Another look at Sabine and how the videos went public

One of the most difficult parts of investigating the Hampstead SRA hoax is putting together an accurate, detailed timeline. We’ve made some headway over the past year or so, but an issue that has remained cloudy is this: When, precisely, did the initial lot of videos of RD’s children find their way onto the internet, and who put them there?

Sabine has always protested that it wasn’t her. In her version of the story, she sent a private email to then-Home Secretary Theresa May which contained links to the videos on her Google Drive. Her finger somehow slipped, and she wound up bcc’ing that email to Henry Curteis, who runs The Tap Blog. Henry incorrectly assumed that the email and videos were intended for publication, et voilà! Instant internet maelstrom. Not Sabine’s fault, for how could she have known Henry would construe her email as permission to publish?

However, here’s another version of the story, based on information which Sabine has published in her e-book.

I had the childrens’ video testimonies neatly organised on my Google Drive, after I had given them appropriate titles and shared them with Ella and our key McKenzie Friends.

I had separated them into

  • Privately recorded videos – which were not part of the court proceedings.
  • Police interviews – which Ella had received from her solicitor after she had sacked them.

In her first secret family-court hearing, Mrs Justice Pauffley asked Ella to hand the police videos in, surely to increase her lack of public accountability.

But Google Drive had deleted the videos – without alerting me, despite my paying for the service!

Google then fooled me into believing that if I went back to their old version, the videos would be restored. It took me ages to realise that with the old version, the videos only looked present. Yet now, others couldn’t access them.

How strange that technological complexities should work so well in support of a corrupt judicial system; that laws on one level of life – software programs – should follow the dictats of those on another level of life – the judicial process – so seamlessly.

However, to throw a spanner into the works of these efficient machinations, oodles of other people had already shared the link I had sent in my email to the Home Secretary. Much later I realised that Facebook had also published this email, quite automatically, because it was an update to the petition.

Which petition? Why, this one:

https://vid.me/e/Lkfe?stats=1
(Our apologies if this video won’t load for you; Vid.me and WordPress don’t seem to play nicely together.)

Sabine says quite clearly that she put up the “Return #WhistleblowerKids and #AbuseSurvivors to their Russian Family!” petition on Change.org on 2 February 2015.

And she states above that she included her email to the Home Secretary on that petition. Therefore, the Google Drive full of videos was available to anyone who wished to see it, starting on 2 February.

Sabine, the brilliant computer genius whose ideas are equal to those of Albert Einstein, claims to have been terribly surprised that “Facebook had also published this email, quite automatically” when she updated the petition…and thus “oodles of other people had already shared the link”.

Uh-huh.

Some might recall that during a video she made with Angela Power-Disney, Sabine said, “It all boils down to the position statement that I wrote with Ella for the hearing of the 26th of January. ‘Either you return the children or we expose online.’ Ella came out of that hearing saying they had no intention of returning the children and by Saturday we had the petition up”.

Here’s what Sabine said in August 2015, again as reported by Scarlet Scoop:

Publishing the link is not publishing the information. I never ‘leaked’. I made info’ available on my private Google drive for whoever approached me. I was ‘following a lawful course of conduct’ in the civil duty of reporting crimes.”

Given that that “private Google drive” was actually included as a link on Sabine’s petition, as well as on Facebook, this statement sounds just the tiniest bit disingenuous to our ears. Given her own statements, we think it’s very clear that Sabine not only threatened to “expose online”, but carried through with that threat by publishing her email to the Home Secretary on her petition as well as Facebook.

sabine-shock-2017-01-11

Advertisements

66 thoughts on “Another look at Sabine and how the videos went public

  1. I think I hate this evil woman.
    That’s the first time I’ve heard her speak in a cold calculating manner which really shows her malicious and evil intentions.
    And like all these phony ‘whistle blowers’, she dares to use the word ‘alleged’ in respect of a father and 70 others while then saying they are guilty of crimes.
    She’s a phony, her claim to being some sort of net genius is as bogus as most of Power-Disney’s falsehoods and she is as guilty as sin of criminally exposing the identities of real victims of child abuse (and she is the abuser).
    Why she wasn’t prosecuted to the hilt for that crime is a mystery.

    Liked by 2 people

      • The daughter of RD has reached the age when school work and peer pressures mean she might need to access the internet, chances are high she will use a simple search of Google to find out what is going on. At the best there is only 12 months leeway before it is 90% certain they will have to have internet access, it is highly unlikely that people can keep a child off the internet with computers and the web forming a central aspect of school studies.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Put her name in a search engine and one of Kane Slater’s YouTube videos pops up. I have reported his channel in the past, but YT haven’t acted at all as far as I can see.

          Liked by 1 person

        • You are right SV in that a simple Google search is all she would need to do. She could even put in a search for her mothers name and be bombarded with a lot of information that she wouldn’t want to see. It’s going to be very difficult to monitor what the children search for on the internet.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Theoretically, she could then instruct a solicitor to sue on her behalf. Interestingly the three year limit rule for suing only comes into effect when the child turns eighteen, not three years from the “event(s)”. So there is every chance that one or both of the children could sue all and any of the hoaxers. And possibly also the police for not doing more to protect their privacy…..

          Liked by 2 people

  2. Remember, key McKenzie friends in Sabine’s world includes actual sex offenders, paedophiles and criminals of various types.

    Think on that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • That documentary really shows Sabine for the dangerous person she is. If anything happens to the children or any of the named people it will be on her head. I would go so far as to call these people terrorists whose propaganda is every bit as bad and fanatical as ISIS. How long are the authorities going to let this carry on for before they use some serious legislation on these people? remember I am nothing to do with this and can see it from an outside point of view. It makes no difference to me what happens to anyone involved with this.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Pingback: Another look at Sabine and how the videos went public | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  4. Sabine is Scum. I hope she gets Slammed for her Evil Crap! Can someone sue Sabine for intentional infliction of emotional distress? A SLAPP suit? Like the kids Guardian Ad Litem for starters AND all the other people. The Injunctions are not working. Did Rupert know about the injunctions? How could he not? He is an idiot of the 1st Order, so….APD is a snake, he couldn’t rely on HER to tell him for sure!! sssss sssss It reminds me of an old song, “Sneaky Snake”….la la la Thanks for the update! Please excuse the current CIRCUS Reality Show going on Over Here in DC….So Embarrassing for Normal Yanks who Care about how the World perceives U.S. as a People, notwithstanding Party Politics. GAWD!! face palm sigh…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Rupert knew everything, he had been told it by many and even befriended by people, he had to keep pushing and mocking and making threats against dearman who angie told him was the one trolling him, it wasn’t dearman at all. He said on air that he pee’d on hampstead church which pissed off people from every side. In the end he had very few allies apart from Angie, but some nasty bastard betrayed him by giving his private messages in which he described her as sexually assaulting him and calling her disgusting to hoaxsted. I wonder who betrayed him.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Well little Miss Scamgella is a pig and so is Rupert! Peeing on a church, what a way to say, “I’m a Dumb Ass SRA Hoaxer” He is lucky his butt wasn’t kicked for that. APD is SO vile with her slovenly “disclosures” about creepy horrible Ella…yuk yuk yuk….Arg! Yes, I wonder who he was texting?

        Liked by 1 person

        • In Rupert’s defence, even he wouldn’t touch the bitch that is Angela Power Disney.

          Shame he didn’t listen to everyone here, on fb, on twitter etc. hoping to help him see sense and warning of her evil ways.

          Not sure how he balances out the heavy involvement of Belinda McKenzie with him and McKenzie being a “friend” of Angela’s.

          I wouldn’t have thought he wants to see Angela ever again, even the mention of her name must surely repulse him.

          Is Angela’s on the road crap an excuse to catch a glimpse of her ex in the dock on 31st January, 2017 somewhere in London? Hendon Mags. Court again where she can cast her evil eyes on him?

          You never know with that fantasist.

          Like

  5. It is in the nature of these Hampstead Satan Hunters to stab each other in the back, they are all working for their own interests to milk the SRA hoax for all it is worth. None of them are innocent, they are all malignant, twisted and dimwitted.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. A couple of interesting reads from The Guardian.

    The first one is a light-hearted review of the history of UK soft-core film:
    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/jan/12/british-erotic-cinema-history

    For my purposes today, keep this bit in mind: “…35mm film stock ensured that the recording and projection of films was prohibitively expensive to all but large, commercial studios and cinemas. These restrictions were only changed with the liberalisation of obscenity statutes and the developments of 16mm and then 8mm movie cameras and projectors, which proliferated by the late 1950s”.

    The second one discusses the tragic PTSD effect that repeated viewing of horrific images has had on Microsoft “moderators”:
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/11/microsoft-employees-child-abuse-lawsuit-ptsd

    I’m no expert on the technology, but what they are talking about therein involves a program developed by Microsoft in partnership with child protection agencies & law enforcement, where prohibited “still photo” images and “frames” from videos are electronically “tagged” with an identifier code. When a Microsoft device has had “report problems” enabled on it, software automatically scans all images & frames that pass through the processor and forwards a notification to Microsoft if a tagged image passes through it, along with a copy of that image. Human “moderators” then have to review these.
    Its a noble effort, but of course “too little too late”. The entire digital industry, so far-sighted with regard to technological innovations, took DECADES to even acknowledge that there could be such a thing as “consumer safety” with regard to their devices, but they can no longer ignore the disasters that their technology has enabled.

    And it is the TECHNOLOGY that has driven its own mis-use. Previous technologies require professional development, “prohibitively expensive to all but large, commercial studios and cinemas”. The proliferation of horrific images has been exponential with every “technological advance” democratizing the ability to generate and “process” such images. In the digital age, with no processing required at all, not only the increased proliferation but also the increased depravity of the images has exploded. BECAUSE IT IS POSSIBLE, not because humanity has somehow ‘degenerated’.
    Would we be gathering here, today, if it were not so G-D easy for Abrella to generate and circulate the pernicious mock “testimonials” of the children?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Tracey Morris’s comment that she made on CCN the other day needs taking seriously, she said they are trying to track the children down. For what? do they plan to abduct them? fanatics are unpredictable, especially when they think God is on their side.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I understand the video was sent to the police.

      I can’t figure out whether ADP and Tracey are just clueless or are actually looking forward to being arrested and being martyrs for the cause. I’m at the point where I don’t care either way.

      The wheels of justice turn slowly but grind exceedingly fine.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Tracey’s all mouth and no trousers as the saying goes.

      Not to say she wouldn’t recruit a vulnerable adult to snatch them and get themselves locked up for doing the dirty work=CRIMINAL.

      Only needs Angela to use her charms on some delusional person and some idiot would carry out the deeds.

      It is very frightening.

      I don’t believe they have any real information, unless they have some contacts in Social Services.

      I can’t believe any one would give information to “Shouty” Aggressive Tracey or Manipulating Angela.

      It’s all bs but the threat is there and the Police should warn Tracey off, imo.

      Not sure if it’s a crime what she has said.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Didn’t Belinda contradict Sabine somewhat by saying something about how she didn’t feel it was right to put the unedited videos into the public domain?
    Not that I believe anything either Belinda or Sabine say.

    Liked by 1 person

      • A good analogy is never allowing the carrots to touch your peas. Belinda McKenzie keeps a cabbage between her carrots and her peas. If the carrots and peas by chance do come into contact with each other, the cabbage gets the blame, not Belinda McKenzie. And I still think Belinda McKenzie has connections to British intelligence, because they are also good at keeping their carrots away from their peas with a cabbage in-between.

        Like

        • I don’t believe Belinda has ever been anything to do with any connections with British intelligence, she just does what all those people do, poking Beese nests, and letting everyone else take the flack for it. All those fake anti child abuse so called campaigners do it, pulling vulnerable people in, and they all have an interest in paedophiles too, and none of them can tell the truth.

          Like

          • I agree, FG—I don’t think Belinda has connections to British intelligence, but I do think her interests lie in the area of filtering money through her various crackpot organisations-disguised-as-charities. Since she lost control of Iran Aid, which was funnelling large amounts to the MEK in Iran, I think her goal has been to hide behind the nutters, pulling strings and getting them to do her dirty work for her.

            Like

    • Belinda will distance herself from anything that would land her in a criminal court, she has her minions to do the dirty work for her and take such risks.

      If there was no personal risk and some money to be made then I don’t believe for a nano-second that she would not have done it “anonymously” herself.

      Given her supposed intellect, Sabine doesn’t know she was played by Belinda. Sabine is not only a raving loon, but also the Hampstead village idiot.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. I seem to remember that the owner of the Tap Blog stated somewhere that he had always had the understanding that anything Sabine sent him was for publication, also Sabine had full admin rights on the blog.

    Regardless, Sabine was in the possession of confidential information regarding children, she should not have been broadcasting this information to anyone.

    Sabine caused this information to be in the public domain.

    As I posted recently re Deborah EU Law Specialist,

    ‘6. Member States shall take the necessary measures, where in the interest of child victims and taking into account other overriding interests, to protect the privacy, identity and image of child victims, and to prevent the public dissemination of any information that could lead to their identification.’

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32011L0093

    How many times has Sabine pushed the EU as being her weapon to beat the UK with.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Excellent Article! I’m getting really sick of the Sandy Hook harassment! Researching ALL Attorneys involved in pushing Hoax. Despicable and Unethical. They all need to be reported to their State Bar, if they haven’t already….revolving door….Making it Happen 2017!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Pingback: EXPOSED!!! The Scam behind Venus FX by Dato R. Ramanan | Bird Info

  12. Pingback: EXPOSED!!! The Scam behind Venus FX by Dato R. Ramanan | Bird Info

  13. Pingback: How Sabine released the videos: New smoking gun provides irrefutable evidence | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  14. Pingback: More evidence that Hampstead SRA hoax was planned | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  15. Pingback: Prelude to a hoax: How Sabine warmed up her audience | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.