The return of the IPCC: New report reveals flaws in investigation

To be honest, we thought we’d seen the back of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. In the autumn of 2015, Abe and Ella made much of the fact that the IPCC had “upheld their appeal”, which many troofers took to mean that the IPCC was now completely on-board, and would soon be re-opening the original criminal investigation that Barnet police had closed in September 2014.

Of course, that’s not what happened; instead, last spring the IPCC completed its investigation, and sent its final report to Ella. Certain dim bulbs still refused to believe that the investigation was over (and by “certain dim bulbs” we mean Kristie Sue Costa, who believes everything Abe and Ella feed her), but that didn’t stop it from being true.

However, since the final report basically told Ella to piss off on all but two counts, one might imagine that she and Abe (and their solicitor Mr Taj) were not terribly happy with the IPCC. They launched an appeal.

We admit that we predicted at the time that the appeal had approximately a snowball’s chance in hell of being accepted, but we were wrong: the appeal was upheld, and on Sunday some enterprising soul posted the final, final report in its entirety on Scribd.

This new report bears some consideration, in part because it takes issues with some of the conclusions reached in the original report.

But first, a question: since the new report arguably answers some of Ella’s complaints about the original, we’d have expected to see it pasted front and centre on their blogs…especially since it was released nearly two months ago. Instead, so far as we’re aware, no one even knew about the thing until “John” posted it on Scribd. We find this exceedingly curious.

All right, let’s dig in: what does this new report contribute to the discussion?

ipcc2-2017-01-16Here, IPCC case manager, Helen Alderson, is firing a shot across the bow of Barnet police. However, contrary to what Abe and Ella or their lapdog Kristie Sue might have us believe, this is an investigation of an investigation of a criminal investigation. It doesn’t mean that the original case will be re-opened or re-investigated.

ipcc2-2017-01-16-2The first substantive issue is an important one: because DCI Foulkes was at least nominally in charge of the police investigation, and was kept up-to-date on it as it progressed, he ought not to have been the investigating officer (IO) of the re-investigation. Fair point, though we wonder why, if this is questionable now, it wasn’t noted in the original IPCC investigation.

Which points were upheld?

We’ll begin with the bad news: here are the points in Ella’s appeal that Ms Alderson upheld.

A word of clarification: each “point” in bold type is a paraphrase of Ella’s own wording. It’s not the IPCC saying, for example, that “officers failed to investigate thoroughly and properly the allegation of sexual abuse against your children”.

ipcc2-2017-01-16-3 ipcc2-2017-01-16-4 ipcc2-2017-01-16-5ipcc2-2017-01-16-6The last sentence in this segment says it all, we think: this case is full of confusing twists and turns, and it’s very difficult to make any assessments or determinations about what really happened, when the facts aren’t really clear.

ipcc2-2017-01-16-7 ipcc2-2017-01-16-8Again: Ms Alderson is not saying that these decisions were necessarily the wrong ones to make in the circumstances. However, as our maths teacher used to tell us (again and again): “Show your work”. The police must not only perform their investigations to a certain standard, but they must be able to show how and why they did so. To do otherwise is to leave the door open to the troofers and fruitcakes of the world, as Barnet police have found out to their sorrow.

ipcc2-2017-01-16-9We know that the troofies will be jumping up and down and clapping over this one, but again, Ms Alderson isn’t saying that RD was guilty of anything. In a civil society where all citizens are considered innocent until proven guilty, an arrest does not imply guilt of any wrong-doing. However, in any police investigation, there are criteria for arrest—and it’s simply not clear enough in this case whether those criteria were actually met.

ipcc2-2017-01-16-10 ipcc2-2017-01-16-11We’re sensing a theme here: “There is insufficient information for me to properly assess this aspect of the appeal”.

We know this won’t forestall the troofers from gleefully proclaiming that they were right all along, but let’s just pause on that for a moment. “Not enough information to assess” is not the same thing as “OH MY GOD THERE IS A COVERUP WE KNEW IT ALL ALONG”.

We do feel that the fact that the IPCC believes that not enough information was given in the first instance is an alarming signal: as we’ve said, the police have a duty to document their decisions, and to make all decisions based on stringent standards. When that standard isn’t followed, it can erode public trust, and with good reason.


Tomorrow: What about the retractions?
We’ll examine the new IPCC report’s views on the children’s retractions of their allegations…including what went right and what went wrong.

Stay tuned….

scales of justice

 

Advertisements

100 thoughts on “The return of the IPCC: New report reveals flaws in investigation

  1. Sorry, I wrote this before your article had gone up, EC, so apologies if some of it repeats what you’ve already said…

    I think that this report is merely an admission that some of the police procedure is worth looking into, which just reinforces what they’d said previously. Point 10, for example, doesn’t concede that RD should have been arrested, just that the reasons for not arresting him weren’t clearly documented.

    Point 11 is another example – it’s a criticism of the interview process rather than a concession that RD is implicated in anything.

    There are also some positives here which work against the hoaxers, such as Point 9, which states that RD’s flat didn’t fit the children’s description and had been empty for some time.

    Then there’s Point 5, which says that there’s no evidence of the children being threatened into making their retractions.

    And Point 3 admits that the reason for not interviewing some of the police officers named by the children is that they turned out not to exist!

    No doubt the hoaxer crew will ignore the bits that like that which contradict their narrative, so in fact it’s a positive that you’re getting in first and presenting a more balanced summary.

    PS: isn’t Taj’s solicitor status in question? And could Vanguard Solicitors be worth looking into?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Good points, Spiny!
      I would add;

      Point 1 – “failing to view the audio and video clips provided by Special Constable whatshisname” – but “two officers and a Sargeant” DID listen to the audio, at his house. No doubt it may have been immediately apparent to those officers, that these so-called “ABE interviews” may have constituted “initial disclosure” but they could not be said to constitute valid “interviews” nor valid evidence of a crime. They were not conducted by a qualified professional, under the prescribed setting & circumstances. They were conducted by “interested parties”, with leading questions by and contaminating cross-talk from those parties, including shouting out the “correct answers” from the background!
      The author of this assessment seems overly impressed by Yaohirou being a Special Constable. Since he wasn’t an investigating officer in the case, but merely an intermediary, his involvement couldn’t have imparted validity to the recorded rumor & gossip sessions even if he was Jesus Tap-Dancing Christ Yaohirou.

      – “failure to search Dearman’s property”, etc. – don’t they need valid search warrants for that? and valid grounds for requesting the warrants, such as evidence that a crime had been committed? Well, they didn’t have any evidence at that point – all they had were recordings of rumor-gossip sessions between the children and a parent involved in custodial dispute with Dearman, and some schmuck named Abe
      .
      I understand that there are whacky regulations about conducting such investigations in the UK, but where I live, all of the potential ‘failings’ this assessment author cites would be contingent on FIRST obtaining a valid forensic interview with the children – THEN you could arrest a suspect, get a warrant to search & seize property, or interview other suspected participants. OR, you could obtain an incriminating forensic medical report – but the initial medical examination & assessment, conducted before the doctor obtained the SRA allegations details, detail very incriminating. The medical assessment only became allegedly incriminating after a later, secondary examination, blatantly conducted for the purpose of generating support to the SRA allegations.
      Did I get that right?

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Yes great analysis from the Coyote.
    In the end whether RD was arrested or not makes no difference to the outcome.
    I don’t why they are obsessing on this fact but this mob make up their own rules.

    I sense a bit of nitpicking by the IPCC as even though they criticize the police it’s quite clear to anyone (except the hoax mob) that the police reached the correct decision while perhaps not ticking all the boxes along the way.

    Of course it’s quite easy for the IPCC to sit up high and judge coppers on the front line who are all working under pressure with limited resources & man hours especially when they are being used to promote a blatant and vicious hoax.

    The coppers also deserve some criticism as they should have been able to tell by the nature of the absurd claims that fanatics were driving this fraud and had no intention of accepting anything else from a court except that their demands for a witch hunt & lynching be implemented and have even more innocent souls lives disrupted.
    Of course easy for me to say in retrospect and I feel for the officers who are being continually defamed by these creatures. They have families too.

    Mind you I’m not sure why Draper who is on the run from authorities and who outrageously evaded police when they went to her home is even being entertained but I guess the IPCC is at least treating even fraudsters and abusers with respect.

    I would have not responded to her at all or invited her back to the UK to discuss the matter. And requested she bring that career criminal child abusing partner of hers along.

    Liked by 2 people

    • To be fair, I suppose it is the IPCC’s job to nitpick. They’re not in a position to overlook the little details, even if they’re of little consequence.

      And yes, I did wonder why a fugitive on the run abroad can be in a position to call upon the services of a body like the IPCC. I’m guessing that’s one little detail that Aseem Tajustgetmoreandmoreannoyingeveryday “accidentally” forgot to mention in his correspondence with them.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I agree, Sam—it’s clear from other parts of this document that one of the constraints facing the police is the lack of resources available to them. I also think there were valid, but not necessarily procedurally correct, reasons to doubt the story they were being fed, from the start.

      For one thing, DC Steve Martin was familiar with Abraham Christie prior to this case, as he’d dealt with him regarding his abuse of his own son. DC Martin would have had access to Christie’s long-as-your-arm record of prior offences, and would have seen “fraud”, “assault”, etc. mentioned frequently.

      For another thing, the allegations themselves were logistically impossible in many ways. That would have rung alarm bells for the police, surely.

      The children themselves sounded strangely cheerful and calm as they described the alleged horrors. Anyone who’s worked with victims of real child abuse knows that they exhibit a wide range of behaviours when they disclose, but complete and utter indifference to anal rape, witnessing/participating in multiple murders, bloodletting, and skinning babies? Professionals whom I’ve asked have told me that children disclosing this level of abuse could be expected to be emotional wrecks—fearful, trembling, obviously distressed, denying their own participation, etc.

      I was particularly struck by the demeanour of the little boy, who went from discussing the horrors to which he’d allegedly been subjected, to describing what he’d eaten for dinner that night, with absolutely no discernible change in tone or emotional tenor.

      Members of the CAIT, who investigate child abuse daily, could be expected to be well aware of such glaring discrepancies, and would have noted them immediately. This would certainly have coloured their approach to the case.

      So yes, it does make sense that the police would have a duty to investigate fully, but they would also need to bear in mind the distinct possibility that they were dealing with a hoax. While this could understandably have led to some corner-cutting, especially in the paperwork department, it has unfortunately resulted in enough gaps in the paper trail to allow nutters like Ella and her loyalists to claim “coverup!”

      Liked by 1 person

  3. I’m often the person defending law enforcement professionals, but this “appeal assessment” smell-lika-poo-poo to me.
    We’ve heard about these “arrest now – with maximum media publicity, investigate later…at your leisure…maybe next year, if you get the chance” policies of course. Alongside the “believe the complainant and call them victim” policies – (because every allegation is inherently valid, accurate & the whole truth of the matter) – conveniently open to such interpretations by witch-hunting “true believer” investigators.

    I suspect the author of this appeal assessment may be one. They do exist – Carole Mallard was one:
    https://www.change.org/p/end-goddard-child-abuse-inquiry-discrimination-against-survivors/c/435578297

    Liked by 1 person

    • I think the document as a whole is a bit more nuanced than that, Justin—today’s blog post is only the beginning. It becomes clear as one reads that the case manager may have another agenda in mind.

      Like

  4. I assume that the document has been confirmed as being a genuine document that originated from the IPCC? Rather than a document that was generated at a third party keyboard.

    I wonder if its found not to be genuine, if it was passed to this blog to try to discredit the blog???

    Vanguard Solicitors is a company of ONE solicitor and it specialises in criminal matters. Assem Taj is not listed as authorised or indeed working for them. Why would the IPCC address a letter via him?

    There are various FOI requests on the internet that have published standard IPCC response templates.

    One is shown below:

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Vanguard Solicitors is a genuine company, you can see that here: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08939316. Their accounts and company info is up to date and correctly filed. However, the Law Society states that only one solicitor is registered there, a Mr. Parviez, and one other person, a Mr. Malik, who owns the business. There is no mention of Mr. Aseem Taj working there, but he is a solicitor: http://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/person/133304/aseem-taj. I’m just posting this for informational purposes.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. If I remember correctly, the Judicial Review mentioned that enquiries into a Satanic cult were considered closed, but that the investigation into sexual abuse was still open. The police went to the church…etc and found no supporting evidence of a Satanic cult. Below is a quote from a MET website which gives brief details of investigations and what it means to be ‘closed’:

    “1. Investigation will be closed – this means that there are currently no proportionate leads to pursue. Should the MPS receive further intelligence or discover new evidence, which it regularly does, the investigation will be re-opened and you will be contacted. Regardless of whether this happens, the information that has been provided becomes a vital part of determining where and when to deploy police resources to detect and prevent crime.”

    I think if you consider the above, it may answer why the police would drop the part of the investigation dealing with Satanic practices (no secret rooms..etc), unless new evidence became available. While keeping open the investigation into possible sexual abuse as mentioned in the Judicial Review. Perhaps waiting on the final report from Dr Hodes, any change of mind from the children, or disclosures to their psychologist, before closing that part of the investigation.
    The police may have been of the view that while no Satanic practices were taking place, there was still some possibility of sexual abuse. That of course would include the possibility that Abraham had sexually abused them.

    “We’re sensing a theme here: “There is insufficient information for me to properly assess this aspect of the appeal”.

    I couldn’t agree with that more EC. It pretty much sums up all of the above points made by the IPCC. Certainly it’s the job of the police to detail and record the decisions they make during investigation and I think it’s fair to complain that not every detail or question has been answered in the police responses. It may even be that there were some oversights by the police. I imagine under the climate of limited resources, limited budget and limited powers, that most investigations will have both weak and strong areas. The important part is that the investigation is good enough to come to the right conclusion. In personally believe it was in this case.

    Very interesting that this hasn’t been pushed more by Abe and Ella.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I think the reason Abrella haven’t pushed this is because it doesn’t really vindicate or uphold anything they’ve been saying. It’s basically a mild criticism of police procedure, if even that. As EC and others have noted, the IPCC is basically saying that they weren’t give enough, or the right information about why the police conducted the investigation as they did. This is something which could easily be countered by the police themselves, if they chose to do so. They probably won’t for reasons of time and money and the relative unimportance of the complaint details within the overall investigation.

      Liked by 2 people

      • If there were a deeper investigation, I think it would only make Abraham look even worse. We know about some of the things he has done – but I suspect not everything.

        I could welcome more inquiry if it didn’t mean potentially more disruption to the lives of innocent people, particularly a group of teachers who, if test results are to be believed, are very dedicated to their jobs.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Yes, I expect this is why Abe and Ella have given up on the thing. This time last year, they were still waving their copy of the appeal acceptance letter, shouting, “Look!! We won the appeal!!” This year…silence.

          Well, except for Kristie Sue Costa, who reads our blog religiously, and has already started sharing the link we so helpfully provided to her friends, the knuckle-dragging buffoons on Voat who’re trying to give artificial respiration to the “Pizzagate” hoax.

          https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1570915
          (Kristie Sue is ‘ListenUp’, just FYI. I hope she doesn’t mind that I’ve given her name and address to some of the legal teams currently looking into lawsuits for damages over the Pizzagate hoax. They were quite happy to receive it, too. Said something like, “The more, the merrier!”)

          Like

  7. What I read from that is the police had no interest in the case from the start and were simply going through the motions to do the minimum required to make a show of it, hence the sloppy paperwork. Which then leads to, why?

    It’s likely that either the police had been working with Social Services and saw this coming, or a phone call to the case worker revealed that it was nonsense and could be ignored.

    They’ll see this crap every day, some psychotic mother throwing accusations around when she is under pressure to stop starving and beating her own children. Anything to deflect attention from her.

    As a police officer knowing all this why would you bother arresting RD or chasing after videos and medical evidence? You know the mother is a mental, her boyfriend a child beater and Social Services are saying it’s bollocks.

    There are probably plenty of other bogus cases like this that have been quickly “investigated” saving time and resources that don’t end up with appeal after appeal over some insignificant technicalities.

    Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. There are a lot of pertinent questions raised here. Perhaps Abe & Ella would be kind enough to come back to the UK and clear them up for us.

    Liked by 1 person

      • No hope for the gold digging Angela then?

        Bit past it I suppose.

        Seeing as he’s got plenty of rental income perhaps he could link up with the other Landlord Power-Disney and they could combine their rental portfolios together.

        Watch out for Arfur in any future “tv shows” of Angela’s.

        We’ve had Rupee in his boxers in the background, Tracey in her bikini top and next I predict it will be Arfur showing his moobs. That’s if he’s allowed to leave Australia.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Yes FA. Arfurs cunning plan to break down the gates to Buckingham palace had uncanny parallels to a threats made by Rupert not so many moons ago.Westminster cathedral may wish consider investing in splash gaurds the way things are playing out.

          Liked by 1 person

    • As there are not 25 acres in West Pennant Hills, an upper middle class suburb, that haven’t been developed, this would mean around 80 houses occupy the land.

      A quick phone call to the Ray White Real Estate office this morning brought a bemused response from the realtor who had no knowledge of any such large property owner in the area who also offered that nearly every house is privately owned with not many changing hands over the years. Prices would put Arthur Kaoutal in the $100M plus wealth bracket but sadly such a local property mogul is not known to their office.

      When my ex-journo pal rang the local cop shop the other day he told a slight fib and asked the officer who has had the misfortune to deal with Mr Kaoutal in the past, that he was offering to rent him his house. The officer said as dear Arthur lived in a flat on a Housing Commission estate (council property) that it would be wise to check with the landlords whether the tenant could legally sub-let his property. When he heard my friend’s accent he said the station referred to Arthur’s subsidized flat community as the ‘Jasmine Allen Estate’ ( of The Bill fame) due to the amount of call-outs they get to the area.

      They had a brief discussion about how previous governments had lumped too many disadvantaged citizens in troubled estates like this although Mr Plod said when he was brought up on the same estate as Arthur with his mother there was never any trouble until drugs came into the picture.

      Angie : don’t do it. I know Arthur is an old smoothy with sophisticated chat-up lines and the elegance of a gentleman who could be the local James Bond of West Pennant Hills but he doesn’t have a pot to piss in.

      Mind you two can live as cheaply as one so your combined Disability Support pensions would go much further in Lanzarote when Arthur has concluded his Good Behavior Bond.

      Like

      • Hehehe.

        And I’m sure he wouldn’t be as discerning as Rupee and would agree to her sexual requests.

        Yikes I hope the bed’s reinforced he must weigh a good 25 stone.

        Like

  9. I have run Arfurs details through major dating site and there is actually one match for him.Unfortunately she shuffled from this mortal coil in the year 137,724 BC.There is someone out there for everyone but timing is fairly important.Never mind eh?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Not sure Arfur is on the invitation list to elegant & smart dinner parties in Sydney despite his reputation for sophisticated oratory.
      The ladies don’t know what they are missing by ignoring this handsome devil known as the James Bond of the Jasmine Allen Estate ( one for the older The Bill fans)

      Liked by 1 person

    • Isn’t Angela envious of Anne Marie and the other sisters that have million pound lifestyles, that she thinks she is entitled to, for just being Angela?

      Are we meant to read between the lines here, is this some kind of confession?

      Like

      • Why do you have to park and get the tram? One could walk, although the tram is accessible to wheelchair users. Why do you have to park at the bottom? Because it is on the top of the hill. Yeh, but why? What TF, you think it should be flattened and replaced with a car park?

        Loving the no pictures, copyright apparently. Oh and his mum thought they would be killed, yeah……….

        Liked by 1 person

        • Well said, Tracey. Wheelchair accessibility is very important in secret underground mind control bases nowadays and the more discerning members of the über-criminal community have really taken this on board. I myself have put a lot of thought into my hollowed out volcano. It’s completely wheelchair accessible, with state-of-the-art hearing loops, neutral autism-friendly decor and a ramp up to the shark-infested death pool. Blofeld is soooo jealous!

          Liked by 1 person

      • Tunnels are a big thing with these small time grifters & liars.

        The Getty Museum is a must see if anyone gets the chance. The building itself is a work of art but this goose finds that a deliberate plan to not have it look like some hideous Walmart surrounded by a ginormous car park filed with autos and abandoned shopping trolleys must be part of a dastardly plot.

        And the entrance to an underground car-park for workers etc is proof therefore the pizza baby munchers are everywhere. The low-level Mafia thugs in Italy who kidnapped the teenage John Paul Hetty Jnr and sliced off his ear to send to his miserly grandfather were not afraid of the Rothschild Cult.

        As for his claim his alleged photos would be their copyright..they are his if he took them. But he didn’t take any that show anything out of the ordinary did he?. Certainly his audience (of around six – you can always tell a room is empty) don’t sound too convinced.

        The evil Fiona Barnett claims there are secret tunnels running from Sydney to the Lucas Heights Nuclear Reactor outside Sydney and then onward to the US Pine Gap satellite station near Alice Springs, 3000 KMs in distance.

        The same dills who claim the Moon landings were fake accept this engineering miracle was pulled off without anyone noticing and never ask, why bother?.
        Pine Gap is so remote and placed were it is because of perfect atmospheric conditions that allow the US to monitor communications world-wide (probably listening right now into The Don and Vlad Putin having a chat).
        It’s always had it’s own air base with US military jumbo jets arriving and leaving daily disgorging personnel and goods. You can’t get near the place for obvious reasons.

        Talk about Straw Man arguments, another favourite of this hoaxers. Make a unproven claim and then claim the fact no-one bothered suing (mainly because they are cheap ‘man of straw’ con artists) is surely proof your claim is real.
        And when someone does decide to take on the sickening David Icke and successfully challenges & proves his anti-Semitic rants and wins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Warman ) they then switch as Icke has and as this bloke does : “if I reveal names they would have to kill me”.

        Like

  10. OK, I didn’t think it could happen but the two vids above have just been totally out-weirded by this epic slice of Starchild/Galactic Federation of Light fruitcakery starring Bellender McOnesie (from 40:54)…

    Nice find, Team MKD 😀

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Pingback: IPCC Appeal 2: The children’s retractions | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

    • I’m told Robert Green has been to prison for Breach of Restraining Order. He’ll have some sympathy with Melanie because that’s what she was in Nottingham Crown Court for on 11th January 2017. She got nine months in prison. No idea where UK column got the ‘two years’ from although they may know more than I do. There’s an outstanding charge to go to another Court, possibly Cambridge. (Info from a reliable source.)

      Like

      • I feel sorry for Melanie Shaw. She’s had a hard life and is a ‘vulnerable person’ due to mental health issues. Of course the conspiraloons tend to think she’s being persecuted because she’s a whistleblower but the fact is that she’s not a reliable witness, so I can’t see her being a threat to alleged perpetrators of abuse.
        I think she’s being used by various people and it’s a shame she’s being taken in by them.

        Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.