Rupert Quaintance trial update: Day 5

Readers of Hoaxtead Research will be aware by now that court was adjourned at about 4:00 p.m. this afternoon, to resume tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. You would be correct in deducing that the jury has not yet reached its verdict.

Here is a summary of the day’s proceedings:

Summation: Judge Martin Griffith

In court this morning, Judge Martin Griffith summed up for the jury the process by which they were expected to reach their decision in the trial of Rupert Quaintance. When they considered the case, he said, they ought to consider all the evidence brought by both sides, and the testimony of all witnesses, as well as the admissions agreed to by both sides. They should make an assessment of all the witnesses, including the defendant, who they should treat as a witness like any other during the time he was on the stand.

The jury would be entitled to draw inferences from the evidence, Judge Griffith said, but not to speculate.

“You heard two speeches on Thursday”, he said, “but you are not bound to accept either of them”. To refresh the jury’s memory, he summarised the defence and prosecution speeches. He pointed out that in any criminal case it is the prosecution’s job to make the jury certain of the accused person’s guilt; it is not the defence barrister’s job to prove the defendant innocent.

Judge Griffith emphasised the need to remain calm regarding the background subject matter in this trial: issues such as child sexual abuse and Satanism elicit strong feelings which must not be allowed to affect the jury’s decision in one direction or the other. It’s important to remember that the allegations made against the parents in this case were without substance.

Cases such as the Hampstead SRA hoax are bound to attract the attention of conspiracy theorists, Judge Griffith said. The defendant became involved when he saw certain inflammatory videos on the internet. He made his own video in 2015, in which he said he would go to Hampstead, kick down doors, take blood samples, and solve this thing once and for all. Nothing happened for a year, but in 2016 Rupert’s video was reposted, and all the witnesses saw it. They felt concern for their own safety at that time.

A GoFundMe page was set up, and Rupert added the comment, “I’m going to the UK to fight paedophiles”, urging people to share the link. Sabine sent Rupert a link containing a list of parents, in which the witnesses’ names were included.

Rupert broadcast his American Freedom Radio programme from Holland, stating that he was not going to kill anyone, just beat them up; he added that those he planned to beat up had laid hands on others, so he felt entitled to lay hands on them. In the summer of 2016, he came to the UK, photographed himself in front of Christ Church Primary School, posted the picture on Facebook, and had a discussion with a friend in the comments under that post intimating that he could have been armed. He claims that the conversation was in fact a shared in-joke about being hit in the back of the head with a ham sandwich.

These three events—the initial video, the American Freedom Radio broadcast, and the Facebook photo—known as A, B, and C—are not in question. Rupert accepts responsibility for each of them. The question is, was his course of conduct calculated to cause alarm or distress to anyone? Apart from one witness, Rupert claims that he didn’t know any of the names of the witnesses in the lists found on his computer and hard drive. However, all of the witnesses say they saw A, B, and C, which they claimed distressed and frightened them. The question is whether he knew, or whether a reasonable person ought to have known, that this would be the outcome of his behaviour.

For example, the first witness who spoke last week said they were checking the internet three times per night, and saw the video. They stated that anything which came from Rupert’s mouth was violent; they thought that the American Freedom Radio broadcast was directed toward them; they knew their name was on the list created by Sabine McNeill which had been given to Rupert; they saw his GoFundMe page and realised that he intended to come to the UK; they saw his Facebook post with its biscuit/knife references; and they were petrified for themselves and their children. The question, Judge Griffith asked, was whether a reasonable person knew or should have known that these actions would cause such a reaction.

The second witness was also frightened by the YouTube video, and was aware of the GoFundMe fund. This witness, too, was terrified that Rupert was coming for their children. The third witness expressed similar reactions, stating that they were afraid of the death threats which many “activists” and their followers had made, and particularly of Rupert’s, as they believed that they could be murdered, and their children left without a parent. They realised that they were on Sabine’s list, and they spent their life looking over their shoulder, worried that Rupert might make good on his threats. This witness was the only name the defendant says that he was aware of.

The fourth witness stated that they were afraid Rupert would kick down doors and “make people squeal” as he had threatened to do so. They said they feared violence would be used against them, and mentioned the safety of their children. Is it reasonable to infer that harm to a witness’ child would equate to harm to the witness?

Review of video evidence

The relevant parts of the YouTube video (A) and the American Freedom Radio broadcast (B) were replayed for the jury. In respect of A, Judge Griffith said the jury would need to decide whether the threats to kick down doors, take blood samples, and “go in there with some gusto” were aimed toward the parents.

In B Rupert stated that he planned to go to Hampstead and “stick his camera in”, and that “Americans are different—they’ve got guns; we need to test this out in a place where it’s less possible to get killed”. He said he “was able to slither away from America” because of his interest in the Satanic aspect, “because I don’t really care, I’m a jackass, okay?” He stated that the amount of abuse coming out against children was “astounding”, and that finding a real child-abusing Satanist would be “like finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow”. He gave a “shout-out” to Angela Power-Disney, and then said, “i want to go the violent route. I don’t wanna kill them, I just want to beat them up real good. Scare them to death”.

Following this replay of the audio, Judge Griffith added that Rupert had asked why he couldn’t put his hands on “them”. He said the jury must decide whether Rupert was referring to the parents or those who had trolled him.

Review of admissions

Judge Griffith reminded the jury of the admissions which had been agreed upon by both the prosecution and the defence. These included the links which had been sent by Sabine McNeill, and to the spreadsheet on Rupert’s hard drive which was dated late July 2016, which listed all the witnesses, amongst other people alleged to have been involved in the “cult”.

Review of defence arguments

He also reminded the jury of Rupert’s lack of previous offences (except for one cannabis infraction), and said that in this respect he would be considered a “person of good character”.

Judge Griffith reminded the jury that Rupert claimed that as a YouTube broadcaster in his “Hi, It’s Rupert” role, Rupert felt free “not to be his normal self”. Rupert claims that “kicking down doors” is just a figure of speech, and that he was just blowing off steam when he said that. He claims that this was not directed at the parents.

According to Rupert’s defence, Rupert experienced abuse and intimidation for a full year, had left the United States and been to Italy, at which time he had gone silent. He stated that when he was online, he was not talking about the parents in the case, but just trying to express his frustration. He states that he knew the name of the father of the two children in the Hampstead videos, but that his internet communications had not been aimed at him.

Rupert claims that he was petrified by the harassment aimed at him, and stated that “people were waiting for me” in the UK. He says he went to Hampstead to “see what it was like”, and that he was scared; he had no intention of meeting the parents, but took a picture of himself to show his friends and the trolls that he had been there.

In Rupert’s version of the case, the spreadsheet with the parents’ names on it was just “something to keep”.

He stated that “he was a victim too”, and that while he was in Italy he had become sure that Hampstead was a non-story.

Rupert does not accept that he played any role in the distress caused to the parents.

Jury sent out

Judge Griffith sent the jury out, with instructions that during this phase of their deliberations, all 12 of them must agree upon a verdict. He said that if no verdict was reached by 4:00 p.m., he would release them and bring them back tomorrow.

Jury note #1

At about 1:00 p.m., the jury sent a note to the judge asking him to explain the concept of “calculated” in the context of the Harassment Act 1997. Judge Griffith explained that “calculated” should be read as “intended”: “harassment must be aimed at someone, so you must be certain that he intended to cause alarm or distress”, he said.

Jury note #2

At 2:36 p.m., the jury asked to see Rupert’s YouTube video (A) once more.

Judge Griffith said that for each charge, “You must be satisfied that he was intending to harass one member of a group; in this case that means one member of the group of parents”. He said that as long as the jury was satisfied that the named parents were in the group that was being harassed, that would be satisfactory.

He also offered a definition of the term “harassment”, noting that it must be aimed at a person. There must be some intention to harass a small group, that is, the parents.

Jury released for the day

At 4:00 p.m. the jury was recalled from their deliberations. Judge Griffith warned them that they must not talk about the case, even amongst themselves, until they reconvened tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m.

The jury’s deliberations will continue tomorrow.

Advertisements

225 thoughts on “Rupert Quaintance trial update: Day 5

  1. So, in summary review of what is reported…

    There is no doubt that Quaintance’s actions caused innocent people to be placed in fear of violence.

    There is no doubt that he was in a possession of a list of individuals to be targeted, including the witnesses.

    He arrived in the UK so equipped and with stated purpose.

    But in defence he claims…

    Not to have known the details of the list that he obtained and that was on his computer.

    To have been ‘petrified’ despite which he still travelled to the UK.

    To be a nice person.

    …And in other news Angie thinks she can sue the court (i.e. the crown) for exposing her role in supplying the list of innocent respectable people (who, factually aren’t ‘alleged members’ of anything) that were terrorised. – In this respect I offer the following by way of considered comment;

    Liked by 4 people

  2. An excellent report on the day’s hearing.

    Completely unconnected to this case and hypothetically speaking, if I were heading to a country and in particular certain local areas of that country, even say a suburb and a specific location such as a place of worship, when I had no real reason to be there- and I was utterly petrified because I had received threats from ‘trolls’ and so on, I would actually not visit that location and if the mythical country in my tale had say, over 65 million people and heaps of amazing places to visit (especially as one suburban house of worship is much like another), sensational Cathedrals and beautiful Castles and endless gorgeous little picturesque villages and, oh just about one million other things I could do and get ‘lost in the crowd’ so the trolls would never find me- well that’s what I would do rather than steam right into the area where the Lawfully Suspected Trolls were a’waiting for me.

    But that’s just silly old me.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Quoth Angela Power-Disney “Our intrepid youtube reporter was either 1. A deep state CIA operative sent to discredit the H Case or 2. A foolish freeloader or 3. A superb strategist willing to take the heat for the right outcome.”

    Or, like yourself Angie….

    4. a complete and utter low-life scum-bastard cunt-of-hell drug addict with a head full of bizarre sexual fantasies, on the make, who didn’t give a flying fuck what innocent person’s life he destroyed so long as he got a bit of attention and managed to con a bit of cash out of people?

    jUzzz sayin like…

    Liked by 3 people

  4. http://imgur.com/a/51wUw

    Don’t worry Angie, everyone would hate you to feel left out – your time in Court will come soon enough.

    The only questionable point is if that is an Irish Court, or an English court. Perhaps best not to sleep with the door locked. It would save either the Guardia or the Police damaging the door with the big red Key.

    How many people do you think you can con before you fall from grace? How many more lives can you ruin before JUSTICE catches up with you?

    I doubt your arrest and term in prison will cause many tears to be shed. Tissue salesmen will not make a fortune with your demise.

    Good luck APD, you will need it – perhaps you will get to share a cell with one of your protagonists? That is worth going to Church on Sunday to pray for. How much misery did you expect to bring before Justice prevailed?

    Liked by 3 people

    • Yes… It’s that post and the comment below to the effect she plans of suing the crown for defamation that I’ve referred to elsewhere… Matters raised in court being subject to absolute privilege.

      Liked by 1 person

      • What exactly has the “Crown” said against Angela that is defamation?

        I think she is “fishing” to find out what was actually said about her, because obviously she wasn’t in court to hear anything.

        Angela’s just up to her usual tricks of trying to scam money in any way she can.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Yesterday she was expressing relief that Rupert hadn’t named her or Sabine as sources for the ‘hit list’ Rupert arrived equipped with; especially herself… She was thinking about suing the crown for naming her in evidence though.

          Thing is though… If you trained in any aspect of news media (i.e. perhaps were at one point ‘young journalist of the year’) you get schooled in the basics of media law. And in particular about how defamation works and such things as ‘absolute privilege’. – i.e. you can’t sue over things raised in court. – I think she’s the source of her own ignorance on this one.

          Liked by 3 people

          • It struck me as pretty much an admission of guilt – why else would you express relief at not being implicated, as opposed to outrage that something false had been said?

            Liked by 2 people

  5. More on the creator or Minecraft promoting pizzagate and other conspiranoid crapola:
    Imagine how easily these tragic events could be exploited…

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-38691882
    “A man who groomed young boys through the online game Minecraft has been jailed for two years and eight months.
    Adam Isaac, 23, from Merthyr Tydfil, previously admitted eight sexual offences against children”.

    …if someone wished to concoct a conspiracy theory, wherein the creation of Minecraft had been a giant world-wide Illuminati plot to groom, access, exploit, abuse and ultimately traffick children for sexual purposes. Eh?

    I agree with Sir Henry that two wrongs don’t make a right, but sometimes I am sorely tempted to teach ignorant pricks like Mr Persson exactly such a lesson. And it is particularly tempting when there really is indisputable evidence that his creation was misused for the purpose of sexually abusing children AND there is NO such evidence that Planet Ping-Pong was ever misused that way.

    Liked by 2 people

    • There was an infamous video floating around on Youtube ( must try and locate it) but he keeps getting it removed: the vigilante ‘pedo hunter’ Stinson Hunter who sets up those on-line stings. The one who was also jailed for 10 years for arson at a school.

      In it he mercilessly harasses a 14 year old boy as sets out and deliberately destroys the boys ‘village’ or whatever (no idea about this game). The lad is clearly quite distressed and Stinson laughs at him, finally telling him to calm down when he realises the boy really is badly upset.

      Why on earth would a grown man search out young teen boys to ‘play’ video games with on the net is a mystery to me.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I haven’t got ANY time for those Paedophile Hunters or whatever they call themselves.

        I can understand if you’ve been abused going for the abuser but seeking out random people I just don’t understand at all.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Not only do they often screw up ongoing police investigations, but because they are so gungho about they way they ‘investigate’ that they often use entrapment techniques, which often makes any `evidence’ they have collected inadmissible in court and often the offender cant be charged at all
          And then of course if they are found innocent (even if they arent) because the courts ruled inadmissible evidence couldnt be used, then legally, they can go after the hunter- especially if they continue to have their utube movies up which of course is the main reason these `hunters’ exist, to satisfy their own self glory on utube
          😦

          Liked by 1 person

      • Stinson Hunter is a twisted sadistic individual who gains similar personal satisfaction from destroying the creative work of a 14-year-old on Minecraft, to watching the life literally ripped apart of those he traps in his child grooming snares. Never think for one moment that Stinson Hunter does these things out of altruism, he enjoys hurting and destroying people.

        Liked by 1 person

    • The difficulty with these guys is they’re glory hunting for their own satisfaction – if it were otherwise they wouldn’t be showing off on YouTube and looking for validation. One of the main objections you hear from police to this sort of thing is that they often interfere with real, serious, operations that generally run in a vary controlled way to target serious level offenders.

      “Why on earth would a grown man search out young teen boys to ‘play’ video games with on the net” – Maybe cos he’s a fucking nob-end who likes fiddling with kids?

      Liked by 3 people

      • people like this need to be watched, carefully.
        if grown men find pleasure in in making little kids cry online, they would find pleasure in doing it in real life. meanness is only fun if they have it coming, dickery should be a function of justice only

        Like

        • As you suggest Dot, it’s a sign of gross immaturity. Maybe I’ve grown too cynical, but I am creeped out by those (men particularly) who go out of their way to involve themselves with kids that are neither their own nor their professional responsibility. – Thomas Hamilton, the Dunblane killer, being a classic example of the type.

          Liked by 1 person

          • i can’t believe he made a video boasting about it, and then he didn’t even care that the one guy committed suicide. it seems to me almost like he joined grindr and did that stint for the publicity, he doesn’t seem to have any apathy at all

            Like

    • Sorry, what have I missed, Minecraft and Pizzagate?

      Both my Sons have played Minecraft online, they tend to stick to playing with their friends only. As far as games go, this one can be quite educational as it takes thought, planning and collaboration.

      Although they are a bit older now 13 and 15, I still check up on them. I have spent quite some time with them on the dangers of the internet as have their schools. They and their friends are very clued up on such things.

      I guess the worry nowadays is for more vulnerable children and parents who are less clued up on all things IT.

      I tend to worry more for their minds these days with fake news and vast amount of total crap floating around the net.

      What the hell is this Stinson upto, what a twaty thing to do.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. It’s really amazing how so many of the people that claim to be ……. or …… are themselves guilty of what they say someone else is.

    Absolutely no self-awareness.

    Projecting their own character on to someone else.

    I could name so many…

    Liked by 5 people

      • She is another one who spread Bill Maloney rubbish, doesn’t do any research, is obsessed with Madaline McCann, but never made the film she was going to make, allegedly was also going to make a film about David Icke, and is obsessed with the V.I.P. Paedophile ring in the House of Commons blah blah blah blah. These so called journalists who don’t do research but say everything they say is gospel, she should team up with APD then they could make up their own scandal, oh and she was also a supporter of Ben Fellows.

        Liked by 1 person

        • There was a period a few years ago when the general consencus was to give Maloney enough rope, particularly when he was involved with that idiot Fellowes. I know for a fact that Sonia was personally ‘faced off’ with the inconsistencies in Fellows story about ‘The Word’ (by a man who was able to recall much of it from memory) and even given numbers to call for part of its production team to confirm; she never did! – To be clear on this, giving Maloney enough rope never included promoting him!

          As for Icke… He’s not as stupid as he seems and you won’t really get near him. On the other things, she’s just attention seeking and waiting for someone else to come up with the goods so she can join in the cat-chorus.

          Like

    • A quick check on that story seems to indicate that she’s another one who seems to have difficulty recognising emosional/developmental boundaries between age groups…

      Liked by 1 person

        • A colleage has just reminded me of another case (American) where that was happening. A failed hip-hop artist in his 40s pretending to be a ‘secret agent’ type, dressing like a teenager and posting pictures of himself in homo-erotic poses and others with guns etc. Something well wrong with a grown man who dresses/acts like that. – Clearly, it’s not grown women (or for that matter men) they’re looking to attract.

          Liked by 1 person

          • I posted here a few months ago about men who like to dress up and be treated as babies, there is an underlying fetish for regressing back to immature stages in human development, a fear of embracing the challenges and responsibilities of the adult world.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Clearly SV, that is disturbed behaviour… Both on the part of the individual and those who facilitate them; but I suggest the ‘man-child’ types like Rupert are actually rather more dangerous as they’re clearly trying to be part of a group they should have departed decades earlier… A 38-year old behaving like a sixteen year old when the reality is he’s of an age where he could quite legitimately have a child of that age? Just not within the gamut of normallity.

            Liked by 1 person

    • I recall quite some time back having a bit of ‘beef’ online with Sonia Poultons boyfriend. I can’t recall what it was all about but he came across as badly as she does.

      Like

  7. On a lighter (?) note: Neelu of The Family Berry has printed out some documents with over a Million Pound claim and popped along to the local bank hoping to cash said document. Not sure it worked as planned.
    Don’t understand why she bothers though as with Niburi fast approaching it’s going to be The End of Civilization As We Know It so her mortgage won’t really be a problem.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4833908/Conspiracy-theorist-claim-planet-Nibiru-destroy-Earth.html


    Liked by 1 person

  8. Just heard the News (Direct from the Court) Rupert has been found guilty on two counts – Count 1 and Count 3.

    He is sentenced to nine months in prison for each (to run concurrently) Also a 5 year behaviour order – but no dep[ortation order?

    Liked by 3 people

  9. A bottle of permier cru Chablis is being placed in the fridge as we speak for a celebratory tipple later …. congratulations all on a fantastic result, and hope that the parents and carers concerned have a measure of closure. Well done Hoaxtead for all the behind the scenes work!!!

    Liked by 4 people

  10. I salute everyone involved in the case who stood up, opposed and worked so hard against this Satan Hunter and his allies until the moment he finally fell from his hubristic plinth.

    It is a tragedy that all the time and energy that so many people gave to this Satan Hunter to convince him to turn away from his folly was for nothing.

    As per Heraclitus
    72. Fire in its progress will catch all things by surprise and judge them.

    87. Even a man who is most in ‘repute’ (reputable?) knows and maintains only what is ‘reputed’, and holds onto that information. But certainly the justice of Dike will apprehend fabricators and false-witnesses of Lies.

    91. What sort of mind or intelligence have they? They believe popular folk-tales and follow the crowd as their teachers, ignoring the adage that the many are bad, the good are few.

    Source of Heraclitus Fragments which is a cornerstone of my own philosophy
    https://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/Philosophy/heraclitus.pdf

    Liked by 2 people

  11. 9 months!

    Really?

    I find that absolutely poor tbh.

    Proportionate….I think not.

    Someone can post a video online….even just one video, and this can destroy a whole life….for life! Not one year!

    Certainly a lot more needs to be done imo.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Up to a point I agree Anon… But bear in mind the realities of sentencing; and that this is just one of the first steps towards tackling these hoaxers. Should have been done years ago! He should never have got into the country! None of this should have happened… But it did, and this is a beginning.

      Liked by 3 people

          • The intent was there imo.

            He threatened with the kicking down doors and blood samples,he came to England, he went to Hampstead.

            Enticed in by the beautiful not, Ms Angela Power-Disney.

            The fellow prisoners will laugh at his choice of woman I would think.

            Embarrassing or what?

            Liked by 1 person

      • @SHR & K, yes I understand, and yes this is an epic outcome, not only for this case but also for future cases. And yes again, this is just the start.

        These people have done what they’ve done for ego, money, to actually destroy lives….destroy lives! Think about that for a moment…

        …..of which will continue to destroy peoples lives and communities for months and years to come, so yes disproportionate.

        And don’t get me started on the platforms they’ve used to distibute this sick material.

        It is a win nevertheless as you have stated, and now for the rest of them.

        Liked by 2 people

  12. It looks like Rupert might not have too nice a night tonight….

    From the report last year published by the prison Independent Monitoring Board reporting on the prison that normally first take prisoners from Southwark Crown Court.

    …..First Night prisoners’ experience was poor and sometimes unsafe. They were often
    put on other wings because E wing was full up with established prisoners. In some
    instances newly arrived prisoners undergoing alcohol detoxification were not placed
    on E wing (14.5)…..

    From the prison inspectorates last report on that prison:

    …….Many prisoners felt unsafe. Until recently, the prison had been unsighted on the level and
    nature of violent incidents and there had been no consistent trend analysis to identify areas
    of concern within the prison. Safer prisons meetings were held infrequently and there was
    no action plan to make the prison safer. The published violence reduction policy was
    ineffective and procedures to address and monitor bullies had ceased to operate four
    months before the inspection. Processes to support victims were weak. ………

    Liked by 2 people

    • “We have lately in the last 3 months unearthed a video narrated by RD”
      FFS! RD had that very video on his own channel too, for years!! He only recently deleted that channel taking all his videos with it and Abe was trolling it. Yet, she says, they unearthed the video 3 months ago?? It’s been around for a long time. LOL!

      Liked by 1 person

      • To be fair, Abe’s comments had been on that channel for months. I made a comment of support for RD and the day after he removed all content from his channel. Hence why I removed all my Hampstead Videos soon after.

        Like

        • Yeah, it made me think he’d been notified of yours, then spotted all Abe’s old comments, which he may not have noticed before.

          Like

  13. So APD thinks Rupert was a, ‘political prisoner’, – A political prisoner is someone imprisoned because they have opposed or criticized the government responsible for their imprisonment.
    I thought she was edumacated! Here’s me left school at 16 many moons ago, did not have the benefit of further education, but can tell the difference between a load of bs & a ‘political prisoner’, yay me! 😂

    Also she mentions Rupert not being allowed to work in the UK, has she never heard of working visas, oh maybe not actually, wasn’t there a mention of her having a problem with getting back into the States?

    Justice prevails, slowly but surely.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. i know i said i came here to figure out how much was truth and how much was people’s paranoia, since i was accused and realized that if im falsely accused then obviously it was likely there were others out there falsely accused, and it was a chance to get my head on straight and fix my perceptions so i dont wrongly judge innocent people, because even if i didn’t attack anyone, it’s still wrong.
    and all of that is true, but to be a little more honest, i was also a bit self destructive at the time and hoping that you guys were as bad as i thought. in part because of anger and in part because i was suicidal and hoping you were assholes who would take me down.
    i mean hey, you’ve been accused of murdering, so why not..
    the more not-afraid i get of you guys and the more comfortable i get on here, the more i despise myself and my previous perceptions
    i feel like i was just as stupid as rupert or angela

    Liked by 3 people

    • Mad Moo is the type who would let off all the Child abusers convicted in the Rotherham and Newcastle grooming rings, just to catch one so called “elite”, Social worker or government employee. She doesn’t care about the children being abused, only her own agenda and hatred of certain groups.
      She was not happy when the news of convictions in the Newcastle case came out, not happy at all about it.
      She spent the next few weeks ranting about the groomer being scapegoats and promoting Hampstead and any bullshit hoax she could.

      Absolutely no sign of her being happy that thanks to the police, hundreds of young girls are now safe from abuse.

      Liked by 2 people

  15. Great to hear that Rupert thinks his legs are powerful as he may need their strength to stay standing whilst playing prison leap-frog.

    Like

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