Finding Abe and Ella’s price: Why are they recanting?

In yesterday’s post, we noted that in their efforts to evade the Awkward Question several of us have been asking them for the past month, Abe and Ella managed to score a beautifully executed own goal. The question (why did Ella not notice that her ex-husband and ex-partner both had gigantic “cult” tattoos in very private places?) seems to have caused some serious squirming and scrambling, until finally Abe blurted out that RD didn’t get his tattoo until after he’d left Ella; and Ella seems to have told American interviewer Nathan Stolpman that in fact, Mr Draper wasn’t actually in the cult after all:

(S)he mentioned that Mr. Draper, her ex-husband, was also involved with the cult, the Satanic cult. I’ve spoken with her now since and asked her about it and she says now she doesn’t believe that was the case and that was maybe something she was prompted into coming up with at the time when she was under duress.”

In fact, the notion that Mr Draper was not just “in” the cult, but was its major financial benefactor, has been put about by none other than the Defective Detective herself, Kristie Sue Costa.

In a blog post written on 28 April 2016, she states this very clearly:

So according to Kristie Sue, who of course takes her orders directly from the Gospel According to Abe and Ella,

There is one single person responsible for this entire Hampstead situation, drum roll please….

Ella Draper’s first husband.  He is responsible for sending RD to Ella.

From the “Jean-Clement recording”,
All three children are involved in the cult now. From two different men, who are cult members. She came to me, because she knew I didn’t, I wasn’t a weird guy. She knew there was something, I was clean. And she knew, in her heart, that I could help her. She didn’t know how. I didn’t know how. … Her first husband, he sent the second man to her. “

Why doesn’t anyone talk about this?

Mr. Draper & his wife (redacted) were in the same cult as RD. Mr Draper is supposedly the cult financier, which would make sense since he works in the banking industry.

Kristie Sue further hammers the point home: Mr Draper and RD were totes deffo not only in the cult together, but they shared poor foolish Ella around, as a kind of cultic brood mare.

So let’s see if we’ve got this straight. Mr Draper met Ella in Moscow while she was getting her masters in art history, got her pregnant and they moved to the UK. Away from her family, in a foreign land, she gave birth to their son (redacted). Got it.

Things didn’t work out so Mr and Mrs Draper divorced and Ella was left to raise their son.

Mr Draper then sends his cult buddy RD to Ella to produce more children, thus child A and child G. Knowing full well that RD was in his cult, Mr Draper must have known how abusive and sadistic RD was.

(Redacted), Ella’s first son with Mr Draper, was a witness firsthand to RD’s abusive ways.

What’cha gonna do, Kristie Sue?

You can see Kristie Sue’s dilemma here.

Her entire premise—that the alleged cult operates through some kind of insane “buddy” system, whereby members pass unwitting sexual partners around to one another to breed children for the cult—has now been completely demolished. If Mr Draper wasn’t in the cult, then he couldn’t have passed Ella along to RD. He couldn’t have introduced his wife and son to the cult. He couldn’t have financed the cult.

And to make matters worse, It’s now becoming clear that Ella was motivated to “revise” the hoax storyline not only by the fact that people were beginning to ask her uncomfortable questions about her ability to notice a great honking tattoo in a very unusual, very obvious place.

It would seem that Ella and Abe have another, even more pressing reason to remove Mr Draper, his current wife, and Ella’s eldest son from their filthy narrative.

It’s the money that matters

It all boils down to cash, or the lack thereof.

You see, when Ella and Mr Draper split up, Ella was able to wangle a rather generous spousal maintenance agreement from her ex. Since she and RD never married, the court order which states that Mr Draper must “pay or cause to be paid” a certain amount to his ex-wife has never been varied.

At some point in the past year, we believe that Mr Draper grew tired of supporting a woman who is a) a fugitive from UK police, and b) a nasty bitch who has seen fit to splash the names of his wife, his son, and himself across the internet, complete with false allegations that he is part of a paedophile/cannibal cult.

And so he did what any right-thinking person would do: he cut her off. We suspect that he wouldn’t have been able to just stop paying her, as he’d have been in violation of his court order (which some people do take seriously, Ella notwithstanding). However, there are ways to ensure that the money could be “caused to be paid”, such as putting it into a holding account which Ella could only claim if she were to return to the UK.

Which she definitely doesn’t want to do. Something about outstanding arrest warrants, we believe.

The long and short of it: Ella and Abe are completely, 100% skint.

And as it turns out, the readers of this blog can claim some of the credit for this sad state of affairs. Remember all those crowd-funding sites you protested? Those were to have been Abe and Ella’s financial lifeboat. And you, naughty Hoaxtead researchers that you are, torpedoed it to the bottom of the sea. Well done, all of you!

How much for that recantation?

Basically, Ella and Abe are in a very tough spot. They are broke, living in Spain, and all their grand plans for turning their hoax into a never-ending money fountain have fallen through. What to do?

Well, there’s always Mr Draper. Perhaps if they’re nice enough to him, and recant the part of their story that involves him, he might be persuaded to go back to paying Ella’s monthly stipend….

At this point, if it’s a choice between sticking to their story and starving, it seems that Ella is willing to sing like a canary. So in this new, improved version of the hoax, Mr Draper is completely innocent, not a cult member at all. Nor is his wife, nor his son.

That was all just a big misunderstanding, terribly sorry about that.

Oh, you say Ella and Abe not only gave out Mr Draper’s family’s personal information, but also their phone numbers, email addresses, addresses, and places of work and study? And that as a result of this, Charlotte Ward and her team of flying monkeys sent out defamatory, harassing emails to 75 of Mr Draper’s investment banking colleagues? A mere bagatelle! You know how it gets: you start making shit up, one thing leads to another, and next thing you know you’re involved in criminal harassment! Could happen to anyone, really!

The fact that Ella has just pulled out the underpinnings of the hoax and shown up her faithful followers like Kristie Sue for the gullible fools they are is immaterial. What matters to Ella and Abe at this point is cold, hard cash. And since none is forthcoming from the hoax, fuck the hoax…or at least this part of it. Those who believe in it will just have to cope.

The problem is, of course, that the internet never forgets. What does it matter at this point that Ella retracts the chunk of the hoax involving her ex-husband and his family? That material is still out there, still easily found, still working its evil way into the lives of its victims.

Let’s put it this way: if you were Mr Draper right now, would you be willing to let bygones be bygones and start handing your hard-earned cash to Ella and Abe?

Neither would we.

And as one of our commenters pointed out yesterday, starvation seems to be good for Ella’s memory. One wonders what else she might feel compelled to remember, as the grim reality of utter destitution sinks in.

Advertisements

85 thoughts on “Finding Abe and Ella’s price: Why are they recanting?

  1. I think you should drip feed the implications of this one really really slowly.

    It certainly gets her off the hook (in her drug addled mind) when she’s asked “what about child number three?”

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Thankyou El C & not me 🙂 nor RD……. we have not wavered nor shied from the truth, nor tried to shield ourselves behind any belief label, nor pushed or pulled any others to become involved…. Everyone has joined in, at their leisure, measure and ability to aid and add. To balance the scales in what was potentially a runaway bandwagon….

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Pingback: Finding Abe and Ella’s price: Why are they recanting? | ShevaBurton. Cross of Change Blog

  4. Here are a series of cropped/blurred images from seized CSA images. It’s ok to look at them, they are merely objects that were associated with the images. The idea here is – identify the objects, perhaps help locate and save a currently abused child.
    I’m interested in image #8. Looks to me, like an old box-style camera such as a Browning. But I can’t say for sure. What do you think?

    https://www.europol.europa.eu/stopchildabuse

    Liked by 2 people

    • OMFG

      I knew from address it’d be OK to click.

      I don’t think it’s the type of camera you mean. It looks like a modern vinyl type thing over a cardboard flimsy internal frame to me. A cube that needs to be propped up because it would just collapse. Maybe takes a camera inside? On top a popper?

      I can’t explain really.

      They are looking for the children aren’t they?

      Liked by 1 person

      • @YdychyncachuTracey – correct. They are hoping to trace the victims, who are believed to be ‘currently at risk’.

        I think that may be a ring, sitting on top. My brother had a collection of old Browning camera’s, this is very reminiscent. Some had a small metal circle like that, (possible ring), on one side or another and not on the lens side. I think it was where you viewed the frame number through. Dunno.
        Thanks for looking though 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • Looking through those images was sad. Knowing they were a small section of a photograph or video of a child being abused. I was unable to identify any of the items they were showing.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Be thankful that we do not have to see the full photographs or videos. Full respect to law enforcement officers that do have to view these awful images in the hope that they will be able to identify either the perpetrator or the child. It certainly is a job that most people wouldn’t be able to do.

            Liked by 1 person

    • I emailed someone who knows a lot about these things. With a quick note to Malclown that I’m quoting somebody else here, they point out that:

      “The Box Brownie is one of the cameras that brought photography to the masses; it was built for that sole purpose. The roll films most of them used (and that are still used by very serious high end ‘art house’ professionals) were and still are about 70mm across.

      Brownies were set up to produce a roughly 2 1/4″ Square or 2 1/4″ x 3 1/4” negatives which was normally just placed in direct contact with the paper to be printed i.e. not enlarged. The reason for that is there were no automated mini-labs for the mass market everything had to be enlarged via hand printing which is labour intensive. So for these $1 cameras and films (including developing and printing) they built them so as the negatives were big enough to make satisfactory contact prints. All of which means is a Brownie or similar is quite a bulky thing…. maybe 100mm x 120mm x 160mmm

      http://www.brownie.camera/ – It’s not any of these or its rivals.

      The Europol image?

      Take that into an image manipulator like Photoshop or Gimp and blow it up to fill your screen… You’ll quickly see it’s some sort of Bakelite or black plastic control box, rather smaller than a Brownie. You can tell this because the quite common type of cables around it (which I think feed into the back) are ‘probably’ around 4mm-5mm diameter and roughly 6mm x 4mm for what looks like grey “twin screened” audio lead at the back.

      What you’re taking to be a lens is in fact a control knob… 40s/50s/60/s style I think, it has an indicator ‘pip’ with a white painted dot to it and two ridges for grip. There is something about the Bakelite box that screams ‘Grundig’ or Eumig’ at me, but that’s just a hunch. Equally well the knob reminds me of those used on American ‘Philco’ radios of the 30s-50s.

      Take into account here that, having seeded the idea of this being something to to with cameras ( and I think you’re on the right track) there will be a bit of cognitive bias at play here. But my best-guess is that object is a changeover switch or remote control for an old projector system…

      If you watch an old movie you’ll often see every 20 or 40 minutes that two ‘flashes’ or ‘cup rings’ appear about 10seconds apart in the top-right hand side of the screen. This is because a reel of film only runs for 20 or (more usually) 40 minutes… And it’s necessary in a cinema, to maintain a continuous programme, two have two projectors set up so that as ‘reel one’ ends ‘reel two’ is lined up, ready to roll…

      The projectionist, once reel 1 is running, lines up and ‘parks’ the second projector on the leader marks that are at the front of every reel. After about 20 or 40 minutes (depends on the reels) he starts watching the film closely. When he sees the first he ‘flash’ kicks on the motor of projector two, and at the second flash throws a switch that kills the lamp on projector 1 and turns on the lamp on projector 2…

      If there’s a subsequent reel (you’ll often hear movies referred to as “three reelers” or “two reelers” he loads that onto projector 1 and so on… The audience see nothing (usually!). And the same switch very-often changes the audio feed from one projector to the other.

      Believe it or not, back in the old days some people took all this seriously enough to set up home cinemas complete with projection booths at home. Another market was schools colleges and universities which often had ’16mm’ projection setups. Given the context here it’s reasonable to point out that there were such people a ‘mobile projectionists’ who would make most of their money running ‘horse racing nights’ at working mens clubs; sometimes with a sleazier sideline in ‘blue movies’.

      So I ‘think’ – and this is just an educated guess – that what you’re looking at there is an amateur/home/education version of that very same idea. The metal ring will be to perch it upon a stand or fixing of some sort so that the contraption can be operated from an observation port in the projection booth rather than having to peer down the axis of the projector itself – in which case you risk getting your head in front of it!

      Hope this helps… But it might be worthwhile seeing if there are forums for people that collect old cine/cinema equipment. They would have a better idea! Some might even be able to identify the make and model.” – End quote!

      Liked by 2 people

        • Our local A/V expert also points out that Europol might get on a little better if they employed analysts with enough sense to flip images round appropriately……..

          Google: “i am a runner” “all it takes” shirt

          Liked by 2 people

          • Yes, thanks to everyone 🙂
            And Alfred, you are brilliant! I’m thinking now, the box is perhaps a form of timer for automated photo taking, capturing a series of images spaced at a specific interval without the abuser-photographer having to stop and click themselves. Hmmm…

            Liked by 1 person

          • Justin, once again our local AV technician pipes in:

            “The device Justin refers to is called an ‘intervalometer’ and one of that vintage would be quite a complex, large, electro-mechanical device as even cine cameras did not have electric triggers and would have been worked through a cable-release… Which takes quite a bit of effort to push reliably.

            It would have required a large solenoid inside, a big high current transformer (or lead-acid battery) to drive it – and would probably have some some sort of ‘clock face’ arrangement to set the intervals. That box isn’t big enough. – The grey ‘twin screened’ at the back is most-likely audio, although some German equipment of the 60s did use a type of mains lead that looks similar… It’s almost certainly photographic in my opinion, and definitely quite old. German made or a Soviet clone would be my guess.”

            Could someone be transferring old blue movies to video? And is that T-shirt generic or made for a particular event somewhere?

            Liked by 1 person

    • no 7 looks like an early ebay reversing camera I had- basically a small video camera (meant for security etc) potted in a block of epoxy to waterproof it so it could be used outside

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Nice digging, Your Howlness. You are one helluva detective and you’ve really got these pyschos on the back foot.

    Defective Detective Costa sure could learn a thing or two from you (if she were capable of learning, that is). Case in point: her comment that “Draper is supposedly the cult financier, which would make sense since he works in the banking industry”. Really, Kris? That makes sense to you, does it? He works in a bank, ergo he must have access to hundreds of millions of pounds to fund an international child-trafficking cannibal cult? If he worked in a petrol station, would that mean he had his own fleets of tankers to do with as he pleased?

    KSC Logic – it’s practically a brand name now.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Crikey my father was a banker so was I being lined up for The Cult?. Finance? (I couldn’t get a 10 quid loan from him but he was Scottish.) Not a Rothschild though. My childhood friend is now a well known TV actor and I stood on the picket lines for the miners in the 70s. Shake a family tree and a Jew drops out..my mother. My God- I just remembered- my child hood pal was also named Ricky but hated the name so had it changed when he became successful.
      I have an aversion to tattoos !

      Clearly the links are there and the dots need joining.
      Was I MKUltra trained to be a Sooper Soldier and then made to forget? . Was I hunted in the Wiltshire woods with a young Angela Power-Disney?
      Why do I huff & puff walking up a hill if I was a trained sniper by age 6?

      It’s also so easy on the net joining those imaginary dots but when they become unglued as EC has forensically done, and the un-picking is done by one of the actual Cult promoters like Ella, surely Troofer heads will explode.

      They’ll say she’s been got at. Visited by a Freemason Rothschild who has warned her she must back track or her beloved Abe will be buried alive in the sand
      Below: a snap of my friend Ricky when he was 8 and at infant school. Nothing odd there surely.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Wonder how Ella and Abe will feel when they realise that their latest dupe, Nathan Stupidman, is the source of this information about their sudden change of heart? Nathan, for his part, is no doubt quite proud to have been the person who helped take down the hoax. 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

        • It’s so funny! I bet Ella told Nathan that, not expecting him to actually do the best job so far in terms of trying to piece together this piece of shit, and exploded the myth. Cue all the bits of interviews edited together she has ever done, repeating the LIE about Mr Draper over and over, including in ‘the list’? Was she still ‘under duress’ there? Nathan, you are my hero of the day, in a way, and at least you like cats. But now please do a video and explain why you believe anything Ella has ever alleged, based on her own revelation to you, now she is ‘realising’ or whatever happened to make her see sense. Wow, this is so big! EC, as ever, big thanks for all the work you do, bringing all the news to us in such a great way. Big clap to Mr Draper who has at last acted for the benefit of all.

          Liked by 3 people

  6. Great work, EC. And thank you to the person who tipped you off about the stipend situation. I’d love to see the look on Kristie Sue’s face round about now 😀

    Liked by 3 people

    • It warms my heart to know that Abrella are not living the life of luxury in the sun. It’s no fun being skint where-ever you live. Great work by everyone at Hoaxtead Research for keeping much needed funds out of their grasping hands.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Brilliant, Norman!

      On a completely different but equally hilarious note:

      Abraham boasts he has NEVER, NEVER, never been interviewed by the police, then has to correct himself: ‘in this case’, LOL.

      You published RD’s transcript, it’s only fair you let us see your own one too:

      How amazing, when he is on the run from the police.

      In this bit, Ella reveals SHE was interviewed by the police. For 3 Hours.

      She complains that it is the interview that ‘they tried to scapegoat and blame Abraham him…..er..ah……eeek…er for what happened…’. Later she says: ‘we have the transcripts’ (of her 3 HOUR LONG police interview. Come on, Ella, fair playing field and all that, what else are you hiding? Show us the proof: You love publishing proof, don’t you? SHOW US YOUR POLICE INTERVIEW.

      BTW if Ella is wanted, and Abraham encouraged her to flee from the police, helping her over the rooftops, is that a criminal offence?

      Liked by 3 people

        • We have often asked why Ella has never revealed her Police interview, yet is happy to splatter the children’s ones all over YT. She is a nasty piece of work and is as guilty as Abe in everything that went on. She also stood by while Abe hit and coached her children.

          Now she wants to change her story and say that her ex-husband was never in the Cult and doesn’t have genital tattoos. The woman is as transparent as Abe in her lies.

          Liked by 3 people

    • Bad luck Dave. The new improved Quell Enemy Gargoyles microwave rock transmitter (commonly know as a QEG) does not leave any mark on the victim’s body.

      I told you to buy one of my (patent pending) microwave deflectors to use while computing but would you listen?

      Liked by 3 people

      • “…watch the movie “The Matrix” and envision yourself in the blue pill world…”
        Brilliant! Imagine that movies are reality, or rather that some people can’t tell the difference between fiction & reality, then you’ll understand DS – and Blondefru Glalax too.

        Or, you could read the truth about DS and who is the real pedophile protector – right here:
        http://www.dysgenics.com/2013/12/22/david-shurters-epic-fail/

        “In Shurter’s pathetic excuse for a book, “Rabbit Hole”, he calls Walter Carlson and Mark Andersen, his friends! His convicted pedophile friends! Worse, he dismisses the testimony of the child victims in these cases as “no real evidence” and tries to portray these pedophile perpetrators as innocent victims of a conspiracy by the boys and their families…”

        Liked by 1 person

      • How on earth can people think so much of Shurter. He is a man who has declared on video that he has murdered children. Do they just choose to overlook that comment? What is wrong with these people?

        Liked by 2 people

  7. What on earth is Angela doing promoting CCN who are begging for money?

    Angela was sacked by them despite paying them money and yet she supports them??

    Weird woman…

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I found this interesting. Those that would rather believe in some creepy Satanic cult abusing children, instead of living in reality. The flawed logic employed by promoters of the Hampstead case who live in a fantasy world where denial is a sign of guilt, adults never manipulate children into telling lurid stories of sexual abuse for their own perversions or agenda, that children never lie where abuse is concerned unless it is during retractions, which in that case is down to manipulation and a cover up, of course.

    Dedicated to Kristie “We believe the children, but only when they are saying what we want to hear, we don’t believe the children when they say they were abused and tortured by a child abusing career criminal strung out on drugs, we want to send them back to their two abusers so Abe can film more pedo-sexual stories about sodomy for our viewing pleasure.” Sue Costa aka Kevin Bacon stunt double.

    “ABSTRACT: Although the false allegation of child sexual abuse does not always start with a child, the child becomes the key to unlocking the mystery of why the allegations are made, and what validity, if any, should be given to the statements made by a young child. The following article is published in three parts: Part I deals with how we measure credibility. The legal competency of the child witness and the manner by which a child learns through the interrogation process is discussed. The conclusion is that children under age ten are incompetent and poor witnesses but attorneys should prepare carefully in these cases. Several practice tips are given.

    The dogma of the child abuse industry is that children never lie about abuse. According to Dr. Roland Summit, in a paper entitled, The Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, children do not fabricate the kinds of explicit manipulations they divulge in complaints or interrogations, and “… very few children, no more than two or three per thousand, have ever been found to exaggerate or to invent claims of sexual molestation.”(1)
    However, if a child recants, it is because they have been “manipulated” into telling something that is not true. This, of course suggests that children do not lie about child abuse but will lie if they deny sexual abuse. That means that all children can be pressured into telling a lie, but only to deny abuse. This obviously is nonsense and, yet, this nonsense has become the dogma of mental health professionals who frequently investigate these matters. The result is a Catch 22 situation for if a child says it didn’t happen, it happened.(2) This is consistent with another dogma of child abuse professionals. Since some abusers deny being abusers, anyone who denies being an abuser is an abuser, as are those who admit to being abusers. In fact, my experience shows that the more vehemently the client denies having abused, the stronger the presumption that he or she is guilty.

    If children never lie about abuse, why is it that the figures show, as a minimum, 60 percent of all allegations are unsubstantiated and may be as high as 77 percent when associated with divorce and custody proceedings?(3,4)

    If children never lie about abuse, why were over a hundred counts and all charges against five of seven defendants of the McMartin School dropped, and why were over a hundred counts and all charges against 24 of the 25 defendants dropped in Jordan, Minnesota?(5)
    http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume1/j1_1_1.htm

    “The Little Rascals Day Care Case in brief
    In the beginning, in 1989, more than 90 children at the Little Rascals Day Care Center in Edenton, North Carolina, accused a total of 20 adults with 429 instances of sexual abuse over a three-year period. It may have all begun with one parent’s complaint about punishment given her child. Among the alleged perpetrators: the sheriff and mayor. But prosecutors would charge only Robin Byrum, Darlene Harris, Elizabeth “Betsy” Kelly, Robert “Bob” Kelly, Willard Scott Privott, Shelley Stone and Dawn Wilson – the Edenton 7.

    Along with sodomy and beatings, allegations included a baby killed with a handgun, a child being hung upside down from a tree and being set on fire and countless other fantastic incidents involving spaceships, hot air balloons, pirate ships and trained sharks. By the time prosecutors dropped the last charges in 1997, Little Rascals had become North Carolina’s longest and most costly criminal trial. Prosecutors kept defendants jailed in hopes at least one would turn against their supposed co-conspirators. Remarkably, none did. Another shameful record: Five defendants had to wait longer to face their accusers in court than anyone else in North Carolina history.

    Between 1991 and 1997, Ofra Bikel produced three extraordinary episodes on the Little Rascals case for the PBS series “Frontline.” Although “Innocence Lost” did not deter prosecutors, it exposed their tactics and fostered nationwide skepticism and dismay. With each passing year, the absurdity of the Little Rascals charges has become more obvious. But no admission of error has ever come from prosecutors, police, interviewers or parents. This site is devoted to the issues raised by this case.

    “There is this idea that people of the 1980s were just not very bright or really superstitious or something like that. Back then, the people who questioned it were treated with suspicion. People would say, ‘Of course this is happening, what’s wrong with you?’ And it’s not like this is an anomaly in American history. In the ’50s, Commies were crawling out of the basement. This stuff goes back to Salem witch trials…

    “The ritual abuse thing also became part of psychological culture. This idea that children don’t lie about these things became really entrenched for a while….

    “It was a way to talk about actual abuse, I think. At the time, the idea that childhood abuse was mostly perpetrated by family members was too outrageous, too awful. People would rather believe that it was evil, Satan-worshipping strangers.”

    – Dan Chaon, author of “Ill Will,” quoted by Joe Gross in the Austin American-Statesman
    http://www.littlerascalsdaycarecase.org/

    Liked by 3 people

    • What a horrible oxygen thief Angela Power Disney really is. These people only live for the next attack so they can vomit their opinions. I am surprised Angie has even been to a hospital lately as the last time she had an operation she said they tried to assasinate her. Angie you old hooker, nobody wants to assassinate you, you are nothing, a worthless child abuser, scammer and complete and utter liar who defames anti-child abuse campaigners like the heroic Sheva Burton.

      When that post of Sheva’s campaigning was put on here earlier, it made me tear up, knowing that a long time genuine campaigner has been attacked by the lowest forms of bottom feeders like Angela.

      Liked by 3 people

  9. Pingback: Ella’s retraction contradicts children’s video ‘evidence’ | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  10. Pingback: Abe & Ella’s lies coming home to roost | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  11. Pingback: FAQ update #1: ‘How we know it’s a hoax’ | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

We welcome comments!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s