UPDATE: Rupert Quaintance case adjourned to January

Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV attended Hendon Magistrates Court this morning at 9:30, where he was charged with five counts of criminal harassment with intention to cause violence, and two counts of harassment involving children.

Rupert plead ‘not guilty’ to all charges, and denied that he had expressed any intention to harm children.

The magistrate was sufficiently alarmed by the nature and scope of the case to require that it be adjourned to 31 January 2017, at which time it’s expected that it will be elevated to the Crown Court.

Belinda McKenzie was seen accompanying Rupert into one of the consultation rooms at the court, but was not seen in the courtroom.

As always, while this case is sub judice we would ask our readers to refrain from speculation as to its outcome.


86 thoughts on “UPDATE: Rupert Quaintance case adjourned to January

  1. Thanks, EC. Was I wrong about Rupert’s request for his case to be heard in a closed court in order to keep his address confidential?

    Liked by 2 people

  2. “I Was too Busy Hanging Out In The Snooker Rooms, Racking Coke & FUCKING Sexy Bitches Twice My Age When I Was 13.”

    Ah, so Arthur admits to associating with paedophiles and drug dealers. Now we’re getting somewhere!


  3. Won’t comment on the outcome, but interesting to know what the charges are, and that the case is probably being elevated.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Thanks for the update! Yes Norman. BM must be BM’ing! Can you say Co-C’s using the I Wires? Do you know if he has private counsel? Hopefully for him, it won’t be “Mr. Taj”, was He ever censured btw? HAHAHA! Did he go to hoaxer rehab to keep his law ticket? Tx to whoever posted Koppel clip on fake news….

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Thanks for update on the charges that Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV faces. Obviously if this case goes to Crown Court trial, it will be the Summer 2017 at least before any result. Will Rupert have to stay in UK all this time? Interesting situation.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Not allowed to return to the US. Can’t afford to stay in the UK. Hmmm. I just happen to be watching a movie which I feel compels me to make a suggestion:


      “Viktor Navorski, a traveler from Krakozhia, arrives at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, only to find that his passport is suddenly no longer valid due to the sudden outbreak of a civil war in his homeland. As a result, the United States no longer recognizes Krakozhia as a sovereign nation, and he is no longer permitted to either enter the country or return home as he is now considered to be stateless. Due to his inability to communicate in proper English, the airport’s branch of the US Customs and Border Protection seize both his passport and airline ticket, whereupon its temporary director, Frank Dixon, makes him stay in the terminal he came through. Left with no other choice, Viktor decides to settle in at a closed off section of the terminal, Gate 67, with only his luggage and a peanut can, soon making a home out of it.”


      Liked by 1 person

  5. The awful thing in all of this is under the Human Rights Act Rupert is entitled to a defence team funded by the UK public purse.

    He is lucky that he has funds coming into him, as he can not work in the UK and is not entitled to UK Benefits. If he could not afford to live then of course the UK would ensure his well being (until the issue is decided at trial) – by looking after him on remand in a UK prison.

    Where is APD in his hour of need?

    Liked by 2 people

      • The first priority of Angela Power Disney is her fags, second priority is her holidays to Lanzarotte, all these have to be paid for by stealing from starving African orphans and scamming gullible followers of her fantasy web pages. Rupert is going to be low on her priorities. It must be remembered the devious witch orchestrated a campaign of recruitment of Jake Clarke and Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV to her fantasy SRA hoax campaign against the innocent citizens of Hampstead and their children. Now look, Jake Clarke is sectioned and Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV is in some seriously deep legal shit. Where is Angela Power Disney? Last seen running away and hiding from the shit she started. She is said to have a London home, well she should do the decent thing and offer it up as accomodation to Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV. Oh, and RD, his children and the many innocent people Angela caused suffering have every entitlement to grab the Irish farm, London house and Lanzarotte home to pay for their suffering and hurt at the hands of the old witch.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I believe she’s permanently stationed in Lanzarote now, as she knows she’ll be nicked if she returns to either the UK or Ireland.

          I think she was lying about having a London home. I very much doubt that those three addresses she gave out were hers. My theory is that they’re the homes of people she dislikes and wants to get even with (she definitely had a friend she used to stay with in Brixton).

          Can anyone can shed any more light on this?

          Liked by 2 people

    • Don’t think that’s under the Human Rights Act, or if it is, the concept predates it by a long time.

      I’m actually not bothered if the UK funds his defence. If he’s going to feel the full weight of the law, only right that he is able to defend himself fully.

      Same with things like interpreters, not bothered, except by Crapita or whoever it is now’s shenanigans.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Legal aid is means tested in magistrates’ courts, you either get it or you don’t, and it’s also subject to an interests of justice test. In the Crown Court the means testing works differently; you can always get legal aid if you ask, but you may have to pay for it if your means are too high. There is no interests of justice test in the Crown Court because the cases are usually more serious and trials before juries without a lawyer are usually not in the interests of justice (think Neelu).

        There has been (limited) provision for some legal representation for poor people from the public purse for centuries, but legal aid was introduced in 1949. Despite that year also being the year that the UK signed the European Convention on Human Rights it has its origin in the Beveridge report and the development of the welfare state. Nonetheless legal aid is compatible with the Convention, which is not surprising as English common law (the real stuff, not Mr Cullinane’s sort) and Magna Carta was one of the main influences on Article 6.

        Article 6

        Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:

        (c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;

        Contrary to the law according to the Daily Mail, the Human Rights Act didn’t introduce the Convention on Human Rights in the UK, it simply allowed people to cite the Act in domestic courts (rather than having to exhaust domestic law then go to the European Court of Justice).

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Google translate only for Rupert – Idiot babble language to English.

    If he ends up in a prison then I hope his cellmate is nice….

    Liked by 1 person

    • Considering that Belinda McKenzie was all for feeding her mentally ill daughter cannabis, a drug that causes a dopamine rush that enhances schizophrenic symptoms, she is a dangerous individual to babysit anyone who is vulnerable.


      • The involvement of Belinda McKenzie is not good.

        One thing that annoys me about that woman is that she has willingly donated to this American that she does not know, yet she is “friends” with a woman who protests outside the RCJ on a Monday who is unable to afford the price of a cup of tea/coffee in the Coffee Shop (can’t remember the name of it) across the road.

        Why doesn’t she help this woman that she actually knows by throwing her some cash?

        Very suspicious regarding the donations to Rupert.

        Liked by 2 people

  7. Rupert Wilson Quaintance IV makes my blood boil. Right from the very start when he made his first video on Hampstead I worked hard to warn him away from this SRA hoax, using methods such as reason and satire. I told him not to come to the UK, to leave the innocent people alone. He ignored me, to the contrary he seemed to take sadistic delight in pursuing his campaign to the very heart of Hampstead, to even to urinate on a public church building. He makes me feel very angry about him and humanity, how someone could be so callous, stupid and malicious in going to such ends as he did.


    • I agree, SV. Of course, Angie has a lot to answer for too but both Jake and Rupert were VERY willing participants and I have absolutely no sympathy for Rupert this Christmas.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Ella, Abe and Sabine PROVED these Jerks are Flight risks! For Pete’s Sake the bum will jump a leaky boat or something….;/

    Liked by 1 person

    • There is a US-UK extradition treaty, it is easier to get extradited to the US from the UK than it is from the USA to the UK. It can be expensive, long and tedious to undo a bad call if a decision is allowed for someone to go back to the USA to await their court case.


  9. Pingback: UPDATE: Rupert Quaintance case adjourned to January | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  10. That’s quite a lot of charges and does raise some questions, though i’ll not speculate about the case. It’s been said before but i’ll say it again, he can’t say he wasn’t warned. No surprise concerning Belinda. Maybe Rupert doesn’t have any other choice but to stick with her for financial aid. I certainly would not want to feel indebted to that devious cow.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. At face value from what is written here, It looks like Rupert might have been charged on with a summary trial only offence. If it is a summary trial only case you might find that its the trial listed for late January and it will be the Magistrates Court.

    Anyone know if he was charged under the Harassment act or with a Public Order offence – if so exactly what part of the relevant act/s? They all have potentially different modes of trial and (possibly) vastly different sentences (if found guilty).

    Without knowing the exact detail we would be wrong to speculate here as to the place (mode) of trial or to the potential range of any sentence for such offences.

    I am certain Rupert or Belinda would rub their hands at anything in this blog helps his/their position.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Protection from Harassment Act 1997
        1997 c. 40 England and WalesSection 4
        Source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/4

        (1)A person whose course of conduct causes another to fear, on at least two occasions, that violence will be used against him is guilty of an offence if he knows or ought to know that his course of conduct will cause the other so to fear on each of those occasions.

        (2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it will cause another to fear that violence will be used against him on any occasion if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct would cause the other so to fear on that occasion.

        (3)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to show that—

        (a)his course of conduct was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

        (b)his course of conduct was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or

        (c)the pursuit of his course of conduct was reasonable for the protection of himself or another or for the protection of his or another’s property.

        (4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—

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

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

        (5)If on the trial on indictment of a person charged with an offence under this section the jury find him not guilty of the offence charged, they may find him guilty of an offence under section 2 [F1or 2A].

        (6)The Crown Court has the same powers and duties in relation to a person who is by virtue of subsection (5) convicted before it of an offence under section 2 [F2or 2A] as a magistrates’ court would have on convicting him of the offence.


        • Then triable either in the Crown Court or the mags. However if the judge decided it should go to the Crown Court for trial it would have gone at first hearing, likewise if Rupert elected jury trial. Since the change to the allocation guideline last February it’s more common though for trials to be retained in the magistrates court (quicker and shorter) followed by committal to the Crown Court for sentence if the facts found in the trial suggest a higher sentence than at magistrates’ court level (if there are multiple s. 4s, that would be 12 months)

          Liked by 2 people

  12. Am I right in thinking that tomorrow’s the big day for various other Hoaxtead fruitloops?

    “So it looks as though 22 December is going to be a very busy day at Colindale police station: Neelu, Lee Cant, and John Duane are all due to appear there that day.”


    And aren’t Sabine, Alan Alanson and Desmond During due soon too?

    By the way, why are they due at the cop shop and not before the beak?

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Question: who are the two people I’d least want to be stuck in a lift with?


    Yeah, looking forward to that one, ladies.


  14. #Cowgate latest…

    “I do it with the local animals once in a while . I should do it more.”


      • Thank goodness he didn’t!

        Angela Power Disney is one nasty piece of work.

        No self awareness and obviously a psychopath.

        Any one with any ounce of compassion would stop her interaction with J. C. as she does him more harm than good. I’m not even sure she does him any good tbf.

        Liked by 1 person

    • APD can now enjoy the festive period plotting to undermine endeavours to establish stabilty and purposeful routines for Jake.Drip feed him with hashtag Hero crapolla until he is groomed back into incarceration.This will of course be “cast iron evidence”that the system is plotting against these warriors of truth and justice(Bluuuurch)

      All so the minging low grade shitbag can temporarily deflect from her own failed putrescent existence.

      Friendly advice:Mind the garlic Angie.


  15. Should search engine AI algorithms be augmented by human overseers capable of discerning fact from fantasy? Hmmm…
    Here’s one of my favorite human search engine operator sketches:


  16. Mel’s mat Fernando may be overselling his novelty tent a tad.
    I’m sensing a new QEG-type scam here.


    • That is an amazing piece of design. I repeat that is an amazing piece of design.

      How many of their target market, sorry, marks, will notice it has no FRIGGING DOOR TO GET IN OR OUT.

      rofl pml lol hahahahha etc.

      Liked by 1 person

    • That thing is just going to be a bastard to lay carpet in. Expensive, wasteful… You’d have all these weird shaped bits left. Then there’s all that skirting board to paint! – As for wallpapering!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Pretty naff ground floor plan too if you ask me. Not a sensible plan for such a small building. My tutors used to say that first year students ALWAYS come up with plans based on hexagons that don’t work. They also used to say, if you think your idea is unique and has never been done before, there is probably a very good reason why.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Ah but to be fair, this design does include a ‘natural healing, telepathic, cosmic creativity, telekenetic [sic], remote viewing, astral travel and quantum teleportation’ feature. If your fellow students had remembered to include one of those, they might have been more successful 😀

          Liked by 1 person

  17. I think this is what is generally known as an epic fail:

    The ill-informed Hampstead bollocks starts at 2:00. (Or ‘Hamstead’, as these amazing researchers spell it at 7:30.)


    • 6:58 – “Sharon Tate was found in the hanged man pose where John Lennon was shot dead.”

      Oh right. Thanks for the update, Professor. I never realised that Benedict Canyon in LA and the Dakota Building in New York were one and the same place. Amazing research.

      And when I say research, I do of course mean unsubstantiated, unvetted and ill-informed bullshite cobbled together from bits of discredited videos by laughable loons like Guidance 2222, George Greek Trucker and Charlotte Ward.

      Liked by 2 people

  18. You should see all the YT Nutters rushing to defend accused Murderer Justin Woolie last couple days….Mad as Rabid Skunks! The usual suspects who befriended then attacked him. Reminds me of Jake with a much worse outcome!

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Pingback: Rupert holds out begging bowl…again | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.