Debs, Round 2: Lies, half-truths, and waffle

Oh dear. Why do we do these things to ourselves? Deborah Mahmoudieh put out a second video yesterday—an ‘addendum’ to the one from Monday in which she tried to claim that because a group of paedophiles had been arrested and found guilty in Wales several years ago, this ‘validated’ the Hampstead hoax. (Hint: No it didn’t.)

And because we are masochistic idiots devoted to bringing our readers the latest news from the Land of the Hoaxtead Pushers, we sat and listened to it, so you wouldn’t have to.

Of course, if you’re truly determined, you can listen here:

Deborah has never been one to trouble herself with hard things like ‘research’ or ‘knowledge of the law’, so it was no surprise that she started with this mash-up of half-truths:

Neelu and Sabine have both been on trial…they’ve been through multiple court cases….it’s all been related to their involvement in trying to get justice for the Hampstead children, and the lack of justice…they’ve been requesting that lawful suspects subject themselves to investigation to prove their innocence.

What in hell is a “lawful suspect” when it’s at home? Is that even a thing? The only suspects we’re aware of in the context of Neelu and Sabine’s trial are…well, Neelu and Sabine.

And since when must any suspects, “lawful” or otherwise, do anything at all to “prove their innocence”?

Hint for Deborah: It is a basic tenet of British law that the accused are innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

Not content with mangling the concept of burden of proof, Debs tries to claim that Neelu’s first charge, “vexing a priest”, was thrown out of court because there was “no such crime”.

Wrong again. There is such a crime (though we’d agree that it was an odd choice under the circumstances), and it was not thrown out of court. The judge decided that there was no case to answer because the prosecution had been unable to assemble the witnesses…because they were all afraid of the consequences should they turn up in court.

Hint for Deborah: The witnesses felt intimidated by the fact that their personal information had been published online by the defendant prior to the trial. Try to remember this; you’ll be seeing those words again.

Deborah’s next claim: “The charge was changed to witness intimidation, so [Neelu] was back up in court again.”

Sigh.

No. Neelu and Sabine were each charged with witness intimidation because Neelu had provided Sabine with her arrest documents, which included full witness statements from a total of six witnesses. Sabine published these on one of her blogs.

Hint for Deborah: Remember those special words we asked you to remember? Bet you didn’t think they’d turn up again so quickly, right? See if you can find them in the above paragraph.

Here’s one that actually brought tears to our eyes: “Since no crime was committed, how could the suspects be witnesses to anything?”

How to even begin to unravel this? All right, deep breaths everyone. Deep breaths. We can do this.

When Neelu’s case was dismissed, it was not because no crime was committed, but because the witnesses were terrified to turn up in court. If by “suspects” Debs meant “the original witnesses” (and that’s by no means clear, but we’re going to assume it is for the good of our own mental health), then they were indeed witnesses to the original crime, which was Neelu’s chasing and terrifying the priest during a service at Christ Church in Hampstead in 2015.

Hint for Deborah: Please try to use your head for something other than a hat rack. And do try to keep your friends’ crimes straight.

“All I’m saying is can we have child protection protocols please? Can we have justice?…This is the way the law works because we haven’t got a written law, we’ve only got case precedents”.

The notion that we don’t have child protection protocols would surprise a great many people who work in the field of child protection; in fact, here’s a copy of Child Protection Procedures from York, just as one example. Similar protocols are used in every jurisdiction in the country.

As for written law, Debs is partially right. Britain does not have a codified constitution, but does have an unwritten one, formed of Acts of Parliament, court judgements and conventions. If anyone would like to understand this more fully, here’s a good link about it. Deborah’s claim that “we haven’t got a written law” but only case precedents, however, is just plain silly.

Hint for Deborah: Before opening mouth, engage brain.

The rest of the video consists of Debs asserting that because Colin Batley owned a camcorder, he was clearly involved in making and distributing commercial child sex abuse images, which proves that this was also happening in Hampstead. Or something.

To be honest, she was getting pretty hard to follow by this time, and a great deal of incoherent spluttering was involved.

She did veer off at one point into a side rant about a woman who lost all her children to social services, and somehow linked this back to children being abused in care, which again ‘proves’ her claims about Hoaxtead. Her stunning conclusion: “This is why the people of Wales need to start really seriously asking questions because who are they really living next door to?”

Cue a quick side-swipe at Jimmy Page, who once quoted Aleister Crowley, and that’s it: “What can I say? I can’t say any more.”

And for that we are all profoundly thankful.

liar pants fire lies

139 thoughts on “Debs, Round 2: Lies, half-truths, and waffle

  1. Sigh……

    She’s conflating a few issues. Firstly, don’t be overly surprised if material shot by Batley surfaces at some point in the future. I’m lead to believe he was involved in making pornography which he shared and which was found. And I think it’s only a matter of time before the police unravel the pornography ring(s) that operate in this country and beyond. There is almost always financial reason why these creeps shoot this stuff and definitely a market. Take an independent look at the Mitchell case for instance; you will find that it emerged in court he was producing child abuse videos. And he was making money from ‘somewhere’. In fact, it has been speculated that this was his prime reason for investing in the industrial-grade video equipment he owned. I don’t fully-understand the reasons why, but the Police seem to prosecute this type of case on the abuse primarily. I think the preference is to feed their intelligence network with any information gleaned in relation to pornography. But I think Operation Latisse shows they’re not ignoring that side of the problem. They seem to be playing the long game. And I do see signs of people who have been under suspicion for years becoming very very nervous indeed.

    I’ve heard it said that Christie and Draper had some involvement in porn. This seems to be distorted by the hoaxers into the children being abused for that purpose too. Which of course we have no indication of Frankly, if there is any such aspect to the case that would be better-kept in the exclusive hands of the police. The rest of her ranting seems very confused. To be honest, those with the patience and time to go through this nonsense are braver souls than I!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, I agree: I think the police will go for abuse charges before they charge anyone with making child sex abuse images for distribution. As you say, these things rarely happen in isolation, and it’s important to keep the long game in mind at all times.

      Liked by 1 person

    • @Joe – it is indeed likely that Batley’s group made images from some of the abuse and may have shared/traded those images with other pervs. There were some statements from victims, that pictures had been taken. But, be skeptical of any info originating from “Annabelle Forest” aka Gemma Marling. What you read in press reports, attributed to those names, isn’t that person’s true history and probably isn’t even her own words. She didn’t just sell “the rights to her story”, she sold the right to TELL her life story, to Weitz &co. In other words, they own the right to alter, distort, add to, subtract from, or insert total fictions into, the core life history she provided them. One example is a statement attributed to Annabelle in a Daily Mail story, that Batley had been “tipped off” and destroyed evidence. Nope, didn’t happen – but they can say whatever they wish to, in her name.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I don’t doubt for a moment how distorted accounts of the Batley case have become. And I’m inclined to take the view that what will be written about it amounts to a form of pornography in itself. Where there is porn there is abuse. And where there are abusers there is a network. – No, I don’t give much credence to Ms Forrest. And I think those who are investigating these things in depth (i.e. the police) will be equally if not more cautious.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Did she get some facts wrong or what!

    Talking of incoherent nonsense I listened to Angela’s Cashes today. Mel was saying she felt it was her human right to know the Hampstead children are ok to which Angela answered…wait for it:

    “Legally when a mother has sought all remedies to protect her children and all have failed, so for instance as Ella went to the police, went to social services, went for counselling (she didn’t know she was walking into the lion’s den at Tavistock) but when a human being has sought all possible remedies they do have a legal right, as a last resort, to cry out for help to the public, the public as an entity, as a legal body and therefore you know that makes a mockery of the whole thing of people being prosecuted for the mother crying out, you know, to the public as a body. ‘Help SOS I’ve tried the police, I’ve tried the social services, I’ve tried the school, I’ve tried the Tavistock Institute stupidly without realising. I’ve exhausted every other avenue.’ So I think on those grounds the public at large, as the legal body, to whom, you know, as the last resort has the right to say ‘find a structure to tell us the well-being of these children because its traumatised a generation’.”

    1. The public has no such right.
    2. You have no such right.
    3. The vast majority of people know this is a hoax.
    4. Get a job.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. For anyone who missed these at the tail end of the previous thread, suffice to say Debs ain’t happy:

    And from a few days ago:

    Liked by 1 person

      • OMG what is she using? It must be something more that Abe’s super skunk piss. “Addendum” reports alerting the people of Wales to what exactly? That..erm…Neelu is on her way, I bet they will love her! Such utter nonsense testing the waters to see how far she can go before getting prosecuted again. The R/O applies equally to all territories and as every penny (evidence) matters. Last time I was disappointed they didn’t invoke the insanity defense, second time round I don’t think CPS will be so ‘lenient’. She really needs to get a job to divert her madness somewhere else.

        Liked by 1 person

        • If not got a job, all the other employees would do a runner or end up admitted to hospital.

          How could anyone put up with that 5 days a week?

          I don’t think I could tolerate 5 minutes.

          Are all her family of similar personality?

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Weird on so many levels:

    Just a little way in it becomes apparent that Angie may be close to burning yet another bridge! (Steffi’s extremely unhappy about Angie sharing that Skype video about her ranting about monkeys with Rupert.)

    And then it just gets weirder and weirder.

    Sample quote: “STEFFI, I AM NOT GAY!”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Seriously bizarre. They’re clearly both high (and they more or less admit it).

      I’m just at the part where Steffi’s talking about a lady who came to buy one of her monkeys. Apparently, Steffi threatened to “skull fuck” her when the lady tried to hug her. For some reason, her husband then “got me shit-faced and fucked me in the bed”. (Of course, Angie’s pissing herself laughing at this tale of borderline rape.)

      Oh wait – I was thinking it couldn’t get any weirder but Angie’s just said she has a friend who can bring horses back from the dead. I utterly SWEAR I’m not making this up!

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oh come on, you are making it up. Yes?
        Sadly truth is stranger than fiction. Oh no that’s not right because what they say IS fiction.
        Neelu again agitating to breach a criminal court sanction. Just a matter of time.
        So these ratbags want the right to harass these kids at some time in the future. I have a sneaky feeling that may not be appreciated and they may get their collars felt.

        Liked by 2 people

      • And I have full sympathy for Steffi’s husband and fully understand the need to get shitfaced when contemplating the marital bed. Why do I think of the words ‘Trailer Trash’ when I look at Steffi?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Just when you think this can’t get any weirder, this is what Steffi’s just said (at 24:45)…

      Steffi: “When the Muslim comes to take my pig, you know, I’ve got a gun there – I’ll fucking shoot him in the head. Then I’ll feel bad about it but I’ll make sure we’ll bury him really deep.”

      Angie: “Yeah. Yeah.”

      Honestly, I am NOT making this up! 😮

      Liked by 1 person

    • Then at 27:23 Angie asks Steffi to put her glasses on so she can show her a picture of her horse…but instead of putting on her glasses, Steffi puts a crown on her head, for no apparent reason.

      Angie: “Oh, you’ve put a crown on your head.”

      Then at 29:08, right out of the blue –

      Angie: “Steffi, have you had a hysterectomy?”

      Steffi: “No, no, it’s all there, just stopped. It just stopped. It’s like, one day my pussy looked at my husband and said, ‘No, we’re done.’ ”

      As Gabi said, we are NOT making this up!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Why do I feel like we’ve wandered into the Twilight Zone here?

      33:57 –

      Angie: “One of my sisters – the one that’s dead – I don’t think she was my mother’s child. I think they switched the babies at birth.”

      Steffi: “I’ve read that too.”

      Liked by 2 people

    • At 35:32 even I think I’m making it up…

      Steffi: “Forgive me if I jack off while you talk.”

      I then had to cover my eyes…and book an appointment with my shrink.

      Angie then calls her a “cunt” but at that point I’m almost too busy wincing to notice.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Angela is such a Liar, time and time again.

      Promising her “friends” she won’t share the video/s means she will share the video.

      I can’t stand the woman, lying down smoking her spliff with Rupert.

      Where are her morals?

      What an awful example she is of a woman who’s a granny.

      Shocking.

      Liked by 3 people

    • So Ange had her pony taken away but hunts for fallen sparrows and Steff sells monkeys? Tell me I haven’t wandered into the Twighlight Zone.

      Liked by 2 people

    • 36:50 – *ANGIE ON BELINDA*

      Angie: “Right, so just shut up a minute – I’ll be as brief as I can.

      So Belinda is a millionaire’s daughter, probably a survivor…er…generational.

      But anyway, she’s a big-shot in the truther community for decades…

      So Belinda has had terrible smear campaigns online for charity scamming. And I stayed in her house for five days and I had some great times, like I’m having with you, with her. And so I just asked her outright, ‘What’s the deal with the money? What’s the deal with all the gossip?’ And she was really honest with me. So…so she inherited four million off her father, and and [sic] so everybody though she like was…But anyway, she got…she spent…she left…she inherited 4 million; she gave most of it to her children. But she kept a million to set up a safe house.

      So she’s got this amazing family home near Hampstead, with, like, 27…er…I mean, it’s hilarious. It’s like a rabbit warren. She…she and her husband live underground because of death threats. And then there’s a guardian studio apartment. But she’s got, like, beds in sheds. It’s like animal farming. But it was her dream to set up this safe space for survivors and, you know, vulnerable people and activists and all the rest of it. Well, she spent more than her budget, so she got, I think, at least three of her best friends to…to remortgage their houses and help her finish making this…this amazing safe house / sanctuary.

      But I learned myself that if you work from home…and you work…No, no, if you work from home when you work with dysfunctional people, it’s too…it’s too much. Right? It’s just too much. So she sorta swings between ‘Yes, it was my dream to have a sanctuary and an open house and yes, several people have invested in that dream’ [sic]. But yes, this was the second time she said, ‘I don’t feel sociable enough to have visitors.’ “

      Steffi: “…Have another fucking cigarette”

      Angie: “So just listen for a second, right…”

      Steffi: “HI RUPERT! Where the fuck is he? He’s always high…He fucking thinks I’m awesome.”

      Angie: “No, Stephanie…Stephanie…”

      Steffi: “Awesome, my ass…”

      Angie: “Stephanie…”

      Steffi: “How rude!”

      Angie: “Stephanie…STEPHANIE! LET ME FINISH, PLEASE!”

      Steffi: “I’m on delay. It took me a while to hear that.”

      Angie: “OK, so because…anyway, whatever. The point I wanted to make was – if she put a million into upgrading her home for guests, it’s her privilege to say, “I don’t want no guests right now, isn’t it. I mean, fuck that. Fuck that, it’s none of my business. If a few people put a few extra hundred thousands [sic] in, it’s still her home. You know? You don’t get to buy a piece of someone’s…”

      Liked by 2 people

    • This video is a veritable goldmine!

      Despite their bullshit about Rupert being in London, it seems he’s still at Angie’s house.

      47:20

      Steffi: “I thought that was Rupert saying something.”

      Angie: “He put his headphones on. he put his headphones on because we were upsetting him, because we were screaming and talking bad about men. Sometimes you need to talk bad about men…No, because I was screaming at you to get you to listen.”

      Steffi: “My monkeys are whistling.”

      Liked by 2 people

      • It’s lunchtime at work here and I can’t watch the video but my colleagues are wondering why the hell I keep laughing. “My monkeys are whistling” is just too much!
        Looking forward to watching this Gigglefest when I get home this evening.🙂

        Liked by 2 people

    • A crock of shoite.

      Weed n alcohol induced, bringing out their true characters.

      Angie admits she is manipulative from her own mouth.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Angie is fast becoming the modern day PT Barnum with her online freak show.

      Mr Barnum made a tidy sum back in the day with his road show menagerie of human curiosities,street urchins and moral defectives.Evidently Angie has adpoted her predecessors business mantra “There`s a sucker born every minute”.

      On a positive note Angies ambition to reach “a third of the planet” at least provides some solice for the other 2 thirds.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. Funny how Angela says Belinda is a “survivor” when Belinda spoke at the Chris Tuck/Chris Twitter rally in June 2015 that she had led a “charmed” life.

    Such a liar you are Angela, such a liar.

    And you’re a tell tale tit too.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. OK, this bit is just sad. Angie on back-stabbing form.

    At 1:26:00 Steffi bursts into tears and begs Angie not to go. And she goes on to hint (again) that she’s upset about Angie and Rupert uploading the “amusing” clip of her talking about getting therapy after one of her monkeys died (yeah, hilarious, Angie) and implies that she felt humiliated. (“I’m so sorry. I wish I was funnier. I’m so sorry, The things you’ve said about me, the things you’ve put out there, I wish I’d made it more funny. I’m sorry. I’m sorry”)

    And this is what caring sharing Angie says to “reassure” her: “You’re not a performing monkey. I don’t phone you to get footage. I don’t phone you to be funny or wise. Fuck that, Steffi. I phone you because you’re my friend.”

    Yeah, Angie. We all believe you. And the fact that you’ve now uploaded this very Skype call under the title ‘My genius ‘autistic’ friend and ally – join ANGIE & STEFFI for tears & tantrums!’ really proves that you’d never upload footage of your friend for kicks.

    And how nice of you to then be so keen to get rid of Steffi when she’s extremely tearful and clearly vulnerable. You’re such a great “friend”. Oh well, I guess you must have been in too much of a hurry to upload your private call against Steffi’s wishes for the entertainment of your 3 viewers.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. 8:15 Angie tells Steffi about Rupert’s interview with a Russian man who’s child has been removed. Steffi says ‘Just give him a fuckin’ monkey. He’ll be alright.’

    Liked by 1 person

  8. BINGO!
    Confirmation that Valerie Sinason was directly involved in the Batley case, PRIOR TO the trial:

    “You should also know that I have spoken with the officers who busted Batley, and to Valerie Sinason of The Tavistock Institute, who helped them”.

    I’m not going to disclose where this came from, here, because I don’t want to give the person any publicity – but I will send that info to Coyote privately just so there’s no question of leg-pullin’.
    Now here is one example of Sinason’s obsessive fantasizing about “Aleister Crowley satanists” secretly wreaking havoc across the UK. This is from the Introduction of her book “Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse”, published way back in 1994!

    “Men and women, dedicated to Aleister Crowley’s guiding principle “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”, worship Satan as their god in private houses or in churchyards and forests. In so doing they literally turn upside down any moral concept that comes with Christianity. They practise every sexual perversion that exists with animals, children and both sexes. They drink blood and urine and eat faeces and insects. They are involved in pornographic films and drug-dealing as a means of raising money. They are highly organized, successful in their secrecy and have a belief that through this they are getting closer to their god”.

    So…I presume this means that the McD’s in Batley’s neighborhood served up poo-burgers and pee-shakes?

    Liked by 2 people

      • From that Private Eye article:
        “Valerie Sinason…who claims to have worked with 300 ritual abuse survivors, was billed to speak on working with learning disability, ritual abuse, DID and mind control”.

        The source of that statement, linking Sinason to the Batley case investigation, is involved in another attempt to exploit a “learning disabled” child as a false SRA accuser – ala the Hollie Greig hoax. You really have to be a POS to use special needs kids as your ventriloquist doll, but Sinason is a BIG FAN of such exploitation.
        She got her SRA start, consulting on a case with a psych patient whose only capacity for verbalization took the form of grunts. Literally, this person could not speak at all. Nevertheless, Sinason claimed that the patient “disclosed” a complex childhood history of “satanic” s&m and b&d, including being forced to eat poop – and that her abusers were still kidnapping her from her hospital bed and abusing her out on the grounds at night! Obviously, the patient couldn’t/didn’t SAY any of this, to Sinason. If she could only grunt, there is only one way such “conversing” could be acted out – Sinason would have to SPEAK FOR HER, and have her grunt affirmations. Sinason would have to ask her: “So, did anyone ever torture and rape you as a child?” type of thing, and interpret her grunts as yes or no. That means Sinason would have to invent-compose the whole complex scenario herself – FIRST. All the UK SRA pushers love performing this kind of “diagnosis” – as Kevin Annett might say: “Alright…let’s make some shit up!”

        Dr Sarah Nelson, in her new book, claims that every SRA believing professional she ever met in the UK, FIRST became aware of SRA because of disclosures made to them by child victims. That is a blatant lie, or a rather disingenuous twisting of the truth. You see, they consider “signs and symptoms” allegedly displayed by a child and diagnosed by them as evidence for SRA victimization, to be “disclosure” of such abuse by the child. Fortunately, Sandra Buck ratted them all out about this, in her article about the history of RAINS, in “Ritual Abuse in the 21st Century”, wherein she documents that the very first such “disclosures” in the UK took this form: “They did this as children do, through their behaviours, drawings and play”. DELUSIONAL!

        “Look, Johhny’s climbing the slide backward! He’s saying that he attended ceremonies where the mass was performed in reverse. What’s that, Johnny? Now he’s peeing in the sandbox – he’s saying that he was raped by an orangutang 5 times a day and forced to drink it’s urine. Poor child!”

        Liked by 2 people

        • I think most serious commentators and investigators of child abuse pretty-much dismiss the ‘Satanic’ element as any kind of ‘genuine’ thing. In terms of sexual deviancy it seems to be something that grew from fantasies seeded by ‘soft porn’ Hammer Horror films of the 1960s as 70s and their like. Not, in cultural terms, entirely baseless but definitely distorted and glamorised by certain threads of popular culture. Abusers need some ‘leverage’ over their victims; some hold on them. And by abusers I mean those who seek command and control over the credulous and vulnerable. By abuse I don’t necessarily mean just sexual or other blatantly-nefarious abuse. I include abuse of official power and privileged position for the purposes of self-satisfaction and aggrandisement. The Satanic Panic seems to be one such abuse. And worse, it acts as a smokescreen for the very real and very mundane structures that facilitate child abuse. While we’re looking for horned gods and midnight covens we are distracted from questioning the gun-obsessed self-style Scoutmaster. We don’t question the dodgy sports coach. Or the ex-Army Intelligence Officer who spends his summers building canoes so he can take little kids on trips out into the wilds. Like wise when we throw out a case for its quasi-mystical (or for that matter any other kind of) lunacy, it’s the entire thing that goes, including any small element of truth that might have been hidden within it.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Part of my job is trying to protect SEN children from predators like Sinason. It’s so sad that there are people like her out there.

          Liked by 2 people

    • Re: batshit-crazy Sinason: she has a disciplinary hearing coming up at the UKCP. The hearing will be secret, but I assume that the outcome of the hearing will be made public. I am going to contact them to find out what the outcome is/whether they will allow the public to know anything about it. The sooner this crazy cow is put out of business the better.

      Liked by 1 person

    • No offence Justin but it is very unlikely that Valerie Sinason had anything to do with the Batley case – also consider the source of your quote….? Sinason might tell people that she helps the police, but that would involve her being named in police notes and in the evidence files… and possibly being summoned as a witness. She would be torn to shreds in court by any half-competent lawyer, and rightly so.

      Like

      • @Athena – “…that would involve her being named in police notes and in the evidence files… and possibly being summoned as a witness”.
        Not necessarily. That would depend on what kind of “help” she was rendering to investigators and at the moment I can only speculate about that. I was consulted many times by local detectives, circa 1987-1992, and had discussions with them that might go on for 1-2 hours, but I was never asked to be a witness or testify in court. I was only a community resource, providing ‘background’ for them, like some local academics playing a similar role. As far as I know, only one of those academics was ever asked to provide “expert testimony” in court, and only on one occaision.

        The source is a pathological liar, that’s true, but I really can’t see what that person would stand to gain by falsely stating in public that they were in contact.

        When I first heard about the Batley case, my first reaction was: “Great scott! It’s Sinason’s dream come true!”. The scenario portrayed in press accounts was so precisely “just what Sinason and RAINS always wanted/needed” that it was immediately suspicious to me. But at the time, there seemed no way to do my own fact-checking or background research.
        I don’t know if you noticed, but publicity about the Batley case seems to have been unusually – and perhaps suspiciously – well contained. I’ve never been able to dig up any press reports about their arrests, from the time of the arrests. There was nothing until the trial was underway, and then, all the coverage repeated the same ‘stock’ info almost like they were all working from one carefully prepared Press Release. Independent background ‘investigation’ was sparse and meaningless – such as quoting ‘shocked’ neighbors who knew nothing of importance. I don’t think I even learned the names of the investigating officers. A lot of information was being suppressed, was my impression, and involvement by Sinason or RAINS members as consultants could be part of what was deliberately being left undisclosed.

        We shall see, I suppose. I intend to keep digging…

        Liked by 1 person

  9. Oh dear, Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. It wasn’t so long ago that these people would have found themselves in some institution or another. Not that I am advocating ‘the good old days’, but the more we hear and see what these idiots are up to the more I understand the reasoning behind these old practices.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Angie:

    “I have Rothschilds coming to me that want to break free from the family.”

    “I want to find a platform to reach a third of the planet.”

    “Amy Winehouse’s father used to pimp her out to Russian oligarchs from the age of about ten or younger.”

    Liked by 1 person

    • So Rothschilds go to Angie to “break free for the family”..riggght

      This somewhat confirms something hinted to on here several times.
      Check out the Wikipedia page on Vicki de Lambray which has my additions about when Vicki / David tried to change his name to Louis de Rothschild but the horrified Rothschild family paid him £10K not to, knowing what would ensue.

      Vicki was an habitue of the small West End drinking clubs in the late 70s where another thief and fraudster drank : Andrea Davison. Angie like a true sociopath picks up little pieces of what she has heard or encountered to weave into her tales. I bet she was involved with small time criminal Davison.

      More indications that Angela Power-Disney has latched on to the “Satanic child abuse” claims to raise donations. You forget these old scamsters never give up but times have changed and they’ll say or do anything for some cash.

      Few people realise that the raison d’être of the ghastly old goat and convicted fraudster Christoper Fay of Elm Guest House lunacy was simply- cash. 50 quid here, 200 there, a free lunch. For a pensioner with no other income Fay rode high for some time until I pulled the plug on him at The Mirror who I convinced would have egg on their faces if they continued believing this lying old creep.

      They ditched him and he moved on to Exaro (look how that ended). It will end in tears for Power-Disney and anyone foolish enough to throw their lot in with her.

      ## note to any member of the Rothschild family- I will gladly take your place if you wish to leave the family. And your inheritance. But I’m not going to become a bloody Mason.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. So Angie was asked to sell the Romonov jewels ! LOL. Clearly someone was trying to scam the scammer.
    The last grandson of the Russian Tsar, Leonid Kulikovsky died in Australia late last year penniless as are the few remaining relatives who live in New York on state pensions.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/12024837/Great-grandson-of-Russian-tsar-died-alone-in-Australia-days-before-family-learnt-of-his-whereabouts.html

    Liked by 2 people

  12. “Investigative research by Deborah Mahmoudieh”.

    Lol, Debs has contact details for Sabine and Neelu, plus the media reports…etc, but still can’t get their trial details correct.
    Did Debs ever ‘investigate’ or ‘research’ who tipped Batley off, and how they did so?….or did she just believe a media article?
    Just because the article does not explicitly describe the police investigating Batley for the distribution of child pornography, does not mean the police did not investigate. It does not mean the police are covering up or will ignore any footage that comes to light.
    What research/investigation did Debs do other than ‘I don’t believe’ that prostitutes can earn £2000 in a month?

    What Debs did was give an uninformed and demonstrably wrong opinion.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Discussed a while back. It’s though she’s been ‘salting her own plate’ – i.e. donating to her own appeal to make it seem as if it’s something with ‘legs’.

      Liked by 2 people

      • If collecting sponsers for a genuine cause perhaps a case can be made for starting the ball rolling with a pound rather than a penny.

        As is her want Angie over eggs the pudding with about as much subtlety as a turd in a handbag.

        Liked by 2 people

    • As stated on Angies GofundMe “a minimum of about 1,200 euro MONTHLY would get me on my feet…(800 sterling or 1,300 dollars) “. I just cannot believe the cheek of this woman. Get a job instead of begging strangers for money.

      Liked by 2 people

      • She’s a ponce, just like Rupert.

        Who the f..k do they think they are that they are so important people want to give money to them?

        Angela doesn’t look like she is starving, she doesn’t need any money the greedy mare, the State has been keeping her and her ilk for the last 16 years as she admits herself.

        She’s a user…

        Like

  13. “You’re not a performing monkey. I don’t phone you to get footage. I don’t phone you to be funny or wise. Fuck that, Steffi. I phone you because you’re my friend.”

    ~ Angela Power-Disney

    I feel sorry for Steffi here. She’s genuinely upset that this was shared by Angie for her and Rupert’s amusement (and she’d been genuinely upset about that monkey):

    Angie has blatantly breached Steffi’s trust here and stabbed her in the back for her own entertainment.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. That’s a perfect illustration of the type of woman that Angie is. She gets stoned with Rupert then decides to Skype her friend because she knows she will get some cheap laughs from it and then puts up the video just to increase the humiliation. What a truly nasty piece of work she is.

    Liked by 3 people

    • It’s sickening, isn’t it, AF.

      And grief/bereavement over losing a pet is very real and can be as traumatic as losing a loved one. It’s not for the likes of Angie and Rupert to take the piss out of. And the fact that she cut her off when she was in tears just so she could dash off and upload it (instead of staying to check that her vulnerable friend was ok) is really shocking.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Angela will turn on the lot of them before very long.

      She’s milking Cathi of the Bases project for all that MKUltra information she has and then Angela fake Disney will use it as her own research.

      How long before she turns on Belinda?

      I think she might save Belinda until the very last, though if Angela’s quest for Top Dog overcomes her, she’ll throw Belinda under the bus sooner.

      Angela is Top Bitch already.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Rumour has it that she and Belinda have been on the outs for some time now. The way we heard it, Angie thinks Belinda set her up for investigation on her charity scamming activities. True? We don’t know. But interesting anyway.

        Like

  15. By the way, as sorry as I feel for Steffi, I wish to go on record as saying that monkeys are wild animals and shouldn’t be kept as house pets. It’s something that many Americans are really into that just doesn’t happen over here (partly because our laws on wild animal ownership are much stricter).

    Liked by 2 people

  16. 50 per cent?! F*ck me, that’s at least 20 times as accurate as Neelu or Angie!

    By the way, anyone any ideas why Gabriella Barney couldn’t be a real name? Is there some kind of name embargo I don’t know about? If so, should we alert the hundreds of real Gabriella Barneys out there? 😀

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sadly for Neelu, HR had contacts in the court on the day, reporting precisely what happened and quoting verbatim what was said (and unlike Neelu, they didn’t conveniently leave anything out).

      Liked by 2 people

      • 10,000 Squids? What is it gold lettering embossed on ivory tablets encrusted with mother of pearl?

        Whatever it costs it sounds like an complete waste of money that could possibly do some real good to assist help impoverished children on our planet not that this grasping tribe give a hoot about such triffling matters.

        If anyone is idiotic enough to contribute to Neelus latest other worldly earner I guess that is their problem.

        Liked by 2 people

  17. Neelu Berry the Woman with the £3 Billion of Gold bullion, the woman who has served lien to Police officers and Judges for £5 Million asking for £10,000?
    Have you noticed that all of them are on the begging game?
    Angie the Puff toy boy slag She has gofund me
    Rupert the scumbag who thinks by being an American he will carry a gun and will destroy churches and schools in UK although he is a drug addict scam bag and most likely sharing his drugs with this Crazy psychopath Angie. Rupert has go fund me page to pay for his travels to Italy and Ireland where today he stays.

    Sabine has 3 gofund me accounts

    So ask your selves
    are these people there to protect children?
    or using the children to profit. a Case that i see every day from the government, Local authorities and these scam artists whose children was not abused by anyone other themselves.
    Angie the puff She said it on video that she hit her kids.

    So if we donate few quid to these scumbags they will come on our side screaming against Ella draper.

    Because ELLA she wants nothing to do with them.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’m speculating but I think this is just another strategy of getting people ‘googling’ into their antics, thereby exposing the Hampstead Children and their other targets at Christchurch. With all due respect by the 4th Day of hearing this nonsense I would need a week off, that Barrister was probably ready to smack their heads together and say “what the f*ck is wrong with you pair?” hence the day off.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. Pingback: A Veritable Goldmine ~ Comments … | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  19. I tried to read her incomprehensible rubbish in Spacebook and got really confused with her claim a Royal Commission had made certain findings, only to then find it’s happening in December.
    So she seems to be claiming to be psychic and even has got inside the head of the Prime Minster who is the only one with the power to call a Commission.

    I wonder if Larry the Cat is a spy for her at No 10?

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Lor’ luv a duck! OK Lary lets be clear there ain’t enuff room fer da two ov us an’ we don’ wan’ any trouble now do we. Now do me a favaaahr an’ run along theres a good boy. Know what I mean?

    Liked by 3 people

    • You know I have this hypothesis, that she is actually sane but this backdrop of madness is a convenient cloak to hide behind – I mean it worked with the CPS fortnight ago, described as “odd, irrational & delusional”, dodged a few serious judicial bullets, if she is totally mad, why is she not under Psychiatric supervision in a Mental Health ward and possibly getting treatment? Just a thought.

      Liked by 1 person

      • We’ve speculated on this too, but without knowing the results of an actual psychiatric evaluation, I don’t think we can really say one way or another.

        Like

        • I think they intentionally avoided using the defense of insanity, which is a full defense to any crime because if they use it, they will be detained, albeit in a padded room while Psychiatrists try to get to understand the perplexing mechanics of mini-satanic figures telling Neelu things.

          Liked by 1 person

          • This is known in legal circles as “bonkers extremis ad nauseum” whereby a defendant is so ultra insane and so many picnics short of a full sandwich that the prosecution ends up with a migraine,the defence solicitor melts down and destroys his career and the judge concludes it is against the public interest to burden expensive psychiatrists with the futile task of working out what the fuck they are meant to do.
            This invariably ends with the court granting am infinite restraining order in the hope that with any luck armageddon will hurry up and sort things out….or something.

            Liked by 2 people

      • I’d say because she is well fed, looks clean n tidy enough.

        Always has those scarves around her neck when she makes court appearances. So is capable of dressing herself in a certain style. She’s not just wearing a cloth sack or a bin liner.

        If Neelu wasn’t talking about craziness like commercial liens for trillions of pounds, that she was some Princess of never never land, she’d appear as sane as the person evaluating her.

        Just my opinion.

        Like

  21. What is really pissis me of is these mentally retard EVIL SRA screamers like Sabine Puff Angie, Neelu, Belinda, the soon to be arrested if dare comes to Uk Rupert, all of them are begging for money through GOFUND ME for themselves to travel but if you read their shit they say they are acting for poor children.

    If they did they would have made a go fund me campaign to collect funds, so they can help real abused children. poor children and poor families.
    They would have raised money to pay the legal fees for some parents that have been victims of family law.
    But of course these greedy drug addict low life scams they picked up a subject of SRA and are cashing in every single day. DONATE for puff Angie the journalist. (where are her credentials as a journalist?)
    Has Angie and her retarded cronies investigated the Rochdale scandal where 1600 young girls in the care system was sexually abused for 12 years?

    Has Sabine or PUFF ANGIE investigated the OXFORD case where 50 young girls was been raped by a
    Asians?
    has the Puff Angie comment in the latest case where a Pakistani mother had sex with her 14 years old son, and sexually abusing her 7 years old daughter?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3720136/Muslim-mother-43-lawyer-said-not-jailed-sex-offences-against-girl-nine-shame-brought-family-punishment-gets-seven-years.html

    No they haven’t. They don’t care. they are the real child abusers who are creating waves to destruct the attention of the public from themselves.

    Lets create a Radio and a WEB TV so we can expose them worldwide and see how fast they disappear.

    Like

  22. Pingback: Al Murray tells Debs what he really thinks | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.