55. Contempt of court is treated as a quasi-criminal matter – in a family court, for e.g. if I want to argue that someone is in contempt I should wear my robes (not otherwise worn in family cases) and the standard of proof is akin to a criminal court. This is because you are asking the judge to take away someone’s liberty as punishment, so it is treated very seriously.

    Liked by 1 person

  56. Yes, we’re working that out right now, Sarah. The definition of ‘agent’ is critical.

    And I’m really sorry you’re being targetted by the loonies—I wonder why they’re not coming to the source? Very odd.


  57. Not so odd really. I think they come after me because I am named and they think they can intimidate me – there have been lots of references to the Bar Standards Board. Bring it on I say. I think these people have for too long benefitted from the indifference of the authorities or the ease with which they can intimidate people with threats.

    I note with merriment how quickly most of them fade away and block me once it gets into their thick skulls that their usual intimidatory tactics are unpersuasive.

    Liked by 1 person

  58. Yes, at heart most of these people are bullies looking for victims. And I have absolutely no doubt of your ability to give them short shrift.


  59. If the correct charges had been put before the court in the 1st place, then there would have been a GUILTY verdict.

    Next time perhaps the CPS would care to get this correct.

    Liked by 1 person

  60. What part of Battersea as Google says it is around 4 miles? Lol.

    Talk about Jake being slow.

    I can swim 1500m in 26 minutes, so could do 5 miles in under 2 n half hours.

    Though I am 12th in Britain for this event in 2015 for my age group.

    I’m double his age.

    Liked by 1 person

  61. Pingback: BREAKING: Sabine charged, released | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.