Rupert Quaintance trial update: Day 2

This morning at court was very similar to yesterday’s snooze-fest, except that it lacked the interesting gossip emanating from Belinda’s end of the corridor. She appears to have realised that our intrepid reporter is not a member of her fan club, and she maintained a steely silence for the hour and a half between the scheduled court time and 11:30 when the public was finally allowed into the courtroom.

Our reporter informs us that although the case was listed as “resumed” at 10:04 a.m., this was a gross exaggeration. Instead, there was much to-ing and fro-ing of barristers and solicitors, much swishing of black robes and bouncing of wigs’ pigtails, and a great many murmured conversations.

Eventually the public was allowed into the courtroom, and the jury was admitted at 11:54, at which point the five written counts against Rupert Quaintance were handed out to the jurors.

The counts, under the Protection from Harassment Act (1997), claim that:

  • Rupert engaged in a course of conduct which caused each of five witnesses to fear that violence would be used against him or her;
  • and that Rupert knew or ought to know that his conduct would cause the witnesses to fear that violence would be used against them;
  • and that Rupert ought to know that his course of conduct would cause the witnesses to fear that violence would be used against them if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think that this course of conduct would cause the other to fear this on that occasion.

Rupert has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Prosecution opening statement

Prosecutor Martyn Bowyer made the point that although the internet has brought us enormous freedom of information and expression, this freedom comes with certain responsibilities. When these responsibilities are abrogated, people may cross the line and break the law. The defendant in this case, Mr Bowyer said, used the freedom of the internet to cause people to fear that violence would be used against them.

Mr Bowyer reviewed the background to this case, including the false allegations against their father, other parents, teachers, social workers, and police officers which two children were forced to make; and the police investigation and fact-finding hearing which completely exonerated all of the accused people of any wrongdoing.

Despite this, material related to the case was published on the internet, arousing considerable interest amongst certain people. “Sadly,” said Mr Bowyer, “the debate did not subside”. He described the backlash against Mrs Pauffley’s judgment, which was said to have been a whitewash, and noted that in a free society, anyone who wishes to do so is free to state that a judgment is wrong. This case does not attack anyone’s freedom of expression, he said; rather, it focuses on drawing a line between the individual’s freedom of speech and a criminal course of conduct, consisting of harassment—either directly or by implication.

Mr Bowyer noted that Rupert describes himself as an activist, an investigative journalist, a vlogger, and a contributor to an online radio site called American Freedom Radio. He maintains a social media presence on Twitter and YouTube, and has a Facebook account with a public profile. In 2015 he became aware of the debate concerning the Hampstead SRA hoax, and became actively involved in the debate. He accepts that he posted a video in which he stated that he wanted to come to Hampstead to “kick down doors” and “take blood samples”, which he claimed would settle the debate once and for all.

Further to this, in 2016 he set up a GoFundMe page on which he accepted donations for the purpose of travelling from the United States to the UK. At the beginning of September last year (2016) he was in London. People reported seeing a selfie of him in which he was standing outside Christ Church Primary School, on the first day of the school term, with a caption, “This is what my defiant face looks like”. One of his Facebook friends commented on this, at which point the defendant gave the impression that he had a knife on his person.

“He will say that it was all a misunderstanding,” Mr Bowyer said, noting that Rupert claimed that he and his friend were engaging in an “in-joke”, which he accepts could have been misconstrued. “However, in-jokes are only understood by those who are in on them”. Against the backdrop of Rupert’s vocal and sometimes threatening support of the hoax, the suggestion that he might have been armed with a knife while standing outside the school named in the hoax created a great deal of consternation.

Mr Bowyer said it is up to the prosecution to prove that each witness was put in fear of violence; that they were put in fear of violence as a result of a course of conduct taken by Rupert; and that he knew, or ought to have known, that this would happen under the circumstances.

Each of the witnesses named in the five counts against Rupert are or were parents of children at Christ Church Primary School; they were swept up in the furore surrounding the hoax; and each was acutely aware of any information that might affect them or their children. These parents all checked online because they had very good reason to do so.

On or around February 2016, all the witnesses say that they saw a video. In it, Rupert Quaintance spoke about the children who were the alleged victims of the “cult”. In July, they became aware that Rupert had spoken in an interview on an internet radio station called American Freedom Radio about his desire to come to the UK. He stated that he didn’t want to “actually kill the parents, just beat them up pretty good”.

On 13 September 2016, Rupert was still in London. When he was arrested at a home in Erith, two computers and a hard drive were seized by the police.

At the time of his arrest, Rupert’s solicitor advised him not to answer any police questions. However, in early October he came to the police of his own volition and provided a lengthy interview, in which he explained how he came to be invited to the UK by Angela Power-Disney and others. Once in the UK, he said, he became subject to a torrent of abuse. He told police that he accepted that he had made some errors in judgement, some of which might have resulted from the cultural divide between the United States and the United Kingdom.

During this trial, Mr Bowyer said, the jury will hear about the materials which were found on Rupert’s hard drive. Police found a file marked “AB”, which contained “cult details”: it consisted of an Excel spreadsheet containing the names of teachers, children, parents, and police officers, along with their addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers. The names of all five witnesses were included in this list.

In addition, police forensic investigators unearthed a Skype message which contained a link to a site related to the Hampstead case. Again, this site contained details of names and addresses of children and parents named in the case, as well as names and addresses of the families’ nannies and babysitters.

Should Rupert have known that his actions would cause the witnesses to fear that he would be violent toward them? Mr Bowyer said, “He did exactly what he said he was going to do”. While no actual violence was involved, Rupert’s actions created fear amongst the witnesses.

Witnesses for the prosecution

As we reported yesterday, a court order is quite rightly in place to protect all children involved in the background to this case from further violations of their privacy. Therefore, we will not be naming any of the witnesses who gave evidence today, and we will be aggregating some of their evidence to avoid any possibility of identifying them, and indirectly, their children.

Three witnesses were heard directly by the jury, and two additional witness statements were read out in court. Each of the three live witnesses stated that they were acutely aware of the allegations originally made against them and their children. One witness described shutting down their Facebook account, and then becoming aware of the threats against them: “It made me look to see what was there, to be aware of the threats coming to me and my family”.

All described screenshotting “thousands” of videos, blog posts, Facebook posts, Twitter tweets, and the like.

One noted that following conclusion of the fact-finding hearing, when material about the case went viral on the internet, their child was implicated: “It was horrifying. There were names, addresses, photographs of my child next to sexual allegations”.

Another said they began to check the internet regularly, sometimes many times per day; the hoax, they said, had affected their life profoundly, forcing them to move several times, to be acutely aware of their surroundings, and to worry constantly about the possibility that they would be attacked by supporters of the hoax, or that their children would be kidnapped.

The witnesses described becoming hypervigilant: knowing that they and their children had been named, they felt they had to keep a close eye on the internet, keeping track of the multiple threats against them.

Each of the witnesses stated that in February 2016 they had seen Rupert’s video in which he threatened to “kick down doors and take blood samples”. One witness described their sense of panic: “How do I keep my child safe if he approaches us?” A witness described printing out Rupert’s picture and putting it in the staff room at their child’s school, to ensure that if any staff saw him they could call the police immediately. Another witness agreed: “I felt fearful and angry. We’d already had a year’s worth of threats and online abuse, so the threat that he was going to get on a plane, when our family’s address was online, was another blow. I was angry that someone was posting this”.

Asked “whose doors” they felt Rupert would be kicking down, a witness said, “Mine. I could only imagine that he intended some sort of violence”.

Regarding Rupert’s GoFundMe page, each of the witnesses said they were aware of it, and that they recognised many of the names of contributors to his self-funding campaign.

Asked whether they were aware that Rupert was at Christ Church Primary School on 5 September last year, the witnesses all stated that they were.

Those who lived relatively close to the school stated that they were “petrified” when they learned he was so close to their homes. “I could only think about how to protect my child”, said one, while another said, “I found it just unbelievable…it was scary, horrendous to think that he was in our neighbourhood and armed”.

A witness said, “My mind goes immediately to my children…in case I were to get murdered”. Noting that their children had already gone through so much during and after the hoax, a witness said when they saw Rupert’s post outside the school, they imagined their children “without a parent…I don’t get it, I just don’t understand”.

Court adjourned following the witness statements, and will resume tomorrow at 10 a.m. (third time lucky?), at which time the jury will be shown video evidence, and the defence will have a chance to present evidence.


We know we’ve mentioned this before, and we hate to be tedious, but we’d like to remind any newcomers that it is crucial that we or any of our commenters avoid discussion of Rupert’s guilt or innocence, as well as speculation regarding the process or outcome of the trial. Please reserve such opinions until the trial is complete, to ensure that justice is properly served, and that we do not find ourselves in contempt of court.

 

Advertisements

174 thoughts on “Rupert Quaintance trial update: Day 2

  1. As the matter of Judge Pauffley’s order has been raised I would offer the observation that the only dissatisfactory aspect of it is that it appears to have been completely worthless as no-one in authority seems remotely interested in enforcing these things.

    Similarly, what underpinned that order were existing laws relating not only to the privacy of children, but the anonymity of alleged victims of sexual assault; and for clarity those stand whether the assault actually happened or not. – Again, seemingly not worth to paper they are written on!

    Whilst third parties (i.e. those who breached that order) are entirely responsible and accountable for their own actions, Google, Youtube, FaceBook and other so-called ‘platforms’ financially profited directly from this misery and abuse; they ought to be paying a price too… In principle their position is no different from that of a man who holds and distributes but does not himself actually ‘use’ child pornography ( as some have been known to claim when caught) in that they are abuse enablers and profit from it.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Agree- the ‘social media’ platforms are a complete disgrace with their lack of policing of such vile hate & libel.
      Who knows, maybe this case may prompt action from the stunned mullet MPs who are supposed to guard our interests.

      Like

    • Me too. I would like to thank the parents that came forward so that we and others can see the reality of deep concern for their children. They were called wicked and all they want to do is protect their children. They did NOTHING to deserve this. I wonder if Belinda feels a tinge of guilt having read this page, excellently written, many thanks to the reporter and you, EC for recording these succinct points.

      Liked by 3 people

        • I have it on good authority i.e. Me, that Belinda isn’t looking too good these days, imo of course.

          I happened to have shared a lift with her yesterday.

          She looked so small and and as though she had lost weight.

          Hi Belinda if you’re reading.

          I am the person that Caul Grant, a “friend” of yours said would make up false rape allegations against men!

          I wasn’t sure whether I should have said anything to you, but I didn’t because you looked a shadow of your former self imo and obviously have other things on your mind, although imo you are wasting your time on the wrong causes.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Caul Grant… ROFLMAO another fine upstanding untouchable! The state was ‘allowing’ him to smuggle drugs apparently but, in an act of terrible injustice one day decided to detain and prosecute him. To add insult to injury the court that prosecuted him laughed at his defence of ‘justification’. – All terribly unlawful of course. – I’m constantly amazed at the sheer stupidity of the two-bit crooks Belinda McKenzie surrounds herself with.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Yes Caul Grant and all that crap he spouts about the heavy duty drug smuggling.

            I said to him once, “If you wanted your day in Court, why did you do what you did?”

            “Why not drive a car through a showroom window for example, you’ll soon get charged with something?”

            His reply, he hadn’t thought of that!

            I smell BS.

            And as according to him I am a State Agent, could he please hurry up and tell the State I’m waiting for my Salary.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Babs, do you have any 3-bedroom semis for sale in the Hounslow area?

            Oh, STATE agent. Sorry, my bad. Carry on.

            Like

        • I’ve been wondering for a little while about Barchon Mad, is he okay?

          I’m not sure if he is commentating here under another name.

          On the opposite side of the coin I’ve also been wondering what Heather Brown is up to these days.

          Anyone know?

          Like

  2. Whilst specific reporting restrictions apply here, may I strongly suggest that there is absolutely no discussion or speculation of the parties’ identities, even after the case? Ultimately it’s important that these people are provided with the opportunity of a clear road to move on, as unfettered as possible from their horrible and distressing experience.

    Bear in mind that certain other parties (not cited in or related to these proceedings or as directly impacted) were so distressed by the wider Hampstead hoax that they uprooted themselves from the area and moved to the other side of the country, such was their alarm. Again stressing that I’m referencing the wider hoax and in particular the antics of Draper, Christie and McKenzie, the attack on the good people of Hampstead has been nothing short of an act of social terrorism.

    Liked by 5 people

    • And my reason for being involved in this matter and this website is I have friends in the area who were not named or accused but their friends were.
      There has been a domino effect that radiated out to so many people that’s its difficult to know where it ends.

      So many issues involved including the fact the residents I mentioned were not all money well off but in my case, households with all parents working to pay a mortgage. Plenty of every day stress for all and then out of the blue, a pitch fork mob appears to make life that much harder.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Exactly so Sam, exactly so… With children at a particular ‘age and stage’ it’s important they are not forced to live important, formative years under a shadow. And that’s apart from the simple fact that the only people who have done anything wrong here are the perpetrators and supporters of this hoax. -‘Fake it ’till you make it’ types who, because of that mentality, are doomed to fail at everything.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Yes and the added whammy that the struggling grafters taxes are effectively funding most of the wastrels whom also rack up untold costs against the public purse cant exactly have eased their frustration.

        Never mind though,maybe Neelu will make good full reparations to those who have suffered when she has finally managed to bankrupt the economy of the known universe and beyond.

        Grr.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Don’t feel bad, Ethel – Alanson is very thick-skinned. Just take a look at this photo I took of him on Sunday. Even a one-nil thrashing at the hands of Huddersfield Toon couldn’t get the old bastard down!

      Like

    • Dave, none of us is wondering “why you’re not dead yet”. We’re wondering why you’re not in jail or a psychiatric ward yet. Happy to clear that up for yer.

      Liked by 2 people

    • The miserable sod will stress himself into an early grave with his Ultra pointless paranoia the way he going.He should take his foot off the peddle,let the engine cool down a while,perhaps make a nice cup of tea,put his feet up and immerse himself in something a little more positive.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Well said, Mik.

        One word of caution, though – if he’s making himself a cuppa, he should make sure he adheres to all relevant kitchen safety procedures, as I have it on good authority that his smoke alarms aren’t working.

        Liked by 1 person

        • He has mould across the back of his house and now its gotten into his aircon vent system- maybe if he cleaned more often than once every few weeks, his mould problem might lessen….

          (Oh and dave- if you have a mould problem- ‘cleaning it up’ requires far more than just scrapping it off the vent with your fingernails- get some bleach and do it properly- mould can indeed kill you and if left untreated can literally end up with you having to demolish your house)
          http://www.wikihow.com/Kill-Black-Mold

          ” But if mould covers a large area of your home – according to the Australian Mould Guideline, which was co-authored Neumeister-Kemp, a rough guide is one metre square – and is dense, or if householders are asthmatic or allergic to mould, it’s best to call in the experts.

          Professional mould cleaners should be certified, have the right equipment and special training.

          “The actual cleaning of the mould is the smallest problem. If it’s just condensation, it’s cheap. If it sits on top, it’s cheap. For a ceiling, for example, it’ll cost maybe $200,” says Neumeister-Kemp. “But if the mould is growing into the ceiling and it’s porous, then it’s expensive.”

          Neumeister-Kemp says badly affected homes may have mould behind walls, in and behind gyprock, in ceiling cavities and under carpets and floorboard. Once it sets into porous materials, it can be easier to replace them entirely than to treat them.

          The cost of getting an entire house remediated starts at about $15,000, but can cost much more depending on the size of the home and the furnishings within it, according to Neumeister-Kemp. The most expensive job she said she’s been involved in was a house in Sydney’s Bondi, which cost $1.8 million in contents remediation.”

          from https://www.choice.com.au/money/property/renting/articles/black-mould-and-renters-rights

          Liked by 3 people

          • yeah he should use bleach or something. pretty sure it just grows back if you don’t sanitize it somehow, and mold can make you pretty sick. he could also use vinegar, which would be safer for his dogs, or baking soda, which would help keep it from coming back

            Liked by 1 person

          • David,its no use coming here every 5 minutes for handy household tips.MI5 currently have enough on its plate without having to sort out every sad,developmentally delayed failure stuck at best somewhere around early puberty.

            Now stop your sulking and go and tidy your room and let that be the end of it.Any more of this nonsense with your imaginary friends on that damn computer and you`ll be in bed early with no supper,now run along,chop chop.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I was going to add “or there will be all hell to pay when your father gets in” but I decided that might tip him right over the edge.

            Liked by 1 person

          • He could invest in a de-humidifier as I have but they are so much cheaper in the USA..sucks all the moisture out of the room that causes mould.
            And yes bleach does the job.
            There you are ShitFace Dave..put up another GoFundMe request for some cash to buy bleach.

            Liked by 2 people

          • awww.. but i like helping people… 😛

            in any case, even if he was a bit of an ass to me, death by mold is a pretty nasty way to go, and i like dogs and his dogs never did anything to me.
            he needs to actually open the vent and clean it out though, not just wipe off the outside. even i know not to half-ass shit like this.

            “Never half-ass anything. If you’re going to do something, always use your full ass” ~an acquaintance

            Liked by 2 people

    • Dear Mr. Shurter

      I am disgusted by something in your latest video: you’ve forgotten the apostrophe after the word ‘Lovers’ in the title.

      Kind regards
      TCL

      Liked by 1 person

    • More meaningless, idiotic fantasies from Shyster.
      He’s particularly fixated on the fantasy, that we all could have a lineage-affiliation with an “organization” from his childhood – that he made up! – when the truth is that most of us don’t even know who the rest of us are, offline.

      But as a satan-hunter SRA fantasist, Davey-boy DOES have a traceable lineage of predecessors and inspirations. And, once again, a lot of them have been far-right whack-jobs including REAL racists, nazis and white supremacists:
      http://www.csicop.org/si/show/conspiracy_theories_and_paranoia_notes_from_a_mind-control_conference/&gt

      And let us not forget Davey’s old buddy Fritz Springmeier – the Army of God whacko who wrote:
      “The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave”

      “On January 31, 2002, Springmeier was indicted in the United States District Court in Portland, Oregon[7] in connection with an armed robbery. On February 12, 2003, he was found guilty of one count of armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and (d) and one count of aiding and abetting in the use of a semi-automatic rifle during the commission of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C § 924(c)(1).[8][9] In November 2003, he was sentenced to 51 months in prison on the armed robbery charge and 60 months on the aiding and abetting charge, fined $7,500, ordered to pay $6,488 in restitution, and assessed an additional $200.[10] Springmeier’s conviction was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[11] He was imprisoned, and was released from federal prison on March 25, 2011” – Wikipedia

      Liked by 3 people

    • David obviously doesn’t understand how The Order works. First is the strange rocks that magically appear in your garden and once they have done their surveillance of their target they order the black mould to come in and make its move.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Even though I am retiring soon from the fight, there are AI projects I am focussed on which will address some of the challenges faced by the parents and children of Hampstead. One idea is that when a user posts content to the internet server such as on Facebook, instead of to a mindless database, the content goes to an AI who will process it, correcting spelling, grammar etc, but also if it is aware of an issue concerning a target of harrassment from a given user, it can automatically censor any content posted at the moment it is sent to the server, and take immediate action against the offending user. There is also no reason why an AI on Facebook cannot talk to a counterpart on Twitter, and educate all participating AI’s with the same rules to deal with targetted harrassment against specific people.

    Like

    • i dunno..maybe? it might stop people from getting slandered, but i can see people balking at it and can also see it being abused or preventing free speech. “there is a precedent” is typically used to excuse furthering something or causing other incidents, and i can easily see this evolving into a tool companies could use to stifle advertisement from rivals, the government or political parties using it to lobby or suppress alternative views, etc etc, close-mindedness abounds and either people leave those platforms for ones with freer speech, or freak out and decide that everything is a lie, since alternative views can’t be expressed. like in the US, i’ve heard plenty of people talk about getting rid of their tvs or stopping watching certain news channels because they feel like they’re being lied to or that certain things are being suppressed and other things over-promoted. and actually, not many but some people already starting to look to other social media platforms because they feel censored or not secure enough. maybe prevent it from contacting slandered individuals if it is aware of an issue?

      Liked by 2 people

      • After dealing with near three years of the toxic content Satan Hunters have been posting re: Hampstead, I no longer care about concerns over censorship and freedom of speech. I have written several posts on my own blog about responsibility that comes with liberty, and the abuse of liberty means it is lost. Information merchants such as Facebook, governments and users have been incapable of dealing with toxic content, so the liberty has become irrelevant to me. I will assist in putting AI tools out there, and it will be down to the ruler and the ruled how they will live with or use those tools.

        Like

        • With you on that, JH.

          Freedom of speech is a well worn excuse used by troofers and hoaxers and I think they really devalue the concept in so doing.

          I agree 100% with people’s right to express their views but the fact is that there are several valid exceptions enshrined in law, as there have been in pretty much every society in history. Examples in the UK include malicious communications, data protection, slander, libel, defamation, official secrets, harassment, incitement to violence, breach of the peace, PACE, threatening behaviour, child protection restrictions, hate speech, public disorder, etc. etc… There’s no such thing as unlimited free speech, anywhere. And as we’ve repeatedly seen from lots of shouty troofhoaxers who scream about their right to express themselves, they’re the first to block and delete anyone who politely disagrees with them or asks uncomfortable questions. Spivey, Angie, Mel & Biggi, Hope Girl, Danielle and Neelu are prime examples that spring to mind

          Liked by 2 people

      • Here’s the thing though DotB… Mainly the issues that arise do so because laws that already exist are just ignored and no-one in authority seems to be remotely interested in enforcing them. – Naming a victim or alleged victim of a sexual offence is a crime for instance. There are laws that say what you can and cannot report of a court case. …Defamation, although it exists as civil ‘offence’ is a law that’s only really useful to the rich. Then there are issues such as the threats of violence that are routinely uttered…

        The ‘chilling effect’ you refer to is only valid as an argument in relation to restrictions that don’t already exist. What’s needed is enforcement and accountability; and to my mind that means holding the owners and directors of these so-called social media companies jointly and severally responsible with the authors of the material that breaks the law… To my mind it’s these people who are at the heart of the problem; they’re the ones becoming millionaires off the back of illegal and life-ruining acts.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Some could argue that excessive use of Al Gore rhythms may interfere with general freedom of speech and potentially weaponized by nefarious propagandists etc.Personally though if helps eradicate the likes of the hoaxmob and their slimy ilk it cant come soon enough.Hitting Farcebook,Twatter etc in the pocket is what them moguls listen to.

      Hope SV when you bow out from this battle you still find time to pop in from time to time.I suspect I speak for most in these here hills.You are a veritable education on legs.Thankyou sir.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. @cuning linguist – correct, the medieval peasants were labelled Lucifer-ans. “Lucifer-ians” had already been used by the heresiologists – they were the followers of Lucifer of Cagliari.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Re: Neelu Berry, two latest videos.

    Video 1
    Electricity, gas and water companies have power of entry in the UK via court order to carry out inspections, change and replace meters and safety inspections. This appears a simple case of change/replace meter, which a court order has been correctly obtained. Neelu Berry is making it unnecessarily difficult for people to carry out even simple tasks, this is a major drain on public funds. Neelu Berry has caused the loss of two hour’s of police time forcing two police officers to attend to satisfy her ego.

    Video 2
    The suggestion that the Berry family are bunch of parasitic vultures, with Neelu Berry being the most vocal and outward representative of them. Neelu’s sister is having her own disputes over house ownership with a bank and/or other creditors. Neelu harrasses another innocent official. ASBO’s were designed for people such as Neelu Berry, why this has not been used against her?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Which of four possibilities will bring Angela Power Disney down?
      1. stealing money donated to hungry African orphans.
      2. her part in Hampstead.
      3. her defamations against a certain Garda police officer.
      4. Baby H, contempt of court.

      Perhaps David Shurter has had a word with daddy on Angies behalf to assist in this parasite escaping any comeback so far.

      Like

        • Insurance companies comparing notes on her periodic “handy” losses of equipment claims may yield “interesting”results too.She needs to keep looking over her shoulder does Angie,oh and I doubt her latest bestest friend Yeshua thingamebob will be providing a reference or putting up bail.The poor bloke will no doubt gladly see the back of the meddling old leech.

          Liked by 1 person

      • I would go for 3. if I had to choose.

        1. Is not going to happen.
        2. Nothing happened yet!
        3. Does the Garda even know?
        4. Only if the Judge can be bothered or someone else can.

        Liked by 1 person

    • “I continue to uncover fragmented memories”, ummm, sure you do Angie. Funny how these memories (stories) come back after talking to other nutbags. Talks to a “Super Soldier” ends up telling tales about fighting to the death and shark infested waters. Still promotes every nonsense conspiracy going, still rambles uneducated tripe about Trauma Based Mind Control and MPD/DID.
      STILL promotes the Hampstead Hoax and garbage. If there was a paedophile protection squad Angela, Lift the Veil and David Seaman would be on the payroll for causing a diversion by promoting braindead CSA/SRA hoaxes that drown out genuine paedophile Rings like Newcastle, Rotherham etc.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Surely at 15 this ‘film maker’ wasn’t a ‘student’ per se, but a schoolchild doing GCSE or the like? I seriously doubt if anyone doing ‘film studies’ would have 1 1/2 hours of some dried up old hag talking shite accepted as part of their coursework; but even so, is it not lamentable that this evil old bag seeks to make money out of this child’s naive efforts?

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Pingback: Parents of Hampstead finally have their say | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

We welcome comments! Please note: this is a Shurter-free zone. Offending posts will be deleted.

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